Because it encourages players to hide on the map borders and avoid playing the objective. It’s all about hunting the enemy on the map borders out of bounds.
Hide? Most used it as a way to move to the “objective”.
Instead we got this new version with players doing Nascar moves chasing each other round these giant rocks.
2 Likes
What on earth are you talking about? If players hide, their team loses as it leaves the objective uncontested.
I see quite a lot of mucking around even at BR 5 - 6.7
Probably most people go into the town, on American Desert, but there are border lurkers too. Sun City is much worse for border lurkers.
This is a game where people just want to snipe and sit back much of the time.
And that’s a perfectly valid strategy.
I cannot doubt your personal experience, but in my 10,000 hours, people being “border lurkers” to the extent of it being an actual problem is something I have never experienced, and I am in the same region as you.
I just played Maginot and that can be added to the list of ruined maps.
2 Likes
Ive just played this map for the first time since the update. It sux! Why are you making the maps smaller and featureless. I think alot of people who gave you the original feed back on the maps are the type of people that have trouble thinking strategically and just go straight to the objective and want to fight in GQB and are the people who complain when they get killed by hidden TD’s and other ARV’s.
Please dont pander to the people who just want to run in die then quit without respawning , by ruining the well thought good maps.
Your point of difference was your different terrain types and different game modes pretty pretty please dont wreck this game by pandering to these types of people , not every one has the internet speed , ping rates etc to fight in CQB nor does everyone want to, some like me enjoy the challenge of a long range shot out, its very satisfying when you take out someone from 2000 plus meters with a stug iii g or a Ferdinand
1 Like
maybe remove the terrain features for AB , geezus RB is supposed to mean realistic isn’t it, so that means hills , creeks and dry creek beds etc please put it back to what this and the other maps where
Isn’t sitting back and sniping what tank destroyers where and are designed to do?
If your not happy being killed by “border lurkers” go and take them out, they’re trying to take out your teams reinforcements and be annoying to your team, seems it works.
Big open maps like Maginot line and Poland etc are a TD’s dream either learn to use your sights and cover or die.
Not every terrain type is suited to CQB in real life.
Maybe a flat featureless CQB mode could developed, instead of ruining maps that are well balanced and thought out
1 Like
God forbid we try something other than frontally engage the enemy in close quarters. I mean, that whole section around A is what, 600 metres long if you count from the two rocky spots where each team can first make contact? And about 400 metres wide before they flattened it. Yeah, no, that’s clearly too much. What if something happens at A, and you need the guys flanking to intervene and do something about it? They would be a whopping 200 metres away from the objective! Clearly that situation just didn’t favour “dynamic gameplay” as Gaijin likes to call it.
Of course, there’s the part where the circle to cap A actually extended into the depression in the ground, meaning that you could both cap, and interrupt an enemy capping it, while being down there. So, I can see why the map had to be changed, because apparently in your view, it resulted in a situation where you can be inside the objective, without playing the objective. Such a paradox could risk unravelling reality as we know it, and had to be removed from the game ASAP.
Not according to a section of the player base.
And on the opposite end of a spectrum, where are you taking an EBR or a Puma if you can’t, as he calls it, border-lurk?
Maybe we should all get rid of every vehicle that isn’t a T-34, a Tiger I, and a Sherman. Everything else - CAS included - goes, since it’s not playing the objective. Hell, airplanes can at times be several kilometres away from the objective, unacceptable! /s
Really, all the changes have done is guarantee I’ll 1DL on this map unless I’m playing with friends. Maybe that’s the dynamic gameplay the devs want to favour, in that case, happy for them.
2 Likes
I don’t mind if people sit back and snipe, but when nobody on the team advances it’s bad. I’m advancing for most of the game and I try to support others who are advancing. If more than half of the team is passive then capture points are lost.
I play with 160 - 220 ping and there’s certainly a disadvantage, but it’s usually overcome by playing scout vehicles. All the stupid German and Russian players have to slowly turn their turrets to face me :)
Yeah but I’m talking about passive scout players who just camp the map border and mark targets for the first 10 minutes while the enemy captures all the points. By the time they try to attack, the team has already lost. There’s no valid reason to spend 10 minutes playing passively while the enemy takes over the entire map with the exception of map borders.
That’s exactly what they should fix on the Cargo Port map. There shouldn’t be stupid hiding spots, it just confuses new players.
