31 replies to this topic

[Shiroi Tsuki]

Add some cover/features around the center. It doesn't have the be super drastic and major, but enough to give those with short ranged builds an opportunity to contribute other than sitting behind cover and wait until one side is about to lose. Nothing is more infuriating than spending a third of the game playing walking and hiding behind cover simulator then get killed, do less than 100 damage and lose, essentially making that match a complete waste of time. Now do this but every 2nd game is Polar Highlands and some people will eventually get bored, forcing them to switch to long ranged/LRM boats. When you enjoy playing short ranged/brawler builds, and you're FORCED to play on a map that heavily favors LRMs/long ranged builds and there's nothing you can do about it other than hide and wait, it gets frustrating and boring really easily. And when your game gets frustrating and boring really easily, then the very basic purpose of a game fails.

I completely understand that there must be map variety, and that's totally fine. You can design a map that favors long range/LRM builds and at the same time, brawlers/short ranged builds won't feel helpless. As a casual pilot that enjoys playing brawlers, Polar Highlands is pretty much hell to me. Playing on the map is VERY demoralizing. I can't look forward to the match knowing that I'll do less than 300 damage on my brawler, because everyone will be hiding cover and playing poke. We all know that stealth is basically non existent in this game, so doing a massive circle around is pointless either.

It would be fine if you could just avoid the map entirely and not have to deal with it, but unfortunately, pilots are forced to play the game. I know many will disagree, but this is my thoughts and opinion as a pilot that runs brawlers, Polar Highlands is not fun.

[Bombast]

There's plenty of cover on that map. All sorts of things to hide behind - Maybe you just are unable to recognize it. Here, maybe this will help.

Hoth Cover Feature

[Dashia]

Didn't they just redo hell? The layout is much better than the old arena wish it would get picked more on QP

[Shiroi Tsuki]

Bombast, on 31 January 2017 - 05:35 AM, said:

There's plenty of cover on that map. All sorts of things to hide behind - Maybe you just are unable to recognize it. Here, maybe this will help.

Hoth Cover Feature

Except this cover is gonna be sitting in the distance, probably playing poke as well.

Dashia, on 31 January 2017 - 05:42 AM, said:

Didn't they just redo hell? The layout is much better than the old arena wish it would get picked more on QP

They did. I wish it would get picked more often, but alas, everyone don't like hot maps.

[Kangarad]

no.it has way more cover than you'd like to admit. tho most of it is also filled with lava. also the map has some excellent flanking ways. Edit: was talkign about Mordor due to teh 2 above arguing about it.

Id rather have them add more suitable cover to Polar lurm lands and polar uphill battle than focus on this nice piece of a map and make it worse.

SO I totally agree with OP.

Edited by Kangarad, 31 January 2017 - 06:06 AM.

[TercieI]

Kangarad, on 31 January 2017 - 05:56 AM, said:

no. it has way more cover than you'd like to admit. tho most of it is also filled with lava. also the map has some excellent flanking ways.

Id rather have them add more suitable cover to Polar lurm lands and polar uphill battle than focus on this nice piece of a map and make it worse.

Hoth =\= Mordor. Know your slang.

Also, no, Polar is one of the maps least in need of help.

[Mechteric]

The interesting thing about the map are the rolling hills, which can be used effectively to conceal LOS (but obviously, not provide tall cover). Of course where you get into trouble is when an enemy light with ECM gets full visibility on your flank, then you're boned.


It kindof accentuates what I think needs to change about LRMs, and that is how indirect fire works. It seems to me indirect fire is too close to the effectiveness of having LOS as an LRM boat. I would wish that either they reduce the accuracy of indirect fire (unless Tag or NARC is in play), or just prevent indirect fire unless Tag or NARC is in play (but increasing the effectiveness of LOS fired LRMs).

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 31 January 2017 - 06:02 AM.

[Kangarad]

TercieI, on 31 January 2017 - 06:00 AM, said:

Hoth =\= Mordor. Know your slang.

