User blog comment:The Z/Battlefield 3 - What DICE (still) need to fix/@comment-1990578-20120101202020/@comment-3020230-20120108075527

I agree Eden, and I've added the MAV problem in the above post... it's been annoying me too as of late.

The map designs in BF3 feature some of the BC2 style for the larger non-B2K maps, but have a lot more condensed urban warfare as well, no doubt to draw in the adrenaline-fuelled lovers of certain other games in the FPS genre (and not just the single one you may or may not be thinking of), as well as to showcase the powerful Frostbite 2 engine. I see no harm in having more urban maps, but only if they had larger areas and/or more access routes between objectives. I don't particularly like seeing maps with 1-3 routes between both sides in any games other than Call of Duty and Counter-Strike. Battlefield is all about strategical, open-world vehicular combat, not so much Paris Metro station bloodbaths. It's fun for a while, but it needs to be more dynamic in its events. I've spent many matches on Op Metro where the whole match was a simple one-line front with us holding B and A, rockets and grenades flying down the corridor and claymores covering the second set of escalators and that being the same for the entirety of that round. I love Op Metro as a map, but I don't like how static and how annoying it can be sometimes.

I'd love to experience 64 players on Op Metro btw, it'd be absolutely insane, no doubt. I love insanity like that, but only for a short time, then it just becomes annoying. I've been on both sides of spawn trapping on Op Metro and it's not fun at all if you're on the receiving end of it. That's my reason for mentioning team balancing.

TL;DR You wrote an essay, so I write an essay back :)