271 replies to this topic

[Hotthedd]

Davers, on 18 May 2013 - 08:10 AM, said:

If the grind is the same, then what is the difference?

Immersion

[Keifomofutu]

Hotthedd, on 18 May 2013 - 08:19 AM, said:

Immersion

False. In practice it's a simple checkbox that takes money from you. You don't see it you just see the money you no longer have.

[Davers]

Hotthedd, on 18 May 2013 - 08:19 AM, said:

Immersion

As much as I disliked PGI's R&R I think I would like R&R that had no teeth and merely served as immersion even less. Why not just ask PGI to have a mock up R&R screen that didn't mean anything but just showed a repair cost?

[Keifomofutu]

Davers, on 18 May 2013 - 08:25 AM, said:

As much as I disliked PGI's R&R I think I would like R&R that had no teeth and merely served as immersion even less. Why not just ask PGI to have a mock up R&R screen that didn't mean anything but just showed a repair cost?

WolvesX made a thread suggesting just that. Only he suggested that choosing to partake in R&R would take money from you, but you also wouldn't earn a net amount higher than people not doing R&R. So end result would be an extra personal tax that you yourself chose "for ummersion".

Edited by Keifomofutu, 18 May 2013 - 08:28 AM.

[karoushi]

@ post above (ergh) making it an option, is not an option; it cannot be a choice and that is not logical game design because it is not fair and you must drop that type of thinking because it is counter-productive to discuss something that isn't what we need, don't you think? You are basically discussing bringing back the old system with an on/off toggle option (which is nonsense to begin with) and we are discussing of actually designing a new system that is coherent and functions as a part of the game and doesn't "tax" or "burden/punish" ANYONE because it won't be a noticeable affair it will just be a function that is there that doesn't 'hit/hurt' anyone.
You have to pay for your ammo, you can't just shoot infinite numbers from 1 ton and this doesn't have to be a bad, horrible, crippling thing either.

Just wanted to point out i'm not going to bother with this conversation because when anyone, like myself, tries to actually point out that we don't want whatever you are speculating in your heads, people go on the attack and it isn't a constructive conversation with any actual discussion going on just whining.

You can call it whatever you want, tax this blah that whatever, it doesn't make it so. It seems like in your world there is no room for improvement of anything and everything that is just is; What is your idea of Research and Development or do you not even believe it exists at all and all of this society was just magically put here by some fictional higher power?

Nothing is impossible and there are simple ways (K.I.S.S philosophy. keep it simple stupid) to design new systems that do not represent whatever you all have so much hatred for but please get over yourselves and stop speculating nonsense and attacking people who try to show a different perspective; You all act like we want the old system when mostly new players like myself didn't even get to experience the old system and thus can design a new system that has none of the old stigma of the old and wouldn't bother anyone like the one you experienced bothered you so.

There is nothing wrong with game design, but there is wrong with people arguing over speculated nonsense they just make up for the sake of arguing.

Edited by karoushi, 18 May 2013 - 08:36 AM.

[Keifomofutu]

karoushi, on 18 May 2013 - 08:32 AM, said:

Just wanted to point out i'm not going to bother with this conversation because when anyone, like myself, tries to actually point out that we don't want whatever you are speculating in your heads, people go on the attack and it isn't a constructive conversation with any actual discussion going on just whining.

You can call it whatever you want, tax this blah that whatever, it doesn't make it so. It seems like in your world there is no room for improvement of anything and everything that is just is; What is your idea of Research and Development or do you not even believe it exists at all and all of this society was just magically put here by some fictional higher power?

Nothing is impossible and there are simple ways (K.I.S.S philosophy. keep it simple stupid) to design new systems that do not represent whatever you all have so much hatred for but please get over yourselves and stop speculating nonsense and attacking people who try to show a different perspective; You all act like we want the old system when mostly new players like my didn't even get to experience the old system and thus can design a new system that has none of the old stigma of the old and wouldn't bother anyone like the one you experienced bothered you so.

There is nothing wrong with game design, but there is wrong with people arguing over speculated nonsense they just make up for the sake of arguing.

There is room for improvement. Getting rid of R&R was a vast improvement. Bringing it back would be the opposite of improvement.

R&R made the game suck. It caused multiple problems and didn't bring anything positive to the game. So yeah people are a little hostile when the idea gets brought up again.