Also, no, Polar is one of the maps least in need of help.

my bad... it is Polar Lurm lands that you are speakign about. I agree then.

bit confusing with people talking about hell and hot maps.

[Shiroi Tsuki]

CapperDeluxe, on 31 January 2017 - 06:02 AM, said:

The interesting thing about the map are the rolling hills, which can be used effectively to conceal LOS (but obviously, not provide tall cover). Of course where you get into trouble is when an enemy light with ECM gets full visibility on your flank, then you're boned.


It kindof accentuates what I think needs to change about LRMs, and that is how indirect fire works. It seems to me indirect fire is too close to the effectiveness of having LOS as an LRM boat. I would wish that either they reduce the accuracy of indirect fire (unless Tag or NARC is in play), or just prevent indirect fire unless Tag or NARC is in play (but increasing the effectiveness of LOS fired LRMs).

It's not about LRMs. It's more about you can't really push up if you're a brawler. There's not enough cover to conceal your movement or hide behind anything once you've committed to push. Frozen City imho is a pretty good example of how long range can be mixed with short ranged. In games like Assault, the opening phase and sometimes the majority of the battle can be a massive poke war between both sides. However, if you refuse to play poke, you can sneak around to the side and attack the enemy at a closer range.

[Mawai]

Shiroi Tsuki, on 31 January 2017 - 06:17 AM, said:

It's not about LRMs. It's more about you can't really push up if you're a brawler. There's not enough cover to conceal your movement or hide behind anything once you've committed to push. Frozen City imho is a pretty good example of how long range can be mixed with short ranged. In games like Assault, the opening phase and sometimes the majority of the battle can be a massive poke war between both sides. However, if you refuse to play poke, you can sneak around to the side and attack the enemy at a closer range.

It my experience, your statement is mostly incorrect.

Polar does NOT have cover if you decide to walk directly toward the opposing team. True. This is exactly the same as the lack of decent cover across the valley on Frozen City (which I find has changed the average play on Frozen substantially). On Frozen you can go around the edges and the SAME is true for polar.

Polar has lots of connecting ravines that DO circle around the battlefield. Choose left or right and you CAN close the distance with the opposition without being exposed to a lot of fire. You just can't effectively do it by the usual method of walking straight at the red doritos representing the other team. The design of Polar forces you to flank to close range.

So the problem isn't so much the map but the lack of team play and coordination in the QP queue that makes the map more challenging because you have to circle push to get into brawling range. Folks hunker down in ravines on opposing sides of the central region and poke at each other.

PGI could add cover or ravines to the central portion of the map ... what would happen then is that folks would complain about how boring polar is since everyone rushes into the middle and just fights there. PGI left rolling hills in the middle to deter this type of play that is common on most other maps. The rolling hills do provide some cover ... just not enough for folks to play the peek and poke game in the middle.

If LRMs are such an issue, and I am not sure that they are, then PGI could add some steeper cliffs and ravines dotted around the map for folks to hide ... but honestly the best strategy is usually to keep moving and circle to close range.

[Paigan]

Shiroi Tsuki, on 31 January 2017 - 05:45 AM, said:

Except this cover is gonna be sitting in the distance, probably playing poke as well.

I wouldn't mind giving Lazar Highlands more cover. So, agreed.

But:
Isn't the quote the actual problem, even if you had your covered approach path?

Even if every map had the perfect cover for you to brawl, isn't the actual problem that different players fight at different ranges?
If the team splits up, some storming forward, some keeping their distance, you are more probably losing than winning.

In almost every match, there is at least one guy who storms forward to die alone in a useless brawl.
And then he complains that the rest didn't follow him and are "cowards".
Being one of that rest, chosing my position wisely, using cover, evaluating enemy positions, ranges, weapons, using my distance and my position to my advantage, I say that brave brawler was just a d*mb suicider who cost us, the tactically playing people, a Mech.

I build my Mechs so that I am useful at every distance. I exploit my range if I can and I brawl if it's necessary / better.
IHMO, at least for quickplay, this is the ONLY viable (and social) playstyle.
I won't storm forward like some cheesy action hero if I can kill 3 mechs at distance without any danger for myself. That would be just st*pid and nothing else.

