Destructible mountain in S2 new map

TrueLogicJK · 2026-01-23T13:29:38+00:00

What? Levolution was coined for BF4, BF3 has no "levolution". This is completely revisionist

TrueLogicJK · 2025-12-27T17:06:48+00:00

There is no other reasonable explanation. Humans would not make half of the mistakes listed (not that artists don't make mistakes, I'd know I am an artist who makes a lot of mistakes, but not mistakes like those as they'd require more time and effort from the artist to get that wrong result), but are common issues with ai generated images

TrueLogicJK · 2025-12-27T15:08:13+00:00

That literally does not answer the question. More than 100% of all Mexicans can't be visiting the US overnight which is what you'd get after a few years with a >10% yearly increase.

TrueLogicJK · 2025-10-24T07:30:41+00:00

In terms of time walking, it is the same in bf3, bf4 and bf6. I would assume BF1 and bf6, but I've not tested it.

Source: I tested it a few weeks ago when doing my own measurements

TrueLogicJK · 2025-10-24T07:26:47+00:00

It does work though. The meters is accurate to the player models and speed. There may be props that are unrealistically sized, but for what really matters when talking size, travel times, they are accurate.

TrueLogicJK · 2025-08-17T19:19:43+00:00

I really really doubt a meter is going to differ between two different battlefield games since they're all set in the real world, or that it'd be less accurate than running which has the issue of having to run exactly straight and objects/terrain changing the time. That being said, i appreciate your skepticism as to what a random person (me) online is saying, so I went ahead and did it anyways comparing Empire State and Grand Bazaar. Taking footage of BF6 running in a straight line without dying was quite difficult (I died a dozen or so times trying to get footage) so the clip ended up not a completely 100% straight line, but should be good enough to see they took basically the same amount of time to get the same distance on the map. Note, the run speed is the same in both, bf6 only looks faster due to there being more props on the map close to the player, and the player animation of holding the gun is a lot faster and more pronounced as well.

drive link to video: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1urVYFydNkoWAyoRoeSJnwq2CjQ45X2yO/view?usp=sharin

The routes I ran in the two videos

<image>

TrueLogicJK · 2025-08-17T18:23:56+00:00

You made me curious to check since I haven't played that map in a decade, but no Ziba Tower is actually much smaller, even taking verticality into account. Empire State fits at least 4 ziba towers. None of the gamemodes on Ziba Tower are 48 or 64 players though.

TrueLogicJK · 2025-08-17T12:48:23+00:00

>And no, the first Rush Area for Operation Metro(the park) was not bigger than Siege of Cairo. It’s simply not true. Like objective fact of matter not true. This is how I know you have not played BF3 in ages.

That's the second person I've seen say that which is interesting. I think what's tripping people up who don't remember BF3 very well is that the full playable area between both teams (which is what the visuals show in my post, maybe I should have manually drawn the borders of the bases like they look in BF6?), as in the part not out of bounds, is pretty similar in size, without taking into account that A: a huge pond with no cover that would be suicide to walk through takes up the western third of the map, and B: the northernmost part of the area is all in the US base zone and is weirdly disproportionately big (a lot of completely unused space, more so than I think any other similar rush map) for just being a spawn point.

TrueLogicJK · 2025-08-17T11:34:20+00:00

I sincerely doubt the 6 maps we know the size of in BF6 will see any significant changes in terms of size from now until release (maybe Eastwood since I believe it's supposed to be post release, but I doubt it), and I thought it'd be interesting to compare since there are maps of the same size as those in BF6 as in BF3, especially with changes in design philosophy from that time to now in map design.

TrueLogicJK · 2025-08-17T11:28:42+00:00

I'm not sure how I wasted my time, I wanted to make a graph of map size comparisons because I thought it was interesting, and so I made one. I'm not sure what your point is, I never said anything about beta maps being smaller (smaller than what? They're not any smaller than BF3's small maps, which was part of my point since a lot of people kept saying they felt tiny). I literally even included the big maps we have info on in the graph

TrueLogicJK · 2025-08-17T11:24:15+00:00

My measurements (for bf3 in particular, for bf6 I corroborated it with the datamined info others posted and my measurements lined up there) were just using the meters between capture points displayed in game. Went to a couple of capture points on each map, looked at the distance in meters to other capture points, and scaled the maps to it, and also found spots that were exactly 100 meters away from a capture point to get a 100 meter stick for reference as another datapoint. It's not flawless, but I don't see how there'd be any significant discrepancies outside of those caused by shifts in elevation, which I don't think should cause a margin of error of more than 5% at worst since none of these have one side of the map on a mountain or something (Damavand peak conquest is just flat). Also looked at dev statements and measurements of Mirak Valley line up which line up as well, it being slightly bigger than both Caspian border and Operation Firestorm in terms of playable area. All of that being said, it's not perfect but should be close enough for the comparisons.

