354 replies to this topic

[OneManWar]

I don't miss it at all. It was stupid. Why should I have to bring a light mech to make money? I could lose in a light and make $60,000 Cbills, or win in an assault or a heavy and make $10,000. It made no sense. If I'm getting paid mercenary style, why would I be paid the same bringing a 13 million dollar mech to the table as someone bringing a 2 million dollar one?

And for those of you that miss the immersion... Yeah, it was SOOOOOOO immersive to click 1 button to repair and rearm after a match, and that's if you didn't have auto RnR on.

The whole system stunk and I for one hope it never comes back.

[oldradagast]

I never played during this time period, and I'm glad I didn't. Repair and Rearm is a terrible idea, IMHO, for anything but a sustained "campaign mode." For quick-drop games - which is the only supported format right now - it simply doesn't work.

Why should I be penalized because I'm learning the game? Or because I'm tired of playing cheap lights with just energy weapons? Or, because my team is clueless or suffers disconnects or AFK's while the other team has everyone playing? Or, why should I be punished by having to waste in-game money to repair my mech after being brutalized by a pre-made team while on a PUG opposing team? Why should I be punished for playing a mech that uses ammo? It simply doesn't make sense.

Repair and Rearm is just a tax - a way of slowing things down - and it also results in frustrating games where you come out behind and would have literally been better off not playing. Since we have nothing but 8-man random drops and many of us have few, if any, people we can really team up with, this type of punishment makes no sense. I can't choose my team, but I should suffer a Repair and Rearm charge because they blew it?

This doesn't even get into the types of game-warping mech builds that were being produced by Repair and Rearm. Mechs with 25% extra ammo so they can get the free 75% rearm and still have enough ammo... mechs that started the match basically mangled... mechs that didn't bother to repair and just focused on protecting their engine and "big gun" long enough to deal damage, etc.

One can say Repair and Rearm is realistic, and that's true... except no sane military commanders in the universe would fight wars with randomly chosen 8-man teams slugging it out on random maps. If they want to add Repair and Rearm back in ONLY for "campaign mode" where people choose their teams, know where they'll be fighting beforehand, etc, maybe it could work (although that is still highly debatable and it should be impossible to come out of a battle with a net loss or why play?), but "quick play," forget it. It should never come back, unless they want to punish new players, force everyone to play energy-weapon-only light mechs, and chase people away from the game.

Edited by oldradagast, 07 April 2013 - 04:59 PM.

[MadcatX]

Xenois Shalashaska, on 07 April 2013 - 04:26 PM, said:

Hey hey hey. Bad players have always been on the low. That will never change. The people who loose are just earning 60k a match, atleast with this they can have the remaining 100K free repair + earnings from loosing. The absolute reason people like me want R&R back in because we don't want a simple narrow minded MechWarrior game. We want a financial, strategic, intelligent matches. R&R is realistic and does separate the fools from the strategic. If your worried about the loosing players its already been implemented as the person who plays the first 15 matches receives 8.9mill c-bills. Jesus man. If you want to see hard grind you should play Hawken or World of Tank and then you would see that MechWarrior is being more than generous. Why don't you explain a way to make R&R work instead of denial constantly and prove a point and dude im not saying lets have the old R&R. why not improve it so your more to win on a positive than negative earnings.

Why bother trying to get people to think on how to make R&R work if those people clearly do not like the concept to begin withj. It should remain where it has always been: In single-player mechwarrior video games. In several of the titles, single-player finance was a factor to consider.

The R&R and grinding are two seperate things and need to be treated as such. Grinding means you'll get to your destination. just more slowly then someone running a founder/hero mech and/or premium time.

R&R implements a Pay to Win model that is very similar to World of Tanks's model. The higher-tier tanks (or even lower-tiers, depending on the equipment) will make you lose money when running them, especially if you're running solo. Same can be said with tweaked mechs, they've already cost you money (and if there wasn't the ammo workaround, I figure there would've been even much more complaints). A player that receiving a distinct advantage by getting more c-bills using mechs or premium purchased with real-world currency to allow themselves to play their tweaked-out mech more often falls under the pay-to-win category.

The only way I would like to see R&R brought back is if there is no means of losing money, worst case scenario being you gain nothing from a battle. That would remove the c-bill requirement to run anything you own and remove a pay to win element. It would make the grind longer for less-skilled or less-lucky players, but it's the better choice between the two evils.

Edited by MadcatX, 07 April 2013 - 04:56 PM.

[Aym]

Alphawolf, on 07 April 2013 - 02:11 PM, said:

I miss R&R a lot too. But sorry OP you are going to get so many whiney babies responding that they could not make money or that others were abusing not fully repairing before a match or some other lame excuse that themselves most likely did. It really comes down to the whiners do not know how to: 1.budget 2. build and pilot a mech within profitable perameters if real cost variables (rearm & repair) are implemented. and 3. wanted everything now but were unwilling to buy MC to get premium time.

