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

River Delta and other Closed Maps.

25 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[THESO]
Weekend Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,575 posts
10,707 battles

I personally like Two Brothers. Not for the Center Rush. But for some of the Interesting Fights sometimes happening there.

 

So I would like to pose a Question.

 

 

Has WG considered making Maps that are much more closed with lack of the Typical Open Spaces ?

 

For example. A River Delta Map which Consists of a Web of Connected Channels and Lakes with Larger Space actually being occupied by Islands.

 

Or a Channel Map which is fairly Long but only maybe 20-30km wide.

 

 

In General Msps that are Special and Provide much less Open Water Combat and far more Close Range Combat between Landmasses :)

 

 

 

  • Cool 5
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LAFIE]
Beta Tester
6,267 posts
6,690 battles

I really hate Two Bros personally because it forces the teams to split in two, and worse still, leaves the halves completely unable to support each other.

 

A hearty "no thanks!" to any similar maps from me.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TACHA]
Players
1,210 posts
22 minutes ago, lafeel said:

I really hate Two Bros personally because it forces the teams to split in two, and worse still, leaves the halves completely unable to support each other.

 

A hearty "no thanks!" to any similar maps from me.

 

In a low-lying river deltaesque landscape, there wouldn't necessarily be much terrain getting in the way of shots, just spits of land between river channels. Perhaps if the cover were high enough to block line of sight between channels (to add emphasis to the role of spotting), but low enough to be easily fired over (tree canopies and the like rather than hills/mountains)?

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TRID]
Players
294 posts
5,686 battles
30 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

I personally like Two Brothers. Not for the Center Rush. But for some of the Interesting Fights sometimes happening there.

 

So I would like to pose a Question.

 

 

Has WG considered making Maps that are much more closed with lack of the Typical Open Spaces ?

 

For example. A River Delta Map which Consists of a Web of Connected Channels and Lakes with Larger Space actually being occupied by Islands.

 

Or a Channel Map which is fairly Long but only maybe 20-30km wide.

 

 

In General Msps that are Special and Provide much less Open Water Combat and far more Close Range Combat between Landmasses :)

 

 

 

 

What you need here is good ol' fashioned gunboat diplomacy with a couple of monitors perhaps (seems like a cool setting for an operation...hint hint). Aside from this, corridor maps in a naval game, not the best for maneuvore really and would favour heavily armoured ships. Remember to bring your floating Mauschen!

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LAFIE]
Beta Tester
6,267 posts
6,690 battles
13 minutes ago, NobleSauvage said:

 

In a low-lying river deltaesque landscape, there wouldn't necessarily be much terrain getting in the way of shots, just spits of land between river channels. Perhaps if the cover were high enough to block line of sight between channels (to add emphasis to the role of spotting), but low enough to be easily fired over (tree canopies and the like rather than hills/mountains)?

As long as the two halves of the team can at least try to help each other then we can talk, it's the second part of that comment that makes me hate Two Bros more than the first.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TPF-]
Players
5,029 posts
20,563 battles

Something like the mouth of the Thames/Medway or the Clyde, or Norwegian fjords around Narvik could be quite fun. Split the teams in half and put them into channels where manouevre could be difficult, but large fleets could be decisive. Brawling ships would love it...

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7,984 posts
30 minutes ago, TheAlba2014 said:

 

What you need here is good ol' fashioned gunboat diplomacy with a couple of monitors perhaps (seems like a cool setting for an operation...hint hint). Aside from this, corridor maps in a naval game, not the best for maneuvore really and would favour heavily armoured ships. Remember to bring your floating Mauschen!

 

For such a map you'd need something completely different. Would work well as an independent game mode... if WG was interested in game development.

 

 

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TACHA]
Players
1,210 posts
34 minutes ago, TheAlba2014 said:

 

What you need here is good ol' fashioned gunboat diplomacy with a couple of monitors perhaps (seems like a cool setting for an operation...hint hint). Aside from this, corridor maps in a naval game, not the best for maneuvore really and would favour heavily armoured ships. Remember to bring your floating Mauschen!

