Having trouble accessing the forums? Try logging out of the forums completely - clear cache, cookies, and temp files - then restart the browser and log in. Thanks!

Giant's Shadow - What do you like/dislike about it?

«13456714
Braddock512
771 postsMember, Administrator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE
edited March 6
Now that Giant's Shadow has been out for almost a month, we'd love to really dig into what you think about Giant's Shadow.

This thread will be focused on feedback - what do you like/dislike about Giant's Shadow?

PS - Be constructive. If you don't like something, offer suggestions.
-Braddock512-

Comments

  • SemperFi-HonorNL
    265 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    The map needs more cover IMO. It's a sniperfest right now. When you're coming from A and B there's some cover while making your way to C or D. But when you start at F and E you are pretty much doomed. Open terrain with a light slope which in general only provides cover for those on E firing at F. Anyone who tries to cross from F is likely to get shot really quick.

    I would've liked it if there were maybe some scattered buildings or a small trench network around the map. Just something to provide some cover from all those snipers.

    From memory I believe the german factions spawns at F not sure, either way, the side that starts with F is most likely to lose as far as I've experienced. Also, the area with the trains isn't being utilized because there's no reason to be there during Conquest mode.

    For Domination mode I really do like the layout.

    Haven't played it on any other game modes than Conquest and Dom though.
  • SaintBrandon88
    1120 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Now that Giant's Shadow has been out for almost a month, we'd love to really dig into what you think about Giant's Shadow.

    This thread will be focused on feedback - what do you like/dislike about Giant's Shadow?

    PS - Be constructive. If you don't like something, offer suggestions.
    -Braddock512-

    It's personally think it's way too open. There needs to be more cover scattered around. I love when there's a battle near the F flag on conquest. Other than that, the only way I like to play on this map is in a tank or plane, because of how wide open it is.

  • Bio_Hazard_Ultra
    2 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Great idea and concept. It wasn't really a good looking map however. It just seemed more barren than the base maps. Maybe putting more sandbags, barbed wire fences, entrenchments, mounted LMGs, and just more basic military occupation structures would make the map look a lot better. More maps from the War Stories would be really cool such as the level Fall from Grace would be really cool to see in multiplayer.
  • YontiYontz
    1 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    My real big issue with this map comes down to about two main things. Spawnpoints are utterly messed up. I find myself spawning next to either 5 enemies and a tank, or right in the scope of a sniper. If anything we need spawnpoints more within cover and more towards your teams side of the map. Second the separation between the middle of the map and the two town/train station flags is too big in my opinion. The safest way across is vehicles with tend to get pummeled by Assaults in the mid flags. The town flags closest to the German side make no sense and are too close to each other. I found many times seeing the British team attempting to skip middle flags and go for the German side flags. I could go on about meta of the map design but my conclusion is it is too widely spread out and the Germans have a pretty big advantage for their spawns on middle. This map had potential but in terms of gameplay in my opinion is BF1's worst entry so far. Maybe flag rearrangement could help because I can't enjoy any match as the British on this map. Honestly think of Shadow as Launch Version Suez Canal where the flags made no sense.
  • BaronVonGoon
    2725 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    -The fog is too heavy and the rain adds blur (on console).

    -There needs to be a little more cover in order to be able to get to the flags in the crash location.

    -The amount of spam (Gas and plane bombs) in the crash site can render the location unplayable. Sure this can win the location for one team, but it's not fun.

    -For Conquest, the village assets/buildings near the gimme flags are completely wasted (Similar the village in the middle of St Quentin), the majority of the time team do not fight at the gimme flags.
  • Techwood2177
    61 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited January 9
    It could do with rock walls, trenches, trees, hedges or all of these to create a reasonable approach to the C & D flags on both sides. If the towns were large enough to reach the edge of the cap areas for both E & B flags then they would be much more fun to fight in. However that makes them very big and likely difficult to fit within hardware constraints. Perhaps moving the towns so they sit between A & B and E & F respectively it would work better? That means dropping E down toward the river a ways too.
    The map would become a bit more symmetrical then and would offer better lines to E flag from the downed airship much like B flag has now.

    The fog is an interesting dynamic but it lasts too long in my opinion. Broken up by sun then rain then fog in quicker succession it may feel more playable.

    Within the downed behemoth itself there could be platforms/ walkways as part of the interior frame that you can climb up on to. These would offer interesting but high risk lines to all four closest flags.

