Honestly? I’ve just started 1DLing a lot more often on maps that had their sniping spots removed. Don’t really see why not. I can accept the prevalence of CQC as a necessary evil for the game because of the preferences of the wider player population, and in turn my 1DLing will be a necessary evil because I get bored of feeling funneled into knife fights nine matches out of every ten. Easy.
10 Likes
It’s funny, there are entire lineups for some nations that rely on sniping and almost nothing else that get royally screwed in maps like Sweden…
Japan 8.3 for example, the Type 74s already feel a little bit ehhh going up against STRV 103s but their advantages just dry up without long ranges and hilly terrain…
7 Likes
When map design is the reason why 2 nations are essentially unplayable (or at least notably less fun than other nations), you know something is deeply wrong with the map design
9 Likes
Yup. I mean, Gaijin’s GF map design has always been on the “meh” side but it seems they got rid of the map designers they had and replaced them with CoD map makers, and then let the interns sort out all the “mean” spots. Only way I can explain how they consistently screw up maps these days.
2 Likes
I disagree on this one. Look at maps like Test Site, newer, incorporates all playstyles pretty successfully.
Blame the players, not the devs. The changes to older maps, not newer maps, are the problem.
Look at how many people bottle up at A on Advance To The Rhine to the point where they can’t even move, let alone affect the outcome of the match, just because it promises instant action. You could cut off the whole rest of the map and the vast majority of players wouldn’t even notice because they just keep respawning into that corridor over and over and dying like bots.
Gaijin would not be narrowing the maps if the player base as a whole really was vehemently against it.
It doesn’t, though. A point? That’s CQC or hill peekaboo games at 200m or less. B point? town CQC. C point? Also town CQC. Okay, a snipey spot along the water maybe, but it doesn’t incorporate all playstyles. Flanks maybe, but… myeah.
That’s a map design problem, not a player problem. You can’t blame the players for using something that the map design encourages - and almost makes mandatory. If it doesn’t happen on A, it happens on the long street next to C.
Oh sweet summer child… Gaijin does not listen to their player base. See the introduction of drones. See the events. See… just about everything really. And even though they claim it’s all done with “player feedback”, nobody’s ever seen the actual data on that. And Gaijin will implement it the way they want to implement it because they feel they know better than us what we want.
4 Likes
I have narrowly missed out on a nuke by playing the Dicker Max hull down on the big hill that overlooks A from the south… in a 6.7 match.
You can go hull down with the Jagdtiger from both the northern and southern spawns and have duels at 900m, which granted is not as long range as I would prefer but it’s much more than you can say about 90% of the maps in this game. Many of them have been pretty rewarding… against Type 99s, against SU 122 54s, even against Tutels.
On Test Site, at A, I nailed a T95’s cupola at 900 metres and got a one hit kill.
At the same time, the defilades allow lights and mediums to flank, meaning that snipers don’t lock down the cap so completely that everything stalls. In fact, and this is perhaps the thing I like the most, snipers and flankers on A basically counter each other, in very dynamic ways.
Test Site is one of the maps where I frequently get first strike, and the simple reason for it is that when I position (say) the Jagdtiger on that hill, the first thing I look for is the inevitable T92, Bulldog, or Ontos rushing west to use the defilade to flank. Sniping countering flanking. But I’ve also done the opposite, such as using a VK to quickly get into a position where I could put the enemy side’s snipers in a cross fire - flanking countering sniping.
Meanwhile, B as you say is is super brawly, and C is CQC but a bit less cramped than B.
This is several orders of magnitude better than maps where sight lines beyond 500 metres literally do not exist.
I always spawn B and C, because I know that the small number of players involved will allow you to have a bigger individual impact on the match if you get it right, and you can end up controlling two caps with a small handful of people to literally swing the match.
So, if you’re focused on winning, the map design encourages you to go where you can fight over two caps instead of one.
If you just want quick action, you go A.
Most players just want quick action.
Mate, I know where you’re coming from and I think stuff like drones is absolutely godawful etc. But I think you’re forgetting one crucial thing.
The playerbase is not what you see here.
The number of people who regularly use the forum, or even who post on Reddit, are basically a fractal compared to the amount of people who play the game, on Steam or elsewise. 90% of the playerbase doesn’t even know the forum exists. They just log on, play for a couple hours, log off, and that’s it, done.
I started playing in Feb 2022 and I only started interacting here around Sep 2023. And it’s not even just a casual vs sweaty split, either. I have friends who’ve been playing this game since the introduction of ground forces or even before that, who have done tournaments and been involved in the esports side of things, who never visit the forum, or the subreddit…
When you say that “Gaijin doesn’t listen to the playerbase” remember that when it comes to maps, they have heatmaps of where people go and don’t go, they have data on how long or short specific matches are on specific maps, how many people ban this map or that map, how many people leave a match early if it’s on this map and not that map… all data that we don’t get to see. We just see the forum post by someone like me who complains about the removal of sniping spots. But for every post I write, there are nine players not on the forum who vote with their feet and immediately leave if they get a map that’s not straight out of CoD.
