Do our community really favors small maps?

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
,
249

Both maps feature towns that you can hide in and brawl.
Those maps have a much better idea behind them than fully urban mazes that completely cut out several playstyles. They have some issues with their implementation which is normal for Gaijin.

Sorry but I can’t really take this statement serious after looking at your stats with BTR and other lights.

The point being that all maps should cater to all vehicles types and their playstyles.
Currently we don’t have that, which is why people complain.

You couldn’t be further from the truth.

250

Well, i don’t really play top tier so i don’t really care, but i guess i can trust you on this one i agree top tier is hardly playable in current state.

It’s not possible. If the map allows lights to control the map from good positions only they can reach using their mobility (which is exactly the case on current large ans open maps), it will be unplayable for any slower vehicle. God forbid you kill one of those lights, it will immediately come back as A2D-1 with 4t of ordinance or whatever.

Try playing BTR-80 with stock ammo constantly thrown at Tiger 2s, T26E5s and stuff of this kind. Before reaching APDS i limited myself to scouting and assist hunting.

That is considering you even reach them which takes at least 2-3 minutes of driving and leaves you vulnerable in the meantime. Not to mention that all you need is 1 plane to smash you with bomb or a light to side shot you through some small opening and you go back to spawn again. Hell lot of fun. Any half decent player will not even consider spawning the heavy on such map in the first place, so you won’t have a lot of enemies to brawl against either.

251

It’s definitely possible.
Limiting the impact of any spot on the map is a key feature of map design.

Taking you two minutes to reach the caps is not something bad if you have cover along the way.

Currently, our caps on most maps are way too close to spawns, so whenever one team folds enemies are basically often given free spawn camping spots.

CAS is an issue that needs to be solved, we can agree on that.

252

I mean how many light at your preferred BR , rank can control the map, if said map allowed all vehicle to be able to play to their style and would a light at your preferred rank and BR can just freely control the map without being striked down by a CAS with anti tank cannon. If we talking about make up scenario , then we at least have to take in all the aspect that made up the game mode , not cherry picking and cut off the fat

Pretty sure at rank 4-5 you can easily make it to the city , map at that BR are not even that big. Heavy around that br tend to have decent moblity. The only exception are the soviet heavies and the Maus and again , cherry picking certain aspect in a match that can have so many possibilities , which many of those possibilities are not rare. Extremely common in fact, with a well design map for those thing to happen you would already lost the game , not counting the CAS for obvious reason. A well design map would be able to offer all player a chance to shine , reward game sense and map awareness and punish those who only hold W in their beloved heavy

253

If anything, at least as a british/german player…

Having a map with long range combat, lots of hills/divots and minimal corner-to-corner or girth of gun vs thickness of front plate combat…

Favours heavy tanks. Heavily.

Why?

  1. Penetration falls off significantly at distance. Take a standard 5.0-6.0 BR non-heatFS light tank and shoot a Tiger I or tiger II from under 100 meters somewhere you know you’ll pen. Now do the same from 500, 700 and 1000 meters out. What do you observe?
  2. Guns have dispersion. Even with best correction and aim, the longer you’re shooting the less likely your round lands exactly in that pixel-perfect weakspot you were aiming. Now, heavy tanks (and heavies masquarading as mediums ala panthers) have some glaring frontal weakspots that you can easily exploit upfront at close range. Now, try to do the same (using custom matches with a friend to control for variables) at 500 meters, 700 meters, 1000 meters and more. You may notice the shell impacting just a few dozen centimetres to the right, to the left where you were aiming and now rather than hitting that glaring weakspot, you just bounce. Some tanks this is more obvious than others.
  3. Heavier tanks usually got bad turret traverse and abysmal reloads.
    Where do you think the conqueror rather lives and thrives?
    In hilly terrain from which it can quickly peek out, lob a shot half a kilometer or more the moment it’s vulnerable thanks to stabilizer and then roll back into cover and reposition where its 20 second reload is not an issue even if the entire enemy team spots her and returns fire.
    or
    Narrow city lanes where even if you instakill with your first shot, your 20 second reload means you get swarmed and taken out.
  4. Heavier tanks usually got slower reverse speeds (with some exceptions). You see enemy round a corner, your round takes out their gunner but by the time you reload their gunner is back in action and oh god there’s their buddy. You put her into hard reverse and… 3 km/h. You’re not getting out of this alive.