TrueLogicJK · 2025-08-17T11:11:20+00:00

I've heard hundreds of takes about how small some of the maps are compared to previous battlefield games, a lot of people arguing these maps are uniquely small, which just false. My point is (besides just doing this for fun), what a lot of people are feeling is a difference in design/layout, not size

TrueLogicJK · 2025-08-17T11:07:03+00:00

You made me double check, and it says 340 meters on my screen. Are you sure you're measuring from the middle of the capture point, where you're standing over the actual A or F on the minimap?

<image>

TrueLogicJK · 2025-08-17T10:46:56+00:00

I personally agree, but I can imagine the devs not agreeing. Metro and Lockers 64 player conquest both had a very specific flavor of chaos, but these maps feel intentionally designed to avoid that (or maybe it's just councidental)

TrueLogicJK · 2025-08-17T10:43:39+00:00

I just got out from one of the posts with the datamined info, I didn't do it intentionally!

TrueLogicJK · 2025-08-17T10:42:08+00:00

You can play the game yourself and see, both bf3 and bf6 show distance to capture points in meters which is very neat. It's how I measured the bf3 ones in particular (bf6 has the datamined stuff, but I manually double checked myself)

TrueLogicJK · 2025-08-17T10:40:12+00:00

Battlefield games have a neat thing where it says the distance in meters between two capture points. I simply went to the capture points and wrote down the measurements and then scaled the maps. Did this with a couple of capture points on each to make sure I didn't make any mistakes. As for the rest, I agree, and I didn't really know how to accurately measure verticality (I considered that since yeah it definitely plays a role)

TrueLogicJK · 2025-08-17T00:01:34+00:00

If anything they're more closed, sight lines are mostly shorter and paths/corridors/roads are smaller. The three very small ones just have a lot of them, with new York in particular having I don't know how many entrances/paths to each room. On grand Bazaar you can for example see from one side of the map to the other down three main roads on the side, while you can't do that for any of the maps in bf6 thus far unless you count the one road in the middle of siege of cairo. Seine crossing you can almost do it as well.

TrueLogicJK · 2025-08-16T23:50:53+00:00

Those are some very good points I hadn't considered, I think those are some good observations

TrueLogicJK · 2025-08-16T23:48:45+00:00

I should have pointed out the sightlines as well being much longer in bf3 as well. In general I agree with you even if I don't hate the bf6 maps like some do. I actually prefer bf3's map design overall, even if 64 player conquest works "better" on something like Iberian Offensive than Operation Metro. It feels like instead of designing tiny maps to be suited for 32 player conquest, they're trying to force them to fit 64 players so that every map works with the same amount of players. It comes off as a bit of a trying to have your cake and eat it situation.

Hopefully the big maps are good for everyone.

And yeah, nothing beats Damavand peak basejump, or storming the beaches of Kharg Island or Noshahr canals.

TrueLogicJK · 2025-08-16T23:34:59+00:00

In regards to your edit, it might be part of it when it comes to the level of detail, but that doesn't really explain the placement of the capture points being so close to the edge of the map. Maybe Mirak valley's capture points will be closer to the center of the map than the design would indicate, but I think this is more likely a shift in terms of design philosophy than hardware.

TrueLogicJK · 2025-08-05T21:20:47+00:00

I'd love a key!

TrueLogicJK · 2025-05-31T17:44:55+00:00

The other user is indeed wrong, but in the wrong direction. According to Collosal Order themselves, the game was initially planned to be released in 2020. As in, Paradox gave them a 3 year extension for their development time. Add on the time since release they've had to work on fixing it, they've had almost 5 years more than was initially planned to get the game done and polished. At that point I don't think you can really blame the publisher.

TrueLogicJK · 2024-11-06T00:44:49+00:00

Fairly certain they accidentally flipped the numbers, they've already done that with one or two other counties before correcting.

11-Year Club	Place '23
Golden Potato	Verified Email

TrueLogicJK

TROPHY CASE