I think i should aim around 300-400 voters so i’ll put into suggestion next maybe i gonna need help from @SPANISH_AVENGER since seem gaijin to listen to him more than me i just hope he did gonna help me with
1 Like
This has probably been said already but one of the ways Sinai could’ve been improved was extend the map to the right moreso than it was before the change and put a capture point up top, and then rework the spawn zones on top of that.
The change they did end up doing while I understand their reasoning behind it didn’t actually fix anything. It’s just a very low effort “fix” that actually ended up doing more harm then good long term. Yes the old map had a spawn camping issue, nobody is denying that, I myself am guilty of abusing it. But their “fix” doesn’t address any of the other issues in that map. It makes the map even more linear than it was before and to be blunt it’s just half-assed.
Hopefully in the next patch or two they give the map a complete rework like they did with Poland and Eastern Europe because while they do have their problems still they are vastly better now to play on them they were before the rework. Especially for high tier battles.
1 Like
Hopefully you’ll get those numbers in no time.
I can’t believe to see how the map re-design are being handled…
Narrowing everything down is not solving anything but the contrary.
Ambush will be something from te past if that continues like this.
2 Likes
Honestly I hope in the future that they like put their proposed map changes out before changing them so that the community can vote on them. Or make entirely separate maps for Arcade and RB/Sim because the playstyles are so radically different. It doesn’t make sense to have to try and balance map design between one mode where people can see everything and another where people can see nothing.
Additionally, removing the areas of a map that allow for various different and supplementary game play styles is counter-productive to the health of the game in the long run. Being able to choose if you want to play as a sniper, flanker, or CQB brawler in most maps is what makes them good. A team that can effectively do all is more likely to win a match and it encourages some teamwork (if it works who knows) to try and cover all these areas effectively. Narrowing down all the maps to be basically CQB only not only turns the games into an attrition war, but punishes anyone who likes doing anything other than CQB. It also removes the incentive to play light-armored vehicles such as tank destroyers, because they aren’t good at CQB. It narrows down the “meta” in a game where everything should be viable to some extent.
This change sucks because while the maps weren’t good, and many people can agree with me on that, this is just making them worse. It’s digging a hole in a scenario where it is still possible to climb out of the hole, and making problems worse rather than better. Removing choice from the map design and basically making it a no-choice fest encourages gameplay without thought because there is no need to decide if you want to play far away, supporting, or up close. It is only one of those now, and it just means every game is going to feel the same. I hope they come to their senses, and at least make a statement about it.
10 Likes
Of course it will be not fun, because its English tanks.
England is the worst wt nation, why do you play it?
1 Like
Different people different likeness
From this an reading what you said in other posts, it’s pretty clear that we don’t talk about the same thing when refering to CQC, flanking, or sniping. Between that and your pretty classical way of arguing as far as this forum goes, I’ll just drop it.
Out of 53 maps, 10 are above 2*2km allowing for mid-range engagements, that is not taking into account the quality of said maps. If you take into account variations, you have 12 out of 250ish maps that are legitimate options. That leaves me with about 5% of the map pool.
That’s why I quit tanking.
true, but when u play worst tanks in the game, don’t complain about bad maps and so on
maps need to be balance for everyone and every type of vehicles (big version of Fulda big Maginot Line and Pradesh are best example) not single type of creature and single type of vehicles if that then why bother add the light tanks and missile carrier when they can just add MBT only since those type of vehicle apart of MBT can’t be used effectively anyway for example sometimes I want to play CV90120 vehicle with no armor but good optics but most of the map force me to play Strv122 because those advantage of CV90120 are useless for CQC maps
1 Like
I enjoy most of the changes, just not the ones to Alaska and Sinai, the changes to them are horrible, most others are fine though. I personally enjoy the Normandy map being changed from the beach to the other side.
Because why not? If we only played the nation with the most OP vehicles we’d all be playing Russia.
The same reason people play France, or heck, Italy. Because preferences are as individual as the players?
Maps need to be balanced for everyone and every type of vehicle
That just allows you to be lazy and only ever learn 1 vehicle type and 1 skill, and never master 90% of the rest of the game. Being lazy like that should be punished relative to actually good players with broad skillsets, by losing a larger % of games than them, which is accomplished by what Gaijin has been doing recently (right side of diagram)
Don’t engage. They’re just trolling. Look at the account: little experience and almost no realistic games. Not to mention the constant ad hominem attacks and insults.
I’ve never seen someone so terrified of looking to the left or right that they consider “flanking” to be an entire map type and playstyle and not just… a strategy or something every map should be designed with it in mind
Don’t forget about nations, not every nation is good in any playstyle
I mean occasionally, a nation is just bad at everything (cough cough tier 1 france), in which case, Gaijin just needs to fix that BR range and add more tanks, etc. not try to deal with it indirectly with map design, of all things.
But in most cases, when a nation is less good than others at style X, it’s because they’re BETTER at style Y. If you have X-focused maps and Y-focused maps in the pool in similar proportions, then that will cancel out over time, and they’ll still be competitive with the other nations. They might just be at a 45% chance going into an X map, but they’re a 55% favorite going into a Y map, average 50%
(In RB, that then gets watered down by the fact that multiple nations are usually on each team, who are unlikely to all have the exact same strengths and weaknesses, so probably more like 48/52 or something. In AB, there is no bias to win at all, because those people are on both teams equally usually)
Someone still will be suffering because of the map
? Who? Again, the next map, you’re on the 52 side, because your nation is good at that specialty, not the 48 side.
Do you also think that there should only be +/- 0 BR matchmaking? Do you think every single time one nation gets a new SPAA at BR 3.7, other nations all need a comparable SPAA at exactly 3.7? Etc?
Stuff can be slightly wobbly moment to moment but cancel out to balanced and even over several games. It’s fine, and the payoff in exchange here is huge: We can now reward people more for having 3 different well trained skills instead of 1, and it’s therefore a more competitive, deep, complex game. Also a lot more “esports ready” which gaijin seems to want.
10 CQC maps in a row in a fucking centauro I 120 so no
Most people just press W