Battlefield Core Feedback - Maps - Feedback Thread

• Which maps presently provide a poor opening experience because of the location of the Base Spawn?
  -All the maps share this issue. Initial spawn points should be moved further forward.
  
  
• Which maps are making it harder to get back into the fight in an all cap scenario?
  -All of them, all cap is and always was a problem in BF and was only ever solved in private servers by nuking the ''farmers''. Adding base AA like in previous games would be wonderful.
  
  
• How do you feel about the current balance between Infantry and Vehicles in Breakthrough?
  -It is bad, not only because of the overwhelming number of vehicles but because of our inability to COUNTER them. MORE transport vehicles, LESS attack vehicles. Keep in mind that TRANSPORT vehicles have weapons too.
  
  
• Have you played 64 player Breakthrough, and do you feel that this is the better way to experience the mode?
  -Yes. Better FPS because of less players, less chaos and games flow little better. Still it suffers greatly from lack of cover and the vehicle problem.
  
  
• On which maps and Flags do you see the most immediate need for more line of sight blockers?
  -Simple, all of them (except Manifest). But Hourglass, Breakaway, Kaleidoscope and Renewal need it the most especially between flags.
  
  
  
• Do you have specific areas on maps that currently stand out to you as lacking cover?
  -See the answer to the previous question, the same applies here because those maps are by far the worst offenders.
  
  
• Do you have thoughts on how we can better define traveling paths between objectives to keep combat focused?
  -More UNARMED transport vehicles like cars, quads, etc. Underground passageways or Overpasses.
  
  
• Do you see improvement opportunities to make it easier to understand how to get from one objective to the next?
  -People can figure it out themselves as long as there is a safer route provided and less Boltes and Nightbirds to mow them down.
  
  
  !!! Here is a good idea to improve maps !!!
  
  Weapon stations need to make a comeback. Capping X flag to gain Artillery or AA emplacements greatly increased the value of some areas of the map and made it worth fighting for to gain a significant advantage over the enemy team.

I think the difference in strategic importance is too great for sectors that consist of a single area and those that do not. A point located in the center of the map should consist of multiple areas or multiple sectors.
I like manifests and discards, but I don't like hourglasses. Manifests and discards have almost contrasting terrain. In the hourglass, the importance of the sectors divided into 3 areas is low, and I think that the victory or defeat is divided in the 3 sectors in the center.

I have never played a breakthrough. Only Conquest and Hazard Zones.

In all seriousness. Would it be possible to just turn 2042 in an updated BF4. Assault, Support, Recon. "Hardcore!" Not all these enemy arrows. BF4, the gold standard of FPS's. Makes one wanna cry 

I have made an excessive post highlighting the issues with the application od the action points on Kaleidoscope here: https://answers.ea.com/t5/General-Discussion/Battlefield-Core-Feedback-Maps-Feedback-Thread/m-p/11329330#M91106

And now I am going to specifically answer the questions attached:

Which maps presently provide a poor opening experience because of the location of the Base Spawn?

- All of them, they are all 200-300m too far away, which even takes too long in a fast vehicle. Just run from Base to A in Renewal, or the worst I have seen, Manifest. Further some real evil genius decided to put about the only pieces of indestructible cover onto the base spawn with narrow gates, so tanks and jeeps will just collide and delay deployment even further, I have also blown up and been blown up in a jeep several times while en route to the first objective because of that.

Which maps are making it harder to get back into the fight in an all cap scenario?

- All, being all-capped means the round is over, travel time, flag layouts, map size, accessibility as well as the overcomplicated conquest and barebones scoring system all make sure that capturing flags and moving is something people actively try not to do. So an all-cap will end the game, whereas in BF4 it was possible to make a comeback easier, although it likely did not change the outcome of the match, but it does not have to, it is just to break up the stalemate and allow dynamic movement again.

How do you feel about the current balance between Infantry and Vehicles in Breakthrough?

- It is awful in Breakthrough, because ifnantry is more clumped up, but it is even worse in Conquest. Speaking as a guy that is T1 with the Hover and Bolte, Breakthrough is harder because more people in one spot will mean more rockets and more rockets hitting potentially killing the vehicle. In Conquest you are farming lone people and small groups that have little chance to retaliate in time. BT also has less vehicles than Conquest. Air assets are equally oppressive in both gamemodes and here clumped up infantry is tendencially better, because it equals more kills and makes it easier to flee, since the playable area is so condensed.

Vehicle balance can only be improved with added structural cover, which means indestructible cover from all sides, especially from above. Also all launcher ammo needs to be 5-7 by default so you can actually fight any vehicle.

Have you played 64 player Breakthrough, and do you feel that this is the better way to experience the mode?

