497 replies to this topic

[Josef Nader]

Rhinehardt Ritter, on 05 March 2013 - 06:27 AM, said:

Really? Come on. Quit catastrophizing


1. First off. There is nothing is free. If u believe that u are naive
2. Pgi's goal. To make money. See #
3. Do u really think a 2 shot heat reduction of 35% (assuming worst case) is going to be any more OP than say ecm?
I dont even plan to buy it, but hey i can manage my heat.
4. Arty and air strikes. They said they would always be in game. No shock there
5. Cost. Do u really think this stuff is going to be so cheap that it will be nothing but coolant flush and air strikes? Really? I doubt many pugs will want to spend money for this all the time

Seriously. Get over yourselves

I don't have to pay real money to get ECM, chuckles. Would you be okay with ECM being pay-only?

Teir 1 ECM: Hides yourself
Teir 2 ECM: Hides Teammates
Teir 3 ECM: Prevents missile locks

[Budor]

Drexorn, on 05 March 2013 - 06:10 AM, said:

It's not like that person can keep flushing the coolant, it's a one time thing.

It doesnt matter, if you are dead it was worth it. If you think 35% less heat at a moment of my choice isnt awesome and a major advantage you must be...new? Hit detection gets better and better. The module simply is more dmg in the same timeframe. How is this not godly in a game about robots killing eachother.

[Yokaiko]

Wip3ou7, on 05 March 2013 - 06:30 AM, said:

I wonder if anyone would complain if these consumables were 1,000/2,000 CBILLS for T1/T2 and 3MC (yes, 3) to reload a T3.... hmmm.... think about it.

The price would have to make then cost inconsequential.

This far we have nothing from the development team to give an indication that is the case 100 c-bills and 1MC I may consider, anything in double digit MC range and 5 digit C-bill range. They lost a paying customer.

[Roland]

Quote

2. Pgi's goal. To make money. See #

The reality is that such changes do not increase PGI's likelihood of making money.

Such moves alienate the player base, and decrease the likelihood of players transitioning to paying customers, if they feel that the game is P2W, and that they are being forced to cough up money just to compete.

I've defended PGI's moves up until this point, but I find it difficult to rationalize this newest decision.

[Grimstein]

I always felt that the players that said this game is pay to win were lost. Hero mechs are not pay to win.

This heat reduction of 35% for paying for cash is to far. I worry that it will damage the game.

[Sir Roland MXIII]

Roland, on 05 March 2013 - 06:41 AM, said:

The reality is that such changes do not increase PGI's likelihood of making money.

Such moves alienate the player base, and decrease the likelihood of players transitioning to paying customers, if they feel that the game is P2W, and that they are being forced to cough up money just to compete.

I've defended PGI's moves up until this point, but I find it difficult to rationalize this newest decision.

That, and as has been pointed out already, if they can have over a hundred thousand players online in one weekend then surely there's enough players playing that even a minor percentage of those paying would be enough to keep the lights on and the investors quiet. So while wanting more is natural, there's a great many better ways to go about that than this.

[Zeh]

The best available items should NOT be MC-only. That defines P2W. These changes are P2W (Although possibly minor, just calling it how I see it).

This shouldn't happen. I'm not making any ultimatums, but I sure as heck don't like the idea.

Gold ammo.

[3rdworld]

Josef Nader, on 05 March 2013 - 06:24 AM, said:

And then the guy drops a T3 air strike on your head, because his one-slot gold module let him do that. The coolant module is the least of our concerns, and that's why the developers gave us exact figures on that first. Let's not forget that Arty and Air Strikes do exactly the same thing.

I would be more concerned about a team mounting only mechs that can use 4 modules and using Airstrike 1&2 and Artillery 1&2.

That would be 32 Airstrike and Artillery.

[Chrithu]

Wip3ou7, on 05 March 2013 - 06:30 AM, said:

I wonder if anyone would complain if these consumables were 1,000/2,000 CBILLS for T1/T2 and 3MC (yes, 3) to reload a T3.... hmmm.... think about it.

Good question.

[Sheraf]

6 PPC Stalkers and coolant flush?

[Torarild]

Just wish to state: I do not approve of this. As has been said, on 1 mech it might not be huge, but on a team it could become an important difference, and there can not be any doubt, it is pay to win.. I am a bit let down.
Cooling should take up weight, and airstrikes\ artillery \ future things like UAV, should somehow be linked to Command Chair, 3 tons.
At the very least the artillery\airstrike etc should take up crit slots.

Not rage quiting though, I still think everything must be tested out and reported back on, so this thread might be a bit early.

[Syllogy]

Please, explain this OP Superiority of the MC version vs. the C-Bill version.

[Yokaiko]

Syllogy, on 05 March 2013 - 07:19 AM, said:

Please, explain this OP Superiority of the MC version vs. the C-Bill version.

http://mwomercs.com/...10-consumables/

[Zeh]

Syllogy, on 05 March 2013 - 07:19 AM, said:

Please, explain this OP Superiority of the MC version vs. the C-Bill version.

Did you miss the Command Chair post or are you just being obtuse and suggesting 35% in one slot isn't > 35% in two slots?

[Ryllen Kriel]

For any company-to-company (dare I say "clan") matches set up, people pretty much might have to spend money just to be competitive. I've seen many matches where a few mechs overheating due to one miscalculation with heat buildup turned the match. An instant 35% drop in heat doesn't sound like much but it certainly could change quite a few battles, especially with the Tier 3 vs. the Tier 1 & 2 users having that extra slot for targeting and sensor modules.

It just sounds like a mess to me how it's currently implimented. I would rather do without a coolant flush unless they just make it a standard feature for all mechs without a goofy module system (as in previous Mechwarrior games).

[Waladil]

I had a realization, and I'm going to start posting this everywhere. Take a look at the first post in this thread. Hopefully this is the correct interpretation and things are NOT designed to be P2W, just very poorly explained:

http://mwomercs.com/...-2-win-threads/

[Tarman]

Waladil, on 05 March 2013 - 07:46 AM, said:

I had a realization, and I'm going to start posting this everywhere. Take a look at the first post in this thread. Hopefully this is the correct interpretation and things are NOT designed to be P2W, just very poorly explained:

http://mwomercs.com/...-2-win-threads/

http://mwomercs.com/...10-consumables/

Read the second post. It's one shot per module. Otherwise you'd get 4 separate cooling bursts from a stack of T1+T2.

[Attalward]

Fully agree with OP.

I wil stop playing untill the retract on their design.

[Tennex]

Viva la revolution! for we are many!!! no longer will they feed on us.

[Protection]

Syllogy, on 05 March 2013 - 07:19 AM, said:

Please, explain this OP Superiority of the MC version vs. the C-Bill version.

35% > 20%