Jump to content

High tiers need their own dedicated map pool instead of forcing them to play on small maps over and over again while add additional rewards for large maps to have an incentive to play them more instead of disliking or banning them to death. I despise city maps in top tiers even though I was forced to play them because of map rotation shoving small maps on our throats.

 

The lack of modern maps is one of the huge flaws of top tier and it seems Gaijin doesn't care about the game design. There would've been more caps and tickets drain slower on large maps.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Kocant12 said:

I'm an average player but I still prefer big maps.


Not "an average player", he means the average player.  And going by the experience in game (18k battles all over, 4-5 years?) I'd say he is spot on at what most players I see seem to do in this game and what they prefer (from what we see in matches).

I think everyone is confusing what is being said, and almost every match I play pretty much proves what Slovenskaver has been saying.  Mostly people lemming train to the worst parts of the map, the CQC areas, and that's it.  Ideally we would have bigger maps that fitted vehicles playstyles etc. but the game caters to ALL players, and big maps could mean many more just dropping out after the first death as they can't be bothered to spend minutes getting back to the fight.  This might have been different had they not decreased SP years back, but now it is more about volume than "quality".

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/01/2021 at 23:29, SlovenskaZver said:

The last thing this game needs are bigger maps. Big maps are simply boring driving simulators. There is a reason why most people don't play simulator, maps are simply too big and games are boring and frustrating.

In realistic we need more small city maps. Most people just want to have a quick, action packed game, not a long drawn-out sniping and driving simulator.

 

Leave big maps in simulator and keep small urban maps for RB

Tanks of rank 3+ ain't meant to fought in urban areas,... Don't get me wrong but it was this kind of things that killed fun for light and low armored medium tanks. 

 

Urban areas do represent only 15 to 25% times of IRL tanks Battles. 

 

And fighting each other from 400meters, when tanks are able to penetrate ennemy even at 5 KILOmeters is ridiculously bad. 

 

NEW Bigger maps with somes villages all around the map, would better as strategy and teamplay is required to win,... Then people will increase their gameplay to a much more immersive thing in no time. 

 

You said about driving is boring,... What are you doing on the actual small maps? 

 

Ain't you searching any cover to every corner?

Ain't you trying to stand on a side to avoid cross fire? 

 

Stop being ridiculous then,... 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/01/2021 at 12:39, SlovenskaZver said:

Big maps will only lead to more people leaving after 1 death, people taking bt5, m22, r3, pumas and other low tier  fast trash, getting a cap and using a plane. Most people dislike driving a slow, stock tank for half an hour only to get one-shoot by fast light tank using heat. People like you prefer big maps, but most people are not like you, most people don't have time to play a single game for an hour, we just want to have fun with friends and destroy some tanks, while not being brain-dead an playing arcade.

There is nothing wrong with preferring more realistic gameplay with bigger maps, that is what simulator is for.

Don't have to,... Since being aware permit to find and kill light tanks,... 

 

"Realistic Mode" all is in the freakin name. 

 

On 10/01/2021 at 01:24, SlovenskaZver said:

Most of arcade gameplay is hiding and shooting long range.

 

I disagree, as when i play arcade i most of time rush in and got basically 2or 3kills per tanks used (sometime it's even more,... And i end up with 9 to 15 kills AB) 

Edited by Cpt_Bel_V
  • Like 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, DOCTOR_OF_WAR said:

I honestly don't understand why people like first person shooter's in city maps, it's very confusing as to why people like a constant 50m fight

 

i would say it has to do with the call of duty aspect of it, the immediate engagement and the chaos that arises the second you let both side have go at each other. its very attractive for impatient players and bad players since a lot is up to chance in these kind of scenarios.

you will get in to immediate action instead of driving for 2mins in to an advantages position

you will get the drop on some on just by pure chance since its impossible to keep track of every thing

you don't need to pay as much attention to your surrounding since you will always have a general idea where the enemy is coming from

skill doesn't matter as much since the one who shoots first often wins especially at top tier 

and you don't have to do such tedious thing like estimating how your shell drops over distance/measuring range. 

basically you can get extremely lucky and have a crazy high kill game with next to no effort put in to it.

