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.
3 Likes
People sleeping on Aral Sea. One of the few maps I actually enjoy.
Also Carpithians is the biggest load of sh*te in this game and utter abysmal at top tier.
OG large Maginot was Gaijin’s best map.
It was the only map where you had a varied choice of playstyle that all could contribute to winning the match, and you were rarely forced into a playstyle that you didn’t want to engage with.
The rework didn’t really improve some of the core issues, but it also didn’t make it outright bad either, so whatever…
3 Likes
Fire arc is just playing “who has the better thermals” while focusing on the town on the hill because nowhere else has lots of cover.
Poland is too flat, and fields of Poland allows for instant spawn sniping. It could be so much better, but gaijin refuses to.
1 Like
That’s why it’s realistic. I don’t care about balance in the sense of what vehicle is better. You should have everything from T55 - T80 in the same match.
In my opinion the gameplay needs to be slowed down as well. Implementing an aiming system like in GHPC where you click and drag your mouse would be preferred to the fast paced garbage that’s currently used. The game at this point is completely devoid of any realism whatsoever, which is what they previously got us all hooked on.
Poland is flat well, because that’s how real land is where you would be using MBTs. If you don’t like it because it’s too realistic, Go play Arcade or WoT.
3 Likes
Just because it’s realistic doesn’t mean it’s good. I don’t want to play on a flat and open map, just like I don’t want to play on a poorly designed city map.
Don’t tell me to play arcade just because I want to not play on a terrible map. Should I tell you to go play sim if you don’t like how RB is?
That is actually false.
Urban environment is worst possible environment for armored warfare, where all tanks advantages are negated.
Enable barrel collisions and you’ll see how not cool the urban environment is for tanks…
Generally maps should get bigger the higher you go in BR.
The fact that I can see maps like Sweden or Advance to the Spawn Rhine above 7.7 is incredibly annoying.
A very evil part of me wishes they would do this honestly…
4 Likes
Old Maginot followed this forumula relatively well…
Fulda kinda does as well but its abit worse than Maginot even with the changes to the latter
(Still better than certain other maps)
Also one pet peeve i have is that they added the arcade versions of certain maps into RB and i wish they would get rid of them.
2 Likes
Fulda sucks so bad it’s not even a joke. It’s a CQB map disguised as a long map.
Long range maps should be the future for GRB top tier, anyone that likes <400m engagements/CQB brawling should stay below 9.3; as the vehicles above that range were almost entirely designed for medium to long range engagements.
It’s the exact same case as the one I like to call ‘The Fox 3 syndrome’ when people cries over guns only/no ARH modes for top tier planes, it only shows how people doesn’t understand how it works the tech they like.
2 Likes
inb4 but muh sabres dont have TTW >1
1 Like
As someone who mostly plays top tier, I much prefer the longer range maps, especially in my Challenger xD
1 Like
No one said it had to be open, there’s plenty of cover and even a town on the big version of Poland.
