I will say one thing. I am pretty happy with Test Site and Flanders because they allow you to engage at long range*, or flank, or cqc. All three can swing the match. Sometimes you end up doing all three in the same match. That’s pretty cool.
It also makes me a bit less worried about the future maps, because it’s clearly the “formula” they have selected. What really sucks is the way that older maps are being turned into shooting lanes.
*Long range is admittedly a bit generous since we’re talking about 900 metres at most, but at this point I’ll take what I can get.
For what we are researching and using rangefinder.
HEAT Ammunition is for long range engagements. Designed for.
For what we have Binoculars, Optics.
Tank destroyers are for long range engagements. For hiding. Even in World of Tank’s you have spots where you can hide your vehicles because they have tank destroyers as well. And this game is an arcade game. Do you notice anything Gaijin ?
NOT EVERYONE WANTS TO DRIVE IN TO THE MIDDLE OF THE MAP AND WANTS TO 1337/360°TURRETNOSCOPE ENEMY TANKS BETWEEN HOUSES AND GOES INSANE ON COKE AND WANTS TO DO INHUMAN GODLY REACTION TIMES.
Not everyone wants to play like this you know. There are people who want to relax. There are older people who don’t give a shit about these things. And do not give me the argument with E-Sports. Thats laughable anyways.
Why driving to that spot when i can literally hit it from miles away. I have a tool for that.
Camping is bad,dont camp or die by bomb for being that scared mofo hiding behind while his team mates at front do the hard work pushing enemy into their spawn…
You call it camping, I call it providing overwatch. You call it camping, I call it using my vehicle as intended.
Different vehicles operate to different advantages. My Tigers are pushing capture points, but my waffle tractor sits up on a hill. Playing to the advantage of both is an asset to your team and yourself. Thinking that there is only a single way to play is a cancerous mentality. Apparently one a mod shares.
See,waffle have no armor which we all know that no armor is best armor and great gun,and as its slow its second line of advance. You let Tigers push and stay 100-200m behind em killing things they struggle with while they take hits instead of you.
I think most people that are upset about CQC are that way because we’re simply locked out of other options and forced to do CQC time and time again, with basically a total disregard of what vehicle(s) we have in that lineup.
Not only that, but smaller maps = faster engagements = faster deaths = faster queues, so it’s basically a win-win for Gaijin.
Casuals that buy their premiums most likely don’t want to spend hours upon hours to learn big, complex maps with many routes. This is why we mostly see smaller maps with a couple of predetermined funnels, so players don’t need to worry that much about people sneaking around, flanking their ass and getting a free kill, which is definitely frustrating for someone on the receiving end.
Not only it’s dismissive, it’s totally false as well.
Yeah, I thought my brain was acting up since it was pretty late, but no, that has actually been said lmao. It has to be one of the worst comments I’ve seen in a while.
Like, this game doesn’t need to be a sniper game in order to cater to sniping vehicles, they’ve surely been added to the game to diversify up things. But no, seems like we can’t have any sniping spots and should all go and knife-fight each other, without any regard to the vehicles we’re using.
so why exactly did the Brits design the Chieftain, which was designed to be invulnerable when hull down, refit it with the Stillbrew upgraded armour package with increased Turret protection when rounds capable of defeating the base armour were developed?
Why was the Challenger 2 designed to have exceptionally strong frontal turret armour?
If your game was always going to be about CQC then there’d be no point in having a British groundtech tree…
May as well just refund the SL, RP and GE spent on any tank in that tree past rank 5…
Oh, and while we’re on the subject, Britain (as in, actual Britain, not the subtree) doesn’t have lots of alternatives… because our glorious devs clearly know whats best and give us vehicles which, if your hottest take is vaguely correct, would be made redundant. It has the Vickers lines, the TD line (which is, funnily enough, also built around long range engagements) and no recce vehicles.
Maybe add stuff like the Scorpion, Scorpion 90, Scimitar Mk.2, Fox, Desert Warrior, Warrior CSP, VERDI-2, Ajax…
Snipers can and should relocate frequently, doesn’t mean they’re not snipers.
I mean… keep in mind forum moderators are IIRC volunteers, and even if I’ve got that wrong, they’re just responsible for the forums at the end of the day. They are unlikely to be informed of development stuff like you mentioned here.
It’s a faux pas for someone who represents Gaijin in the forums, whether directly or indirectly, to sound so dismissive, but we also shouldn’t read too much into that, mate. Pacifica has probably just expressed their personal opinion in a way that grates a bit because of their mod role, but again not worth reading too much into it if I’m being honest.
Oh, I know. But I make it a point to always try and emphasise player harmony wherever possible.
I’ve said it a thousand times in the past: this is a game you structurally cannot play without other people. You have every incentive to want everyone to have a good time. Your enjoyment is my enjoyment and viceversa, because if someone quits the game out of misery, it’s one fewer person for me to play with or against, and so on.
