I will answer with a question:
Is providing support for my team that is usually a main attacking force (and thus helping my team and contributing to victory)… a bad thing? (Those people provide necessary intelligence by spotting and firepower with snipers taking out bunker mg crews)
Is defending team being forced to use a bit of defensive strategies to prevent those players from doing so… a bad thing?
Tactics are giving this game so many oportunities. They should be further developed and encouraged, not taken away.
The answer is obvious. I feel weird when asked like you want to accuse us of deliberately degrading gameplay.
I think you understand that we will not break our game. Because she’s ours.
But if you are a game designer, there are many factors to keep in mind, such as team scores and session times. And avoid situations in which a workaround can take half the session time.
I never said that it is being done on purpose, or intention behind it is to destroy your game. That would be dumb.
Problem is, that by encouraging more narrow meatgrinders for the sake of action, you also unintentionally sacrifice some more aspects such as variety or tactical gameplay (for example, narrow and small style of maps encourages using automatic weapons, while your awesome variety of different weapons pretty much falls into the dust because it is not possible to utilize their strenghts on the battlefield.
Lets take example from War Thunder´s “variety” again because problem is very similar.
The variety is there, but most of it is simply not usable due to the environment. And it is such a shame.
Actually I already wrote about this map while pointing out its strenghts and weaknesses.
Following discussion however gave me an impression that those weaknesses are actually perceived as strenghts by developer team, thus I used comparisons of other maps/campaigns or even games to prove those points.
Also I really appreciate that you engaged in active discussion with us. Thank you.
I may disagree, even closest battles on moskow offer at least 3 ways to attack (front and sides) and sometimes are essential to win. However if people don’t use them properly or get into position and start camping instead of actually moving forward - it often leads to a defeat. That’s exactly a kind of scenario where ‘optional tacticts’ can harm your team, as they could perform better even by playing it straight forward. You can call this ‘meatgreander’ - its fine, but thats still fun and not necessarily worse than what you call ‘tactical’ gameplay. This is war game, this game is not about how good you flank with your single soldier and how much people you sniped, its about team push and massacre afterall, while pushing (rushing using tactics and various ways) is clearly a contrary of flanking+ambushing+camping.
After 2hours, around 5 matches (lonefighter only) on that map, I think this map is “fun”. Because it’s more complex than other open field maps, but is not that complex that turn the map into a maze.
Sector A and C is very big, nice! Not a single room that turn a sector into a meat grinder. B is too small, consider expand B’s border to some nearby rooms.
This map MAY too small for full 7 member infantry squad mode. But for 20vs20 lonefighter mode. The size is “perfect”. But vehicle only player may find difficult to play.
Church map
This map has zero open fields, there is not much to talk about.
I would love to make the open area around the village playable with capture points or make it a part of an Invasion map
Monastery
Invasion is great but Conquest wasn’t needed, please make it lone fighters exclusive
Lake map
The area around the B point can be considered open but trees massively reduce the openness. Areas around A and C are absolute meatgrinders,
Again, I suggest allowing us to play on open fields around the map
Village
I always forget the name of this invasion map so…sorry.
This map is full of useless trenches and they just work for attackers to dump grenades on defenders.
The part where attackers have to capture that barn (3th base) is good but everything else is a meaningless meatgrinder.
Spawns on this map should be more far from each other and the area where attackers spawn should be on different position (instead of being 10 meters away from the trench)
And I again want open areas around the map to be playable.
The town map (forgot the name again, sorry)
This map should be only for lone fighters
Manor
The map is very narrow and SMG is the only usable weapon.
This map has a potential to be open, the area where the castle is should be just a part of the whole map (like Chateau le Bosq) and the areas around the map can be open field paradises
This map could also be an Invasion map
My other ideas
Instead of reworking the old maps, we can also make new ones from the parts of the main Moscow map. These maps don’t need to be only located in villages, they could be open battlefields too
That’s all I could think of, I might write another answer if I find anything to add
Punishes any other squad due to lack of close quarters combat power and as a result:
Punishes you for not having that prem assaulter squad, further pushing the P2W nature of this game
Punishes vehicle players as they can’t get inside of the battle area indoors
Punishes anti-vehicle players as there are no vehicles
No rewards for going into the courtyard
B cap is too small, makes it way too easy to predict where the defenders are
B cap only has 2 ways of entry from inside the manor, with 1 more from the outside, further limiting this
B cap can not be defended well, and as such, turns into a meat grinder
My suggestions:
Move the B cap into the courtyard, or on the courtyard side of the manor. If the latter, also make it 2 floors, instead of 1, so the balcony area also counts towards capping.
Agreed
Agreed
Or add some trenches to move between areas more easily
Imo this is fine
This one is also a meatgrinder if defenders set up MGs or tanks
The town map is actually my favorite and imo should stay as is
i agree moscow is too small, because they don’t learn from their direct competition like hell let loose or others, they have huge maps and people plan great strategies, or batlefield itself, people love big independent maps then go for it means, medium,
but at least they let the tanks not be so evident in their route and others, I want to play my tank without being forced to go through places that a tanker would never go because of the risk that is run against the AT infantry.
Much more open maps would make the AI feel out of the way, and this should be your main concern, given that what differentiates them from their competition is the AI and the vehicles and both feel awful on closed maps like today’s
I love how they manage to make the Normandy and want a similar thing in Moscow
But maps in Enlisted shall never be the same as in hell let loose
Enlisted (Normandy) takes away everything boring about HLL (such as lack of soldiers, 30 minute walk to be killed out of nowhere…) and makes a great yet realistic ww2 experience
But I would always choose hell let loose map over the Enlisted Moscow map because Moscow feels like tiny CoD WW2 maps with 20 times more soldiers
I think devs should give us a big open map once to try ourselves but wait this should not be done by making the by making the battles 2 vs 2 in the already existing map lol
), There is not a single open map in Moscow