# Maps when? **URL:** \ **Category:** General Discussion\ **Created:** [April 16, 2019, 6:56pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858 "2019-04-16T18:56:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Ypsilon-Oh](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/y/9dc877/32.png) [@Ypsilon-Oh](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Ypsilon-Oh)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 4:48pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/21 "2019-04-17T16:48:00Z")
> [@Ameriken05](#): > > GrinddalDDG said: > > Ameriken05 said: > I would stay patient and excited. We are getting two maps focused on just the Battle of Greece and hints at at least a few Pacific maps this fall. Obviously content push on this game is a slow burn but can’t complain too much because it’s free and the player base will not get divided by any paywalls. Do I miss the guaranteed content of premium - sure, but I won’t miss how half of that content will be dead and empty a few months later because half the player base doesn’t have it. And we should be glad they put BR into the game as it could add to the fanbase and revenue of the game and hopefully extend out the WW2 content timeline. Hopefully, hopefully they keep the content going until the next gen consoles are released and it’s time for a fully upgraded BF title. That means we have a full 1 1/2 years plus of WW2 content, and with Pacific already on the roadmap I would expect a very busy 2020 with Eastern Front, Italy, France, Germany, etc. > > Buck up 🙂 > > [CBRA] CPT CALIGULA > > Free? Perhaps after we have our 9-10 maps, then the rest are “free”. > > Well with Panzerstorm and now Halvoy I’d say the game is pretty close to 100% of what base content should have been, so yes moving forward the 2-3 maps coming later this summer are free, not to mention what will most likely accompany the opening of the Pacific theater. Sounds like 5-6 maps coming this year (Mercury, Marita, Urban CQM maps, Mystery “Battlefield Fan” Map, 1-4 Pacific Maps?) BR map doesn’t count cuz u can’t play conquest on it… ---
**Author:** ![Stahlmach](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/d9b06d/32.png) [@Stahlmach](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Stahlmach)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 5:12pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/22 "2019-04-17T17:12:00Z")
Doublepost because the Forum acts again like a drunken Mongol who yells at Night against the chinese Wall ---
**Author:** ![Stahlmach](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/d9b06d/32.png) [@Stahlmach](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Stahlmach)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 5:13pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/23 "2019-04-17T17:13:00Z")
> [@aRrAyStArTaT0](#): > > > [@Ameriken05](#): > > > > > [@GrinddalDDG](#): > > > > > > > [@Ameriken05](#): > > > > > > > > I would stay patient and excited. We are getting two maps focused on just the Battle of Greece and hints at at least a few Pacific maps this fall. Obviously content push on this game is a slow burn but can’t complain too much because it’s free and the player base will not get divided by any paywalls. Do I miss the guaranteed content of premium - sure, but I won’t miss how half of that content will be dead and empty a few months later because half the player base doesn’t have it. And we should be glad they put BR into the game as it could add to the fanbase and revenue of the game and hopefully extend out the WW2 content timeline. Hopefully, hopefully they keep the content going until the next gen consoles are released and it’s time for a fully upgraded BF title. That means we have a full 1 1/2 years plus of WW2 content, and with Pacific already on the roadmap I would expect a very busy 2020 with Eastern Front, Italy, France, Germany, etc. > > > > > > > > Buck up 🙂 > > > > > > > > [CBRA] CPT CALIGULA > > > > > > Free? Perhaps after we have our 9-10 maps, then the rest are “free”. > > > > Well with Panzerstorm and now Halvoy I’d say the game is pretty close to 100% of what base content should have been, so yes moving forward the 2-3 maps coming later this summer are free, not to mention what will most likely accompany the opening of the Pacific theater. Sounds like 5-6 maps coming this year (Mercury, Marita, Urban CQM maps, Mystery “Battlefield Fan” Map, 1-4 Pacific Maps?) > > With the maps we have now, we’re past base BF1 and BF4 map count. And the spectacle of some of the recently released maps (Firestorm for example) really shows how much actually went into them. Considering their size (Firestorm’s map is an estimated 4x Hamada in size) and their detail level, it feels like, there’s a lot missing from individual areas, but overall, lots is there. If we were to put the content from Firestorm’s map into a Rotterdam sized map, it would be more cluttered than any other BF game to date. > . > Work went into these maps. Just because some don’t prefer to play them doesn’t mean that the maps don’t exist and content wasn’t delivered. Thats like saying that the Singleplayercampaigns count because they have " maps " and " work went into these ". Firestorm was created by Criterion and not Dice. So what are they actually doing all the time ? Oh i know they announced one Map for march but that was delayed a week before the release towards May and nobody knows if that one map will now even be released in May. The next thing are Cod like 5 vs 5 Maps nobody asked for. Former Battlefield titles had shortly after release more maps on the main part of Battlefield which is Conquest. While these maps were far better than the joke maps of BF V. ---
**Author:** ![PsychoRat66](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/p/cdc98d/32.png) [@PsychoRat66](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/PsychoRat66)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 5:14pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/24 "2019-04-17T17:14:00Z")
Predictably, the DICE shill has entered the room. ---
