Jump to content


Why WoT?


  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

Gunadie #21 Posted Jul 12 2018 - 18:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 41072 battles
  • 4,876
  • Member since:
    08-20-2011

View PostDrone157, on Jul 12 2018 - 08:19, said:

20+ maps isn’t enough variety? Download a session tracker and look at how often you play the same map, Over the course of 50 games, I rarely see the same map more than 3 times.

 

The whole map argument is ridiculous, they fix maps and people complain about changing it, they introduce new maps and people say they’re bad cause it has a corridor (every map, including steppes has corridors), they bring back maps and people say just make new ones.

 

This is why wargaming doesn’t (and shouldn’t) listen to the community, cause it doesn’t know what it wants.

 

Thanks for your worthless opinion!

This game DOES need new maps regardless of the rotation!

These are all old and stale, some improvements are good and some bad but in the end they are the same old tired maps for most who have been here 3 or 4 plus years.

I now what I want and I also know what this game needs to keep my interest

And that is new maps..Not pulled and redesigned maps!!!



Gunadie #22 Posted Jul 12 2018 - 19:03

    Major

  • Players
  • 41072 battles
  • 4,876
  • Member since:
    08-20-2011

View PostNunya_000, on Jul 12 2018 - 07:00, said:

How would you make a map without "corridors" without the maps pretty much being all the same?  When they do make a map without "corridors" then players complain about tanks being able to hit them from all sides.

 

If there are more options and likes of travel that would make a huge difference!

What WG "designers" (and I use that word generously) do it funnel the game play to 3 points and force head to head gameplay

City maps should be completely open and allow for umpteen paths of approach and retraction not some retarded tank trap and unrealistic drop off from both sides

All this design will do is promote camping at both of the far entrances. 

Who, other than the unsuspecting, and maybe some zippy scouts would go in to a enclosure with a guaranteed bad outcome, or in this case no outcome but annihilation!

DUMB! 



Trauglodyte #23 Posted Jul 12 2018 - 19:44

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 15755 battles
  • 2,409
  • Member since:
    06-04-2016

View PostJTM78, on Jul 12 2018 - 15:55, said:

https://thearmoredpa...kov/#more-65000

Why would you make that map even more of a corridor map then it was before? Why would you put in one way drops that force more tanks into corridors?

This game does not need more corridor maps!! This is really starting to show that map designers or map team leader is totally clueless!

 

You complain about corridor maps but then fail to realize that when you have a non-corridor map, ala Erlenberg, everyone is terrified to go out into the open, lest they get tattooed by tanks that they can't see (namely because most Light drivers are freaking monkeys).  By adding corridors, you give people of all experience levels a chance and a predefined area in which to fight.  The lack of corridors is only good on maps like Front Lines.

 

View PostDrone157, on Jul 12 2018 - 17:19, said:

20+ maps isn’t enough variety? Download a session tracker and look at how often you play the same map, Over the course of 50 games, I rarely see the same map more than 3 times.

 

The whole map argument is ridiculous, they fix maps and people complain about changing it, they introduce new maps and people say they’re bad cause it has a corridor (every map, including steppes has corridors), they bring back maps and people say just make new ones.

 

This is why wargaming doesn’t (and shouldn’t) listen to the community, cause it doesn’t know what it wants.

 

20+ maps isn't enough variety because a great many of the maps need to be stripped from mid-to-high tier game play.  There is NO reason for Ensk and Mines to be in the rotation for tier 6+.  More to the point, you can't adequately support game play like Encounter and Assault on something so small.



JTM78 #24 Posted Jul 12 2018 - 20:16

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 20582 battles
  • 1,013
  • [OBSCN] OBSCN
  • Member since:
    08-16-2013

View PostTrauglodyte, on Jul 12 2018 - 12:44, said:

 

You complain about corridor maps but then fail to realize that when you have a non-corridor map, ala Erlenberg, everyone is terrified to go out into the open, lest they get tattooed by tanks that they can't see (namely because most Light drivers are freaking monkeys).  By adding corridors, you give people of all experience levels a chance and a predefined area in which to fight.  The lack of corridors is only good on maps like Front Lines.