 

 

Edited by MaggyYolokrau1
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 4
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/01/2021 at 18:53, SlovenskaZver said:

There is a thing called preferred maps. There most people dislike or ban maps such as Fulda, Fire Arc, Mozdok (my most hated map), fields of Poland, European province... And they like maps such as cargo port, Sweden (my favorite map), advance to the Rhine, American desert, Italy... Also i noticed that whenever i get one of the bigger maps people spawn with less tanks, they spawn with bt5, m22, r3, pumas and other low tier fast trash, and more people leave after 1 death. If most people would really prefer big open maps, there would be a lot more of them.

 

You may prefer bigger maps, there is nothing wrong with that, you are probably an above average player. But most players are not like you, most people, including myself, lack the patience and time to wait hull down for minutes and wait for a impatient tank to drive over a hill few kilometers away.

 

I would be fine with arcade game-mode if they would remove penetration indicators and names above enemy tanks, add that press 7 to get a plane for a minute nonsense. Since you have problem with word "realistic" perhaps Gaijin should rename it to mixed battles and rename simulator to realistic battles.

 

And as for lack of players in simulator battles, perhaps it is in part due to the fact that majority of people prefer shorter, less skill dependent games on smaller maps.



Go back to Arcade battles, this thread is not for you.

And do not mention a thing about "Preferred maps".

This thing is utter garbage, dust in the eyes by Gaijin. It allows for 3 maps to be disliked, and 1 to be banned. Can you guess how many of those i keep getting?
All of them.
I have disliked 3 small maps, banned another one. I keep playing the same maps every single time.
Karelia, Carpathians, White Rock Fortress, Ask River.
And this at 10.7, with guns that are made to kill tanks at 2km+. The entire map is from A to C, like 800m big. Usual encounter range? 300m.
If we go to a city map, like Advance to Rhine - 100m encounter range.
Alaska or American Desert? 100m encounter range.
And there is a certain Ardeness map, that is from spawn to spawn less than 800m.

If you want small maps, keep playing AB.
Majority of paying players are playing RB.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/01/2021 at 22:29, SlovenskaZver said:

The last thing this game needs are bigger maps. Big maps are simply boring driving simulators. There is a reason why most people don't play simulator, maps are simply too big and games are boring and frustrating.

In realistic we need more small city maps. Most people just want to have a quick, action packed game, not a long drawn-out sniping and driving simulator.

 

Leave big maps in simulator and keep small urban maps for RB

 

The whole essence of actual tank combat is manoeuvring your vehicle from position to position while hunting, observing and tracking targets followed by engaging and destroying the enemy at range.

 

What most players want when playing ground vehicles is a realistic experience. WT is far from this as it is currently. Particularly with modern vehicles but the same applies to all after rank 2. There is no scope for manoeuvre on even the biggest map in the game.

 

They are far too channeled which results in camping... there are so few viable positions it ends up being a spawn camp fest after 3 mins of game time on some maps simply because even the spawns are literally the standard engagement range of modern MBT's away from each other at 2.5 - 3km.

 

Killing an enemy at point blank range is not satisfying compared to say tracking an enemy at 6km and manoeuvring yourself unseen to close the engagement range, waiting for the perfect opportunity to engage them when they become a valid target and you land that perfect shot at 3km which requires far more skill than pointing and clicking in 3rd person at a fully exposed target less than 100m away.

 

In terms of gameplay the way RB is now should be arcade... keep the maps the way they are, let players yeet around the battlefield, 3rd person clicking at point blank and spawn camping within 5 mins... RB in terms of mechanics should be like SB is now but with ally markers still and no team killing but on much larger maps. Larger maps would have multiple benefits particularly at higher BR's... One of which, as an example, would be less of an impact that helicopters and jets (with huge amounts of ordinance) have on the battlefield. Any player who has played the game for more than 5 mins at top tier will know that a handful of jets/helicopters can completely dominate the battlefield and the reason is simple... because its too small. A jet will fly across the AO in 3 sec... What makes CAS so powerful currently is that they have a very small area to patrol. It's literally like hooking fish in a barrel because that's what they are doing in these miniscule maps. There is no hiding from it. The more advanced the CAS gets the situation will only become worse. When the F15 Strike Eagle and SU-27 etc show up then there won't be any point in playing as a tank when all 16 of your team are within 2km of each other and a single jet can wipe them all off the map.

 

As a further example it would also make light tanks and AFV's have much more of an impact on the battlefield which would be to provide reconnaissance/intel to the tanks on the ground... Particularly early game. Surprisingly that is their real life purpose. They could also direct the CAS to where it needs to be.

