DISCUSSION: Maps

Comments

  • DK_Bastian2
    136 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Moorlander wrote: »
    LEGlJAS wrote: »
    i need custom camouflage outfits for every single map.... maybe u should start with this

    And then the cry babies would complain that they can't see you; completely ignoring the fact that you took the time and effort and skill to choose the right outfit for the job. This is after all the job of camouflage gear, is it not?


    I dont get those people choosing a snow outfit on panzerstorm, and then get mad when i choose a green camo with green face paint and they can't see me!

    They need to get more into the customization so players know what a big deal it is to choose snow on grass. Like maybe make an officiel video showing how hard it is to spot a person with the RIGHT camo.


    like people choosing grass on snow, or desert helmets on snow og anything


    they need to add more variants to different already existence clothing and helmets like Hazadorous Conditens.



    sorry my English my hands hurt haha
  • Kongo030
    666 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 2019
    Basically the game needs to adjust. Like War Thunder you get a default skin and you can buy individual ones for snow or desert maps. The game loads the skin according to the map. No special skin and you end up with a default.
    It would also attract players to buy skins.

    With that bad UI I'm not bothering to switch skins before the round. I expected a lot more functionality when they announced the company feature.
  • KAMEKAT
    2 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    First post!

    First of all , thank you for this game DICE. I love this game.

    As far as maps go, I'm aware that a lot of our comments are subjective.

    For instance, I prefer infantry focused maps. Fjell, Rotterdam, Arras, Battle of Hannut, Devastation.

    I still enjoy the other maps for the most part!

    One map that I cannot play right now is Aerodome. I used to love this map. But nowadays, both teams will have 15-20 snipers which makes it impossible to play the game for me. I understand there's probably no way around that as it's not a DICE issue but a player problem.
  • someguy12121
    468 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Kongo030 wrote: »
    Basically the game needs to adjust. Like War Thunder you get a default skin and you can buy individual ones for snow or desert maps. The game loads the skin according to the map. No special skin and you end up with a default.
    It would also attract players to buy skins.

    With that bad UI I'm not bothering to switch skins before the round. I expected a lot more functionality when they announced the company feature.

    Also you provide yet another reason why BF1 was better. BF1 had Loadouts that you could save and switch to on the fly mid-round. This would be awesome in BFV as then you could presave uniforms depending on the map. Heck BF4 had adaptive paints which changed based on the type of map to blend in better which I LOVED, slapped it on all of my vehicles and some guns. The fact that you have to go to a separate screen to change anything mid-round is crazy and primitive.

    The maps though in this game are just meh overall. Devastation is the only one that makes it feel like a battle.
  • Kongo030
    666 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    That's what I expected from my company. To set up different loadouts and safe them with custom names. So I could have different for example assault loadouts depending on whether I need to attack or defend or if there are vehicles or not.
  • misisipiRivrRat
    1004 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Jokerdef wrote: »
    I'm going to keep it short and sweet with an example:

    Visualize Siege, Dawnbreaker, Firestorm, Oman, Propaganda, and Pearl Market.

    Visualize Twisted Steel, Panzersturm and Narvik.

    How different are the two groups?

    The BF4 maps have alot of assets. They're not open fields with some assets sprinkled in. They're made up of alot assets concentrated in an area. The asset-to-open-space ratio is very high, their isnt much open space.

    Now the BFV maps are the exact opposite. All I can think of while playing is I'm bored. I want more buildings. Bigger buildings. More hallway firefights, more urban stuff. More corners. Less open spaces requiring eyes in the back of my eye head.

    One thing the maps in BF3/BF4 had on BFV is less random deaths, because there were less open spaces.

    I agree with this. Virtually all of the maps are way too open and have sparse cover. This leads to players just sitting still and sniping. Also many of the objectives are located in very open areas and thus are easily defended and very hard to take.
    My favorite map Arras has cover, urban areas and many opportunities to flank the enemy. In other words, you can have fun like in BF4 and also BF1.
    So for future maps I would like to see more dense maps with better cover and for the current maps perhaps relocating the objectives in Frontlines and Conquest modes could make some difference. And you could also change weapon balance so that sniping and camping is less effective and a mobile more tactical play style would become more popular. Like in the "good old days of BF".