    Lastly I think some small 5 man non weaponised water craft offering river access to D from A and F flags would be a neat addition. Again a high risk but possibly high reward flanking opportunity.

    These are dramatic changes to suggest I know but they are changes I believe would benefit the map greatly, bringing it into line with the best maps BF1 has already.
  • DANNYonPC
    179 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited January 9
    +
    Looks good
    fighting in the blimp is fun
    Works great to make fake trenches
    Easy to farm tank or plane kills
    Tdm/Domination map is TDM Canals V3, wich is good :p

    -
    The fog, that damn fog!
    Very open
    like, really open
  • TheTacticalBrit0
    1 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Now that Giant's Shadow has been out for almost a month, we'd love to really dig into what you think about Giant's Shadow.

    This thread will be focused on feedback - what do you like/dislike about Giant's Shadow?

    PS - Be constructive. If you don't like something, offer suggestions.
    -Braddock512-

    First and foremost I think we can all appreciate free dlc. I think it's wonderful that this is something that is still being done and I hope to see more of it, even if it's little things here and there.

    Onto the map. Unfortunately Giant's shadow really doesn't go down well with me. There are three overarching issues:

    1: the map is far too open. The lack of cover between objectives just makes it an absolute slaughter fest for infantry. This ruins otherwise decent objectives that have good battles in and around them.

    2: the map lacks fluidity. This a byproduct of the openness. Individual objects have great battles. But they suffer as a result of infantry not moving collectively between objectives. These battles can be short, unsustained and overall underwhelming.

    3: the final subsequent result of 1 and 2 is that this map loses what makes BF1 special. Intensity, immersion and the feeling of being in a real battle. With no intense battles and nowhere to really direct fire it loses the gritty war sensation BF1 gives.
  • couldawg
    3 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    I really like the overall design of the map. That being said, I have a HUGE gripe with the invisible walls / collision boxes overlaying the holes surrounding the fallen zeppelin. So many times, I've tried to toss grenades through the holes in the fuselage, and they bounce right back at me. I also think there ought to be a little more cover between E and F... perhaps a pill box and a few trench lines. I really do like the dual capture zone of C and D, especially with the elevation difference. I also think A and B are really well designed, with the water channel separating the two.
  • cammoses003
    641 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    I really like having the two center objectives for conquest. Typically Im not a fan of linear map (Suez & Argonne) but I feel like Giants Shadow plays well because of how wide it is - I never really feel limited to specific play styles. I only really play conquest, so I can't speak for other modes, but it plays really nicely - I find myself able to any of the four infantry classes whenever I want depending on the engagement. I can't think of many cons for Giants Shadow other than visuals, the colours specifically, are rather bland. I think if there was a tad more trees/shrubs/bushes in between the crash site objectives and village/lumberyard objectives it might play a little better - because holding down the crash site and sniping from it can be extremely easy to pick off targets, due to how open it is.

    also, I can't seem to understand why people have a problem with Dice pulling maps from the single player campaign? its a night and day experience - after playing through the campaign three times (for platinum trophy) I can't help but think how many great landscapes/locations we got to play that would translate incredibly to multiplayer maps.
  • cptjack2308
    3 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    i Fully agree with @BFBulletin , the map is a bit too open and D and C capture points are way to close. Maybe move C a bit in to create a triangle affect with E point and F point. there is a lot of useless open areas that does nothing for the map.

  • Deyno9
    7 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited January 9
    The map is good. I like the dense fog, the giant in the middle of the map, the advance of the train between flags

    Things I would improve:
    1. Improve coverage between flags and between flanking roads
    2. To allow a plane to pass through the giant, like a tunnel, would be epic :)
    3. The air fight have a very narrow space
    4. The river should be within the area to allow flanking
    5. E flag is very simple in comparison to other flags

    this map like some others give me FPS drops and 100%CPU usage. this is the principal problem in BF1 :/
  • Ashfie1der
    49 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    It seems like when trying to reach the airship from outlying flags, there isn't enough cover. Some rank wreckages. Large craters, more trees could be added to allow infantry to be able to push towards C and D objectives more safely, rather than hoping that snipers aren't looking at you.
    I think the fog is a bit too thick at the moment, with it obscuring far too much vision.
  • No_Other_xD
    438 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    IMO...A and F need a reduction on capture area just like in Suez 1.2, the fact that enemies can capture the flag from almost everywhere is a nightmare also can be capture from every floor building :-/
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!