Kaleidescope

i don’t have a updated map layout but I feel like this would hurt the US team.

Its deceiving but the distance to the dual towers (F points) is about 600 Meters from both US and Russias starting point.  If anything, RU does have a little benefit with G1 being a little closer to them.  But this can easily be tweaked around within this South East part of the map.

In reality, i would have done something more like this where the yellow box is rubble from a destroyed building (or something along those lines) with an added objective here.  Then move RUs headquarters a little closer along the East to shrink the distance to G1--G1 is actually closer now for one of the towers than what this pic is since its the pre-rework.

@WedgeTornado 

Here is an updated photo of the new map and a bit clearer view of what Im showing.  The South East areas (the 4 towers) may need the objectives moved around a little bit but in essence, instead of 3 paths from each HQ (with the north being fairly dead right now), we condense it to 2 paths.

Why does this exist? Why waste assets for this area?

---

---

@WedgeTornado wrote:
@BgobbleDI’ll play it tonight and get back to you on the A sectors whether not I think there’s a use.

If that’s the skyscraper I remember there’s some good battles there is there not?

Fighting between the two As and C?I can’t remember that area but I know we capped it last night because we already had C1.

---

C is quite poor design due to its lack of cover--did not change with the rework from what I could tell except maybe some minor elevation.  A is very simple as well.  Youll typically get small skirmishes up here but most of the heavy fighting remains in the other points most of the time.  Plus, A and C are just a bit too deep in terms of traversal distance from everything else for infantry.  Kinda just feels "out there" imo.  This also has a tendency to lead to "sheeping" or whatever you want to call it, where players are just running from point to point.  The way this map is designed, 10 Objectives (7 sectors) is just not good for the flow of battle.  Thus why I think condensing it from 3 paths from each HQ to 2 paths would help a lot.

---

@Adamonic wrote:

What is the purpose of the tunnel with elevators next to the data center? I have never seen that tunnel used for a tactical purpose. You could gain back so many assets back by just sealing the entrances (maybe with rubble?). Then the number of assets gained back can be used elsewhere.

Also, how can you have that much tactical defensive structures and the concrete walls and curbs are perfect and untouched? The new ones leading to the data center are so high you can even climb over them anymore. Those should also all be blown up and cracked. 

---

Plus, maybe knock down some of the surrounding buildings so aircraft don't have a painfully easy time of LoSing any attempts to kill them/save on budget.

I'm honestly shocked they didn't do this, both as it should give a fair number of triangles (as I understand it) and help reduce the problem of unkillable aircraft.

@BgobbleDI was on the Russian side tonight and didn’t even make it to A lol.

It’s the bottom and top of that skyscraper right? Hell I’d just take that skyscraper and move it between B and D down there.

I’ve had some fights at C, the skate park on both teams so I’m not sure on cutting that out.

It’s wayyy to open though. Put some ramps in there, definitely needs more cover too. Hell take C and bring it towards D.

Are the devs not seeing this with all the playtests they do? “Hey level dev it’s looking better but man some of the objectives are way out there. Can we take a look at that? Let me show you what I mean”

Not sure how things get missed like this. If we see it they had to of. 

Question: Why are massive buildings still surrounding the map?

Doesn't that take up triangle budget that could be used in the play field?

Why do aircraft have guarantees cover as long as they're anywhere near the edges of the map, allowing them super easy access to hide behind buildings to block locks/missiles - which helps because stingers fly insanely slow.

The rest of the updates are pretty good, but it honestly still seems like nobody at DICE has the foggiest clue what to do with the horrible balance of aircraft so there's simply no effort put forth to do anything. That alone would go a long way in giving ground forces a chance in hell of killing a remotely competent pilot on Kaleidoscope, because otherwise it's like the past 4-5 rounds of CQ I've played - one team establishes air superiority and that team both maintains it and wins because there's simply no way to take down their aircraft as ground forces.

DICE, come the heck on. This is 9 months post launch and while things are getting better, this is "making my first videogame" stuff.

Russia side needs to be able to use the skyscraper with an elevator so it gives the option to come from above.  I strongly believe that would help the map be more balanced,  the US side gets 2 skyscrapers which are now completely useless in breakthrough but still overall give an equal opportunity to take the fight above instead of just ground and limited heli space.