    My ideal maps would be like the wide open maps you mentioned combined with the smaller areas for close quarter combat. Then there is still that Battlefield feel. Just think , you're taking damage from a tank so you run into a building to escape only to engage enemy soldiers.
  • someguy12121
    468 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Kongo030 wrote: »
    That's what I expected from my company. To set up different loadouts and safe them with custom names. So I could have different for example assault loadouts depending on whether I need to attack or defend or if there are vehicles or not.

    You mean the customization that they said would be in the game and now isn't?
  • Jokerdef
    56 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 2019
    Jokerdef wrote: »
    I'm going to keep it short and sweet with an example:

    Visualize Siege, Dawnbreaker, Firestorm, Oman, Propaganda, and Pearl Market.

    Visualize Twisted Steel, Panzersturm and Narvik.

    How different are the two groups?

    The BF4 maps have alot of assets. They're not open fields with some assets sprinkled in. They're made up of alot assets concentrated in an area. The asset-to-open-space ratio is very high, their isnt much open space.

    Now the BFV maps are the exact opposite. All I can think of while playing is I'm bored. I want more buildings. Bigger buildings. More hallway firefights, more urban stuff. More corners. Less open spaces requiring eyes in the back of my eye head.

    One thing the maps in BF3/BF4 had on BFV is less random deaths, because there were less open spaces.

    I agree with this. Virtually all of the maps are way too open and have sparse cover. This leads to players just sitting still and sniping. Also many of the objectives are located in very open areas and thus are easily defended and very hard to take.
    My favorite map Arras has cover, urban areas and many opportunities to flank the enemy. In other words, you can have fun like in BF4 and also BF1.
    So for future maps I would like to see more dense maps with better cover and for the current maps perhaps relocating the objectives in Frontlines and Conquest modes could make some difference. And you could also change weapon balance so that sniping and camping is less effective and a mobile more tactical play style would become more popular. Like in the "good old days of BF".

    My ideal maps would be like the wide open maps you mentioned combined with the smaller areas for close quarter combat. Then there is still that Battlefield feel. Just think , you're taking damage from a tank so you run into a building to escape only to engage enemy soldiers.

    Hmmm like Caspian Border in BF3 maybe? That would be great indeed :)
  • kismo1980
    28 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Still I would love it if this game would have more maps...
    Something in the forests, some maps that we saw during the single player...

    Some more diversity and other locations ....
  • olavafar
    2261 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    My feedback is going to be based around Conquest as that's my most played mode.
    Thanks to @Marshennn as I used their post as template for mine.

    My style of play is mostly quite objective close. I play both vehicles and infantry and I play more or less every class equally much. I do daily orders and assignments for the weapons which sometimes make me play in different ways.

    AFRICA

    AERODROME
    I like this map. I tend to play scout or tank and push flanks.
    It can be annoying when both sides decides to use tanks as snipers and avoid each other as this limits the possibility to move quite a lot (see Panzerstorm). Scouts can be countered if one is scout but a sniper tank may require a tank to take out and it might not be possible to get one.

    HAMADA
    This map I do not particularly like. I seem to spend a lot of time just running here.
    The E - G flags and the A - D has this huge gap of open area between them. It is mostly possible to get over as it is not easily locked down by scouts etc but it is a looong run. Often one ends up at the objective just after it was taken anyway, only to see that the flag one just came from is now contested. Just sitting and waiting is not something I'm very fond of either.
    I play all classes on this map. Flying is quite enjoyable on it.
    Side note: I do like the Frontlines version of this map very much.

    FRANCE

    ARRAS
    I like this map a lot. I can play any class here and have fun. Lots of flanking options and cover.

    TWISTED STEEL
    See Arras. Bonus is flying a fighter through the bridge. I try to do that every round if I can get a plane :).

    NORWAY

    NARVIK
    See Arras. It is a bit hard to be aggressive with tanks here I think. I do not mind it as I have no need to stay in a tank for a full round so I just drive to C and get blown up. It lacks the 'open' flag options of Arras and Twisted Steel.

