criterion-sm dice-lg ea-starwars-lg instagram lucasfilm-lg motive-lg twitch you-tube
Community Calendar

Linear map designs fits better in Star Wars

I just read some topics here and I'm suprised many people here suggests more open maps. "Linear maps" as you call it fits Star Wars more moreover it fits every war game more.
On the battlefield there are frontlines which you have to force forward or backward. So how it was in battlefront1 gave you a feeling you are on a battlefield.
More open maps with muliple starting points would be unlogical.

Replies

  • I imagine the maps in BF2 will still have some linear and 3-lane design to them with maybe some deviations. I don't expect huge changes
  • Trooper8059
    10199 posts Member
    edited May 2017
    I think it depends on the mode it works alongside with. But focusing solely on linear maps and modes is definitely not the way to go. Linear maps leave pretty much no room for any kind of strategy or creativity, it's just push or defend. It makes the game grow repetitive faster than it has to be. You learn the maps faster, and as a result you get more tired of the same thing happening over and over again. It's especially frustrating in this game considering it's been out more than a year and people are still making the same simple mistakes over and over again.

    Now, take Battlefield 1 for example. Battlefront and Battlefield 1 both released with a similar number of larger maps, that being not too many. However, each took to their maps a separate way. Battlefront has almost every map move in 1-2 directions. Battlefield allows you to choose far more. The maps got older quicker in Battlefront and the playerbase decreased drastically. Battlefield has received quite some flak from its community on the content updates, but yet its playerbase still remains quite healthy.
    PSN: Trooper8059
    "Remember: Your focus determines your reality."
    ezgif_5_a643336582.gif
  • They can still keep the linear basics and add more than 1 or 2 routes so at least 4 routes. It could provide you the feeling you are fighting on the frontlines and keeps you interested in finding more tactics and don't get bored
    @Trooper8059
  • Undeadjon
    339 posts Member
    I always felt that if a map and it's objectives are placed right, that there's a good line of defense, and if so that's how I'd enjoy it
    Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good forum post kid.
  • Frix
    626 posts Member
    HoundTwin wrote: »
    I just read some topics here and I'm suprised many people here suggests more open maps. "Linear maps" as you call it fits Star Wars more moreover it fits every war game more.
    On the battlefield there are frontlines which you have to force forward or backward. So how it was in battlefront1 gave you a feeling you are on a battlefield.
    More open maps with muliple starting points would be unlogical.

    I like linear when the game mode has defenses built into the map like trenchers and pillboxes. But it just feels awkward when you can't push the enemy back at all and for some reason the maps are designed so that there are no flanking routes.

    Linear is okay if the map and game mode is designed correctly. However in the last game they weren't. Open maps solve this.
  • TimothyTheFirst_
    195 posts Member
    edited May 2017
    it's fine when the mode is balanced well. it becomes a problem when... for example, last night a friend and i were playing, we played a bunch of games and then it got to the point where walker assault was pretty much the only playlist we could find a game. we got into a match on survivors of endor as the rebels. the imperials were just wrecking us with heroes and vehicle pickups and it got to the point where we were pushed so far back we were under fire literally the second we spawned in.

    and I kept looking at the map thinking "man if only i could flank all these people from the other side..." but that side was blocked off. and there was literally nowhere to go, we would spawn and whichever direction you picked (if you even had time to pick one) there was either an at-st, a hero, or a dozen infantry troopers shooting at you.

    I think the best player on our team was like 14-32.

    my point is the linear maps can be really fun when they're done right but when they're not, the game becomes pretty much unplayable.

    my friend and I were talking about how even on the more linear modes in battlefield, when your team is pushed all the way back, it still spawns you back a little bit further and there's more than one spawn point which pretty much fixes that whole problem.
  • I know I prefer linear maps especially matched with a attack and defend mode, keeps the action going. I would like to see more verticality.
    Big open maps even on Battlefield with 64 players can get boring, you spend half the game running around looking for people.
  • ROMG4
    4069 posts Member
    Indeed the worst thing about the game were the Grey Zones.

    Rebel Players could place Blaster Cannons down in their grayed out area and camp the first uplink on Survivors Of Endor and there was no way to flank them. the only way to get to them was either a Ion Torpedo or rushing the Blaster Cannon with a Hero or Shield Infantry and considering how badly they implemented team work in the last game....yeah.

    I lost a Bossk thanks to my team being incompetent and constantly being hit by fire from the Blaster Cannon.

    Rework the Teamwork system entirely we need troop commands that go to every player and cannot be blocked, Classes that definitely support and demand Teamwork and superior map design as in the last one it's pretty much just charging in the open or small crowded areas.
Sign In or Register to comment.