New map changes are terrible

The map changes have simply eliminated the little strategy that the game had, now it’s just going forward and that’s it, and the one who stabilizes first or the one who has a stabilizer wins vs. the tank without it.

3 Likes

Normandy was a great example of a map ruined. Normandy is historically about hedgerows and that was a big feature in the game and a reason for the map. Now those hedges are gone and its somewhat pointless or rather its lost its identity.

Veitnam was two opposing hills with a valley and plenty of sniper points now those points have gone and its pointless.

Sinai had the hill one side which we all knew about and played it accordingly. It was a big feature of the game. Now we just have featureless maps for featureless players.

Put the maps back to how they were a year ago and lets bring all the old maps back and increase variation and rotation.

Is giving bigger maps to higher BR/Modern Vehicles beyond Gaijins abilities? That is a question that needs asking and answering, yes or no.

Do I need to see modern cars and buses while driving a WW2 tank and does somebody in an Abrams or Merkava need to see Kublewagens on a WW2 map ?

Game has been running for 12 years, when will this be sorted out finally? I don’t want new vehicles or line ups or nations, I want those already existing to have a good map system then we can move on from there.The game is going backwards not forwards.

8 Likes

They have transformed all the maps into something generic, two or three points to shoot that cover little map and then go to CQC at all times, and then the cropped maps that cut them even more when it is just a base, like a loading port (which is a straight line without further ado).
The issue of the maps is by far the most absurd and stupid thing that gaijin has done since the GF started, they only dedicate themselves to destroying the gameplay of the game, in exchange for achieving mediocrity in the game, which they have not achieved because there are not many people complaining about this, when the forum should be literally on fire.

6 Likes

I agree 100%. Considering the player base supposedly asked for the changes I see nobody on here defending them and it seems to be the one area where we are all united on this forum.

It might help if we were all a little more tolerant of the maps in general (as they used to be ) and I would include myself in that.

We can all complain about a sniping position when we face it then use it ourselves when its available to us then pretend, we don’t.

Nothing is more frustrating than travelling to a known favorable firing position on a map only to find it gone or made inaccessible. Map knowledge now made irrelevant. Just makes your game plan invalid, your chosen vehicle pointless and it’s no wonder we have so much ODL or even No DL.

3 Likes

+1 agree

I think that the maps would have to be much larger, so that the sniper positions could be flanked, and thus eliminate whoever is in that position. Now the sniper positions can only be eliminated by CAS or by killing in front of that enemy, since when you try to flank you always have the edge of the map to stop you from entering a gap in the map.

1 Like

I don’t have an issue with maps of all sizes really, I can accept some maps are big and open and some might be small and urban, but I do think a big map at 1BR is torture and a small map at 11 BR ridiculous when it allows Helis to fire spawn to spawn at the start of the game.

I think its down to the player to take time learn the maps and an unlock them in terms of figuring out how they work, the good bits and the bad.

The whole idea of being useless on a map then slowly learning the map via replays and seeing how you were taken out by other players, to eventually knowing the map inside out and getting good was part of what makes me stay with the game year after year. Now I find my patience is for nothing as its all changed. I invested time for no reason and I’m kind of reluctant to even bother wasting more time when it all changes every five minutes,

If Gaijin want to throw a bone to new players, then have smaller, new maps at low BRs which will be new territory to the new and vets alike.

1 Like

Yes, of course in the smaller levels the maps have to be smaller, but in any case, for me they should be slightly larger than the ones there are now, and then increase the size depending on the level.
On the other hand, I would make restricted games for only newbies. They would be maps the size of those that exist now, and that all newbies would remain until they played 100 games, after which they would move on to the normal game.

2 Likes

the change of spawn on the ardennes map with 3 point (with C on a hill) is terrible for one team, it’s really very bad. It allow spawn killing too easily for the enemy team

1 Like

Again I dont think that was needed. Just bring in new maps if change is required. Let people get used to the Ardennes map with out fiddling with it. The new C zone map should have been put into rotation alongside the old one not as a replacement.

Same with Poland and Stalingrad, add the snow maps but keep the old versions as well. Having much bigger rotation would mean that intermediate and veterans have to learn so much more and don’t an advantage quite so easily. Would it hurt Gaijin to have a big selection of maps on rotation? Put them all in.

I might even suggest losing the map ban and Gaijin pushing for people to be more tolerant. It would impact me but I would have to adapt. Gaijin could certainly help with era and BR related maps to help with ODL.

New map changes are pretty shit and just exasperate the apparent influx of suspicious players.

