Re: Maps Need to be bigger.

I don't think it needs saying that Battlefield 6 isn't for just anyone. It's either kill or be killed. It's simple, but what does that have to do with what I'm thinking? Escalation maps should be massive, not as large as they are. The largest is large, but offers few options. Don't you think that if the game is going to be about war, it should be over-the-top? I'm talking about enlarging the maps and adding the ability to use one artillery piece per game. I also want to increase the game time to two hours in Escalation mode. There's no way to use better vehicles for longer than a dozen seconds, after which the game ends. I mean, in general, the options are greater, but there are limitations, such as the small map size and the short time limit during a single game.

Adding new weapons and vehicles, I think the M142 HIMARS would be great for long-range support for Nato. And the Panzerhaubitze 2000 could be for the PaxArmata. The reload time would be enormous, but the blast radius would be large in both vehicles, enough to cover one part of the sectors on the map within a 10-meter radius. After that, for example, the artillery would charge for 30 to 45 seconds. Before firing, you would need to activate the fire mode so that the artillery could move. Otherwise, the gun would be inactive. These are just my suggestions, but I think that for wargames in modes like Escalation, it would be good on huge maps. Regarding the maps, I suggest adding new ones, five times larger than the largest one, which is two maps. At least then you wouldn't have to mention knowing all the locations in one round and getting rid of everyone in the second. The maps would be divided into three sectors: the upper one, which is, for example, a city, the middle one, empty fields with a few buildings, and the lower one, which is a rocky terrain with a canyon. There are several passages between them. What do you think? Would it be interesting or not? I'm waiting for the developers to see what they think.