-Bigger maps for air/naval
-Stronger bomb targets for air modes (or light and heavy bomb targets)
-Modern ground AI in ARB instead of the cold war targets.
-Better map design, since most ground reworks turned into spawncamping paradise maps and naval is just shooting from spawn to spawn.
Etc.
How to apply to be map designer for this godforsaken game
Dude fr tho, the community could help with such cool ideas and locations! If they made the custom creations tools easier to use, we would have a flood of cool places to choose from.
Honestly, we don’t need bigger maps.
Everyone will just move onto the “fighting zone”. All bigger maps does is to make the time to fight way longer than necessary.
Many people have jobs and don’t want to play that long. In naval, certain ships like Courbet and the Italian premium battleship already struggle to aim their guns because the maps are just too big.
I work 7 days a week and would rather play one single hour long game than 5-10 sub 10 minute games
Mood, it’s way more fun to show up on the weekend and play 2-4 sim matches each ~60-120 minutes than look at RB, take off, watch one team die by 7-10 minutes and repeat without anything meaningful or cool having time to happen.
My only lament is that I can only do this in Air. Tanks’ equivalent is very random (even if predictable) on whether I can actually play on a given day or whether the vehicles I want to use are unavailable. Even if I do get to play, maps often barely differ from RB and the objective design is literally the same.
We do need bigger maps for the top tiers in both ground and naval RB. Not necessarily much longer from spawn to battlezone, but a much larger area to operate on! A dynamic spawn system could also be implemented for this.
Where are you gonna try to hide your SAM-bus on Sinai, Aral sea and the likes?
Spawn in Yamato to slug it out from spawn to spawn in African Coast, Fuego island etc?
You call that fun and interesting gameplay?
I really wish for a ground EC mode, pve or pvp, or both! Doesn’t really matter, just some mode to keep it more interesting than what is battles today!
Typical confusion on depth and range, width and lanes.
Probable cause: seen too many bad map designs without knowing how a good map should be like.
The developers don’t try to make good maps anyway.
So it’s better to have small bad maps than big bad maps.
Would better have actual Chile than a corridor xD longer time = more rp, longer drive = less 2min spawncamps (they tried to delete the part by spawn-doorway to spawn-doorway shooting anyways, see pradesh). No one would mess up longer engagement range here.
SAM bus have more to do with map design than map size
And no one would know how Yamato would perform
Gaijin furiously scribbling down notes to shrink more maps after reading this post.
isn’t naval maps already big? honestly the SB Naval already huge… what it need is content, people literally dying from boredom just to capture or find target after traveling 1km.
would be nice if they include water rat (sub-boat) just like RB ground rat.
who know they probably planning to add Submarine?
No, naval maps are absolutely not big at all!
Its a joke when spawns are 8-10 km apart, everyone spawns in a big clusterf***k and you cant even manouver away before you either crash into someone, someone crashes into you or you eat some good salvos from enemies after 30 seconds…
I think you are confusing with something othe than naval battle maps!
Getting uptiered fully in a 5.7 or 6.0 cruiser on Franz Josef land, African coast and the likes…not fun, and it wont be better with bigger and better ships!
I’m honestly surprised there isn’t a community spotlight that showcases custom maps. I mean it’d be an easy PR stunt.
Just have an annual or biannual map competition, winner gets some GE and bragging rights and we get a new map voted in by the community.
I support the idea of bigger maps but I would also like to note the following issues:
How do we deal with the downtime that becomes driving longer distances to find enemies and objectives, especially once the player count drops off.
Additionally, I see the larger maps being an advantage and disadvantage for casemate tank destroyers. For small maps, tank destroyers can can camp in a variety of locations and the player density allows them to be effective. At longer ranges they will typically have advantages when it comes to firepower and in somecases armour but the lower density might mean few or no enemies spotted.
Do we need to increase the ticket count on big maps to allow time to counterattack or retake objectives or do we keep the matches short.
Personally I think downtime and boredom will be an issue if maps get bigger and slower. I don’t think means we should give up on the idea but I think there will need to be additional gameplay elements to make larger maps succesful.
