Jump to content


Level Design Improvements for Fisherman's Bay, Ruinberg, and Pilsen


  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

MacGunnr #41 Posted Feb 17 2018 - 16:05

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 22165 battles
  • 34
  • [DOGOP] DOGOP
  • Member since:
    07-10-2015
I've spent some time on the test server and found the new maps to be pretty damn good all the way around. Seems most hills have been lowered a bit making it possible to make it up them in an AT-15 before the game is over, I like that. There seems to be a much better balance overall of cover for the timid and lanes for the audacious, I like that. The 'tactical' changes are substantial and many of the old hidey holes are gone or, alternatively moved or changed. Most for the better. The graphics are stunning. With the landscape extending off the sides of the map all of them feel much bigger. I like the 'fun stuff' like the Bismarck and the Hindenberg, though I'm certain that's not the name of the downed airship. ;)

I like the Russian changes mostly though the Obj. 263 gun has been over-nerfed and makes it an odd duck--too inaccurate to be a long range sniper and I mean really bad at this, and nowhere near quick enough reload and agility to be a brawler. Despite it's drawbacks I much preferred the SU-122-54. I noticed the 263 gun had been de-nerfed a bit down to .39 after one of the Public Test micro patches and this helped but not enough. I was disappointed enough I quit working the 263 line and have stared grinding the 704 line.  I was quite resistant to switching to the 257 as I like the T-10 a lot but the 257 (I call it "The Roberts" google if  you must) is at least for my play style a superior tank. But don't get rid of the T-10, just get on with the new X for that branch. Maybe bring back the 122-54 in a branch like the Ferdinand off the SU-152 line.

Though there will be some niggles and glitches all in all an excellent effort, well done, lads. 

MUMBLESRUMBLES #42 Posted Feb 23 2018 - 02:37

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 43324 battles
  • 802
  • [TAC-E] TAC-E
  • Member since:
    11-18-2013

View PostLunaCada, on Feb 05 2018 - 13:40, said:

Why does Wargaming always say "new maps" when they are not? 

Bring back some of the old ones first.  

Put a vote to the players and let them speak. 

 

when pigs can fly, thats when u will see the old maps back...

MUMBLESRUMBLES #43 Posted Feb 23 2018 - 02:41

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 43324 battles
  • 802
  • [TAC-E] TAC-E
  • Member since:
    11-18-2013

View PostShrivie, on Feb 05 2018 - 21:11, said:

Ok WarGaming.... I appreciate the fact you guys are working to make these maps look great and they do. However I constantly hear people say we need new maps and I agree. Why you guys aren't delivering on that, I don't know. If you don't want to work to develop new maps, then why don't you guys bring back the maps we haven't played for a long time for a week and then change them out. Just have a special map available for  week or month at a time. You guys have got to mix this up some for the players. It's the same thing over and over with the same plays over and over. The only problem is now is that people are doing stupid things in the game because frankly, it's boring. Bring out a map of the week or month and give us something different. In the meantime if the players are bored with the game stop buying gold and perks until they bring out some new content. It's about time for something new. I'm not saying delete any maps either, just bring out some new stuff.

 

 

i stopped buying months ago. i gave up because im bored out of my mind with these maps. some times in games i find myself using arty and shooting buildings just for something different....i dont understand why they dont get it. why they insist on being so slow with new maps, and the last bunch were horror stories.... sorry wot if i sound bitter and whiney, but im bored to death of these maps.. bored beyond the word bord, and so are everyone in our 535 player clan system...