I dunno about you, but I much rather take my centurions/conquerors, tigers and panthers and even comets and fireflies into hilly terrain with long distance sightlines rather than brawling corner to corner where my armour means nothing, my reload matters significantly and lack of one-hit-kill potential from solid shells can make what looks like a easy win turn into a death as there’s nowhere to reposition and hide between your shots except a building.

2 Likes
254

Many players have noticed that Ground RB maps in War Thunder are becoming smaller and more restricted over time. This trend affects gameplay quality, tactical depth, and the overall realism of the mode. Based on player experiences and repeated community feedback, here are three clear points that describe what Gaijin is doing with the maps, supported by concrete arguments.

1. Gaijin is increasingly restricting large maps

Large portions of many maps are now blocked off, sometimes up to one‑third of the original playable area. Players have pointed out examples like North Holland, where entire sections have been removed, turning previously open environments into narrow corridors. This reduces tactical depth, eliminates long‑range engagements, and forces players into predictable routes with little room for maneuvering.

2. The current map rotation heavily favors small, fast‑paced layouts

Full‑size versions of maps rarely appear anymore. Instead, the game frequently selects compact layouts where the distance to the center can be as little as 500 meters. This forces close‑quarters combat even at high BRs, where tanks are designed for long‑range fighting. Matches often end in under five minutes, which many players describe as “Call of Duty with tanks,” rather than a realistic tank battle.

3. Gaijin seems to prioritize quick matches over realistic gameplay

By shrinking maps and removing flanking routes, the game pushes instant‑action gameplay at the expense of realism. Several players argue that Ground RB is becoming dominated by close‑range brawling, making it feel more like an arcade mode. This undermines the intended tactical and realistic nature of the mode and disadvantages vehicles that rely on positioning, stealth, or long‑range firepower.

Conclusion These changes collectively reduce the strategic variety and realism that many players value in Ground RB. Larger, more open maps are essential for balanced gameplay, especially at higher BRs. Many players hope that Gaijin will reconsider the current map design philosophy and restore full‑size maps to the rotation to improve the overall experience.

255

Stalingrad? Yes - a stupid map for a tank game. Artillery and infantry is what did most of the fighting in Stalingrad.

Not completely correct.

Look up many of the armored ww2 battles, and infantry is a major part of the equation. They support the armor and help prevent it from being flanked. You can’t hold an area without infantry. Just like air can only do so much for your army. No boots on the ground - no win.

Stalingrad is a prime example. It’s a terrible location - tactically, for armor to fight. Ambush city. Armor was NOT the major factor in winning or losing Stalingrad.

1 Like
256

Poland could use some more room in the southern sector tbh

1 Like
257

I agree, long range would be the more open maps and close rwnfe are the more city-esq ones, which I feel War Thunder has done nicely

1 Like
258

The bold is the details your sentence omitted.
Infantry isn’t in War Thunder, thus your point isn’t relevant.

259

@Carius30122
1- 2 maps at most larger than 2x2km have been restricted.
Of the ~6 total maps with added red-zones, 4 - 5 of them are restricted to BRs of 7.7 and lower.

2- Those maps are restricted to BRs of 7.7 and lower.

3- The last 10 maps added to War Thunder are all larger than the 2018 average map size.
The maps whose borders got restricted 100% purely due to player feedback are almost exclusively lower BR maps.

Player feedback the resulted in the roadmaps is the sole reason we have red zones on maps to begin with.

1 Like
260

So be it. Full size maps are neither interesting to play due to small amount of players per square, nor rewarding as they rarely let you get many kills. Also their reward is shifted to passive gameplay, as on long-range, its largely about being a sneaky bas… and have first shot from however far away possible.

1 Like
261

You missed the point of those posts.
Gaijin has taken locations of famous WW2 battles and dropped them into their tank mode, even though the locations are unsuitable for tank battles - Stalingrad as a prime example.

