Eastwood Escalation still unbalanced despite the changes

I agree with every single point.

It really feels the map wasn't playtested, still isn't playtested, and is completely ignored because it wasn't Blackwell or Sobek.  Eastwood is just as bad as both of those maps, but for some reason it never gets the same hate.

I think they’re stuck because Eastwood has some fundamental flaws that go beyond this or that obj; it’s really the completely different terrains on each side of the map that kill it: one side you can hide and move freely in, the other is barren and dangerous. But yeah, it clearly hadn’t been tested enough.

But I understand why players are sympathetic to it: after the miserable maps from the initial release, and the nightmare of Blackwell Fields, players were really happy with Eastwood initially. Finally a “real” BF maps! The unbalance was only really discovered after a few months of play. I guess many people still ride that positive feeling. 

Honestly, the changes made it worse as far as I can tell.  Here's a few more problems.

• On top of the terrain and cover issues you point out, PAX has a safe hill to peak from INSIDE their spawn area.  Meanwhile, NATO hill is open play area.  
• Pax gimme, the house in the mountainside, cannot be flanked.  There are two routes to it, straight east across the no mans land of the empty road, or come at it from the south which go through the active battle.  PAX spawn has a clear view protecting this gimme base, while NATO gets the opposite, where their northern "gimme" provides more cover and access for the attacking team than NATO.
• PAX hillside + south gimme both offer EXCELLENT coverage of the southern empty flank route.  Nato side has abysmal coverage, with little to no cover for those wishing to guard the south flank.
• The route for NATO to the center of the map is littered with vehicles and tanks and anything else you can think of.  Conversely, the PAX side has clear open roads.  You CANNOT drive directly to center OBJ as nato, but you can as PAX.  The traversal time is so different that by the time NATO beings taking their north gimme, PAX is driving up to contest it, while NATO can't even get to the center OBJs by the time PAX has already capped 1.5 of those.
• The spattering of buildings on NATO side offer 101 places for players to hide respawn beacons.  On PAX side, there is almost nowhere to hide a respawn beacon.  NATO must spend a significant amount of time to clear homes every time a player makes it across the map, while PAX can just sweep the area and find 90% of beacons.  

It really feels the map wasn't playtested, still isn't playtested, and is completely ignored because it wasn't Blackwell or Sobek.  Eastwood is just as bad as both of those maps, but for some reason it never gets the same hate.