New GRB game mode - Frontline

Since this got denied as a suggestion by mods, I’ll leave it in the discussion section.

At this point, I think most players would agree that the game has become somewhat stale and repetitive, with a lack of fresh experiences over the past decade. We’ve seen the same short-lived deathmatches again and again, and the only new content tends to be vehicles and maps, mostly for low-tier battles.

Given that the game features multiple tech trees for air, ground and naval forces, I believe it’s only fair to propose a new game mode that incorporates all of them (at least as a starting point). This game mode features various mechanics, some of which already exist in the game in other modes.

Name: Frontline
Type: Mixed Realistic Ground Battles
Duration: 40–60 minutes
Size: 32–64 players

Each team begins at their respective spawn point and advances toward the enemy’s side, capturing key positions along the way to establish a frontline OR if the map is too big, both teams start at the closest to the frontline spawn point in the middle of the map.
Eventually, both teams meet near the center of the map, where the real battle begins. From there, both sides fight to push the other back to their original spawn and recapture territory to earn points.

The match ends when time runs out or a victory condition is met. The team with the most points at the end wins.

Some details:

  1. Players can respawn as many times as they want.
  2. If a player leaves the match, new players can join and take the available slot. This keeps teams full and helps maintain balance.
  3. All players will receive rewards based on their performance during the match, which are distributed after the match ends.
  4. Players can respawn on captured points, but not closer than one sector behind the frontline. This prevents long travel times from the initial spawn area (see image below).
  5. Players can’t capture enemy points beyond one sector ahead of the frontline. They must secure the nearest objective to extend control and push forward. However, flanking into enemy territory is allowed.
  6. Initial spawn zones (marked in orange on the image) are off-limits to enemy players to prevent spawn camping.
  7. Costs and rewards should be balanced to encourage players to stay in the match longer, without the stress of leaving early due to high SL costs.
  8. There won’t be a match-ending feature like a nuclear strike, as the goal isn’t to end the battle as quickly as possible. However, there could be an equivalent, such as a mini tactical nuke (top tier only) that if used strategically, creates a temporary opening for allies to push deeper into enemy territory.

I’m not going to provide exact spawn cost values, as that would require testing, but here’s a general idea of how this could work:

  • Light, medium and heavy tanks
    • Silver lions +
    • Spawn points - free
  • SPAA
    • Silver lions +
    • Spawn points +
  • Fighters
    • Silver lions +
    • Spawn points ++
  • Bombers, attackers
    • Silver lions ++
    • Spawn points ++
  • Helicopters
    • Silver lions +
    • Spawn points ++
  • Coastal fleet
    • Silver lions +
    • Spawn points - free
  • Blue waters fleet
    • Silver lions ++
    • Spawn points +++

As shown, some vehicles don’t require spawn points. This allows players to stay in the match longer and accumulate enough spawn points to access more powerful vehicles later on.

SPAA units do require spawn points, as some (e.g. ZSU-57-2) can be overly effective against tanks. This cost is intended to prevent abuse and force players to make strategic decisions, whether to spend some spawn points on SPAA or save up for aircraft or ships.

Blue-water fleet units (available only at lower tiers) have the highest spawn cost, comparable to a nuclear strike. These ships can be extremely powerful against ground and even air targets, capable of bombarding large areas from a safe distance while being difficult to destroy.

For example here is how it can look on the Normandy map for top tier battles.
There are no modern naval vehicles in the top tier yet, so this example doesn’t include them.

Current map layouts

Frontline layout

For slow WW2/cold war vehicles, the map can be scaled down to 4 sections instead of 6. Or maybe even go alongside the shore to make possible the inclusion of naval content.

Now you can apply these ideas to other maps and see how they can work out including naval gameplay with some extra points to capture.

For example Port Novorossiysk

Naturally, this game mode would require some reworking of existing maps to support this gameplay and visual fidelity.

