For those who are saying the maps are huge

[Rambo]

I just found this thread and the OP sets it straight with a comparision with a BF2 map.Im not trying to fuel bf3 hate but rather state the facts... Crunch started this when he said "he thinks metro is bigger than the BC2 beta Valdez map".

http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/battlefield-3/1417656-caspian-compared-2-dragon-fushe-kubra-meters.html

To me Metro is a optical illision ,that it seems very big?.I never got to play caspion so i just cant judge how it feels in a jet.

[Vreki]

Re: For those who are saying the maps are huge

So the one conquest map we know of is on average 25% shorter and 15% wider than three carefully selected BF2 maps?
I dont think I will lose much sleep over that.

But I dont like how all the flags have been piled up in the middle.

[Scinto]

Re: For those who are saying the maps are huge

I just found this thread and the OP sets it straight with a comparision with a BF2 map.Im not trying to fuel bf3 hate but rather state the facts... Crunch started this when he said "he thinks metro is bigger than the BC2 beta Valdez map".

http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/battlefield-3/1417656-caspian-compared-2-dragon-fushe-kubra-meters.html

To me Metro is a optical illision ,that it seems very big?.I never got to play caspion so i just cant judge how it feels in a jet.

And Dice have already said that Caspian Border isn't the biggest map.

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: For those who are saying the maps are huge

The flag positioning is absolutely retarded. 50% of the map is without use or purpose.

[CptainCrunch]

Re: For those who are saying the maps are huge

I do agree that the flags are too close in Caspian Border by looking at the map. I didnt get to play it, so maybe it works out. DICE did mention that they want more action in their games and less sitting around. Maybe they think this will do that, IDK though.

However, Rambo, good try, I will give you that and +rep for effort. The problem is that they may be comparing two of the largest maps of BF2 to the smallest map of BF3. We just dont know. Actually, its not the smallest, metro is smaller than Caspian. I think its LONGER than Caspian though, its hard to tell, so not sure how that pans out.

Unfortunatly I dont know how the OP of the thread measured and if the maps are to scale. Lets assume they are and lets look at Caspian vs. Gulf of Oman:

Obviously the scale is not correct and Oman has a huge ocean that is a "no mans land". I think we all have a pretty good rememberance of the popular map though and I dont consider it the smallest map of BF2, but I feel that Caspian is larger than Oman. Those that played the map can clarify if it is. Hopefully someone will mention a yes or no on that.

So anyway, comparing the largest to the unknown isnt going to be enough to convince me that the world of Battlefield is shrinking. It could be, but as DICE has stated, some of the maps are the largest they have created. Maybe if the poster did a more thorough method of measurement and/or compared a small BF2 map, such as Dalian Plant, with Caspian then we could really see something. His measurement idea wasnt off by much, but he is standing at one point and looking at the other points and taking that measurement, so he knows the size from flag A to flag B, C, and D, but his picture shows border to border. So, which is it? How did he measure border to border? His quote from Demize only states one of the measurements, end to end, and not the width, yet he has width measurements.

So there has to be at least one map that is larger than any BF2 map to date and chances are there are a few that are closer to the same size and a few smaller than the largest of BF2.

A little off topic, looking at those BF2 maps and now knowing about the "invention" of the choke points, all three of those maps had a series of of them as well. I think Kubra Dam is moreso because of the mountain range and it was difficult going over them and around. I never really noticed that before. I mean every map has the paths most taken, but to see it now as oppose to back then is kinda interesting.

Crunch

[*FMJ*Power]

Re: For those who are saying the maps are huge

I definitely feel oman is larger than Caspian, just something more open and large feeling about it.........I cant put my finger on it, perhaps the lack of console saturation and bloom but I'm almost positive it's the piss poor flag placement on Caspian having them all thrown in a hodgepodge in the middle of the map. Although oman sure did have a lot of "untraversable" territory but it still just felt so much larger.

I fear that DICE's desire to be the next call of dooty is becoming more and more painfully clear with each minute i play this beta......infantry first......vehicle combat is a afterthought.....would be interesting to see the sizes on some classic 42' maps for comparison as well because i have a feeling they are only a fraction the size of those.

