51 replies to this topic

[Adridos]

Insaniti, on 06 November 2011 - 08:30 AM, said:

There is a lot of discussion occurring about F2P and P2W issues. One issue that MUST be addressed by the developers is the role of costs with regard to recurring in-game events such as:

1) Repairing armor/mech/item damage

2) Ammunition

3) Item purchase

If any of these require in-game resources (time, c-bills, and/or real life money), then I may have to 'grind' or spend real-life money to be able to participate fully in my merc group's fights.

This is unacceptable.

If I have the skill to pilot a Catapult and wreck heads from afar... then I should be able to do that without having to take crappy fights for 3 weeks prior with my Warhammer to make enough money to buy the LRM ammunition needed if I don't want to spend real-life money.

A simulation means I can fight with whatever mech I think is tactically appropriate at any time. If that's not the case and I need to 'build up my character' to play in a simulation... it's not a simulation.

It's a grindy MMORPG.

Any dev care to comment on this issue?

Just my opinion,
Insanity

As I have said on many threds before this one. We don't even know how is logging in going to be, let alone, that there will be some repairs, refills, etc. Making threads like this before the actuall annoucment of the system is a bit "weird".

[Zyllos]

I believe the developers already have their minds made up in regards to how salvage, repairs, ect are going to be handled.

Q. How loyal will MechWarrior® Online™ be to the tabletop rules (heat management, melee, armor penetration, etc.)?

A. We are adhering very closely to the BattleTech® tabletop rules. Some mechanics in the tabletop version of the game do not translate well into a videogame and we are coming up with our own rule sets that mitigate these differences in an intuitive and fun manner.

[JzT Dolomite]

Insaniti, on 06 November 2011 - 08:54 AM, said:

There are combat simulations and universe simulations.

In my mind, Mechwarrior (in the multiplayer environment) is the tactical simulation of mech-based combat. Not a simulation of the entire BattleTech universe which would be a MMORPG.

If I have to worry about ammo, damage, etc, I'm no longer simulating combat... I'm playing a MMPORG with grind... with occasional combat.

I want to kick **** in a mech, not spend time at a mech flea market buying and selling bits of salvage to get myself back into combat.

Simulate combat, don't simulate the economics surrounding combat.

Insanity

But if they are following the BTU line, then that universe is gonna matter. We can potentially have games where my Mech unit is cutoff on planet and we have to hold out till we either get rescued, captured or destroyed. It would kinda make no sense if I could get a full refit on a hostile planet. HOWEVER the negatives should not be ridiclous if that kind of situation happens, but enough to make you realize "we need to get to a better place NOW!!"

[TheRulesLawyer]

Id actually love to see everything the OP doesn't want. I'd like to see supply shortages making me worry about capping resources for my faction. I'd love to no be able to get a replacement part for my damage mech on some backwater outpost and have to fight down a couple guns or light on ammo. Just drop the BV and find me a fair fight.

People who don't want to deal with supply could always stick to being in a house unit and fighting on core worlds. Rewards might not be as high as playing as a merc willing to go anywhere.....

[Gaius Cavadus]

{JzT}Dolomite, on 07 November 2011 - 08:42 AM, said:

But if they are following the BTU line, then that universe is gonna matter. We can potentially have games where my Mech unit is cutoff on planet and we have to hold out till we either get rescued, captured or destroyed. It would kinda make no sense if I could get a full refit on a hostile planet. HOWEVER the negatives should not be ridiclous if that kind of situation happens, but enough to make you realize "we need to get to a better place NOW!!"

I think you're giving the complexity of MWO way too much credit. People need to go check out World of Tanks so they can develop realistic expectations. This is just going to be an online matchmaking lobby. There won't be any supply lines. No one will ever get cut off and stranded anywhere. There's not even going to be any type of singleplayer component.

What's gonna happen is you'll pick your mech, if we're lucky we'll have a MPBT: 3025 -esque map interface, and then the match maker will do it's thing.

You'll get dumped into battle, earn some c-bills and XP, and get pushed back to your mech hangar/dropship afterwards. That's it.

[Brakkyn]

Without risk, reward is meaningless. Actions must have conseuqences--good decisions are rewarded, mistakes are punished.

[Dozer]

Brakkyn, on 07 November 2011 - 09:02 AM, said:

Without risk, reward is meaningless. Actions must have conseuqences--good decisions are rewarded, mistakes are punished.

The thing is reward means different things to different people. Playing competitively maybe enough reward. Winning may be enough. Hell even losing if something is learned. Personally I like the idea of having some risk involved, but I recognise that this is a game so i want to be able to play full stop otherwise I.. well... won't play. Too much restriction puts me off so I don't advocate it, but I see why some people do find it a necessary component.

Edited by Dozer, 07 November 2011 - 09:11 AM.

[Vlad Ward]

/outofcharacter

Why not simply make custom equipment/mechs/weapons have an associated repair/maintenance/resupply cost while having the player's Great House cover the costs related to Stock 'Mechs?

This way, skilled players will be able to receive both a risk and a reward for being good, while less skilled players will not be harshly penalized or stuck in a Flea for all eternity.

[PewPew]

I find that threads like this contain two groups of people. One group dislikes something about a game and deems it as "unacceptable". For drama, it is often stated like so:

This is unacceptable.

The other group finds some elaborate method by which they expect the game developers to follow.

Neither group really understands how game development works, so I'm going to throw a couple ideas out here.

1. Recurring costs like ammo, repairs, etc. are not just there for the lols. They help to regulate the currency and provide a sink of money, since money in videogames is created out of nowhere. They are economic regulators in videogames. It's why games like WoW have auction fees

2. Creating an economic system in a videogame, at least a successful one that is difficult to exploit, is not an easy task. It is probably near impossible to implement all the intricate demands that people are proposing here. Don't get your hopes up for something like that. It will probably be quite simple, similar to gold in various fantasy MMOs. Instead of having to buy a new mech when yours dies, it will probably be something arbitrary and easy, like the "durability" value in lots of games. You died 3 times? Eventually you'll have to pay a small fee to "repair" your gear.

[Black Sunder]

I don't like WoT's system of forcing players back to the mid tanks to pay for their high tanks. I don't care if someone wants to play assaults all the time. I'm all for it.

I think a mech should be able to profit regardless of its weight class unless you go into battle and get WTFBBQPWNED the first 1 minute. Then you might lose out on some money but other than that let all mechs be able to profit.

[gregsolidus]

You payed for ammo and repairs in the other MWs,why not here?

Edited by gregsolidus, 07 November 2011 - 03:41 PM.

[Black Sunder]

I disagree with the OP. Paying for your repairs and ammo will make you a better player.