354 replies to this topic

[Victor Morson]

Here's my problem with R&R based on how the game is setup:

1- It punishes good players the most; the guy who stands there and gets cored in the past system paid a magnitude less than the good player that spread the damage over his/her armor, ending the match barely intact (but alive).

2- It runs the risk of making competitive builds (High end equipment like Endo) not be viable for players without premium / a ton of skill. It could easily get really ugly if it forces the typical player to be handicapped even more by forcing them to run standard frames and such. They should never balance this stuff by the metagame.

The only suggestion I have? If they put R&R back in, tie it to SALVAGE, so a percentage of the enemies you killed/assisted killing = goes back into your 'mech first. If you assist in multiple kills, salvage would cut your repair bills drastically down, for example. Or, to not exclude scouts, merely splitting the dead enemy 'mechs salvage with your entire team could work too.

That said, unless the game gets much more detailed in the CW meta, I'd say leave R&R out.

[ChapDude]

Dudeman3k, on 06 April 2013 - 09:41 AM, said:

we NEED R&R back is the thing.... Take War Thunder for instance. You can either repair out right for (c-bills) or wait 20 - 30 minutes for it to auto repair for free. gives meaning to Multiple garage space AND you wouldn't be gimping your team driving a broken mech in battle to begin with, as it wont let you drop with it.

personally im not against or for R&R as i understand why it was taken down initially but i really like this idea you've posted, but i would like to see it be pay MC for instant repair, pay cbills to have the time down to 10 min other wise its 30-45 min. why? cause this is a business and i want to see this business prosper so i can get my single player mechwarrior games in the future but not through a pay to win model but through a accelerate how fast you get stuff done by paying model.

Edited by ChapDude, 10 April 2013 - 11:26 PM.

[ryoma]

Short answer: No
Long answer: nnnnnoooooooo

[Sudden Reversal]

Armour should be cheap. Internals less so.

Only specialised ammo should be reasonably expensive. High tech components should have higher repair cost.

The cost of the item or weapon should not necessarily reflect on the cost to repair, that should be determined by the availability of parts and ease of repairing. In other words, pretty much all the values could have been tweaked to make R&R balanced.

PGI just lacked the intestinal fortitude continue with it and the player base the backbone to have consequences to their choice of load out and behaviour in the field.

[Kaspirikay]

Yeah I miss rock and roll, sometimes I crank up some acdc in my 3L

[Solis Obscuri]

Yeah, R&R was good stuff - if you played well and kept your ride intact, you could make mad money.

If you burned ten tons of Artemis and get slagged on an XL in a bum match, you could actually lose money.

Made you think a little bit about what you wanted to bring to the fight - you get grab a few more kills in assaults, but you might not do more than break even after all the repairs came through. But pilot a little light 'mech with a few lasers, well, if you were halfway competent you could rake it in hand over fist! Really gave people some incentive to vary what they rolled in that way.

[Ricama]

Solis Obscuri, on 11 April 2013 - 02:19 AM, said:

Yeah, R&R was good stuff - if you played well and kept your ride intact, you could make mad money.

If you burned ten tons of Artemis and get slagged on an XL in a bum match, you could actually lose money.

Made you think a little bit about what you wanted to bring to the fight - you get grab a few more kills in assaults, but you might not do more than break even after all the repairs came through. But pilot a little light 'mech with a few lasers, well, if you were halfway competent you could rake it in hand over fist! Really gave people some incentive to vary what they rolled in that way.

No, no it didn't. It just punished people for playing the way you didn't want them to play. You had fun because your builds were money efficient, you had no risk and all reward. It did not make better pilots, it made worse matches where you could be guaranteed at least 1 person and usually at least 2 were sui-farmers. Most at least had the decadency to run their trial Jenner into the enemy and let it die but some just didn't bother and blew themselves up as soon as they could. R&R did not do the thing you seem to think it did, and will not do what you think it will do.

Take off the rose coloured glasses and understand R&R brought out the worst most immersion destroying behaviour in the game. There is more to immersion than watching an autorepair report pop up or clicking on a 'repair' button. Immersion is on the battlefield with people actually trying to fight instead of trying to grind money to eventually try on the battlefield.

