Except it’s unbalanced when only 1 team gets the good spots.
Yep, really annoying. The hills on Alaska and the fighting around the cap at the bridge were the only thing going for this map. Now it like another 4 maps are instant back to hangar. This is so sad…
1 Like
By the way and speaking of that map, Normandy in the urban version is another of those maps that have been cut out, if anyone has the idea of flanking up to the barn, don’t try it, it is cut out halfway, another brilliant idea in the purest gaijin style If they have done it to avoid flanking and prevent the opposing team from getting into the respawn of the other poorly done team, the same can be done.
1 Like
It seems Gaijin just want a fast brawl in matches, put on a bayonet and go head to head, it’s good for the queue times when the matches is over before they start,… and crap for game play.
Next step is to funnel or even teleport the vehicles into a huge boxing ring
2 Likes
High tier maps most of them are suck CQC map need to be remove from 9.0 onwards (or just get rid of map filter it useless)
It useless that some tanks with no armor to go CQC with MBT it good armor
For example i use AMX 30 super vs T-72AV at bigger map i have more chance fighting it since i can move to dodge the round CQC map it won’t give me that
And making CAS also easier since they know there to look at (And people complain CAS are problems when they just ask for it)
1 Like
Flanking should be a tactical choice, not a function of one’s speed.
Take for example a BMP-2M. It’s light and fast, and can quickly get to a spot from which it can shoot the sides of unsuspecting enemies.
An opposing M60 won’t even get to his first position.
However, if maps were more confined and dense, even slow vehicles could flank, as fast vehicles would be limited to a general proximity to slower ones.
This can be achieved by map designs incorporating lanes. With some effort, lanes can be implemented seamlessly while maintaining immersion.
Another option is to create maps that are sufficiently open and lacking in hard cover especially in their far ends, where far flanking does not contribute to escaping lines of sight or physical protection. An example of a somewhat decent open map is Sands of Sinai (enlarged Sinai map), but if its eastern side was cut or was more open and elevated.
I believe that such map designs could remove the light tank/IFV meta and make mobility more equally balanced with protection. IFVs would still be viable and competitive.
I remember loving the big Tunisia map in SB, I wonder if its still in the game.
every team gets good spots for flanking.
and for counter flanking.
you only have to find them…
1 Like
I flank with every tank, sometimes with Maus too.
it may take more time, but when you’re on site, if you can reach it, it’s always effective.
sometimes it lasts till the end of the battle, especially when players play dumb head on matches.
sometimes i can get only one or two kills before a SMART player takes me out because he knows he can be flanked.
if you can’t flank, how long would you survive in a BMP in a head on match with an M60??
flanking is often the only option for light vehicles.
I personally avoid playing hard on maps that don’t allow flanking, using only AAA, or sit in a dug in position sniping (and camping).
2 Likes
I don’t know what you are talking about. I have been flanking with heavies since beta no problem.
1 Like
And presume a good chunk of the enemy just lemming to the same cap over and over and over and over… and over?
Tortoise was an interesting flanker on Japan!
1 Like
IMO limiting map movements restricts tactical freedom and slowly but surely pushes WT towards WoT but with multiple assets.
1 Like
I think you and I think of flanking a little differently.
There’s the driving to the edge of the map and sitting on a hill type of flanking that you can’t do with a Maus, and there’s the traversing the city streets to get behind an enemy type of flanking that I’m promoting instead.
Other than flanking, fast vehicles can benefit from having the ability to relocate to another lane if the situation is more favorable to them there.
WoT had legitimately very well designed maps. At least back when I played it. And I never fealt a lack of movement and tactical freedom. You just move in an area that’s more constructed and pronounced. If anything, in WoT I actually had to strategize, while in WT on most maps it’s just done to you finding a pixel on a wide open area, and race against that pixel finding you and shooting you.
In WT, compared to WoT, there are, in almost every situation, far more directions from which one can be shot and killed. And since you can’t really scan all directions all the time, you resort to leaving some things to pure luck. And more luck =/= less strategy.
Surely that comes in when in higher tiers with LRFs etc? So most of WT is not this exactly.
So you are Zucc_Boi! Not me!
A friend of mine got 23 kills in a match doing exactly that with his T55E1. Is that impactful enough for you?
To me, that’s skill. The enemy team kept feeding him kills by not looking his way or reporting his location. Artillery, enemy air, plenty of ways to de-trench him, but no. They played badly, and were punished for it. He played well, and got 23 kills and a win in the bargain.
Why should we seek to prevent this scenario from happening?
Yes, you’re right, there will often be many situations in which an allied player on your team flanks down there, and completely wastes the position, because he’s not engaging caps directly, and the two or three people they manage to pick off en route from spawn to cap are not enough to turn the tide of the battle. While interdicting reinforcements is always a good idea, it has an opportunity cost, and sometimes it can cause your team to lose the match.
But… again, so what?
We expect players in this game to be able to account for shot drop. To memorise weak spots of enemy tanks they might encounter at BRs where armour is relevant. To have at least a vague recollection of the reload times, ammunition types, crew and ammo locations of the hundreds or thousands of vehicles they’ll meet on the battlefield. We expect them to fly, and/or use SPAAs.
How is this any different? Why should we not expect players to also know the maps, to also be able to make judgement calls about when is the right time to flank, or to camp, when is the right time to cap, when is the right time to do something in between?
If we take away flanking options because several players misuse them, what else are we going to take away? Shot drop, because it messes up reaction time for several players? Come on.
I say this as someone who mostly plays heavies, so flanking go-karts like said T55E1 are my bane, even more so at late WW2 BRs where the go karts generally have comparable firepower to you, better reload, better mobility, and questionable damage models. So I have no particular dog in this fight, not on the Normandy map at least. It just seems completely illogical to me, to dumb down the game to the lowest common denominator.
Different vehicles have different strengths. If we really want every map in this game to be like Alaska, then let’s just ditch some 50% of the vehicles in-game and let’s all play in stuff that can brawl at 300 metres. Might as well.
3 Likes
LRF = Laser Range Finder. It’s used to lay the gun on a target that you’ve already identified. Therefore it solves absolutely nothing. I’m talking about maps being far too open and luck based, not about laying guns.
No wonder the other bloke had beef with you and took it out on me.
If you are unable to discuss what I wrote then best of luck… fml this forum is odd…
Watch out, not only do they censor here but I gave my honest clean opinion on the game and someone reported me, now I have a 15 day chat ban in game. Just wow. Who did I trigger?
Not sure what you’re talking about but okay.
I literally don’t see my name mentioned here by anyone.