What makes a map good?

[Turbo]

I am going to be doing reviews for new battlefield 2 maps, tell me what you look for in a map design.

[Shiner]

Choke points (to concentrate opposing forces), availability of transport (to prevent walking 10 minutes just to die), creative cover (use of terrain, undergrowth, buildings etc that provides cover for attacking and defending units), and balance (ensuring the rock-paper-scissors is uphelp and both teams are equals on the map).

[Obi]

This is a hard question.

I enjoy trying to use the terrain of a map to my advantage so I think the shape and contours(sp?) of a map are important.

Edit: Crap,I only just saw the poll.

[Mateo]

Good open areas, combined with opportunities for close quarter combat.

[Tempus]

One thing not mentioned... TICKET BLEED! Not all maps have it, but they should.

Also, for what players like most in maps, one only needs to see how popular Karkand is.

Fewer flags is always good, too.

[=Sarc=]

I liked Karkand at first but I'm slowly losing interest. It ends up as a big killfest near the middle of the game. I do like that there aren't air assets because I feel the AA weapons are pitiful.

I think something like Karkand with ticket bleed would be good. Karkand reaches stalemate because it's not necessary to take flags to win. A map with a flag in the middle that becomes the deciding ticket bleed flag would be great. Zatar Wetlands is sort of like that but perhaps not so open.

[Shiner]

I was thinking of playing with the mod editor at some point on a map design.. one thing I wanted to experiment with was a 3 CP (2 UCB) map design. Ticket bleeding, no jets, no extra cps to worry about whack-a-mole. The team best able to utilize the terrain should be successful. I think in the TG environment you would see a decent amount of the fighting move out from the lone CP as the team with the CP will try and control the surrounding terroritory as well. This map would probably not be that successful in the "wild" but who cares.

[Shiner]

Question for the Admins.. does TG envision supporting a "TG Map Pack" or community produces maps that would run on our servers in the future?

[Beatnik]

Shiner and Tempus hit it - Ticket Bleed and Balance seem to be the two biggest deficencies in BF2 as is. Though 'Balance' is somewhat of a catch-all term... I personally prefer maps where I'm not getting completely dominated by air, since I lead ground squads 99% of the time. And it seems that maps with only 1 UCB heavily favor the team with the UCB.

[asch]

Originally Posted by Shiner

Question for the Admins.. does TG envision supporting a "TG Map Pack" or community produces maps that would run on our servers in the future?

I don't see any problem with custom maps that promote the TG style of play, meaning that it has a tactical nature to it. Maps that lead to running around killing people probably wouldn't fit, even though that's what some of the standard maps are like.

[asch]

Originally Posted by Beatnik

And it seems that maps with only 1 UCB heavily favor the team with the UCB.

I agree. This means the team w/o the UCB needs an extra squad to defend their main CP.

[perry]

I voted for natural choke points, CQC, and UCB's.

Ticket bleed is good because it brings tactics in to play instead of mass killing like Karkand becomes.

If you got rid of the land bridge things on Zatar it would be a much more interesting map. The bridges would become the choke points - you want to control and island, you need to control access to that island. There is ticket bleed. You have close fighting at the flags with open areas between them. Both teams have UCBs removed from the action so their assets are protected - except for that important center flag that has the attack chopper.

[Turbo]

Balance is going to be hard for me to judge by myself. I will try my best to see what I can come up with. I should be able to get an idea of the balance by the types of vehicles and terrain. Keep it coming I want to know what the TG community wants in a map. Would no artillery or scan be interesting?

[asch]

Originally Posted by Turbo

Balance is going to be hard for me to judge by myself. I will try my best to see what I can come up with. I should be able to get an idea of the balance by the types of vehicles and terrain. Keep it coming I want to know what the TG community wants in a map.

IMO, balance is map layout, vehicles, UCBs and CPs to start. Many maps are considered unbalanced now because one team as a UCB (or more) and the other does not.

Would no artillery or scan be interesting?

I think if both teams were without, it would definitely change the strategy / tactics of a map and that can be a good thing.

[Turbo]

Thanks Asch.