If anyone wonders why they are removing sniper points… its this. And Vehicles like this
The strongest Russian APFSDS in the game can’t Penetrate the turret front of the BASE MODEL Challenger 2. So they force it, and others, to play against their strengths, they force it to be up close, they take away the sniper points so it has to brawl with the Russian T-80BVM’s, and T-90s which is is TOTALLY at a disadvantage of at close range.
16 Likes
Well said mate but I also think Gaijin do much to try and cover over the huge plot holes in War Thunder. CAS being a fine example.
Gaijin do nothing but firefight. A new update to sort out the mess created by the last update. Putting tanks like the Chally 2 on small maps made for WW2 is just lame and lazy at first glance but it does also make late Russian vehicles so much more relevant than they would be in reality. Possibly the same for the M1 etc.
1 Like
It is because the average player does not like larger maps sadly. That, and new players not knowing how to play maps, then disliking the larger maps.
It is not because of any sort of bias lol. How you brought russian bias into this is a massive leap, and I am almost impressed.
1 Like
Not really, everybody knows that Russian tanks need to get in close to NATO MBTs to stand a chance ,its about size and weight. Its tank doctrine.
Small maps force that narrative and remove choice. So do urban maps. Its like a side show con, not always apparent but effective.
2 Likes
While it is true that NATO tanks are better at longer ranges, there are more BRs than 11.0+. Plus I highly doubt Russian tanks are even that bad at longer ranges.
They force the narrative of quick matches and fast paced action (which is what the average player would want the most.)
1 Like
And that exactly why Russians have lot advantages because most of the maps in this game are small and Russian tanks can play on thier game the only western tanks that can also playing CQC game with Russian are Strv122 since it only western tank that Russian can’t just aim hull and win
2 Likes
Does that not mean less RP for players overall?
Okay, that’s valid - but now drag this up to 10.0+ and the dynamics change completely, which is more what I’m talking about. I know at lower tiers the map does work out just fine (Super Hellcat, fun times) but at higher tiers it’s boring AF :)
Agreed!
The thing is that a lot of players don’t actually select a spawn and Gaijin’s auto-spawner apparently loves spawning people near whatever point will result in CQC the quickest - or sometimes it’ll spawn the north team on the right of the map and the south team on the left in order to almost force a clash at the map center (where usually one finds a B point).
I generally spawn at A on Test Site because while you have a valid point on the B/C cap situation, if you don’t keep a hold on the terrain around A, you’re going to get absolutely clapped by flankers. Most maps have that problem that there’s 1 cap that isn’t “relevant” to the match but you need to keep a hold of it because if you don’t, happy fun flanky time. Sun City is like that too, match is often won on B/C caps, and A cap can be left alone - but if you’ve got nobody around there, you get spawncamped on the A side spawn, and you lose B to people coming in off the flanks, and usually if you’ve lost B you’ll be losing C shortly after due to not having enough people to counter.
I know that :) But I’ve spoken to a fair number of people that don’t use the forums or reddit or anything really, and back in the day with the drones they didn’t like it one bit - even in dev it was controversial and Gaijin was warned that implementing them in the state they were in would be problematic. IIRC drones got implemented where they spawned up high and close enough that they were in the SPAA dead zone, and it was entirely possible to cheese your two kills before SPAA even had a chance to do anything about it. That’s why their spawn point got moved - a few times, if I’m not mistaken.
Exactly, we don’t get to see - that’s my main beef. That they collect that sort of data, of course, it makes perfect sense. But if they use that data to make map changes that are - at best - controversial, it’d be nice if they could provide an explanation that goes further than just “because the players want it that way”. There’s also no way for any of us to verify that they actually used the data, and didn’t just pull it out of thin air because of various other reasons that have more to do with influencing match timings for instance…
Correct - but like I said in another post, the solution is - in my opinion anyway - simple: if people want quick action, play arcade. Or introduce a map vote mechanic that actually works - and open it up some more. Maybe 2 bans (and a ban meaning you don’t want to play that map, period, ever, at all), and 8 downvotes where your chances of getting that particular map are reduced by a decent percentage - similarly, 8 upvotes where your chances of playing that map increases by a decent percentage.
And that will, I think, shut down both sides of the argument rather quickly. Us folks who don’t like CQC can just ban/downvote the city maps and upvote our preferred long range maps, and so on. Heck, if they want to be really fancy they can add a dialog to it that asks what you prefer, CQC or longer range and based on what you click it’ll preselect votes.
2 Likes
Also known as “go play Arcade” :)
4 Likes
The problem are not “big maps” , the real problem is Gaijin is removing ALL sniping spots even in medium/small maps too and only adding urban completely flat maps and this only benefits certain type of tanks and yes, they are mostly russian tanks.
