What IS a good map? Who has a list of detailed requirements?

I see dozens of threads over time whining about how maps are bad. But I’ve honestly never once (here or on reddit or in game or anywhere) seen someone clearly lay out and commit to what they think DOES make a good map?

I invite people to give actually constructive lists of everything a good map needs in this thread, and/or better yet: even diagram out an example.

Maybe everyone wants the same thing. Maybe you find out that “the perfect map” to you would actually also get dissed and shredded by others just as much as Gaijin’s. Either way, it would be a lot more useful than just complaining about everything.


Fulda, European Province after rework

Large maps with terrain for flanking and positioning to snipe

People will complain European Province of old was “better” because they could see clear in to the enemy spawn those people are non-serious

The reworked European Province is much better


They don’t. There’s quite a large portion of the player base that wants the CoD knife fights and Gaijin caters to them. Unfortunately as more and more modern technology is added it makes the game more and more unplayable for certain vehicles, take the Bradley. Extremely effective on long maps with cover, completely useless in CQC maps.


Fulda, European province; These are good maps.

The large version of Sinai is a good example of what new top tier maps should be as well, but it’s ancient and deserves a rework since it suffers from the same shooting from spawn to spawn of old European province.


A map style like the one pictured above, with plenty of time, space, correct vehicles/variants for the battle, and more than 3 caps, not some primative, arcadey, run-and-gun DOD-style cookie cutter mosh pit with a cap or two placed exactly in the middle. This isn’t the late 1990s, gaijin. Unfortunately, maps like this are completely beyond this game since WT is a primative, arcadey, run-and-gun DOD-style mosh pit…


I think a good map is one that gives players choice and flexibility with reasonable balance of distance and cover from the spawns. What this means is having a map that really allows players to move and fire from cover at both CQB and distance. Fulda is a good example of this giving players some flexibility in how they play.

A bad map is one that lets you fire from spawn to spawn or even from one capture point to the other. The worst are those built like WoT or a MOBA in which there are essentially only 3 lanes and everyone just stacks up in those lanes because thats the only place of cover while everywhere else is just a death sentence. Lastly some maps have minor and major advantages depending on which side you spawn which should be balanced.

I generally like most of the maps with the exception to the new smaller ones, (e.g. Why is a boundary in the middle of the city on the Alaska map.

I really like the Aral Sea map but 1/3 of it is almost never played because it’s wide open from the middle, which is why maybe 1 or 2 people only spawn on that side. Aral Sea is a good example that players can literally drive through the middle of the map and neever be shot and immediately spawn camp either spawn, especially from the south. Cool map, bad design. Fire Arc is similar neat map until no one can go A or flank because the CQB hill can just shoot everyone so what’s the point of even having all that map.

Now that I think about it, most maps have some glaring issue with them, its not the whole design concept but an aspect of them that needs worked.


The image does not indicate scale, I can’t actually see any difference here except “12 cap points”. Can you elaborate on why 12 cap points is better than 3?

It is a big sucker. I recall that it took at least maybe eight and a half minutes to drive from one end to the other in a speedy tank. More objectives obviously increases tactics/gameplay rather than invariably funneling you into some ill-placed capzone planted exactly in the middle of a shooting gallery

I don’t think there will be much consensus on what people consider a good map. It depends too much on people’s playstyle and which tiers they prefer.
For example, and contrary to the previous two answers, I detest Fulda so much that it is the map I have chosen to ban.
If I had to pick some maps that I like, it would probably be Tunesia, Maginot Line and Kuban.

The extremely large version of Tunisia is poggers.

Naturally it offers opportunities for long range combat, but also has enough cover that flanking is possible. The lack of concealment is also a plus for me, it makes it much easier to search for potential snipers before crossing an open piece of ground (Unlike large Volokolamsk, which is a nightmare for anyone who doesn’t camp)

I like this, you can pick between close quarters combat and sniping


I agree with this 100%. 3 lanes is just not fun and gets stale as that is basically everymap, if the future of War Thunder were to feature larger maps then they have to add more dynamic cap points near spawn where people can respawn on (and cut down driving time to the main battlefield).

This would create some sort of frontline and it would address many issues with the game, mostly spawn camping and more area for SPAA to move around.

1 Like

I would consider Arctic, Iberian Castle, and Abandoned town to be good maps. They are all balanced, and they don’t force you to be exposed or unexposed.

Depends on the tier really.

