75 replies to this topic

[Aim-Bot]

Bobzilla, on 19 March 2013 - 06:12 AM, said:

They only difference between 'grindng' and 'fighting' is ones attitude. It's the exact same thing.

If you feel like earning cbills is a grind, unlimited cbills won't make the game any more fun, you'll just decide to look at the game in a different way or get bored and stop playing.

i totally agree.
I hvae 3 ctf on master and spend about 70 mio c billd for different versions. during this time i learned to use those mechs very good.if i could switch to everything i want i would just get bored and wouldnt learn much .
why would i get bored? cause i dont have to work for my mechs ( fight for c bills)
why wouldnt i learn something? because i dont have to use my mechs alot to make progress.

[blinkin]

Bobzilla, on 19 March 2013 - 06:12 AM, said:

They only difference between 'grindng' and 'fighting' is ones attitude. It's the exact same thing.

If you feel like earning cbills is a grind, unlimited cbills won't make the game any more fun, you'll just decide to look at the game in a different way or get bored and stop playing.

i already have most of the mechs i want. to be honest the current system is ideal for me. (sort of)

BUT

new pilots get thrown on the field against pilots who almost universally have heavier, more expensive, and just outright better mechs. suggesting getting rid of cbills is a shock and awe tactic designed to get people to pay attention to the problems that have arisen since the removal of repair and rearm.

this is what RR did before:

• reduces bots
  
• (eventually) balances clan tech
  
• limits number of high end expensive mechs that punish new players that do not have money or a good mech yet
  
• keeps the field mixed between expensive and cheap mechs so that you don't spend all of your time fighting one mech
  
• adds immersion to the game (makes you feel more like a real merc)
  
• brings back the challenge in the game for me

[Skadi]

blinkin, on 15 March 2013 - 03:53 PM, said:

you have my yes vote.

not because i want cbills gone, but right now they serve no purpose other than seperating out new players.

bring back repair and rearm. put more pilots back into trial mechs or at least into cheaper builds. bring the game back to a point where i am proud to pilot my SRM catapults because they demand a skilled pilot to tame them, instead of being ashamed because it is the blunt instrument of choice for the mouth breathers that want to leg hump their way to victory.

Did you really just call srm boats skillfull?

Edited by Skadi, 21 March 2013 - 12:04 PM.

[blinkin]

Skadi, on 21 March 2013 - 12:03 PM, said:

Did you really just call srm boats skillfull?

not the leg humpers that make up the majority of the field.

[Peiper]

I'm saving my C-Bills for a Warhawk or a Phoenix Hawk. Whichever comes first.

Edited by Peiper, 27 March 2013 - 04:24 PM.

[Koshirou]

In my opinion, C-Bills are going to become more important again as more consumables are added. I don't really like the concept, but these are going to work as a C-Bill sink.

[Daggett]

Karl Streiger, on 15 March 2013 - 06:52 AM, said:

So the only thing C-Bills does is to slow you down.

Edited by Daggett, 01 April 2013 - 09:56 AM.

[flying1ace]

Keep C-Bills! This game needs something, a challenge! Something you can over come, when I look for a good game, I need a challenge factor! Navy field, the next ship! Tanki, the next gun, level! Level ups work well, but then so does the XP thing, but the C-bills keep the game running in the long term. If you could have whatever you wanted, why play the game? Everyone will either have the Awesome-9M or the Raven!

[blinkin]

flying1ace, on 01 April 2013 - 12:37 PM, said:

Keep C-Bills! This game needs something, a challenge! Something you can over come, when I look for a good game, I need a challenge factor! Navy field, the next ship! Tanki, the next gun, level! Level ups work well, but then so does the XP thing, but the C-bills keep the game running in the long term. If you could have whatever you wanted, why play the game? Everyone will either have the Awesome-9M or the Raven!

cbills don't add skill they just add grind. if we had repair and rearm or anything that actually drains those cbills then skill would be introduced into the game, and no the one shot use modules like coolshot are not nearly expensive enough to make up for this.

[MentalPatient]

C-bill grind serves 2 purposes. 1. It gives you something to aim for, like getting enough c-bills for the new mech, or whatever, 2. To give lazy people the option to fast track the process, which will pay for the free to play game we all enjoy. Take them away, and you may as well have a pay to play game, or no game. So I voted no.

[SJet]

I feel that C-Bills are 100% needed, if you didn't have them then this game would be 75% pay to win. I don't mind people paying for a mech, heck I've done it, but I think that the "grind time" is needed, heck if you have been playing any amount of time you should already have a stockpile of weapons and equipment stockpiled to equip. I hate to see free to play games go down the "pay to win path", just look at what happened to world of tanks.

[blinkin]

MentalPatient, on 01 April 2013 - 06:55 PM, said:

C-bill grind serves 2 purposes. 1. It gives you something to aim for, like getting enough c-bills for the new mech, or whatever, 2. To give lazy people the option to fast track the process, which will pay for the free to play game we all enjoy. Take them away, and you may as well have a pay to play game, or no game. So I voted no.

SJet, on 01 April 2013 - 08:56 PM, said:

I feel that C-Bills are 100% needed, if you didn't have them then this game would be 75% pay to win. I don't mind people paying for a mech, heck I've done it, but I think that the "grind time" is needed, heck if you have been playing any amount of time you should already have a stockpile of weapons and equipment stockpiled to equip. I hate to see free to play games go down the "pay to win path", just look at what happened to world of tanks.

you have both missed the primary point of this thread. the suggestion to remove cbills is itself a theatrical attempt to draw attention to the real problem. there is currently nothing in game to offset cbill gain. if players play long enough eventually anything that has a cbill price will be effectively free. the developers lose out on income and new players get screwed because everyone who has just been around longer has better equipment regardless of their skill. the field fills up with assault mechs and whatever "winning build" the community has attached itself to, because there is no cost.

this thread is mostly about bringing back repair and rearm. cbills are just the hostage we are using to get attention.

