101 replies to this topic

[Ian Grahame]

ASHTAR0N, on 20 January 2016 - 10:30 AM, said:

I
-There is no "official meeting point" where the 2 teams meet 95% of the matches.

I-9 begs to differ with you.

[General Solo]

New map
New Forum Posts
Same old

[p4r4g0n]

OZHomerOZ, on 25 January 2016 - 09:38 PM, said:

New map change to game mechanics / maps / mode / quirks / anything
New Forum Posts
Same old

FTFY

[gloowa]

I will just say that i love the map. Finally something that's not rooms connected by corridors with walls made out of cliffs. 10/10 will drop again any chance i get.

[oldradagast]

AnimeFreak40K, on 25 January 2016 - 06:42 PM, said:

You know, I had a really long, drawn out post in response to you, but after reading it over, I decided to delete it because you just plain don't get it.

I said it before; I'm done with you on this topic...and I was a fool for ignoring my own words.

And I am done with you on the matter. You clearly don't get it. Every time anyone brings up the very valid complaint that a map where "teamwork" is the driving factor - and yet you have no control over your team in composition or mech builds - is a poor idea, you just lash out at them about how they "must hate teamwork" and then waste a half page yammering on about how "people should learn to lock targets / call targets / use cover / shoot the bad guys / listen to my genius."

People hate losing when they lack control over the situation. Polar Highlands is an unforgiving map that brutally punishes the smallest mistakes as well as the "wrong" mech builds (brawlers, etc.) and the "wrong" team composition (no scouts, huge difference in mech speed, etc.) THAT is why people hate the map: they have no control over any of those elements in the solo queue (and limited control in the group queue), and yet they are the driving factors that determine victory or defeat on that map, not the basic skills that any decent player is already using on every map.

If you could understand those facts, instead of just making groundless and snotty assumptions about anyone who "dares" disagree with you, we'd be able to have an intelligent conversation. Sadly, that is clearly not possible. Enjoy your fantasy world where "every map" is like this one - and MWO is a dead game.

Edited by oldradagast, 26 January 2016 - 04:18 AM.

[Rattazustra]

Rattazustra, on 19 January 2016 - 11:25 PM, said:

It is a horrible map. Just incredibly bad map design.

I retract this statement. It certainly doesn't happen a lot in these forums that someone admits that he was wrong, but I'll be the first one to acknowledge I shot too fast here and with sloppy aim.

Rattazustra, on 19 January 2016 - 11:25 PM, said:

Sure, it LOOKS nice, but it is incompatible with most of the dominant game mechanics and makes some of the less dominant mechanics completely destructive. The cover distribution on this map is just lousy.

I maintain this, but I do not deem it an issue any longer. The map IS incompatible with most of the dominant game mechanics, but I no longer feel that it is the shortcoming of this map. it is a shortcoming of all other maps to allow for such discrepancies to exist in the first place. The cover situation is actually quite interesting. There is little to no HARD cover. That IS a problem. There is a lot of soft cover and indirect cover, though. Overall it is fine. It is just not very forgiving.

Nonetheless, after more thought on the matter I feel more maps should be like this one. Especially CW maps. More asymetrical obstacles would be nice and in general PGI should give every map multiple sets of spawn locations that are randomly picked each time so that it does not become repetitive, but that is something else entirely.

LRMs remain an issue, though. Their influence is too chaotic. They either dominate completely, or they are completely useless. This is mostly due to the overly powerful effect that ECM and radar deprivation have. Both are horrible and skew game balance horrendously. If both had a less drastic effect LRMs would be more consistent and people could adjust to their presence much better. As it is many players who think in a less analytical manner are led to believe that the best defense against LRMs is ECM and radar deprivation. Then when they lack one or both they fall apart. If LRM were more consistent people could learn to REALLY adapt to their presence.

Rattazustra, on 19 January 2016 - 11:25 PM, said:

Play this map in a Dire Wolf (or similarly slow mech) and you'd wish you could watch paint dry instead.

This DOES remain an issue. PGI should just move the spawn point of the assault lance ahead of the others. That way it would be compensated a bit. Just 500m would do wonders here.

Edited by Rattazustra, 27 January 2016 - 11:23 AM.

[Alec Braca]

All that the rebels had to do to defeat the Empire at Hoth was to use LRMS.

[Bud Crue]

Alec Braca, on 27 January 2016 - 11:52 AM, said:

All that the rebels had to do to defeat the Empire at Hoth was to use LRMS.

Or run along the trenches and shoot the AT-ATs in the back like many of us are learning to do.

