In part 1 we looked at map sizes, but what really makes maps special is their design. In this part I want to see which map features and design elements people like or dislike.
Map gamaplay features, VOTE FOR WHAT YOU LIKE
Urban combat (brawling)
Long sightlines
Short sightlines
Flanking
Sniping (from back position)
Ambushing (from covered position)
Amphibious crossing
0voters
Map terrain features, VOTE FOR WHAT YOU LIKE
Hills/Ditches
Mountains (in/around the map)
Towns/Cities
Forests/Woods
Lakes/Rivers
Small rock formations
Swamps/Marshland
0voters
Real life locations or inspired by, WHAT DO YOU LIKE
Historical (close to real life)
Inspired by real locations
Fictional
0voters
What do you dislike on maps?
Spawn to spawn sniping/sightlines
Camping spots
Weather (snow/fog/rain) and sun (against you)
Lack of cover
Map borders cut off (flank removal)
Wide flanks
Long range positions
Urban combat
0voters
Do you often feel vulnerable to aircraft on the ground maps?
Yes
No
Depends on the map
0voters
Over the last couple of years Gaijin has made changes to several of the maps we have in game (not counting full reworks). The biggest of these changes were the cutting op flanks with red zones and moving the spawns closer to the caps to make the maps smaller overal.
Do you think these changes are good (especially for the higher ranks)
Yes
No
Depends on the map
0voters
I know these were a lot of polls, but I appreciate you taking your time to show your preference. If you have things to add, comment them and I might put them in the polls later.
Please tell me me which maps you have liked/disliked/banned in game (with a screenshot if possible), I feel that that system needs some work too.
Part 3 will be about actually playing matches, things like match duration and gameplay
As a note, my response on dislike is kind of not independent.
What I mean is - camping is a non-issue with proper flank and “lane/frontline complexity.” If someone is camping a section of the map, if I don’t have an option to go around and pressure elsewhere - I dislike camping because it’s just “drive forward into the slaughterhouse.”.
If someone has locked down a section of the map but I can react and try to find a weakspot in the enemy coverage to get at an objective, gain a controlling position over the person locking things down or simply apply map pressure some other way that might oust them? That’s fun and engaging.
From my pov the target audience of gaijin is not present in this forum. You see mainly veteran players here whilst the game itself is optimized to please kids hungry for a plain shooter - and those rookies do not even know that this forum exists, or they don’t care.
Having a video game (running for >10 years) with millions of players and billions of matches allows every decent game developer to steer players to fulfil gaijin’s economic goals whilst being aware of their needs.
In other words:
Poll results here are irrelevant for gaijin as long as they focus not on long-term players - but you might agree that you meet more or less mainly new & fresh players at any BR.
So the only outcome of your activities is mainly a kind of pulse check if the game has enough veteran players able and willing to pay for an “optimized” RB mode.
Edit:
To make this clear: Every increase in difficulties to play the game is detrimental for rookie players and creates entry barriers for them.
That is also the reason why the game play in itself was “dumbed down” over the years, it doesn’t matter for Ground or Air RB - the changes like CQB maps for tankers or 16 vs 16 for pilots allows rookies to play and participate - and all they need to score is to find an even lesser experienced player - or just bomb some bases.
Gaijin is not beholden to out of touch shareholders
Gaijin is not owned by a private equity trying to flip it
Gaijin is owned by Gaijin.
Why is it that games, despite owned by private equity (in fact: despite - the developers and executives pushing back constantly against private equity demands as they know the product far better with their decade+ experience over “random chinese company that bought us out last year.”) are capable of:
Providing content to veteran/“High level content community.” (high level meaning high level of skill - demanding, challenging, requiring teamwork and practice and preparation).
Provide aspirational mid-difficulty content for newbies and casual long-timers
Provide QoL for onboarding total noobs into doing aspirational content or to entertain them in different, more accessible ways
This “We cater to all parts of our community” had only led to record profits each year and the largest MMORPG around so it works. They don’t do these side-by-side. They clearly focus one year to develop for one group, but there’s faith that next year your group will be catered to so most don’t hate it (in fact, HLC welcome onboarding casuals and giving them a taste of what more complex gameplay is like because that’s more HLC down the line!).
Group 2/3 sometimes complain that 1 is inaccessible, but usually 1 is far less in terms of content variety/breadth so it’s not really a valid complaint.
A bunch of other sims I play go even further and basically involve the community in every step of the way (Sailwind, DeltaV as two games that I played recently.)
Only way it’d make sense is if gaijin was not owned by gaijin and was pressured by external shareholders or private equity. The fall of KSP2 can be observed to have occured for this reason - moment squad answered to an external owner, the game went down the trashpile for sake of new players/mass appeal