Furthermore R&R has been mentioned as being part of CW. CW is the immersion based part of the game with risk/reward each battle having relevance the whole nine yards. It's coming, wait for it, and stop trying to get a crappy system brought back to random battles.

Edited by Keifomofutu, 18 May 2013 - 08:36 AM.

[Hotthedd]

Keifomofutu, on 18 May 2013 - 08:25 AM, said:

False. In practice it's a simple checkbox that takes money from you. You don't see it you just see the money you no longer have.

True. Knowing what you did or did not do, and how it affected your bottom line IS adding to the immersion of the game. If the net result is similar, what exactly is your issue with it? x amount of C-bills is still x amount of C-bills.

[Davers]

karoushi, on 18 May 2013 - 08:32 AM, said:

@ post above (ergh) making it an option, is not an option; it cannot be a choice and that is not logical game design because it is not fair and you must drop that type of thinking because it is counter-productive to discuss something that isn't what we need, don't you think? You are basically discussing bringing back the old system with an on/off toggle option (which is nonsense to begin with) and we are discussing of actually designing a new system that is coherent and functions as a part of the game and doesn't "tax" or "burden/punish" ANYONE because it won't be a noticeable affair it will just be a function that is there that doesn't 'hit/hurt' anyone.
You have to pay for your ammo, you can't just shoot infinite numbers from 1 ton and this doesn't have to be a bad, horrible, crippling thing either.

Just wanted to point out i'm not going to bother with this conversation because when anyone, like myself, tries to actually point out that we don't want whatever you are speculating in your heads, people go on the attack and it isn't a constructive conversation with any actual discussion going on just whining.

You can call it whatever you want, tax this blah that whatever, it doesn't make it so. It seems like in your world there is no room for improvement of anything and everything that is just is; What is your idea of Research and Development or do you not even believe it exists at all and all of this society was just magically put here by some fictional higher power?

Nothing is impossible and there are simple ways (K.I.S.S philosophy. keep it simple stupid) to design new systems that do not represent whatever you all have so much hatred for but please get over yourselves and stop speculating nonsense and attacking people who try to show a different perspective; You all act like we want the old system when mostly new players like my didn't even get to experience the old system and thus can design a new system that has none of the old stigma of the old and wouldn't bother anyone like the one you experienced bothered you so.

There is nothing wrong with game design, but there is wrong with people arguing over speculated nonsense they just make up for the sake of arguing.

When someone presents a system that is worth discussing then we will talk about it.

[Hotthedd]

Davers, on 18 May 2013 - 08:25 AM, said:

As much as I disliked PGI's R&R I think I would like R&R that had no teeth and merely served as immersion even less. Why not just ask PGI to have a mock up R&R screen that didn't mean anything but just showed a repair cost?

There would be SOME teeth to it. It would still marginally effect your bottom line depending on how well you did, it just wouldn't increase the grind too much or punish people for being new. It would also give a non-MC way to increase revenue by running smaller mechs.

Keifomofutu, on 18 May 2013 - 08:27 AM, said:

WolvesX made a thread suggesting just that. Only he suggested that choosing to partake in R&R would take money from you, but you also wouldn't earn a net amount higher than people not doing R&R. So end result would be an extra personal tax that you yourself chose "for ummersion".

And, of course that is entirely unrealistic. Nobody is going to intentionally handicap themselves. We are all a little dumber for having read it.

[TruePoindexter]

Khanublikhan, on 18 May 2013 - 02:40 AM, said:

Then in all likelihood I will be leaving Mechwarrior Online.

They're different games entirely - why should they try to be similar?

MWO does not have a player driven economy. You do not craft anything and resell it to other players. There is no point in a money sink in such a system except to artificially slow down player advancement. It's already enough of a grind - why should it be more so?

[MustrumRidcully]

In WolvesX thread, there was actually a not-so-funny-because-it-was-rather-smart suggestion:

Make R&R optional. If you don'T use it, everything works as it is right now.
If you use it, you must pay your repairs and all, but salvage is more than just some money reward on the screen - you can also actually get item drops and occassionally salvage a destroyed mech.

Risk, Reward, Immersion, and no one has to care if he doesn't want to.

Of course, if that R&R system is lucrative, everyone will use it, if it isn't, no one but the diehards will use it.