I'm all for progression of the series I certainly will take it all with a grain of salt but shying away from and drawing focus away from the one thing that sets a battlefield game apart from the crowd of cod wannabe's ;massive vehicular combat; just isn't the way to do it.

[MrChris_CJ]

Re: For those who are saying the maps are huge

as someone who played Caspian a lot

the flag setup works nicely, there is more space than you think but its map designed with a more hemmed in interior and open spaces surrounding it

you should see how much space the jets get to fly around in, is stupendous how far out you can go

they also finally put in uncap protection for conquest as well ha

[Anarchy1]

Re: For those who are saying the maps are huge

I agree, the flag placement is absolutely fine.

And Rambo, the problem with those pictures is that the person is assuming 1 m in BF2 = 1 m in BF3. The scales may be different.

Besides, I don't actually want a map as big as Fushee or Dragon Valley. They were great maps for vehicle combat, but the infantry combat was terrible. Get in a vehicle...drive to a flag...if you are unlucky, you may see a single enemy...drive to the next flag...while you are capturing it uncontested, the flag you just took was recaptured...drive back...recapture...etc. etc. etc. I loved BF2, but I hated the maps with 10 flags spaced out over an entire map.

Caspian is perfect. Plently of airspace for dogfights and heli battles. Lots of space around the flags for vehicles to move around and fight. And just enough space between the flags so that you can be an infantry and drive (running would does take a long time, unlike most BC2 maps...think the distance from Atacama US main base to flag B) between the flags and still have massive battles at each because that is where the infantry is concentrated.

[Shawn Zipay]

Re: For those who are saying the maps are huge

as someone who played Caspian a lot

the flag setup works nicely, there is more space than you think but its map designed with a more hemmed in interior and open spaces surrounding it

you should see how much space the jets get to fly around in, is stupendous how far out you can go

they also finally put in uncap protection for conquest as well ha

Also agreed.

Played a "ton" of Caspian while it was available and the flag placement in game is fine. With so many hills, rivers, forests, etc. It's a lot better in game than it is just by looking at some overhead map that doesn't give a fraction of the story.

As for the size comparisons, again, it's a huge map with everything factored into it. I'd rather have something like Caspian that's a tiny bit smaller than a map in BF2 than have it the size of some of the BF2 maps and feel TOO large and subsequently boring when you have to spend most of your time moving from place to place instead of fighting.

[Rambo]

Re: For those who are saying the maps are huge

Anarchy1

How can the scale be different?everything is in perspective of player and vehicle size.When you run with your character, it would be about a 1 meter stride and that would not change.

[-Shifty-]

Re: For those who are saying the maps are huge

Seeing those three BF2 maps again brought back so many wonderful memories. It's sad moving on from BF2. I really wish they'd release a BF2 map pack. I'd even pay for it.

[Elder]

Re: For those who are saying the maps are huge

Seeing those three BF2 maps again brought back so many wonderful memories. It's sad moving on from BF2. I really wish they'd release a BF2 map pack. I'd even pay for it.

I agree. One thing I always wish they would have done in BF2 is port over some of the old favorite maps from 1942. El alamein, Gazala, Battleaxe, Aberdeen, Bocage, Berlin, Stalingrad, Market Garden, 73 eastings, Lost village. I could go on all day, those maps were gold.

I would definitely pay for the occasional map pack.

[CptainCrunch]

Re: For those who are saying the maps are huge

Ummmm, they are releasing a BF2 map pack and its free for pre-orders.

They are also releasing map packs throughout the lifespan of BF3.

Crunch

[Eagle101]

Re: For those who are saying the maps are huge

also not to forget Karkand is coming back, and from what i remember back int he day Karkand was the top urban environment map! and 64 players was big. So in BF3 in addition to graphics its going to look amazing, cant wait to fight in it. plus we only saw 2 maps out of many to come.

[The_Eliminator]

Re: For those who are saying the maps are huge

The game is shipping with 9 maps right? And then we are getting 4 in the B2K map pack?