The specific case is also something generated by the developers. The Khrizantema-S is a vehicle with a BR of 9.7, when in reality it is an ATGM designed to combat the M1A2 and Leopard 2A6 (around BR 12.0). This happens to several vehicles with very powerful ATGMs, which, due to the lack of large and well-made maps, become vehicles without a clear function in the game, so they cannot fight well in CQC, and therefore receive an extremely low BR compared to what they should have if the maps were better made.
2 Likes
its always been that way it just is
i dont know what your trying to say here ? old sinai before the rework
you could snipe from the side mountains which could wipe the whole right side of the map
people who want long range maps with sniping spots like pradesh for realism are same people who T72A with night vision vs M1A1 abrams
realism doesnt belong in this game it can only be so realistic without being just completely unfair
The point is that sniping itself isn’t unfair.
It only gets unfair if the map is designed in a way that you cannot play without exposing yourself to the sniper. But I can’t think of any map where that is the case.
for example pradesh you cannot cap most of the points if someone is on that hill as you can see them the ENTIRE left side of the map is forced to be out in the open its horrible
and 95% of snipers are hull down which makes most tanks for example the LEO 2a7 UNKILLABLE
I don’t get that map very often, so I can’t really comment on it in detail. However, it does seem like a map where a lot of sniping happens.
Personally, I find Attika quite annoying. The map is very open and there are too many angles from which you can get sniped.
The problem isn’t that sniping is possible. The problem is that there are too many positions that can be sniped from multiple directions at once.
Sinai
In Sinai for example, you mainly got sniped by that hill.
I marked:
- Blue: the hill which was the most important part of the map
- Red: zones you should absolutely avoid staying in for too long and where you should pay full attention.
- Yellow: zones where you have to be careful to not get sniped from the hill, but there is cover to work with
- Green: zones you are absolutely save in
Obviously this is not a perfect model
The hill was the most important part of the map. Losing it completely put your team at a disadvantage. However, it was still possible to play in a way that minimized the risk of getting sniped. The center of the map also provided enough cover to fight back.
I think we can agree that you can reduce the risk of getting sniped by following two basic principles:
- Pay attention to the main sniping positions.
- Use available cover whenever possible.
If you follow these principles, the next step is to avoid giving the sniper what he wants: an open tank to shoot at.
There are many ways to deal with a sniper depending on your position. You can try to flank him, bait a shot, or use cover to exchange fire. A sniping enemy is like a trap — you either need to defuse it carefully or avoid it altogether.
Even in highly competitive games like Counter-Strike, dealing with strong sniper positions works in a similar way.
The only truly unfair aspect of this map was that spawn camping was possible. In that situation you have no real opportunity to avoid or counter the sniper.
Hürtgen Forest
I would say that Hürtgen Forest can be quite unfair when it comes to sniping. But on most maps — as on Sinai — a sniper cannot force you out of cover. You can use that to your advantage, because a sniper who stays in one position is also somewhat of a sitting duck. That allows you to take the initiative.
finally something we can agree everyone hates attica
fire arc is also a horrible map same with red desert
i just wish theyd rework maps we dont like instead of the ones we do
im fine if they make ranged areas in a map but it should not be able to control 1/4th of the map from that spot
1 Like
oops sorry didn’t expect a directly unfair position to be mixed with long range engagements
Not a matter of range but a problem with badly designed empty small maps.
Think about GHPC fulda.
Only in the outside skins of the vehicles - and that only most of the time. Everything else is whatever they feel the need for it to be.
as i know, back in 2014 the game was more “realistic” and actually had objectives and historic philosophy
I am fine with gameplay when it comes to low tier to 8.0. Most maps are more designed for WW2 to Cold war tanks. But once it reaches anything above 9.0+, the maps start to feel way to tiny for me. Zero breathing room for modern machines, pure chaotic CQC.
2 Likes
they had flying ponys back then
Yes, but that is what gives you both tactical advantage and disadantage. Map has several chokepoints where enemies NEED to go through to get to you, and all arount it makes routes to get to them
Yes, them big cardboards like Nashorn do suffer to find their place in cities. THo them heavy armored ones work out pretty well.
Its hard to disagree that older maps were better. Again, because the game was simplier, there were no MBTs, no thermals, ect.
