crap, was gonna edit to put more thoughtful stuff into that post…
i think agree with the whole lateral thinking bit - it’s very satisfying to be the guy going the other route on camden 2nd/3rd obj and pulling a slight pincer maneuver on a solid defensive hold, thus helping your teammates push through to the obj.
but to me that involves distinctly different options/routes. otherwise there’s no element of surprise and it kind of boils down to crossfires/who outguns whom.
i think whitechapel has some definite weak spots in that respect - several parts of the map are kind of wide open intersections where the only moves you can make (in terms of routes etc.) is moving through a crossfire or engaging in gunfights at long distance.
the first objective seems very much like that - sure you can move from spawn behind cover and reappear closer to the EV, but it can be a bit of a shooting gallery and there aren’t really any routes which allow attackers to flank defenders without first moving through open territory.
or the milkjug loading @ the church - attackers pretty much have to move through a guaranteed line of fire in order to do anything, so if defense can hold them at the ev and control/reinforce the lane/church crossfire it can get a bit stale in terms of offensive possibilities.
overall, i feel it’s a map that plays out very “statistically”, with less emphasis on creating/utilising windows of opportunity. (part of this is probably due to the somewhat automated nature of the EV/lift objs, though).
as for defining fun; you’re right, i didn’t. it is indeed highly subjective, but i think you may agree that some tactical scenarios are more fun than others.
it is perfectly possible to create a map where, if certain conditions arise, one team is going to find themselves plainly outgunned at the bottom of a meatgrinder. that’s not fun, i think.
whether it’s useful to draw a very final conclusion from just one horrible loss is another matter, though. 
).