In a premade, you can coordinate to do an all-out brawl, of course. And it will probably be very effective and a lot of fun.
But:
If you drop with random people and complain that you can't use your pure brawler build effectively, you're the problem, not the team.

Edited by Paigan, 31 January 2017 - 06:44 AM.

[Shiroi Tsuki]

Paigan, on 31 January 2017 - 06:40 AM, said:

I wouldn't mind giving Lazar Highlands more cover. So, agreed.

But:
Isn't the quote the actual problem, even if you had your covered approach path?

Even if every map had the perfect cover for you to brawl, isn't the actual problem that different players fight at different ranges?
If the team splits up, some storming forward, some keeping their distance, you are more probably losing than winning.

Long range builds can fight in shorter ranges, short range can't fight in long range. If the brawlers do their thing and brawl, the long range builds can still provide support and move up with them on the second lines. If you can have more team mates shooting their guns, your team will be able to pump out more damage. If there's not a lot of cover to push forward, then people would be sitting behind cover and play poke. At that point, it's usually which ever side brought more long range builds that would come out victorious.
If Team A has 2 dedicated brawlers and 10 that can engage in range effectively, then they have better chances of winning against Team B that only have 7 guys that can engage in range effectively. They have more guns and would be able to focus their targets better.

HPG imho is a good example of map design in MWO. There's a good balance between short and long range, LRMs can do really well if they play it right. The verticality also allows for flanking and alternative routes. The basement is pretty much a backdoor to the enemy lines and if you use this resource to your advantage, you could easily assassinate a LRM boat behind enemy lines and run back or perhaps harass the enemy firing line to give your team more breathing room. You don't need to be in a well coordinated team to pull this off either.

[Mole]

Only thing I find difficult on Polar Highlands is the fact that if I get NARCed on the enemy team has any LRMs I'm pretty much screwed, because there is simply no tall cover to hide behind to block the incoming missiles. Plenty of ditches to break LOS but nothing to save you when you're receiving indirect fire from a NARC beacon that you can't just break LOS with.

[Coolant]

agree with OP...the fact that we can't know the map beforehand means we guess about the ranges of our weapons. Make all maps have enough cover to get into brawling range - it doesn't have to be easy, make it hard to get that close, but every map should have a way for all ranges of weapons to work.

[El Bandito]

Only in solo-q do people have issues with Polar, cause organized push is harder to do. In group-q and CW drops I have seen brawler mechs tear through the opposition by using the trenches to get close, and LRMs performed less that good. The map is far from needing any reworks.

[Shiroi Tsuki]

El Bandito, on 31 January 2017 - 09:30 AM, said:

Only in solo-q do people have issues with Polar, cause organized push is harder to do. In group-q and CW drops I have seen brawler mechs tear through the opposition by using the trenches to get close, and LRMs performed less that good. The map is far from needing any reworks.

Another reason I think it would need a rework tbh. It's not consistent

[El Bandito]

Shiroi Tsuki, on 31 January 2017 - 09:45 AM, said:

Another reason I think it would need a rework tbh. It's not consistent

Then it can wait behind Alpine and Plexus.

[Shiroi Tsuki]

El Bandito, on 31 January 2017 - 09:48 AM, said:

Then it can wait behind Alpine and Plexus.

As long as these issues gets addressed by PGI, I have no complaints

[Cy Mitchell]

Is it a problem with the map or is it a problem with min/max and creating specialized Mechs with a very narrow focus on what they can do well?

In my mind, this is a player created problem not a map design problem.

[Shiroi Tsuki]

Rampage, on 31 January 2017 - 09:56 AM, said:

Is it a problem with the map or is it a problem with min/max and creating specialized Mechs with a very narrow focus on what they can do well?

In my mind, this is a player created problem not a map design problem.

Bad map design. I've already given examples of good map design on previous comments. Ranged builds can fight in shorter ranges. Short range can't fight long range. Having a dedicated role should not be punished TOO harshly, especially on maps where you have little control of choosing.