• ElSamuel04
    115 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Since my mode is breakthrough i can help by give my opinion, on map in that game mode.

    -Arras work good in breakthrough, it feel balanced but i will give to attackers the spawn tank (almost 1) in the second sectors of the map.

    -Areodrome for many seems unbalanced on the first sectors (when british can spawn 5 tank) but i find fine since some round i've lost as attacker on the first sectors. Also when you attack second sectors , german can very good defend the hangar so is not easy come inside and win. The thing is i will prefere more fortification on A for german defenders on first sector.

    -Rotterdamn on breakthrough is very cool i find it fun when i play in infantry. As tankers you must fix the supply station on second sectors near poit A, it is in gray zone.

    -Hamada is the worst map instead in breakthrough ; The first sectors for attackers is a nightmare you have only one tank, and two planes, the problem is german have high terrain superiority and 2 stationary AA with two planes. Is easy for them get to get air superiority, and most of time you can conquer the first sector. It will result in a boring bleeding on ticket, and the battle seems infinite. I suggest you to remove the first sector, and start to the secont, with low tickect it feel more balanced there. Or you can give more assets to attackers like 3 tanks (is alredy hard to play tank in that map).

    - Hannut is very fun map, but it has one big problem at the start: Most of the time german cannot conquer the first sectors due the "camp" on the supply station in A area. Even if you destroy it , defenders can rebuild it fast and in some seconds they resupply and repair they tank in easy way, instead as attackers you get pushed back first or later. I suggest you to allocate this station OUTSIDE of A cap zon area Maybe protected with some fortification/building), so the defenders tank need to leave the cap zone to take ammo (and give the opportunity to german to push). As infantry on defenders i will appreciate more house and more buildable fortification. So is better give to the village more building and more covers for infantry. The rest of map is fine.

    Fijell i will introduce some assets maybe one planes for both, and stationary AA ofc. Maybe some cannons. and buildable trench for attackers!!

    Narvik seems ok.
  • X_Sunslayer_X
    1579 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    i get the complaint of new maps needing to be added. But i feel new maps wont fix any of the underlining issues the game has. sure it will be neat but visibility will not get any better. class balance will not improve weapon balance will not get addressed. i feel like this should be the order of business
    • net-code
    • class-balance
    • weapon-balance
    • visibility
    • new maps
    but that's just my opinion.
  • JCN66
    64 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Once BF1 was released, one thing I really did like was the maps, and there is lot of really great DLC maps too. One thing I don’t like in BF5 is the maps, well ok, Arras and Devastation are at least good. Of course I don’t like all the BF1 maps, but it is only good that there good variety of different maps to different tastes.

    Hopefully we will get linear (like Suez) and interior (like Fort de Vaux) maps to BF5 too, they have lot of friends. And more no planes maps. In this point where there is no good infantry weapon against planes at all, they give nothing to game from infantry point of view.

  • MatthewSkeet
    382 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 2019
    I only play breakthrough and occasional frontlines mainly as medic

    Arras - probably is in my top 3 maps.
    Point A (defender) can be sometimes a bit cumbersome especially when there are tanks pressing on it. the farm building can be knocked down in seconds. and you are without a cover. then the hill humpers can snipe you down and you cant do anything. What I would like to see here is giving the defenders a bit more area to approach that damn hill and take out snipers and camping tanks. this would force people to actually attack the objectives
    also the path between A and spawn (church) is too open and more often than not attackers block you from coming down to defend it.
    I think the worst bit about arras is the actual grass itself. in real life it would spread out as you move across it.... NOT STICK THROUGH YOU and still covering you. all you have to do is to prone in a random place and camp (that often happens at 3rd cap points (water mill and that last building before last cap point).

