Jump to content


Lites Mediums and Heavies CAMPING is it a problem?


  • Please log in to reply
51 replies to this topic

Poll: Is Camping a problem in Random Battles (70 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 100 battles in order to participate this poll.

Do you feel Lites, Medium or Heavies that camp affect the outcome of Random Battles

  1. yes (55 votes [78.57%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 78.57%

  2. No (15 votes [21.43%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 21.43%

Vote Hide poll

Ralista #21 Posted Dec 05 2017 - 23:14

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 18463 battles
  • 163
  • Member since:
    09-29-2011

Nothing gives me greater joy than to Camp in my Type 5 heavy and snipe with the tank destroyers.  I've even managed to grab the tank sniper medal for doing the most dmg at distance without missing shots.  I highly encourage it for those of you who like to change your playstyle up a bit.  It's kind of funny to see the clickers pound the mini map while typing wthwthare you doing. 

 

I'm just sitting back, lounging in my chair, drinking a cold one, and sniping away.  Like Magneto said...always let the pawns go first.  



IKEWIN #22 Posted Dec 06 2017 - 16:29

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 26155 battles
  • 11
  • [FOI] FOI
  • Member since:
    10-10-2014

View PostRalista, on Dec 05 2017 - 23:14, said:

Nothing gives me greater joy than to Camp in my Type 5 heavy and snipe with the tank destroyers.  I've even managed to grab the tank sniper medal for doing the most dmg at distance without missing shots.  I highly encourage it for those of you who like to change your playstyle up a bit.  It's kind of funny to see the clickers pound the mini map while typing wthwthare you doing. 

 

I'm just sitting back, lounging in my chair, drinking a cold one, and sniping away.  Like Magneto said...always let the pawns go first.  

 

​LOL here is an example of a camper. Top Tier heavy at the back using team mates to take the hits for them?

 

I have read all your posts and there seems to be a misunderstanding! I am not talking about Tank Destroyers or Self Propelled Guns only tanks.

 

I have read others admit to mining people they call YOLO! This is funny. CAMPERS are people who do not travel far from the spawn. They are in a position that they can not hit the enemies cause they are out of range or do not have a line of sight on the enemies!

 

MINES is a great map that gives example. There are many camping positions that do not have a line of site on the enemies in the center and the only way many campers can hit the enemy is after the enemy has killed all the forward tankers and is now advancing past the center of the map!

 

 


Edited by IKEWIN, Dec 06 2017 - 16:30.


HunterGamer #23 Posted Dec 06 2017 - 16:59

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 4241 battles
  • 170
  • Member since:
    03-26-2013
don't forget about SPGS! they shouldn't be camping, they should be fighting me face-to-face >:( on reload >:)

TRK213_Turkey #24 Posted Dec 06 2017 - 17:01

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 5889 battles
  • 377
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    01-02-2017

View PostNudnick, on Dec 05 2017 - 21:55, said:

I have the opposite problem, I don't know when to stop. I figure I have a motor I might as well use it. From what I've seen controlling large portions of the map works better than being surrounded and picked off one by one.

Same here. I did better after I started driving a slower tank and couldn't get in trouble as fast.

 

I am tempted to say that bots are a bigger issue than campers when bots are present.  Sometimes it's hard to tell.



Sgt__Guffy #25 Posted Dec 06 2017 - 17:08

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 1857 battles
  • 933
  • Member since:
    04-01-2017

View PostIKEWIN, on Dec 05 2017 - 14:26, said:

I have played 26 000 games. I believe that camping is a serious problem WoT refuses to address in MM and RNG.

 

1. When a "tank" never leaves the spawn or hides with the TDs at the back it basically puts the entire team at a disadvantage. When the team consist of more than 50% camper tanks in Random Battles a team the odds of winning are greatly reduced.

 

2. Camping at the back of the map is effectively providing the enemy team with the teams positions and result in forward player getting swarm killed when the enemy deducts they are easy to pick off.

 

3. Camper by the nature/style of play abandoned the objective of capturing the enemy Base.

 

4. Campers make it impossible for their team mates to advance past the center of any map.  If you do advance past the center of the map the campers will never see or hit the enemies your fighting cause the enemies are out of radio range.

 

5. I am not talking about yolo I am talking about the ability to advance or count on support is not there when to many players camp.

