Map Design

the best map design is one where I can lie down with my LMG with the bipod out and mow down 20+ guys who are just trying to get close to the objective.

Attached: 1503761852404.jpg (1280x960, 653K)

operation metro

Attached: kaede shoot.png (595x797, 497K)

>it’s an “insurgents perfectly time an RPG that knocks out half the team 5 seconds into the match” episode

Attached: 8489A79D-DAB8-4351-8AFA-58E5E9A41148.jpg (742x1024, 82K)

Metro is just proof that stat tracking alone can ruin games.

Metro is an ok map; but it's to small for 64 players (40 max), explosives, m320 and frag rounds were to much

>What should map design revolve around at all stages of development?
fun

Operation Metro was the moment I realized I was no longer the target audience for Battlefield.

that's why I loved it though
it felt like warfare
people dying left and right
me myself at constant threat if being blown the fuck up

i wish they'd make a sequel to battlefield 3 or 4. i hate these fucking spin offs and meme war games where they say it's ww2 but it's actually just this clusterfuck of prototype meme bullshit and magical horses running around. just make a sci-fi or a fantasy battlefield game if you want it to have non-sensical shit in it

Fluid gameplay with different options for tactics,map control ist import and without ending in camping in one spot.

This ist why 2forts in TF 2 ist a good map,

And snowbound in Halo 3 sucks.

>lets make our game have a random map queue that can put players with powerful machines that are designed to begin combat at ranges up to 5km in a very flat and narrow box with ranges that may reach at most 1km

Attached: r9dsuqphklu11.png (1600x800, 67K)

even worse
>it's an "insurgent team all goes snipers and doesn't get on A and lets the security have the hardest cap in the game on the first wave" episode

Attached: 34645633456.jpg (1280x720, 51K)

I love maps that take place where it wouldn't normally be a warzone
that's why I loved the close quarters DLC in BF3
maps like
>ziba tower
>mw2 terminal
>Mario Cart coconut mall
I wish more games would do stuff like shopping malls or schools

fuck the queue what about the maps themselves, some of the maps in that game especially with the tanks are so one sided it's shocking

>wouldn't normally be a warzone
>schools

user...

BF3 maps did a good job of separating the infantry only players who like Metro from the CQ players who played Caspi and kharg 24/7; was letting that happen really that bad?

I think you have mistaken it with maps like caspian border or kharg island (in case of bf3), operation metro is usually constant spam of explosives around the stairs, unless you start spamming smoke grenades around and try to push forward

>we'll make a map that will literally have both sides within line of sight the moment they spawn
>they must then travel a long distance to not be in instant death range

>we'll make factions that have an abundance of painfully slow ww2 vehicles play on VERY large maps that we designed for modern mbts with 1500 hp

there used to be more open maps but people complained so much they removed some maps and modified Kursk so engagements took place closer.

here is your map bro

Attached: glynn-richards-vietnam-001-copy.jpg (1920x1080, 571K)

>buying a combined arms game to play cawadood
>dice focusing so hard to appease this audience that they try really hard to keep the core elements of the game from effecting each other

It's funny how in the beginning they emphasized that it would strictly be a ww2 game with some vehicles from the early 1950s and now there are atgms, heatseekers, and helicopters.

delet this racism tovarich ))))))))))))
italian ground forces are so OP it's not even funny

>>dice focusing so hard to appease this audience that they try really hard to keep the core elements of the game from effecting each other

I'll give you that; DICE has become more stuborn yet indecisive
The first rush phase of Metro was good at lower player limits but there's nothing wrong with infantry focused or exclusive maps and modes if done well like sienne, strike etc (which they aren't capable of doing now days)

Magic. A sleepiness that suggests reality. Obsessive mundane details.

>What makes a good map?
Good flow of movement and understanding of conflict zones. You want weapons to be good in specific areas and terrible in others. You want people to be able to traverse your map so they can quickly get to where they need to be, but not too quick that the geometry is worthless. It's a hard balancing act and honestly borders on understanding human psychology. You're basically creating elaborate mice mazes for humans.