**Author:** ![aRrAyStArTaT0](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/53a042/32.png) [@aRrAyStArTaT0](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/aRrAyStArTaT0)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 5:20pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/25 "2019-04-17T17:20:00Z")
> [@Stahlmach](#): > > > [@aRrAyStArTaT0](#): > > > > > [@Ameriken05](#): > > > > > > > [@GrinddalDDG](#): > > > > > > > > > [@Ameriken05](#): > > > > > > > > > > I would stay patient and excited. We are getting two maps focused on just the Battle of Greece and hints at at least a few Pacific maps this fall. Obviously content push on this game is a slow burn but can’t complain too much because it’s free and the player base will not get divided by any paywalls. Do I miss the guaranteed content of premium - sure, but I won’t miss how half of that content will be dead and empty a few months later because half the player base doesn’t have it. And we should be glad they put BR into the game as it could add to the fanbase and revenue of the game and hopefully extend out the WW2 content timeline. Hopefully, hopefully they keep the content going until the next gen consoles are released and it’s time for a fully upgraded BF title. That means we have a full 1 1/2 years plus of WW2 content, and with Pacific already on the roadmap I would expect a very busy 2020 with Eastern Front, Italy, France, Germany, etc. > > > > > > > > > > Buck up 🙂 > > > > > > > > > > [CBRA] CPT CALIGULA > > > > > > > > Free? Perhaps after we have our 9-10 maps, then the rest are “free”. > > > > > > Well with Panzerstorm and now Halvoy I’d say the game is pretty close to 100% of what base content should have been, so yes moving forward the 2-3 maps coming later this summer are free, not to mention what will most likely accompany the opening of the Pacific theater. Sounds like 5-6 maps coming this year (Mercury, Marita, Urban CQM maps, Mystery “Battlefield Fan” Map, 1-4 Pacific Maps?) > > > > With the maps we have now, we’re past base BF1 and BF4 map count. And the spectacle of some of the recently released maps (Firestorm for example) really shows how much actually went into them. Considering their size (Firestorm’s map is an estimated 4x Hamada in size) and their detail level, it feels like, there’s a lot missing from individual areas, but overall, lots is there. If we were to put the content from Firestorm’s map into a Rotterdam sized map, it would be more cluttered than any other BF game to date. > > . > > Work went into these maps. Just because some don’t prefer to play them doesn’t mean that the maps don’t exist and content wasn’t delivered. > > Thats like saying that the Singleplayercampaigns count because they have " maps " and " work went into these ". Firestorm was created by Criterion and not Dice. So what are they actually doing all the time ? > Oh i know they announced one Map for march but that was delayed a week before the release towards May and nobody knows if that one map will now even be released in May. The next thing are Cod like 5 vs 5 Maps nobody asked for. > Former Battlefield titles had shortly after release more maps on the main part of Battlefield which is Conquest. While these maps were far better than the joke maps of BF V. I mean, is it not? Just because you don’t like Battle Royal titles doesn’t mean they don’t exist and work didn’t go into them right? Just because you don’t like racing games or fighting games doesn’t mean they don’t exist. It’s a ridiculous assumption to pull the “But I don’t play BR so that’s not relevant to me” as it can be applied to literally anything, even in the same game. Just because you don’t play with shotguns doesn’t mean the new shotgun they (might) come out with doesn’t mean it’s not content. . Also, be careful with absolutes. “Nobody asked for” is a blanket statement. I’m sure atleast one person has asked for it. I’ve even seen it on the forums. There’s a reason Squad Conquest was so popular. ---
**Author:** ![aRrAyStArTaT0](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/53a042/32.png) [@aRrAyStArTaT0](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/aRrAyStArTaT0)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 5:27pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/26 "2019-04-17T17:27:00Z")
> [@PsychoRat66](#): > > Predictably, the DICE shill has entered the room. Please stay on topic. Just because you and I don’t align with the same opinions doesn’t mean I’m a shill. I know, and have publicly acknowledged the faults in the game. Just because I still enjoy myself when I play it doesn’t mean I’m being paid to play and make opinions about it. . Don’t believe that I have negative opinions about some things about the game? Read my comment history. I’ve read some of yours. I don’t want to discuss your comment history but I will discuss mine. . I’ve said things are wrong with the game. Multiple times. Most recently, about Combined arms and how it still needs work. I’ve also talked about Sniper balance and AR balance. I’ve done a lot. I’ve seen a lot. I’ve grown tired of seeing unconstructive complaints from these forums. I’ve grown tired of the “Why aren’t they responding” even though they’ve responded repeatedly to multiple threads. I’ve grown tired of the “Me” center that this forums has grown around. “Why aren’t developers responding to _me_?” “Why did they bother with Firestorm? It doesn’t interest _me_.” ---
**Author:** ![Ernie\_Shavers](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/e/53a042/32.png) [@Ernie\_Shavers](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Ernie_Shavers)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 5:30pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/27 "2019-04-17T17:30:00Z")
> [@doctorrocktor](#): > > Same it is getting harder to defend this game,I’ve started to wake up. I woke up a month ago maybe even further back than that. Checking in here is interesting as I love the franchise and and want to see a culture change from DICE. Unfortunately that hasn’t happened and DICE still seems greatly detached, distant and out of touch. ---
**Author:** ![Stahlmach](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/d9b06d/32.png) [@Stahlmach](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Stahlmach)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 5:34pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/28 "2019-04-17T17:34:00Z")
> [@aRrAyStArTaT0](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Thats like saying that the Singleplayercampaigns count because they have " maps " and " work went into these ". Firestorm was created by Criterion and not Dice. So what are they actually doing all the time ? > > Oh i know they announced one Map for march but that was delayed a week before the release towards May and nobody knows if that one map will now even be released in May. The next thing are Cod like 5 vs 5 Maps nobody asked for. > > Former Battlefield titles had shortly after release more maps on the main part of Battlefield which is Conquest. While these maps were far better than the joke maps of BF V. > > I mean, is it not? Just because you don’t like Battle Royal titles doesn’t mean they don’t exist and work didn’t go into them right? Just because you don’t like racing games or fighting games doesn’t mean they don’t exist. It’s a ridiculous assumption to pull the “But I don’t play BR so that’s not relevant to me” as it can be applied to literally anything, even in the