 

 

Again, a pointless poll , camping obviously is a determining factor in the outcome of a game. I assume the OP refers to random games.

 

Camping seems to be a generic term which "covers all" in respect of passive play. Defence in WOT is the weakest strategy. Well almost non existent. Reading the game you would think it logical not to advance, stay in proximity of the campers and use your abilities in conjunction with their guns. However, that is not always going to work as campers are often clueless and camp because of their inability to read the game and react accordingly. Campers are a dead weight.

 

As we all know the ones who advance, unless they possess higher than average ability, die sooner than later. The enemy advances and although campers may do damage from their defensive position, the damage done is usually too little, too late. The result is usually a ROFLstomp for the enemy.

 

So, instead of moaning and complaining about camping, it needs some sort of collaboration with WG to find a way of resolving the problem. A lot of the problems lie at WG's feet. They created maps which encourage camping. The worst act was to remove cover in their conversion of the game from strategy to arcade shoot 'em up, to encourage fast play, brawling in the upper tiers and a speedy conclusion well within the 15 minutes allocated for each standard game. 

The other problem is the lack of education for beginners. What do they have? Mittengard! Start at one end, meet in the middle and shoot the hell out of each other. Does WG seriously think that good preparation for the new player to progress up the tiers? 

It also takes all sorts to make a game. Not all players are the same. Some are aggressive, others are passive. The former can also suffer from "camping fear," where it is better to YOLO than be criticized for staying in one spot the whole of the battle, which is usually what campers do. The typical camper has "advancing fear" which might mean they get their nice paintwork scratched, or they won't get a shot off before they are destroyed, or they are more experienced than you think and on seeing the deployment are giving up, embarking on damage limitation and waiting for the next game, or they are cynical, preferring to wait until the enemy are weakened so they can advance their death incarnate and mop up what is left of the enemy.

 

Now, put all that into the melting pot and give it a good stir and you have the random games we love or hate. What do you do to make this recipe so good that everyone wants to play and do the right thing? I don't know. That is the nature of the game and it is what WG have produced. No one player can resolve it. So I think it is in WG's hands to create the environment which promotes a better standard of play. Now, clearly, so far, they have not done that, largely because they present format generates a lot of revenue for them. Just add a few overpowered premium vehicles into the melting pot and sit back as you rake in the money seems to be their goal.

 

I think we have to accept camping is here in perpetuity until WG either shut down the servers or realise that it is a problem that needs to be looked at and campers need a helping hand.

 

Do you really thing that is likely to happen?

 

Watch this space folks!

 

Have fun, playing your own game.

 

Guffy.  



NeatoMan #26 Posted Dec 06 2017 - 17:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 24589 battles
  • 15,756
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostDockmaster, on Dec 05 2017 - 15:47, said:

There are legitimate reasons for camping.

 

Complaining about it in game is too much like telling others "how to play their game."

Sure, they can play however they want, but those players shouldn't expect to win very much either.    Choosing an inferior tactic will lead to inferior results.



Markd73 #27 Posted Dec 06 2017 - 18:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 28828 battles
  • 3,664
  • [AOS] AOS
  • Member since:
    04-20-2011

There are always going to be bads camping in the back. It is like getting mad at a dog for barking. Bads are going to camp. They cannot help it, as it is in their nature.

 

Just ignore them and move on to your next battle.



IKEWIN #28 Posted Dec 07 2017 - 02:59

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 26155 battles
  • 11
  • [FOI] FOI
  • Member since:
    10-10-2014

View PostMarkd73, on Dec 06 2017 - 18:52, said:

There are always going to be bads camping in the back. It is like getting mad at a dog for barking. Bads are going to camp. They cannot help it, as it is in their nature.

 

Just ignore them and move on to your next battle.

 

​Apathy.......Is this the best way to solve problems. I am writing this poll to discover if people feel camping is hurting the game.

 

And by the way distance travelled and damage over 300 meters are recorded every game and are in your permanent stats..... therefore WoT can use these stats to determine the make up of a team!

 

Also WoT can reduce the award for farmed and mined damage! Damage from over 300 meter for a lite, medium or heavy tanks should be worth 1/2 as much credits and experience. This alone would motivated the stat [edited]to move closer. Rewarding camper equally to those who move forward with the battle is wrong......