 

Communications and teamplay would become much more important...

 

As a real time TC I can tell you that Salisbury plain in the UK (which is our largest training area) which is roughly 12 x 24 km is too small to conduct any exercise involving tanks in any larger a formation than troop level (thats 4 tanks). We, up until recently, used the Canadian prairie in Alberta which was roughly 100km squared and that was only used for Squadron level (18 tanks) exercises. The training area in Omani desert during a fairly recent exercise was 250 x 300 km where we had to play cat and mouse with the OP FOR and the observation range was 12km... Engagement range, was on average, 3km.  

 

Give the tanks the space to roam free and leave this Call of Duty style gameplay to WOT and AW...        

Edited by _Fear_Naught_
  • Thanks 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, _Fear_Naught_ said:

 

The whole essence of actual tank combat is manoeuvring your vehicle from position to position while hunting, observing and tracking targets followed by engaging and destroying the enemy at range.

 

What most players want when playing ground vehicles is a realistic experience. WT is far from this as it is currently. Particularly with modern vehicles but the same applies to all after rank 2. There is no scope for manoeuvre on even the biggest map in the game.

 

They are far too channeled which results in camping... there are so few viable positions it ends up being a spawn camp fest after 3 mins of game time on some maps simply because even the spawns are literally the standard engagement range of modern MBT's away from each other at 2.5 - 3km.

 

Killing an enemy at point blank range is not satisfying compared to say tracking an enemy at 6km and manoeuvring yourself unseen to close the engagement range to 3km and waiting for the perfect opportunity to engage them when they become a valid target and you land that perfect shot at 3km which requires far more skill than pointing and clicking in 3rd person at a fully exposed target less than 100m away.

 

In terms of gameplay the way RB is now should be arcade... keep the maps the way they are, let players yeet around the battlefield, 3rd person clicking at point blank and spawn camping within 5 mins... RB in terms of mechanics should be like SB is now but with ally markers still and no team killing but on much larger maps. Larger maps would have multiple benefits particularly at higher BR's... One of which, as an example, would be less of an impact that helicopters and jets (with huge amounts of ordinance) have on the battlefield. Any player who has played the game for more than 5 mins at top tier will know that a handful of jets/helicopters can completely dominate the battlefield and the reason is simple... because its too small. A jet will fly across the AO in 3 sec... What makes CAS so powerful currently is that they have a very small area to patrol. It's literally like hooking fish in a barrel because that's what they are doing in these miniscule maps. There is no hiding from it. The more advanced the CAS gets the situation will only become worse. When the F15 Strike Eagle and SU-27 etc show up then there won't be any point in playing as a tank when all 16 of your team are within 2km of each other and a single jet can wipe them all off the map.

 

As a further example it would also make light tanks and AFV's have much more of an impact on the battlefield which would be to provide reconnaissance/intel to the tanks on the ground... Particularly early game. Surprisingly that is their real life purpose. They could also direct the CAS to where it needs to be.

 

As a real time TC I can tell you that Salisbury plain in the UK (which is our largest training area) which is roughly 12 x 24 km is too small to conduct any exercise involving tanks in any larger a formation than troop level (thats 4 tanks). We, up until recently, used the Canadian prairie in Alberta which was roughly 100km squared and that was only used for Squadron level (18 tanks) exercises. The training area in Omani desert during a fairly recent exercise was 250 x 300 km where we had to play cat and mouse with the OP FOR and the observation range was 12km... Engagement range, was on average, 3km.  

 

Give the tanks the space to roam free and leave this Call of Duty, arcade style gameplay to arcade

Fixed

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, _Fear_Naught_ said:

As a real time TC I can tell you that Salisbury plain in the UK (which is our largest training area) which is roughly 12 x 24 km is too small to conduct any exercise involving tanks in any larger a formation than troop level (thats 4 tanks). We, up until recently, used the Canadian prairie in Alberta which was roughly 100km squared and that was only used for Squadron level (18 tanks) exercises. The training area in Omani desert during a fairly recent exercise was 250 x 300 km where we had to play cat and mouse with the OP FOR and the observation range was 12km... Engagement range, was on average, 3km.

 

I am not arguing that modern tanks fight on small area, but that is in real world. Such big maps in game would mean a lot of driving and waiting. For most players that kind of gameplay is not interesting (it might be for some, but not for vast majority).

