Copyright reddit
Good faith is hard when people automatically assume EA/ DICE are out to get them but I'll try: Battle royale games only work on large maps. Fortnite, Apex, Warzone, etc, they all have one thing in common - their maps are massive compared to any non-battle royale shooter. The battle royale formula relies on a healthy combination of looting, exploration, initiating combat, and de-escalating combat. Part of what makes the genre so enthralling for people is how many ways there are to approach combat and the win conditions. You need to be able to run away, especially when another squad has an advantage on you, and sometimes that means running for miles to get away. Being able to hide, sneak, third party, or run head first into every engagement is part of what makes the formula work. The same goes for Battlefield 6's battle royale. A large map is paramount to the genre to enable a wide variety of tense encounters that don't always come down to gunfights, and allow for win conditions that don't always involve killing as many people as possible. This isn't true of Conquest. Map design for conquest has to force gunfights and heavy traffic areas, otherwise games would all go to time. It's why maps like Firestorm are so heavily criticised - the map is so open that there are no clearly defined combat zones, and even crossing the road between buildings is often suicide. Caspian Border had the same issues, which is why infantry players don't like it as much as vehicle players. Compared to, say Golmud, where there are obviously zoned areas for vehicles and infantry, and crossover is dangerous for each party. The map feels big, but when you actually look at it it's not very large at all. This is in part due to how the map is laid out, but also because the scale of fights is focused down into important areas rather than spread out. Contrary to what this sub seems to think, larger does not always equal better for a Battlefield map. One of the most popular maps in Battlefield history is Zavod, which was narrow, claustrophobic, and made vehicle players work very hard for a long life. It was mid sized overall, with common chokes and defensive lines forcing gunfights. Very similar to Liberation or Mirak in BF6 in terms of design ethos. The only difference is that it included viable flank routes on the outside in the wooded areas, which BF6 maps have chosen to omit. I'd like to see map boundaries on Rush and Breakthrough expanded a little. Likewise, the battle royale can include full destruction because map balancing does not matter, due to the shrinking player space. In conquest or any other modes, full destruction would mean any map could become a wasteland by the end of the game, and any meaningful outplay, verticality, or positioning becomes irrelevant.
