Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
ZealousStrategist

Map tactics

13 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[BOOBY]
Players
21 posts
4,482 battles

 

Hello and welcome to this topic :Smile_hiding:

 

I do not know if this topic was already discussed, but even if it was I believe it can't be bad to "refresh" it.

 

The "goal" of this topic is to discuss, share and/or create tactics for the maps that exist currently in game.

 

I would like to start this topic with a tool, that some may be familiar with: https://en.wowstactic.tk - tool for creating tactics on maps

I hope that we could potentially even have tactic discussion sessions on this tool if possible.

Using this tool we could also "create" scenarios which we can discuss here or elsewhere.

 

The next thing I would like to point out are a few videos that I have found "helpful": 

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLslIWpE2CMxSj6Kf7EPZdSLHtQ4q0eNP6--

 



Now...

I have a lot of possible scenarios I would like to discuss, but I would rather "hear" what you the  1 who read all this has to say, so please leave your thoughts/strategies in the comments. :cap_win:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BOOBY]
Players
21 posts
4,482 battles
53 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

Thx for pointing out this section, but rather then vague advice, what I am looking for are actual plans, or rather creating simulations and discussing how to make appropriate counters.

For example: image.thumb.png.c9c7260831fd3f2c3a5a829004ff464a.png

Now the situation in the pic will probably never happen, but it was made just to show that having a plan "mapped" out gives finer details then saying things like: 

"The problem of this map is that going to B and C, the better option, requires superb discipline onf behalf of most of the team. DD's need to scout and smoke, BB's need to angle and threaten caps while cruisers support and keep their consumable toys ready. Superb discipline is required because there are so few islands covering B and C. Because of this, the first team opposite B and C that withdrawls is the team that loses instantly. And since player generally avoid risk and damage, which makes sense, any position near B and C is an inherently unstable one."

or: "Cover the caps your team wants to capture with guns.

Other ships are better suited to cap early."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
5,061 posts
8,562 battles

No 2 games are the same. You can plan like this for clan battles, not for randoms. And for CB you really should do that with your clanmates not with people on forums

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TTTX]
[TTTX]
Players
4,608 posts
8,081 battles

having a plan as a team and sticking to it is a good idea.

 

having a plan when you have no idea what your team is going to do, not so much...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BOOBY]
Players
21 posts
4,482 battles
22 minutes ago, wilkatis_LV said:

No 2 games are the same. You can plan like this for clan battles, not for randoms. And for CB you really should do that with your clanmates not with people on forums

Yes, you are right. But if you do limit it to just clan mates, then you won't end up with the best possible result which is to have a solid strategy against most opponents.

Not to mention that clan mates are  only so experienced in the field of strategy and plan making.

Thus only by exchanging ideas and strategies, such as over the forums, can we as individual players gain more experience in plan making and thus better help our own respective clans (if that is your main issue).

 

The other benefit of strategizing over the forums is that players who are not in clans, but want to help their teams in random battle to have a higher win ratio, could also gain more insight into map strategies and thus increasing their chances of successfull battles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
5,061 posts
8,562 battles
37 minutes ago, ZealousStrategist said:

Yes, you are right. But if you do limit it to just clan mates, then you won't end up with the best possible result which is to have a solid strategy against most opponents.

Not to mention that clan mates are  only so experienced in the field of strategy and plan making.

Thus only by exchanging ideas and strategies, such as over the forums, can we as individual players gain more experience in plan making and thus better help our own respective clans (if that is your main issue). 

 

The other benefit of strategizing over the forums is that players who are not in clans, but want to help their teams in random battle to have a higher win ratio, could also gain more insight into map strategies and thus increasing their chances of successfull battles.

That comes down mostly to simply playing your own ships better. Pre-determined tactics won't work because of how random the game is. 21...23 other players play their own game with no regards for what you have planned. And trying to stick to some plan will just ruin your chances as what you needed to do was "react" and "adapt". Every single time.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
4,651 posts
11,707 battles
14 minutes ago, ZealousStrategist said:

The other benefit of strategizing over the forums is that players who are not in clans, but want to help their teams in random battle to have a higher win ratio, could also gain more insight into map strategies and thus increasing their chances of successfull battles.

Making team-wide strategies won't help that, though. The insights a solo player might get from such discussions won't apply when the team does their own thing(s) and - what's worse - feeling that "you know the strategy" can make you a cringy armchair admiral that tries to force some global strategy instead working with the team.

 

The level of insight valuable to a solo player is being aware of the main open lines of fire, sight and approach (all these can sometimes be surprising based on how high or how flat certain islands are). When you know where a convenient crossfire can happen or which caps can be contested "safely" (and which positions being overrun by the enemy make it no longer safe) and other stuff like this... the rest is basically building your personal strategy around the particular kind of potatoes on both teams. What use is there in having some theoretical idea about what they should be doing? You won't get to make strategies for your team. Even if you happen to have some idea about what they should be doing, they won't listen to you. Some because they don't like being told what to do, some because they're too stupid to get where you are coming from, some because they have another idea or just don't want to stake anything on a tactic that requires a decent follow-up from the team they don't trust (say: they don't expect friendly Radar cruisers to really help them in the cap so they won't try and contest the cap in a Kitakaze against Z-52 because they know that yes, they can win 1v1 easily but only IF the friendly Radar briefly negates the Hydro advantage - and just having a Radar cruiser close enough to make that happen is nowhere near enough guarantee that the Radar is going to be used at all, especially when the cruiser in question might not have a line of fire to the enemy DD due to terrain).