[DrRedCoat]

Rattazustra, on 27 January 2016 - 11:22 AM, said:

I retract this statement. It certainly doesn't happen a lot in these forums that someone admits that he was wrong, but I'll be the first one to acknowledge I shot too fast here and with sloppy aim.

I maintain this, but I do not deem it an issue any longer. The map IS incompatible with most of the dominant game mechanics, but I no longer feel that it is the shortcoming of this map. it is a shortcoming of all other maps to allow for such discrepancies to exist in the first place. The cover situation is actually quite interesting. There is little to no HARD cover. That IS a problem. There is a lot of soft cover and indirect cover, though. Overall it is fine. It is just not very forgiving.

Nonetheless, after more thought on the matter I feel more maps should be like this one. Especially CW maps. More asymetrical obstacles would be nice and in general PGI should give every map multiple sets of spawn locations that are randomly picked each time so that it does not become repetitive, but that is something else entirely.

LRMs remain an issue, though. Their influence is too chaotic. They either dominate completely, or they are completely useless. This is mostly due to the overly powerful effect that ECM and radar deprivation have. Both are horrible and skew game balance horrendously. If both had a less drastic effect LRMs would be more consistent and people could adjust to their presence much better. As it is many players who think in a less analytical manner are led to believe that the best defense against LRMs is ECM and radar deprivation. Then when they lack one or both they fall apart. If LRM were more consistent people could learn to REALLY adapt to their presence.

This is easily the most mature thing I have ever witnessed on the internet and I must applaud you for it. Your willingness to look again from another angle and rationally discuss is admirable. I think you really hit on the core of the matter, though. The primary issue is not so much that this map flies in the face of this game's core mechanics, but that most maps until now have allowed the mechanics to be abused into supporting one trick pony builds.

You are correct in regards to people's approach towards LRMs. I almost exclusively see people's advice towards countering them to be either ECM, AMS, or Radar Dep and while these tools are helpful and (in the case of AMS particularly) are made explicitly for this purpose, I do not think they are necessary to succeed against LRMs. Getting a feel for time to lock, missile flight duration, time it takes to break lock, and what cover blocks missiles may take time but once learned is usually enough to minimize LRMs ability to deal damage.

I think another problem is the community's attitude to LRMs in general. When LRMs are easy to ignore due to their current state in the game balance, everyone is fine. But once LRMs become usable, the community gets up in arms about it. I suspect this is because of their ease of use and lack of any real need to do pin-point aiming so people don't want to see this perceived easy-mode be a viable way to win. But I digress. That's a matter for another time.

Edited by DrRedCoat, 27 January 2016 - 02:14 PM.

[Mmerryweather]

Quote

The primary issue is not so much that this map flies in the face of this game's core mechanics, but that most maps until now have allowed the mechanics to be abused into supporting one trick pony builds.

This is one of the best points brought up in defense of this map.

[Bud Crue]

This map is funny. So many complaints about LRMs. That has been pretty low on the list of draw backs for me. I mean yeah they are there in swarms but they are not deciding most of the matches I am playing in. No, the thing that gets me killed more than anything is simple lack of cohesion and it really seems to be based on mech speed and players unwillingness to group up (maybe this is different at higher tiers).

To wit: Often at the start of a match the company just runs off at top speed, and by the time contact is made with the enemy you have 3 assaults still rumbling along near the drops; 4 lights way out in front all ready dying, out of position or hassling some of the other teams lights; and the rest of the drop in a fairly spread out mess. This of course can go both ways, but if the other team is less spread out than your main body. They win every time and vice versa.

While this sort of thing occurs on the other maps, on those other maps terrain features usually allow you to withdraw, hide a bit, go behind a wall, etc. while the other members of your team catch up. On Hoth there is no where to hide (especially if the initial contact occurs IN a trench) to create that delay. As a result we end up with extended long range snipe/poke fests or a quick brutal clash where the more concentrated group wins very quickly.

At least that is what I am seeing. Still like the map though.

[Semper Bob]

@ oldradagast

The PSR reward structure is heavily biased for teamwork regardless of the map. It behooves everyone on a pug team to work together anyway. If a pug team doesn't work together they will likely lose on any map. You are not going to win every pug match nor should you expect to. Even as a relatively new player here I recognize these facts and I enjoy the challenge of PH.

You appear to be an experienced veteran player so I don't understand your position, as I understand it, that every map should amount to easy mode.

[M T]

I'm one of the few that, out of the 25 matches I've played on it, has only encountered LRM spam twice, of one which was not even worth mentioning.

