...and it gave me an idea.
4v4 maps tend to be a bit hit and miss, mainly because they're so big and take so long to make. On the other hand, most 3v3 maps are of a good size and could probably take a 4th player into the mix without it destroying the playability of the map.
My suggestion? Make a majority of 3v3 maps 3v3/4v4 maps. Abbeville and Schijndel have already set the precedent, why not a 3v3/4v4 version of some other maps?
Tanteville currently fights 2 at the village and to the right, 1 on the left. I don't think 4 would be too much, 2 in the village and 2 on the left could become a pretty ferocious battleground.
Radar Station usually fights 1 on the hill, 1 at the station and 1 at the village, a 4th would easily fit on to that map.
St. Lambert plays ok with 3, 1 up the middle and 1 down each of the sides, I'm sure a 4th wouldn't break that balance too much, there's enough room for the spread to balance itself.
Bocage would work nicely as a 4v4, it always feels a bit big in a 3v3.
Obviously some maps work less well as 4v4s than others, but smaller 4v4 maps will also improve lag problems (smaller maps are generally less laggy), give 4v4 games the quality maps that 3v3s enjoy, and give more flexibility to the War Map list, allowing more 4v4s to be played. There's also the question of 2v2/3v3 maps. There are a few 2v2s that wouldn't be ruined by adding the 3v3 capability to them also, and a few 3v3 maps that might play well enough as 2v2s, but that's a different topic.
This isn't intended as a criticism of the War Map list in any way. The idea is purely about artificially increasing the number of maps in EiR by allowing some maps to double up for different game types, thus broadening the available selection of maps for each category. If you have...
5x 2v2 maps
5x 2v2/3v3 maps
4x 3v3 maps
4x 3v3/4v4 maps
3x 4v4 maps...
you have a total of 21 maps. However, you have...
10x 2v2 maps
13x 3v3 maps
7x 4v4 maps...
essentially giving you a selection of 30 maps for games. I'll take a moment to apologise for using mathematics to support my argument, but it helps illustrate the point.
I have no idea how difficult it is to add in extra player capacity to existing maps, but as the maps are generally already balanced and play tested, it helps reduce the workload on the mapping dept. to produce more maps for a particular category, if an existing map will already double-up. And obviously, less time spent churning out new map after new map gives more time for fine tuning the new maps, and for playing games, which is never a bad thing...
