No shooting lanes otb this time, kids. There are a few obvious and excellent lanes but for this layout effective laning may depend in how teams find ways to get extra guns in play otb. Instead, I want to look at aspects of the design that I think will limit aggressive play and tend to slow points down.
I'ma try to keep this short and to the point but we both know how that's gonna work out. Neither 50 dominates. Neither 50 even delivers guaranteed kills. This is, in part, because most of the cross field lanes are blocked or partially blocked. And the lack of cross field shots will tend to push play into half field contests with the snake side battling the snake side opponents and the dorito wire fighting the opposition dorito wire. Alone this simply means there are two games going on simultaneously and if you win one of the battles fast enough (or first) there is the potential opportunity to flank the remaining opponents and close out the point. The primary defining characteristic of this divided field play is that most of the action will be dominated by gunfighting. And in play dominated by various gunfighting combinations the key is not field position, it's the relationship between bunkers. (If the best props were up field or paired with a higher risk factor; for example, can be pinched or at least attacked from multiple diverse angles, that would neutralize or balance their effectiveness.)
Continuing the gunfighting and/or lane control themes let's look at some key bunkers beginning with the snake corner SD. It's important because it's virtually useless except as an alternate primary with access to snake 1. It cannot effectively contest movement up the snake and is at a huge disadvantage in a lane control contest with the opponent's snake side MT. It is also susceptible to numerous direct and indirect lanes of paint. The upshot is that no team will want to play the position consistently and the inability (or unwillingness) to routinely risk a player in that position will strengthen the snake side MT's already dominate position by limiting the possibility of multiple wide guns battling the position.
Looking at the pink marked props we isolate the two MTs and back center Can. The Can has good lanes to both sides of the field, good visibility of the action on both sides and is the ideal early parking spot for a player given the field's tendency to play in halves. A player kept back can respond to either side of the field as needed--which is a sensible take but also a fundamentally defensive one. Snake side MT dominates the snake wire with only snake 1's TCK any sort of viable counter. And the dorito side corner MT offers a dominating wrap on most of the rest of the dorito side bunkers any time it is uncontested by either a mirror or the fifty dorito. If you have more shots, better shots from a more diverse and defensible position like the corner MT why risk moving up field to less effective positions?
The green TCK demonstrates a counterpoint to the elevation advantages of the MT's. [Elevation refers to the line of sight options and gun positions available. Tall bunkers are good.] The snake MT's forward position gives it numerous advantages without corresponding risks. The snake 1 TCK (which may be played standing, sorta) is a mixed bag by comparison. It's useful elevation blocks the corner SD behind it. And in order to make use of it's elevation potential the player also increases the risk from incoming shooting lanes.
The orange marked bunkers illustrate a couple differing qualities. The snake CK (snake 5) is the only one with multiple shots cross field. Examine the shots from snake 1 and snake 5. Keeping with the defensive tendency the field encourages there is little reason to press the snake given the available shots while the risk involved is very high, particularly with an active MT in place. The orange TCK on the other hand is an easy access prop with elevation and lanes that play both sides of the field while still allowing potential rotations to either side of the field. In comparing orange bunkers teams are far more likely to have a player in the back line TCK than they are to press the play of the game and take snake 5--until they've eliminated everyone on that side of the field.
Of course, there remain ways to effectively attack some of these prime bunkers and a player snap-shooting the MT from the snake can still eliminate an opponent despite bunker to bunker disadvantages that normally make it easier for the MT player to shoot the snake. However, my point remains, the design encourages defensive play because the odds of success clearly favors a defensive approach in the basic layout and in the placement of key bunkers. Even so, the strongest gun-fighting teams are likely to be the most successful. (The alternative is a team that gets hot laning and consistently begins points with numbers advantages.)