It’s not everyday you see someone hop on the internet just to flat out wrong seemingly on purpose lol. Fire arc and fields of Poland are the best maps for high tiers because they’re realistic map settings that aren’t CQC hell holes. The terrain and size is what makes the perfect.
Yes, exactly, that’s why Red Desert is the best map for high tier MBTs.
Those are literally the worst maps for toptiers.
You didn’t read the entire doctrine and your post is just cherry picking.
That and your post contradicts itself. Claiming both that tanks are designed for brawling at longer ranges while claiming they’re not for brawling.
You love long range brawling, that’s your map preference.
Your top 4 maps are all brawling maps, and your worst 5 maps are flanking maps.
The map with the most flanking routes in the game [Sweden] is among those five.
hot take but i like fulda gap at high brs
Nah for the southern no man’s land and north mid range mess with no width
Nah for camp only. Forced frontals occurs on both long and short ranges.
LHS no man’s land, RHS does not leave that much width.
Those open areas with 16v16…?
And Pradesh should be on the list if only the eastern two spawns aren’t that ****
At least we still have walls instead of pure opens here.
Rhine Yes for complicity. imo many large maps aren’t any larger than Rhine for all those open No Man’s Land… But anyways close ranges should always stay as an appetizer not a main.
That’s because Brawling in a city is much different from brawling at range lol. Brawling at range is about scanning with thermals and engaging either hull down or maneuvering.
Brawling in the city is left up to RNG (should’ve looked left instead of right).
→ don’t agree with your take
→ u must be psychopath"
This forum will never stop amusing me
I mean that In the nicest way possible. All the cqc maps in the game are both unrealistic, and unbearable. You die from RNG more than players with skill.
What are you even on?
Why do you talk about CQC maps, when i specifically talk about red desert - the biggest map in the game?
When comparing the size, I care more about engagement distances rather than over all size. Which is why Poland is better. There’s still CQC aspects in red dessert, such as the cap zones . With fields of Poland, the cap zones are more in the open, making it a real risk to drive up and cap. That’s how the game should be. You shouldn’t have to constantly worry from spawn about what direction you’re going to get shot from.
Which is why Red Desert is much better, because you regularly fight on 1,5-2,5km distances.
You literally have city in poland map in the middle
You literally can shoot from spawn to spawn in poland.
This map is godly wdym
Kursk/Fire Arc: never been a fan of, but it’s okay at best.
Poland: I absolutely love all variations of Poland, because it allows so many different kinds of gameplay.
Mozdok: is another “okay at best” but it doesn’t help you can snipe spawn from the objectives.
Sands of Sinai: Gaijin ruined that one for no good reason.
Fulda: this one is a great map, not sure why you didn’t mention it.
Advance to the Rhine: it’s a great map, plus it has a certain nostalgia to it. A chaotic map that can be enjoyed at all BRs.
American Desert: unironically a map that favours specifically Russia. Flat, boring, unimaginative. This feels like a map that should be the B point in another map. Like how Poland is the B Point in Fields of Poland.
Alaska: don’t knock Alaska. Although it needs to become a winter map. It’s Alaska, that’s all Alaska is known for.
Sun City: another great map, it’s plenty of fun.
Sweden: definitely the worst map to play on.
Breslau: how did you forget this terrible map? This is the worst map of them all.
Brawling at range without any cover is just waiting for a black dot to appear.
I like all the maps you listed, no exceptions, because a friend of mine is a veteran tanker and was able to give me the entire doctrinal strategy of using tanks in the United States, Vietnamese, Chinese, and a few other nations’ militaries.
Doctrine is fiction we create that we think we can force into reality, and sometimes it works.
Any retired tank commander will tell you the exceptions of every situation.
If you think the complexities of dozens of road networks is “RNG” then I shudder what you think basketball is.
Diversity of maps is more important to me than some arbitrary nonsense.
Advance to Rhine above 8.7 is absolute mess. Map isnt scaled for 32 players in fast vehicles. Its a rat race to camp the best positions and holding them. A/B line is essentially

sweden is the worst map to play on but sweden 2.0: desert boogaloo is plenty of fun? why?
This is nonsense. The doctrine for the abrams comes from the reason I was developed in the first place. Its design was to provide increased protection / survivability for the crew in the even the USSR sent hoards of tanks into Western Europe. Places like Fulda where you can engage at distance.
MBTs are not meant for RNG city maps as it’s a known unnecessary risk. Obviously that’s the rule, and there are exceptions, but there’s other vehicles that are much better suited for it.
The city maps in game are meant for lower BRs which is fine. MBTs are not meant for that kind of combat.
I’m specifically talking about hight tier from like 10.7 up. I’m cool with some of the urban maps for lower tiers. Just not high up where speed is everything.
No map is “RNG”.
And tanks are designed for as many terrains as possible, including urban.
If you read American doctrine its exclusive stipulation regarding urban environments with tanks is enemy infantry. If enemy infantry is not present or there is enough allied infantry, that stipulation is to be ignored.
Guess what doesn’t exist in War Thunder? Infantry, thus that stipulation doesn’t matter.
Don’t be a doctrine addict either.
Tall buildings and planes >:-)
You’re “banned word”, and just want to argue. Most player don’t want those maps at the higher BRs so it’s just a fact that you’re wrong. It makes the game just like CSGO or Call of duty. And yea, urban maps are absolutely RNG based.