Why are game so balanced now or at least each side starting off the same?

For those of you that played it lets look at BF 1942. For the D-Day map the Germans control the whole hill and the US has to storm the beach and then make their way up it. For some of the island maps which either nation controls the whole or one area isn't controlled by them. With the Berlin map the Germans only have flags and the Russians have a spawn that's non-captureable. The map is pretty damn one sided to the Russians but it is possible for the Germans to win.

For the sides each side has the same type of weapons and vehicles but one side is a little stronger. The Germans have the Tiger which is the best tank. And the have the STG-44 which is good and the godly MP40. The Japanese also have a better AR than what the US has. 

I know Battfeild has some maps that have a team starting from the water but even then they still have vehicles that are the same as the other.

YEah. Gulf of Oman even has the attacking team start on an aircraft carrier with the same vehicles.

I want a really good D-Day map.

Because I, and a lot of other people, hate playing unbalanced games.

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Balance game = Reasonable fun for most

Unbalanced game = Unreasonable fun for the few lucky ones.

Balance game = Reasonable fun for most

Unbalanced game = Unreasonable fun for the few lucky ones.

Maybe I'm just odd, but I find the prospect of a D-Day style map quite enthralling. Like, running up the beach and getting gunned down sound slike stupid fun.

Also OP- do you mean aysmmetrical more then unbalanced?

Also OP- do you mean aysmmetrical more then unbalanced?

Also OP- do you mean aysmmetrical more then unbalanced?

The best designed maps do that purely from player nature. Lockout is not an outstanding map, but the way it has that middle section, the epic assaults and required moments of tactical brilliance to turn the tide it causes-it's a small masterpiece in creating those unbalanced situations by relying on player skill variation and style.

Also OP- do you mean aysmmetrical more then unbalanced?

Pretty much that. Nearly every map know is a mirrored version of each half or plays out about the sane.

Balance game = Reasonable fun for most

Unbalanced game = Unreasonable fun for the few lucky ones.

Maybe I'm just odd, but I find the prospect of a D-Day style map quite enthralling. Like, running up the beach and getting gunned down sound slike stupid fun.

I know what you mean.. but very.. VERY few games can pull off a fun, unbalanced game.

Also OP- do you mean aysmmetrical more then unbalanced?

Pretty much that. Nearly every map know is a mirrored version of each half or plays out about the sane.

Right. Yeah, some of my favourite Halo maps are the Zanzibar and Co. remakes.

I enjoyed Black Gold (BF2) because the MEC could keep the Americans off the oil rig if they were organized, but if the Americans managed to capture one point then the odds shifted in their favor, because now the MEC has to pick classes other than anti-vehicular.

That said I've always enjoyed asymmetrical maps more than symmetrical ones, because I get a completely different experience depending on which team I'm on.

That said I've always enjoyed asymmetrical maps more than symmetrical ones, because I get a completely different experience depending on which team I'm on.

Same here. For games like CoD each area is a different experience and it causes you to play differently. Then for BF1942 some of the maps have fun starting points like D-Day or the island maps where one team can invade anywhere.

I HATE unbalance. HATE it.

Symmetry begets balance.

Would you bother playing soccer if the other team got a smaller net?

An overall unbalance is bad, but local unbalances are good.

e.g. A one sided map is bad, but a map with various flanking routes (each being one sided to one or the other team if a conflict arose there) is better.

Same applies to weapons and vehicles. One team has better tanks, the other team has better AT equipment. One team with a great SMG is balanced by the other team having a better long range rifle, that sorta thing.

So yeah, an overall imbalance is pretty crappy and fun for only the victors, but localised imbalances or class-based ones make it a more enjoyable fight.