Lucky me

[DAEDALOS513]

This is what I call a 'filler' map.. a map they should have thrown in between 2 or 3 good maps. If that were the case I wouldn't mind as much, but after waiting all this time for a new map (not a remake) and to receive this uninteresting, yawn producing map is really an insult. Who cares if it's like the mw4 maps.. that doesn't automatically make it good.

Also, bring the old maps back into rotation please.. there is nothing wrong with small brawler style maps.

[DAEDALOS513]

Bud Crue, on 27 January 2016 - 03:01 PM, said:

..the thing that gets me killed more than anything is simple lack of cohesion and it really seems to be based on mech speed and players unwillingness to group up (maybe this is different at higher tiers).

To wit: Often at the start of a match the company just runs off at top speed, and by the time contact is made with the enemy you have 3 assaults still rumbling along near the drops; 4 lights way out in front all ready dying, out of position or hassling some of the other teams lights; and the rest of the drop in a fairly spread out mess. This of course can go both ways, but if the other team is less spread out than your main body. They win every time and vice versa.

While this sort of thing occurs on the other maps, on those other maps terrain features usually allow you to withdraw, hide a bit, go behind a wall, etc. while the other members of your team catch up. On Hoth there is no where to hide (especially if the initial contact occurs IN a trench) to create that delay. As a result we end up with extended long range snipe/poke fests or a quick brutal clash where the more concentrated group wins very quickly.

At least that is what I am seeing. Still like the map though.

I don't blame those lights at all. Who wants to wait 5 minutes before engaging the enemy. This is really just a horrible map design.

[DevlinCognito]

Personally I have nothing but happiness seeing this map roll around. The whole point of Mechs (maneuver warfare) can finally be done properly instead of everyone hiding behind the same bloody spots and rotating around them ad infinitum. Personally I can run brawling Atlas on here just fine, and I know I'm an average pilot at best.

I also know I am a lot more aware of leaving fat guys behind, and also have noticed a lot more folks providing escort during the initial movements. Instead of people just complaining about being left behind, maybe the next time YOU are in a heavy or a light maybe YOU should be watching the fat guys backs eh? Lead by example.

[Wildstreak]

Only time I see people getting really LRM'd is when the poke out and sit there for a while shooting people usually while their own team goes off in another direction or if one team gets a Light spotter on the flank or rear of the opposition and the targets refuse to look for the Light spotter even when you warn them.

Ian Grahame, on 25 January 2016 - 08:39 PM, said:

I-9 begs to differ with you.

So does J6.

[MechsForTheMechGods]

I just wish I could get to actually play this damn map. I have only seen it twice in vote screen and alot of people seem to hate it, but I really need to play this map to have a good idea on what it is like.

Goddamn map voting....

[Solis Obscuri]

Polar Highlands is a really well designed map. It's just a shame we didn't get it two years ago.

As it is, for all the varied terrain, long sight lines, numerous covered approaches, and opportunities for engagements damn near anywhere, what stands out the most is just how heavily routinized a majority of PUG droppers seem to be. Ran a fair number of matches over the last week, and in a vast majority of them half the team immediately rushed diagonally right then forward full-tilt, not waiting for anything slower than their top speed. A couple of heavy/assault snipers would just run up the first ridge they saw and set up camp, whether because they just despaired of ever catching up to the NASCAR rush or they just didn't care about the rest of the team anyway, I couldn't say. Meanwhile the lights disappeared into the woodwork immediately and never said a word to the rest of the team about enemy movements, leading to lots of prairie-dogging and guesswork trying to figure out where to engage.

In cases where I wound up on a team that communicated, win or lose it was a fun and interesting fight, no two of which were alike. In every case where the team dissolved at the start of the match, it played out the exact same way and was a total shitshow. Repetitive map design features have gotten really ingrained into a MWO PUGs over the last three years and it shows. It's pretty pathetic, really.

[Bolter01]

I am really impressed with the design, that without large obstacles you (PGI) were able to create a map does have plenty of cover and a relatively level field.
Rarely have I had trouble with LRM's, besides that can happen on any map. The difference is the play style of this map, requires different tactic's and promote's greater teamwork.

As much as it scares me, I do enjoy the feeling of being out in the open and not knowing where the enemy is, even if you do see 1 or 2, where is the bulk iof their force? ~ then I may catch a sneaky peak over a crest and ~ BOOM! there is the Red heavies and assaults 200m away!

Boundries in this map seem to be next to non-existent.
Really well done o7