Edited by MUMBLESRUMBLES, Feb 23 2018 - 02:43.


torn2hell #44 Posted Feb 23 2018 - 09:58

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 35242 battles
  • 11
  • [4PLDG] 4PLDG
  • Member since:
    11-13-2014

Map Balance:   yes some balance is good, and to much is over kill, if it becomes 100% balanced it takes away from the free flowing fluctuations which make it unnerving, and fun, otherwise it will be  flat lined, and repetitive, which this is part of the reason that 80% of players don't give a hoot if the map is 100% balanced or not, they just want a map that they can go out and have fun on, win lose or draw, that's the thrills of War gaming!!! if the map is unbalanced, you have a 50/50 shot which is the premise of RNG, that's the core value, in that respect your allotted a fair shot, you win some you lose some, and that's basically the entire premise of the game anyway, to try and paste over that, would only open up bigger unnatural cracks. This brings up another point, WG needs to quite making the maps in a particular fashion, there designing the map to function in particular  preconceived way, which places limitations on game play reducing creative play, reducing the freedom of play, and overall excitement. Random generated maps will allow for a more random free flowing play style, which it appears the game was naturally doing in the first place. Theres an old saying it goes like this, if its not broke don't fix it.  WG is going against the grain and natural flow of the game style, you could call it the WG conundrum, Instead of listening and most importantly taking surveys, they would probably not be in the situation they became, instead they came of with theory and an idea for what they thought was the right thing to do at the time based on chatter, instead of getting the actual facts. WG is not doing bad with the game. The game could be in a much more natural satisfying state, instead of a giant budget overhaul, based on a preconceived notion, combined with ideas from non factual chatter,

P.S.  Bring back the older maps, a majority were organically thrilling, compared to the contrary, most of the maps WG expelled were complex and naturally robust  vs. the ones kept. The Old maps just had a natural rigorous complexity to them, allowing free flowing engagements, while encouraging all tanks styles, with a feeling for it to excel. A majority of current maps feel incompatible or restrictive to a particular tank style..  If the goal is to keep the game part realistic, in war time they didn't just get to create the landscape in suitable way, so to have that feeling wild raw pulse pounding war machines. there must be a fluctuating rigorous natural  environment that will leave you feeling excited and high strung!   With current maps you are forced into a repetitive  game play style, becoming dull boring, and non conducive.



01LT #45 Posted Feb 26 2018 - 21:35

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 27032 battles
  • 55
  • Member since:
    06-15-2013
Isn't that about what I have been saying OBSTACLE based maps not these funneling 1 tactic lemming hill or corridor maps. I swear it makes you feel like your playing a side scrolling game. There is alot that can be done with the maps out now that you can see places where access was purposely blocked. Or just take some of the old maps and open up the dead pace. I still would rather see new maps instead or reworked prettified old maps. Full urban map Full forest map.Stop wasting DEV time on pretty menus and flashy effects. I thought long ago they promised moveable trains and building and rocks that can be shelled away. Still waiting and with that how about tow able and push able tanks.

Fetzer_Valve_ #46 Posted Mar 26 2018 - 09:14

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 19394 battles
  • 23
  • Member since:
    04-25-2014

Problems with new 1.0 in general: redesign looks nice, but for the most part all TD sniper locations are gone with rare exception.  Except for ONE new spot on a map I won't name, all the spots TDs have to bush up and play as a TD, gone.  You have dramatically changed gameplay because of this.  There are no clear lines of fire anymore, there are seconds of degrees worth of shot opportunities.  There is insufficient coverage for TD's.  Spots with coverage are well within draw range and you die fast.

 

I play all varieties, but you have made TD a less desirable choice because we are now sitting ducks in turretless thin skinned TD's.

 

Please reconsider and replace coverage.


Edited by Fetzer_Valve_, Mar 26 2018 - 09:24.


01LT #47 Posted Mar 27 2018 - 21:43

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 27032 battles
  • 55
  • Member since:
    06-15-2013

1 TD does not mean COWER In back ground and be little help. I so hate seeing TD imedialy just run to the back of the map and sit

2 Maps didn't change that much they are still funneling king of the hill mentality maps

3 the main difference I see in the maps is the clutter(fences cars and such) more high walled areas,and thicker foliage

 

give 1 kudo the new map (glacier) nice

 

Still waiting for that FULL URBAN map and a FULL FOREST map






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users