New maps should be designed with top-tier battles in mind from the start, and then scaled down for lower-tier gameplay, rather than the current approach of designing maps primarily for low tiers, which often don’t scale well for high-tier gameplay.

This change could bring several positive improvements to the game:

  • No more frustration with one-death leavers, teams remain full and balanced throughout the match
  • Unlocking extra crew slots and creating bigger lineups actually makes sense
  • Longer, more immersive battles with dynamic map progression and a wide variety of vehicles used in a single match
  • Enough time to actually play the game, strategize and test various mechanics

This is simply a general concept outlining a possible new game mode and its gameplay, without going into specific details. Everything mentioned is a subject to change and open to discussion.

Would you play it?
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters
28 Likes

god i wish we had more gamemodes

1 Like

you should ask them why it got denied
this is quite interesting

9 Likes

Does look cool with a look over it. Did you ask a suggestion moderator about it? They should be able to give you a reply as to why it wasn’t accepted.

This is important, contact a Regular Suggestion Moderator, not a Senior. If they do not reply (take into account that they are voluntary and they are not obliged to reply to you the moment you send the the message), you can add another Regular Suggestion Moderator (no need to create a new message) and so on. Ultimately, if none of them reply to you, you may contact a Senior Suggestion Moderator. Very ultimately, I think you ‘can’ contact the Community manager assigned to the Suggestions.

1: queue times might be long. You’re expecting a 32-64 player gamemode. You’re better off asking for an 8v8 to a 16v16 match.
2: while it would be great on large maps, you’re expecting Gaijin to make specific maps for such a large game mode.
3: allowing people to join and leave as they please isn’t such a smart strategy.

I absolutely would love this mode, but I am only issuing three complaints that might show up.

4 Likes

Mod replied that it was denied by another mod who reviewed it because suggestion was identified similar to an old game mode.
Don’t know which and mod who replied doesn’t know either as it was before him. He said that he would ask them about it.

2 Likes
  1. The match can start with fewer players, as new ones will be able to join later. Since the match is expected to last at least 40 minutes, there’s plenty of time for teams to fill up. Currently, queues for 16v16 GRB rarely take more than 10 seconds at any BR, so long waiting times don’t seem to be an issue.

  2. All necessary maps and assets already exist, though for the new game mode they would need reworking to function outside of current map layouts. Obviously, new maps should be designed with large-scale battles in mind, rather than the smaller layouts that currently are usually releasing with new updates.

  3. Why? Sim mode already works like this, and it functions alright. Many other games like Battlefield use a similar system, and it works perfectly fine. This approach would help keep both teams full and balanced throughout the match. Right now it’s a major issue in standard GRB where up to 80% of one team can leave in the first few minutes, while the other team remains nearly full.

This one mode would probably be something like an event mode. Just like the Naval EC. Would be cool to play and since Naval EC has a lot of players, I don’t see why this one wouldn’t.

1 Like

Very fleshed out post with helpful photos, i’m a fan.

1 Like

What you are suggesting is not Ground RB, or even close to it. It’s an entirely different mode that is conducive to what many players have always been wanting for World War Mode.
Not that I am against the idea, not at all. But pretending this is anything remotely connected to Ground RB. . . . well, just no . . . not what it is at all.

Having such a thing as a weekend only “Battle Campaign”(or some such name not connecting it to any current mode types) would seem like a possibility.
Similar to Naval EC, the larger player count and expanded map areas might be problematic for the game to handle/produce. But, if those things could be overcome I can see a LOT of interest in such a thing and yes, I would try it.
(As long as it is not limited to JUST RB . . . not everyone plays or likes RB)

And as an incentive to Gaijin, these “events” could also have a GE payment requirement to join(not a lot, somewhere around 25 GEs per session maybe . . I dunno), but if it generates revenue, I think Gaijin would be much more open to such an idea.
Only real difficulty I can see is what kinds of rewards would be offered . .
that would seem to be a large obstacle to overcome as well . .