And is not a coincidence this huge and agressive maps chanes only comes after the massive russians win ratio drop across all his tech tree.
6 Likes
And the game is not only Top Tier. Most of the russian Tech Tree have endemic problems of gun depression and poor performance at long range, T-34, KVs, IS series, T-54s etc etc practically all are bad at long range vs his western counterparts. Thats why Gaijin probaly is destroying sniping spots and only adding small rat urban mazes.
6 Likes
Yes, of course. I don’t play above 7.7, so that colours my judgement considerably. But honestly, the more modern vehicles are simply too fast, too good at acquiring targets, and too capable of long distance engagements for the way WT ground forces was set up from the start, IMHO. The higher you go, the narrower the meta gets, the steeper the incline of the snowball effect, the more important the initial engagement.
And that’s not to mention the insane CAS ordnance available.
In an ideal world you’d have a separate map pool for 10.+, to start with, and bespoke mission types would probably help as well. But like I always say, MMOs are about averaging out the experience for as many players as possible, so this will realistically never be done. It’s one of the reasons why I don’t play higher BRs, to be totally truthful. It looks like a permanent beta with no real hope of being balanced.
Sorry, I meant that I spawn B/C on Advance To The Rhine. On Test Site, I also spawn at A invariably, every time.
Usually my approach to maps is either to go where I know my vehicle will be strong (example, parking the Jagdtiger behind the hill north of the western spawn on Hurtgen Forest and engaging people trying to take the hill or trying to cap B), or where I know fewer players tend to go, and so “someone has to” or that flank is lost.
Yes. Typically what I do on Sun City is go C, then push progressively towards their spawn, then swing B. Only reason why I don’t go A is that the vehicles I use (like casemate tank destroyers or heavies) tend to do better at C. A Jagdtiger holding the alleyway next to C can be a pain in the ass for the enemy team, especially if you have someone taking the stairs in the adjacent square; or sometimes if I see the alley has allies already I’ll go take the stairs myself, maybe in a Panther or a Tiger II depending on the BR.
While I don’t normally like city maps, I tend to do well on that one because I’ve figured out “the flow” of it, so to speak. It is a similar story on Sweden, where I always flank A from “the outside” (i.e. the north), usually with a heavy so I can stop light flankers like Hellcats - and American Desert too, where I also flank A and then try to cut off reinforcements to B.
I got two nukes on American Desert with the Tiger II in January and joked to my friends that for some reason I’m getting nukes on maps I absolutely despise. I would much rather have one on Surroundings of Volokolamsk or Sands Of Sinai. :D
I think drones are almost universally hated.
I agree with TEC’s take that the worst thing about drones is that they show just how powerful CAS can really be in this game mode.
Eh, I understand why they don’t, though. Remember an employee of theirs and his family were recently doxxed over the spall liner scandal, of all things. People will absolutely look at publicly available stats and then try to minmax, figure out what is “meta”, not play stuff that looks to be in trouble, and that will begin to skew information massively as people only play one thing and not the other…
Just look at how some people seize on absolutely useless Thunderskill data (where it’s always worth pointing out, the average winrate is above 50%) to draw far reaching conclusions over how this or that nation is doing globally in the game. I can’t imagine the insanity we would see with more data.
And finally, it’s also probably done with competition in mind. Right now WT has no real rivals but that might change one day.
I say all of this with sadness, because there’s some data I would love to see, and not the minmaxxing stuff, but to try and benchmark myself. For example: who is the player with the highest winrate and K/D in the Jagdtiger over a representative sample of matches? If I knew that, I could look them up, compare how they play the vehicle vs how I play it, try to learn from them, and get better at the game. But I can’t do that, because we don’t have that kind of leaderboard available to us.
So you’re left to fumble in the dark a bit, not really knowing if you just had a great match because your opponents this one time happened to suck, or because you genuinely did well.
That’s what an ideal world would be like. Sim for slower, thoughtful gameplay (man I haven’t played sim in too long a time, sad). RB for that peculiar skillset that we’ve all come to know, which mixes FPS elements with reflexes/reaction time and knowledge of “the meta”, and arcade for the more FPS-style gameplay and quick action.
However, when you consider that AB is much more played than RB, which in turn is much more played than SB, and when you remember that MMOs try to average out player experience… yeah. Arcadeification is inevitable.
I don’t think we’ll ever get more banned maps. The votes I’m pretty sure are intended exclusively to provide them with data and I think this informed the making of maps like Test Site and Flanders. It would be nice to have more freedom to choose, but again, anything that adds extra steps to the matchmaker will always be a tough ask in an MMO.
I just don’t think it’s worth inflating our expectations.
1 Like
For example, this is Fulda Gap area (6x6 km).
In WT we get only a fraction of usable combat area between hills while real terrain has lots of rolling hills for either flanking or hull-down positions.
11 Likes