 

 

20+ maps isn't enough variety because a great many of the maps need to be stripped from mid-to-high tier game play.  There is NO reason for Ensk and Mines to be in the rotation for tier 6+.  More to the point, you can't adequately support game play like Encounter and Assault on something so small.

 

Erlenberg is nothing but a corridor map NOW. The only lane of attck is the town that is so built up that very little flanking fire can be put on the heavies. While the side look open they are not. The excess bushes at the end of both outsides promote camping. Since both sides have been flattened out TONS, there is no holding the high grow for defense or flanking fire. Since the town has been built up so much the artillery can no fire on lite heavies. The very short sight lines from this poorly reworked map promotes camping with no scouting. This one of the worst map reworks I have seen in any game!

The problem with the 20+ map we have is that the map rotation program only allows like 3-6 map to rotate per hour. I am still get only 3-4 maps per hour to play on. All the maps are corridor maps no matter what they look like and only promote brawling while screwing over every other class in the game 90% of the time.The maps need to be limited by size per tier with the largest maps being used for tanks higher in tiers. There is no good reason for tier 7+ to be on any map smaller then 1000x1000. WoT can resize the maps quickly. I personally would love to see 1500x1500 or even 2000x2000 maps for tiers 7+ since the view range values of the higher tier tanks.

Nunya_000 #25 Posted Jul 12 2018 - 20:28

    Major

  • Players
  • 21033 battles
  • 12,785
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostGunadie, on Jul 12 2018 - 10:03, said:

 

If there are more options and likes of travel that would make a huge difference!

What WG "designers" (and I use that word generously) do it funnel the game play to 3 points and force head to head gameplay

City maps should be completely open and allow for umpteen paths of approach and retraction not some retarded tank trap and unrealistic drop off from both sides

All this design will do is promote camping at both of the far entrances. 

Who, other than the unsuspecting, and maybe some zippy scouts would go in to a enclosure with a guaranteed bad outcome, or in this case no outcome but annihilation!

DUMB! 

 

Don't disagree with you.  I think the biggest problem is that the maps are too small for the number of tanks in each battle.  Larger maps will allow more options.....though they might cause issues later in the game.

Drone157 #26 Posted Jul 12 2018 - 21:01

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 21337 battles
  • 317
  • [GBOTS] GBOTS
  • Member since:
    01-19-2012

I just counted how many “unique” non-reskin maps we currently have in game, 30. exactly 30.

Here’s a list of popular games and their number of maps.

Battlefield 4: 10

Black ops 3: 12

League of Legends: 1 per mode.

Halo 5: 6 for Team Slayer mode.

Rainbow Six Siege: 18

Overwatch: 18 with smaller versions for Arcade mode.

 

Many of these introduce more maps as DLC, however WoT does not charge you to play new maps when they come out.

Again, the idea that we don’t have enough maps is absurd, these aren’t “the same old maps” many of the old maps were removed, many of these are relatively new(at least compared to himmelsdorf”

 

Steppes is a pretty open map, yet nobody goes in the open, they stick to the corridors... why is that? Might be because it’s safer.



Altwar #27 Posted Jul 13 2018 - 01:17

    Major

  • Players
  • 54798 battles
  • 3,911
  • [A-F] A-F
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011

View PostNunya_000, on Jul 12 2018 - 11:28, said:

 

Don't disagree with you.  I think the biggest problem is that the maps are too small for the number of tanks in each battle.  Larger maps will allow more options.....though they might cause issues later in the game.

 

Good point here in that larger maps will allow more options.   Given the view range of upper tier tanks versus the sizes of the maps, many of these maps can be traversed across rather quickly or at least brought within view range and then what?  That's the end of the map so positioning upon it is an important thing and it's more of a chess match.

