Battle mode has been effectively dead for years yet remains in the rotation. The evidence is visible every match:
Players quit immediately after loading in
others quit after dying once
SPAA players respawn and quit after realizing there are no aircraft
Modern stock tank players face huge maps with no LRF or thermals unlocked
Why It Fails
Battle mode consists of two slow capture zones on opposite sides of large maps. The result:
Extended driving with minimal combat
Stock players suffer disproportionately (no LRF, no thermals, large engagement distances)
Modern tanks above 9.0 BR in close quarters combat on small maps like Advance to the Rhine makes no historical or tactical sense
Large maps like Campania (great for other modes) become driving simulators in Battle mode
The Two Failure Scenarios
Large maps: Pure driving simulator. Players quit from boredom before reaching objectives. Stock tanks face fully upgraded opposition across enormous distances.
Small maps: Forced close quarters combat with modern MBTs. Historically nonsensical and tactically broken at 9.0+ BR.
Neither scenario produces enjoyable gameplay.
What Should Change
Three options for developers to consider:
Option 1: Remove Battle mode entirely
Redirect players to Domination and Conquest modes which handle similar objectives better
Develop new game mode ideas moderated by testers
Option 2: Limit Battle mode by map size
Only allow Battle mode on moderate/small maps
Remove large maps (Campania, Fields of Poland, etc.) from Battle mode rotation
Keeps the mode viable for close quarters gameplay at appropriate BRs
Option 3: Limit Battle mode by BR
Battle mode works reasonably at lower BRs (1.0-7.7) and smaller maps where slower vehicles suit the pace
Remove or heavily restrict Battle mode above 8.0 BR where mobility and firepower make it unplayable
Modern MBTs above 9.0 BR should never be in Battle mode on large and small maps
Why This Matters
Battle mode’s failure cascades into broader problems:
Early quitters reduce team sizes making matches unwinnable
Stock players face impossible situations on large maps
Sometimes, SPAA players waste spawn points with no aircraft to engage
Match quality drops across the board affecting everyone’s experience
Matches can last 20+ min with little engagement due to “hide and seek tactics”.
If this is an intentional design to frustrate stock players into purchasing modules with real money, it’s counterproductive. Players simply quit rather than spend. Long term retention suffers more than short term revenue gains.
I enjoy slow-paced, tactical gameplay. I play other Simulator games. But Battle mode on large maps has crossed the line from tactical to tedious. The community has been complaining about this for years for a reason
(please read the post fully before answering)
What should happen to Battle mode in Ground Realistic Battles (and SB)?
Remove it entirely
Keep it but limit to small/moderate maps only
Keep it but limit to BR 1.0-7.7/8.7 only and small/moderate maps only
Keep it as it is (please explain what you enjoy about it)
0voters
Depending on community feedback and further ideas discussed here, I’ll repost this as a formal Suggestion for developers to review. Your input shapes the direction of that submission.
High tier battle mode is why I always look at the players asking for larger maps with fatigue.
Are you really demanding an even worse driving sim when the current one is already showing it is not popular?
The big maps are exactly what I LIKE about Battle mode, because that’s the engagement distances tanks are designed for. I will allow that there should be side goals to help keep people engaged, but I HATE 3-lane MOBA and tiny-map CQC combat. I like feeling tactical, taking my time to plan out the engagement, and especially playing the sniper role.
Battle is one of the few modes in rotation for ground vehicles that focus intelligent player effort on either offense or defense. The LAST thing that should be done is putting it on CQB maps, because at that point it’s just another mad-scramble TDM/spawn campfest with an alternate win condition.
If anything ground modes need larger maps in order for vehicles to show their actual worth with scouting, flanking, frontal assaulting, positional firing lines, and avoiding (for AB/RB modes, since Sim modes don’t have a substantial issue with it) one CAS aircraft/helicopter from wiping out a third or more of the team in one pass.