    Devastation - viability, viability, viability, viability, viability. yet is my 2nd of top3
    but. 1st A, B are great to defend and attack. I rarely had games where attackers were blocked from even reaching the B cap point although it does happen
    A/B/C caps the only issue I have is limited space to move around for defenders especially between A and Cathedral
    3rd A/B are good and balanced
    4th A/B (trains) I hate - I can never tell where from the defenders will come, there is just too many options in comparison to other cap points

    Fjel - yup I like it as well. but visibility is an issue here.... a lot and it's too short (just 4 caps)

    1st A/B points have way too much open space (especially A). While I manage to smoke myself in there 9/10 times, I should not have to. Hill humpers (support and recon) can be a nuisance on those points although if they are busy you can flank them fairly easy. Furthermore, if you flank A where the huts are there is a bit of an open space till next huts (and the defender spawn canyon thing). This is where I often get shot down.
    2nd A/B - The out of bounds flank on B (dice please do not fix this) can be often a game changer if executed well. The A cap is annoying as hill humpers camp in out of bound area so either extending it or doing something to stop this from happening would be great. Again I'm playing medic so there is not much I can do to take them down.

    The one change I probably would do is to limit number of snipers/long range shooters on this map as these are the players that ruin the map

    Rotterdam - this is a mixed bag
    A cap is great. bit of CC bit of sniping, decent flanks and defending points and the clusterfeck in the under passage reminds me of Op Metro in BF3

    1st A/B. B point (market) is very unbalanced. too many dark areas meaning you get shot by ghosts (viability again) especially under the train track. The tank being able to camp out of bounds behind the market is another dumb thing to have.
    A I rarely attack this side because it's a lottery. I cant see people in the windows because they simply blend in. on top of that access being blocked by sandbags makes it impossible for me to get past it (medic) so flanking options are limited and they should not be in my opinion especially in CC areas (look at 1st A with 3 completely different access points)

    2nd AB - B (white building), again visibility is an issue but less than A. several access points including back entrance flank
    A - (train tracks) is just too open, the tracks themselves are full of camping support players with MMG, without a smoke it can be difficult. and as mention earlier visibility in shadows

    Aerodrome - well, this one is a mixed bag probably one of the worst maps for me.
    I like defending and attacking A.
    B is wrecked by hill humping TANKS. yes, tanks. I wish I took screenshots. I would have beautiful images of 4-5 tanks on hills just shooting from a distance
    A (hangar) - cap zone should be changed im just not sure how. Getting inside is a pain and once you are in you are shot down from 4 different directions. Some windows would be great so that you can check whats going on.
    I only like to play this map if I have Mastery (5-6-7) assignments to complete
    2nd A/B
    Radar - I dont even go there
    hangars - visability is a main factor taking away the fun in this area.

    In summary, there is too many tanks that camp too far.

    Narvik - I like the whole B side of the map (bridge, coal etc), A side is just ruined by visability but I do enjoy playing this map and I rarely get shot by a sniper which cannot be said about the next map....

    Hamada - why DICE, why?!
    Who's decision was it to even release this map. it is literally the worst map in the game. full of damn hill humpers ( remember, as a medic there is not much I can do).
    Might as well just do plane field and it will be easier to play this map. most of the attack points or access to them are in the valleys. DICE WTF!!??
    Did I mention that it takes forever with 500 tickets to begin with
    Sumarry: Default playstyle is me pressing the options button and selecting quit

    forgot about
    Twisted steel. my 4th fav map I'd say. It's really good in either BT or FL
    I always take the right hand side. it's more CQ the with limited campers for attacking and defending teams.
    1st B point is spammed by bombers and leveled down to oblivion making it impossible to hide from incoming fire. And guess what, there is no way of taking those planes down.

    The bridge, I simply ignore, it's just not worth it (unless I land on top of it lol)
    the last ABC points are too open when attacking (can you see a theme). Basically once you capture C and plan to get B or A it's a lottery if you will get shot down by a camper hiding in the bushes or somewhere

