Jump to content

- - - - -

Consumable Items - Feedback


971 replies to this topic

#1 Viterbi

    Social Media Manager

  • Staff
  • 849 posts
  • LocationMontreal, QC

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:02 AM

Edit: This thread is now locked, as the developers have responded to Community Feedback. Please see our new Official Feedback thread in the context of the response.


We understand that there is a considerable amount of feedback regarding consumable items. This thread shall serve as a consolidated outlet for all comments and suggestions surrounding consumable items; we will be closing redundant threads and linking players here to voice their opinions. This may include concerns, costs, types of consumables, coolant flush, etc.

We kindly ask that you keep discussion on-topic and constructive so that we can compile your suggestions for the developers to review.

Edit: A number of posts from this thread have been removed for lacking a constructive purpose. "Do not want" is not a useful point. Quoting another user and writing "+1" is not useful.

Edited by Niko Snow, 16 September 2013 - 12:35 PM.


#2 Redshift2k5

    Welcoming Committee

  • Elite Founder
  • Stone Cold
  • Stone Cold
  • 11,766 posts
  • LocationNewfoundland

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:07 AM

I would be happier if the CB and MC versions had identical functionality, and the only advantage to the MC version was cost/convenience.

#3 WolvesX

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,652 posts
  • LocationStalker-3F x Tharkad, Royal Guards HQ

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:09 AM

Think about that:

Lets make AC20 Gold Ammo!

AC20 Gold ammo pierces though the armor and damages your internals directly.

But to make it not OP & pay-to-win we have a fair system for you:


C-Bills versions:

Tier 1: Have a 2% chance that your AC20 pierces through armor!

Well, yes thats a rater low chance, but here it comes! You can combine it!

Tier 2: Have a 4% chance that your AC20 prierces though armor!

and:

Tier 3: Have a 5% chance that your AC20 prierces though armor!

and finaly:

Tier 4: Have a 6% chance that your AC20 prierces though armor!


But you can combine all the modules, so that you get the same chance as MC tier!!!

MC-Version:

MC-Tier: Have a 100% chance that your AC20 prierces though armor!


Summary: You only need 4 module slots, which you can activate 4 times in a match!!! For the small cost of having no module slots left!

While the REALMONEYAMMO-User only needs 1 slot to get 100%.

Sounds fair! :D


"Bad design decisions are Bad - No support for PAY-TO-WIN!"




Any piny bit of advantage you could gain with real money is bad for a compedative game and ruins the balance!


In other words, the problem of the current mechanic is that you need 2 Slots to get the same thing as 1 slot, but only for real money!

Its not 35% for 35% its 35% 2 slots / 35% 1 slot.

With more things to come (modules and consumables), every slot is viable and needed and a serious thing.

Like:
With realmoney: ADV. SEN, ADV. DEC, T3 Arty, T3 Cooling
Without realmoney: ADV.SEN, T1 Cooling, T2 Cooling, T2 Arty.

See the problem.

Sry if this post is a bit heated up.

Edited by WolvesX, 05 March 2013 - 08:27 AM.


#4 Zoom2136

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 62 posts
  • LocationMontreal

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:10 AM

Same fonction would be more balanced. Pricing is up to you as I don't really care. Just keep it reasonnable.

my 2c

#5 irony1999

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 295 posts

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:10 AM

Artillery and Airstrikes could be easily abused as a consumable that can be mounted multiple times on a mech, on multiple mechs on a team.

I don't want to play in matches where coordinated strikes win. Your original concept - as a command tree item tied to the Command Console was a decent idea.

#6 Mason Grimm

    Com Guard / Technician

  • Legendary Founder
  • 2,883 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationToronto, ON

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:10 AM

I love the idea of consumables with the highest Tier costing MC. I'm a poor poor firefighter and I can't wait to smack some Richie Rich players around and then thump my chest about it!!!! It's like icing on the cake!

My only suggestion would be to make Consumables a "One and Done (whether you use it or not)". This would make people really think about it and analyze the dollar cost average. It would also prevent entire teams from stacking with MC items (at least easily) and facing teams that may or may not stack MC items and keep the playing field a little more level.