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BOOBY]
Players
21 posts
4,482 battles
5 minutes ago, eliastion said:

Making team-wide strategies won't help that, though. The insights a solo player might get from such discussions won't apply when the team does their own thing(s) and - what's worse - feeling that "you know the strategy" can make you a cringy armchair admiral that tries to force some global strategy instead working with the team.

 

The level of insight valuable to a solo player is being aware of the main open lines of fire, sight and approach (all these can sometimes be surprising based on how high or how flat certain islands are). When you know where a convenient crossfire can happen or which caps can be contested "safely" (and which positions being overrun by the enemy make it no longer safe) and other stuff like this... the rest is basically building your personal strategy around the particular kind of potatoes on both teams. What use is there in having some theoretical idea about what they should be doing? You won't get to make strategies for your team. Even if you happen to have some idea about what they should be doing, they won't listen to you. Some because they don't like being told what to do, some because they're too stupid to get where you are coming from, some because they have another idea or just don't want to stake anything on a tactic that requires a decent follow-up from the team they don't trust (say: they don't expect friendly Radar cruisers to really help them in the cap so they won't try and contest the cap in a Kitakaze against Z-52 because they know that yes, they can win 1v1 easily but only IF the friendly Radar briefly negates the Hydro advantage - and just having a Radar cruiser close enough to make that happen is nowhere near enough guarantee that the Radar is going to be used at all, especially when the cruiser in question might not have a line of fire to the enemy DD due to terrain).

You are indeed correct, for the most part...

But more often then not, when the first player on my (random battle) team sinks. 90% of the battles I played where I (personally) give a pointer on what the side of the map (where that ship sank) should do.

They in most cases do it. 

What's more, what I noticed from my many battles trying to make the team be more team playable (the random battle 1).

When I "stack up" a success rate in terms of "orders", where after at least 1 player does something I said they should do and succedes (and continues doing good for a period of time, thus "stacking up the success from "my" orders").

In such cases the team always without exception ends up following my orders as if I was some Admiral of sorts (which is kinda fun) :cap_win:.

Spoiler

I say target him, and they do so, etc.

 

However getting to that point, or rather "stacking up" the "good" orders is a huge "pain in the *ss", and thus such events where I generally give orders to the (random battles team) are not many, simply because it is tiring to issue orders while trying to do well with the ship you have taken,

Spoiler

Unless you are on a bb, where you have more then enough time to chat during the reload of your guns. But even then, it can be a pain some times.

 All in all, if you have enough patience for it, you can 100% guaranteed make your (rb team) listen to your strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
8,460 posts
13,036 battles
1 hour ago, Tyrendian89 said:

having a plan as a team and sticking to it is a good idea.

 

having a plan when you have no idea what your team is going to do, not so much...

 

That.

This.

What he said.

Quoted for emphasis.

Quoted for truth.

^

 

 

Even if you can (and should) narrow down optimal positions on any given map for any given ship and your preferred playstyle for maximum efficacy, it is always going to be a necessity to adjust or if needed abandon your usual position if your team's position makes your initial intentions untenable. A Des Moines/Worcester behind an island near a cap is a great idea in general, but if your team leaves your sides open for the enemy to flank or simply abandons that part of the map completely you'd just die there with minimal impact.

 

Optimally team's would be roughly aware of one anothers' positioning and synergize, but realistically that's not something anyone should plan on. It's a nice thing when it happens, but more often than not you'll just have to make due with filling the gaps where you can as the match flows around you.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BHSFL]
Players
3,366 posts
13,049 battles

It is good to have a few set scenario's in mind when determinating a strategy. But without scouting/spotting and see what the enemy is up to you can't make decisions and be in control of the outcome.

 

When playing individually one should assess removing what ship would benefit the team most at any given moment. Teams that have most of such players simply win of teams that just "shoot at ships" or "that kill is mine"

 

Lol at those "Forbidden for BB" signs on some close cluster of islands. I get the message....still i will decide myself to go in there or not. Because Master Sun Tzu said : "attack where it's not expected"  sometimes that can be BB or even CV creeping through narrow passes they barely fit through. Yes that is stupid when caught pants down.....but it's not when you cap with the enemy team being too far out to prevent losing, or shoot them in the back with their turrets pointing 180 degrees in the other direction....and so on. Despite that being very DD-ish, we all did that with other class ships  right ?  :-)))

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
26,035 posts
14,077 battles
9 hours ago, Beastofwar said:

 

Lol at those "Forbidden for BB" signs on some close cluster of islands. I get the message....still i will decide myself to go in there or not. Because Master Sun Tzu said : "attack where it's not expected"  sometimes that can be BB or even CV creeping through narrow passes they barely fit through. Yes that is stupid when caught pants down.....but it's not when you cap with the enemy team being too far out to prevent losing, or shoot them in the back with their turrets pointing 180 degrees in the other direction....and so on. Despite that being very DD-ish, we all did that with other class ships  right ?  :-)))

Not if it takes you minutes out of the match and your team has to fight outnumbered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,290 posts
14,054 battles

I thought the new and only tactic was to just blob together and get picked off slowly and don’t go for caps???

 

Coz that’s what all my teams mostly do...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×