262

Well, that you feel larger maps are less interesting to play, that’s your perception, no problem. On a bigger map its easy to play it like a small map. You drive to a cap point in the center of the map and you’ ve your favorite game. Battle on a small map. Others, those who like tank tactics , may use the flanks, go deep into the fields and have there fun. Everybody happy. On a small map though, there’s no other option then to play an arcade stile battle. Very unsatisfying for me. I play this game for 14 years and was atractic to this game because it was not arcady. With bigger maps and room to manouvre. Hope you understand

1 Like
263

He only cares about maps like Ash River or North Holland and such

264

You replied to the wrong user as your entire post addresses nothing in my posts.

@MeanBROSofD72805 Oh, you’re the one he meant to respond to that hates large maps.
I see.

Well, enjoy your Ash River. Not sure why you mentioned North Holland…
I’ll keep enjoying Red Desert, Sweden, Pradesh, etc.

266

Because I don’t like any of the maps I don’t like and North Holland is a slop map of all time that discourages flanking at every turn

267

I personally like both, but given the choice id rather just only play small maps ever again, why?
Because at top tier aside from pradesh and red desert big maps dont change anything about the gameplay, they still make it slower, people will instantly spot and kill you at any range making the changes irrelevent

268

Thats the problem: you drive to the cap and stay there, spending time (boringly driving by emply map) to get there and having to stop there for the game to be of your liking. Its univerally boring for all BRs. More than that, the time you spend on the move is the time you are the easy target for one who already IS on the cap or just camps around your spawn, which is also relevant with all BRs but a MUCH BIGGER problem on top tier with their LRFs and APFSDS. So its a 1-respawn game basically. Plus you now dont have tactical mobility, meaning you probably wont be able to move to different capture point because the map is huge and the reason number 1 i described here. Meaning, if there are no enemies here, or if there are too many, you wont get kills or wont be able to recieve help, and you already spent some time. And more than that, SOME big maps dont even have such caps to play CQC. 2 out of 3 points of the Sim Tunisia are the caps you`ll be forced to shoot your way out with enemies sitting 1+km away on the sands. Same with big Normandy. Big Poland is basicaly all 3 caps are to be shot from 2km away. Ect.

1 Like
269

Larger maps create a more challenging and interesting experience in Ground RB — especially at higher BRs — because they restore the tactical depth that small maps simply cannot offer.

High‑tier vehicles are designed for long‑range fire, maneuvering, and positional play. When the game forces them into close‑quarters brawls on tiny layouts, most of their intended gameplay disappears. Here’s why larger maps matter:

1. Vehicles can finally perform as intended

Modern MBTs are built for 1–2 km engagements, not 80‑meter corner fights.
Stabilizers, thermals, LRFs, and APFSDS only shine when there is space.
On small maps, everything becomes “who peeks fastest”, which is shallow and repetitive.

2. More space = more decisions = more skill expression

Large maps introduce actual decision‑making:
route selection, segment control, terrain reading, timing, and risk management.
Small maps reduce all of this to linear rushes and instant engagements.

3. Flanking becomes a real playstyle again

On small maps, flanks are predictable, short, and easy to pre‑aim.
On larger maps, you can create pressure, break lines, and maneuver — the core of tank warfare.

4. Spawncamping becomes harder

When caps are 300–500 meters from spawn, a collapsed flank means instant spawncamping.
Larger maps give depth, reaction time, and counterplay.

5. High‑tier mobility is designed for open terrain

At 9.0+ almost everything drives 60–75 km/h with excellent optics.
These vehicles need space.
On small maps, their mobility becomes overwhelming because there is no room to counter it.

6. Engagements become more varied

Large maps naturally create a mix of:

  • mid‑range duels
  • long‑range overwatch
  • close‑range fights around objectives
  • maneuver battles on the flanks

Small maps force one single playstyle: close‑quarters brawling.

Why this matters even more at high BRs

High BRs have extremely lethal ammunition, extremely fast vehicles, and extremely short TTK.
On small maps this results in:

  • instant kills
  • 3‑minute matches
  • no maneuver space
  • no recovery options

On larger maps you get:

  • tension
  • information warfare
  • positioning battles
  • teamwork
  • actual tank combat instead of arcade‑style corner fights

Short version

Larger maps bring back tactics, maneuver, vehicle identity, and meaningful decision‑making — all of which disappear on small maps, especially at high BRs.

2 Likes