This means for me that: all tech trees should be strong and healthy. All vehicles should be worth playing and have broadly similar odds of doing well in a match based on their BRs. And all maps, either individually or collectively, should allow these vehicles to do well.
As someone who loves sniping, I can make the case for small maps in the game too: they make the stock vehicle experience less atrocious. They make the grind faster if you’re just trying to push your way past a vehicle you dislike. They help ease inexperienced players into the game (to a point, because knife fights can also be very high-skilled fights in some situations). They can be convenient if you have only an hour or so to play before you need to go do something else.
I can empathise with other players and I want to see their needs met in the game. All I ask is for them to return the same courtesy to me.
Exactly. It’s clear that there is a benefit to being able to “just chuck in” a vehicle and not have to worry about how well it’ll do, because the BR system will handle it from there - “let God sort them out” basically. Again, I accept that it’s often a necessary evil. I understand you occasionally need to screw Peter to pay Paul. I’m patient and willing to wait and see if at some point better things will come for “my niche” as well, and in the meantime, I expand and adapt to the playstyle the game requires.
But after all that, I get told what Pacifica wrote, and like, lol. Mate. Literally adding insult to injury.
Big Tunisia. Ticks all 3 boxes, and all 3 are almost a requirement; snipers take care of the rushers who just rush to a cap, mid-range sits and defends caps, close range goes in and gets the caps and cleans up. It’s a map where tactics properly applied by a few people can swing the match in your favor. It’s also a map where you can get absolutely lollerclapped if nobody’s thinking. Which is why a fair number of people hate it because they have to actually, you know, play the long game and can’t just barge in pew pew pew pointy-clicky-kill.
Anyway.
Best CQC map though. But it is an absolute boring map to play. There’s about 4 or 5 sightlines for both sides, and it devolves into camp sightlines like a pro, point, click, and the person with the best ping or reflexes wins the engagement. Rinse, repeat, snooze.
You ever hear of the concept of a simile? And I quote… a figure of speech involving the comparison of one thing with another thing of a different kind, used to make a description more empathic - quit being so damn literal.
Working as intended, comrade. The usual course of events is staff member says something ill advised. Gets called out. Doesn’t respond. Topic is allowed to run for a short while so people can vent. Topic is then closed for some random reason that has nothing at all to do with what happened in said topic no sir not at all…
Played that. A long, long time ago. I dare say it was more interesting than a lot of WT maps :D
And deservedly so.
Or you sit back 600 meters and use the guns accuracy to take care of issues before the Tigers even get there. Just as valid a way to play the game.
There’s a reason a lot of MMO’s will give staff an account separate from their personal one (EVE Online for instance). Because when they’re on their staff account (even if just forum moderator), they are representing the company, and anything they say can and will be dissected and discussed by the players. If he wants to proclaim personal opinions, then he needs to do that on a personal account, not his mod account. Because if it’s on his mod account, he’s “official” (even if just a lowly forum moderator) and braindead out of touch statements don’t really help the image Gaijin is building of being… absolutely braindead and out of touch with their playerbaes.
Gaijin sees statistics.
Statistics say “most players play low tier”
Reason: They play low tier because they can’t play high tier. (to expensive, takes to long to grind whatever reasons).
Gaijin : We need more smaller maps because most people play low tier and community wants to have more CQC maps.
CQC maps might be interesting for low tier players because the games are faster/faster grind. Thats probably the thought process behind this.
Gaijin implements more CQC maps because community wants it and most of the community plays low tier. OF COURSE THEY PLAY LOW TIER BECAUSE THEY ONLY CAN PLAY LOW TIER. How it is possible being so dumb.
And what i do now with the top tier vehicles ? Not playing ? skipping. ignoring ?
This is one of the few cases where you’re in a bit of the wrong Pacifica. Respecting you when you do your job is a plus, however, “Sustaining a hit” is the same as taking a hit. Many tanks are designed in mind to sustain/take. A hit from an enemy shell and survive it. It’s just different wording.
However not all tanks can do either, some tanks were designed to be infantry fighting vehicles, and Some were designed to be armored personnel carriers.
Some however were designed in mind for artillery, long or short. Anti Air as well as carrying a large gun for the sake of reduced armor. Not one of these vehicles was designed for handling an incoming shell.
Assault Guns though were designed to assist infantry and provide mobile direct firepower to destroy enemy positions which over time evolved into IFVs and wheeled vehicles however recently now including some vehicles such as modern-day light tanks such as the M10 Booker designed as SPG just so tank crew don’t start using it as a light tank.
Summary:
The point is tanks are designed by countries with different mindsets in mind. Some are offensive, meant to engage the enemy with maximum protection either at range or a distance. Some though were glass cannons for range. Some were designed for speed.
You can’t entirely compare 1 country’s tank development to another one, their tanks however the ones who designed them had a list of goals that were needed. Some were meant to have an armored and well-protected turret just for range/defensive measures.