- It improves the performance, which is a big plus for many people, but apart from that it changes little. In Conquest it even makes the game worse, because the flags are denser and players are less spread out, while air space remains the same. This in turn means less coverage air space, which is the only way to deter air assets.With 128 players the chance that one guy with a Stinger is under the escape route of a heli is higher. This applies to BT as well, but not as much, since it already is condensed.

On which maps and Flags do you see the most immediate need for more line of sight blockers? Do you have specific areas on maps that currently stand out to you as lacking cover?

- All maps and all flags that are not part of the infantry fighting areas. That said, flags need the least amount of sight blockers, by your map design algorithm cover can only happen on flags, so everywhere else is more in need of cover. All flags need more structural cover, meaning buildings, that come with what is commonly known as a roof. This should be the prime learning point. Roofs. Also cover that is impenetrable to ground vehicles, so that you can evade them completely.

Also LOS blockers are meaningless if it is a bush. Indestructible cover. As for specific areas: Everything outside of the flag areas on Breakaway (Ice Sheet, Gravel Hill), Discarded, Hourglass, Renewal (basically everywhere, but especially E to D, A to C, B to C), all maps really.
Flag specific, all new flags on the new version of Kaleidoscope, because you just moved every flag out into the open. Spawn areas also need to be in cover.

Do you have thoughts on how we can better define traveling paths between objectives to keep combat focused?

- To actually incentivize moving and reducing travel times. If the shortest way is devoid of cover, people will not travel. Cover means cover from all sides. Not necessarily everwhere, as vehicles need to move. Also flanking routes should not be three times longer as the direct route and expose you to everyhwere but the position you are trying to flank. Scrap 50-200m from every travel distance. If you have multiple options to move out to the next objective more people will spread out.

Change your scoring and reward system, so that capturing is actually incentivized and not just a risk. Being in a super-fight for no reason so your squad can not spawn on you up to 30s is super-crap. Spawning 150m away from the objective you are defending is super-crap. Spawning in the open with vehicles around and/or in direct sightline of enemies, is super-crap.

Do you see improvement opportunities to make it easier to understand how to get from one objective to the next?

- Cover. If I see that the route to the next objective is an open field I will not traverse. It actively prevents me from moving. A direct view of the capture point, but with clear covered lanes will more likely invite people to traverse. Short distances will invite people to traverse. This should be obvious.

TL;DR: Structural cover from all sides especially above and drastically reduced travel times, alongside a revamp of the spawning system and mechanics and a re-do of the capture and scoring system will fix many issues, but will not get rid of the huge underlying flaws of the game design. Just bandaids.

Every single map in both Conquest and Breakthrough (64 and 128 players) needs more cover. I'd love to see a more war torn environment, broken down buildings, burnt out tanks etc.

Most maps are just a killing field for the Boltes and Nightbirds - as an almost exclusively infantry player I can honestly say this is the first Battlefield I've played (and I have played every one since 1942) that playing as infantry is a miserable experience, I simply do not enjoy it.

For traversal add more proper transport vehicles, quad bikes, jeeps - vehicles with no weapons! And as per the point above take out or balance some of the attack vehicles, give us infantry players a fighting chance!

• Which maps presently provide a poor opening experience because of the location of the Base Spawn?
  
  
  • Hourglass - A and E sectors have much less importance to capture, bucause they are far from Base Spawn and no influence without all flags capturing. So I suggest to set the Bases behind A and E, and add one single flag sector in the centre of C, D and E. C, D, E and new sector will be essential sectors to cap.
  • Breakaway - C is too far from the US base, and B is too far from both bases even it is a multi flag sector. How about moving the US base on behind of B, and make F single flag sector and C multi flag sector?
• Which maps are making it harder to get back into the fight in an all cap scenario?
  
  
  • All cap rarely occurrs, so you may not pay attention with it in current 2042.
• How do you feel about the current balance between Infantry and Vehicles in Breakthrough?
  
  
  • It seems to be no significant issue except C5 drone.
• Have you played 64 player Breakthrough, and do you feel that this is the better way to experience the mode?
  
  
  • Yes, I think so. 128 BT is too crowded. If the battle line is much more long, 128 BT can be fun but it seems to be difficult with current basic BF system.
• On which maps and Flags do you see the most immediate need for more line of sight blockers?
  
  
  • Kaleidoscope - C1
  • Breakaway - D1
• Do you have specific areas on maps that currently stand out to you as lacking cover?
  
  
  • Orbital - between D1, D2 and E1
  • Hourglass - the centre of C, D and E
  • Kaleidoscope - North and south of D1
• Do you have thoughts on how we can better define traveling paths between objectives to keep combat focused?
  
  
  • The sectors should be brought closer together, or a new sector should be added. It is easy to predict enemy position when a near objective is capped.
• Do you see improvement opportunities to make it easier to understand how to get from one objective to the next?
  • If the base is geographically isolated, it may be a good idea to reward mobility vehicles after capturing. Also, if it is far away and multi flag sector (less importance to cap sector), it would be good to reward a armored vehicle or helicopter.

