The new map ar pacific is really nice, but we nearly loose every round of it. Some problems are the allies can build spawn within 45m, when we have to build them 80 meters away. Also the mostly have the high ground, soupieret tanks and planes. Havy MGs build on the hills (high ground) can directly fire in the spawns and kill most of reserve. It really feel lost every time.
2 Likes
As I’ve noted on other posts, this also is not so much of a direct “this map is poorly made” issue.
A lot of these issues can have a sort of waterfall effect of issues tied back to one main thing:
That fortifications are far too flimsy and broken in far too many ways.
Hear me out here.
If sandbag walls had:
- the ability to be double stacked
- were immune to fragmentation damage
- were much more resistant to HMG fire
- could be placed more effectively along player dug trenches
- couldn’t be “deconstructed” unless you had an engineer or toolkit consumable
A LOT of the issues with “bad maps” would be alleviated. Tanks and aircraft spam, HMGs, Spray and Pray flamethrowers, and others would no longer be such an issue. However, it would still require a player to set it up to really benefit from the change. So if players elect to be dumb and not try to put up any fortifications, then they will continue to get relentlessly pounded by these things.
Before someone makes the comment that they sandbag walls would be to hard to break then, let me say this:
- Engineers
- TNT mines
- Direct hits from aircraft
- Tanks running over them
- Toolkit consumables (likely used with a large backpack as a viable alternative to grenade pouches)
- Enough large blasts nearby (it still takes damage from direct blast, but not fragmentation damage)
All of these ways can be used to get through fortification, and historically its how they did. It would GREATLY help change up gameplay for the better, and alleviate a lot of issues, including this one.
1 Like
They would need to make the matches longer first because as it is now theres barely any time to build fortifications or dig trenches
1 Like
The main issue of the plane wreck map are the absurd exploitable spawn points, even for a Enlisted map.
1 Like
I’m not disagreeing, but there is also this.
Additionally, I do think that defenders should always be shown where ALL objectives are going to be via the map. Pulling back to fortify shouldn’t be frowned upon, after all that player is essentially trading a lot of potential points to set up in advance, which can often be the difference between being able to hold a point or not and therefore winning the game.
Idk why the devs seem to be allergic to adding mechanics that would add more strategic gameplay, rather than just run-and-gun BS like CoD. That playstyle is SO overdone anymore, many of us just want strategic gameplay and teamwork.
1 Like
Do the objectives not stay the same based on gametype?
Not really a problem of new map, Japanese are currently loosing on old ones as well.
No. There are some objectives that are guaranteed locations, such as the bunker on the airfield map in normandy, but MAJORITY of objectives have 2- 3 possible locations per objective.
It used to be that the location with the default spawn would be the location it would go to next, but that has since changed as too many people complained that defenders were actually setting up in advance (which is the entire point). So now it goes to one of the two and from my testing it seems to choose whichever one has the fewest fortifications nearby (the LEAST defended of the options).