Never said that. I own the 2A4M prem, clickbait, and BVM. I find urban maps the least one sided, least CASified, and most fun for all playstyle tanks.
You just pointed out a thing. Balance…
Urban maps would make the above vehicles you mentioned more balanced and usable.
Tell that to ariete Challenger2 or any light tanks
I can spawn full load CAS within three minutes after the match start in small maps all i had to do is spawn fast light tank go cap scout a little and J out
And since tanks mostly cluster together it easy to get multi kill too and I don’t even have to look much it took more times in bigger map to spawn CAS
least CAS you said hah?
1 Like
Yeah seriously, CAS is actually easier on small maps. Even at top tier.
Small maps the spawns are close together and the area to search is small, just pointed my mav camera at the enemy spawn and boom there are all the SPAAs. Lock them all up, fire them off all together and thats the enemy SPAAs cleared out in one easy go.
On the big wide open maps, while there may be less cover from CAS, the CAS player has to spend a lot more time searching for targets, which gives SPAA players (especially ones that actually leave their spawn) a lot more time to shoot them down.
1 Like
In addition to points you made I feel that War Thunder topography is unnatural in a way that hinders gameplay.
Context for my posting in General: I believe that as more systems are modelled an accounted for in the environment, more gameplay possibilities and opportunities for fun gameplay will emerge (within limits ofcourse, I don’t example think that reloading the cannon and operating the breach as a loader in VR would be fun)
TL;DR - war thunder has created video game maps for real world vehicles with real world physics. Video game map design is fine when you’re driving a Warthog or its Farcry’s janky ass vehicle physics. Idon’t know that more realistic terrain would fix anything but I would hope it might result in more natural/organic tank fights
War Thunder needs to seriously consider its maps from a vehicle physics perspective. As much as their physics and realism has differentiated war thunder from wot, the reality is the maps are creating the exact same gameplay albeit with slightly different metas.
Some maps with rolling hills and terrain features seem to be lifted of real world locations using lidar topography, most likely 10m contours. When scaled down to war thunder sized maps there actual grades would be miniscule. So It seems to me that they’ve exaggerated the vertical scale to what ‘appears’ to be correct visually but creates an awful terrain to drive and fight over with most maps feeling like grass covered sand dunes. Then, desert maps with actual sand dunes like Alamein have sand dunes that are taller than the f#kc!n mountains and cliffs. The cities are the polar opposites, being dead flat save for embankments with 1:1 batters…
I really ought to shut up and have a go at map making
1 Like
It defintely does reduce the CAS and mostly becomes planes going a2a against each other and taking out helis.
There definitely needs to be a revision of how maps are actually designed and rendered. Let’s look at Attica. For example, it’s a map with cover in all of the wrong places so you are constantly exposed when trying to play towards objectives and then rocky outcroppings surrounding all 3 objectives allow for players to essentially shoot fish in a barrel trying to play objectives.
This proves disastrous at the higher BRs since most shots hitting are laser accurate and will typically cause critical damage, not to mention the actual size of the map, it seems extremely disproportionate given the location and and layout.
Comparing this to a map like Fulda or Maginot line, 2 maps that reward positioning and map knowledge, both also possess little to no problematic camping spots and are far more imteresting to play on in a top tier setting, however I think they both need their terrain adjusted to flow better, Fulda’s hills are quite steep and don’t flow with one another, maginot simply has terrain too dense in some areas, and not nearly enough in others, plus it lacks vegetation and cover in these Hills
Another thing i’d quite like to see come to the game is maps that match up with the terrain on the Whole map (the stuff you can see in aircraft too), this is done quite well on maps like Hurtgen Forest, Fulda and Pradesh; Then horribly done on maps like American desert, Attica, north holland and vietnam.
A feasible improvement would be to create a more uniform ‘whole’ map using the same terrain generation, then reduce textures and quality of buildings far out so you still have nice looking stuff from the view of a plane or heli but it doesn’t hinder performance.
Finally, onto a location I’d like to see come under my vision would be somewhere like Swedish farmland (as seen in a game like Generation Zero), Czech hills (Chernarus), Finnish summer forest (preferably one closer to the south so the terrain is more interesting), japanese countryside (1990-today), Alpine Mountains (swiss/austrian), a revamp of the Caucasian map (Kuban) and many more.
Feel free to bolt on more cool geographical areas for tank battles and criticise/agree witb any of my points.
I like it but i dont mind big maps in top tier
The bad part is that 9.3 get thos big maps too so imo only 11.0+ should have this maps
hell nah 9.3 needs those big maps to be fun , playing a 1km size map from 8.0 above is just awfull , either your team or the enemy team gets spawn trapped in 3 minutes and loses the match bc of that
1 Like
Try that in a Challenger MK2