I don’t enjoy it like couple of years, that’s why I don’t play a lot now, only for something related to Japan (decals, profile things). Things that I hate most of time my teammates are 15-30 lvls on top tier but enemy team 6-10 players are 100 lvls, balance tilt in Russian side (CAS weapons, things like Terminator (12.7 hull on 10.3 br at start)), all events (atleast 90% of them) last year or more are one of 3 nations (USA, Russia or Germany), I just don’t see any reason to me to play WT
I think you meant Tunisia, which is also the same size.
Second Battle of El Alamein also is the same size overall, and got larger in ground RB.
Sands of Sinai is still the same size, it just moved west to encourage long range engagements.
Funny how Gaijin edits a map [Sands of Sinai] to encourage long range engagements, and a loud minority complains.
A minority of loud people HATED losing their beloved CQC area, hated it. They hated playing at longer ranges.
Capture point A side sees 7x the amount of players today than it EVER did when the CQC area existed.
People overwhelmingly love that Sands of Sinai became longer range engagements, all without changing the size of the map.
Oh, and the final point.
War Thunder has more than one map.
This is implying all maps available to tanks and aircraft of their respective BRs.
Map size 6 years ago was on average 40% what we have today in ground, and 15% the size of air RB maps at the top end.
Even prop maps are getting bigger. Newer prop maps have been at least 2x larger.
I still remember when I was playing 30x30km and 40x40km maps in Mirage 3C against F-14A.
40x40km is 10% the area of 128x128km.
I still remember when Abrams could see 1x1km maps, now all of those except 2? are locked to 7.7 and below.
Nope, I was talking about this:
https://old-wiki.warthunder.com/Second_battle_of_El_Alamein_(Ground_Forces)
When it was introduced it was played in full sized in RB (I remember spawning there with black prince).
1 Like
I mean i guess. Theres no other game like WT so if i want tanks that arent hitbox sponges im stuck.
Waiting on forza horizon 6 to come out to play a new game in a series i like
Most of the maps at top tier are Town/City maps, the large open maps like Sands of Sinai are literally never or rarely in circulation. Air RB is already short enough as it is because within 60 seconds there is fifty ARH missiles already in the air.
Gaijin purposely made RB rewards time based because they KNOW they’ve purposefully made their match times shorter by encouraging faster gameplay, never mind the fact that the gamemodes literally haven’t been updated in years.
2 Likes
No, most of the maps at top BR are >2.0km x 2.0km maps.
The most maps you see =/= the most maps you can see.
Sands of Sinai is always in circulation. Once again, just because you don’t see it doesn’t mean it isn’t there.
If Gaijin wanted matches to be shorter they would remove all maps made after 2017, reduce team sizes, and unrestrict the small maps.
Gaijin has never encouraged faster gameplay. They literally made strike aircraft spawn on the ground to increase match times.
Air RB matches use to last 1 - 3 minutes at the fastest.
It’s obvious you didn’t play back in the day when matches were significantly faster than they are today.
Edit:
BTW, the only reason matches lasted a long time early on in War Thunder is because of high climbing bombers.
BR balancing made that less possible.
Then players started optimizing the fun out of War Thunder [myself included] and we were able to get matches faster and faster until A-7D was introduced and single-handedly caused 90 second matches.
Then Gaijin in response to players seeking faster and faster times started a war against fast matches.
Larger maps, larger team sizes, removal of air spawn for strike aircraft, amended legacy maps to make them take at least slightly more work to move around to mean positions, etc.
All efforts to increase match time, and all of them have been successful.
Cause I cannot remember the last time a 3 minute match happened.
I can tell you how many 6 minute matches have occurred, and in the rare case a 5 minute match.
But nothing like the past records.
Its not the only possibility
Yeah, I still enjoy the game as day one in ARB. However, the maps in GRB have been an incresingly annoying thing to deal with the autocannon meta shift.
Breslau, Attica, Port Novorossiysk or Campania are ridiculously BAD maps at top tier. And no, I don’t like top tier’s CQB to begin with. I find it a ridiculous concept and betrays the purpose for which many modern vehicles were built (Laser rangefinders? Thermals? Optics? All useless in CQB).