Rufiji Delta, you say? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TRID]
Players
294 posts
5,686 battles
21 minutes ago, NobleSauvage said:

Rufiji Delta, you say? ;)

 

17 minutes ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

 

One possibility, or this too:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amethyst_Incident

 

image.thumb.png.96d81c730b4141b939cc03f22d92a784.png

 

These are both good ideas for a scenario, you could even go pre-WWI in this case, think ironclads or river gunboats that you just wouldn't be able to use in the main game. 

 

Perhaps some sort of breakout scenario escorting a ship through a blockade?

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TRID]
Players
294 posts
5,686 battles

Perhaps not quite what the OP intended, but I wish WG would add in more historical scenarios like they did for Dunkirk. I mean we have Campbeltown languishing at T3, why can't we have the St Nazaire raid as a scenario?

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LUZ1]
Players
2,019 posts
15,842 battles
5 hours ago, Sunleader said:

I personally like Two Brothers. Not for the Center Rush. But for some of the Interesting Fights sometimes happening there.

 

So I would like to pose a Question.

 

 

Has WG considered making Maps that are much more closed with lack of the Typical Open Spaces ?

 

For example. A River Delta Map which Consists of a Web of Connected Channels and Lakes with Larger Space actually being occupied by Islands.

 

Or a Channel Map which is fairly Long but only maybe 20-30km wide.

 

 

In General Msps that are Special and Provide much less Open Water Combat and far more Close Range Combat between Landmasses :)

 

 

 

Although I sympathize with the idea of more diverse maps, I think many maps in WoWs are already too closed and littered with islands. I know this is probably not a popular opinion, but in real life littoral warfare was something for small ships. Big ships like CVs, BBs and cruisers would stay away from coasts like death. Island hugging for cover is weird and happens too much in this game. So personally I woul prefer fewer islands and more open maps.

After all, this is WoWs, not WoT.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[P7S]
Players
322 posts
6 hours ago, Sunleader said:

 

Has WG considered making Maps that are much more closed with lack of the Typical Open Spaces ?

 

You sure you are playing the right game?

 

No wonder that WG games are landsliding if there are such ideas and wishes living in the playerbase.

 

I can already see WG doing this with argumentation:

"Manouvering confuses players"

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Weekend Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,575 posts
10,707 battles
1 hour ago, Camperdown said:

Although I sympathize with the idea of more diverse maps, I think many maps in WoWs are already too closed and littered with islands. I know this is probably not a popular opinion, but in real life littoral warfare was something for small ships. Big ships like CVs, BBs and cruisers would stay away from coasts like death. Island hugging for cover is weird and happens too much in this game. So personally I woul prefer fewer islands and more open maps.

After all, this is WoWs, not WoT.

 

I dont mind. Everyone has its own Opinions.

Albeit the Reason is Fairly Obvious for the Game.

 

Open Ocean Maps as the one we have. Tend to really not Fit the Gamemodes the Game has.

Capturing an Irrelevant Point in the Middle on an Open Oceam Map without Cover or Obstructions tends to unfortunately end up with pretty clear Roflstomps as the Teams are Forced into a Direct Battle by the Domination Mode and any Ship Lost means that you lose Firepower in the Struggle. Meaning that the moment one Side gains even a Slight Advantage that Advantage Snowballs as there is no way of using Islands or Cover to to create a Tactical Engagement where they might Fight and Beat a Limited Part of the Enemy one after the other and thus Reversing the Advantage the Enemy has.

 

Hence WGs Reluctance to use Open Ocean Maps even tough it would be more Realistic.

 

53 minutes ago, Vbeest said:

 

You sure you are playing the right game?

 

No wonder that WG games are landsliding if there are such ideas and wishes living in the playerbase.

 

I can already see WG doing this with argumentation:

"Manouvering confuses players"

 

Ah Love the Instant Hostility towards anything that Differs from your Own Holy Opinion.

Allow me to Answer in Kind.

 

I am Playing World of Warships. An ARCADE Warships Game with Focus on Fast and Action Based Naval Combat.

 

It Seems however that you are looking for a different Game here. With a more Simulation Approach of Realism.

Which means you should likely be checking out War Thunder. A Highly Complicated Game with very High Levels of Realism which for the Sake of said Realism doesnt care if things are Hard to Learn for the Player or tend to take alot of non Action Preparation and Moving Time for the Player.