 

If Wargaming opened up the maps even to a 1200 x 1200 size, we have 44% larger maps, the tanks with the best view range no longer spot the other side within a few moments and more play can happen.   As it is right now, maps like Ensk and Lakeville force tanks to the edges of the maps to remain concealed which doesn't exactly give players much room to breathe.  Or there's Abbey and Mines where pretty much you have to put yourself into viewing range immediately if you want to keep your cap and SPGs from being under siege early in the battle.   And think about SPG range?   Some maps allow SPGs to hit nearly anywhere on it without having to move.   If larger maps were put into play and now the SPGs have to push forward if they want to bring their gun into play (think Frontline and Grand Battles), now things get interesting.  Want to sit in the back all battle long?  Okay, chances are you are going to have nothing to shoot at because the battle points are not necessarily within range anymore.

 

As it is now, many of these maps amount to fighting in a small box that many of us have seen thousands of times (or dozens or hundreds if you want to count the HD versions as "new") and they are stale.   Cliff, sure, it has some nice new ruins on the map and such but it's not like there's some dramatic way about the way it plays.  It's the same ole, same ole.  Abbey has a nice pond on the west side with ruins there and still plays the same.  And so on and so forth, which is why I lobby for more maps.  O, seasonal maps.  Say, during the summer, there are more desert or scrub land maps or heck, reskin some of the regular maps so they have a seasonal feel.    In the fall, Redshire can have more trees with fall colors and such.   Winter we can see more snow skinned maps like say Sand River with snow?  Or similar such stuff that makes the current maps seems to be more than they are.  Maybe some random changes per map like every time you play Steppes, maybe there's some depressions that aren't there that usually are but now there are some elsewhere that appear this time but not next?

 

 



Trauglodyte #28 Posted Jul 13 2018 - 14:01

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 15755 battles
  • 2,409
  • Member since:
    06-04-2016

View PostJTM78, on Jul 12 2018 - 20:16, said:

 

Erlenberg is nothing but a corridor map NOW. The only lane of attck is the town that is so built up that very little flanking fire can be put on the heavies. While the side look open they are not. The excess bushes at the end of both outsides promote camping. Since both sides have been flattened out TONS, there is no holding the high grow for defense or flanking fire. Since the town has been built up so much the artillery can no fire on lite heavies. The very short sight lines from this poorly reworked map promotes camping with no scouting. This one of the worst map reworks I have seen in any game!

The problem with the 20+ map we have is that the map rotation program only allows like 3-6 map to rotate per hour. I am still get only 3-4 maps per hour to play on. All the maps are corridor maps no matter what they look like and only promote brawling while screwing over every other class in the game 90% of the time.The maps need to be limited by size per tier with the largest maps being used for tanks higher in tiers. There is no good reason for tier 7+ to be on any map smaller then 1000x1000. WoT can resize the maps quickly. I personally would love to see 1500x1500 or even 2000x2000 maps for tiers 7+ since the view range values of the higher tier tanks.

 

I get what you're saying.  But, let's look at Steppes.  Why don't people drive down the 3 line and the 7 line (ie., the two open areas between the side corridors and the central river bed)?  The answer to that question is because they'd immediately get spotted and destroyed by everyone in render range and beyond (SPGs).  People complain about corridors but then they fail to realize the alternative.  You either build a map that has areas with cover which, in turn, people gravitate towards.  OR, you create an entirely open map and watch people get God smacked.  In games like this, there is no grey area.  Seriously, think of every map that we have in rotation that is NOT a city/city-ish map.  All of them have one thing in common:  massive amounts of unused open territory that will forever remain open territory because driving across it will mean the end of you.  Erlenberg is central corridor heavy because the bush emplacements at the Northwest and Southeast corners provide so much cover that you end up bogged down at the 1 and 0 line mid points and thus get picked off if you sit there for too long.  Ergo, the center is the safest place from which to operate because everything else is <drum roll> open ground.  The only way to fix the issue would be to apply the Prok/Muro effects and just slather every map in bushes.  But, then you have a situation that I had last night where my 505 meter view range RU couldn't pick up 3x T95s rolling down the 1 line until they were within 250 meters.  So, we pick our poison and grit our teeth when it goes against us because no map is ever perfect.  Just be glad that every map isn't Leningrad (though, I REALLY enjoyed that map).