Most of the old maps were small enough to fit a great battle with WW2 era tanks. Now its obvious that some newer maps lack that, because they were designed for them MBTs. But i dont agree that all of the newer maps are that bad. American Desert is decent, Breslau is, well, city; Seversk-13 is also a good map where you can fit every machine. And so on.
Then again, the screenshot you showed is actually very fair. But i disagree with it within several points. Especially with italy and american desert. Those maps are designed that way that LTs are easy to flank enemies with, and TDs can position to cover the flanks and main streets. There are few special positions for them TDs and LTs, but im certain that you just dont really need much more on those maps for any type of machine, as both of them are “maze-like” maps which work perfect based on great situanional avareness.
I agree. WT is just one of the products that you can immediately tell the makers have never used. Across shitty ui, no map voting, insane RNG reliance, BR compression, and much more, it just fully fails in every single little way.
Here’s how I imagine 90% of gameplay features were decided upon.
Gajin guy 1: “Hey let’s add artillery strikes!”
Gajin guy 2: “Why?”
Gajin guy 1: “I dunno, it just sounds cool.”
Imo, everything about scouting was poorly thought out. It Gajin made a change SO SIMPLE as just making the scout marker disappear early when the scouter dies, that would be an absolutely massive improvement to gameplay, all on its own.
1 Like
That’s exactly what people are pointing out, lol. You’re agreeing with the people you claim to be disagreeing with.
Correct. WT is best understood as a drip feed content industry product. A living game, in a sense. They constantly add new stuff that fundamentally alters the way a bracket is played. Combined with the map changes, the chasing of player preferences etc, that means the game never settles into one enduring meta.
While that may be a negative to you, it also keeps the game fresh for many players who return precisely because the game changes all the time.
1 Like
I would honestly not mind UAV scout nerfs as long as the score for them went up significantly in return because it’s such a powerful and helpful thing for your team it should be worth something; but I also acknowledge it’s insanely strong as it currently is.
The goal of Realistic and Simulator battles should be realism.
Arcade for everything else. Biggest issue RB faces is people wanting Arcade mission and map design but without markers and realistic physics leading to conflicts of interest.
Difference between Realistic and Simulator should be accessibility: ARB gets mouse aim/instructor and third person view. GRB Tanks can’t friendly fire and can have full third person view and no parallax to deal with (also GRB has a functional queue rather than restricted lineups that push me to play GRB over GSB while I can play exclusively ASB and be mostly happy with it).
The balancing should occur in battle-ratings (we don’t get I-16s and Spitfire Is fighting Bf 109 F-4s and Fw190 A-1 nor M4 shermans facing Tinger IIs nor Buffalos and Wildcats facing A6M2/A6M3s (without the floaters at least).
Nobody wants to fly I-16 vs Bf 109 F-4. It’s historically accurate. It’s also not fun for either party.
I do want realisticly designed mission scenarios, maps and vehicle behaviours though.
The goal of realistic and simulator battles is to support the wider strategic objective of the game, which is to earn money.
GRB has become the most popular mode in the game precisely because it sells the illusion of realism while retaining the accessibility of arcade, imho.
It’s not “an issue RB faces” because RB is not a thing that exists in the natural world, it’s a product. Part of one anyway. Any business that can choose between catering to audience X or catering to bigger audience Y which also includes parts of X, will choose the latter. They’d be masochistic if they didn’t.
Here you have literally answered your own point, man.
Really hard to make that fun and balanced in a PVP game.
Imagine playing realistic Fall Gelb. You have to drive your Pz 38t through the Ardennes without stopping for three days. No meeting enemies until you’re out of the forest.You refuel on the road with the assistance of support vehicles.
The biggest threat to the operation is a traffic jam, so your goal is to follow signals very closely or the immense concentration of AFVs on a narrow shitty forest road will literally crash the offensive.
Then you finally break out of the forest and race for the river, where your task is to secure a bridgehead, only problem is that on the far bank there’s a guy in a prepared defensive position in a Char 2B with a disco ball decoration and a “did you angle today” sticker that’s ready to blast your ass back to the hangar because the only thing you can frontally do to him is perhaps sing him a song.
For anyone involved that was an extremely dramatic personal moment. It’s one of the most famous ground operations in contemporary military history. But it would make for atrocious PVP gameplay.