When i said random map queue, i meant how they give you random gamemodes or spawn points, and map setups.

I've played 8.0 games on small poland with 2 spawns on both sides of the hill next to the lake. Everyone was about 10 seconds from ez spawn camp spots right at the beginning.

3.0 time traveling Italian go karts

tanks of the 80s against 1950s

Dice focused on the CoD crowd then. TTK dropped stupendously and game balanced aired more towards infantry gameplay rather than combined arms. Unlocking autism infested the series. Most populated servers went to these metro 24/7 inspired grinds.

There hasn't been a successor to BF 2 or 2142 since and the last good battlefield was BC2 which is how Dice should've gone if they wanted an infantry focused game that was still battlefield in feel.

But I'm done bitching. It's not my series anymore. I got pushed out of it because I just couldn't play something I didn't like. The people who have fun with One and Five can keep enjoying that.

Same but it really sucks that there is simply no one making a game like BF2 but with all the improvements they could have had in it with todays tech. I like playing Squad but it's not the same when it is done by a bunch of modders.

>What should map design revolve around at all stages of development?
CHOKEPOINTS AND EXPLOSIVE SPAM

Attached: DICE map design 101.jpg (960x2159, 542K)

What about CQ in 4 which is undeniably vehicle focused in balance and maps?

2fort is one of TF2's worst maps though.

the game suffers from horrible br compression, especially in the higher tiers. I remember in the april fools event for modern tanks the br was 15.0 and the T-80 and m1 are at 10.0.

Also this shit should be considered a fucking crime.

Attached: MapLayout_Conquest3_Mozdok.jpg (834x834, 359K)

HAY BIC BOI

damn shame karkand didnt make it into 4

you will surely get the karkland

At least we got Dragon Valley.

Attached: battlefield_4_dragon_valley.png (784x471, 769K)

2nd assault should have had karkand, instead we got Oman and Metro, both shit

>we're bringing back midway
>but we're not going to bring back capture the flag

Attached: 1505474920395.jpg (846x1024, 59K)

Oman is a fine map. It's just the sandstorm levolution that made it worse.

Attached: clint_ew.gif (240x228, 858K)

Levolution makes every map worse
The smaller implementations are good (collapse cranes and smoke stacks, lumpi landslide)

I mean, BF2 towards the end of its lifecycle was mostly Strike at Karkand Infantry Only.

the benefit was that it made jets useless

>implying that BF4's stealth jets are as capable as BF2/3's fighter jets when it comes to farming everyone on the ground
And at the same time it made tank and IFV drivers into predators with the thermal scope.

Jets, other than A10's and Frogfoot were already pretty useless in BF3. In BF2 they caused most deaths.

it feels like dice doesn't want to do combined arms gameplay anymore. the last time they actually tried was in bc2. tanks were pretty strong, but you couldn't do lone wolf gameplay bullshit with them. instead, they were primarily used them to provide cover for infantry and grind down enemy defenses. if they tried to run off alone, they'd quickly get overwhelmed by AT. kinda like in real life!

in bf3 and onward, dice designed to redesign tanks as these one-man killing machines that could zoom across the battlefield sniping infantry from 300m away using a thermal scope. the map design shifted back towards shitty conquest, so there was no need for tanks to play carefully within their limited range of movement or help push with infantry, and instead they could just take position miles away from the action and grind for kills. infantry could no longer threaten them if the driver had even half a brain either. it's not a surprise everyone retreated to infantry only maps, since it just wasn't fun to play against vehicles anymore. like wow, you have to land like 3 rockets to even disable a tank, and the tank only needs to as much as look at you to instantly kill you. why bother?

this shit probably won't change either because vehicle whores are some of the most vocal and autistic people on forums and such. they even got c4 nerfed in battlefield 4 as an anti-tank option, which is fucking hilarious to me as a concept. like, if you can't stop a jeep or a dude from running right into you, then you fucking deserve to lose your vehicle.

