Jump to content

Wll we ever have a patch focused on map design?


Will it ever happen?  

63 members have voted

  1. 1. Will Gaijin ever focus on maps

    • Gaijin gonna Gaijin
      57
    • maybe
      6


At this point I'm fairly convinced that some maps are simply J out straight at the beginning. Especially fields of poland, which has been broken for years now with those goddamn cliffs that have been adjusted like 10 times already yet they are still broken OP

 

Give me map updates so I can actually enjoy my vehicles instead of dying 5 seconds after the start of the match

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, chomiake said:

At this point I'm fairly convinced that some maps are simply J out straight at the beginning. Especially fields of poland, which has been broken for years now with those goddamn cliffs that have been adjusted like 10 times already yet they are still broken OP

 

Give me map updates so I can actually enjoy my vehicles instead of dying 5 seconds after the start of the match

I personally don't like any map with 3 bases. As I usually grind in bombers. Besides that any map is fine besides fields of poland,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't expect too much from it. To be honest, there is no map in the game that does not have a BUG   Even the old maps have bugs, like little stones that can completely block dozens of tons of tanks and a little concrete fence that can block off tank shells.

Edited by Naga1224
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the Vote is 11 to 0 ...absolutely no confidence in the developer.

I mentioned it today in an Air RB match but i would love to see a Ground Forces Map for the map called "City" the one with the hunge Skyscrapers and Highways 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, CreditCardCmndo said:

I love the Vote is 11 to 0 ...absolutely no confidence in the developer.

I mentioned it today in an Air RB match but i would love to see a Ground Forces Map for the map called "City" the one with the hunge Skyscrapers and Highways 

There is one. It's Alaska. It's not nearly that big of a city though.

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Delfigrey said:

There is one. It's Alaska. It's not nearly that big of a city though.

most maps that are 'big' are wide open field maps, the rest are small city maps with no or little cover, and crap spawn point locations, let alone the ability to shoot into spawn, from spawns. So yeah, I can see why people have little faith in the devs, I'd be surprised if the devs had faith in themselves.

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, GhostUnitVII said:

most maps that are 'big' are wide open field maps, the rest are small city maps with no or little cover, and crap spawn point locations, let alone the ability to shoot into spawn, from spawns. So yeah, I can see why people have little faith in the devs, I'd be surprised if the devs had faith in themselves.

The air version is fun to fly through. There is stuff in there to do, but the tank version is so much smaller. It would be fun to hunt other players on the larger map, but Gaijin thinks we want small maps. Those are fine for low tiers, but not for tanks that can cross the map quickly and kill from 2 kilometers away.

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
On 19/12/2020 at 10:07, Thodin said:

I'd like to have more maps which have real battle sites as templae. All those artificial nonsense maps are not that great, like Alaska, Italy etc...

 

I would too, though you have to think about how those maps would be implemented in the game.  Personally, I'm more concerned about where players will spawn and where the capture points are located.  I think that before we add even more maps, we ought to think about the maps we have now and make adjustments to those lest they slip off our radar again.

 

This.  H u r t s .

 

MapLayout_Battle_Italy.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, False_Swiss said:

 

I would too, though you have to think about how those maps would be implemented in the game.  Personally, I'm more concerned about where players will spawn and where the capture points are located.  I think that before we add even more maps, we ought to think about the maps we have now and make adjustments to those lest they slip off our radar again.

 

This.  H u r t s .

 

MapLayout_Battle_Italy.jpg

What is wrong with this one? Own cap 1/3 of the distance to enemy spawn, enemy cap 2/3 to enemy spawn. The castle and terrain blocks view from spawn to spawn. I think this is one of the better ones when it comes to spawn and cap positioning. Blue side has a little bit of advantage since they have the cap that is easier to defend.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Himish said:

What is wrong with this one? Own cap 1/3 of the distance to enemy spawn, enemy cap 2/3 to enemy spawn. The castle and terrain blocks view from spawn to spawn. I think this is one of the better ones when it comes to spawn and cap positioning. Blue side has a little bit of advantage since they have the cap that is easier to defend.

 

Driving time is what a lot of players dislike. Nobody wants to spend driving around for 5min to get one tapped and back to hangar. 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, TheKomrade said:

Driving time is what a lot of players dislike. Nobody wants to spend driving around for 5min to get one tapped and back to hangar.

At that Campania map, generally it is about a minute or less to get to the friendly cap, unless you are in some super heavy thing.

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TheKomrade said:

Driving time is what a lot of players dislike. Nobody wants to spend driving around for 5min to get one tapped and back to hangar. 

If you play Realistic without markers that should not be a problem as IF players want instant action without long ways to drive (or without the possiblity to flank) they can still use the Arcade Mode.

 

So bigger Maps could be a thing on Realistic / Simulator and small Maps for Arcade (not all the time but 70-80%).

