Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Keep in mind its a game and if maps were too big they it would be more driving than anything and people already ♥♥♥♥♥ about maps like maginot line enough. Odds are squares are 100x100 meters. Although its not very important. Never used the minimap to rangefind, instinct is much quicker
Most tanks are not designed for such close distances. I am not saying Arcade should have 4km x 4km, but if you saw my thread I created, I did the math and shown that, on average, around 56% of the total area compatable for tank combat is not used at all — completely wasted.
Take American Desert for example — it is 1.35x1.35km. Tbh, that is just next level pathetic, I have played infantry games with bigger maps. But anyways, the full map is actually 4km x 4km: literally 11% of the map is being used in all gamemodes. Arcade, Realistic, and Simulator even, from tanks like the T-26 to the T-80U. Frankly no map ever should be under 2x2km in Realistic Battles imo, but to put tanks with 1500 HP engines, 120mm smoothbore APFSDS stabilised guns, laser rangefinders, on a 1.35x1.35km map? That should be the full 4x4km map right there, yet it isn’t used in any gamemode. Even in Simulator — they could add a 10x10km map to Sb, and people would give a s***! But you can literally play 1.05x1.05km maps in SIMULATOR battles! Even at low tier, I think 1.35x1.35km is rediculous, it takes only a minute to get to the middle in the slowest tank in the entire game — much less your average tank. There is little room to flank, there is little room for any type of combat for barrel-to-barrel combat, which is very rare, statistically speaking most people don’t like these maps, they are very unbalanced — putting maps under 2x2km in a game like War Thunder is like putting CS:GO maps in games like Red Orchestra 2.
The issue is what mode you talking about? I know for a fact air RB has giant maps that take you like 10-15 minutes to drive to a bombing target then back to the runway to reload, and that is using diving to gain speed to flee from attackers/bomber hunters. In Tanks it can take you about 2-10 minutes to cross the map but varies on map.
I am not sure on the maps but in tanks you do get engments from 2k out in some maps just a bit hard to pull off in most modes. Ships I know for a fact are larger then boats I find myself swapping shells at 3km out more often then not when I hit destroyers or higher. And longer you go the more boring it gets as you find your self waiting like 5+ seconds just to see the shell splash. Not only at some point in real life you could fire beyond the horizon with spotters in some ships and I really don't want to deal with that noise.
But most players not the ones who sit around taking unoffical polls will say heck no. If you look at those poll numbers its not even fraction of the player count its alwasy like 100 which sounds big till you realize there is few thousand on a day in the game. Its like ones in other games i play they go "12 thousand players say they want this thing!" its like um it sold over a million copies that isn't even 2 percent of the players...
It just is common sense to not give 1250-1500 HP engined MBTs with stabilised 120-125 smoothbore APFSDS and 5-6km ranged ATGMs, laser rangefinders, etc. a map bigger than 1.05x1.05km. I have not seen very many Realistic and Simulator players say ‘gosh, I love having CQC arena sized maps 2/3rds of the time!’
2-3 minutes for the average map, f***ing time it before you join that lot “omg it takes 20 minutes!” I recommend not getting a date if 3 minutes is a long time for you.
I’m asking for bigger and better tank maps, I am not asking for every map to be 12 x 12 km Desert-Storm completely flat terrain style maps. When I ask for common sense to be applied to the matchmaker, don’t assume I mean ridiculous stuff like that.
There is no evidence that “12000 players” there for example, are not representative of the playerbase at whole. I have also seen people disagree with the minority, and say the same thing — I don’t see any evidence of a “silent majority” either. And then of course, even if it is a majority, to express your opinion and win in an election, you got to actually vote. And finally, “sold two million copies” — do you remember downloading this game for free, right?
And let’s say there is a “silent majority.” Most players play Arcade right? So why the actual f*** do they care what happens to Realistic and Simulator Battles? Why the f*** do you care what happens in Simulator, you don’t even play it? We could have 4x4km maps at Rank II and we’d love it!
But this isn’t representative of Realistic Battles. You have well over 3 times more AB battles played than RB, what other reason than “I want a slightly more arcade 2.0 mode” is there for saying Realistic Battles shouldn’t have a minimum size of 2x2km? That is a completely reasonable size. 3x3km would be better for all tiers, bigger at Rank 4/5+. It does not take “15 miNutES” to reach the battlefield, you would literally need 10x10km maps or so, and a Churchill. In fact, the biggest allowed map size in game, 4x4km, it does not often take more than two minutes before you start spotting enemies, for a low tier map with slower tanks. In fact, to put time into perspective for you — tank battles often don’t even last 5 minutes at high tier. You apparently don’t have any high tier vehicles I see, if you use the same username. To put into perspective what high tier is like, take a BT-7 out. It has a similar HP/t to the Type 90, and keep in mind, it even then has a lower top speed. Now imagine you instead of having a 45mm gun, you have a fully stabilised 120mm smoothbore that fires high velocity APFSDS, assisted by a 5km laser rangefinder. Now take for example, Advance to the Rhine: it takes 45-55 seconds to get to the other side of the map, not the center, spawncamping range ‘other side’.
I could keep going, but I think you get the point — I’m not asking for WW2: Online 70x70km maps, I’m literally asking for basic human common sense.
Between the spawn map, the minimap, and the map from a plane, all of the grid squares are labeled (and probably positioned) differently.
I tried calling targets from the spawn map before just to realize that what I called would be wrong from the minimap