Vechs, on 08 July 2012 - 10:39 PM, said:
We're thinking of cheap in two different ways.
Battletech also uses a "Battle Value" number (which roughly follows the C-Bill money cost) to gauge how expensive something is.
The Urbanmech will be "cheap" for your team, assuming they account for BV in matchmaking (and I think they will).
So let's say we have a 5,000 BV match. Having an Urbanmech will use up 454 BV, while a Jenner would take 669 BV from your teams budget. That means if I use an Urbanmech, you could spend more BV for yourself and roll out in an Assault mech instead of a Heavy.
Having cheap BV mechs is important for teams that want to have flexibility in their composition.
you lost me with complex MWO mechanics that I do not understand, so can't make an argument to that, so I guess you win.
Vechs, on 08 July 2012 - 10:47 PM, said:
Heh. I think maybe that's the big misunderstanding with the people who don't like the Urbanmech.
I like the Urbanmech because it's "bad". (Read: cheap)
If you play a strategy game, you're going to lose if you try to do nothing but build your most expensive units. That's why vehicles like the Urbanmech have their place.
So, basically, I think the Urbanmech is good because it's cheap, and it's cheap because it's bad. So I think it's good because it's bad.
So i was originally right... It's a fanboy thing. You just had to say that and countless words and hours would've been saved
Roguewolf, on 08 July 2012 - 10:44 PM, said:
And this is exactly why we have "My Little Pony" fanboi hug farms everywhere. The Urby is the Pony of BattleTech
HOLY CRAP. You're right. It's the exact same thing. Kinda like how bronies like MLP and when you actually bring it up, they try to defend with their lives, and you can't argue with them anyway because no matter how logically you argue using specific examples... they will not budge an inch... I feel the similarities strongly in this thread.
Edited by Adm Awesome, 08 July 2012 - 10:55 PM.