Jump to content
Okeano

Okeano & Rexxie's guide on where NOT go to on maps (Updated 12/2/15)

Recommended Posts

I am not advocating pushing these positions. That would just end in a quick death. My argument is based on what can happen when a team ignores B8 - C8/D8:

  • If SE team ignores C8, the NW spawn gains a good sniper position at C7 that can spot/snipe F9 ridge campers or anyone climbing up too high at G5.
  • If NW team ignores C7/B8, a spotter can use the bushes on the ridge at C8. He can spot tanks shooting from D4 and possibly get a quick shell into them before dropping back into the terrain depression.

The main value of these positions is to provide targets for the dumbest part of your team (people camping F9/D4) while keeping enemy spotters down the slope thus preventing them from spotting your own team's dummies.

 

Of course, it is a valid question whether a good player should take a position with limited damage-dealing opportunities for himself for the benefit of the least skilled of his teammates? Probably not. In particular from south spawn I find G5 a lot more useful since it provides spotting opportunities with far superior shooting lanes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying that you're advocating pushing that side either, I mentioned it to show the lack damage to the match even if you lose that side. I've tried spotting there, in Bat with optics, in 13 90 with binocs. The only ones that ever get spotted are really bad players that sit out in the open who don't contribute much to the game in the first place. The ridge of SE spawn have cover that they can quick retreat to, and the hill of NW spawn is very hard to spot. Yes, it would be a battle of the dummies if I do spot something, and I don't feel like that's a good use of time, since you'll likely need every minute of it to break this map.

 

It's not about position with limited damage-dealing opportunities, but also yielding limited damage-dealing opportunities for your team. I'll be gladly to sit at E7 or E4 of Malinovka and not do a single point in damage for the entire game if it means lighting up half of their team for my team to shoot. But from past experience, trying to play that ridge and do spotting doesn't yield much.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So utilizing this and Sela's linked thread in the original post, my WN7 rating has gone up from 200 or so overall or so to 600 or so in my battles since finding this site.   My last 50 or so battles it's nearly 1000.   Which isn't too terrible considering about 15 of those I basically had to go AFK :).    In total I'm over the 400 mark now.   Thank you map guys.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about military tactic is just that the strategy map can have arrows zig-zagging in every direction and each can come up trumps in the execution depending on a number of variables. Take for instance the red circles which are indicated as "no-nos"; well, I have on occasions carried out the most brilliant of war-winning moves via those same areas.

What I think is, while the "no-no" zones are in the main dangerous, they may be traversed by tankers where the circumstances permit. The panzer forces of the Wehrmacht used the Ardennes forest during the early days of the blitzkrieg at the same time the French & British Expeditionary forces considered the area unsuitable for armor operations. But, in the circumstances, it worked like a charm! So that does say a lot, does it not?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 I have on occasions carried out the most brilliant of war-winning moves via those same areas.

 

 

 

On VERY VERY VERY rare occasions you mean.

 

Look at Okeano's succes rate... then look at yours. Realize that YOU are the one doing it wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about military tactic is...

 

Before you make another post, consider that this is not the military, and the purpose of this forum is how to succeed in World of Tanks.  The correlation between this video game and a real battlefield are scarce.

 

On this forum, arguing otherwise is an express route to a ban, as it is easier to block posts about poor tactics than it is to refute them ad nauseum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 The correlation between this video game and a real battlefield are scarce.

 

 

I disagree. Good military analysis uses statistical methodology and post action reviews to figure out what works, why, and how to reproduce that. It analysis the enemy capability and doctrine as compared to yours to figure out how best to counter their probably deployment.

 

 

Bad military analysis is just bad.

 

 

I drove a tank in real life therefore I know something applicable to WoT is just fucking dumb. Blackhorse Six isn't welcome here for a good reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about military tactic is just that the strategy map can have arrows zig-zagging in every direction and each can come up trumps in the execution depending on a number of variables. Take for instance the red circles which are indicated as "no-nos"; well, I have on occasions carried out the most brilliant of war-winning moves via those same areas.

What I think is, while the "no-no" zones are in the main dangerous, they may be traversed by tankers where the circumstances permit. The panzer forces of the Wehrmacht used the Ardennes forest during the early days of the blitzkrieg at the same time the French & British Expeditionary forces considered the area unsuitable for armor operations. But, in the circumstances, it worked like a charm! So that does say a lot, does it not?

 

It doesn't say anything.

 

The Charge of the Light Brigade was done against accepted doctrine. It failed. That says a lot, doesn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like my answer better.

 

 

Tru dat. SR and I like to hear ourselves talk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No.

 

Aww, how cute.

 

Last chance: Okeano wins 76% of his games, you win 50%.  If you can't accept that that means you should listen to him and not argue with him, you're not gonna fit here, and frankly you're not welcome to try.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No.

 

I'm sorry, the official forums are here.

 

You can either accept that there are certain moves that are superior to other moves on certain maps, or you can go to the official forums and extol the virtues of the Lakeville Valley Rush.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Aww, how cute.