 

Even on lower Tiers like BR 4.7 upwards, but especially in hightier when tanks with 1500hp, laserrangefinder (10.000m) and APFSDS with 1500m/s and modern CAS like Choppers and Jets (not to think of the things which are still coming in the futur).

 

--> i dont want to play with BR 10.7 on ashriver / frozenpass or small mozdok, the engangementdistances are just crazy low.

Edited by Noir89
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Noir89 said:

If you play Realistic without markers that should not be a problem as IF players want instant action without long ways to drive (or without the possiblity to flank) they can still use the Arcade Mode.

 

So bigger Maps could be a thing on Realistic / Simulator and small Maps for Arcade (not all the time but 70-80%).

 

Even on lower Tiers like BR 4.7 upwards, but especially in hightier when tanks with 1500hp, laserrangefinder (10.000m) and APFSDS with 1500m/s and modern CAS like Choppers and Jets (not to think of the things which are still coming in the futur).

 

--> i dont want to play with BR 10.7 on ashriver / frozenpass or small mozdok, the engangementdistances are just crazy low.

 

Suggest bigger maps for higher tiers instead. Arcade is not option and ''Realistic'' battles is just what used to be in Air battles and wasn't renamed to Combines battles or Aracde+

medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These maps are not designed with high tier in mind. We need a whole separate pool of maps specially for high tier. Either add new maps specially for high tier or rework existing ones, and dont half **** it by just expanding the spawns or adding a rock or two.

medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What YOU want in map design others HATE.

So no, I can't imagine Gaijin guessing which player to listen to.  Especially since the MAJORITY of players want fast, CQC games.  You want a more "competitive" selection then I suggest pushing for a split between types of player.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Deranger79 said:

What YOU want in map design others HATE.

So no, I can't imagine Gaijin guessing which player to listen to.  Especially since the MAJORITY of players want fast, CQC games.  You want a more "competitive" selection then I suggest pushing for a split between types of player.

yes: make arcarde mode more close too each other like that, they will have to TDM from spawn to spawn,... :D

and make RB great again!

  • Like 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Cpt_Bel_V said:

yes: make arcarde mode more close too each other like that, they will have to TDM from spawn to spawn,... :D

and make RB great again!

 

Oh I'd hate it. But you need to see what the majority of the player base do within matches on the way to TT.

 

Almost EVERY match is a rush to CQC areas, without fail.

 

Two examples: Factory (yes it all really CQC but one area is the worst for it), Tunisia.

 

Explain to me why else 90% of players go exactly the same way with most of the team always making a B-line for the built up areas. Heck, even Fire Arc! (And there is a huge difference between making the most of these areas and just hiding amongst them).

 

The problem with "what we want from maps" is that everyone likes something different. Past situations have seen maps removed (good or bad) and whole match modes being wiped out of the game.

 

If people really wanted "better maps" then where are the details of what these maps would look like. I doubt taking advice from most comments would bring maps anywhere near what people expect to be a "good map".

 

The silent majority seem to love CQC fast action, no tactics. Welcome to DumbThunder aka SoloThunder.

 

Thing to do, each throw down comprehensive guides as to how to make maps work for you, then compare. If it's that easy then draw some up!

Edited by Deranger79
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem isn't high tier, even at lower tiers these maps are problematic, at best. Once you die and the enemy team advances to positions ahead of the cap you'll have a hard time getting it back so some players quit and the rest are basecamped.

Gaijin must change the way they develop maps to allow different playstyles. Bigger maps for them is simply and open field with no cover.

There's a lot of improvement to be made, for example, objectives could be a Hangar or downed airplane instead of a circle. Also, objectives should be better covered, so if someone takes the risk of going there they're not punished by players idling sitting 1km+ away. We need less maps like Advance to the Rhine and more like Carpathians.

  • Like 2
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there are only two truly horrible maps unrelated to BR: the Karelia conquest, where the center hill with view to enemy spawn and the cap and the single cap itself are basically on the side of the other team; the Port Novorossiysk domination, where the other team basically has two home caps and the other just one. The reason is that these are not a level playing field for both teams.

 

Most maps are OK at low BR and gradually get worse through better penetration and accuracy of the weapons over long distances and the difference in mobility when the BR increases, but remain somewhat equal for both teams. Some functionally pretty OK maps are ruined by that they are disliked by so many players that they incite suicidal and one death leaving behaviour.

 

A lot of the players see the maps through the lens of the current SL-RP economy, and their goals and the view how the maps relate to it is very different from the players who do not care about the economy that much or with different emphasis. Maybe you could make a map to some kind of compromise for all of these players, but then there is the huge number of players who are acting beyond all logic.

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard the map design team is literally only 2 people. No thorough playtesting at all, aside from the brief period on the dev server, and that's not nearly enough time to make any real geometry changes. That's why almost every maps plays horribly; they're designed to look good, not really to play well.