 

;)

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,056 posts
245 battles

I wouldn't mind this actually, also wouldn't mind a giant mountain or peninsula in the middle of maybe one map, lots of little islands on another and maybe a big map with a small island town on it or something.

Mainly due to how the game works, i would suggest more open for lower tiers however and longer range and accurate secondaries so BB's can move and pew pew moar.

 

for funnies you could have moba style maps with just three rows of islands a little crossways between them lol.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[STEEL]
Players
786 posts
9 hours ago, lafeel said:

I really hate Two Bros personally because it forces the teams to split in two, and worse still, leaves the halves completely unable to support each other.

Also my most hated map. It's like gambling. You have 4 possible courses of action. Going left, going right, going center, staying where you are. In either case, you may meet no enemies for the entire game and cannot shoot over those damn mountains if you find yourself on the no-action side. Sailing around in a slow ship takes half of the game. On the other hand, you might run into the entire enemy team, and nobody can support you. It's a CV map, and everybody else is pretty f*cked if he happens to sail the wrong way at the start of the game.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7,984 posts
7 hours ago, Sunleader said:

 

I dont mind. Everyone has its own Opinions.

Albeit the Reason is Fairly Obvious for the Game.

 

Open Ocean Maps as the one we have. Tend to really not Fit the Gamemodes the Game has.

Capturing an Irrelevant Point in the Middle on an Open Oceam Map without Cover or Obstructions tends to unfortunately end up with pretty clear Roflstomps as the Teams are Forced into a Direct Battle by the Domination Mode and any Ship Lost means that you lose Firepower in the Struggle. Meaning that the moment one Side gains even a Slight Advantage that Advantage Snowballs as there is no way of using Islands or Cover to to create a Tactical Engagement where they might Fight and Beat a Limited Part of the Enemy one after the other and thus Reversing the Advantage the Enemy has.

 

Hence WGs Reluctance to use Open Ocean Maps even tough it would be more Realistic.

 

 

Ah Love the Instant Hostility towards anything that Differs from your Own Holy Opinion.

Allow me to Answer in Kind.

 

I am Playing World of Warships. An ARCADE Warships Game with Focus on Fast and Action Based Naval Combat.

 

It Seems however that you are looking for a different Game here. With a more Simulation Approach of Realism.

Which means you should likely be checking out War Thunder. A Highly Complicated Game with very High Levels of Realism which for the Sake of said Realism doesnt care if things are Hard to Learn for the Player or tend to take alot of non Action Preparation and Moving Time for the Player.

 

;)

 

I've lately come to understand that the kind of single player simulations games many of us like would not work as an online game. However, it has nothing to do with game mechanics, instead the key thing is time compression. In a single player simulation game (note I'm calling it a 'simulation game' not a 'simulator') there is an option to use accelerated time. It is an incredibly important feature because none of us have the time or desire to stare at a computer screen for hours, days, or even weeks in the case of say, submarine simulations.

 

We can't have the same kind of accelerated time option in an online game, so instead they have kind of baked it in.

 

IMO there is a range of options that define how much of an 'arcade' a game is and how much of a 'simulation' it is. The controls in WoWS are pure arcade, but the mechanisms are a incredibly complex, they are simulation level IMO but the problem is they are not realistic.

 

What I don't get is... why make a 'simulation' of something that isn't realistic and call it 'arcade'.

 

If it was optional to have a less arcade game mode meaning more of the Ocean, more open waters, bigger maps, I'd go for it. I would not play the island hopping maps at all, given the choice. I would, however, be interested in game modes that feature coastal battles, river deltas or even rivers/lakes as long as they would be optional and separate from open water warfare.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[STEEL]
Players
786 posts
3 minutes ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

If it was optional to have a less arcade game mode meaning more of the Ocean, more open waters, bigger maps, I'd go for it.

YES!

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LEAKS]
[LEAKS]
Players
237 posts
12,885 battles

Two Brothers is my favourite map.  I love the uncertainty it engenders.  It certainly is preferable to all those small islands where a BB would never venture.  What the OP is suggesting would seem to be more in keeping with land battles where terrain has a big influence of tactics.  In truth this is not how naval battles really play out.  Dodging and hiding seem more in keeping with WoT rather than WoW!

