there are maps where people already do this; this is why jets and helis exist in Ground RB. or atleast one of the reasons, to ensure you can’t just hold down a section of map because its easy.
Because Gaijin knows their target audience, and that target audience seems to be incapable of focusing on something for more than a few minutes. So if there’s larger maps and longer battles? That target audience will hate it and will not play and not spend money.
A lot of people still operate under the misconception that Gaijin cares about the game; they don’t, really. They care about the bottom line. So anything that makes that bottom line grow, is considered good. Up to and including sneaky psychological trickery to get you to spend.
Gaijin knew damn well what would happen with those 10.3 premiums they sell; new players will buy one thinking they get to omgwtfpwn and look good doing it, and all they’re really doing is just being cannon fodder - and get hella frustrated. But since they spent good money, they’re not just going to walk away.
Gaijin knows damn well their map changes (removal of sniper spots, flattening the terrain, blocking map areas with any sort of elevation, and so on) aren’t popular - and if they claim it’s for game play reasons, they’re lying, because it’s for another reason altogether: noobs getting shot from a sneaky spot tend to complain, loudly, and this doesn’t look good.
Plus those noobs may leave and not spend on the snail and that just won’t do. So now every map follows that good old World of Tanks cookie cutter formula so that doing up new maps doesn’t cost them as much, and we can all be funneled into a brawlfest so matches can have a quick turnover (usually by way of snowball) which leads to frustration which leads to people making dumb choices like maybe getting yet another FOMO premium because maybe that’ll take the frustration away.
For instance that Holland map? It’s laughable. It’s Poland, rotated, with some new art assets (ugly ones at that). I’m Dutch, and the Netherlands? It doesn’t have hills. Or canals like that. Or really anything. That’s actually what ticks me off because a real Holland map would actually be interesting to play if they pick the right area to model.
I’m all for large maps with interesting terrain, but I’m not holding my breath. Gaijin has decided we must all brawl, and so we shall, because after all, the snail knows what we want, and if we don’t know what we want or don’t like their idea of what we want, that’s what we’re going to get because in the end, it’s all about that bottom line.
8 Likes
No you are not alone. I would like to see larger maps since it gives players the ability to think through game plays and out maneuver opponents, which kinda nulfies clear biased algorithms towards certain nations at these small maps where we see in game cancelation of fired shots and around the corner non rendering of tanks at the expense of others.
Like i said, Red Desert, a map that can only be played at high teir, you never see because it is at the top of a lot of people’s ban list, same thing with Pradesh
2 Likes
What else would they be? They are a company who has to justify decisions to stakeholders, and I can promise you that if you go and tell your investors that “we are making decisions based on what a tiny percentage of our consumers say on the forums”, those investors are not going to stay very long.
This is the great thing about War thunder, is that there is already Arcade-style gameplay and has been for many years, Arcade is the most played gamemode, then realistic, and Sim has its own little community. What people play in game already shows exactly what you have said. War Thunder IS, and always has been, an arcadey shooter, the mechanics of actually playing the game are completely arcadey in all modes apart from sim. War Thunder has never been a realistic Simulator, it has always been aimed primarily at the casual playerbase who are interested in Military vehicles, and want a multiplayer experience including them. Having the vehicles made as realistic as possible, and adding other mechanics to improve the realism of the game is great for Gaijin because it means they can expand their marketing to try and encompass the casual players who just want good gameplay with some iconic vehicles, and the much smaller community who want a realistic simulator at all costs in terms of the playabilty of the game. To be honest, it looks like they have done a great job if the sort of people who talk on the forums are anything to go by, and they have done it without actually seriously damaging the gameplay with overwrought realistic mechanics or arcadey additions that take away the autheniticity of the historical side of the game. There is still plenty to improve in the game, dont get me wrong, but the core of the game, mechnics wise is very strong.
What. Dude, we had Short-Medium, Medium-Long, Short-Long ranged maps in the past.
1 Like
Weren’t you the same guy who made a rant post thread, and within the babble essay stated you were a one-death leaver? Which i responded immediately and made your claims invalidated because you were contributing to the issue by participating in it.
I still like to watch my old videos from 2016ish (± 1 or 2 years). There was gameplay, there was communication, there was movement and there was strategy (and there was bad map design back then too of course). Then they halved the spawn costs and everything went towards arcade-WoT style gameplay.
If I look at what Kursk used to be, I get sad. You were able to truely snipe at 2000m.
I think the entire map is not even 2000m total anymore. They reduced the zoom of optics over the time, despite there being examples of vehicles with the original optics.
I get it: people don’t just want to die after driving a bit. But do we really have to turn every map into tunnel maps where moving with a light or any other vehicle is practically not possible anymore? :(
I support larger maps for even lower tier tanks. It just gives more options and gives combat more flavor in my opinion. But I realize we also need more to do then just capping stuff. It should also not just be a circle on the map. It should be a town, a outpost, a port, equipment, ect. I would love to see that.
4 Likes
Why? Because of all the Kids that can’t wait!
I absolutely hate the maps in this game, besides the fact that 90% have uptier vehicles
1 Like
This. Engine I have heard is difficult to make maps for too, which should be solved with long term investment when you are making the money they do. You have a one of one game that no one else matches, but have the worst maps of any game I have ever played in 30 years.
Why?
