Jump to content

Deeper Trenches For Polar


7 replies to this topic

#1 DAEDALOS513

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Flame
  • The Flame
  • 2,633 posts
  • LocationArea 52

Posted 26 October 2017 - 06:57 AM

Making the trenches deeper is a good compromise that would satisfy lurmers, brawlers and medium rangers alike.

#2 PFC Carsten

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Helper
  • Little Helper
  • 2,188 posts
  • LocationOn your six

Posted 26 October 2017 - 10:20 AM

Please don't! It is one of the very rare occasions, where piloting mechs with a lower silhouette really pays off. On other maps it's mostly a tall building or an entire mountain range you're hiding behind.

#3 Void Angel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 7,093 posts
  • LocationParanoiaville

Posted 26 October 2017 - 12:08 PM

The problem is that this map is also where LRM counter-play is extremely difficult. All they have to do is see you, or have a light spot from 1000m away, and you can be totally hozed with zero options and no error on your part. So increasing the depth of the "trenches" is probably a needed change.

There's no need to accept a serious balance issue for one weapon system (two if you count ATMs) in exchange for the dubious benefit of favoring low-slung 'mechs. The low, rolling hills that make the Polar Highlands what they are won't be going away - you'll still be able to use the terrain to your advantage, but a spotter with sensor gear can't cause your complete destruction from outside of weapon (or even normal sensor) range.

#4 PFC Carsten

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Helper
  • Little Helper
  • 2,188 posts
  • LocationOn your six

Posted 26 October 2017 - 12:55 PM

If they LRM you, your positioning is bad, gitgud. That's at least what Comp players kept telling me.

Then there is Radar Derp and ECM that you can take. And if that's not an option or does not help: It's one in what, twelve maps, that's allowing for LRMs to shine? DWI.

Edited by PFC Carsten, 26 October 2017 - 01:03 PM.


#5 DAEDALOS513

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Flame
  • The Flame
  • 2,633 posts
  • LocationArea 52

Posted 26 October 2017 - 01:32 PM

View PostPFC Carsten, on 26 October 2017 - 12:55 PM, said:

If they LRM you, your positioning is bad, gitgud. That's at least what Comp players kept telling me.

Then there is Radar Derp and ECM that you can take. And if that's not an option or does not help: It's one in what, twelve maps, that's allowing for LRMs to shine? DWI.

The map needs to gitgud...

#6 Void Angel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 7,093 posts
  • LocationParanoiaville

Posted 26 October 2017 - 02:22 PM

View PostPFC Carsten, on 26 October 2017 - 12:55 PM, said:

If they LRM you, your positioning is bad, gitgud. That's at least what Comp players kept telling me.

Lolno. It's true that positioning is important, and that many of the people who whine endlessly about LRMs simply don't use the counterplay available to them. But the simple fact of the matter is that on Polar Highlands there is no counterplay at times. That's an important weakness in the map - and while the strengths of the map outweigh this weakness, it's still an important flaw that should be addressed.

#7 BlackDeathLegion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • 141 posts

Posted 26 October 2017 - 03:41 PM

I'd rather see PGI just add TUNNELS all over the entire map. You can TUNNEL UNDER the enemy, then come up an opening behind them.

THINK about that for a min.... go ahead . . .
Imagine how much FUN and tactical GAMEPLAY and DEPTH THIS WOULD ADD!!!

#8 Void Angel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 7,093 posts
  • LocationParanoiaville

Posted 26 October 2017 - 04:10 PM

It would totally change an excellent map into something else. We've already been asking for a new map that's fully or partially subterranean, however...





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users