I’ll take a page out of your book. NO. Does that help buddy. I recommend you first think before you respond since you interpreted my words into something that was so off what I said which I’ll regurgitate, what I wrote down is what I meant. No butts.
whatever dude.
im not going to waste more energy on you.
have fun
1 Like
Good to know, good bye.
Narrow maps, and narrowed maps need to go. They are not good for the game. No flank potential on a lot of these variants, and removing some really fun spots from a lot of maps.
8 Likes
Current map design plays huge part on how unbalanced the game is.
One way or another with some planing you could get away with full up tiers and just bad tanks with positioning, repositioning, flanking but in the current state of the maps that is not the case anymore.
That creates huge unbalances and makes most of the tanks just useless, the game further frustrating and i don’t think is ever going to be fixed.
It wasn’t the economy, is not the “bias”, not the up tiers, IS THE MAPS.
10 Likes
100% agree, I have been trying to bring all these threads back to life to get attention to the devs as it is bad right now.
1 Like
As if Warthunder maps were symmetric in the first place lol.
Second Battle of El Alamein: North spawn have massive advantage by getting to south hills.
Frozen Pass: North can get sneaky way into C by going B4-B5, meanwhile east spawn gets exposed to fire from B4
Eastern Europe: West have overall better positions both in north side of river as well as south forest (They litterally can overlook spawn exit/C area)
Jungle: West side hill
Hurtgen: West have much better hill topology on north side, plus from south east spawn is way more open.
Ash River: C,B-4 spot for west spawn
Karelia: North can sit at C5 locking south route to center hill from D5.
Kuban: E6 hill, enough said.
Normandy: West can rush to E4 locking both south and entire D4 area.
Port Novo: South spawn have sneaky way into E4 area meanwhile North spawn have to fully expose themself to enemy fire lines in order to get there.
I can go on and on how imbalanced maps are.
2 Likes
That would imply that most people flank in the first place.
1 Like
Most, probably don’t, but those that do can turn the tide of a battle when done correctly. It’s just a narrow column fight if the option is taken away from you. Most of these narrows take away interesting sniping spots and such.
2 Likes
The majority playing just drive straight until they find an enemy.
1 Like
Most people drives in a straigth line to the nearest cap to die.
Sorry, I have corrected my response. I must have been distracted. The majority can still drive straight, but at least those with more than just a W key can use it if the maps have flanking potential.
1 Like
at br 10.+ this maps are a cancer
and no, the majority of people hate small maps, at br 10.0+ first.
1 Like
Aka Spawn camping. Such a scummy move.
And yes, I am joking. But also not as to the majority wanting quick face brawls (who game is for due to being a majority) and the many complaints of spawns camped (not on about ranged snipe spots on spawns) when this was probably due to a failure to cover flanks. The players seemingly want all of this.
So, after trawling through the year old thread I do not see much about what the vocal minority here do want and a guide on how maps should be and a rough shot at what they would look like.
(I agree with the sentiment of this topic, you can see I made my choice on involvement due to how WT has evolved, but mostly it is “I don’t like” but with nothing positive to add, aka what a good map/mode would look like. So far I have never seen anyone discuss what would work).
1 Like
If You ask me, I think that objectives should have a logic behind them - like you should capture a supply/ammo/fuel depot, rather than a plain open field. It might also be a good idea to make the capture area larger.
I would also make the each team’s spawn point(s) also a capture point(s) - so that they can also just get back here to resupply, but also a way to end battles quicker - all points captured = battle ends.
And, in general, I think there should be more capture points.
Whereas the topology, I’d need to open a map editor some day, to have worthwhile suggestions.
1 Like
Gaijin should just get AI to generate maps for them.
It would be much better than what we have now
1 Like
4km maps are good, but are too rare and that ruin gameplay at high tiers
1 Like
that is because with the switch to the new forum, the old map critic thread was shut down.
that thread has had loads of constructive feedback, suggestions and ideas to improve existing maps with small changes as well as how to improve overal map design in the game in general, with a wide variety of design ideas laid out in great detail.
its just that gaijin never cared to even look properly into the thread, let alone implement some of the more general and fundamental changes in their approach to map design.
we as a community have provided a plethora of ideas and discussed in detail what could work, how much effort/time it would take, what potential compromises of different ideas/time required could look like, their pro’s and con’s and so on.
and that is true for both air and ground maps, for realistic and simulator versions.
let alone all the feedback, suggestions and ideas for air realistic enduring confrontation, a gamemode that would a majority of problems with the maps for air RB entirely just by its fundamental difference in gameplay.