same game. Just because you don’t play with shotguns doesn’t mean the new shotgun they (might) come out with doesn’t mean it’s not content. > . > Also, be careful with absolutes. “Nobody asked for” is a blanket statement. I’m sure atleast one person has asked for it. I’ve even seen it on the forums. There’s a reason Squad Conquest was so popular. Dont dodge the important part. Unlike Guns or Vehicles a Battle Royal mode is actually a total different Game. Its like putting a race mode with Tanks into BF V. And again, it wasnt even Dice who made Firestorm but Criterion. So although it was outsourced the Dice Devs did what excactly the entire time regarding to Maps ? The former titles had maps that were made mainly for Conquest and had the possibility to be used for Squad Conquest while in the case of BF 3 there was later a mappack like Close Quarters. But before that came things like Armored Kills with big Maps and lots Vehicles. And here we have BF V, a Battlefield Game set in WW2, the biggest War in human history and we have maps like Rotterdam and Fjell while you barely see vehicles, especially Tanks. While the rest is also a joke compared to the quality of former BF titles maps. ---
**Author:** ![GRAW2ROBZ](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/graw2robz/32/102113_2.png) [@GRAW2ROBZ](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/GRAW2ROBZ)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 5:44pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/29 "2019-04-17T17:44:00Z")
One map in May and two in June. So that give us a grand total of 12 conquest maps. But still as of now with 9 maps I only like 3. Not sure if the odds will be good enough for me to even like the next 3 new maps. I guess I been spoiled with better games years ago. _Cough_ Bad Company 2 _Cough_. ---
**Author:** ![aRrAyStArTaT0](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/53a042/32.png) [@aRrAyStArTaT0](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/aRrAyStArTaT0)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 5:54pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/30 "2019-04-17T17:54:00Z")
> [@Stahlmach](#): > > > [@aRrAyStArTaT0](#): > > > > > [@](#): > > > > > > Thats like saying that the Singleplayercampaigns count because they have " maps " and " work went into these ". Firestorm was created by Criterion and not Dice. So what are they actually doing all the time ? > > > Oh i know they announced one Map for march but that was delayed a week before the release towards May and nobody knows if that one map will now even be released in May. The next thing are Cod like 5 vs 5 Maps nobody asked for. > > > Former Battlefield titles had shortly after release more maps on the main part of Battlefield which is Conquest. While these maps were far better than the joke maps of BF V. > > > > I mean, is it not? Just because you don’t like Battle Royal titles doesn’t mean they don’t exist and work didn’t go into them right? Just because you don’t like racing games or fighting games doesn’t mean they don’t exist. It’s a ridiculous assumption to pull the “But I don’t play BR so that’s not relevant to me” as it can be applied to literally anything, even in the same game. Just because you don’t play with shotguns doesn’t mean the new shotgun they (might) come out with doesn’t mean it’s not content. > > . > > Also, be careful with absolutes. “Nobody asked for” is a blanket statement. I’m sure atleast one person has asked for it. I’ve even seen it on the forums. There’s a reason Squad Conquest was so popular. > > Dont dodge the important part. Unlike Guns or Vehicles a Battle Royal mode is actually a total different Game. Its like putting a race mode with Tanks into BF V. And again, it wasnt even Dice who made Firestorm but Criterion. So although it was outsourced the Dice Devs did what excactly the entire time regarding to Maps ? > The former titles had maps that were made mainly for Conquest and had the possibility to be used for Squad Conquest while in the case of BF 3 there was later a mappack like Close Quarters. But before that came things like Armored Kills with big Maps and lots Vehicles. And here we have BF V, a Battlefield Game set in WW2, the biggest War in human history and we have maps like Rotterdam and Fjell while you barely see vehicles, especially Tanks. > While the rest is also a joke compared to the quality of former BF titles maps. I’m not dodging the important part. You’re ignoring my point though. The work is there. It’s a game mode, clearly, rather than a game, just like Blackout is a game mode in BO4. It fits and fills a niche. Lots of people enjoy the mode as well. SO many people enjoy the mode. I have yet to see one bad review about how the gameplay feels, acts, or plays out from anyone except the forums who are upset that it’s even Battle Royal. I have fun playing it and I don’t like BR games. . Edit: Obligatory; it has flaws of course, but as far as quality is far more popular than many games and game modes (Blackout, for instance) of the same or similar type. ---
**Author:** ![SirBobdk](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/sirbobdk/32/103491_2.png) [@SirBobdk](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/SirBobdk)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 6:01pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/31 "2019-04-17T18:01:00Z")
> [@Stahlmach](#): > > Game set in WW2, the biggest War in human history and we have maps like Rotterdam and Fjell while you barely see vehicles, especially Tanks. > While the rest is also a joke compared to the quality of former BF titles maps. BFV is like a teaching game where new players who have not played BF before can practice on a light version with small maps and a few vehicles before playing the full version. Its not cod but it’s for sure not a BF game as we have been used to. ---
**Author:** ![Stahlmach](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/d9b06d/32.png) [@Stahlmach](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Stahlmach)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 7:44pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/32 "2019-04-17T19:44:00Z")
The Campaigns " Tirailleur " and " The last Tiger " give you - in comparison - a better WW2 gameplay than the Multiplayers maps. [aRrAyStArTaT0 ] [ ] [You are still dodging one major point: Firestorm - a total different game - wasnt made by Dice but by Criterion. So what the hell where these Dice Devs doing the whole time besides copying Weapons from BF 1 ?] [ ] [Oh and i think the verdict of this review is spot on:] [ ] [" Firestorm plays it safe by taking the excellent gunplay and vehicle combat that work in][Battlefield V](https://www.ign.com/games/battlefield-2018) and putting it into a 64-player fight to the death. Besides some messy looting, nothing is glaringly bad about DICE’s take on battle royale, but few things are particularly interesting, either. Firestorm just feels like it came out too late and missed its opportunity to make a splash. Launching merely a month after EA’s own Apex Legends, Firestorm was set up to fail unless it had something that greatly separated itself from the other battle royales, and vehicular combat isn’t quite enough. The gorgeous but otherwise completely forgettable and bland map is a prime example of how you can’t judge a book by its cover." [https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/04/04/battlefield-v-firestorm-review](https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/04/04/battlefield-v-firestorm-review) A bland and forgettable map. Just like the other BF V maps. ---