    FJELL 652
    For me this is primarily a flying map. The flying is so good on this map I tend to do that if I get a plane. Infantry play is OK but has a tendency to tilt one way or the other with one team only have A or E or getting caught in spawn.


    HOLLAND

    ROTTERDAM and DEVASTATION
    I regard these manly as infantry maps and they are both favorites. Playing tank in any of them, especially devastation, is hard if one wants to be on objectives. Rotterdam works but devastation might just as well be without the tanks. On devastation the main use of the tanks are as spawn points but they will rarely last very long and spawning on a tank has its drawback with the animations involved.


    PANZERSTORM
    This is the map I like the least. Playing as infantry means running around a lot. Tankers have a tendency to camp in the open areas making the game quite static. Flying is not very enjoyable either as the map is flat and gives little cover from AA or other planes. Imo it should come in two of the legacy modes: Tank superiority and Air superiority. As a combined arms map, not a favorite of mine.


    RELATED SUGGESTIONS
    Map voting is something that comes up now and then. I'm not particularly fond of it as I like the variation one gets with a rotation. As it has been up until now though there are no map-based assignments so that argument against is gone.
    Question is how one could design a map voting system that both gives a variation (so that not all servers turn into Devastation 24/7) while still giving players some influence over next map.
    One such suggestion could be to have a rotation but let players affect the order by voting for the next map among those not yet played in a rotation. So if we have map A-K. We start the server on A. Next round one can vote for any of B-K. If D wins, third round will be between B,C, E-K. etc until all maps have been played and then next round there is A-K to vote among again. I have not thought much about what this would mean, just throwing it in here.
  • ENKkii87
    200 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    This is kind of off topic but can we have 64 man variations of game modes. Sometimes and absolutely chaotic frag fest is a good thing.
  • Granatenmaxe
    67 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Close quarter 64 player Wolfenstein map would be great.
  • hshtrs
    9 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    So about the maps, I'm saying this all the time and I think I can speak for majority of the ccommunity - we need remake of Operation Metro based in Paris 1944.
    BFV desperately needs this kind of CQC mess!
    And I can guarantee you, tons of people will come back just for this map.
  • KingAchilles666
    2 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    LEGlJAS wrote: »
    i will never forget the battlefield hardline maps.... the beat, black friday, code blue, museum, diversion, pacific highway... damn i miss this game sooo much..never had so fun in since bf3

    I actually just booted up Hardline a few days ago, a lot of the maps are fun and diverse and the Night Maps are actually like a spooky night time lol.
  • tolly2121
    15 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I agree with the comment above that Fjell needs some work. I can honestly say it is my least favorite map, but when I do like it it is because I am playing C and the mountain village was a cool idea.

    All the other maps work well IMO. They force you to play differently, so what works on one will not work well on another. I like that. I do think the brightness in Hamada needs to be toned down just a titch.
  • fakemon64
    898 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    LEGlJAS wrote: »
    i will never forget the battlefield hardline maps.... the beat, black friday, code blue, museum, diversion, pacific highway... damn i miss this game sooo much..never had so fun in since bf3

    I actually just booted up Hardline a few days ago, a lot of the maps are fun and diverse and the Night Maps are actually like a spooky night time lol.