>Oman is a fine map
>one side liteally incapable of fighting out of a spawn trap

You could do some crazy shit with BF3 little birds and two engineers fixing it mid-flight.

Not if the attackers are efficient at both air and ground.

>one side has to micromanage their entire 32 man team to stand a chance or de facto lose the match
>the other just needs one jeep to take a long flank

BF3 still had good ground vehicle balance due to infantry counterplay options and that without infantry, vehicles quickly die
BF4 went overboard with shifting entire game towards vehicles

Scouts were even more broek in 4

Attached: dad285966492d43d144f9321dea2d7c7.webm (1280x720, 2.86M)

I didn't play 4 much becasue my co-op buddy didn't bother. Did I miss out?

oh yea i remember the fun of playing jets in bf2. I was pissed when they restricted it to were you could only carry one type of munition as before you could have missiles and bombs

no, the only good thing about the game is when they brought back dragon valley. the whole levolution thing was only noticeable on a handful of maps and they pretty much gave up on it after that.

4 was absolutely broken beyond belief for ~a year until DICE LA iirc fixed it, overall the game is balanced for vehicles (especially air) to dominate but the DLC maps and infantry combat can be quite good until some vehicle whore, ucav, mortar or XM25 faggot shits it up
Can't say if you missed out as I wouldn't say 4 is comparable to any other BF but I'd take BF3 or BC2 over 4 any day
It's populated everywhere so check it out using the free trial

I swear to god if i get Poland tier 6 one more fucking time...

Attached: 1497755902113.png (428x500, 192K)

RRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Attached: help.jpg (456x320, 31K)

where can i find neo-nazi russians? i want to be worshipped for my aryan features

that map kills my soul

tell me more

>walmart sks
Immersive map, but it doesn't sacrifice gameplay and balance just for the sake of realism and/or looks
also fuck lane maps, such a retarded idea, fuck you respawn

Attached: qtie with svd.png (549x585, 731K)

the constant scanning of the treelines
the urban ambushes
i just stick close to someone else so he takes the shot and i dont

By far the best map of 4

Attached: Replay 2019-07-16 15-58-10.webm (1280x720, 2.72M)

Funnily enough, the story behind this remake was based on a poll from DICE to see what "classic" map would the players want to see in BF4. These are the results:
>Grand Bazaar 114,215
>Noshahr Canals 107,773
>Seine Crossing 81,108
>Kharg Island 79,953
>Damavand Peak 77,758
>Arica Harbor 62,180
>Ziba Tower 60,718
>Strike at Karkand 59,018
>Hill 137 54,545
>Omaha Beach 49,575
>Wake Island 49,321
>Valparaiso 44,591
>Panama Canal 43,873
>Atacama Desert 42,379
>Tehran Highway 40,388
>Epicenter 40,325
>Phu Bai Valley 37,871
>White Pass 37,837
>Oasis 36,288
>Vantage Point 36,204
>Dragon Valley 36,191 (had the lowest but won)

A map that allows me or the enemies to move around in that doesn't involve going in to a chokepoint slaughterfest hoping that eventually after many deaths maybe this time you will be able to break through the slaughterfest

i wanted atacama desert
was a great map

Also, I forgot to mention that Noshahr Canals technically did make it, it was recreated in Dragon Valley's team deathmatch layout.

Attached: bf4cte_2015-10-16_19-13-16-84.jpg (1920x1080, 300K)

I'd say the most important things are the following:
Unique in setting, unique in how the map's design makes the match play out, perhaps a gimmick, and the maps design has multiple ways for players to apply whatever tactics they may cook-up(In other words multiple ways to approach a situation)

Daily reminder that Battlefield V is a godtier game battlefield game that absolutely does not deserve all the hate from the autistic niggers that hate wimmenz and niggers.
It has the best gameplay since Battlefield 3.
And Operation Metro 2019 is coming in 2 months.

Attached: 6256851cv25d.jpg (1000x562, 65K)

they did remaster grand bazaar, but in hardline :^)

>Operation Metro 2019

Wow, the most boring and overplayed map in the entire fucking series. Better go out and buy it right away.

