Login

russian armor

Westwall

20 Jun 2018, 18:33 PM
#1
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 4873 | Subs: 18

Can someone pls explain me, why people hate this map so much?
Imo there are way worser maps out in 1vs1. But i am happy to hear the arguments.

Thank You.
20 Jun 2018, 18:35 PM
#2
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 3310 | Subs: 2

I always veto it. I find it too large, garrisons right ontop of cutoffs, pathing can be an issue around mid VP as well as elevation changes.
20 Jun 2018, 19:45 PM
#3
avatar of Rosbone
Senior Mapmaker Badge

Posts: 972 | Subs: 2

I do not have enough play time on the map to have an opinion, but wanted to post an overhead to help illustrate:

1. The buildings on the cutoffs (2,3) are a constant complaint.
2. The other cutoffs (1,4) also seem a little aggressive. If someone takes a bad engagement and retreats to their base, they could quickly lose all of their income.
20 Jun 2018, 21:18 PM
#5
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

I feel the map has ballance problems - the armies with snipers tend to do better on it.

Apart from that I don't like what the garrisons have become. Yes, they were hard to destroy before but still pretty easy combat with 2 windows on 2 sides. Now they are just death traps that often fall down after one rifle nade.

In general though I agree with OP that it is a decent map. I also belive people complain way too much about maps in this community.
20 Jun 2018, 22:20 PM
#6
avatar of Rosbone
Senior Mapmaker Badge

Posts: 972 | Subs: 2

In general though I agree with OP that it is a decent map. I also belive people complain way too much about maps in this community.

One thought is:
Most people like to play a certain build every time. It is the meta for them and is the strongest they can be. Some maps force you out of your comfort zone and you have to come up with a different build order. If you really care about your rank you get pissed because you lose a game or two trying out different builds until you find the one that works for that map. So its all open rural maps from now on. Get used to it B-)

That said, Westwall seems to be large enough to flank and open enough so the CQC units are not OP. So I would assume players would like those aspects.

Maybe it is too open? And it has a stigma attached from the cutoff buildings? The high importance of the cutoffs would also force a lot of action in the middle VP, which would also be good for snipers. Less flanking and plenty of targets?
20 Jun 2018, 22:31 PM
#7
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 1636

The cut off garrisons need a bit more health so they dont die from one rifle grenade (as said before). That´s a bit stupid. Make them like 25% health instead of 1%.

Other than that the map is fine IMO.


I don´t get the hate for it either.
20 Jun 2018, 22:36 PM
#8
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Jun 2018, 22:20 PMRosbone

One thought is:
Most people like to play a certain build every time. It is the meta for them and is the strongest they can be. Some maps force you out of your comfort zone and you have to come up with a different build order. If you really care about your rank you get pissed because you lose a game or two trying out different builds until you find the one that works for that map. So its all open rural maps from now on. Get used to it B-)


Well, that is a short way to make the game boring. I feel the problem is that there is a big group of maps that play the same and thus people take the maps that demand different playstyle as outliers. If we had more maps like this, they would have to get over the fact that they need to alter the build to suit the map. Mind that changing your build to the map, opponent and faction/commander is pretty much all the macro/strategy this game has, so its better not to remove these aspects.
20 Jun 2018, 23:05 PM
#9
avatar of Tric
Master Mapmaker Badge

Posts: 1400 | Subs: 3

People hate this map cause of four things.

Garrisons (either they are too low health OR because they simply exist on cutoffs)
Height elevation mid that eats shots
Cutoffs are too hard to hold (extrapolated most likely by the fact that garrisons there exist)

-and the most important one-

People do not want to move off their "one build to rule them all" style. If there are any maps that have some things that are non meta that perform well. All hell breaks lose. People want to mindlessly play the same games over and over with a slightly different color on the map. This has been the case for two years. It won't change anytime soon.

This means anytime non-meta maps get implemented (even if balanced and fair from both sides in terms of being mirrored) people lose their shit cause they REFUSE to play around it, or change their commander loadout from the most meta things on the list.




21 Jun 2018, 03:33 AM
#10
avatar of CODGUY

Posts: 610

I hate this map. Too much crap scattered all over the place so you can't really use armor effectively. Also has the bug where the player on the north side has one of his base defense structures outside the boundries of the map so it will not fire on any attacking units leaving you open to early base rushes. Also can't stand the way the territories are divided up combined with the size and orientation of the map, its a bitch to defend once you've taken the territory.
21 Jun 2018, 13:08 PM
#11
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 4873 | Subs: 18

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Jun 2018, 23:05 PMTric
People hate this map cause of four things.

Garrisons (either they are too low health OR because they simply exist on cutoffs)
Height elevation mid that eats shots
Cutoffs are too hard to hold (extrapolated most likely by the fact that garrisons there exist)

-and the most important one-

People do not want to move off their "one build to rule them all" style. If there are any maps that have some things that are non meta that perform well. All hell breaks lose. People want to mindlessly play the same games over and over with a slightly different color on the map. This has been the case for two years. It won't change anytime soon.

This means anytime non-meta maps get implemented (even if balanced and fair from both sides in terms of being mirrored) people lose their shit cause they REFUSE to play around it, or change their commander loadout from the most meta things on the list.



Thank You, I had the same feeling!
21 Jun 2018, 13:13 PM
#12
avatar of Tric
Master Mapmaker Badge

Posts: 1400 | Subs: 3



Thank You, I had the same feeling!


It would also be important to mention that this is still the wrong version of the map. Bunker north still not in playable area, and the Interactivity Stage Editor has holes in it in the south that eat the camera.
21 Jun 2018, 13:16 PM
#13
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 4873 | Subs: 18

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jun 2018, 13:13 PMTric


It would also be important to mention that this is still the wrong version of the map. Bunker north still not in playable area, and the Interactivity Stage Editor has holes in it in the south that eat the camera.