Edited by Mason Grimm, 05 March 2013 - 08:14 AM.


#7 FrostCollar

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,454 posts
  • LocationEast Coast, US

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:11 AM

The most modules that any mech can have now is four. I'm concerned about the ramifications of allowing someone to use MC on a module that takes half the space of the cbill equivalent, especially since it seems that more modules are coming that are more useful.

#8 Biglead

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • Phoenix Overlord
  • Phoenix Overlord
  • 1,102 posts
  • LocationManassas, Va

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:12 AM

I will accept coolant flush as a module if you make it weigh 1 ton to simulate the weight of the coolant.


Also, you must give us a consumable that is the cool flying probe that shot out of the Warhammer in your old trailer.

#9 WolvesX

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,652 posts
  • LocationStalker-3F x Tharkad, Royal Guards HQ

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:12 AM

To be honest, consumables shouldn't be even in the game.

Make them GXP & CB or MC unlockable modules, that get refilled every time after a match for free (of cause) and screw all that tier 123 thing.

Like:

Cooling Module: 35% like T3, one time use in battle.

Edited by WolvesX, 05 March 2013 - 04:07 PM.


#10 Mackman

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 746 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:12 AM

Just going to get this in here early:

A lot of people claim that you can get the same functionality as the MC version with the C-Bill version(s). And you're almost right: If this were the only module in the game, sure, you'd have a point.

But it's not the only module in the game.





And the fact that a paying player is always going to have better options when it comes to modules is extremely problematic.

If you're a non-paying player, and your mech has 3 module slots, you can choose to get:
  • Tier 1 and Tier 2 cooling (for 35% flushing),
  • and one other module, whether it's another Tier 2 Consumable or another kind of module.
If you're a paying player, and your mech has 3 module slots, you can get:
  • a Tier 3 Coolant (for 35% flushing),
  • another tier 3 consumable (which right there puts you over the non-paying player),
  • and you still have another slot for whatever else you want in there.
You may still be thinking, "well, alright, that's kind of an advantage, but it's still pretty small." Now multiply that advantage by 8 (or 12, when we get 12v12), and you'll see that a paying lance will have a huge​ advantage over a non-paying lance in any kind of competitive setting.




This is completely unacceptable and completely P2W. Arguing that it's a relatively small advantage does nothing but prove that you agree it is an advantage: One that can only be bought with money.

Also, just going to add this in here, for information purposes (so people can give feedback that is fully informed):

EACH COOLANT MODULE CAN ONLY BE FLUSHED ONCE

Bryan Ekman responded to my thread, clarifying that each one can only be used once.

There is no doubling up on Tier 2 to get that 40% cooling. There's none of that going on. So stop defending it using an incorrect understanding of how it works!

Edited by Mackman, 05 March 2013 - 10:35 AM.


#11 Monky

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 3,125 posts
  • LocationHypothetical Warrior

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:13 AM

View PostRedshift2k5, on 05 March 2013 - 08:07 AM, said:

I would be happier if the CB and MC versions had identical functionality, and the only advantage to the MC version was cost/convenience.


I would be happier not having a coolant flush, and having this functionality for airstrike/artillery BUT you need 1 module equipped for either the cbill/mc version of each AND YOU MUST HAVE COMMAND CONSOLE. Otherwise command console is useless. It dovetails together, make it work.

Edited by Monky, 05 March 2013 - 08:13 AM.


#12 Chavette

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,846 posts

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:13 AM

Written with, but not only cutting edge competitive gaming in mind:

Why do the consumables have to go into module slots?
The module slots already have their use, and the number of them give some mechs/variants an edge.

Say I have a 5 large laser stalker, I get to have two modules after mastered, thats two whopping coolants for 35% total or one coolant one airstrike, while my buddy in his atlas(4 modules total) can have both of those but with MC higher tier plus two modules?