Try close quarter combat. FIAT 6614 can destroy the tracks and engines, leaving some enemies stuck for 40+ seconds. I can also mark them to be bombed or attacked by my team mates. True, you can play scout vehicles in open terrain and mark at great distances, but certain guns can also shoot your tires and slowly destroy you. Vehicles like FIAT 6614 are better used at close or near range, rather than 1000 metres where they will be sniped. I use the EBR and FIAT to ambush and capture points, not to venture into open group and stay there. There’s no benefit in that, besides marking enemies and moving on. Playing passively isn’t a permanent strategy that players should spend 10 or 20 minutes of game time on.
Too many players are just lazy and want medium/heavy/SPG battles with some air craft. Not enough players seem to utilise scout vehicles from my observation. It’s scout vehicles that allow the team to break into enemy positions and expose weak points. But people are too scared to use them at close range.
You keep talking about this. How about you post a replay of just one game where this is actually happened?
I love to scout like this when I get the opportunity. BUT … it is so rare to get a map where you can do this. Most times you sit in spots and pray that nobody comes your direction and sees you. And even if you scout all enemies and the map is filled with red symbols there is no guaranty that your team is able to deal with this.
I saw situations where my team got tunnelvision from those red symbols on the map and lost the match because they forgot their flanks.
BUT … one single scout with a good team can be deadly.
2 Likes
I have seen this happen to, but why shrink the maps , its a bit extreme. Because l’m quite often trying to out flank the enemy l get to kill these “lurkers” then they usually quit
OOHHH its fun to see confused new players , we had to figure stuff out why cant they? The ones that sit back and spot for ten minutes must get so bored, liven up their game and put an arty strike on them.
Those ping rates are about the same as mine, I somehow got them down to 132, now after this update there back to 190.
I like to use a scout or light tank at the start, cap a base or 2 get killed then come back and kill the enemy snipers and cut off their reinforcements.
Ive spoken to some people that only fight CQB because they either cant use their sights and range finders or their crews cant see very far or both
There is a reason I didn’t cite FIAT 6614. Yes, it needs to be close because of its gun. Not all light vehicles are best played this way. Some are much more effective by flanking hard.
I don’t particularly enjoy light vehicles, myself, as I prefer tank destroyers. Speaking in terms of personal enjoyment, light vehicles for me have the primary gameplay benefit of making some otherwise absolutely atrocious maps (like the large version of Ardennes, or American Desert before this change) just about tolerable, since you can get a bit creative and high mobility allows you to try things.
But one of the close friends I frequently play with, uses both the 6614 and the 6.7 EBR a lot. I’ve seen him get nukes with the former in CQC. I’ve seen him get (many) nukes with the latter by flanking hard, and I’ve occasionally spawned in a light myself to follow him around and try to learn a gamestyle that I’m still less comfortable with, compared to what I usually do.
Will he do well anyway, even on the new American Desert? Almost certainly. He’s a great player. But maybe he’ll think twice about spawning the EBR first.
This game has thousands of vehicles. As maps become more and more mono-dimensional, it flattens the range of effective vehicles that it makes competitive sense to spawn in.
That would be a huge balance problem on its own, even before accounting for the fact that the range of player skill also gets flattened. CQC peekaboo is one of the skills you need to do well in GRB, but not the only one. And yet, it’s massively over-represented, because the maps keep narrowing, and we keep being funneled into CoD-style engagements.
There’s so much wrong with this short statement that I feel like I need to break it down…
-
Playing tank destroyers isn’t lazy. I don’t go around telling people their vehicle preferences are bad, but I’m starting to learn that I can’t expect the courtesy to be returned.
-
Even if that was true, what does that have to do with flanking in a vehicle with high mobility, which is what we were talking about? Is that lazy too? And flanking isn’t about getting to a height and staying there 20 minutes… if you don’t stay mobile, CAS of the people you killed will find you and kill you.
-
You can’t have it both ways. Gaijin would not introduce these map changes, if they weren’t loudly demanded by players: the maps keep shrinking, because players want them to shrink. Because to most players, being killed by a target you can’t see (because you got flanked, or because you got sniped from far away) is intuitively “unfair”.
If players really did want to just use SPGs or heavies, they wouldn’t ask for urban rat mazes. It’s either one or the other; tertium non datur.
Outside of grinding events, there is no real pattern to this. Play German mid-tiers and you’ll be in games without a single light vehicle on your team, and games where there are laughably high levels of Puma spam.
Having played this map a few times now, I’ve come to the decision that the map maker tasked with “updating” it probably, completed this after lunch on a Friday just before a long weekend.
They needed it done before leaving work, so they just dropped boulders everywhere to fill in the slopes.
I don’t understand when they develop these maps whether or not they actually play them. Golden Quarry is an example. Overall not a bad map, but they place one of the spawn points in a crater which requires you to drive out it. Why place is it placed there?
1 Like
This possibly makes the southern spawn less popular. I agree, it is VERY strange.