This isn't conquest!

[troybob]

Re: This isn't conquest!

The maps are huge, just narrow as opposed to wide like previous BF maps.

This has map organization has its advantages, be keeping things relatively close but not to close, some interesting fire fights can occur.

I don't understand how "interesting" firefights are impossible on wider maps.

[imported_Kalo]

Re: This isn't conquest!

I also noticed this. But they seem structured like all of 2142s maps which I enjoyed a fair deal. So just give it a chance if you actually did like 2142.

[*FMJ*Power]

Re: This isn't conquest!

they are all extremely linear maps with the exception of a couple.....I too was pretty heartbroken when i saw how much of the maps are simply being wasted.....conquest should have the entire map open for play.

[Rambo]

Re: This isn't conquest!

they are all extremely linear maps with the exception of a couple.....I too was pretty heartbroken when i saw how much of the maps are simply being wasted.....conquest should have the entire map open for play.

was anoyed bf2 wasted alot of free space too,would like bigger or should i say wider for flanking ect.they may be as long as bf2 but there much much narrower

[=)BiT(= Evant3k]

Re: This isn't conquest!

Good example of maps wasting space is Zetar Wetlands.

[DrunkenPirate]

Re: This isn't conquest!

Oman was just as bad, if not worse.

[*FMJ*Power]

Re: This isn't conquest!

I guess I'm just so used to playing the AIX mod in the last year I never really noticed how much of the maps vanilla BF2 was wasting.

[iQue]

Re: This isn't conquest!

AIX has a lot more dense maps yeah... but also a lot more system demanding (not that it matters much now in 2010)