    Overall, the maps are too open at places and dying from a hill humper that never goes at the objective is just annoying.
    I said this in a previous topic somewhere. Most of my deaths are from snipers and someone camping in a dark corner of the map. When you have to run from your spawn area flanking a capture point for 2 minutes only to be shot down by a camper it takes out all the fun.
    In fact snipers in this game are the most useless and infuriating class of all BF's games
    Post edited by MatthewSkeet on
  • Woodlbrad
    744 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Add urban, snow, forest, and a jungle pacific themed maps
  • BaronVonGoon
    7067 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Less clutter and things that obstruct visibility. Make engagements more predictable rather than decided by who camps harder because of all the things on a map that obstruct visibility. There's no excuse for how bad the visibility is on most BFV maps. The map design should encourage careful movement rather than stationary super defensive/campy playstyles because the map is an open field with a lot of clutter everywhere that obstructs visibility but keeps you open to get attacked from any side.
  • Wisdomlikesilenc
    20 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    1. Needs more WW2
    2. Not enough cover on wide open spaces
    3. Very little CQB or internal spaces like Locker or Metro
    4. The sandstorms etc should happen more frequently
  • westin76
    37 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Put in parts of the campaigns big explore type areas into a multiplayer map even if they don't fit all game modes it would bring a special kind of feel too the areas and bring more to certain game modes and be some what easily Incorporated because there in the game files.
  • johnkapa1
    293 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I understand the tides of war and going through the whole war by each year which from a historical factor i can appreciate but at the same time i'd rather have you guys concentrate on the new maps and factions coming out. Its nice to see a few different maps that we never really saw in previous WW2 shooters but at the same time its important to focus on those import battle that are really known by everyone. We really need some American and Japanese action soon with the Russians and maybe the Italians soon as well. Hope the new roadmap is awesome!
  • Gr33nsIoth
    23 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    My favourite and only battlefield V maps that i enjoy to play on are in two of the grand operations - Rotterdam, Devastation, Panzerstorm and Arras. The reasons I enjoy them is because there is minimal down time between each respawn, action packed, both objectives aren't too far apart and mostly are infantry friendly. Imo Grand operations panzerstorm is the only large map that has managed to solve the downtime problem by providing us with tons of vehicles that respawn instantly. Hamada still suffers from this a lot and results in a very slow paced match. I don't enjoy running to a flag for minutes only to die and respawn a mile away. Also it lacks cover, making firefights one dimensional and end really quickly. The longer the firefights, the better and it creates a war-like atmosphere.

    I joined the franchise when I played the BF3 beta. I remember the artillery strikes opening up the tunnel and everyone running down. Why don't we have dynamic events like that on maps anymore?
    Metro was a fan favourite and the fact that we don't have a metro type map in battlefield v is really hurting it's replayability. BF4 had one with locker and BF1 had one fort vaux. So in short I'd like to see more urban and infantry focused maps with lots of verticality and destruction.

    P.S No more snow maps pls
  • mariostar53
    14 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I think the current map selection in BFV is a good start, but the maps (mostly new ones being or will be developed) could be really good. I will agree with the people in this discussion who are talking about adding some more CQC-focused maps. Before I leave my map suggestion, I want to say that based off the concept art seen from the map set in Greece, it looks naval combat could be shown off, which could be a major step up from Turning Tides in BF1 (as in getting battleships, destroyers, submarines, etc.) With that out of the way, here's one of my suggestions: it would basically be larger version and a re-imagining of the map Siege of Shanghai from BF4, but it would be called Siege of SIngapore. The map would basically involve the British holding off the Japanese from invading Singapore. It would be a CQC-focused map, but with the addition of having ships battling each other (and shelling the city) from the harbor and the Strait of SIngapore. There would be six objectives: one possibly being an advantage point overlooking the city and harbor (possibly a cliff), another being a taller building in the center of the map (functioning like the skyscraper from Siege), and many others spread across the city.
  • TheVinylPaladin
    17 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I don't know if anyone has mentioned it yet, but adding the night versions of Narvik and Panzerstorm, which are already in Grand Operations, to the other game modes like Conquest might help to satisfy the demand for night maps (for at least a little while).
  • Kongo030
    666 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Maybe it puts too much load on the game but the feature of building trenches is nice. If there would be more spots infantry could build more cover against snipers in open areas.
  • crapjon
    160 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 2019
    Post edited by crapjon on
  • DogRoyal
    121 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I am totally one of those asking for Night Maps and proper War Maps (Community Maps would be fantastic too) but one of my biggest wishes is that we get some good old Battlefield maps that are huge, but is still split into different parts where close quarter fights are also possible. The biggest problem i have with the current BFV maps is that they are all so small and made in such a way that everyone is always at the same spots. i spend 70% of the matches getting instantly killed as i spawn, i miss the good old days where you could spawn and actually run/drive for a while before you got into action. Try to do that in BFV and you'll instantly get sniped across the map by either an actual sniper or a tank. Panzerstorm is a really big map which is great, but the problem is that its extremely open and flat. Most of the Battlefield 3 maps were fantastically put together with a lot of different areas, forests and buildings. The server was split up around the whole map and there was action around certain parts of the maps, you could actually move around there without instantly dying and there wasn't always 32vs32 in a tiny area. That is my whole perspective on this, the thing that makes a good Battlefield map is a big and detailed map with a bunch of varied areas and "hotspots" where both Infantry and Vehicle can fight without causing a massive clusterf**k of constant spawnkilling.

