I think that is where the confusion lies it was not an official position but a moderator viewpoint.
Totally with you on everything else there 100% for what it’s worth, lets get those old maps back.
I hate red lines and even worse the death penalty for straying over them, that’s a big cause of ODL for me or even no DL when I spawn on a map like that. Narrow Alaska? I’m gone in six seconds.
Not based around sniping.
Though - Game offers few brawlers with majority vehicles are best suited for medium to long range engagement. Especially seeing as we rely on a “accurate” source for vehicle design and modeling, then application and tactic MUST be taken into consideration. Otherwise again, WoT here we come.
Every other large game does not allow mod opinion on official accounts. Official accounts in gaming are generally used for guidance or enforcement - that special symbol in their name makes it “law”.
Taking the latter in public mindset into account - it opens for arguments of “So and so said it, my point is valid and yours is wrong”. This is how we end up with people being voted into hidden or attacked for having opinion. Side note - it also does not stop a mod from enforcing their opinion through other channels.
TLDR - What a few mods say resonate through the game and I think this is what adds to the drastic change to the game.
I noticed a comment that made me smile in the Battle Pass comments section about the BP prize Sheridan having the potential to be a great flanking vehicle so long as Gajin didn’t make the maps too narrow for it .Thats the way its getting.
War Thunder has never been close to World of Tank’s 800x800 meter maps.
Like the smallest WT map is still over 1x1km made in like 2013/2014.
War Thunder’s rewards don’t scale with map size which is also a flaw in games like Battlefield where the best map is a WW1 trench warfare style subway system called Metro for earning rewards.
Nuketown for COD.
Cause all these games don’t reward playing on larger maps and players want more rewards per minute.
I did have serious issues as a novice while having low BR and un modded tanks on big maps like Red Desert ,now it seems those who play High BR are subjected to small maps.
I don’t venture past 7BR much . Does the game still not have BR or era specific maps at top tier? They don’t seriously just hand you the same maps we get at 4-5 BR ?
It’s a forum moderator? Their entire job here is to be on the forums and engage with people, what difference does their opinion make from ours?
When 20k people say something, that’s almost 1/4 of the entire forum. What they say means quite a lot.
“Back in my day” discussions are pretty common, seeing as most of the people whining about nonsense started playing the game in 2021-2022.
The Tiger’s counterpart when it was added was the M26… A tiny bit after it was added, there were floods of M18 variants and Shermans that were introduced.
The first “large” map addition was Volokolamsk, and that was partitioned into the smaller versions that we occasionally see at low BRs.
Sinai was also added around the 2017 period, and both maps were limited to about 1x1km. The farthest engagement you’d see would be from D4 firing on E5.
That was an even more prevalent problem in the early days, especially on Karelia. People would find ways to mountain goat to the top of the A line, the top of the G line, or the far left side of the 1 line.
As for SPAA, radar locking was a welcomed change.
Console is only capable of locking onto aircraft, which is quite fair seeing as gamepads don’t have fine-tuned control.
Almost all vehicles then cost 3x more than they do now. A Panzer IV H cost over 150k, while today it’s… Oh, sorry, not 3x less, it’s actually 20k. My mistake!
It still is? I was jumping over the addition of Chinese helicopters, mainly because of my BF4 obsession. When Italy got the AV-8B+, I tried pushing straight down the air tree.
Hell, any time there’s a new Mirage, I love it. I don’t care if we have over 16 of them, I love them all.
This is actually very valid.
CoD was shipment, CS was Dust2, 2Fort for TF, etc…
My question is, how does one increase rewards for specific maps only? Bring back the D cap? Otherwise, what about limiting X maps (as we have already) by X BR? Using cargoport as example - small and narrow for low BR (sub 7.7) and full scale for high BR? What about implementing red zones accordingly to BR as well? Example, Japan - Low BR you do not have weird climb spaces where some tanks will never be able to get to or defend against and have the same red zones removed for high br where almost any vehicle can get to said places?
What if you seperate maps by era? WW2 VS Cold War VS Modern? This way, you also do not have a 6.7 WW2 running against a 7.7 Cold War.
Sure - you do not have the map size based reward but you do have maps that cater for the vehicles in question.
I haven’t paid anything, yet I’m having a blast staying out of Frozen Pass.
Map reward multipliers probably.
Which is the idea I suggested as something for
Mozdok = Bad, Sweden = Bad, Arctic = Bad, Poland= Bad, Pradesh = Bad.
etc etc
I have Mozdok thumbed up, Poland thumbed down.
I’d have Pradesh thumbed up if I didn’t like others more.
And I have Campania banned again since legacy Italy was a better trashheep than what we have now.
Mozdok with 3 points is alrigght, but 1 point is suffering
It is limited to 1 map with premium. Without premium you have nl influence at all.
There is no way, in which the “map filter” helps playing only on maps that you like.
In Mesopotamian times people believed the earth was flat. In Middle ages came the globe theory. It is still argued to this day. Just because someone has written it somewhere it does not mean that it speaks for everyone. It also does not mean that it is right or wrong.
ye I have whined about nonsense, till I learned more about the game. Guess we are all guilty of it in one way or another. I started playing in 2018 on and off. Now it feels, like with the map discussion, the players are being babysat into progression and wins. However, you did bring out some nice points.
Engagement is one thing. But first rule of CS is to never display or endorse anything that is not official to the company. Maybe here people are held to a “lesser” standard.
It does not matter if they don’t speak for everybody or if they’re right or wrong, they’re a large chunk of the forum.
My favorite fad about it is the whole “CAS bad” thing… It’s almost as if there are dozens of AA in the game for that exact purpose.
Nothing is being displayed or endorsed but their own separate opinion…? There’s a reason why those who shouldn’t talk their opinion on a subject don’t. Those are Community Managers. Every other moderator doesn’t have an obligation to keep quiet about topics they’d like to put input in.
1 map per squad member, up to 4 maps banned.
Which is hilarious.
That is the absolute maximum, yes, but the text speaks of each player eventually only playing on the maps he likes, which doesn’t even remotely work in the game.
are you trolling?
The issue I see is they are taking away the options to use maps to kill people. Like with Hurtgen forrest where they blocked off the sides so you couldn’t flank around to take out people sniping across the fields, or when they took away all the cliffs and sniping positions on El Alamein. Also they blocked off all of the flank routes on American Desert so you can get around everyone camping at A point.
They are trying to make it more of a brawling game which most of the vehicles were not made to do. Like how is IFV supposed to take on a MBT from the front which happens in most cases on these maps.
I agree with this, the map blacklist system is very flawed and definitely needs a rework. I personally feel like players are not given any power in influencing the map choice and sometimes it seems like some maps are completely “out of rotation” although I don’t really have the data to back this up.
Its hard to speculate on this system with the wide range of maps that are limited to specific BRs and with every person being able to blacklist certain maps.