Source: EU Portal
Last year, players had an opportunity to participate in three episodes of the Recon Mission event, which offered the chance to look at new maps in development and leave feedback. Recon Mission was a big success, with over 2 million players participating and over a million questionaries completed. We took our time to analyze this massive amount of data and are now ready to share the results with you.
Here’s a quick reminder of how the Recon Mission event worked
The event had three episodes, each featuring three new in-development maps. After playing a certain number of battles, players could pick their most liked and disliked map. Following additional battles on a map, players could complete a detailed questionnaire, which included personal feedback. While this was happening, we collected battle statistics for each map to help us analyze map balance.
Evaluating Your Feedback
When picking maps for further polishing and development, we considered two factors:
- Gameplay balance and variety
- Player feedback and map voting
With the first criteria in mind, we started by eliminating a map from the pool that did not meet the basic requirement for balance between teams and their bases. This map was Place of Power with a 12.8% difference in win rate between sides. The most balanced map turned out to be Airshipyard with a 1.7% difference. All maps had an average battle time between seven to eight minutes, showing they are well sized, teams are not meeting too fast, and gameplay is appropriately paced.
After this preliminary filtering, we sent Place of Power away for an in-depth rebalance, and we began studying player feedback.
Once players had played six battles on a given map, we asked them to complete a detailed survey on their experience. The questions included but were not limited to:
- Did you like the map?
- Do you want to see this map in the game?
- Is this map suitable for light tank, medium tank, heavy tank, tank destroyer, and self-propelled gun gameplay?
- Does the map have enough cover from self-propelled gun attacks?
- Does the map allow different tactics to be used?
We also provided a blank field for any additional feedback, so that you could leave us your thoughts.
Measuring the Data
The next step was to assign points based on the survey answers and create a second ranking of the maps. This offered unique insight into the maps from the subjective view of players. Finally, we compared this feedback against the objective data and statistics we collected with a view to finding any outliers.
For example, players said Outpost and Oyster Bay best facilitated tactical variety, while Volga was voted the least accommodating. A glance at the heat maps shows this was reflected in the data.
|Light tanks||Medium tanks||Heavy tanks||Tank destroyers||Self-propelled guns|
|Outpost heat map||Volga heat map|
Nobody likes being struck by a self-propelled gun, and players said Oyster Bay offered the most cover from aerial attacks, with Volga providing the least protection. The heatmaps show how SPGs on Volga had free rein to target almost any location without needing to relocate, yet Oyster Bay demanded greater planning and positioning to besiege a given spot.
|Registered SPG hits: Oyster Bay||Registered SPG hits: Volga|
After examining all questions and sorting maps with the help of player votes, these are the maps that stood out as the strongest:
- Oyster Bay
- Far East
We would like to thank you, our players, for making Recon Mission a special collaborative experience. Your input in such a sensitive matter as map development was crucial. It helps make gameplay more varied, even for commanders who stick to a limited selection of vehicles.