**Author:** ![Stahlmach](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/d9b06d/32.png) [@Stahlmach](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Stahlmach)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 8:43pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/33 "2019-04-17T20:43:00Z")
> [@SirBobdk](#): > > > [@Stahlmach](#): > > > > Game set in WW2, the biggest War in human history and we have maps like Rotterdam and Fjell while you barely see vehicles, especially Tanks. > > While the rest is also a joke compared to the quality of former BF titles maps. > > BFV is like a teaching game where new players who have not played BF before can practice on a light version with small maps and a few vehicles before playing the full version. > Its not cod but it’s for sure not a BF game as we have been used to. The Campaigns " Tirailleur " and " The last Tiger " give you - in comparison - a better WW2 gameplay than the Multiplayers maps. [aRrAyStArTaT0 ] [ ] [You are still dodging one major point: Firestorm - a total different game - wasnt made by Dice but by Criterion. So what the hell where these Dice Devs doing the whole time besides copying Weapons from BF 1 ?] [ ] [Oh and i think the verdict of this review is spot on:] [ ] [" Firestorm plays it safe by taking the excellent gunplay and vehicle combat that work in][Battlefield V](https://www.ign.com/games/battlefield-2018) and putting it into a 64-player fight to the death. Besides some messy looting, nothing is glaringly bad about DICE’s take on battle royale, but few things are particularly interesting, either. Firestorm just feels like it came out too late and missed its opportunity to make a splash. Launching merely a month after EA’s own Apex Legends, Firestorm was set up to fail unless it had something that greatly separated itself from the other battle royales, and vehicular combat isn’t quite enough. The gorgeous but otherwise completely forgettable and bland map is a prime example of how you can’t judge a book by its cover." [https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/04/04/battlefield-v-firestorm-review](https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/04/04/battlefield-v-firestorm-review) A bland and forgettable map. Just like the other BF V maps. ---
**Author:** ![EoG\_Alchemist](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/e/a88e57/32.png) [@EoG\_Alchemist](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/EoG_Alchemist)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 8:43pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/34 "2019-04-17T20:43:00Z")
> [@aRrAyStArTaT0](#): > > Stahlmach said: > > aRrAyStArTaT0 said: > > Thats like saying that the Singleplayercampaigns count because they have " maps " and " work went into these ". Firestorm was created by Criterion and not Dice. So what are they actually doing all the time ?Oh i know they announced one Map for march but that was delayed a week before the release towards May and nobody knows if that one map will now even be released in May. The next thing are Cod like 5 vs 5 Maps nobody asked for.Former Battlefield titles had shortly after release more maps on the main part of Battlefield which is Conquest. While these maps were far better than the joke maps of BF V. > > I mean, is it not? Just because you don’t like Battle Royal titles doesn’t mean they don’t exist and work didn’t go into them right? Just because you don’t like racing games or fighting games doesn’t mean they don’t exist. It’s a ridiculous assumption to pull the “But I don’t play BR so that’s not relevant to me” as it can be applied to literally anything, even in the same game. Just because you don’t play with shotguns doesn’t mean the new shotgun they (might) come out with doesn’t mean it’s not content..Also, be careful with absolutes. “Nobody asked for” is a blanket statement. I’m sure atleast one person has asked for it. I’ve even seen it on the forums. There’s a reason Squad Conquest was so popular. > > Dont dodge the important part. Unlike Guns or Vehicles a Battle Royal mode is actually a total different Game. Its like putting a race mode with Tanks into BF V. And again, it wasnt even Dice who made Firestorm but Criterion. So although it was outsourced the Dice Devs did what excactly the entire time regarding to Maps ?The former titles had maps that were made mainly for Conquest and had the possibility to be used for Squad Conquest while in the case of BF 3 there was later a mappack like Close Quarters. But before that came things like Armored Kills with big Maps and lots Vehicles. And here we have BF V, a Battlefield Game set in WW2, the biggest War in human history and we have maps like Rotterdam and Fjell while you barely see vehicles, especially Tanks.While the rest is also a joke compared to the quality of former BF titles maps. > > I’m not dodging the important part. You’re ignoring my point though. The work is there. It’s a game mode, clearly, rather than a game, just like Blackout is a game mode in BO4. It fits and fills a niche. Lots of people enjoy the mode as well. SO many people enjoy the mode. I have yet to see one bad review about how the gameplay feels, acts, or plays out from anyone except the forums who are upset that it’s even Battle Royal. I have fun playing it and I don’t like BR games. > .Edit: Obligatory; it has flaws of course, but as far as quality is far more popular than many games and game modes (Blackout, for instance) of the same or similar type. Just because there is work does not mean it is good work. If I pay you to build a house and instead you build me a shed, the work is there but I wanted a damn house. ---