The poor stalker isnt being taken serious for 8v8s as it is! And its not about the stalker, its about mechs with less module hardpoints. This change will further restrict viable builds the same way as ECM hardpoints, the more, the better chance you win, and if you arent taking it, youre setting your team back.

Consumables related balance issues were not taken in account when figuring out the module numbers for mechs.
How to fix?
Fixed two consumable slots,
per mech, like summoner spells in LoL(they are small, hand of god type interventions).

Update, Ive managed to get bryan respond to this part:

View PostBryan Ekman, on 05 March 2013 - 11:15 AM, said:

We may review this at a later date. We like to do everything in small bite sized steps, to minimize the impact of new mechanics.


Number two, do you really think this is a viable idea in a game with competitive gameplay in mind?
There is no question MC consumables would need to be blown on any serious clan on clan action, where every millisecond, every damage point counts, and if you dont, you'll be left with "what if"-s until youre a grandfather.

If the enemy clan is packing it, you have to pay real money too, in order to have a fair match.

Just imagine an SK Quake/CS 1.6 player, at the world playoffs, between two matches, his view being shown on the big screen, while hes in the lobby, as his credit card is on his lap, buying chopper strikes and packing up instant reloads...

The features themselves: Im all for it, strikes from air are good ideas, to break 5 minute sniping sieges, whole teams camping behind corners and so on.


Summary:
- No separate slots for consumables encourage ECM-like team composition hardpoint number race
- This further sets back variants/mechs with less ECM/module hardpoints
- One or two consumable slot per mech, with consumables buyable with c-bills or MC, make the three tiers have exponential pricing, so MC purchase is feasible
- Paid RoF advantage doesnt belong into a game seeking its way into competitive gaming, "no money paid that round = no fair fight" is toxic for high level gaming community, is demoralizing for everyone else


Addendum, on pricing:

I think some exponential cbill and linear mc pricing would keep everyone happy. Tier 1 would be low enough for the newbie to buy, and Tier 3, who really wants to would still get it.

Besides, who says everyone must use their strikes every match?
Its fine if higher tiers cost alot compared to match earnings, with ELO, you arent stomping noobs with your Tier 3 items, the teams are on a similar skill level, and its the other teams choice not to use as many. And with the higher cbill price, you wouldnt be using it every match for long anyway...

Edited by Chavette, 05 March 2013 - 11:58 AM.


#13 Hobo Dan

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • Phoenix Guardian
  • Phoenix Guardian
  • 486 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationWest Virginia

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:13 AM

What about consumables in the new Testing Grounds? Can we use them there without them being consumed? I don't want to just charge into a live battle with stuff I've never tested but will lose after one use.

#14 stjobe

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • Phoenix Overlord
  • Phoenix Overlord
  • 7,401 posts
  • LocationOn your six, chipping away at your rear armour.

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:15 AM

On page 2 of the now-locked threadnaught, Garth posted this on Dec. 6th about why coolant pods weren't going to make an appearance in MWO:

Quote

It's actually because it invalidates heat as an issue in a team vs. team environment.

As far as I can tell, nothing has changed in the game to make this a false statement.

Then, of course, there's the issue that the MC coolant flush is strictly better than the CB ones (either it flushes more, or it uses less slots). That's really not a good way to go about it if you for some reason think that Garth was wrong on Dec. 6th.

The solution is, happily, rather easy. Either
1. Make the MC flush take up two module slots, or
2. Make all three tiers purchasable by both CB and MC, or
3. Do the right thing and don't implement Coolant Flush at all.

In 3050, there's two ways to cool a 'mech over its heat sink rating:
1. Submerge its heat sinks in water, or
2. Hook it up to a Coolant Truck and flush the cooling system.

In 3061 there will also be
3. Coolant Pods, which weigh 1 ton and take up 1 crit slot. They also explode easily and cause internal structure damage.

All these three ways of cooling a 'mech are fine and dandy. Coolant Flush as a module isn't.

#15 vrok

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 131 posts

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:15 AM

This implementation of consumables is P2W, you pay MC to have more module slots available.