I dont disagree with your ideas, however this post was made with top tiers in mind, since I mentioned the new AA systems and top tier battleships coming in this update!
The technology has far outdated the maps we have, some are even from the beginng in what, 2013?
They are maybe laege enough for Shermans and Tigers, but not T-80, Abrams etc.
Same for naval!
Normal naval maps are not that crazy right? Most of the time it is just straight to spawn sniping after the match starts. So in some cases an island in between could maybe solve a small part of it. I’m personally not familiar with naval sb but i know enduring confrontation can have some big ass maps.
With the new big ships i think you’re right. We had the modern submarine event a few years back and not to long ago the u-boat event. So a hand full of functional models that could eventually make their way to the game. But i think they’ll have to change a lot before they’d make an appearance, otherwise the new battleships would already be toast before they had their had their prime.
If free GE gets involvid we would for sure see a huge number of people giving map designing a go. Not to forget some amazing talentet people that we already have in the community.
Maybe the dev server would be a good place to vote for community maps so players can explore, experiance and give feedback on what they think of it.
I’d say to only make bigger ground maps available for the higher ranks where speed is amongst all vehicle. Ground would only need minor changes, long drives would indeed make for dull gameplay. Map size is probably most needed for top tier air, where mach 1 to 2 capable planes with long range missles are currently basicly launching right after take off making some matches only last 5 minutes.
Imo mountain style maps with big tall mountain passes would be great. More balance in gameplay. Higher alt would still allow for missles gameplay, while low alt gameplay around mountain passes or narrow canyons could result in some gun chasing. (Can still be combined with sea, desert and other elements for diversity). I think this might solve a part of the problem since it’d require more skill to fight instead of yeeting a bunch of fire and forget missles into the lower atmosphere.
Now we mostly see mountains around the far edges on a handfull of maps so a test map for this would be great.
In terms of ground i think different map styles and a new mode could improve gameplay. Most current conquest maps have 3 objectives in a line down the middle of the map. Making a slightly bigger map with 4 objectives in a square/diamond instead of a single line could combine a lot different areas allowing more dinamic gameplay models.
In terms of modes chainlink conquest would cool to see. For example a big jungle style map with up to 6 objectives. In order to be able to cap C, your team needs to cap and controll A and B.
So for example if your team has controll of objectives A,B,C and D it’d allow your team to make a move for E. (Meanwhile the opposite team starts at F trying to build their chain from the other side). But if a sneaky enemy player comes around and decaps B breaking the chain, you’ll have to fall back and work together to rebuild your chain. If you capture the enitre chain points get depleted at a high rate. Meaning if you hold the chain without an enemy breaking it, it can win you the match. This mode would require an increased ticket count, but i think it would highly promote teamplay and reduce spawn camping. (Maybe even block spawn camping, making the enemy spawn out of bounds untill your team has captured the entire chain)
The maps would require cover and try to block out a lot of the long range engagements. A lock on CAS could improve the teamplay and experiance even further.
Agreed wide open desert maps for example would just be way to boring. Would result in a lot of camping like we see in some of the reworks now, and would most likely make players quit sooner. Actual good maps design and testing would be neccesary.
My message for some reason decided not to tag you haha. My reply is above this one.
Can’t comment on air/naval maps as I don’t play those yet. Ground maps do need some improvement though, especially at higher tiers.
Something gaijin should consider is adding some AI elements to larger maps and possibly some team focused mini-objectives until the pvp action begins. The addition of these features might eliminate the potential for “boredom” I’ve seen mentioned in the comments about the problem with large scale maps. It won’t be just driving until the battle with actual players begins.
So many options could be added regarding AI elements that could add value to the addition of large maps. Interception of advanced AI scouting units, capturing AI defended bridges, capturing AI defended fuel and ammo depots, destroying retreating AI forces, the lists goes on.
For myself maps are a key element of WT and playing the same maps over and over again lends itself to boredom even with a new shiny tank/IFV/SPG or SPAA. Would love to see gaijin give a little more effort in creating larger and better designed maps but then again we can’t purchase maps, just vehicles so there you have it.
Happy hunting.