Wow talk about selective perception. The VAST majority of the nay-sayers in this thread are saying that it was PAY TO WIN WITH PREMIUM TIME or that it unfairly punished new and or inexperienced pilots, which by the way is NOT ME!
I flourished under RnR but I don't want a system that overly rewards me and punishes others, I want a fun and fair game.

[MadcatX]

Aym, on 07 April 2013 - 04:56 PM, said:

Wow talk about selective perception. The VAST majority of the nay-sayers in this thread are saying that it was PAY TO WIN WITH PREMIUM TIME or that it unfairly punished new and or inexperienced pilots, which by the way is NOT ME!
I flourished under RnR but I don't want a system that overly rewards me and punishes others, I want a fun and fair game.

I'll meet you halfway on that statement. Sure I'm damn harsh about R&R. I agree that it was not a full-blown P2W in contrast to the speculation surrounding consumables at the time. But it did introduce negative income as a gameplay mechanic, which provided even more incentive to get premium time.

[Josef Nader]

R&R has no place in a random drop game scenario, and it DEFINITELY should never be used as a balancing mechanism. R&R has a place in faction battles in Community Warfare, where everyone is playing for keeps and a Pyrrhic victory is worse than a loss where you saved most your assets.

When I have no control over who I'm dropping with and it's a game mode where everything's made up and the points don't matter, R&R is a pointless and frustrating scheme for lengthening the grind between new toys.

[DCLXVI]

Josef Nader, on 07 April 2013 - 05:23 PM, said:

When I have no control over who I'm dropping with and it's a game mode where everything's made up and the points don't matter, R&R is a pointless and frustrating scheme for lengthening the grind between new toys.

this is what playing mwo is like let alone r&r hahaha shiiiiii. I played with a group for the first 2 weeks in this game and came to the conclusion, wtf's the point really? lol

[Hedonism Robot]

Well it looks like the saga of terrible players wanting an advantage hits 14 pages.....

[Wintersdark]

Xenois Shalashaska, on 07 April 2013 - 03:31 AM, said:

You need a friend buddy. Fibrous and endo steel are two different mech upgrades. Understand I mean the cost of repair of standard armour and fibrous armour. Im guessing you never ran fibrous when R&R was in. It cost a lot to repair. R&R must be improved with a stimulus of free repair of 100k per person with add incentives for lower drop weights of the team.

Nobody ran Fibrous because it was - and still is - utter garbage. It's only good in a tiny percentage of builds - ones in which you have 14 free slots, no tonnage available, and using it would allow you to get a larger engine.

People running Fibrous instead of Endo-Steel even without R&R are making a bad build, period. There is no circumstance where FF is superior to ES, none whatsoever. Adding a huge additional repair cost to FF armour is making something already terrible even worse.

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

There are two sets of proponents to R&R here:

1) Those with rose coloured glasses, attributing aspects of emergent gameplay to R&R, and
2) Those who understood the old system was broken and terrible, and want a better system.



So, two separate responses, then:

Proponent #1:
Changes in how people played. People don't play badly now because of a lack of R&R. It hasn't changed tactics at all.

What changed was R&R was removed shortly after Open Beta started. Most of the users in the R&R days were experienced veterans, and there were very few new players. Having started at the beginning of Open Beta, I remember this time quite clearly. After the first month or two of Open Beta, zounds of new players coming in had no clue whatsoever. And as such, more and more of battles where chock full of people with no clue whatsoever, and even if they had learned to play to some extent they had no clue of the tactics that had been developed around R&R.

So, what changed how matches play out was the introduction of vast numbers of new players, to the point where new players outnumbered the veterans dramatically.

Regardless, I clearly remember the R&R days. I loved it conceptually, but I hated the implementation. I regularly saw people running unrepaired zombie mechs, and terrible builds - people who'd come to the realization that they weren't good enough to win and it wasn't financially worth trying. So, they'd go to battle in ****** mechs to get what they could, and the experienced players all rocked the baddest loadouts they could. There's little Risk & Reward in this: If you're a good player, in a superior mech, you can lay waste to lots of poor players with impunity and easily make enough to cover your losses should another experienced player kill you.

It would be so very much worse now with Elo, as was noted earlier in this thread.

Proponent #2:

To you, I say: I agree completely. A good implementation would be awesome.

But it's not a trivial thing to do, and it won't happen as there simply isn't the spare dev time to do it, and they're absolutely not going to delay CW to make it happen. It's very complex to design a system like this that wouldn't punish newer or just poorer players dramatically. Design time, development time, testing time, balancing time, bugfixing and maintenance after release, these are things PGI can't afford for a feature that would ultimately add nothing but (great!) immersion.


To all the proponents? While I'm with you that a good system would be awesome, this whole thread is a waste of time because it absolutely will not happen. Simply put, it would be very difficult to design and implementation that would make the new user experience (particularly after they get their first mech, if it doesn't apply to trials) so much worse, and damaging the already rough new user experience is something PGI absolutely can not risk.