Firstly, it is worth mentioning the sort of rock-paper-scissors idea that is present at lower tiers.
Medium Tanks > Light Tanks > Tank Destroyers > Heavy Tanks > Medium Tanks
Ideally, the “perfect” map would accommodate each type of tank equally, but there is so much overlap in some aspects that it might just be outright impossible.
That being said, for lower tier maps (1.0 - 7.0, or in time period up until ~1960) you need to have a mixed CQB-long range map with more emphasis on the CQB, due to the massive prevalence of heavy tanks, which are extremely difficult to deal with at range but can still dish out damage. While that is the point of heavy tanks in general, as a gameplay mechanic it would be unfun for everyone on the other side of said heavy tank. Picture it as trying to damage a car with a stapler from 1km away, it just won’t work. So, to “counter” said heavy tanks, maps need to have some form of flank route(s) in the map that are accessible to both teams, so that it isn’t a cakewalk for one team or the other to just setup on a corner and snipe the entire other team.
However, designing maps in this way sets a sort of “barrier to entry” to anything that doesn’t have enough armor to stand up in a frontal fight, which means tank destroyers, light tanks and, to a point, even medium tanks, would be glorified piñatas for the heavy tanks. So the map would have to also be designed to incentivize/reward playing the riskier tanks, maybe with flank routes or sniping spots or just having an SL/RP bonus to playing them (which isn’t part of map design, but still worth mentioning).
A good example, in my opinion, of this sort of design is Advance to the Rhine. It mixes CQB and at least a semblance of long range pretty well, allowing for both playstyles and most vehicles to be effective. Imo if the sightlines were a bit longer or the map an extra 50m bigger (in all directions) it would be great, and it is already a pretty good map. A bad example is Finland, being just three lanes with little to no movement between them, and not much room for light tanks or tank destroyers to be effective in.

For top tier, (7.3+) range is the name of the game. Combine extremely accurate guns with extremely powerful rounds and you get the potential for most hits on any target to be devastating. So being at a range where getting those hits is actually somewhat of a challenge is ideal, to allow for avoidance of being hit (by changing speed/direction, etc.) and also allow for sniping.
The problem here is that having one side be able to control a powerful sniper’s nest style location can effectively lock down that area of the map from one side, potentially even denying the opposing team a spawn point (or multiple in bad cases). Assuming equal matchups, this would be countered by going a different direction, but on some maps (European Province, Poland, etc.) that just isn’t possible due to the sniper’s nest area providing an overlook of the entire map. So that would need the map to be hilly to provide defilades for tanks to hide in to approach enemies, and allow support vehicles like IFVs to be able to “ambush” enemy MBTs. However, if you make the map too hilly, either with hills too steep or the top of the hills being too open, or various other issues, you’d end up with just another “lane” map where everyone is directed down a very small area to avoid being shot at by the other team, turning the game into a massive CQB battle when both sides get nearer to each other. Think of Arctic Base or whatever it’s called, practically no one goes up the “trench” hills because you risk being shot from basically the opposite spawn. That forces everyone down the “trenches” to the cap points to stay in cover, which while a good thing is also forcing CQB encounters that not every vehicle at top tier can handle.
A good map for top tier, in its current state, is the new large version of Tunisia. It has long open sightlines with enough hills to safely hide behind practically anywhere on the map, along with a small (but not insignificant) CQB area in the form of the center of the map and the towns on the edges.

In general, what to avoid is the three-lane map design similar to those found in FPS games. There needs to be ways to move between the primary points of contact easy, to both encourage different playstyles but also to avoid stagnation.

Another thing that may be a consideration in map design is the cap points. Generally, the cap points in this game are just CQB fests at all tiers. For top tier especially, a switch to a mode like Battle where you have to “push” into where the enemy is waiting while they simultaneously do the same elsewhere is the kind of style of game you would want. It combines range (the waiting) with CQB (the pushing) pretty decently, and implemented well on maps with cover, and also probably moving the cap away from the spawn in some capacity, would make for an interesting game for both the attackers and the defenders of any given area. It would also encourage teamwork in a way, because if the enemy team is breaking through a certain area of the map, it would be prudent to have a few friendlies go over there to “hold down the fort.” Obviously, describing map design in text is hard, especially when the maps are for a very niche game style that is hard to balance around.

1 Like

I hope that at some point we will fight for something other than A, B, C on the maps.
The maps are sometimes not that bad. The recent adjustments are annoying because players are quickly locked out of areas.
On the other hand, the developers hardly need to bother building large maps if 95% of players only ever use a 250 metre wide corridor.
The maps are sometimes not that bad. The recent adjustments are annoying because players are quickly locked out of areas.
On the other hand, the developers hardly need to bother building large maps if 95% of players only ever use a 250 metre wide corridor.

A good map offers various tactical possibilities. And the different capabilities of the individual vehicles have to be taken into account somewhere. I don’t expect every map to take everything into account. That’s what makes it so appealing.
For example, it is difficult to find a place with Russian vehicles due to the poor gun depression. However, this also makes for a tactical attraction because the player is required to compensate for this disadvantage with their own skills.

Small maps like abandoned factory, advance to the Rhine or eastern Europe.

1 Like

So it’s good when there is billions of bushes and you don’t see no one, + drive 5+ minutes to combat?

1 Like

The best maps are the ones that have heli spawn points in clear view so you can smack them with a missile the moment they spawn.

We should have more of those.

Is that one of the RO tank maps?

I loved most of those!

What nation do you play?