**Author:** ![aRrAyStArTaT0](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/53a042/32.png) [@aRrAyStArTaT0](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/aRrAyStArTaT0)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 11:04pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/35 "2019-04-17T23:04:00Z")
> [@EoG\_Alchemist](#): > > > [@aRrAyStArTaT0](#): > > > > Stahlmach said: > > > > aRrAyStArTaT0 said: > > > > Thats like saying that the Singleplayercampaigns count because they have " maps " and " work went into these ". Firestorm was created by Criterion and not Dice. So what are they actually doing all the time ?Oh i know they announced one Map for march but that was delayed a week before the release towards May and nobody knows if that one map will now even be released in May. The next thing are Cod like 5 vs 5 Maps nobody asked for.Former Battlefield titles had shortly after release more maps on the main part of Battlefield which is Conquest. While these maps were far better than the joke maps of BF V. > > > > I mean, is it not? Just because you don’t like Battle Royal titles doesn’t mean they don’t exist and work didn’t go into them right? Just because you don’t like racing games or fighting games doesn’t mean they don’t exist. It’s a ridiculous assumption to pull the “But I don’t play BR so that’s not relevant to me” as it can be applied to literally anything, even in the same game. Just because you don’t play with shotguns doesn’t mean the new shotgun they (might) come out with doesn’t mean it’s not content..Also, be careful with absolutes. “Nobody asked for” is a blanket statement. I’m sure atleast one person has asked for it. I’ve even seen it on the forums. There’s a reason Squad Conquest was so popular. > > > > Dont dodge the important part. Unlike Guns or Vehicles a Battle Royal mode is actually a total different Game. Its like putting a race mode with Tanks into BF V. And again, it wasnt even Dice who made Firestorm but Criterion. So although it was outsourced the Dice Devs did what excactly the entire time regarding to Maps ?The former titles had maps that were made mainly for Conquest and had the possibility to be used for Squad Conquest while in the case of BF 3 there was later a mappack like Close Quarters. But before that came things like Armored Kills with big Maps and lots Vehicles. And here we have BF V, a Battlefield Game set in WW2, the biggest War in human history and we have maps like Rotterdam and Fjell while you barely see vehicles, especially Tanks.While the rest is also a joke compared to the quality of former BF titles maps. > > > > I’m not dodging the important part. You’re ignoring my point though. The work is there. It’s a game mode, clearly, rather than a game, just like Blackout is a game mode in BO4. It fits and fills a niche. Lots of people enjoy the mode as well. SO many people enjoy the mode. I have yet to see one bad review about how the gameplay feels, acts, or plays out from anyone except the forums who are upset that it’s even Battle Royal. I have fun playing it and I don’t like BR games. > > .Edit: Obligatory; it has flaws of course, but as far as quality is far more popular than many games and game modes (Blackout, for instance) of the same or similar type. > > Just because there is work does not mean it is good work. > > If I pay you to build a house and instead you build me a shed, the work is there but I wanted a damn house. But you didn’t pay for anything except the game. And as far as I can tell, you still got the game didn’t you??? It’s outrageous to claim you didn’t get what you wanted because they built what you paid for and more. ---
**Author:** ![Stahlmach](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/d9b06d/32.png) [@Stahlmach](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Stahlmach)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 11:41pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/36 "2019-04-17T23:41:00Z")
> [@aRrAyStArTaT0](#): > > > [@EoG\_Alchemist](#): > > > > > [@aRrAyStArTaT0](#): > > > > > > [»] > > > Stahlmach said: > > > > > > aRrAyStArTaT0 said: > > > > > > Thats like saying that the Singleplayercampaigns count because they have " maps " and " work went into these ". Firestorm was created by Criterion and not Dice. So what are they actually doing all the time ?Oh i know they announced one Map for march but that was delayed a week before the release towards May and nobody knows if that one map will now even be released in May. The next thing are Cod like 5 vs 5 Maps nobody asked for.Former Battlefield titles had shortly after release more maps on the main part of Battlefield which is Conquest. While these maps were far better than the joke maps of BF V. > > > > > > I mean, is it not? Just because you don’t like Battle Royal titles doesn’t mean they don’t exist and work didn’t go into them right? Just because you don’t like racing games or fighting games doesn’t mean they don’t exist. It’s a ridiculous assumption to pull the “But I don’t play BR so that’s not relevant to me” as it can be applied to literally anything, even in the same game. Just because you don’t play with shotguns doesn’t mean the new shotgun they (might) come out with doesn’t mean it’s not content..Also, be careful with absolutes. “Nobody asked for” is a blanket statement. I’m sure atleast one person has asked for it. I’ve even seen it on the forums. There’s a reason Squad Conquest was so popular. > > > > > > Dont dodge the important part. Unlike Guns or Vehicles a Battle Royal mode is actually a total different Game. Its like putting a race mode with Tanks into BF V. And again, it wasnt even Dice who made Firestorm but Criterion. So although it was outsourced the Dice Devs did what excactly the entire time regarding to Maps ?The former titles had maps that were made mainly for Conquest and had the possibility to be used for Squad Conquest while in the case of BF 3 there was later a mappack like Close Quarters. But before that came things like Armored Kills with big Maps and lots Vehicles. And here we have BF V, a Battlefield Game set in WW2, the biggest War in human history and we have maps like Rotterdam and Fjell while you barely see vehicles, especially Tanks.While the rest is also a joke compared to the quality of former BF titles maps. > > > > > > I’m not dodging the important part. You’re ignoring my point though. The work is there. It’s a game mode, clearly, rather than a game, just like Blackout is a game mode in BO4. It fits and fills a niche. Lots of people enjoy the mode as well. SO many people enjoy the mode. I have yet to see one bad review about how the gameplay feels, acts, or plays out from anyone except the forums who are upset that it’s even Battle Royal. I have fun playing it and I don’t like BR games. > > > .Edit: Obligatory; it has flaws of course, but as far as quality is far more popular than many games and game modes (Blackout, for instance) of the same or similar type. > > > > Just because there is work does not mean it is good work. > > > > If I pay you to build a house and instead you build me a shed, the work is there but I wanted a damn house. > > But you didn’t pay for anything except the game. And as far as I can tell, you still got the game didn’t you??? It’s outrageous to claim you didn’t get what you wanted because they built what you paid for and more. Thats like going eating in a Fast Food restaurant, ordering a Burger, paying and with the first bite realizing that they put like half a Bottle of salt into the Meat. By your Logic you have to still be grateful because they gave you a free salad as a side dish. Again: What was this Developer doing the entire time while another company made Firestorm ? ---