Aym, on 07 April 2013 - 04:56 PM, said:

Wow talk about selective perception. The VAST majority of the nay-sayers in this thread are saying that it was PAY TO WIN WITH PREMIUM TIME or that it unfairly punished new and or inexperienced pilots, which by the way is NOT ME!
I flourished under RnR but I don't want a system that overly rewards me and punishes others, I want a fun and fair game.

This absolutely.

I did fine under R&R as well, and would if it were implemented now. But it would really, really necessitate premium time, particularly for poorer players. I don't want to see newer/poorer players disadvantaged further, because that chases them away. We want as many players as possible, even bad ones, because having lots of players makes the game better for everyone.

[Celyth]

LoL at few baddies' arguments saying "ohh, i used to boat 20 LRM15s back then and fired 1000000 missiles into the wall, when i saw how much my repair and rearm was, i played the next match more conservatively and smertly"

Sorry breh, you should play smart as a means to win, not as a means to lessen repair and rearm bills. The whole idea leaves a poor taste in my mouth.

Either way, it looks bad. Before, new players were repelled by R&R, now the minmax warriors (me included) stomp them, and who's to say they won't leave after getting stomped? (at least they don't get punished for getting stomped).

I guess the lesser of two evils would be now, where you stomp with a tricked out mech and they don't get punished.

Rather than people use premium for their built mechs to keep it in the green every game to stomp and punish new players.

[Screech]

Would it be safe to assume that all the people that want R&R returned also want a C-Bill wipe as well.

Seems only fair, sure a little extreme, but still fair.

[FupDup]

Wintersdark, on 07 April 2013 - 06:08 PM, said:

People running Fibrous instead of Endo-Steel even without R&R are making a bad build, period. There is no circumstance where FF is superior to ES, none whatsoever. Adding a huge additional repair cost to FF armour is making something already terrible even worse.

It lets you squeeze in a few more armor points or w/e if you're driving a light or Cicada.

But yeah, other than that it's kinda useless.

Edited by FupDup, 07 April 2013 - 06:18 PM.

[Tekadept]

Davers, on 07 April 2013 - 01:23 PM, said:

So that is one vote for 'Let's punish new players for trying out this game'. *sigh*

The worst punishment for new players wouldn't come from any form of R&R if it was brought back in,It would be Trial Mechs and lack of training documentation.

[Mechteric]

repair and reload was bad, if it makes a return it should only be for the community warfare stuff when fighting for planets and such, but not for regular matches like we have now

[Davers]

Tekadept, on 07 April 2013 - 06:15 PM, said:

The worst punishment for new players wouldn't come from any form of R&R if it was brought back in,It would be Trial Mechs and lack of training documentation.

Trial mechs suck. There is no denying that. Training docs may help some, but I never read them personally and I doubt I am alone. Most people will just jump in rather than sit there after downloading the game for an hour than read the help files.

[Thomas Covenant]

After Community Warfare, if the realism of R&R will add to mwo experience. I want to see it work, but I also want to see everyone having a good experience.

[Wintersdark]

FupDup, on 07 April 2013 - 06:15 PM, said:

It lets you squeeze in a few more armor points or w/e if you're driving a light or Cicada.

But yeah, other than that it's kinda useless.

If you are disagreeing with my post, no. It only helps if you are already running Endo Steel, and then only in a tiny fraction of builds.

There are builds where it's good, but again, ONLY if you have Endo Steel already. In no circumstances whatsoever is FF better than ES.

Tekadept, on 07 April 2013 - 06:15 PM, said:

The worst punishment for new players wouldn't come from any form of R&R if it was brought back in,It would be Trial Mechs and lack of training documentation.

Again, these are not mutually exclusive. Just because there are already problems in the game doesn't make it ok to add more. The new user experience is already bad enough, it's not ok to make it worse.

[Sybreed]

Hedonism Robot, on 07 April 2013 - 05:42 PM, said:

Well it looks like the saga of terrible players wanting an advantage hits 14 pages.....

and I didn't have to bump it!

AMAZING ISN'T IT?

If you got nothing interesting to say, just stay out of this thread. [REDACTED] R&R isn't a black and white issue and should be perhaps discussed properly.

Thank you for your understanding.

Edited by Viterbi, 08 April 2013 - 12:57 PM.
Removed targeted language

[Xenois Shalashaska]

Josef Nader, on 07 April 2013 - 05:23 PM, said:

R&R has no place in a random drop game scenario, and it DEFINITELY should never be used as a balancing mechanism. R&R has a place in faction battles in Community Warfare, where everyone is playing for keeps and a Pyrrhic victory is worse than a loss where you saved most your assets.

When I have no control over who I'm dropping with and it's a game mode where everything's made up and the points don't matter, R&R is a pointless and frustrating scheme for lengthening the grind between new toys.

This guy is speaking my language. R&R is a must for community warfare or factions will never weakend and we will have endless ransacking of boarder control.

[KhanCipher]

Josef Nader, on 07 April 2013 - 05:23 PM, said:

everything's made up and the points don't matter

i see what you did there, i see that