R&R in random matches only works when there is clear tiering of the weapons and clearly tiered matches. MWO doesn't have tiering of weapon systems and everyone's thrown into the same pool; it has a concerted effort to balance them all. It's not perfect and never will but they are getting close with a number of weapons and it's starting to come down to situational synergy more than individual weapons power. When weapons x and y have similar performance, this gives people who like using weapon y a distinct earnings advantage without loss of battlefield performance. You're right back to the old situation of some people saying "I don't know what you're talking about I still make plenty of money" and everyone else having to grind before they may have fun.

[Victor Morson]

Ricama, on 11 April 2013 - 10:42 AM, said:

No, no it didn't. It just punished people for playing the way you didn't want them to play. You had fun because your builds were money efficient, you had no risk and all reward. It did not make better pilots, it made worse matches where you could be guaranteed at least 1 person and usually at least 2 were sui-farmers. Most at least had the decadency to run their trial Jenner into the enemy and let it die but some just didn't bother and blew themselves up as soon as they could. R&R did not do the thing you seem to think it did, and will not do what you think it will do.

Yep. While I believe R&R could be made to work if there's need for it later, the old implementation was horrendous.

If you ever skew the meta numbers so that you can't afford to run the best equipment all the time, all that happens is people will farm to support the best equipment, then come in and use it as a full group on a bunch of people in low-tier gear. It creates a huge imbalance with the "have" and "have nots" in the metagame.

Also the best players could continue to afford running this stuff anyway, making a wider divide in the "Good get better, bad get worse" thing.

So yeah, everything else you said pretty much.

[Ngamok]

For the most part I run STD engines, I don't run XL. And anything missle related on my mechs I just used the 75% free re-arm feature, I never ran with full missles. Only on the ACs I fully re-armed.

So, no, I don't miss it. All it did was give me more money to cover the repairs.

[Phalanx100bc]

Yes....

Think you'll be seeing 3-4 D-DC's or multi ER PPC Stalkers on every team during a drop? I think not.

It catered to instant gratification XBOX whiners who want 3rd person/respawns and HEADSHOT in bold letters in the game and could care less about immersion or realism of the BT universe.

[Juree Riggd]

The only thing R&R is going to do is make broke players rely on energy weapons.

[Davers]

Phalanx100bc, on 11 April 2013 - 01:53 PM, said:

Yes....

Think you'll be seeing 3-4 D-DC's or multi ER PPC Stalkers on every team during a drop? I think not.

It catered to instant gratification XBOX whiners who want 3rd person/respawns and HEADSHOT in bold letters in the game and could care less about immersion or realism of the BT universe.

ERPPC Stalkers with standard engines would be a pretty cheap build to run.

[jay35]

Rhinehardt Ritter, on 10 April 2013 - 08:48 PM, said:

I agree..Games SHOULD be fun. Part of fun is variety.

I see a huge amount of variety every time I play.

Quote

Right now current game mechanics allow everyone to run some of the most powerful pieces of equipment in games. Have you tried playing 8 mans?

No. And the game shouldn't be determined solely on 8-mans. That's essentially the elite tier competitive play compared to the normal experience in a PUG. PUGs have huge variety. The problem is with 8-mans, not the game overall. There are many ways to 'fix' issues with 8-mans and none of them require R&R.

Edited by jay35, 11 April 2013 - 04:31 PM.

[Scarlett Avignon]

Nick Drezary, on 06 April 2013 - 12:24 PM, said:

No, they would just farm in trial mechs.

Like they can't do that now? That really is a dumb reason to justify taking out R&R

[MustrumRidcully]

Franklen Avignon, on 16 April 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

Like they can't do that now? That really is a dumb reason to justify taking out R&R

The thing is -back then it was one of the best ways to earn money fast, by a good margin. If you had to repair and rearm your mech after a match - succesful or not - you'd suffer severe profit cuts.

Why bother risking making only 20,000 C-Bills from a match you fought hard in for 6 minutes, if you can make 15,000 C-Bills by dying within 3 minutes and loading up another mech to repeat it?