**Author:** ![Ameriken05](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/ameriken05/32/106452_2.png) [@Ameriken05](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Ameriken05)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2019, 11:49pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/37 "2019-04-17T23:49:00Z")
> [@Ypsilon-Oh](#): > > > [@Ameriken05](#): > > > > GrinddalDDG said: > > > > Ameriken05 said: > > I would stay patient and excited. We are getting two maps focused on just the Battle of Greece and hints at at least a few Pacific maps this fall. Obviously content push on this game is a slow burn but can’t complain too much because it’s free and the player base will not get divided by any paywalls. Do I miss the guaranteed content of premium - sure, but I won’t miss how half of that content will be dead and empty a few months later because half the player base doesn’t have it. And we should be glad they put BR into the game as it could add to the fanbase and revenue of the game and hopefully extend out the WW2 content timeline. Hopefully, hopefully they keep the content going until the next gen consoles are released and it’s time for a fully upgraded BF title. That means we have a full 1 1/2 years plus of WW2 content, and with Pacific already on the roadmap I would expect a very busy 2020 with Eastern Front, Italy, France, Germany, etc. > > > > Buck up 🙂 > > > > [CBRA] CPT CALIGULA > > > > Free? Perhaps after we have our 9-10 maps, then the rest are “free”. > > > > Well with Panzerstorm and now Halvoy I’d say the game is pretty close to 100% of what base content should have been, so yes moving forward the 2-3 maps coming later this summer are free, not to mention what will most likely accompany the opening of the Pacific theater. Sounds like 5-6 maps coming this year (Mercury, Marita, Urban CQM maps, Mystery “Battlefield Fan” Map, 1-4 Pacific Maps?) > > BR map doesn’t count cuz u can’t play conquest on it… Well we traded a 10th map for a giant map and new mode. And say what you want about Battle Royale, but now we essentially have two games in one and more than enough to keep us entertained until new maps and modes start rolling in May… ---
**Author:** ![aRrAyStArTaT0](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/53a042/32.png) [@aRrAyStArTaT0](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/aRrAyStArTaT0)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2019, 12:21am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/38 "2019-04-18T00:21:00Z")
> [@Stahlmach](#): > > > [@aRrAyStArTaT0](#): > > > > > [@EoG\_Alchemist](#): > > > > > > > [@aRrAyStArTaT0](#): > > > > > > > > [»] > > > > Stahlmach said: > > > > > > > > aRrAyStArTaT0 said: > > > > > > > > Thats like saying that the Singleplayercampaigns count because they have " maps " and " work went into these ". Firestorm was created by Criterion and not Dice. So what are they actually doing all the time ?Oh i know they announced one Map for march but that was delayed a week before the release towards May and nobody knows if that one map will now even be released in May. The next thing are Cod like 5 vs 5 Maps nobody asked for.Former Battlefield titles had shortly after release more maps on the main part of Battlefield which is Conquest. While these maps were far better than the joke maps of BF V. > > > > > > > > I mean, is it not? Just because you don’t like Battle Royal titles doesn’t mean they don’t exist and work didn’t go into them right? Just because you don’t like racing games or fighting games doesn’t mean they don’t exist. It’s a ridiculous assumption to pull the “But I don’t play BR so that’s not relevant to me” as it can be applied to literally anything, even in the same game. Just because you don’t play with shotguns doesn’t mean the new shotgun they (might) come out with doesn’t mean it’s not content..Also, be careful with absolutes. “Nobody asked for” is a blanket statement. I’m sure atleast one person has asked for it. I’ve even seen it on the forums. There’s a reason Squad Conquest was so popular. > > > > > > > > Dont dodge the important part. Unlike Guns or Vehicles a Battle Royal mode is actually a total different Game. Its like putting a race mode with Tanks into BF V. And again, it wasnt even Dice who made Firestorm but Criterion. So although it was outsourced the Dice Devs did what excactly the entire time regarding to Maps ?The former titles had maps that were made mainly for Conquest and had the possibility to be used for Squad Conquest while in the case of BF 3 there was later a mappack like Close Quarters. But before that came things like Armored Kills with big Maps and lots Vehicles. And here we have BF V, a Battlefield Game set in WW2, the biggest War in human history and we have maps like Rotterdam and Fjell while you barely see vehicles, especially Tanks.While the rest is also a joke compared to the quality of former BF titles maps. > > > > > > > > I’m not dodging the important part. You’re ignoring my point though. The work is there. It’s a game mode, clearly, rather than a game, just like Blackout is a game mode in BO4. It fits and fills a niche. Lots of people enjoy the mode as well. SO many people enjoy the mode. I have yet to see one bad review about how the gameplay feels, acts, or plays out from anyone except the forums who are upset that it’s even Battle Royal. I have fun playing it and I don’t like BR games. > > > > .Edit: Obligatory; it has flaws of course, but as far as quality is far more popular than many games and game modes (Blackout, for instance) of the same or similar type. > > > > > > Just because there is work does not mean it is good work. > > > > > > If I pay you to build a house and instead you build me a shed, the work is there but I wanted a damn house. > > > > But you didn’t pay for anything except the game. And as far as I can tell, you still got the game didn’t you??? It’s outrageous to claim you didn’t get what you wanted because they built what you paid for and more. > > Thats like going eating in a Fast Food restaurant, ordering a Burger, paying and with the first bite realizing that they put like half a Bottle of salt into the Meat. By your Logic you have to still be grateful because they gave you a free salad as a side dish. > Again: What was this Developer doing the entire time while another company made Firestorm ? there’s a flaw in your metaphor. Your metaphor assumes you MUST use that entire product, which you don’t have to. It also assumes that the new addition RUINS the current product, which it doesn’t, it’s just an add on. . A more effective metaphor would be the people furnishing your house upgrade you from a Twin bed to a Queen bed without cost. Or the people building your house build an outdoor shower just because. In the first, you just get extra stuff. In the second, you don’t _hav\*\*e_ to use it, but it’s there. Sure, you didn’t ask for it, but it’s not detrimental to the experience of owning a house. ---
