The Maps... oh the maps

(The following speech was delivered at TedX Mirak Valley)

Developers, 

Thanks for working hard to bring a solid experience to players after the series lost its way with 2042. There's a lot of good here: the gunplay, movement, sound design, etc. That does not go unnoticed. 

However, the maps in this game are fundamentally altering the experience of Battlefield. Besides Firestorm (which is from BF3) and Mirak Valley, I find almost no enjoyment in my gametime in multiplayer. The combination of extremely rapid spawning, poor lane design, overpopulated medium sized maps, and a general smallness to all maps (even the aforementioned "good" ones), leads me to feel like I am playing COD. Spawning in and dying within 5 seconds because I am being shot at from all sides immediately is antithetical to the experience of playing a BF game.

Having played BFBC2, BF1943, BF3, BF4, BF1, BF5, and BF2042, I feel well enough versed in the experience to know a well-designed map from a poorly-designed one. That's not to say every game had maps that tipped either side of good/bad, but there was at least some variety in the experience, and openness for battles to be wide and form fronts, and better Rock-Paper-Scissors gaming via the vehicles that leads the match to actually feel like a battlefield. Currently, the overwhelming onslaught where cooperative play and squad based tactics breaks down is genuinely disheartening. I've never played a BF game that I wanted to refund because of map issues, but I am genuinely considering it in this case, unless something changes with the new season, DLC, or map focused updates and additions. And I know for a fact I am not the only person who feels this way: Reddit Discussion on Map Issues, "Size is not the only issue, maps have no flow, no clear choke points or lanes, maps can't be small AND miss those features or they will suck. You can have small maps with great design, grand bazaar is a good example, with clear lanes, vehicle gameplay on the sides and flank options. Many bf6 maps are larger than grand bazaar yet they play worse because there's no flow."

I truly want to see battlefield succeed, I've missed this kind of gaming; the more tactical kind that prioritizes objectives, where classes can make a difference, and you can actually DO things before being killed in 5 seconds. But in its current state, BF6 is feeling more like COD than BF, and that is honestly sad. 

Some ideas to improve and bring the experience back to its core:

• As with Firestorm, port in some old BF maps that are fan faves. There are so many to choose from, but many of the ones from 3, 4, and 5 would suffice in this area. Classic maps already have proven pacing, balanced lanes, and thoughtful spawn zones. Bringing them back provides instant goodwill from veterans and reestablishes a design template for future maps.
• When designing new maps for future drops, avoid like the plague small, close quarters maps at least while this map selection is an issue. Smaller maps amplify player congestion, suppress vehicle gameplay, and push combat into a repetitive run-die-repeat loop. Large scale maps with flanking abilities and long scale vehicle play, as well as coverage so that fronts or assault lines have to form is imperative to keep the player base, especially players who love the BF formula and don't want Call of Battlefield.
• Some of the maps simply shouldn't be 64 players, it is so chaotic that it becomes very unfun, very quickly. Reducing player counts on mid-sized maps would help preserve balanced engagements and reduce constant suppression fire from all angles. The chaos right now erases the importance of positioning and teamwork, Battlefield’s core strengths.
• Increase spawn times specifically for the longer playtime modes or larger maps would help. This would slow down the pacing and allow attackers to establish footholds before being overwhelmed by near-instant defender respawns. It also gives time for squad-based tactics and flanking maneuvers to actually develop, instead of collapsing under nonstop reinforcements. Currently, playing attack (as I seem to be placed into nearly every mode, but that's a problem for another thread) is, and I mean this, almost impossible. The combination of attracting a large player base of non BF gamers (which is welcome mind you, they are just green and tend to play for kills and not tactics or defense) + near-immediate respawn for defenders makes it so that attackers have absolutely no breathing room to do... anything. I have yet to win a single match as attack. It is a huge balance issue. 
• A genuine rework of current medium and medium large maps with expanded map boundaries and more lanes, flanking routes, and reworked cover could definitely work. There is a priority of spectacle it feels, but this loses the logical, intentional design that allows for classic BF gameplay to happen. This would restore the sense of spatial logic and intentional design that allowed older Battlefield titles to form distinct fronts, rather than devolving into chaotic crossfire from every direction. Wider lanes and better cover placement naturally promote team play and longer life expectancy per spawn.
• There are more ideas to be shared, but perhaps others in this thread could chime in.

At the core of this are two things that I think capture this problem: New Sobek City, and the amount of back-capping occurring. 

New Sobek is ultimately a huge letdown of a map. I truly say this constructively, but it is possibly the worst BF map I can recall playing, at least in recent memory. This isn’t just about personal taste, it’s about how the map’s structure violates Battlefield’s core design language. I really think you Devs need to take a good hard look at the gameplay occurring on that map and see why it's design is emblematic of this larger issue: NSC mirrors what’s happening across multiple maps. It serves as a clear case for how overemphasis on spectacle and visual design can come at the cost of functional gameplay loops. Spawns and deaths feel stochastic and random, constantly looking over your shoulder and doing 360s to ensure no one is spawning or walking up right behind you is a fundamental misstep of BF map design. At its core, it just isn't fun. Fun in Battlefield arises from tactical momentum. When design randomness overrides skill and planning, that feedback loop collapses, leaving only frustration and fatigue. On top of this, during a breakthrough match, the first capture area is so stubbornly hard that I question if it was even play-tested in any meaningful way. This choke point imbalance breaks the fundamental rhythm of the mode. Attackers are funneled into open kill zones with little cover or alternate routes, which makes coordinated play futile and encourages mass quitting. Even a slight redesign such as expanded side lanes and improved cover density could resolve this. It is so frustrating, that when I get this map in a game, I quit most of the time. When players start abandoning sessions, it signals a systemic problem with engagement pacing and team balance. It simply is not enjoyable and the lack of tactical playing makes NSC an abysmal experience for attackers. See here: New Sobek City discussion, the top comment reads "Defending New Sobek stage 2 in Breakthrough is indistinguishable from a bot farm server, there's literally nowhere for attackers to flank to." This is my experience as well. 

In terms of back-capping: obviously that has always occurred in BF games, I am not going to pretend like it hasn't, but when it occurs, it is due to smart players working tactically to surround or flank an unguarded point. In BF6, back-capping occurs in nearly every single conquest game I play because the map size and stochastic spawning and poorly designed laning makes it so defending in a meaningfully tactical way is fundamentally impossible. Points can flip instantly with no opportunity for squads to reinforce, which breaks the illusion of a living front line. Players can’t hold or plan, they simply react, turning conquest into a disorganized deathmatch. When this occurs, the map becomes a chaotic mess where you are blasted and sniped from every direction on the compass. It is, again, simply not fun. This all-angle threat environment removes the predictability and coherence that Battlefield maps need to support teamwork. In prior titles, back-capping was a strategic maneuver, earned through stealth or coordination. Here, it happens arbitrarily because players spawn unpredictably across tiny zones, destroying any coherent front line or sense of territory control.

I hope this criticism is taken constructively and to heart. I really care about BF6 and want it to succeed! And I am not some purist: I know the series must develop, evolve, and move forward. But in its current state, this is less of an evolution and more of a copy/paste of COD. That classic tactical BF experience is seldom found right now. The large-scale, strategic, class-driven gameplay makes it unique. Fixing map flow and spawn logic isn’t just about balance but preserving the game's identity in a shooter landscape saturated with faster, smaller, less tactical twitch shooters. Please, listen to the feedback about maps. Larger scale, improved lanes and choke points, smarter directional coverage and cover, spaciousness for vehicle battles, and tactical design language can really bring BF6 to life in a way no other shooter can!