 

Last chance: Okeano wins 76% of his games, you win 50%.  If you can't accept that that means you should listen to him and not argue with him, you're not gonna fit here, and frankly you're not welcome to try.

This is also a place of discussion, if he has valid arguments he is more than willing to put them forward and form a discussion. He is more then welcome to disagree with anyone, as long as he's willing to be proven wrong (and accept that he was wrong) and as long as he has legit points to defend his opinion. Not just "No." to someone who has demonstrated a greater mastery of the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is also a place of discussion, if he has valid arguments he is more than willing to put them forward and form a discussion. He is more then welcome to disagree with anyone, as long as he's willing to be proven wrong (and accept that he was wrong) and as long as he has legit points to defend his opinion. Not just "No." to someone who has demonstrated a greater mastery of the game.

 

About the only time I'd dispute something from a purple player would be if it were demonstrably non-factual.  IE, mis-listing an in-game value or something.  Personal anecdotes or the like don't count.  I guess the point is, we scrubs shouldn't dispute things from our betters without really, really, really good reason, and assuming we know better is 100% the wrong attitude to take.  Whenever I run across a purple opinion that differs from my own, I work from the basis that I'm wrong, not him.  See: vents vs optics.

 

In the case at hand....they're arguing over opinions on the "best" move tactically.  Absent real statistical contrary proof, Okeano is right, as proven by him over his 76% success rate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm open to hear his reasoning and I thought the 2 posts after my "No" were overly harsh. I'm not for shutting down someone completely here just on stats alone. But no, whatever happened that one time that one army overcame the odds at that place does not say a lot.

 

This thread, as with all things on this forum, it's there and no one's forcing it down anybody's throat. Take it or leave it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

About the only time I'd dispute something from a purple player would be if it were demonstrably non-factual.  IE, mis-listing an in-game value or something.  Personal anecdotes or the like don't count.  I guess the point is, we scrubs shouldn't dispute things from our betters without really, really, really good reason, and assuming we know better is 100% the wrong attitude to take.  Whenever I run across a purple opinion that differs from my own, I work from the basis that I'm wrong, not him.  See: vents vs optics.

 

In the case at hand....they're arguing over opinions on the "best" move tactically.  Absent real statistical contrary proof, Okeano is right, as proven by him over his 76% success rate.

Yes but you're not learning. Engage in the conversation of "why" at that point. Blindly agreeing with someone just because they have a purple stat is a horrible way for this community to be run. While gernerally you should listen to us (them) if we tell you something, if you, for some reason, think we're wrong, put up your opinion and ask why it's wrong/why what they say is the way to go.

 

This isn't some religious cult, we don't want blind followers, we want thinkers. A lot of stuff is also dependent/situational based on the tank(map positioning) or playstyle of the person (vents/optics).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but you're not learning. Engage in the conversation of "why" at that point. Blindly agreeing with someone just because they have a purple stat is a horrible way for this community to be run. While gernerally you should listen to us (them) if we tell you something, if you, for some reason, think we're wrong, put up your opinion and ask why it's wrong/why what they say is the way to go.

 

This isn't some religious cult, we don't want blind followers, we want thinkers. A lot of stuff is also dependent/situational based on the tank(map positioning) or playstyle of the person (vents/optics).

Nailed it. This isn't the official forum and I don't have to cut through all the layers of bullshit with "your stats suck, stfu". 

 

I saw no reason to explain at work why given the choice, you would pick 7-2 off suit over pocket aces even though sometimes 7-2 off suit could win.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but you're not learning. Engage in the conversation of "why" at that point. Blindly agreeing with someone just because they have a purple stat is a horrible way for this community to be run. While gernerally you should listen to us (them) if we tell you something, if you, for some reason, think we're wrong, put up your opinion and ask why it's wrong/why what they say is the way to go.

 

This isn't some religious cult, we don't want blind followers, we want thinkers. A lot of stuff is also dependent/situational based on the tank(map positioning) or playstyle of the person (vents/optics).

 

I didn't mean it as blind following.  I meant more that, when there is a conflict of opinion, I look for a flaw in my own reasoning first, rather than his.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nailed it. This isn't the official forum and I don't have to cut through all the layers of bullshit with "your stats suck, stfu". 

 

I saw no reason to explain at work why given the choice, you would pick 7-2 off suit over pocket aces even though sometimes 7-2 off suit could win.

Off Topic: That's why we play Seven-Deuce when we play poker. (If someone wins with 7-2 everyone has to put in an extra dollar to the winner) adds excitement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Off Topic: That's why we play Seven-Deuce when we play poker. (If someone wins with 7-2 everyone has to put in an extra dollar to the winner) adds excitement.

 

WoTLabs poker night?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to call in a success story.

 

I had a tier V game on Lakeville (standard) recently and our only heavy, a 49%er in a KV-1, said he was "gonna hold the valley". I pleaded with him to come to town where he had a great game making some key contributions to the win. Afterwards I made him promise to never go valley again.  :doubleguns2:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...