The suggested consumables are bad ideas for gameplay. Coolant promotes ignoring heat management and gimmicky alpha strike builds even more, which is currently a big problem in this game. Artillery and air strikes is Call of Duty ******** and using them is not a mech piloting skill. Not to mention that if they follow the same system you could have A LOT of them in an 8 man team.

Having consumables be one time use and then force you to rebuy them is a tax on players far worse than R&R and promotes P2W simply because your mech will be worse for not having them, so if you can't afford them every game you will be disadvantaged. This effect is multiplied by having multiple consumables equipped at once. Also being forced to muck around in the mechlab to replace consumables every single game is annoying and reeks of bad design.

Consumables are bad.

The definitive poll thread on consumables/coolant/P2W is here, make your vote heard:
http://mwomercs.com/...2w-poll-thread/

Edit: Due to bad moderating they closed the poll thread so I guess it's just screaming in here that's left.

Edited by vrok, 05 March 2013 - 09:30 AM.


#16 UntamedHawk

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:16 AM

I find the concepts to be generally okay, except for the fact that someone paying CBills must use two module slots for something that someone paying MC requires only one.

#17 Valleye

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • Phoenix Guardian
  • Phoenix Guardian
  • 95 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationWindsor, ON CANADA

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:19 AM

Even before the module is available I hate coolant flush. I am not going to get into the P2W debate. There is enough of that going around. I have not ever stuck around in a F2P game long enough before MWO.

Consider the physics of a heatsink. It is physically connected to the device creating heat. This connection is a highly thermal conductive medium. Some metal or ferrofuturamic material. It could also be a thermally conductive fluid, oil, water, aquafuturamic, a coolant.

If you flush coolant you expel the coolant and the thermal energy it collected rapidly. You have to replace that coolant or your systems efficiency is reduced, repeat enough and the system stops working all together.

I personally think that the ruggedness of a battlemech heatsink would preclude a liquid cooling system. That is why mechs use myomer fibre muscles and not hydraulics.

So for this system to work, the coolant flush system must have a reservoir of coolant that it can replace the heat loaded coolant you just flushed. Dumping loaded coolant and not replacing it with fresh air temp coolant would not reduce your operating temperature even if the system was large enough to compensate for the lose of fluid.

The system should have a permanent cost or risk for the match. Beyond the module it takes.

A crit slot that could be hit. I hit before use it will disabl the flush or if hit after use it damags a heatsink

I hate gimmicks and coolant flush is a gimmick. So if I had my way drop the feature.

As for air strike and Artillery, I have no qualms with these.

Edited by Valleye, 05 March 2013 - 08:22 AM.


#18 FupDup

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Phoenix Overlord
  • Phoenix Overlord
  • 9,416 posts
  • LocationNowhere.

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:21 AM

View PostMason Grimm, on 05 March 2013 - 08:10 AM, said:

I love the idea of consumables with the highest Tier costing MC.

Everyone else hates the idea.

With the burning passion of an alpha-striking 6ERPPC Stalker.

Edited by FupDup, 05 March 2013 - 08:22 AM.


#19 Barghest Whelp

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 377 posts
  • LocationIn a loophole

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:21 AM

Seriously, I don't understand all the rage. The way I see it, the CB version of flush coolant offers more versatility when compared to the MC one. Am I the only one that would rather have (oh, and btw, I do pay $$$ for this game) the free version? Seriously, 35% is not going to let anybody unleash untold death upon their enemies. All it's going to offer is a way to get out of a pinch. The free version means you can do it twice, but slighlty less effective each time they're used.

I'm not too much of a fan of artillery or airstrikes, but I don't like those in any games. Then again that really depends on how it's implemented. Usually they mean instant death which is really hard to avoid. That is, every game I've played with this implemented has worked in such a way. If MWO can avoid falling in to this trap, then could turn out to be an interesting adition to the game.

#20 Doc Holliday

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 377 posts
  • Locationplaying some other game that's NOT PAY TO WIN

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:21 AM

Well this was certainly ONE way to get all the attention off broken ECM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users