And i thought Panzersturm is a worse map but this map tops this fact without any problems. Looks beauty but ¯_(ツ)/¯ as ¯_(ツ)/¯ balance on this map. But this map proves the BF5 is is really more suited to Camperfield
I am on the fence now. The map was very fun on breakthrough.
Totaly agreed,played 2 hours today,i think amount of players must be reduced to 48 or 32
The maps decent. Played worse tbh. But it’s just one map. If this was part of a 4 map DLC then it probably hold up better among it’s piers. As of now it will be played to death as the only new thing in town!
Awesome map.
Lots of cover and flanking routes. Especially in the middle D and E flags
The first sector of breakthrough is a bit too open, and can be frustrating when you’re attacking and your team is sniping from spawn, but that’s a common issue with the mode and not necessarily the map
Not sure why everyone is complaining about how open the map is. There’s areas that are open, and snipers can dominate if you let them, but there’s enough flanking routes and cover to avoid snipers.
Seems not to be there yet at ps4, or am i wrong? Played a full rotation, nothing there
It’s not in the regular rotation mate, it has it’s own continuous Conquest, Breakthrough play list. You’ll see Mercury in your game settings.
it’s looking a lot better in Conquest.
I’ll have to play it more before I make up my mind, but my initial reaction is if you liked Metro and Locker, you’ll love Mercury. It’s small, it’s linear, it’s difficult to flank unless the other team is asleep, and much of the cover is buildings which go away during the course of the game. If you dislike snipers and prone machine-gunners, you are probably going to pop an artery playing this map.
Small map for conquest that plays like one big tdm.
Makes no odds when your netcode is massively flawed anyway!
As one of those Metro/Locker folks, I do disagree, just based on how open and vertical the map is. That said, I can understand where the reaction comes from. 
So in other words it’s nothing like Metro and Locker.
Looks like a lot of wasted space on Conquest. Could easily have been 7 flag map or a better laid out 5 flag map.
Honestly it is your typical map made by LA. Looks pretty but not really fun to play. Just as I expected it to be.
Not good not bad, seem to die to planes an awful lot though - the map would be better without so many planes. Unfortunately it plays with incredible stutter and lag - one game was enough.
Doubt I’ll play it much as dying to planes from above is not my idea of fun.
Right why did those f&&& remove Domination and Frontlines?
“All show and no go”
A few weeks ago a dev said that you will love it if you loved Monte Grappa and another BF4 map which I don’t remember the name because I haven’t played that game.
OK, Monte Grappa was one of my favourites of BF1 and it doesn’t looks like Monte Grappa at all, as I said before it’s more like Empire’s Edge which was one of my most hated maps of BF1.
I don’t know why they thought Mercury is similar to Monte Grappa, because have some small hills and a little verticality? It doesn’t has huge hills with a lot of trenches, bunkers, tunnels and a big basin with more or less secure paths for advancing if you don’t like the bunkers or the hills, so it doesn’t remind me Monte Grappa at all.
The map is a stuttering mess geared towards snipers.
Can’t say I’m surprised. Next.
Mecury plays great on my system. The map is amazing!!! The size is great, the graphics, and the fast paced game play and verticality make great. Easy 9/10 map. Its the best BF5 map to date.
It is way more similar to Empire’s Edge in terms of verticality than MG or Altai Range. It might be too small though for 64 players. I think it might be smaller than Devastation and it has a kind of linear flag layout creating a denser space.
It would make a really good conquest small map, and I am looking forward to the SQC version.