 

43 minutes ago, MuricaxSuffers said:

What most players want when playing ground vehicles is a realistic experience. WT is far from this as it is currently. Particularly with modern vehicles but the same applies to all after rank 2. There is no scope for manoeuvre on even the biggest map in the game.

As for majority of war thunder players, just look what happens when you get Fulda map. In my experience most players drive straight to castle area. Fulda is a big open maps ideal for long range sniping engagement, and yet most players drive straight to the only area where engagement ranges are close. If what you are saying is true there should be more players playing the other parts of map. Or look at Sinai, there is a point in the open, where almost nobody goes to. Most people on that map fight in city part of map and on the hill above the city. another good example is Tunisia there are 3 points, but more people go to town near the sea, than to other two points combined.

 

52 minutes ago, _Fear_Naught_ said:

In terms of gameplay the way RB is now should be arcade... keep the maps the way they are, let players yeet around the battlefield, 3rd person clicking at point blank and spawn camping within 5 mins... RB in terms of mechanics should be like SB is now but with ally markers still and no team killing but on much larger maps. Larger maps would have multiple benefits particularly at higher BR's... One of which, as an example, would be less of an impact that helicopters and jets (with huge amounts of ordinance) have on the battlefield. Any player who has played the game for more than 5 mins at top tier will know that a handful of jets/helicopters can completely dominate the battlefield and the reason is simple... because its too small. A jet will fly across the AO in 3 sec... What makes CAS so powerful currently is that they have a very small area to patrol. It's literally like hooking fish in a barrel because that's what they are doing in these miniscule maps. There is no hiding from it. The more advanced the CAS gets the situation will only become worse. When the F15 Strike Eagle and SU-27 etc show up then there won't be any point in playing as a tank when all 16 of your team are within 2km of each other and a single jet can wipe them all off the map.

Well, to be honest CAS is most effective on big open maps without any cover, trees, bushes, or buildings. I noticed that CAS is least effective on maps such as Italy, Sweden, advance to the Rhine and other urban maps. It is a lot harder to spot a tank somewhere in a city, than on open flat ground, it is also a lot harder for helicopters to fire ATGMs from kilometers away and still hit a moving target when moving between houses. Bombs also seem to have problem killing tanks if there is a building wall between them.

 

57 minutes ago, MuricaxSuffers said:

Killing an enemy at point blank range is not satisfying compared to say tracking an enemy at 6km and manoeuvring yourself unseen to close the engagement range to 3km and waiting for the perfect opportunity to engage them when they become a valid target and you land that perfect shot at 3km which requires far more skill than pointing and clicking in 3rd person at a fully exposed target less than 100m away.

What about the player who was being shoot at. Imagine driving your tank for minutes, driving for more than 3 kilometers just to get one-shoot by someone who spotted you first. The games would be a lot longer and more people will try to spawncamp. Just look at most big maps in War thunder, loot at fields of Poland, European province, even fields of Normandy. On smaller maps there is a lot less spawn camping before the game is already decided. There are some bad spots even on small maps, but that can be fixed by adding more houses, rocks and other barriers to limit line of sight.

 

  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, SlovenskaZver said:

 

 

What about the player who was being shoot at. Imagine driving your tank for minutes, driving for more than 3 kilometers just to get one-shoot by someone who spotted you first. The games would be a lot longer and more people will try to spawncamp. Just look at most big maps in War thunder, loot at fields of Poland, European province, even fields of Normandy. On smaller maps there is a lot less spawn camping before the game is already decided. There are some bad spots even on small maps, but that can be fixed by adding more houses, rocks and other barriers to limit line of sight.

 

At top tier, the El Alamein takes like 1 minute, to get from one spawn to the center of map. And this is one of the better big maps.
Same with Easter Euripe.
Maybe 2 minutes on Fulda, simply because its not as flat as the other two.

You dont drive your tanks for minutes. This is not a Maus.
The higher the BR, the more powerful the tanks become.

This is why, the higher the BR - the bigger the maps.
Just the same as in real life - the more modern the tanks became, the bigger the engagement range became.

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SlovenskaZver said:

 

I am not arguing that modern tanks fight on small area, but that is in real world. Such big maps in game would mean a lot of driving and waiting. For most players that kind of gameplay is not interesting (it might be for some, but not for vast majority).