LUL? I thought in the DBP lordrommel fixed it as well with the bunkers. hm.

And "Interactivity Stage Editor has holes in it in the south that eat the camera" so what does that mean?
21 Jun 2018, 13:18 PM
#14
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 4873 | Subs: 18

What i have for patchnotes:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=794967218
Central area and cutoffs:
Building reduced to 51% health. They will go down way faster now.
Furthermore i have moved the cutoffs away from the buildings. They are still in range but no longer in close range and/or "jump in-and-out" range.
adjusted the LoS objects at the church to mimic the cap situation on the other map side.
added negative cover to the road next to the church to mimic the street design from the other side of the map.
Both VPs:
Building reduced to 54% health. They will go down way faster now (compared to the old full health version).
added some LoS objects and adjusted the cover to get use of the new LoS objects.
moved the VP points away from the building (no jump-in-and-out capping).
increased the gap at the dragon teeth line for vehicles.
General adjustments:
moved some steel bars at the dragon teeth road blocks to enforce vehicle path finding. I have adjusted one or two minor objects/things.
added a new cutoff for the munition. Map has now 4 cutoff points.
Fixed the basebunkers

Since the buidingschanges are in, I guess Lordrommel failed somehow?
21 Jun 2018, 14:24 PM
#15
avatar of Siphon X.
Senior Editor Badge

Posts: 1128 | Subs: 2

Frankly, not sure if the playerbase gives reworked maps really a fair chance (note, I'm not complaining about that, I think that's just the reality of things).

I guess most players aren't even aware that maps have been reworked (I expect only the hardcore players (on coh.org) to go through the patchnotes point by point and even less so through the changes to the maps.

Moreover, the regular patchnotes get a higher visibility due to streamers and other casters occasionally discuss patchnotes, but I never see anybody reviewing map changes, really...

So, basically, once players have their opinion on at certain map, the majority of players will rarely change it, regardless of how much the map has changed.

One of the reasons why Westwall is disliked (given past discussions), is in particular the dragons teeth and the slight hill they are sitting on, which tends to block e.g. pak shots. While this feature was toned down a little, LordRommel regards it as a defining feature of the map, so I guess he would like to keep in regardless.

Then again, the more recent discussion really centered around garrisons mostly, so maybe the DTs are a non issue by now.
21 Jun 2018, 14:40 PM
#16
avatar of AtomicRockets
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 772

I remember playing on this map on version 1 when the cutoff garrisons were full health. The garrison issue has largely been solved (except for early game when you don't have any indirect fire save USF) but the vehicle pathing issues caused by the dragon's teeth still remains. I remember losing two StuGs because they started spinning :D .
21 Jun 2018, 19:31 PM
#17
avatar of Tric
Master Mapmaker Badge

Posts: 1400 | Subs: 3

What i have for patchnotes:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=794967218
Central area and cutoffs:
Building reduced to 51% health. They will go down way faster now.
Furthermore i have moved the cutoffs away from the buildings. They are still in range but no longer in close range and/or "jump in-and-out" range.
adjusted the LoS objects at the church to mimic the cap situation on the other map side.
added negative cover to the road next to the church to mimic the street design from the other side of the map.
Both VPs:
Building reduced to 54% health. They will go down way faster now (compared to the old full health version).
added some LoS objects and adjusted the cover to get use of the new LoS objects.
moved the VP points away from the building (no jump-in-and-out capping).
increased the gap at the dragon teeth line for vehicles.
General adjustments:
moved some steel bars at the dragon teeth road blocks to enforce vehicle path finding. I have adjusted one or two minor objects/things.
added a new cutoff for the munition. Map has now 4 cutoff points.
Fixed the basebunkers

Since the buidingschanges are in, I guess Lordrommel failed somehow?


No he sent multiple copies to relic and relic uploaded the wrong one. The version with all fixed, was not put in.
21 Jun 2018, 19:32 PM
#18
avatar of Tric
Master Mapmaker Badge

Posts: 1400 | Subs: 3

I remember playing on this map on version 1 when the cutoff garrisons were full health. The garrison issue has largely been solved (except for early game when you don't have any indirect fire save USF) but the vehicle pathing issues caused by the dragon's teeth still remains. I remember losing two StuGs because they started spinning :D .


The same will happen on any other map if you mis-position your tanks or over extend.

21 Jun 2018, 20:59 PM
#19
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 4873 | Subs: 18

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Jun 2018, 19:31 PMTric


No he sent multiple copies to relic and relic uploaded the wrong one. The version with all fixed, was not put in.


Hm, i mean i talked with him before DBP and this link i got from him. And this link Relic used.
I am confused.
22 Jun 2018, 12:31 PM
#20
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 4873 | Subs: 18

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Jun 2018, 01:30 AMGiaA


I have a lot of respect for you whiteflash, love argentan in particular but why have so many obvious trash maps been approved for automatch ? Westwall is a good example. I mean it doesn't take a couple of 100 games to realize that that map is bad.


Pls explain it more why you disagree to westwall. I want to understand it. And maybe read the thread here as well pls :)
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • Ostheer flag tightrope
  • The British Forces flag Kobal
Faymonville Approach
Faymonville Approach Honor
Honor it
3
Download
Download
13
uploaded by Kobal

Board Info

289 users are online: 10 members and 279 guests
Aarotron, SneakEye, Smartie, ZeroZeroNi, Nadzinator, angelreeya, WAAAGH2000, jackill2611, Stormjäger, PMC_Down
319 posts in the last 24h
1195 posts in the last week
3854 posts in the last month
Registered members: 74418
Welcome our newest member, Maranderaq70
Most online: 918 users on 27 Oct 2019, 01:03 AM