I’m not a map designer and lots of the community have already provided videos and suggestions for the game that sound like a good direction more than I could contribute too. 

i would however suggest while to take the 6 months to fix one map you could release the maps from previous BF games that do work. This way we have a game we can play. Put the portal maps into regular rotation for full xp and add metro, grand bazaar, breakout, nelson bay, port Valdez. You have all the game assets so this would be a nice quick fix so that folk will play your game. 

biggest issue just now. I can’t play your game as not enough people are playing it in my region / platform. (EU / XSX)

Hello - have thought about this and put my views below to the key questions. Predominantly play on conquest and am very surprised that the majority of questions seem to lean towards the issues being in breakthrough. My experience of playing conquest on 128 player especially is you start so far away from the action that its easier to die and respawn at the first objective captures (which is always taken by whoever has a vehicle). Being forced to join the game and go through the mundane helicopter animations is pointless. Why not allow people to view the map and choose, or better yet not start a good 5 minutes away from any actual action. I think that is consistent on every map in most modes. I would stick to 64 player conquest if I could, but there aren't enough people playing for that right now!

The following is based on playing conquest 128/64.

• Which maps provide a poor opening experience because of the location of the base spawn?

I am struggling to think of one which doesn't. Especially on 128 player. Breakaway and Hourglass are especially bad, but all of them are just too far and too open.

• Which maps are making it harder to get into the fight in an all cap scenario?

None of the maps feel particularly good in this regard. If you have no capture points you're generally going to struggle. Perhaps some stationary TOW and anti aircraft might help prevent people being killed before they leave the perm spawn though. In fact it would be nice to have these dotted around all maps at various points to help keep vehicles honest.

• How do you feel about the current balance between infantry and vehicles in breakthrough?

I wouldn't say the imbalance is limited to breakthrough. My friends and I think that vehicles dominate in most conquest modes also. Personally I think having vehicles "self repair" is one of the main offenders. Someone can cause havoc, back off for a bit, wait for the self repair to do its job and then come back. Should have to rely on the repair tools for vehicles imo.

To counter Helicopters you have amongst other things SOFLAM but at the moment why does the person using it get very limited xp/credit when someone destroys a vehicle? This could use rework as I'm sure more people would use this gadget if they were rewarded appropriately.

Basic thoughts are that vehicles are very much overpowered, infantry is generally cannon fodder. This is especially true when your base spawn points are out in the open with no cover! A great example is on orbital at D1 (128). Spawn in a field and generally get cut down by a vehicle before you even get to the shipping containers. It's infuriating!

• Have you played 64 player breakthrough, and do you feel this is a better way to experience the mode?

I have not tried 64 player breakthrough, but generally I do not think this mode is enjoyable, preferred rush as a variation on this format.

• On which maps and flags do you see the immediate need for more line of sight blockers?

I think every map needs more cover, line of sight blockers, traversal routes etc. The whole thing is just way too big and way too open.

In an ideal world there would be way more buildings, destructible elements and the map would change during the course of the fight, as with all previous versions of Battlefield. At the moment things are way too static, apart from the odd wall being destructible everything feels too fresh, clean and not remotely war torn.

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

As I've said above they're all in need of reworking. Some egregious examples include hourglass - which is just a big open desert (I try to stay in the stadium for obvious reasons), the majority of breakaway which isn't around the hangers/outbuildings, kaleidoscope (anywhere outside the large central building), almost all of discarded apart from the spawn points on the ship. Every map suffers from the same issue - very big, very little cover. One of the best map areas is D1 and D2 on Orbital - there's a tunnel so you have some cover when moving point to point. That stands out to me as one of the few places infantry have a chance to avoid being massacred by vehicles.

• Do you have thoughts on how we could better define traveling paths between objectives to keep combat focused?

I really struggle to see how you can do this with the specialist system. You have guys with grappling ropes and flying suits that just go wherever they want. Perhaps consider removing these specializations as a first step to helping keep combat focused.

Without specialists traveling wherever and however they want I imagine it would be easier to create pathways using terrain, buildings etc. You do still have the problem that there are huge spaces between objectives and people can travel around them at will as it stands. I would take a look back at some of the maps in previous BF's to see how they were able to achieve this.

• Do you see improvement opportunities to make it easier to get from one objective to the next?

I think it is evident there are lots of ways to improve this. Everything now is too spread out and too open. I'm also not sure that increasing player count to 128 players has made things better. To accommodate the additional players the maps seem to be even bigger, which is not necessarily better.

One thing I would say about specific markers is it would be nice if the UI was better configured. I don't want to see all the objective markers down at ground level in my eyeline, put them up in the air - they block the view when aiming and generally cause annoyance. I've died a few times to someone who was stood in the middle of an objective marker, making them difficult to see.

Hope the above is useful. Good luck with the implementation of the feedback you receive.

Many thanks.