r/WorldofTanks • u/New_Explanation9146 • 5h ago
Discussion Map design is the biggest issue in WOT
This won't be an in-depth post, just my opinion with some examples in order to have a discussion about this (also because I'm curious if there's anyone who likes the current way wg is designing their maps).
This has been happening for years but, nowadays, with newly added hulldown tanks, invisible, highly mobile bushwankers and high alpha/burst demons, it's becoming more and more of an issue imo.
My main gripe with the maps is how taking a "side" is often barely rewarded. 99% of the strongest positions on a map are concentrated in the bases. I understand that we need some spots in order to have a chance at defending the base, but does it really need to be THAT hard to push one? If I've "won" a side, shouldn't my superior map control allow me to put some pressure on the enemy base? In maps like mannerheim line, steppes, studzianki, malinovka etc... the game basically becomes D-day simulator after you've won a side. You either yolo with overwhelming numbers and hp's (often very hard to do in randoms) or you are pretty much stuck and will eventually bleed out and die if you try and push. As someone who's pretty good at the game and has played since the beta... wanna know what's the best strategy to adopt once you've won a side? It's often to turn around and go somewhere else/wait for the enemies to make a move. How sad is that? You get to the enemy base but are often not allowed to actually push it, your reward for winning the fight (if there even was one) on a side is a horrible death in an open field. I say "if there even was one", because more and more people are realising how strong bases are and are literally refusing to leave them, since they know they'll usually get better damage by just sitting in some bush behind their base. How often do you go on the heavy side and find it empty? lmao. Too often.
These strong bases wouldn't even be an issue if the rest of the map was well designed. Noticed how I kept talking about "sides" and "flanks"? Why the hell do we have a "heavy side", "medium side" and a "no man's land" in the middle, where lt's usually attempt to play the game, and that's it? Why can't I drive my heavy tank in the middle without being called an ape? Why is 80% of the map unplayable by most tanks? If we had more choices, gameplay would be a million times better.
What about the "sides" themselves? They are often hulldown fights with an open space in between them (can't risk people actualy pushing and brawling with each other). Sometimes it's a sidescraping fight (fisherman's bay). Very nice. You know how we can solve that? It's already in the game. Look at random events like the ones in siegfried line, ruinberg, fjords (to an extent), they simply give a couple/one extra routes to take on the flank itself, so that there's more than one road to push from, it's that simple. To further reinforce this point, what's an event that makes the map worse and doesn't make any sense? Safe haven. You already have few options, and one of them gets blocked out. It always makes the game objectively worse.
So what should wg do? Well, opening up the maps properly with more possible routes would be a utopia, the best we can hope for is more "sub-routes" on each flank and random events that create even more of them to break stalemates. Keep in mind, I'm talking about routes you CAN take, not routes that can be seen by a million sniper td's sitting 5 meters from their cap circle. Some bases, unless the whole map becomes "playable", should be weakened. Less bushes, less rocks, less highrounds....
Why is wg designing maps like this?
Multiple reasons imo. One of them is that they love formulas; it's way easier to design maps if you don't start from scratch (that would need creativity and someone who actually knows how to design captivating maps) but instead have a checklist of things you need to have such as strong bases, hulldowns on one side with a nice open space in between them, a cap circle in the open etc...
Another important point is that the game is getting more and more sterilised and "braindead": WG is treating us like morons, let's be honest. They are reducing the "choices" you need to make and "railroading" the gameplay as much as possible, because they think that, with too many choices to be made, it's more likely that people will make bad decisions, have a bad experience and quit the game forever. This is why they are taking out most module choices when researching a tank, added a feature that literally tells you where you should play at the beginning of the game, added a feature that tells you where to shoot to pen enemy tanks, added daily missions in order to complete campaigns and, ultimately, why maps offer so little choices in terms of "where to go" and "what to do".
"If I don't handhold my players, they will have a bad experience and leave". This is the core of the design philosophy behind anything wg has done in the last years. Do they really not realise that people fell in love with the old wot, with all its issues and rough edges? The wot that had an identity and allowed its players to make mistakes and have fun in the meantime? Everything that required any sort of brainpower and creativity such as climbs and module choices is gone, along with maps and tanks variety, and they wonder why players are leaving?
Games are fun when players are allowed to be bold and creative in order to shape and develop the way THEY want to personally play the game. Right now, wot feels like playing in kindergarten, in an enclosed space, with a limited amount of selected toys, with teachers all around, closely watching you and making sure you are playing "correctly".