Edited by blinkin, 01 April 2013 - 10:54 PM.

[Karl Streiger]

The argument when removing C-Bills was: to pay players for their efficience on the field...
But a closer look...maybe not 100% objective.
But take the Noobcat before Splashdam-argedon ... when you have played your cat well you got a good chunck of c-bills thanks to assists and kills - maybe even your team won - because of you - even after your dead
So you got really much money.
Next round doesn't work for you that good...you run over open terrain and got caught by some snipers...no damage for you.

What would have happen when you would have run a a moderate balanced design for example the C4 with LRM and SRM - with less ammunition and std fusion.
You would hardly dealed as much damage as a good running A1, but maybe you survive. Second round you will die...but maybe with some damage.

So lets compare the income...i can assure you that the Noobcat got more money after both matches. With RnR in place...he would have less...because he had spend much more ammunition, because he have to repair a XL fusion.

So I can assert that - the income based on "actions" - that not include team work or surviving - without any costs is just a simple barrier - without any other purpose

[Hil]

Neolisk, on 15 March 2013 - 07:37 AM, said:

That's cause people who vote are already established players. They don't care about starters.

No, that's because game without any limit will make people bored much earlier. Fight for the right to build your own mech as you see fit! Or donate like crazy, if you want to skip.
OP's logic is simply childish "I wan' it now, why not, mommy?"

[BR0WN_H0RN3T]

You can't just remove cbills? How else can u buy new stuff? With MCs? That's P2W!. Bring back R&R. Punish expensive builds.

[blinkin]

Hil, on 02 April 2013 - 01:49 AM, said:

OP's logic is simply childish "I wan' it now, why not, mommy?"

OP and myself want things to be more of a challenge. without repair and rearm players just soak up money and run any broken build they want with impunity. the field becomes stagnant as it fills with assault mechs and whatever the "winning build" happens to be since the last patch. new players get screwed because there is no diversity in the field. trial mechs are built to be well rounded and die against the wall of assault mechs.

actually take a little time and read some of the later posts. the OP was theatrics designed to draw attention to the real problem.

players should have to work to maintain their superior technology. you shouldn't have better stuff just because you have played more. better pilots should have better equipment, not just any moron who logs in a lot.

Edited by blinkin, 02 April 2013 - 02:06 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

Hil, on 02 April 2013 - 01:49 AM, said:

OP's logic is simply childish "I wan' it now, why not, mommy?"

Is it? Maybe because i have learned from my son: "meins"
maybe ... maybe because i'm bored to death...maybe because i have grinded the Atlas for exactly....16 times...what was still some fun with RnR in check...but now its simple the more games the more money - that has nothing to do with the better you perform in battle the more money you earn.

As blinkin said...my arguments are exaggerated.

[Hil]

Well, I, personally think that old closed beta R&R system was better. It seems it simply was too annoying to tune for devs => gone to trashcan.
But current system is still much better than no B-Bills money at all.

[Daggett]

blinkin, on 02 April 2013 - 02:04 AM, said:

without repair and rearm players just soak up money and run any broken build they want with impunity

But with RnR in place well-off players will spend real money to run any broken build they want with impunity
In competitive games like this, game elements must not be balanced through economy. As soon as you do this, the game likely gets P2W.

If there is a broken build, only a counter build (meta game) or nerfs/buffs can keep it in check. Anything economy related like RnR cannot and will most probably lead to P2W.

That does not mean that RnR is a bad thing by default. It just needs to be designed correctly. The upcoming community warfare would provide a good opportunity to include such a well designed RnR system which does not punish F2P-players.

Edited by Daggett, 02 April 2013 - 05:48 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

Daggett, on 02 April 2013 - 05:45 AM, said:

But with RnR in place well-off players will spend real money to run any broken build they want with impunity
In competitive games like this, game elements must not be balanced through economy. As soon as you do this, the game likely gets P2W.

I know what you are saying...but if you boil it down... ammunition have tree disadvantages over energy weapons:
...they can run dry during battle
...their ammo can explode

but the last and most important is: your supplies run dry too. That is the point...look its fundamental BattleTech, its part of the novels its part of the lore....the Clans were beaten on Tukkayyid becaue they wasted that much ammo.
While in "normal" TT the Clan Energy Weapons are even better as ammunition feed weapons...that fact was allways curious for me. But during playing Mechwarrior Games it became important...and only in the MW 3 single player campaign the reloads were a real concern.

So when economy is bad...for balancing how to create a shortage of ammunition? Same with armor and spare parts.
I player have to spend MC to run broken imbalanced builds...than they have too.

Well...its a joke at least:
for example the 36+Artemis IV build A1 cat..some said it is I-Win, some said it is not a I-Win button. With RnR those Mechs would have spend all their income to rearm and a premium account to not make a big minus after the battle.
So players would spend money...to maintain this inefficient build. Do you think there would have been much players left that would said that the A1 is not a I-Win? Because it is obvious that some need MC or real money to use them....that means when MWO should not become P2W - they have to nerf the 36 SRM A1.

Edited by Karl Streiger, 02 April 2013 - 06:15 AM.