But, I appreciate the effort you have put into this “project”, good luck with it

If it were to be similar to Naval EC, it could vary from Arcade, Realistic and Simulator. And yeah, rewards would be a bit difficult to calculate.

1 Like

This mod is the Graal of WT

It’s positioned as GRB because it’s focused mainly around ground gameplay where majority of players will sit.
Air content is fully SP gated, well, because it’s air.
For coastal fleet gameplay there is not much content, it mostly will work as additional gameplay option with limited objectives compared to ground. And blue waters fleet is heavily SP gated as it’s too op.
Therefore it’s mixed GRB.

Limiting this game mode with GE will kill it right on the start.
In this case incentive for gaijin will be the same as it is now - more players including returning ones, more exposure by streamers and other media, and more content in general for players to consume (expanding crew slots, prem vehicles, etc.).

Note: If a thread does not pass the approval process, it’s up to the poster to contact the Suggestion Moderation team for further details and if requested a copy. We are more then happy to assist where needed.

Ask them for a copy (I don’t know what that means but it might lead to something.

1 Like

Yeah, and as I mentioned, what I believe the majority of players were wanting for a true World War Mode is much more along these lines. Albeit in a more Arena/Open World setting, far different from the WWM they offered us.
but again, the map sizes and larger player count could be major blockers to that whole idea/set up anyway . . . we just don’t know the limitations the game has or what the Devs are capable of doing along those lines . . .
Like I said earlier, I do like the idea, just not trying to pass it off as another Ground RB mode . . . for me, that just doesn’t fly for what is suggested.
I would also wager that is a big part of why it was denied.

A “cost” to participate in a “special” event will not “kill it”, not for sure.
While many F2P players might not get in right away, there are still ways and other chances . . . . they have done many things off of “tickets” in the past as well. That could be a possibility as well.
The reason I mentioned this is to give Gaijin incentives to make the effort. Just wanting/demanding/or begging for a new game mode doesn’t give them much incentive to do it. It’s a business, they need to generate revenue. Thinking of and suggesting such things is not a bad thing, it’s a way of trying to compromise in order to get the things that you want.
Putting ideas out there is a way of helping to progress the concept.
In the end , it’s up to Gaijin anyway, giving them several reasonable suggestions can only help them to decide . . seems like.
At any rate, it is merely a thought/idea . . nothing is carved in stone.
And the entire premise of a large scale “campaign” as this idea and WWM both are is of course, based on the ground . . . “territorial acquisition” has always been a main point of military conflicts . . . doesn’t make it a “tank mode”, that was more the point . . nothing against Ground RB, many people play it. That’s just not what this is

1 Like

Looks good and possibly a great way to have all vehicle types in one game +1

Maybe have the SP vary with ship class? While torpedo boats would only be affective against heils up close and larger ships, frigates could pose a genuine threat to close ground units, helis and most of the coastal boat classes.

Problem with stuff like this is that anyone with half a brain and isn’t 1 death leaving in a premium is going to main the mode, and then the current GRB mode just becomes an absolute hellscape every match because its only 1 death leavers there. They would have to make the current GRB modes/map 1 spawn only, but then planes and SPAA are only usable in the new mode. And then there is less incentive for players to buy premium vehicles if there isn’t a whole lineup of premiums like 10.3 russia.

IDK in an perfect world we would have something like you suggest OP, basically EC/Advance and Secure, and then the normal game modes stay as a 1 spawn place that maybe people that hate CAS can play or something.

I think we have enough players in NA for split ques like this, but idk about other servers, they probably have less players + they dont get a massive injection of other players in off hours like NA gets chinese and whatever else in the morning.

+1 this is basically just the Advance gamemode from a few years ago.

I disagree with adding naval units, because they will be overpowered even when limited to lower BRs/high SP costs.

1 Like

Hopes and dreams here too bud…