Attached: wipe this meme.jpg (1920x1080, 139K)

that map was shit

bf4 wake island would have been comfy

>We want women and minorities in our game
>Ok sure
>Let's set it in a historical war where regiments were racially segregated and women were EXTREMELY rare on the front lines
>Let's take actual events and replace the soldiers that fought in them with women
>Let's also shoehorn in some bullshit political commentary which isn't even historically accurate
>Also let's insult our fanbase and call them uneducated bigots and outright tell them not to buy the game
>What the fuck
They could have just had it set in modern times or the near future and avoided all that backlash but they had to push it.

Attached: 26804896_10157024716398989_2232045958126749290_n.jpg (563x681, 30K)

A chokepoint at the middle for maximum carnage

Attached: 1560851514033.jpg (600x600, 75K)

>make a small objective-based map game mode where one side plays as the French resistance, one of the classes is a woman
>lock character appearance to each map and have a North African map where the British team is an Indian regiment (bonus points if they add a Japan Vs. India map later down the line)

There, I just made their insatiable Swedish desire for diversity compatible with a historical shooter and it only took two minutes of thinking.

>you have to land like 3 rockets to even disable a tank, and the tank only needs to as much as look at you to instantly kill you. why bother?
I forgot how much bullshit this was compared to BF3
I'm still mad about how nerfed AT was in BF4

Didn't Battlefield 1 do this? I don't remember anyone complaining then.

>I'm still mad about how nerfed AT was in BF4
Same. That C4 nerf + resupply time for explosives did affect the balance between ground vehicles and infantry.

dice would rather whitewash history and say that racially segregated military units didn't exist in ww2. kind of weird how it be

BF1 didn't do race properly either, but it wasn't as spectacularly bad as BFV (and there was tons of shitposting about brown people before and after release, you must have a poor memory). For example the British team was 50% Indian and African on every single map when it should have been all-white on Western Front maps and majority Indian/African on the Middle East maps, the American team had a black guy in it despite being so racist at the time that they mostly sent their black soldiers to fight with the French so they didn't have to be near them, and for some utterly bizarre reason the German cavalryman is black.

I never played it to be honest, also I stopped coming here until recently and didn't really keep up with gaming news for a while.

The level designers that made the original Metro map for BF3 are working on the absolute definitive complete version of that map for BFV.
The shills that played it at the E3 booths say it's still metro, but a thousand times better, they fixed all the chokepoints and problems.
I agree completely.
They shat the bed hard with the marketing and their sad attempt at damage control.
That still doesn't make BFV a bad game at all.
It's LIGHT YEARS better than BF1 and BF4 in terms of actual gameplay and mechanics.

How's BFV content-wise? I was debating getting it on sale

i think i'd play bf5 but it ran like total shit on my 970 and lol at buying a new gpu right now

you now remember suez

Attached: 1479213962140.png (1384x602, 1.33M)

one of the most balanced maps in that shitheap that was bf1
>b-but muh monte grappa
*bombs you from the skybox*

Nobody is paying me to shill, so i'll tell you the truth:
There is very little content, and what has been promised so far is coming at a very slow pace.
Sure, premium is finally gone and all the new content is completely free, but it's still a couple of new weapons and a map per month.
>I was debating getting it on sale
The game is worth 20 dollars at best.
The deluxe edition is a massive scam.
It was 23 dollars barely one month ago.
I'd say you should wait for the americans and japanese factions, coming this winter.
But if you feel like you're missing out on skins and stuff (weekly challenges) then sure, but buy it only if it's severely discounted.
Game is good, EA isn't.

Pretty awful, there were like 8-9 maps on launch and they've only added a couple since. The majority of those maps suck ass, either they're choke point galore or you have a team full of snipers

>coconut mall

Not taking the most simple basic mapmaking considerations and just adding in detailed garbage and bloom.

Attached: Blood_gulch.jpg (1280x800, 723K)