The problems you speak of mostly refer to the older maps - the research facility is much better for this stuff and I look forward to seeing more like it with the production facility coming in the next few months. The older maps are definitely lacking but it's getting better for sure.

The older maps are getting phased out.

Also, the letter whichever objective you're referring to changes.
Is B the one on the second floor, with the two stairways up and a couple of walkways across to it?
It's not particularly easily defensible, but honestly it's my favourite part of the map to fight over. What I find is more of a problem is at A there are only a couple of routes in - if you're spawning there it's quite easy to be spawncamped, especially with grenades.

Lol of course, of course. If they weren't we'd have nothing to play on. I'm just saying it's clearly something that is improving. Expect way more of what you ask for in the new sockets coming...

For example, those medium sockets with the bunker style building with 2 entrances and a curving wall around the CRU - those are pretty defensible. The large research socket with the objective underground is very very defensible. Yes, others are still pretty open but if everything was easily defended, attacking would become ridiculously hard and we'd have precisely the opposite situation to that which you currently complain about.

Thats the very essence of an unfair comparison. metro is one of the greatest infantry maps that i've ever played on, a match between 2 competent teams turns into one very big, very fun firefight. i would have loved to play that thing on pc its a blast even with the limited numbers on console.

There's infantry maps and then there's vehicle maps. Thanks to constant whining, vehicles have been all but neglected and those vehicle oriented maps are nothing but a joke. You made your own bed if you ever complained about HAV, dropships, and would rather use the front bumper of an LAV over its turret.

I would really have to disagree with this...

Dust has large maps and the thing is even with such large maps there are always different places to fight on and have good fire fights that can happen for 2-5minutes before and objective is taken. I do not want to be fighting at an objective for 10minutes. I can fight on the bridge take A run over and start rushing the C objective and it will take me and my team a while to take it.

Cosgar touched on it. The maps in uprising were an attempt to balance vehicles with infantry among other things. Or to at least help provide infantry a place to fight while not getting wailed on by HAVs. I think the maps are fairly balanced in this regard, outside of some redline issues with sniping.

Interesting read.

Let me first start off by saying I despise choke points. You hate grenade spam? Avoid the chokepoint. It's nothing more than a bowling alley. And i will nade you to hell if I can. I often try to flank choke points because mercs are so engaged in battle that they don't even pay attention to their surroundings. I don't ever like choke points. It's easy kills for the opposing reds or for the well tuned killer.

Second, about cover. The pictures shows significant locations for cover. The table top map-no one should be on that road unless you're scurrying between the two buildings by Charlie and Delta. But as far as underneath the table top? I'm sticking to the foundations, installation for a short brief period, the trailer and using the ladder as a smoke screen. Same thing as by alpha. Alpha has short columns enclosed around it-use it. You knew there are more than five ways to get to you in that location. The perfect squad would use sub teams within the squad. Roll with 6 while three and three handles engagements as the time comes.

Also with the table top, its key to get the L shape. Meaning, if you're spawning south, you want B, C, D. The focal point is always alpha. It's a problem to defend because of the many holes, flanking positions, higher grounds and CRU. Once you capture D, you need to watch the redline for upcoming mercs with your 3 man sub team while the other team watches out for Alpha. Reaction time is great for Baker. Alpha is a nuisance.

And did I say I hate chokepoints? Go around the chokepoints. Flank positions. I'm always looking for ways to flank the enemy. I hate playing cowboys and indians, it doesn't make sense when the glory of coming around their flanks and kill one at a time while the whole team doesn't have a clue cannot be replicated by any other tactic. Use the Shaka Zulu infamous bullhorn tactic.

I love the tactical...

and you'll notice that most of those maps are infantry centrc, with vehicles having either little or no effect on the match. vehicle centric maps such as operation firestorm or caspian border involve lots of wide open spaces with mixed to light cover, rather reminiscent of certain dust maps. dust maps could have been executed better agreed but overall old style dust maps have similarities with battlefield vehicle centric ones.

Not trying to bring in any AV/Vehicle drama. My point is that just about every map works better at different things. Those wide open maps were primarily designed for vehicles. Tanks, Dropships ferrying troops, and LAV convoys running light suppression. But designed purpose and practical use has gone askew since the primary focus went to infantry combat.

Think about it: When's the last time you've ever seen someone use an LAV other than getting from point A to point B. Hell, how many players are actually skilled into LAVs outside of LLAVs back when murder taxis were a thing? Not trying to redirect the focus of your topic, but when you talk about map design, let's not ignore an entire side of the community.