4 replies to this topic

[skullman86]

I posted this in a topic in general and I've seen others suggest similar changes, so I thought I would just make a topic here because of all the stuff going on in general. Maybe this was already "playtested" and the people in charge didn't like it, but I think you would get a lot less flak if you took a different approach to consumables balance.

This suggestion would hopefully apply to all "consumables"

---------------------------------

• Both versions should be identical in the amount of slots they take up and the bonuses they provide

• The C-bill version should be a true consumable (once used you have to buy more) and it should be cheap (I'm thinking less than 100k)

• The MC versions should be permanent buys that recharge at the end of a round. The modules can only be used on one mech at a time, however, so this gives players a reason to buy in bulk.

Basically, instead of trying to do asymmetrical balance, you are giving players two different ways to buy the same item...kind of like you did with camo phase 2.

Edited by skullman86, 04 March 2013 - 08:23 PM.

[Graufalk]

Agreed. This is what I was going to suggest as well. They seriously need to get rid of the "better" MC version as that would make it basically mandatory for high ELO matches, not to mention the horrible PR. Don't even have to look at these forums, most other places that discuss this game are already calling out PGI for implementing 'pay to win' items.

Although rather than permanently unlocking a consumable (as the cost would have to be prohibitive to offset the c-bill money sink), structure it like Premium time:

1000 MC = unlock consumable for a week
1750 MC = unlock for 2 weeks
3000 MC = unlock for a month

[TheMagician]

Yep. This will encourage MC purchases, rather than 'require' it.

[HammerSwarm]

Graufalk, on 04 March 2013 - 10:28 PM, said:

Agreed. This is what I was going to suggest as well. They seriously need to get rid of the "better" MC version as that would make it basically mandatory for high ELO matches, not to mention the horrible PR. Don't even have to look at these forums, most other places that discuss this game are already calling out PGI for implementing 'pay to win' items.

Although rather than permanently unlocking a consumable (as the cost would have to be prohibitive to offset the c-bill money sink), structure it like Premium time:

1000 MC = unlock consumable for a week
1750 MC = unlock for 2 weeks
3000 MC = unlock for a month

No. This is dangerously close to a subscription pay to win scenario. It might even be blatantly pay to win.

Edited by HammerSwarm, 05 March 2013 - 07:22 AM.

[skullman86]

Graufalk, on 04 March 2013 - 10:28 PM, said:

Agreed. This is what I was going to suggest as well. They seriously need to get rid of the "better" MC version as that would make it basically mandatory for high ELO matches, not to mention the horrible PR. Don't even have to look at these forums, most other places that discuss this game are already calling out PGI for implementing 'pay to win' items.

Although rather than permanently unlocking a consumable (as the cost would have to be prohibitive to offset the c-bill money sink), structure it like Premium time:

1000 MC = unlock consumable for a week
1750 MC = unlock for 2 weeks
3000 MC = unlock for a month

Are we talking about unlimited uses for all consumables over all of your owned mechs or just XXXX MC to rent one type of module? Premium time (as of right now) gives a nice xp and c-bill bonus, so it's worth it, but premium equipment wouldn't really give you anything substantial in return (at least not in the long run).

PGI could charge ~300mc for consumables and people would buy large quantities without even giving it a second thought because it would be a reasonable price for the content. It's just like camo. Hardly anyone liked the camo system pre-phase 2 because the purchase was basically a waste of money. People wanted to invest their money into items and be able to keep them, and I think equipment premium would have the same problem, even if it was cheap.

...but that's just me.

Edited by skullman86, 05 March 2013 - 02:53 PM.