 

As for majority of war thunder players, just look what happens when you get Fulda map. In my experience most players drive straight to castle area. Fulda is a big open maps ideal for long range sniping engagement, and yet most players drive straight to the only area where engagement ranges are close. If what you are saying is true there should be more players playing the other parts of map. Or look at Sinai, there is a point in the open, where almost nobody goes to. Most people on that map fight in city part of map and on the hill above the city. another good example is Tunisia there are 3 points, but more people go to town near the sea, than to other two points combined.

 

Well, to be honest CAS is most effective on big open maps without any cover, trees, bushes, or buildings. I noticed that CAS is least effective on maps such as Italy, Sweden, advance to the Rhine and other urban maps. It is a lot harder to spot a tank somewhere in a city, than on open flat ground, it is also a lot harder for helicopters to fire ATGMs from kilometers away and still hit a moving target when moving between houses. Bombs also seem to have problem killing tanks if there is a building wall between them.

 

What about the player who was being shoot at. Imagine driving your tank for minutes, driving for more than 3 kilometers just to get one-shoot by someone who spotted you first. The games would be a lot longer and more people will try to spawncamp. Just look at most big maps in War thunder, loot at fields of Poland, European province, even fields of Normandy. On smaller maps there is a lot less spawn camping before the game is already decided. There are some bad spots even on small maps, but that can be fixed by adding more houses, rocks and other barriers to limit line of sight.

 

sry but on all maps it takes me like max 90 secs to get from 1 spawn to another and that if i play carefully otherwise i would need 70 secs or smt (using2a5/6)
what is the point to have ammo flying at 1600 ms+ to fire at knife range ? 
Sry but if you drive 3 mins and get killed in 1 hit **** happens move on, its the same for getting killed by arty in a cap zone 30 secs after the game began 
I would love to fire at tanks on 2km + but most of the time you can be lucky to sit at 800m range...
I like to make use of my armor that is only effective if you have some distance to your enemy thats why i don't try like a ... to the cap but drive around it with some distance and wait for the enemy to pop up ;) 

Edited by MuricaxSuffers
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, SlovenskaZver said:

fields of Normandy

Thats not a big map at all, its 1,8x1,8 km size. Normal Normandy is silghtly bigger 2,1x2,1 km. Maginot is 3,3x3,3 km. The largest map is SB Mozdok 3,8x3,8 km followed by Fulda 3,6x3,6 km and those are barely minimum for modern tank combat.

 

Map sizes can be found here: https://wiki.warthunder.com/Category:Ground_forces_maps

  • Thanks 1
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem is that this is a grindy game, and small maps are more efficient for grinding, so people will prefer them for that reason.

 

Gaijin needs to add special multipliers on large maps. One kill on Fulda should equal two kills on advance to the Rhine IMO

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, SlovenskaZver said:

What about the player who was being shoot at. Imagine driving your tank for minutes, driving for more than 3 kilometers just to get one-shoot by someone who spotted you first. The games would be a lot longer and more people will try to spawncamp. Just look at most big maps in War thunder, loot at fields of Poland, European province, even fields of Normandy. On smaller maps there is a lot less spawn camping before the game is already decided. There are some bad spots even on small maps, but that can be fixed by adding more houses, rocks and other barriers to limit line of sight.

He'll learn to spot, teamplay,... And all others kind of things that make a game immersive. 

 

By the way, armor is more effective with distance and damage effect will be weaker due to loss of velocity/distance.

 

About spawncamping, it's entirely false,...

Since spawncampers will not be able to reach objectives in times due to distances

 

They will weakened their main forces who try to reach objectives, making you to win, when the weakest main force will die. 

 

And since there is more place on big maps, Gaijin should be able to protect them fairly easily. 

 

A 5x5map,will also make ennemy to go through 4km at least while remaining undetected,... This will be harder to remain undetected through open fields, and with players that would be more aware of flanks around them to far distances. 

 

1 minute ago, watch_your_fire said:

Gaijin needs to add special multipliers on large maps. One kill on Fulda should equal two kills on advance to the Rhine IMO

This might be, because distance make it harder to hit, and distance will make more spread of players, or tacticals squads. 

 

 

 

In the end, bigger maps will improve both immersion, strategy, and teamplay. 

It will also improve the variety of tanks. 

 

But: Gaijin had to adjust rewards to the size of maps. 