1 Like
While I, and tank designers disagree with you partially on CQB, I appreciate your perspective.
Most of modern tanks (except maybe the Merkava series) were NOT designed to perform heavy duty CQB at all, that’s why many got APS systems later on to increase survivability.
Many top armies approach urban combat doctrines through a blend of infantry-APC/IFV offensives, and most recently, by using many sorts of drones. Not by using tanks.
And stop referring yourself as an authority, it’s embarrasing.
1 Like
@PyroAddict
I’ve never once referred to myself as an authority. The quote you provided has me deferring authority to people that design tanks.
Please do not project onto me.
If modern MBTs were only designed for sniping, they wouldn’t need variable optics with low-zoom options.
They especially wouldn’t need 1x optics for the commander.
Tank designers explicitly design MBTs for 0 - 5500 meters engagements.
Cause they don’t know what the crews will use it for in real battles, so they cover their bases.
And if the reason for “No CQB” involves infantry, that’s not a reason. War Thunder doesn’t have infantry to begin with, and urban fighting among tanks has been occurring since their introduction.
They need variable optics for threat assessment, not for close combat. Same for commander sights.
As far as I’m concerned, besides missile-based systems, every gun is designed to perform from 0 meters, however, that does not turn them automatically into close quarters suited systems.
For instance, I wouldn’t call the Leopard I a close quarters suited tank, but under your interpretation, it totally is, which is openly questionable.
And there’s a nuance: That’s why they have coaxial and mounted machine guns, those are the ones which solves imminent threats at close range, which under any normal army should be only infantry.
If an enemy tank or another armored vehicle sneaks below a hundred meters, the army related to our instance-mentioned tank commited a dozen of suprisingly catastrophic mistakes.
It literally is a reason. Modern MBTs were developed to provide both direct fire on fortified positions or enemy armor and indirect fire on infantry at medium/long ranges. Anything in between is stretching their doctrinal and operational capabilities.
War Thunder started with WW2 vehicles. Urban CQB in WW2 was a common, documented thing during allied offensives at the 2nd half of the war. Translating that gameplay into modern MBTs is ridiculous and neglects decades of research and development.
Modern MBTs were simply not developed or built for CQB as their primary function, and anything that happens on maps like Breslau, Attica, Port Novorossiysk, Campania or even Rhine is simply fictional for any army you ask about.
2 Likes
depends.
usually yes, but would like it even more if it was balanced in MANY more ways.
Millions of accounts does not equal millions of players. Gaijin never deletes any created account even if they are inactive (or banned for that matter).
There is probably significantly less than a million active players of the game and the loss rate/churn in new accounts is probably something horrific like 50%.
War Thunder is notorious for being the “game players love to hate”. More than I’ve seen with anything else.
2 Likes
160,000 x 12 hours = just under 2 million per day of people that play 2 hours per day.
And considering people complain about the grind a lot, I’m guessing 2 hours per day is potentially rarer than 1 hour per day.
You are making some probably untrue assumptions there.
1 Like
You’re more than welcome to prove the average player plays more than 2 hours a day on average.
Easy to demand something that is unobtainable.
1 Like
Clearly you didn’t watch BVVD’s Q&A
2 Likes
I started playing war thunder 10 years ago early 2016 when i was 11 and war thunder back then was very fun for me personally snail used to make very fun events the rewards were really good and maps not that like in 2026 small maps and a lot of premiums tanks that are really killing the a lot of brs and players leave games most of the time and i don’t blame them everyone has his own reasons & there is nothing new in gameplay or new game mode and (infantry) does not count for me i joined War thunder because am fan of WWII tanks / planes / heavy tanks i don’t like infantry or this kind of games and that’s my personally opinion the only reason am still in war thunder is am waiting for planes / tanks / and war thunder forums i don’t see my self playing war thunder in next 3 to 4 years because maybe am getting older and my sister call me unc even am only 21 like gurl get out .