 

IKEWIN



IKEWIN #29 Posted Dec 07 2017 - 03:02

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 26155 battles
  • 11
  • [FOI] FOI
  • Member since:
    10-10-2014

View PostSgt__Guffy, on Dec 06 2017 - 17:08, said:

 

Again, a pointless poll , camping obviously is a determining factor in the outcome of a game. I assume the OP refers to random games.

 

Camping seems to be a generic term which "covers all" in respect of passive play. Defence in WOT is the weakest strategy. Well almost non existent. Reading the game you would think it logical not to advance, stay in proximity of the campers and use your abilities in conjunction with their guns. However, that is not always going to work as campers are often clueless and camp because of their inability to read the game and react accordingly. Campers are a dead weight.

 

As we all know the ones who advance, unless they possess higher than average ability, die sooner than later. The enemy advances and although campers may do damage from their defensive position, the damage done is usually too little, too late. The result is usually a ROFLstomp for the enemy.

 

So, instead of moaning and complaining about camping, it needs some sort of collaboration with WG to find a way of resolving the problem. A lot of the problems lie at WG's feet. They created maps which encourage camping. The worst act was to remove cover in their conversion of the game from strategy to arcade shoot 'em up, to encourage fast play, brawling in the upper tiers and a speedy conclusion well within the 15 minutes allocated for each standard game. 

The other problem is the lack of education for beginners. What do they have? Mittengard! Start at one end, meet in the middle and shoot the hell out of each other. Does WG seriously think that good preparation for the new player to progress up the tiers? 

It also takes all sorts to make a game. Not all players are the same. Some are aggressive, others are passive. The former can also suffer from "camping fear," where it is better to YOLO than be criticized for staying in one spot the whole of the battle, which is usually what campers do. The typical camper has "advancing fear" which might mean they get their nice paintwork scratched, or they won't get a shot off before they are destroyed, or they are more experienced than you think and on seeing the deployment are giving up, embarking on damage limitation and waiting for the next game, or they are cynical, preferring to wait until the enemy are weakened so they can advance their death incarnate and mop up what is left of the enemy.

 

Now, put all that into the melting pot and give it a good stir and you have the random games we love or hate. What do you do to make this recipe so good that everyone wants to play and do the right thing? I don't know. That is the nature of the game and it is what WG have produced. No one player can resolve it. So I think it is in WG's hands to create the environment which promotes a better standard of play. Now, clearly, so far, they have not done that, largely because they present format generates a lot of revenue for them. Just add a few overpowered premium vehicles into the melting pot and sit back as you rake in the money seems to be their goal.

 

I think we have to accept camping is here in perpetuity until WG either shut down the servers or realise that it is a problem that needs to be looked at and campers need a helping hand.

 

Do you really thing that is likely to happen?

 

Watch this space folks!

 

Have fun, playing your own game.

 

Guffy.  

 

​I appreciate your comments but I respectfully disagree this poll is pointless. This is an exercise in democracy on an issue that needs to be addressed for a lot of the people who pay to play this game.

 

If 70% agree camping affect out comes of games then there will be another poll on the solutions to the problem.

 

Other than your point about the pointless survey your post was very bang on. Apathy I do not think is the solution to this problem.

 

Regards IKEWIN



SpitYoYoMafia #30 Posted Dec 07 2017 - 03:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 18387 battles
  • 13,595
  • Member since:
    05-25-2012
Delete artillery, bet people would camp less

SpitYoYoMafia #31 Posted Dec 07 2017 - 03:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 18387 battles
  • 13,595
  • Member since:
    05-25-2012

View PostBattlecryGWJ, on Dec 05 2017 - 12:48, said:

While I do tend to dislike passive play, the game mechanics do tend to encourage it (particularly the spotting system).  Individually, you have the biggest advantage is spotting when you're not moving, sitting in a spot waiting for the enemy to advance into you.  Of course that gets rather more complicated and nuanced when it comes to trying to work as a team given that you're a random group of 15 people tossed into a fight together.

 

I think they should fix this and just normalize spotting mechanics so you get the same camo moving or not but they gave that advantage to light tanks (hint: just buff their camo values)

Sgt__Guffy #32 Posted Dec 07 2017 - 03:18

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 1857 battles
  • 933
  • Member since:
    04-01-2017

View PostSpitYoYoMafia, on Dec 06 2017 - 20:11, said:

Delete artillery, bet people would camp less

 

Interesting. So you are stating that there are never any "campers" in a non arty game.? Would you go as far as to state that is the case even with one artillery on each side? After all, one artillery per side does not have that significant effect, unless one happens to be an Lefh, which we all know is overpowered. 

