Why would you want more maps? The gameplay is the problem roflmao.
Batter would be haveing bigger maps then more.
I disagree.
Currently we have very few maps (Afghanistan, part of Vietnam and Spain) where terrain plays a role and can be used tactically. The rest are basically just flat.
I’d be all for more maps with interesting terrain, like for example the Alps…
6 Likes
Oh no… This will harm “sim” players that takeoff, spam 120s and just watch.
Most of the world is just flat plains. That’s how plane combat goes, there’s air all around you and nothing else. We don’t need more maps with interesting terrain. Dogfighting in the mountains is primarily seen in movies.
It’s the same as with ships, you have water all around you and nothing else. It’s just as stupid as making every naval map with islands.
I get your desire for dogfights, but artificially forcing them by making every map a mountain maze is not the way.
Tank maps are already pretty much mazes only and it’s not fun to play a Leopard in the city all the time, when it can easily snipe at 2-3km with a laser range finder.
If you dislike flat maps because of multipathing, then maybe I don’t know, nerf multipathing???
2 Likes
Having a map that makes carrier ops more relevant without punishing axis (Germany, Italy) for not having carrier-capable aircraft compared to allies (both US and UK have lots of carrier capable aircraft, only USSR suffers), especially through assymetry (Allies start ~32 km from objectives. Axis start ~100km from objectives if not carrier capable) would be very nice for prop tier ASB.
At the moment only Denmark and Dover strait exist. Denmark is assymetric (axis may not have useful airfields near objectives or if they do, they’re spawncamped while allies are 16-32km from objectives at all times without even having to use carriers), and Dover has no air superiority missions and bomber escorts get bugged out into guaranteed kills (they circle around D4 for infinity).
Tunisia/Siciliy/Moresby have carriers, but the carriers lack utility more often than not. Moresby has the most utility, but it’s also moresby where the ground is so dark as to make it annoying to play on .
Fwiw, I’m talking from 3.0-5.7 pov.
Yes, and 500+ km between your and enemy airbases.
I need a 10X bigger map or at least a complex terrain to have ability to hide and think and avoid missile spam towards my airfield.
I agree, we need bigger maps. 10 times bigger is maybe a little excessive, even dcs doesn’t have 1280x1280km maps I think, but 2-5 times bigger for sure. If maps got any larger than that I would want air refueling.
1 Like
Close to that numbers )
Syria is 1000x900 km
Sinai is 1500x1000 km
Detailed area is a little smaller, but anyway…
This square inside default detailed Caucasus map is 128x128km – the beiggest map size in WT.
I think I will be able to fit dozen of them inside this map )
1 Like
More maps, improved objectives = better gameplay
My point was that if even for DCS this is about the largest map size, then War Thunder isn’t ready for maps THAT big, when we don’t have AWACS, air refueling etc. and War Thunder straight up just isn’t a simulator.
Bigger maps sure, of course, but not THAT big. These maps are bigger than many countries lmao.
Yes, DCS is also rarely uses the whole map entirely.
There can be a frontline, as in Sim EC and the airfields closest to it can be selected on both sides.
The distance between opponents in this case can be less then 100 km.
But you always able to choose another distant field and use flank tactics or what else you want.
1 Like
I sincerely hope that the new modern anti-aircraft systems will be added as airfield defense vehicles in the air sim. It would have almost only positive points for the mode and that would make it really more immersive and fun
1 Like
Do you think they would move the bases away from them accordingly? They are already within kill zone since years since when the Rolands were added.
Oh no, one thing at a time. If they changed something, it would be the first change in three years, so take it easy, don’t rush them.
Aside from that, base placement is only problematic on the smaller maps (and maybe Denmark in the northwest), and the CCRP makes it easy to reach all bases without any problems, especially for those too close to airfields.
I think we just have to literally wait for them to run out of vehicles to add before they put even 5 minutes of effort into updating actual gameplay.
Its ridiculous.
4 Likes
Most of planes have dozen of variants. They will never run out of them.
Like this this match already was 1v3 2 minutes ago after I joined, because the MM told me it was 5 on team blue and 5 on team red…then switched to 4 on team Blue 5 on team red as I clicked on “To battle”…yeah total lie, one Yak-28. I then tried out the FFAR’s which didn’t work…killed their Harrier with my F-84F…by nailing something on his last wing with my last ammo.
Then got killed by one of the three active enemies.
And somehow despite being alll alone on my team, the MM thought: “1v3 is not rookie numbers, let’s make it 1v5!”
It’s already bad enough when you allow one team to gain double the strength than the other has, which I’ve seen often enough…but this was just a bad joke.
fantom sessions arent smth new