(8) Road To Arnhem

The latest version of Road to Arnhem has recently been added to the game (Oct-2019).

(8) ROAD TO ARNHEM
This version has been greatly reworked with the help of Sturmpanther and Sander93. The goal was to make a larger sized map with a lot of flanking options.


Most 4v4 maps are centered on the initial fuel battles. For this map we chose to place the munitions and major point cutoffs in the middle. So players had the option of trying to spearhead thru defenses on the fuel, or flank around and cutoff the enemy resources while gaining a munition advantage. Buildings placed near the cutoffs can be used by infiltration units to harass as well.



The map layout is very open. Allowing units to move side to side. Many areas were also opened up so flanking units could retreat safer north/south. We wanted to reward flanks any way we could.


Currently the map has two large roads that are red cover. One road runs North/South the other road runs East/West. These roads are designed to get vehicles on the field quickly and let these vehicles quickly move side to side for attacks.


One way to look at a maps size is the distances to major parts of the map.
Base-Base The distance from your base to the enemy base.
Fuel-Fuel The distance between fuels. since most fights are over the fuels having a large fuel distance will make the map feel like two separate 2v2s.
Vp-Vp The farthest distance between victory points.
Far-Far The farthest distance between the side points. This is usually Fuel or VP distances.

MAP	Base-Base	Fuel-Fuel	Vp-Vp	Far-Far
Arnhem	395m	267m	418m	418m
Steppes	440m	193m	370m	440m

Looking good, will check it out later.

Now in map pool. There is cover everywhere on this map. It has very little actual neutral ground where you can punish your opponet for being out of cover. You can jump cover to cover with little punishment.

Overall width of the map is too small for 8 players IMO. It feels maybe just above the width or crossroads or rails and metal, but with many more players. It turns into an HMG + indirect war/blobfest with arty pieces. Very difficult to push schwers once they're down.

The "flanking routes" seem to be rather easy to bunker up which forces your opponet into indirect.

Overall width of the map is too small for 8 players IMO. It feels maybe just above the width or crossroads or rails and metal, but with many more players.

Thanks for getting some dialog going. Much appreciated.



The widest part of the map at the front line is 566 meters. Which is very close to Essen Steelworks and General Mud. Steppes is about 600m but much of that area is blocked off.

For comparison:
Crossroads is approx 242m
Rails and Metal is 250m
Redball is 309m

The road running across the map does not leave room for area separation at the front. So the front line may feel smaller than it is since you can easily rotate towards attackers?

Most matches I have seen so far:
- Each side VP and fuel have one person fighting over it.
- Very few flanks are attempted. Usually MG, sniper, and mortar battles.

These games support your theory that it feels smaller than it is to some extent.

Thanks for getting some dialog going. Much appreciated.



The widest part of the map at the front line is 566 meters. Which is very close to Essen Steelworks and General Mud. Steppes is about 600m but much of that area is blocked off.

For comparison:
Crossroads is approx 242m
Rails and Metal is 250m
Redball is 309m

The road running across the map does not leave room for area separation at the front. So the front line may feel smaller than it is since you can easily rotate towards attackers?

Most matches I have seen so far:
- Each side VP and fuel have one person fighting over it.
- Very few flanks are attempted. Usually MG, sniper, and mortar battles.

These games support your theory that it feels smaller than it is to some extent.

Well I know players didn't utilize the farthest left and right flank routes because they were either A) bunkered, or B) mined. I think the numerous hedges make the games feel very small, unlike mud. Mud feels very open and is one of the largest maps in pool if I had to guess

The factions/commanders with early assault troops get the maximum benefit. I just played a 4 v 4 here. I was soviets airborne but i was constantly being harassed by assault grens and sturms using pio sight. Later on stg volks and shreck pgrens. My point is this map greatly benefits the early asualt troops to such an extend that enemy isn't able to recover. Especially with wider arc mgs covering the advance in case you manage to get the enemy to retreat.

Also i had one AI on my side after this guy left after his sniper died.