 

With the way you bluff, I'd be more than happy to play poker with you. It would be like taking candy from a baby.  ;)



SpitYoYoMafia #33 Posted Dec 07 2017 - 03:31

    Major

  • Players
  • 18387 battles
  • 13,595
  • Member since:
    05-25-2012

View PostSgt__Guffy, on Dec 06 2017 - 18:18, said:

 

Interesting. So you are stating that there are never any "campers" in a non arty game.? Would you go as far as to state that is the case even with one artillery on each side? After all, one artillery per side does not have that significant effect, unless one happens to be an Lefh, which we all know is overpowered. 

 

With the way you bluff, I'd be more than happy to play poker with you. It would be like taking candy from a baby.  ;)

 

bad players will always camp, I will always camp if more than one artillery is in a game, no point in going out early to get spotted and explode, I also inform my team mates at the start of the game what will happen if they decide to be brave.

 

I know for a fact that arty free games are dynamic and people camp less.



ColonelShakes #34 Posted Dec 07 2017 - 06:15

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 5984 battles
  • 505
  • Member since:
    01-17-2016

View PostSpitYoYoMafia, on Dec 07 2017 - 03:31, said:

 

bad players will always camp, I will always camp 

 

Fixed



Aknazer #35 Posted Dec 07 2017 - 08:57

    Major

  • Players
  • 16555 battles
  • 3,217
  • [RDDT7] RDDT7
  • Member since:
    12-22-2012

I voted no because your question is too vague but the answer is...it depends.  I don't know how many times I've been accused of camping in my LTs when I'm actually at a spot where I can spot for the time.  Sometimes that spot can even be back where others are shooting from due to the terrain up front (not having a safe spot to scout from) and the fact that my 470m+ VR can still let me effectively see from so far back.

 

Other things could also be the map itself.  There isn't too much to "scout" on a city map so sometimes it's better to sit back in my tank, see how the battle develops, and then flex from there.  Or it's Assault and we're letting the enemy push up.  Or Fisherman's Bay west-side where one doesn't need to push up far to scout and likewise it is foolish to just abandon the flank until you know where all of the enemies are (so just because no one is pushing on west doesn't mean it's safe to leave it either).



WastedSpacer #36 Posted Dec 07 2017 - 09:36

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 7004 battles
  • 31
  • [R2C] R2C
  • Member since:
    09-17-2013

View PostAknazer, on Dec 07 2017 - 07:57, said:

I voted no because your question is too vague but the answer is...it depends.  I don't know how many times I've been accused of camping in my LTs when I'm actually at a spot where I can spot for the time.  Sometimes that spot can even be back where others are shooting from due to the terrain up front (not having a safe spot to scout from) and the fact that my 470m+ VR can still let me effectively see from so far back.

 

Other things could also be the map itself.  There isn't too much to "scout" on a city map so sometimes it's better to sit back in my tank, see how the battle develops, and then flex from there.  Or it's Assault and we're letting the enemy push up.  Or Fisherman's Bay west-side where one doesn't need to push up far to scout and likewise it is foolish to just abandon the flank until you know where all of the enemies are (so just because no one is pushing on west doesn't mean it's safe to leave it either).

 

Yup I'm with you - impossible to group those who should and should not camp based on type other than arty. The map and starting locations are one vector. What the enemy team does is another. If you are up against a team with an excess of highly mobile tanks - maybe holding back with more camping might be optimal? Consider where TDs are expected to camp ... unless you use an E25 .. then all bets are off. Of course I'm sure we have all seen examples of the ridiculous yolo TD that's NOT an E25. 

 

Lights are expected to scout - unless you have something excruciatingly slow. Mediums  are also expected to be mobile support/hit-taking/spotters though depending on the specs/equipment many don't excel at that, Some can spot, support, brawl or camp/snipe. Some mediums  play better as pseudo TDs - some of the Japanese mid tier mediums can fit that style.

 

Many folks have no clue about the capabilities of their team-mates. I remember on a couple of Mines games being berated for not quickly  "taking the hill" with the other lights - huh - I was in an AMX 38 with a top speed of 25 - the game would be over by the time I could get there!!     