 

  • Haha 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, watch_your_fire said:

Problem is that this is a grindy game, and small maps are more efficient for grinding, so people will prefer them for that reason.

 

Gaijin needs to add special multipliers on large maps. One kill on Fulda should equal two kills on advance to the Rhine IMO

 

Grinding what ?? SL ...good joke .... Maybe at 3.0 ....:biggrin:

There is only one reason why so many small maps are in the expensive HT range . Normal players lose here a lot of SL in a short time. But most have not understood this money out of pocket trick. Your EP are nothing if you can not afford a repair without premium account! 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/01/2021 at 04:17, DOCTOR_OF_WAR said:

I honestly don't understand why people like first person shooter's in city maps, it's very confusing as to why people like a constant 50m fight

 

It's because city maps are skill equaliser. The same rules are being used for map design in casual AAA action 3rd person shooters like CoD. 

 

Even the most skilled player is going to be regularly killed by complete beginners due to simple luck - when every single place in the city is being design artificially to be visible from many spots/streets around simple "luck" will be a decisive factor. Skilled person still is going to have somewhat better results but only a bit. And every beginner is still going to kill (and die) a lot. Due to the blind luck only. Even some guy is driving brainlessly - some other guy simply accidentially drive 10m in front of him from the some street, the only thing the first guy has to do is to click the mouse button.

 

In open maps, when man can actually controll his enviroment around, using terrain and experience to his advantage, the discrepancy between skilled players and beginners is simply far bigger often resulting with some experienced guy having ~10 kills and 0 deaths when the beginners are often only a cannon fodder.

 

 

(P.S. That's also the reason tanks IRL would never fight other tanks INSIDE the city. The only situation when tanks would go inside the city is completely assymetric warfare when the enemy doesn't have any tanks, any airforce, any artillery, any recon - just some lightly armed partisants. And even than proven to be often catastrophic for the tanks.)

Edited by BlES
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Evinsher_IT said:

That's the point. Probably we will never se a pool only for Top tier, cause the majority of players prefer CQB even with MBTs.

Doubt they prefer the gameplay, they just prefer the rewards.

 

Fix big maps, give them higher RP and SL modifiers.. ez fix

 

Edit: another idea is to give awards for long range kills, regardless of the map.

Edited by watch_your_fire
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly remember when the maps like Hürtgen Forest were always large it was quite fun even around the 5.0 range and gyjoob just had to sadly ruin such an experience where people would learn  it just seems kinda dull to me to even bother with tanks on such small maps especially at top tier, when like others have said are less than 1Km

plus one would think the more open the space the less likely to be bombed at top tier right?

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that would definitely increase the need for bigger maps is bigger teams. I truly believe war thunder should increase the maximum number of players to at least 20 a side. Imagine the tank combat we could have if there were 20 tanks on either side of Fulda. 

 

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/01/2021 at 18:23, Savanne said:



Go back to Arcade battles, this thread is not for you.

And do not mention a thing about "Preferred maps".

This thing is utter garbage, dust in the eyes by Gaijin. It allows for 3 maps to be disliked, and 1 to be banned. Can you guess how many of those i keep getting?
All of them.
I have disliked 3 small maps, banned another one. I keep playing the same maps every single time.
Karelia, Carpathians, White Rock Fortress, Ask River.
And this at 10.7, with guns that are made to kill tanks at 2km+. The entire map is from A to C, like 800m big. Usual encounter range? 300m.
If we go to a city map, like Advance to Rhine - 100m encounter range.
Alaska or American Desert? 100m encounter range.
And there is a certain Ardeness map, that is from spawn to spawn less than 800m.

If you want small maps, keep playing AB.
Majority of paying players are playing RB.

What is up with these RB players saying that AB players like small maps? I am an AB player and at rank 6 and 7 i do not want to see small maps primarily. I and many others have made multiple posts about the lack of properly sized rank 6 and 7 maps. 

 

Would be nice to see dedicated,properly sized, balanced rank 6 and 7 maps introduced for AB,RB and SB !

 

 

Edited by Laviduce
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, watch_your_fire said:

Doubt they prefer the gameplay, they just prefer the rewards.

Nah i don't think so

21 hours ago, DOCTOR_OF_WAR said:

plus one would think the more open the space the less likely to be bombed at top tier right?

The more the obstacles that protect you the more chance you won't get bombed

Edited by Evinsher_IT
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...