3 Likes

Every map, ancient map destroyed with new map changes… except Sand of Sinai in Reastic battles this is the only map on this gamemod got improvement…

…and terrain modification caused more destruction than i expected…
Example from Aral Sea map:

Spoiler

social experiment by Gaijin, I assume

1 Like

I would argue Sinai is worse, as it is further limited in how to play it.

2 Likes

I argue with you a bit about this. I know some players like the old sand of sinai but old version only playable with fast tanks or top tier tanks.

In old map variant clickers(campers, fast tanks) on hill and opposite side of the hill decide the whole battle. Old version exist 2-3 camping spot from both side where able to to cover the whole map. I belive that was the reason why sand of sinai changed. Camping and wait for impatient player or kamikazes who rush into capture points to earn something. On opposite side of hill, on industrial area of hill 2-3 dunes and campers battle not really exciting. Lot of player exit from battle after lost after lost first tank.

Now in City part become as a frontline style where heavy armored tanks finally worth something (marked with green) In mid is a sneaky area(marked with magenta) where light tanks /fast tanks can flank and the dunes part(marked with aqua) give a lot of opportunity to camping or sneak to capture and hold point and win the match. Now much more opportunity added into this map which i expect earlier.
image

1 Like

Old Sinai was great and a regular source of kills when played from both sides if you could be bothered to analyze it and work it out.

The hill was as much of a hindrance as a help if you fired at it from the right side of the map with the hill on your left. You could ambush the ambusher and get kills then push on the enemy spawn.

Like Aral sea ,if people took time to work it out rather than moan about it then it would still be in rotation and still a good map and unique like it was.

1 Like

well, all i can say is: the large maps and realistic game play were the reason i changed from WoT to here, in 2018.
And not having them anymore is the reason why war thunder is only running on my mobile now for quick games while waiting for somebody, every few weeks. i deleted it from the PC months ago and looking into threads like these proves me right. it will never improve again.

1 Like

Interesting to hear that. I did have a feeling the game peaked a couple of years ago not that long after I started.
Maps were all in rotation, all varied and BRs were good. The game was not as clogged in high WW2 era BRs with modern artillery and other fancy dart firers.

Less copy paste. All went down hill really quick and the maps underline it all.
Like you it gets played less and less as it gets worse and worse. Shame ,it was very good.

3 Likes

Thats my currents statepoints according the experience and yes new map changes are terrible.

As i see all current concept fit for 3 pattern:

  1. -front line: massacre in mid and limited flank opportunity.(like north Holland) and restricted areas on maps which not allow us to flank enemy
  2. -Hill land where half of tanks are useless thanks to bad gun depression
  3. -lowland where everyone camping.

Moreover not just boring every map thanks to same pattern, they are destroyed in current state which most case provide more 0 or 1 death quit. Not variety just same … and they mappers work on big force to convert old ones to fit this 3 pattern. Copy paster schema. Basically force players to rush instead of use tactics and skill. Not to talk the oldschool TD (like SU-85,Stug ) useless. And i m not satisfied. As a veteran player who play with warthunder since 2014, and when i realized the mass map destruction which happend since 2022-2023 i sad really. Why happend? I not know that why needed(the map construction update). Because if happend when want to improve spawn protection, it happend the opposite. 75% of maps which got an update more opened the spawns or hard to leave it safety. Thats the experience. If nobody tested it or how accepted the changes without someone checked it or idk what happend . So please do not hide behind the following statement: maps got and update because improved the spawn protection, because thats NOT TRUE, thats a big lie. Idk what suggestion based on roadmap(s)

If it not enought old spawn protection environment’s 70-75% removed or changed which provide more opened maps. like in Sinai, Aral Sea case. Or put more back the spawn(maybe into the valley to got more disadvantages) forexample in RB maginot line case and you need to across the full opened fields while no cover exists.

In other hand i like, to they changed and add minor modification on cities like in: advance to Rhine, easter europe, which in first impression not bad but if you realise what it cause , its a disaster. But what it caused ? Mostly large tanks much harder to maneuvering and stuck in environment. Favor for one team of the team (depend on location)to set up an ambush and successful hold the points. And the best i not find any sources to that update happend… just faced in battles

In Carpathian hills also a big disaster. team which captured the hill able to hold it easily thanks to additional flora and covers. Not just hold it, the opposite team who try to attack need to across the opened field with a hil climb which have a negative effect on maneuvering also…

That’s force me to play only in air battle and give up ground battles…

Idk, the roadmap made on/based on (which contain map changes) which suggestion(s), but that nobody checked or not checked by mapper or came from inner circle …
Idk, who accepted it but it make a huge mistake when it did it.

#Istandwitholdmapconstructions #Nomoredestructionupdateonmapsaccordingtoonroadmaps
#Backoldmapsconstruction4ever

1 Like