 

As to your point about map rotation, you're exactly correct.  Between only getting 5-7 games an hour and the algorithm being based upon the entire 30 person game make-up, you're likely to repeat maps over and over again instead of getting new ones.  The irony is that you can complain about getting the same maps while other people are happy that they haven't seen the same map yet.  RNG is especially a [edited]with this.



Drone157 #29 Posted Jul 13 2018 - 17:39

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 21337 battles
  • 317
  • [GBOTS] GBOTS
  • Member since:
    01-19-2012

View PostTrauglodyte, on Jul 13 2018 - 08:01, said:

 

As to your point about map rotation, you're exactly correct.  Between only getting 5-7 games an hour and the algorithm being based upon the entire 30 person game make-up, you're likely to repeat maps over and over again instead of getting new ones.  The irony is that you can complain about getting the same maps while other people are happy that they haven't seen the same map yet.  RNG is especially a [edited]with this.

 

Again, I challenge you to install a sessions mod, Yasenkrasen is a solid one. I’m confident you’ll find that the rotation is fine.



Kliphie #30 Posted Jul 13 2018 - 17:50

    Major

  • Players
  • 30606 battles
  • 3,092
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    07-20-2012
Careful Drone, keep pointing out the flaws in "feels" data and you'll be accused of being on the payroll.  

Nunya_000 #31 Posted Jul 13 2018 - 17:55

    Major

  • Players
  • 21033 battles
  • 12,785
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostDrone157, on Jul 13 2018 - 08:39, said:

 

Again, I challenge you to install a sessions mod, Yasenkrasen is a solid one. I’m confident you’ll find that the rotation is fine.

 

I agree.  I can play 10 battles and will normally never see a repeat of a map.

24cups #32 Posted Jul 13 2018 - 17:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 23041 battles
  • 2,398
  • [D-DAY] D-DAY
  • Member since:
    01-25-2013

View PostKliphie, on Jul 13 2018 - 11:50, said:

Careful Drone, keep pointing out the flaws in "feels" data and you'll be accused of being on the payroll.  

Shill ! Stooge ! Crony  !

Did I miss any ?

 

Oops... forgot fanboi  !



Trauglodyte #33 Posted Jul 13 2018 - 18:22

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 15755 battles
  • 2,409
  • Member since:
    06-04-2016

View PostDrone157, on Jul 13 2018 - 17:39, said:

 

Again, I challenge you to install a sessions mod, Yasenkrasen is a solid one. I’m confident you’ll find that the rotation is fine.

 

At what point did I say that the rotation is bad?  Read again what I wrote.  The algorithm isn't based solely on you.  It is a weighted algorithm that takes the entire player pool into the equation.  I had Ensk a couple of nights ago 3 times in 5 games.  According to you, that didn't happen because the map rotation is fine which means that I'm either lying or exaggerating.  Yet, since I've collected data on every game that I've played since the new MM and map algorithm went live proves you wrong.

 

To be clear:

 

- I am NOT saying that the algorithm doesn't work

- I am NOT saying that the map rotation is bad

- I AM saying that, due to how the algorithm works and the pool of players upon which is derives the rotation, you can hit the same map again and again in a small number of games which, in turn, gives the sense that it isn't working

 

I don't feel bad about map rotations and I don't feel about map designs, per se.  What I feel bad about is when people blame maps and then play completely within the confines of those map designs and then [edited]about how they're broken.  You'll either play in the open and pay the price for it or you'll gravitate toward the corridors and live longer.

 

EDIT:  underlined the "feels" words to differentiate between action and thought; ergo dirty RNG can happen but it happens in limited cycles


Edited by Trauglodyte, Jul 13 2018 - 19:23.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users