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Weekend Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,575 posts
10,707 battles
1 hour ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

 

I've lately come to understand that the kind of single player simulations games many of us like would not work as an online game. However, it has nothing to do with game mechanics, instead the key thing is time compression. In a single player simulation game (note I'm calling it a 'simulation game' not a 'simulator') there is an option to use accelerated time. It is an incredibly important feature because none of us have the time or desire to stare at a computer screen for hours, days, or even weeks in the case of say, submarine simulations.

 

We can't have the same kind of accelerated time option in an online game, so instead they have kind of baked it in.

 

IMO there is a range of options that define how much of an 'arcade' a game is and how much of a 'simulation' it is. The controls in WoWS are pure arcade, but the mechanisms are a incredibly complex, they are simulation level IMO but the problem is they are not realistic.

 

What I don't get is... why make a 'simulation' of something that isn't realistic and call it 'arcade'.

 

If it was optional to have a less arcade game mode meaning more of the Ocean, more open waters, bigger maps, I'd go for it. I would not play the island hopping maps at all, given the choice. I would, however, be interested in game modes that feature coastal battles, river deltas or even rivers/lakes as long as they would be optional and separate from open water warfare.

 

I would consider Time Compression as Part of the Game Mechanics to be Honest. But well thats just a matter of Viewpoint I guess.

 

Maybe try out War Thunder ?

No Offense Intended on that by the way. I play War Thunder myself whenever I feel more like Playing a Realistic or more Simulation like Game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LUZ1]
Players
2,019 posts
15,842 battles
1 hour ago, Tatsfield said:

Two Brothers is my favourite map.  I love the uncertainty it engenders.  It certainly is preferable to all those small islands where a BB would never venture.  What the OP is suggesting would seem to be more in keeping with land battles where terrain has a big influence of tactics.  In truth this is not how naval battles really play out.  Dodging and hiding seem more in keeping with WoT rather than WoW!

The good thing about 2 brothers is that both flanks are pretty open and lend itself to open battles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7,984 posts
21 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

 

I would consider Time Compression as Part of the Game Mechanics to be Honest. But well thats just a matter of Viewpoint I guess.

 

Maybe try out War Thunder ?

No Offense Intended on that by the way. I play War Thunder myself whenever I feel more like Playing a Realistic or more Simulation like Game.

 

Isn't WT naval play.. (that sounds weird...:Smile_unsure:) somehow much more restricted in terms of ships, or do I have an outdated impression of the game?

 

However, I still think WoWS would benefit from more a varied approach, be it different map modes, ships modes, combat modes or operations. I suspect the downside could be that it would split the player base in terms of queuing. But that IMO is a lesser issue than lack of meaningful content. Shortest queues are always outside empty shops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,056 posts
245 battles
28 minutes ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

 

Isn't WT naval play.. (that sounds weird...:Smile_unsure:) somehow much more restricted in terms of ships, or do I have an outdated impression of the game?

Dunno but balans seems fooked there, freedom-bias is pretty strong there with the newer ships coming in. Although that can and will change since we havent seen any bigger supercruisers or ships with 305's yet (wondering if they will add pre-dreads and semi-dreads in).

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LUZ1]
Players
2,019 posts
15,842 battles

Thinking a bit more about it, I think that many maps are so closed around the middle and around the caps, it really promotes static play and camping, because ships can hide too much behind islands. I think fewer islands would really promote more dynamic play.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Weekend Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,575 posts
10,707 battles
1 hour ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

 

Isn't WT naval play.. (that sounds weird...:Smile_unsure:) somehow much more restricted in terms of ships, or do I have an outdated impression of the game?

 

However, I still think WoWS would benefit from more a varied approach, be it different map modes, ships modes, combat modes or operations. I suspect the downside could be that it would split the player base in terms of queuing. But that IMO is a lesser issue than lack of meaningful content. Shortest queues are always outside empty shops.

 

WT Started with Patrol Boats Only

Then Implemented Bigger Torpedo Boats and Frigates.

Then Destroyers. Then Light Cruisers. And has now Implemented Heavy Cruisers.

 

So its not as Restricted anymore as it was at the Start.

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×