No More CQC Maps

Noticed interesting lines in Roadmap. Personally I hope this won’t be affected to the game.
From realistic side, the battle of tank should start from ranged, then gradually closer, rather than just “teleporting” to 1~2km away and go for CQC battles, especailly for top tier. From the gameplay side, shortening battle range would make this game more competitive in reaction and timing rather than tactics, and would give advantage to those who are heavily armored.
A good map should combine and have good balance between sniping and close-fight. Now maps are either sniping-based(Mozdok, Maginot) or CQC-based (Campania and Breslau). The newest map even don’t have any complex terrain like hills. This might be good for newcomers, letting them to get to the game fast but from long shot, the map with few tactic avaliable will greatly limit the diversity, and fun of the game.
We choose War Thunder because it’s more tactical and realistic. If I’m have to go tank CQC why I don’t play WoT instead? Hope dev team can make more maps with varied terrain and tactics, and most importantly: More Large Map For Top Tier.


Right now every thing related with maps in WT is a great snafu.
Rotation is completely destroyed just the weird system just take 5 maps and repeart over and over.
Maps desing is another great fail, mostly of the maps in WT are stupid small urban areas or urban areas with small portion of open terrain in the borders, probably this maps are good for Arcade but for RB and SB play certain tanks in urban maps over and over again is just painfull.

The new map “iberian castle” should be removed becuase is a mix with the worse of the last maps. Is just another crap small semi urban map like golder quarry, Abandoned town, etc etc


You, you did this, you dont speak for anyone other than yourself

1 Like

you also speak only for yourself

i would also love to see bigger maps not this cqc party
in the past they had some good ones but alll of the maps got split up in smaller maps
at the moment i often have to wait longer times until i can play on some big maps
luckyly yt provides a lot of documentarys which i can watch while my crew is locked :D


Do we really want more sniper maps for hull down Russian tanks?

CQC maps make it easier to grind stock tanks that don’t have APFSDS & LRF. And at lower tiers, some tanks simply cant snipe as well.

Large maps also have a tendency to have more “places from which one can control most of the map” than CQC maps.

The newest map even don’t have any complex terrain like hills.

I’ve seen plenty of hills on both old and new maps, even the new castle map.

From realistic side, the battle of tank should start from ranged, then gradually closer

Maybe this would work if we had moving spawn points like Enlisted, but in War Thunder, the battle starts at range and stays at range. Anyone trying to get closer will get sniped. Especially if there are no CQC areas on the map that let you move up and flank.

the map with few tactic avaliable will greatly limit the diversity, and fun of the game.

I think this is what needs to be addressed, maps with “places from which one can control most of the map”. Without that addressed, most matches will revolve around those camping places, which limit the diversity.

shortening battle range would […], and would give advantage to those who are heavily armored

This advantage goes both ways, you can snipe with a heavily armoured tank.

Ultimately, maps are never going to be perfect, and how you perceive them is very subjective. There are CQC maps and long range maps, you may prefer one or the other. But the game would be less balanced if there was only one type of map.


This is the reason why WT getting less enjoyable

Actually Russian tanks suffer from disadvantage from long range battles. But ofc not the “long range” we say in WT. Since they didn’t take the ammo speed influence to trajectory (which would be significant above 2km), and needless to say all top-tier APFSDS are somewhat nerfed for “balance” reasons. But no, this game should not be a game with average battle range of less than 500m, tanks shooting with each other from 1 street away is neither realistic nor funny.
It’s silly to go sniping with heavy tank, but I know many would choose to do that. How to balance is still a problem. HT should be encouraged to push forward.

Anyway, maybe I’m playing top these days what I can see is unstoppable CQC battles, everyone trying to get close from battle start and few choose to stay ranged.

Even sniping maps like Maginot or Mozdok there are ways to let you approach your enemy, but for CQC maps there are no such sniping points, which means you have to put yourself in danger when you trying to shoot anyone. This makes the game simply ammo vs armor and aiming/shooting skills much less important


All top teir apfsds stats are classified so who knows what actual values they have. all of top teir is fake because the stats are classified, so you can complain about it all day and it isnt going to change. As for this whole argument, its all opinion based, some people like long range, some like close range, but like @TaseR said in his post, short range maps help stock vehicles to be able to actually do something

I rarely play anything above 8.3 in GRB, so I can see how maybe the longer range maps would be preferred by some in the higher tiers, but in the low/mid tiers I actually enjoy the CQC maps. I like the longer range maps, too, of course, but I would prefer to see more of a balance between the two, rather than weighing more heavily in one or the other’s favor.


can’t agree, short range means more vulnerable. The incompetence of stock vehicle is economic problem(like no stock dart or FPE) and shouldn’t rely on map designs to fix or balance this.

For WWII battles I don’t mind short range battles or long. It’s OK anyway. But I think the main problem is for modern age tanks, they deserve longer engaging range.


yes short range means more vulnerable, all of the non stock tanks are more vulnerable to the stock tanks.Calling it an economic issue makes no sense, the lo and hi of it is that maps should facilitate all playstyles, like @ptrthgr8 said in his post, the best maps are a balance of the two.

1 Like

Agree with this. But what I’m arguing is the game now shows the tend to approve only short range maps and I hope more long ranged one would be adopted in the future.

1 Like

Maybe players need to learn that not all strategic points on the map have circles on them. Like the castle on Carpathians. The team that controls that usually wins so that should always be the point to assault/bomb.

1 Like

I love to be in a stock mbt while fighting aced mbts with laser rangerfinder, thermals, and sabot while I have heatfs. CQC is one of the only ways for top tier stock/nonaced tanks to have a change to get kills.

1 Like

Like what I’ve said. Top stock vehicle should get rangefinder and APFSDS. Now the stock status is just the shield to switch to CQC-only game, which should be balance with short and long range

Gaijin implements things based off statistics, so if people are banning the long range maps more often, they will introduce less such maps. Just maybe you are in the minority in wanting more long range maps


And the minority play only low Tier battles