I’m really tired of these small maps in War Thunder — they just make the game feel super arcade-like. Bigger maps are way more immersive and strategic. But as always, Gaijin keeps pushing these short 1-cap maps. I straight up don’t play them anymore. Honestly, if you don’t like this kind of stuff, the best protest would be to leave the match right at the start. Grind more than one nation so you have options when one lineup gets locked.
At top tier it’s just ridiculous. Sometimes you don’t even get the chance to spawn your second tank because people are already spawn-camping. Gaijin should take inspiration from maps like Red Desert — at least there you can actually get back into the match.
And at low tier it’s even worse. The maps are tiny as hell — you can barely play tank destroyers, which are meant to snipe, or even light tanks made to flank, because the maps are basically straight lines. These vehicles get totally outclassed by heavy tanks and anything with a turret.
To make things worse, with these small maps and the new AA vehicles, you’re forced to stay in your spawn. You become an easy target for CAS and don’t even have the option to reposition.
1 cap maps should be removed, but there’s a lot more depth to map design and how good it is other than just it’s physical size. I think talking specifically about map size is misguided because there is so much more wrong with Gaijins map design. They have a real issue with spawnpoint amount/location, as well as edge of map design.
Not really. I can’t think of many specific low tier maps that are both tiny and restrictive.
Those are perfect for TDs since they can’t be flanked as easily.
I dont agree with it, in small maps they can be flank easily, tanks with turret has advantage anyway. Sometimes you dont have mobility to back and do a second shot
I don’t think it’s a problem in the low tier. What I don’t like is large maps, when most of my team don’t even have the filter upgrade for the tank. My team sits near spawn like fish in a barrel because it’s too hard for them to drive up hills and over terrain. On a small map people can level up faster.
Shorter maps don’t mean faster grinding. Quite the opposite. The more time you stay in a match and actually play, more XP you get. These fast 5-minute stomp matches give you nothing. So even progression-wise, small maps are just bad.
True, the longer the better, but I find that there’s usually enough spawn points at low tier, and people stay in the game longer. In Rank V or Rank VI half my team is wiped out sometimes at the beginning. At low tier people seem to stay around even if they died 3 or 4 times.
Here No. Red Desert is how a map should not be designed. Look at those empty plains front of the spawns, and the red zone covering 1/4 of the vertical length.
Engagement range is good, but it needs more depth (yes, depth not just length). 16v16 may have also made width a prob, but that would lead to another smaller team only switch part
So you want maps without flanking.
That’s the message your post says when it claims most flanking maps are bad, and the one open large map with the most flanking routes is also bad.
Looking for players behaviour on those maps (red sands, fulda…) everyone just leaves after 1 death (i just leave without spawning, because it’s extremely boring to drive slow tank 5 minutes in empty side, and even more boring, when finding out there’s no enemies on your flank because everyone chooses 1 side (because 2nd side of map is fully open field, so going there means death).
Big war thunder maps are boring as hell and as i said before, nobody likes playing it.
It defend us from CAS… espically City maps with buildings. Big maps is basically sitting at each other spawn and snipe 2km and dodging those shells coming towards you.
Good maps > bad maps.
And for higher tiers:
Good big maps > good small maps.
It’s simply a shame to have modern tanks locked in really small maps and have them engage each other from spitting distance, when there’s much more that you could be doing with those as both mobility and firepower are excellent, so you have no issues in handling long range scraps.
I think smaller maps for low tier are fine (though some new larger maps definitely wouldn’t hurt), but for the rest I fully agree. The map design in this game is THE worst I have ever seen, and like you said, especially at top tier it’s super painfull. There are only a handfull of mid to long range maps, and those are very hit or mis as well. I absolutely agree we need bigger maps!
I love small maps when playing certain vehicles (Object279, Falcon, and such). Nothing boring about rolling straight through your enemy. Sniping across the map can put me to sleep, though. It’s why you bring lineups - I have vehicles good for small maps, and vehicles good for big maps.
I don’t think they need to or should be removed. It brings some variety to the already kind of stale ground gamemodes that we have. Even if I myself don’t really like them.
BUT (and mainly i also dont like them because of the following two issues)
They shouldn’t be 20 vs 20 (or whatever numbers of players) matches especially in top or high tier. Way too cramped, too many people on too little space making most of those matches a chaotic mess.
AND they should be the exception, like maybe one of ten matches, not five one cap maps in a row.
It can or does force people to play/learn discover parts of the maps that they usually don’t like to play on and it would give the opportunity to use parts of maps that usually are not the battlezone as such (for example - just out of my head: something like cargoport but use the southernmmost part in east-west configuration. Or Big Normandy, but use the easternmost part in a north-south configuration, with the cap in the forest east of the hangar. (that would be a cool map config that i think would be fun), one cap, max 8 or 10 players per team). Possibly the map is not suited for that, i didnt check that in detail for this example, but it could be so cool playing on parts of maps you usually don’t (obviously needs to be examined if that part of the map makes some sense in a one cap config - one team spawning in a flat open half of the map and the other team in cover doesnt). and even if its not perfectly balanced map-wise, that wouldnt be such a problem if you only see that configuration once in 100 matches. And you could have so many different variations of one cap configurations that it wouldnt get boring or repetitive. All on the already existing maps. But with new spawns/caps.
Still, 2 matches out of 10 or something on such restricted maps with such limited movement and possibilities would be enough at least for me
That’s just your opinion. In contrast to you, I and many other players like these big maps.
Pradesh is the best map in the game. Red Desert is a great map. Maginot Line too. Fire Arc is terrible, but at least you can snipe. European Province is probably the only map I hate out of this list, after Gaijin ruined it.
Gaijin makes money off of almost everything in the game except maps so there’s maybe part of the reason maps seem to take a backseat.
It would be nice if there was a section of the forums dedicated just for maps, land, air and sea, other than the suggestions area.
Correct me if I’m wrong but I’ve read that map design has been outsourced.
Yes, we need better designed and larger maps, especially for high tier. What I don’t understand is why some of the 1 cap maps are heavily restricted yet other 1 cap maps they are not restricted and are open like the 3 cap maps.
We also need larger cap areas instead of crowding players into a tiny cap. The same applies for the spawning locations. Also no map should ever have a single spawn location, ever.