Profile of MMX

My initial plan right now, is to make the map feel smaller as this seems to be the biggest problem for now. I drew a plan, to bring bases more closer to each other as seen by the red arrows. In theory, units will take less time arriving to the battlefield and shorter retreat times.

i think the reduction in size and inter-base distance will greatly improve the overall playability of the map. however, what do you think about moving the bases closer together in the vertical instead of the horizontal direction? not sure if i'm alone with this, but due to the way the position / default angle of the camera is set up i prefer maps that have spawns in the east/west over those with north/south layout (i hate to start in the north and am usually too lazy to rotate the camera 180°, which also messes up my orientation on the map).

i've recently come back to the game from a longer (~1.5 years) hiatus and used to dislike the map alot back then. however, after giving it kind of a fresh start (no vetos) and a handful of games on lost glider, i'd say the map is not as bad as many people make it to be and i actually enjoy playing it. i agree the north spawn is on a disadvantage, especially if you lose control over the central church it feels more difficult to regain control over the middle than as if you start south. the abundance of high health buildings is always a problem for those factions who only got access to reliable anti-garrison tools via doctrines, but the same could be said for other maps and is probably more of a faction design than map design issue.
i also like the fact you can easily break up the compartmentalization of the middle section by tearing down the walls to transform the map into a more open battlefield if needed, which is a lot harder or even impossible on other maps.
lastly, there seems to be a part of the hedge near the western entrance to the north spawn that looks like a shot/sight blocker, yet allows the base mg to fire through. not sure if this is a bug or intended?

i personally like the idea of giving heavies a build time, or, if possible, to add a significant delay between unit call-in and actual arrival on the field. a big part of the advantage of stalling for heavies is that you can get them instantly whenever the resource requirement is met, whereas the quite significant build time of mediums further narrows their window of opportunity.
i'd prefer a solution that keeps heavies as call-ins with significant delay over making them buildable or increasing the cp requirements. this way the timing issues between smaller and larger gamemodes that the patch aimed to resolve would remain untouched, while a (significantly) delayed call-in would mean a bit more of a commitment compared to being able to build and cancel your heavy at any time if the resources could be spent better otherwise (e.g. by getting a td instead)

thank you very much for this highly informative and in-depth analysis RedxWings! there are a lot of good points i missed while watching the original cast and i think (or, better, hope) i've learned something to step up my game, too.
posts like this really are a very welcome breath of fresh air in the .org forums; i wish the focus would shift back to discussing builds and strategies instead of the same people hurling mud at each other over and over in the endless 'this up - that op' balance threads. anyways, looking forward for g3-g5 and happy holidays!

And i believe all but 3 Axis tanks, have 0% to counter fire against that, think about that: 0%. I just cant fathom gameplay odds that so oppressive.

zero chance to fire back? i'm sure i'm not the only one who can't fathom how you came up with this number.