 

Funnily enough, a few maps could have almost all their issues fixed if they just rotated the spawn/capture locations.

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/01/2021 at 13:39, Deranger79 said:

Almost EVERY match is a rush to CQC areas, without fail.

By the way, I consider this partly as a symptom of dissatisfaction with the map. The rush to the massive CQC cluster is because they want to get to the next map quickly and they harvest as much SL and RP as quickly as possible and die quickly then leave after first death or take a plane. The same players might play tactically smart, even long distance engagements, if they are satisfied with the map. Because of the differing views what is a decent map this kind of behaviour is present at almost all maps.

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/01/2021 at 12:39, Deranger79 said:

 

Oh I'd hate it. But you need to see what the majority of the player base do within matches on the way to TT.

 

Almost EVERY match is a rush to CQC areas, without fail.

 

Two examples: Factory (yes it all really CQC but one area is the worst for it), Tunisia.

 

Explain to me why else 90% of players go exactly the same way with most of the team always making a B-line for the built up areas. Heck, even Fire Arc! (And there is a huge difference between making the most of these areas and just hiding amongst them).

 

The problem with "what we want from maps" is that everyone likes something different. Past situations have seen maps removed (good or bad) and whole match modes being wiped out of the game.

 

If people really wanted "better maps" then where are the details of what these maps would look like. I doubt taking advice from most comments would bring maps anywhere near what people expect to be a "good map".

 

The silent majority seem to love CQC fast action, no tactics. Welcome to DumbThunder aka SoloThunder.

 

Thing to do, each throw down comprehensive guides as to how to make maps work for you, then compare. If it's that easy then draw some up!

You know i was ironic, huh? 

 

Gaijin had followed people when maps were Bigs allowing a real battle time, and strategy. 

2nd Battle of El-Alamein, was way bigger than it is right now. 

 

But those newbies peoples of 2015/2016 have asked to reduce size of maps for both AB and RB mode.

 

Of course now peoples have grown, of course now we have more interesting peoples who know that a tank ain't only meant to go in CQB only(mainly Rank3+, we can found some in Rank 1/2)

 

Now they(you too) want Biggers maps!

Now they want real spawn protection like a Base (AKA, Battlefield 3/4)! 

Now they're wanting more than those 2x2km maps,... 

 

Fulda map(3.2x3.2km) was designed to make people disagree on bigger maps. 

And Gaijin made it well As it works when people said Fulda is a bad map. (still those 2015/2016 peoples) 

 

And it affects now RB GROUND as RB AIR (which only had 2 big map:Spain and Afghanistan) 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/01/2021 at 08:39, Deranger79 said:

 

Explain to me why else 90% of players go exactly the same way with most of the team always making a B-line for the built up areas. Heck, even Fire Arc! (And there is a huge difference between making the most of these areas and just hiding amongst them).

Fire Arc never worked as a map, looking back years before when we even had bots and the map was called Kursk. The idea that holding the central part of the map gives you access to every other part of it makes it impossible to recover from a game if the enemy team doesn't overextend. It's the epitome of big maps for Gaijin; big, open maps and no cover - which means basecamped from 1,5km+. And they wonder why people quit after a single death.

In my opinion, maps should allow for more than a single way of playing. Most maps have 3 capture points, meaning there's a lot of room for working, lots of things to implement. They can make big open fields for those who want to camp and CQC in cities (true cities, not a small village where you can get shot from outside) and everyone can get what they want.

I think the frustration mostly comes from being forced into a playstyle you don't want, like expecting a long range map and get Berlin or wanting to play CQC and getting European Province.

 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 11/01/2021 at 02:10, Lahgtah said:

I've heard the map design team is literally only 2 people. No thorough playtesting at all, aside from the brief period on the dev server, and that's not nearly enough time to make any real geometry changes. That's why almost every maps plays horribly; they're designed to look good, not really to play well.

 

Funnily enough, a few maps could have almost all their issues fixed if they just rotated the spawn/capture locations.

 

second job, 10 hours a month.   Certainly a student , he was told our target group are 10 years old .with to much pocket money .  After 8 years of "work" the map design  looks like a failed painting attempt by a 3 year old .

The whole map design is based to 80% on tunnels (3 roads 3 ways) giant stones, scattered on the smallest area. Unimaginative, childish, unrealistic.

 

 

 

On 11/01/2021 at 20:37, Despeao said:


I think the frustration mostly comes from being forced into a playstyle you don't want, like expecting a long range map and get Berlin or wanting to play CQC and getting European Province.

 

 

 

Frustration comes from being too ignorant to put 1 + 1 together.
Advertise with realism, sell very expensive stuff, but too lazy to create a suitable playground , for the expansive Toys.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...