    This. (Without the night map part).

    Maps of Panzerstom size is what Battlefield is about imo. Where you drive to get to flags, good flanking opportunities makes way for fun smaller skirmishes. Elevation and room for both infantry and vehicle combat.
    Good examples are Caspian border, Dalian Plant, Gulf of Oman, Wake Island.
    current maps Panzer (could use elevation), Arras and Hamada.

    For every 3 large maps we need a smaller more infantry focused one. Examples are Strike at Karkand, Grand Bazaar and current Devastation is a great map. Small but large enough to have use of vehicles to support infantry advance.

    Fjell: everything looks the same and you just run around in a circle.
    Aerodrome: uninspired. Too much death funnel. Too open.
    Narvik: too small an too many small cap areas. Poor visibility. Unfun/impossible for vehicles.
    Rotterdam: close to being good and have potential but too many places for infantry to hide all over the place and easy to snipe for long distance makes it camper map no 1.

    Large maps with more vehicles calls for a bit of class balance to work well: give sniper the tnt back again so 3 classes have vehicle counter. Take tnt from assault and give them a few more rockets= fixed.

    Thanks for these discussions.

  • Kongo030
    666 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Cap areas on many maps could be increased. Would also reduce the issues with the bombers which sometimes only need to hit a very small area. A simple change that could change the existing maps a lot.
  • blackbird79
    1 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 2019
    For my part, i also liked the old urban maps, like Karkand & Pearlmarket.
    In BFV my favourite maps are the Holland maps & Twisted Steel (lots of hide and seek in dense vegetation around the bridge). Also i am looking forward to possible "Night" maps, like the ones in BF1.

    But my main question to BFV in general, since it should be a WW2 Shooter, what is with the Pacific Theatre? Since the European Theatre was only half part of WW2, i am missing definitely some Tropical Island maps and maybe even an Operation cycle with some Pacific maps.
    In most WW2 Shooters, the main focus seems to be on Europe, but that area was only a part of the whole WW2 locations.
    In the past, the BF series had some nice Pacific maps, so why wasn`t there at least 1 map on BFV release?
    It would be great, if there would be something coming up in that regard.


  • antwerpeagle2
    3 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I hope there will be a map set in antwerp because it will be a nice way with all the little streest and the cathedral and de Boerentoren (thats how we call it in Antwerp)
  • bloodprizm
    91 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Arras, Panzerstorm and Twisted Steel are by far the best maps in the game. Some wide open areas to fight BF style of yore, sprinkled in with some good CQC. The perfect mix. As a rule of thumb, for me, if a map doesn't accommodate vehicles, it's not really a BF map. It's a COD wannabe. A closet shooting experience that is more of a spawn simulator. I'm looking at you Fjell.

  • dlgabriel7
    1 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Making maps that dont encourage people to lay prone in the fields/coners or sitting at the back sniping would be a good start.
Sign In or Register to comment.