    I wasn't a big fan of hardline, but I will admit the maps were pretty damn decent...
  • Faylum
    441 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 2019
    Some very interesting suggestions here. There is a few types of maps i am looking for, something i don't think DICE are capable of making due to low res settings nuking foliage. But to put it simply:
    *
    Jungle maps. (No i don't mean jungle elements, i mean maps entirely filled with high grass and foliage. Where tankers have flamethrowers, flame troopers, coastal ships shoot incendiary rounds and the map can be burned down to charcoal. What am i talking about? A Levelution style map like Tarowa, Guadalcanal, Burma.)
    *
    Island defence maps. (Where Allies have a few planes they cannot bail out of. Ships for artillery and landing craft. Defenders have a few minutes to build their coastal batteries and defences, the islands have underground bases, hill bases and airfields to capture)
    *
    A real Battle of Britain map based almost entirely on the BF1942 map. (In its objectives and layouts. With Spitfires being nerfed in number and damage. perhaps 2 spitfires for every 10 Axis planes. And the axis having infinite numbers of planes to spawn immediately. So as not prevent gaps in plane waves.)
    *
    Japanese vs Russians in Manchuria
    *
    Crimea
    *
    Italy
    *
    U-Boats vs Escorts. Atlantic shipping war, allies get planes, destroyers, cruisers and battleships, along with people having to physically escort the transport ships, while axis get access to U-boats.
    *
    Bismark vs Allied bombers
    Scharnhorst vs Allied fleet
    Aircraft carrier vs Aircraft carrier, US vs Japanese
    (Obviously this wouldn't work without being able to steer big ships and sink them.)
    *
    For once i would like a map that is based on a retreat. Where one team has to effectively retreat while perhaps some NPC vehicles need to progress backwards, perhaps some trucks or first aid vehicles. The Germans lets say are fighting rear guard action against the Russians and only have to buy time, their only objective is to buy time. The attackers have more vehicles and planes but longer spawn delays and must negotiate obstacles and kill pits. Basically a type of 'mine cart' game mode, where team work for both sides is in breaking through an area. PTFO in its rawest form.
    *
    Arhnem
    *
    And most importantly i want an absolutely visceral and unreal depiction of the Normandy beach landings.
    (If only the battlefield franchise could spend some time working on gore'n'gibets i could spend my life reliving this theatre)
  • OldSkoolzFinest
    471 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    If you want to make a good maps,
    Stay away from designing them like Fjell, Devastation , Hamada.
    These maps have the worst Lighting and Shadowing out of them all.
    FJELL and Narvak is Blinding with how the lighting sheens off of the snow making the map look blue, and then the shadows are so dark on the players blend right in.

    Devastation is a Dry one tone Nightmare of a map. A prone campers best friend. Dark and saturated with shadows. Every Night map in BF1 has better Visibility than this does.

    Hamadas open desert area is too damn bright with how the light sheens off the rocks is well.............rocks shouldn't be able to blind players.
    This games Visibility problem isn't because of Camouflage or what the player is wearing, it's because the lighting and shadows are too extreme compared to past titles with bad contrast implementation.

    I just bought two well rated mid/high end 4k tvs that I had professionally calibrated to play on Xbox one x and this game still looks terrible on them.
    But all my other games look phenomenal including past titles in your own Franchise.
  • JDOGMcFUZZL
    125 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    We definitely need more maps in general. But definitely some maps with elevation changes in them. Either a city that has more buildings to run around in (rotterdam has some but most of the buildings only have a ground floor) or a mountain side with lots of valleys and hills to fight through. Also we need some naval battles in this game. With boats. That would be awesome. And we need another large map like panzerstorm with lots of tanks and even more planes.
  • DeadAgain210
    207 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 2019
    My favorite maps.

    Rotterdam (break through) love the main places to fight at. From the "river barracks?" To the green bridge, to the river ect...fun movability. Except to get into the train. The low steps are great The "high steps" not so much fun.

    Devastation (front-lines) What a fun map. CQC. Great places to ambush opponents. Easy to run to objectives.
    What could make it even greater. Maybe a sniper spot or two looking into the church. An idea on a next map maybe?

    My dislike maps.

    Hamada. (Conquest) a nightmare for infantry. I wish we had a motorcycle that could move like the one in Hardline. The jumps were epic. And we got there. Note: E & F on Hamada, have some great fights. Sometimes D, but planes ruin that crap real quick.

    Panzer storm. On going to objective "A" in the beginning No cover for infantry. If tanks don't wanna move up, infantry is not in a good mood. Getting hammered. A trench. A creek. Some thing.

    Actually, I think when I look at panzer storm the middle and last maps are great. Lots of fun.

    But I can't even get to see the second or third maps. Because the 500 tanks we got are to scared to move.

    An idea map. Some thing like Hardline "beach mansion" river/beach around the mansion. It provides CQC along with other possibilities. Someone said, a factory like zavada. Ahhh the sweet memories. Of that stage.
Sign In or Register to comment.