**Author:** ![Stahlmach](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/d9b06d/32.png) [@Stahlmach](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Stahlmach)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2019, 12:39am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/39 "2019-04-18T00:39:00Z")
> [@aRrAyStArTaT0](#): > > > [@Stahlmach](#): > > > > > [@aRrAyStArTaT0](#): > > > > > > > [@EoG\_Alchemist](#): > > > > > > > > > [@aRrAyStArTaT0](#): > > > > > > > > > > [»] > > > > > Stahlmach said: > > > > > > > > > > aRrAyStArTaT0 said: > > > > > > > > > > Thats like saying that the Singleplayercampaigns count because they have " maps " and " work went into these ". Firestorm was created by Criterion and not Dice. So what are they actually doing all the time ?Oh i know they announced one Map for march but that was delayed a week before the release towards May and nobody knows if that one map will now even be released in May. The next thing are Cod like 5 vs 5 Maps nobody asked for.Former Battlefield titles had shortly after release more maps on the main part of Battlefield which is Conquest. While these maps were far better than the joke maps of BF V. > > > > > > > > > > I mean, is it not? Just because you don’t like Battle Royal titles doesn’t mean they don’t exist and work didn’t go into them right? Just because you don’t like racing games or fighting games doesn’t mean they don’t exist. It’s a ridiculous assumption to pull the “But I don’t play BR so that’s not relevant to me” as it can be applied to literally anything, even in the same game. Just because you don’t play with shotguns doesn’t mean the new shotgun they (might) come out with doesn’t mean it’s not content..Also, be careful with absolutes. “Nobody asked for” is a blanket statement. I’m sure atleast one person has asked for it. I’ve even seen it on the forums. There’s a reason Squad Conquest was so popular. > > > > > > > > > > Dont dodge the important part. Unlike Guns or Vehicles a Battle Royal mode is actually a total different Game. Its like putting a race mode with Tanks into BF V. And again, it wasnt even Dice who made Firestorm but Criterion. So although it was outsourced the Dice Devs did what excactly the entire time regarding to Maps ?The former titles had maps that were made mainly for Conquest and had the possibility to be used for Squad Conquest while in the case of BF 3 there was later a mappack like Close Quarters. But before that came things like Armored Kills with big Maps and lots Vehicles. And here we have BF V, a Battlefield Game set in WW2, the biggest War in human history and we have maps like Rotterdam and Fjell while you barely see vehicles, especially Tanks.While the rest is also a joke compared to the quality of former BF titles maps. > > > > > > > > > > I’m not dodging the important part. You’re ignoring my point though. The work is there. It’s a game mode, clearly, rather than a game, just like Blackout is a game mode in BO4. It fits and fills a niche. Lots of people enjoy the mode as well. SO many people enjoy the mode. I have yet to see one bad review about how the gameplay feels, acts, or plays out from anyone except the forums who are upset that it’s even Battle Royal. I have fun playing it and I don’t like BR games. > > > > > .Edit: Obligatory; it has flaws of course, but as far as quality is far more popular than many games and game modes (Blackout, for instance) of the same or similar type. > > > > > > > > Just because there is work does not mean it is good work. > > > > > > > > If I pay you to build a house and instead you build me a shed, the work is there but I wanted a damn house. > > > > > > But you didn’t pay for anything except the game. And as far as I can tell, you still got the game didn’t you??? It’s outrageous to claim you didn’t get what you wanted because they built what you paid for and more. > > > > Thats like going eating in a Fast Food restaurant, ordering a Burger, paying and with the first bite realizing that they put like half a Bottle of salt into the Meat. By your Logic you have to still be grateful because they gave you a free salad as a side dish. > > Again: What was this Developer doing the entire time while another company made Firestorm ? > > there’s a flaw in your metaphor. Your metaphor assumes you MUST use that entire product, which you don’t have to. It also assumes that the new addition RUINS the current product, which it doesn’t, it’s just an add on. > > . > A more effective metaphor would be the people furnishing your house upgrade you from a Twin bed to a Queen bed without cost. Or the people building your house build an outdoor shower just because. In the first, you just get extra stuff. In the second, you don’t _hav\*\*e_ to use it, but it’s there. Sure, you didn’t ask for it, but it’s not detrimental to the experience of owning a house. It seems you are the one not understanding the metaphor. The Burger was the main course you ordered, just like BF V. And that is oversalted for various reasons. And no fancy side dish can change that. Or using YOUR metaphor: You ordered the Queen bed but only got the Twin bed while they also build that outdoor shower you never cared for in the first place and by that also changing the appearance of your house. Which by the way means it affects the " main product "… Honestly i am starting to understand why some people call you a Dice shill… And again: What was Dice doing all the time while another Company made Firestorm ? ---
