Forum Discussion

Straatford87's avatar
Straatford87
Icon for DICE Team rankDICE Team
4 years ago
Solved

Battlefield Core Feedback - Maps - Feedback Thread

We have just posted an update on our current design direction for Battlefield 2042 Maps. Read the full update, here. In this update on map design we've outlined several questions for you on ...
discussion
  • Straatford87's avatar
    Straatford87
    4 years ago

    Hi everyone,

    Thanks again for providing your feedback around Map Design.

    It's been a week since we posted this feedback request to you. That means we'll now close this thread so we can start compiling all your thoughts and comments. Again, we really appreciate that you've taken the time to have this discussion with us.

    Once we're done reading through everything, we'll follow-up with what we've learned and next steps.

    Thank you,

    //Straatford / @Straatford87 

    Battlefield Community Manager

CarpoVP's avatar
CarpoVP
Seasoned Hotshot
4 years ago

@Straatford87

Which maps presently provide a poor opening experience because of the location of the Base Spawn? : This one for me is renewal, on 128p BT, both main bases on the initial spawn are directly next to each other and 9/10 end up with the defenders getting camped and unable to leave main spawn, moving the defenders initial main base to behind the mid gate in the wall would be a better compromise IMO.

How do you feel about the current balance between Infantry and Vehicles in Breakthrough? Balance is pretty poor on both sides, too many attacking vehicles (Boltes are still OP) if defenders had access to stationary weapons, i think this would help counter the numbers.

Have you played 64 player Breakthrough, and do you feel that this is the better way to experience the mode? Yes i've played, it's a much smoother experience but not to the intensity i would prefer, like 128p.

On which maps and Flags do you see the most immediate need for more line of sight blockers?  Orbital for sure, the run from B Objectives to C is largely open with little cover.

Do you have specific areas on maps that currently stand out to you as lacking cover?  As above.

Do you have thoughts on how we can better define traveling paths between objectives to keep combat focused?  More use of Underground passageways/tunnels would make concentrated engagement areas.

Do you see improvement opportunities to make it easier to understand how to get from one objective to the next?   would having more transport vehicles be an option (unarmed ones like humvees/quads etc) be an answer to this, having that ability to have smaller/unarmed transports spawn on captured points to help move between objectives would help massively.

bwvalzh's avatar
bwvalzh
4 years ago

Hey, 

first of all I wanted to thank you for COMMUNICATING with us! I really think that this is the only way

to safe the game.

But in terms of map improvements it‘s not really about telling you which area on which map needs to be worked on

because seriously every map needs improvements everywhere in cover and line of sight and especially travelling.

And you actually mentioned the main reason for this in your post: It‘s about the 128 player gamemodes.

Just remove them and focuss on the classic 64 player battlefield experience we had in earlier titles.

I was one of the people that thought 128 player could be the next step for battlefield when I first heard about it but after playing a few games I noticed quickly that it pretty much only brings negative things to the game.

First of all the maps: they are huge, have an insane amount of free space, almost no cover, a lack in detail and don‘t feel like a battlefield at all.

The performance: As we all know the game has an insanely pour performance and is completely unplayable for a lot of people. I don‘t say that 64 playermodes only will solve this problem completely but it would definetly help to have half of players and smaller maps to atleast improve performance at some point.

The experience: 128 players result in games where you as a soldier or even an entire squad has no real inpact on the game. It is not possible to carry your team or make gamechanging plays because it is just to huge. The gameplay is also extremely vehicle based.

SO DICE, please just go back to 64 player games and design your maps for this. I understand that it was probably a huge marketing move to have these „revolutionary“ bigger game modes but the game is at a point where it‘s not about marketing anymore but saving the game from dying.


Besides that I can only recommend to

shorten the maps anyways because even on 128 players conquest there is like no action at all, 

add as much cover as possible and relocate spots closer to each other 

and add more detail to the maps so that they actually look like a battlefield by wars and natural disasters destroyed world that is collapsing and not like a fine world. (To have actuall distruction like in Battlefield 4 again would be great btw. 😀)

Also think about adding an infantry close quarter map like Operation Metro, Locker or Underground. These were always the most popular maps and people are tired of the vehicle dominated gameplay we have right now.

I hope you listen to this because I think I speak for pretty much all the experienced players that still hope you bring the game back on the track. (*cough* removing specialists and adding a class system *cough*)

Give us updates on your work as soon as possible!

About Battlefield 2042 General Discussion

Discuss the latest news and game information around Battlefield 2042 in the community forums.15,965 PostsLatest Activity: 16 minutes ago