I will agree that there should be at least a few secondary objectives like AT guns or support vehicle staging areas to hit, but the focus should be still on securing the enemy’s zone through making a breach point in their armor coverage.
Great points from both of you. Secondary objectives are exactly what Battle mode would need to prevent stagnation.
Taking inspiration from Air Battles bomber/CAS objectives, ground equivalents could include:
AI-controlled Forward Operating Bases or outposts with Heavy Machine Guns and/or ATGM bunkers in contested areas, like portrayed in the game SQUAD™
Lightly armored AI convoys (Humvees, M113s, BTRs + 1 or 2 basic SPAA and/or tanks) patrolling defensive cap zones
Infantry + AT weaponry defending perimeters
Ticket loss when these objectives are neutralized
This could create constant engagement throughout the map without forcing everyone into the same two cap zones. Matches wouldn’t stagnate into 20+ minute driving simulators.
On map size: agreed that larger maps suit higher BR vehicles with LRF and thermals. But CQB on modern tank maps is a separate problem entirely. Fighting Abrams and T-90s on maps designed for M22s and Panzer IIIs (Karelia being the perfect example, which is a 14 year old map) makes no tactical or historical sense.
These are actually two separate suggestions worth pursuing formally:
Secondary objectives for Battle mode
Map size/design restrictions by BR
I’ll develop both separately based on this discussion
yea battle mode is pretty bad and takes long but great for nukes because more time because every time I’m close to a nuke I cant get it because of the match ends
AI garbage list of fake points. None of the claimed phenomena are unique to Battle or more prominent in it.
The rest of the post is not even worth engaging with as it’s just AI slop motivated by crazy levels of skill issue and laziness/unwillingness to engage with the game and play properly.
Bro when is the last time you’ve played a Battle mode game on a big map (Big as in its an existing map but with the outskirts added, like Poland or Eastern Europe have)?
Every. Single. Time. I play Battle mode on this maps, half the teams are gone by the 3-minute mark or just thereafter.
Only the diehard fans stick around and spawn again after they’ve died once.
One of the most tense matches of the last few months is a Battle I’ve had on Eastern Europe, the large version. Full uptier to 7.7. A squaddie and I made a crazy last stand on our cap with Tiger II 105 (him) and Tiger II Sla (me) while a Conqueror and several American heavies pushed us to drive home the win. Instead we turned it around. Incredibly tense.
Other mission types rarely go down to the wire the way Battle can.
This is imho just confirmation bias, you notice because you’re looking for it. I see teams melt in all mission types. Conquest in fact might be where it happens the fastest because bad players just press W and die quickly.
I regularly check my team list no matter the battle I’m in. Don’t even really know why I do, but it’s become a habit of mine.
Yes, teams can melt in every gamemode and on any sized map, but from personal experience (I know that is a shoddy claim but thankfully my habit hasn’t transgressed into taking a screenshot everytime I look at the team list yet) it happens more frequently and more often with 1-death leavers on large maps.
Don’t get me wrong, I too prefer having variety when it comes to maps (Though I will admit I have a personal love for CQC).
However, I do think that most of the large maps the game has are just complete and utter garbage, simply being existing maps stretched out (often resulting in only fields and sometimes a forest or two being added) instead of unique maps that stand on their own.
The only map of the latter kind that I can think of is Pradesh, which just so happens to be my favourite large map (Another unpopular opinion, I know).
BAsically everything you describe is not a game mode problem, its large map problem. That happends not related to game mode, because no one wants to play more than one spawn on huge maps, even those who were lucky to get some killls.
However, Battle mode isn’t helped by the fact that the only objectives available to players, beyond shooting each other, are located the furthest away from any game mode.
So whereas someone in a battle on say Field of Poland might not mind to try and contest the C cap near the bottom hill a second time because it’s exactly halfway across the map, if it were battle mode, then that cap would be about 4/5th of the map from where you spawn.