1 Like
@Creastroy
I trust the US military and sports over randos on the Internet that think flanking means running away for 4km
Can you even call A and E a flank at that point? These routes are like 5m next to the town. Everybody with a functioning stereo can here them.
Isn’t it more like an ambush? To me flanking means penetrating the enemy from the side.
This is just sneaking yourself into the enemy lines.
According to the cambridge dictionary,
Flank n. the side of something
“A small group of houses clings to the eastern flank of the mountain.”
End of quote xD
Ambush is different.
And you are going to the enemy’s side doing these maneuvers.
This is more like going in between the enemies.
Flanking is going around the enemy’s front line.
It can be the same thing depending on how you think about it.
Flanking a group of enemies just means getting to the side of them, but flanking an area often means something much wider and larger. The 2nd type is where Gaijins map design fails, but it’s also hard to get it right while keeping it balanced and not spammed.
1 Like
You have to go between enemies in flanking in war. Flanking is penetrating the lines and hitting individuals from their side or rear.
That would be a completely different usage of the word “flanking” than anywhere else. Idk if you watch football but that’s not what it means there, same with the equivalent word in my mother language.
So whenever you get behind the enemy lines it’s called a flanking maneuver? I would say it’s more about how you get behind those lines.
1 Like
You oviously talked to wrong people then. I talked to some real life tank commanders and standard flanking distance for tanks is between 1.5 and 2 km because tanks are loud and pick up lost of dust while driving offroad. If any of the scouts see/hear you, your flanking manouver failed.
Even for infantry standard flanking distances are more distant than average WT map.
You didn’t listen well: 1.5 - 2km in OPEN AREAS with a lot of visibility.
The average WT map is 2x2km BTW.
Even around cities. Tanks go at least 1.5 km away from urban area to flank.
Thats why WT maps are too small.
They do that for infantry presence, which War Thunder doesn’t have making that refer to back to visibility.
Recently had a re-enactment custom sim battle for the assault on iwo jima.
We were in LVTs, Shermans, stuarts (plus planes and boats doing support).
Usual engagement ranges were well in excess of a kilometer with the lead tank often using smoke shells to mark targets for aircraft and the rest of the “Platoon” and just calling out on VC where to shoot and what.
Quite a distinct experience from our corner-to-corner fighting in cities.
2 Likes
wow i wonder why its so monotonous. maybe because im playing the same bullshit battle over the chalk circles since 2013
2 Likes
One important point I wanted to address is that Gaijin’s attempt to improve light tanks through reconnaissance is a problem.
Gaijin has tried to compensate for the disadvantages of light tanks through the reconnaissance mechanic. However, the disadvantages vary from light tank to light tank; most have very poor armor, but many have very good mobility, others have good firepower, and others have good survivability. Some are very similar to medium tanks (TAM → Leopard a1a1, Ikv.91 → Leopard 1, DF-105/Clovis → AMX-30, Leopard) in terms of their performance, but there are others that are extremely different from most other tanks in the game (M18, Fiats, BMP-1, Bradley, etc.). Nevertheless, ALL are buffed by the same mechanic; I think this only fairly compensates for the disadvantages of some light tanks.
Instead, the map design should allow all kinds of tanks to exploit their advantages, without any hypothetical reconnaissance and drone mechanics.
So, there should be advantages on all maps for highly mobile tanks, for tanks with good cannons, etc. Above all, this would also help medium tanks, which actually play a bit like light tanks but still don’t get to enjoy the reconnaissance mechanic.
For example: Today, the DF-105 has the reconnaissance mechanic, but the Leopard 1 doesn’t. The DF-105 is essentially just a Leopard 1 with a worse shell but a better reload time. Both play very similarly; in fact, you could argue the DF-105 is even better. If maps were designed to give mobile vehicles like the Leopard 1 or the DF-105 gameplay opportunities, both would benefit equally, and there wouldn’t be an imaginary line between medium and light tanks that would grant light tanks an advantage that relatively equal medium tanks don’t get.
So, in plain English: Good map design could allow tanks to take on roles based on their stat cards, rather than pressing them into one-dimensional categories and simply giving all light tanks a mechanic.
Likewise, Gaijin has already desperately tried to give TDs an advantage through mobile ammo reloading. What many of these tanks really need, however, are varied maps where they can also play according to their tank design.
For example: Does the ammo reloading mechanic help an IT-1? Yes, absolutely, it can simply stay in cover! Does the mechanic help an ISU-152? No, at least not that much, because it has a 27-second reload time anyway and will very rarely run out of ammunition. What’s needed are maps where you can use the ISU-152 as a casemate tank with huge gun and reload properly!
Diablo 2 made the game online to where the map changes always its never the same. It would be COOL to see that in newer games refardless genre. For example, still keep historical maps, but also add random generated maps also that are not replayable a second time for some player vs player matchs. Ofcourse, peiple will come say this is not a good idea. Thats fine. Im open to negative comments and constructive criticism.
That or include dynamic maps like in enlisted/battlefield/hell let loose in which when a set of objectives are achieved we move into another section/stage of a map and a new set of objectives is to be accomplished.
They also could put a set number of respawns allowed per match no matter how many vehicles are in your lineup like in SIM, where making real tactical/situational choices would matter more than going through a list by elimination and finishing the match with your worst vehicle instead of choosing what you need to accomplish that particular challenge.
We have many maps that are using the same areas, el alamein being a good example, having some urban terrain, oasis/ish type and the dunes would make for some unique matches while using large areas and would allow for so much more varitety in the gameplay loop.
3 Likes
I like your ideas. You got a good brain!
I mean it’s like basic FPS/milsim game modes lol.
1 Like