The middle area of this map plays like crap due to the red cover road. For some reason the road has its maximum width in the middle yet there are 0 ways to work around it (no craters, no cover) unlike on the left or right side.

In general I dont understand why there must be a giant red cover area across the entire map that splits north from south side. It makes turtle play-styles with many MGs unnecessarily annoying to deal with

it's trash

The widest part of the map at the front line is 566 meters. Which is very close to Essen Steelworks and General Mud. Steppes is about 600m but much of that area is blocked off.

For comparison:
Crossroads is approx 242m
Rails and Metal is 250m
Redball is 309m

I'll start with the disclaimer that I haven't played the map yet, so make of this what you want, but looking at the numbers and the layout I have an idea why the map might feel narrow:

As you write in your starting post, in particular early game players tend to focus on resources over VPs.
So, everything relevant will happen between the two fuel points and their distance - according to you - is basically the width of a 2v2 map.

I guess what happens is that the game starts by two players per team going to each of the fuels. Whoever secures the fuel for their side plonks a MG or bunker on the VP next to it and forgets about those parts of the map for the most of the rest of the match. So, all the action is basically happening on a relatively narrow strip.

Steppes has an even closer distance of the fuel points, true. Difference though is that the northern half of the map not only contains two VPs but also two muni points and several other territory points that you can't simply semi-secure with a bunker and a mine...

Also, none of the other territory point seems to really act as a cut-off. Well, ok, I rephrase that:

For example if we look at the fuel in the north-west: For the southern team C1 acts kind of like a cut-off, but if the team loses this point for an extended amount of time they probably have lost anyways, so it is not actually a cut-off from a resource perspective (might still work for a "close the pocket", but otherwise...).

For the northern team C6 is the intended cut-off, right? Now, the problem is that if the northern team attacks that fuel straight up (or from the center), they will have control over C6 anyways. It only would be an endangered cut-off if they indeed flanked around the North-western corner and basically attack the fuel from the VP.

So, basically you are better off with concentrating your forces in the center and attack the resource points from the center outwards. This way you will have no issues with cut-offs, have automatically control over the munitions, can help each other more easily and potentially even pressure the cut-offs C1&C2 if the opposing team gives up the center and concentrates on the VPs in the corners.

TLDR: Simply having VPs in the corners is probably too little incentive for players to commit a lot of forces to those areas so everybody will clash in the strip between the fuels.

Show Spoiler

I think that's a fair analysis of how you should play the map. However I do find that in practice it's pretty much impossible to lock down all angles of approach to the Fuel, cutoff and VP's so it provides good opportunities to harass vps or Flank from whatever angle you choose.
Haven't played a lot of games on it so far but it seems to have a nice flow so far as a result of this dynamic.

I do think the mid Vp red cover should be removed. You are forced to cap vps by game mechanics no reason to punish players for doing so. Additionally you can cap in green cover on one side but not on the other so that should be adjusted to be symmetrical.

Wonder, when people will notice that the middle is the most important part. Double muni and easy way to go for cutoff and flanks.

So, basically you are better off with concentrating your forces in the center and attack the resource points from the center outwards.

As stated above, 95% of matches I have spectated are just head butting matches within the fuel sector. No attempts at all are made to flank. This map is like General Mud or Steppes, you need patience and smart flanking. Most players just rush the fuel and headbutt a wall. Gradually I am seeing people come around to it as they learn the map.

I cant tell you how many matches I have watched waterfalls of infantry running straight into an MG they already know is there. Where if they just moved 30 meters to the left or right, they could easily over run it. Or matches where people start spamming indirect then get run over by mobile infantry. This is a fast and mobile map. It shouldnt be played like Red Ball.

Most matches I watch, the player who pushes the center gets an extra muni and VP. They end up having a muni income almost double the enemy. You are also then in a spot to attack the cutoffs.

The first few days in rotation, White Ball was a little more popular than Road to Arnhem(R2A). Then it started to switch and Arnhem was becoming more popular. I have a recent screenshot where 5 of 9 top ranked matches was R2A.