Yeah, you nailed it. The amount of progress on this game is similar to Star Citizen. Glorified Vehicle packs and some spreadsheet changes are called an update, they hype up the Star citizen suckers each time about massive changes/areas coming, but it never does and just like here, almost no actual content or large mode additions or other changes, because any changes to the engine incur massive tech debt. So maybe we can call this ‘War Citizen’ lmao.
And low tier also needs to retain the map size or allow SBMM to have bigger maps.
Any of the new tiny CQC maps should be BR1 at most. WW2 German doctrine for many vehicles recommend an 800m engagement range at minimum, sure that wasn’t always possible but it was reccomended for a good damn reason. Their armour sucks in CQC in most BRs and there in lies the German Team problem when all else is equal. Most maps you can’t do that range with BR2-4 stuff and its getting worse.
@T3ddy4
Adding vehicle assets and spreadsheet changes isn’t really an update when compared to most games. Look at Hello Games updates, it’s not even fair comparison in features/additions vs WT. Most WT updates are a vehicle pack and a minor spreadsheet tweaking dressed up as an update. Some bug fixes, etc sometimes. Bug fixes are probably the most updated part of the whole lot. If you like those ‘updates’, you should definitely play Star Citizen, you’ll love it.
2 Likes
Same guy - also you didn’t “made” anything; and while I am indeed now contributing to the exact issue I was ranting about, it boils down to “if you can’t beat them, join them”. I see no fun in playing through a 6 vehicle lineup if you already know how the match is going to go.
Or are you going to tell me straight faced that you do enjoy it?
And what, if anything, does that have to do with this thread? Or are you one of those people who need to pull in all sorts of irrelevant stuff to attempt to make a point? You do have one, right? A point, I mean? No? Oh… okay.
Anyway. Go rouse your rabble somewhere else :)
I quite like Holland now I have played it a bit.OK it is stupid having WW2 tanks on a 21st map but that is a major failing of War Thunder anyway.
I think the main issue with Holland is the red line time out thing.
The river should be physically walled off or placed at the edge of the map if they dont want us to go past the River edge.The narrow constrains of the river is actually one of the most fun parts of the map and having it at the side of the map as a risky flank option is good but the way they did it with lame red lines is terrible and much hated as we know.
One issue with having to drive so far after dying is the shortage of game play time ,you just don’t have time to start again and that maybe why so many don’t bother to re-spawn a second time especially in a slower vehicle.
Simply we need era related maps not WW2 on big modern maps or Top tier on old WW2.
So after 12 years ,when will Gaijin address this or rather what do we have to do to get them to address this?
1 Like
In the past, you would reach higher levels and see that it was shit and go back and try to have fun in the second war again, nowadays you can’t even do that because the maps are garbage, the time is rushed for mini games, and it’s full of light vehicles from other eras and shitty artillery that swallows ghost shots, I’m disappointed, because it was once a game synonymous with realism but deep down it has nothing to do with realism, in a realistic CQC way, without putting historically enemy nations together with the same nations
1 Like
If you call tight corridor wot type of gameplay as realistic then you need to check your knowledge about “realism” dude.
1 Like
Define the average player .It may not be what you think it is.
This post was made for a reason but it shows how old the player base actually is.
It may be fair to say that many of those who want fast silly games don’t even play War Thunder as its too grounded in realism and technicality upon first glance.
And you expect a rant post to magically change anything? The 2 posts you wrote just single yourself out for other folks to poke fun at you. The fact that you decided on 1 vehicle and left does what folks expect you to do, which is being a liability. You’re not solving a problem you’re just making it worse. You’re setting an example. By being the example that other people will start following. The results of matches will result in a one-side winning by default. Which will lead to you or someone else making another post on the forums that has nothing of Importance and the cycle will repeat itself for eternity.
1 Like
I know very well that the Average player is generally an adult with a life and other time committments, but like i said, these players:
The Idea that the community is made up of kiddies with no attention span isnt something I have ever pushed, and although there is some truth to it, that section of the playerbase is probably pretty small, all those people are too busy brainrotting on tiktok to play games.
I understand what you are trying to say here, but the Dagor engine is built in house, and run by Gaijin, so you have no clue actually how much effort goes into adding things to the game. The Vehicle assets might not be so complicated, but the changes to the mechanics, the shell bursting simulation, the different functionality to the loadout screens, the new weapon systems and other systems that get implemented with different vehicles, custom loadouts for hundreds of different vehicles and so on could be any amount of time and effort, you or I have no idea. It certainly is comparable to adding fishing mechanics to no mans sky.
Firstly, this is what people ask for, so i’m not sure why you are surprised when this what is included, but this is also not really a true representation of what comes in each update. For example, in this most recent update we got a completely new weapon system mechanic, the GNSS bombs, we got a new UI setup for loadouts, the customisable reticlues system and a complete new system for damage to helicopters. All of that is more than just asset additions and spreadsheet changes, and there are most likely several changes Gaijin have made internally to the Dagor engine to accomodate all of this.
I have no interest in star citizen, never played it, probably never going to.
Just as a side note, i read the rest of your post and with what you are saying and asking for, it shows a clear lack of understanding about what War thunder is fundamentally. I agree in the general statement that there are plenty of bad maps in war thunder, but how about suggesting specific ways of fixing them, instead of just “bigger”, because then we will just have big poorly designed maps, and it doesnt solve the actual issue anyone has.
3 Likes
None of us can agree with what War Thunder is fundamentally ,I don’t think even Gaijin can anymore.it’s trying to be all things to all people at the same time and starting to fail miserably.
It went from a favourite to a pointless nonsense I just skip now.
That really was one map they totally gutted.