And of course, design maps to cater to a variety of gameplay preferences. The solution here is relatively simple: re-introduce the tiered map rotation, where certain maps are limited to certain tiers, and create more maps like Fulda that are designed around high tier tank gameplay. Small maps simply do not allow this flexibility-what is someone who wants to snipe in their Challenger supposed to do on Advance to the Rhine?
There's also the fact that larger maps can be designed to cater to both types of players: by having a section of the map more akin to the small maps some players like, and having a section of the map more akin to the larger maps other players prefer.
Inevitably, players will run out of dislikes and bans for the larger maps, if they do not want to play on them. There's also the fact that we have ~25 1x1km-2x2km maps, and ~5 large-ish maps. Gaijin's statistics cannot account for players who would prefer larger maps if they were better designed in game, or if the game was better designed for them. However, what percentage of players would prefer larger maps, were it not for poorly protected spawns we have on most of them, or the often-frustrating presence of CAS? Many of us can think of players we know who fit this description perfectly. It may be the case that many players do indeed prefer shorter ranged, most fast paced gameplay at higher tiers. Why players make these decisions, is unknown to Gaijin. All Gaijin knows is what maps players like, dislike, and ban (if they pay up and buy premium of course). However, as is often the case with Gaijin's statistics, the numbers don't tell the whole story. At the top rank players like both - big and also compact maps and compact maps even more. Statistics of the bans and dislikes shows that it isn’t the case. Gaijin will say this is the case, such as here, from an October 2020 Q&A: Now you might say: there's a map preference feature, surely the map selection at top tier is reflective of what the players want. We even have kill streaks in the form of player controlled aircraft and helicopters, and of course the recently added tactical nuke. It's like playing Modern Warfare 2, except with much worse hit detection, and much fatter operators. Ping and sound whoring are your biggest advantages, and conventional tanking tactics such as playing hull down, gunnery, and map knowledge are of little use.
Now imagine these vehicles thrust onto maps designed when War Thunder had nothing more modern than a King Tiger in game. Imagine, if you will, a 50-60 ton steel vehicle that can comfortably cruise at ~45kph on difficult terrain, can easily identify targets at long range with thermal optics, and engage them with high velocity APFSDS and a laser rangefinder. No, my issue with high high tier tank gameplay in War Thunder stems almost entirely from the maps. Not even the ever-static game modes bother me. Nor is it truly the strange additions or non-additions we have had over the years, such as the lack of a T-54A/B for Russia (but China gets them!), or the seemingly endless stream of 8.7-9.3 German tanks, or even the suspicious omission of the Marder 1. It's not the buggy hit detection, or the inconsistent post pen damage, especially when you hit viewing blocks or optics, that bothers me. While I have found these vehicles fascinating for years, and marvel at the lovely models we have in game, the gameplay has always been lacking. I am also writing this from a sleep-addled haze of hate and frustration-so this should feel right at home with any students and/or procrastinators here.Īs some of you know, I've had a long time love/hate relationship with high tier (BR 8.3+) tanks in this game. Two disclosures first, I have this flaired as 'Drama' even though I am mostly writing this with the context of Ground RB and Ground SB.
0 kommentar(er)