**Author:** ![aRrAyStArTaT0](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/53a042/32.png) [@aRrAyStArTaT0](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/aRrAyStArTaT0)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2019, 12:59am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858/40 "2019-04-18T00:59:00Z")
> [@Stahlmach](#): > > > [@aRrAyStArTaT0](#): > > > > > [@Stahlmach](#): > > > > > > > [@aRrAyStArTaT0](#): > > > > > > > > > [@EoG\_Alchemist](#): > > > > > > > > > > > [@aRrAyStArTaT0](#): > > > > > > > > > > > > [»] > > > > > > Stahlmach said: > > > > > > > > > > > > aRrAyStArTaT0 said: > > > > > > > > > > > > Thats like saying that the Singleplayercampaigns count because they have " maps " and " work went into these ". Firestorm was created by Criterion and not Dice. So what are they actually doing all the time ?Oh i know they announced one Map for march but that was delayed a week before the release towards May and nobody knows if that one map will now even be released in May. The next thing are Cod like 5 vs 5 Maps nobody asked for.Former Battlefield titles had shortly after release more maps on the main part of Battlefield which is Conquest. While these maps were far better than the joke maps of BF V. > > > > > > > > > > > > I mean, is it not? Just because you don’t like Battle Royal titles doesn’t mean they don’t exist and work didn’t go into them right? Just because you don’t like racing games or fighting games doesn’t mean they don’t exist. It’s a ridiculous assumption to pull the “But I don’t play BR so that’s not relevant to me” as it can be applied to literally anything, even in the same game. Just because you don’t play with shotguns doesn’t mean the new shotgun they (might) come out with doesn’t mean it’s not content..Also, be careful with absolutes. “Nobody asked for” is a blanket statement. I’m sure atleast one person has asked for it. I’ve even seen it on the forums. There’s a reason Squad Conquest was so popular. > > > > > > > > > > > > Dont dodge the important part. Unlike Guns or Vehicles a Battle Royal mode is actually a total different Game. Its like putting a race mode with Tanks into BF V. And again, it wasnt even Dice who made Firestorm but Criterion. So although it was outsourced the Dice Devs did what excactly the entire time regarding to Maps ?The former titles had maps that were made mainly for Conquest and had the possibility to be used for Squad Conquest while in the case of BF 3 there was later a mappack like Close Quarters. But before that came things like Armored Kills with big Maps and lots Vehicles. And here we have BF V, a Battlefield Game set in WW2, the biggest War in human history and we have maps like Rotterdam and Fjell while you barely see vehicles, especially Tanks.While the rest is also a joke compared to the quality of former BF titles maps. > > > > > > > > > > > > I’m not dodging the important part. You’re ignoring my point though. The work is there. It’s a game mode, clearly, rather than a game, just like Blackout is a game mode in BO4. It fits and fills a niche. Lots of people enjoy the mode as well. SO many people enjoy the mode. I have yet to see one bad review about how the gameplay feels, acts, or plays out from anyone except the forums who are upset that it’s even Battle Royal. I have fun playing it and I don’t like BR games. > > > > > > .Edit: Obligatory; it has flaws of course, but as far as quality is far more popular than many games and game modes (Blackout, for instance) of the same or similar type. > > > > > > > > > > Just because there is work does not mean it is good work. > > > > > > > > > > If I pay you to build a house and instead you build me a shed, the work is there but I wanted a damn house. > > > > > > > > But you didn’t pay for anything except the game. And as far as I can tell, you still got the game didn’t you??? It’s outrageous to claim you didn’t get what you wanted because they built what you paid for and more. > > > > > > Thats like going eating in a Fast Food restaurant, ordering a Burger, paying and with the first bite realizing that they put like half a Bottle of salt into the Meat. By your Logic you have to still be grateful because they gave you a free salad as a side dish. > > > Again: What was this Developer doing the entire time while another company made Firestorm ? > > > > there’s a flaw in your metaphor. Your metaphor assumes you MUST use that entire product, which you don’t have to. It also assumes that the new addition RUINS the current product, which it doesn’t, it’s just an add on. > > > > . > > A more effective metaphor would be the people furnishing your house upgrade you from a Twin bed to a Queen bed without cost. Or the people building your house build an outdoor shower just because. In the first, you just get extra stuff. In the second, you don’t _hav\*\*e_ to use it, but it’s there. Sure, you didn’t ask for it, but it’s not detrimental to the experience of owning a house. > > It seems you are the one not understanding the metaphor. The Burger was the main course you ordered, just like BF V. And that is oversalted for various reasons. And no fancy side dish can change that. > Or using YOUR metaphor: You ordered the Queen bed but only got the Twin bed while they also build that outdoor shower you never cared for in the first place and by that also changing the appearance of your house. > > Which by the way means it affects the " main product "… > > Honestly i am starting to understand why some people call you a Dice shill… > And again: What was Dice doing all the time while another Company made Firestorm ? Wait what? You literally just changed the metaphor. The food metaphor doesn’t really apply anyways because there’s a fundamental difference between a $5 burger and a $60 game. . My metaphor you literally changed. You _paid_ for a _twin_ and they upgraded you to a queen. For free. And if the only reason you couldn’t get a queen is because of money, there’s 0 reason why you wouldn’t accept it. In addition, if they built an outdoor shower, there’s no real reason to complain about that either. “It changes the appearance of the house” is a not great reason. You have extra utility in your house now. If the asthetic is such a big deal to you, then you’re obviously going to get upset at every little thing that goes wrong and you might as well build the house yourself. . Anyhow, other people are in charge of this product. You don’t really get that much of a say. Sure, you paid for it, but by your own accord. By paying for it, you locked yourself in to receiving whatever product comes out of this adventure. So like it or not, constructive criticism is the only way to get anywhere, and complaining about an optional feature doesn’t really help any arguments. Imagine if people complained about life that way. Getting upset that there’s an option for chocolate ice cream even though they don’t want it simply because “all those resources could have been used on making more vanilla.” . TL;DR: just because it doesn’t fit your fancy doesn’t mean it doesn’t need to exist. [Previous page](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858.md?page=1) [Next page](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/maps-when/106858.md?page=3)