 


Edited by WastedSpacer, Dec 07 2017 - 09:43.


StepChild_TO #37 Posted Dec 07 2017 - 10:02

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 33737 battles
  • 273
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011

I had my grille 15 up with the meds on the hill on ?? the map where the south side has railroad and bridge. we had a mess of tds and I said I would support the meds push. so I killed e50m and a batchat 25t and scared the rest into backing off. most the tds sat and waited for the enemy to come to them. didn't happen. 6 tds had 0 damage and survived. passive play in a tank game is because of stat farmers who know they will get kills on almost dead tanks when they show up to cap them out. its existed from the beginning of this game and always will. people play like that because of the I'm a 55% and I'm more important then you, you 44%er. phhhht.

 what a joke. I have learned lately how not to just rush off, be stubborn and look for someone to help me. cause that doesn't ever happen. I am getting better, slowly.

 



Varathius #38 Posted Dec 07 2017 - 10:09

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 4893 battles
  • 92
  • Member since:
    11-09-2013

Yesterday, 1 enemy light went yolo at start to map edge. That result caused:

 

- 3 dead on our side, he killed them all.

- Half remaining team incl. Heavies, camping the base and area where enemy yolo scout went.

 

Battle result:

We were overrun from all sides, never seen so much flame chat, insults, etc in my life in such a short time. Our arty did it right, drowned himself immediately to not endure it no longer.

 

Yes, lol, it affects the battle, in all kinds of negative ways.


Edited by Varathius, Dec 07 2017 - 10:10.


Aknazer #39 Posted Dec 07 2017 - 12:27

    Major

  • Players
  • 16555 battles
  • 3,217
  • [RDDT7] RDDT7
  • Member since:
    12-22-2012

View PostStepChild_TO, on Dec 07 2017 - 10:02, said:

I had my grille 15 up with the meds on the hill on ?? the map where the south side has railroad and bridge. we had a mess of tds and I said I would support the meds push. so I killed e50m and a batchat 25t and scared the rest into backing off. most the tds sat and waited for the enemy to come to them. didn't happen. 6 tds had 0 damage and survived. passive play in a tank game is because of stat farmers who know they will get kills on almost dead tanks when they show up to cap them out. its existed from the beginning of this game and always will. people play like that because of the I'm a 55% and I'm more important then you, you 44%er. phhhht.

 what a joke. I have learned lately how not to just rush off, be stubborn and look for someone to help me. cause that doesn't ever happen. I am getting better, slowly.

 

 

Random bad plays can still work out for the better.  On Lakeville one time we had like 10-12 tanks push valley which is a HORRIBLE idea...except this particular time the enemy only had 2-3 tanks defending it which we quickly disposed of and then capped them out before the rest of their team could get back and reset everyone that piled in (practically our whole team pushed my T95 through the valley until I crested the hill and they swarmed out from behind me after I blocked the initial volley).  A horrible strategy but one that worked out in that instance (I have seen multiple instances where such things haven't worked out so well for a variety of reasons).

 

Another time I saw a 46%er who was deep red just randomly driving around while I was passively spotting for my team.  We were winning but then he yolo'd towards me and my team missed their shots which got me spotted and killed.  Afterwards my team was slowly picked apart and lost because no one picked up spotting duty but just kept camping.  Does that mean the YOLO run was the right move?  No but it happened to work out in that one particular instance.

 

A 55%er has shown that statistically they have a better grasp on how to influence the outcome of the match.  Obviously they can and do still get it wrong just as how a 44%er can and does get it right.  But just because a 44%er gets it "right" doesn't mean the choices were made for the right reasons (YOLO'ing just cuz isn't right even if it works out), just as how when a 55%er gets it "wrong" that it was a wrong decision (getting outplayed and losing the tactical engagement doesn't mean that your strategic choice was wrong even if your tactical execution of it was).  Then of course there's the unicums who can make what appears to be a 44%er move but they are actually doing it for the right reason, which is what separates them from everyone else.



SpitYoYoMafia #40 Posted Dec 07 2017 - 13:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 18387 battles
  • 13,595
  • Member since:
    05-25-2012

View PostColonelShakes, on Dec 06 2017 - 21:15, said:

 

Fixed

 

That's hilarious, telling one of the most aggressive players in this game that he's a camper




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users