[Hotthedd]

MustrumRidcully, on 18 May 2013 - 10:04 AM, said:

In WolvesX thread, there was actually a not-so-funny-because-it-was-rather-smart suggestion:

Make R&R optional. If you don'T use it, everything works as it is right now.
If you use it, you must pay your repairs and all, but salvage is more than just some money reward on the screen - you can also actually get item drops and occassionally salvage a destroyed mech.

Risk, Reward, Immersion, and no one has to care if he doesn't want to.

Of course, if that R&R system is lucrative, everyone will use it, if it isn't, no one but the diehards will use it.

Except for the fact that WolvesX's suggestion was only about the added expense, without any reward.

[MustrumRidcully]

Hotthedd, on 18 May 2013 - 10:06 AM, said:

Except for the fact that WolvesX's suggestion was only about the added expense, without any reward.

Someone else in his thread made the suggestion with the added rewards. That's why I said "In WolvesX thread, there was", and not just "WolvesX suggested in his htread".

[M0rpHeu5]

Davers, on 15 May 2013 - 05:48 PM, said:

I don't miss it.

1. It hurt new players much more than veterans.
2. it rewarded afk farming and other exploits.
3. It punished good players who spread damage by torso twisting and allowed players to grief each other by picking a damaged mech apart.
4. It hurt solo players much more than pre-made groups.
5. Balancing by economy is a bad idea. It creates the idea that 'It is ok for x weapon to be OP, it costs more.' Isn't actually balancing the weapons a better idea?
6.Forcing people to play mechs they don't like in order to afford the repairs on the ones they do is bad. It leads to the idea that 'Play lights or mediums to make money' instead of lights and mediums actually having a viable role in the game.

Smart play IS rewarded. It's just that we lack the tools to share our brilliant insight and strategies during a match with complete strangers.

[Vassago Rain]

merz, on 18 May 2013 - 08:08 AM, said:

i kind of like how vassago rain basically says this is world of tanks with a battletech skin over it. with authoritative declarations about what things were, are and, with utter and absolute certainty, will or will not be. spoken like a true goony goon, sir!

anyhow, what i'm hoping for is a mode of play where you lose equipment, have r&r, etc... the game's producer was just asked about this kind of a mode in the latest series of questions and responded with a 'maybe'.. I understand this style of play is not for everyone, but if i can have a couple hundred of quinquagenarians with unkempt facial hair spreadsheeting the fffffffFFff out of something like that, complete with BV and 12-man drop tonnage restrictions, i don't care if the rest of the game switches to third-person/no heat/unlimited ammo.

fragmentation is inevitable because casual bambi wants an arcade experience, but the kind of people who've supported the game financially to the point where it is right now desire the polar opposite. like i already said, vying for casual bambi head-on at expense of reliable core demographic is damn near suicide.

a lot of things have giant robots and use a model very similar to this. world of tanks offers a comparable experience, but you also have hawken. and the guys who did mektek expansions (and battletech firestorm update for VWE) are making the heavy gear game. With depth you retain and grow. With casual focus you increase playerbase in the short term but also increase churn..so i mean,

'hurr durr, giant robots. hurr durr, this will never have economy, deal with it'

you're clearly not stupid, vassago rain, so why are you saying really stupid things in counter-argument..

You are mistaken. WoT is the game that has a punishing grind and RnR system, to the point where you can't even maintain certain tanks unless you buy premium items and premium time.

The farther we move away from this, the better.

[jakucha]

Vassago Rain, on 18 May 2013 - 01:33 PM, said:

You are mistaken. WoT is the game that has a punishing grind and RnR system, to the point where you can't even maintain certain tanks unless you buy premium items and premium time.

The farther we move away from this, the better.

I agree, R&R wouldn't work generally for this game. I wouldn't however mind seeing it in a hardcore mode, as long as rewards were higher.

[merz]

nevermind rewards. i'd like it just so we could have tools to run a league with it.

[Vassago Rain]

merz, on 19 May 2013 - 01:38 AM, said:

nevermind rewards. i'd like it just so we could have tools to run a league with it.

You don't need RnR to do that.

[Halconnen]

I joined too late to see the R&R system, but doesn´t it promote the usage of energy based weapon systems? I already started to dislike ballistic weapons cause they´re heavy, need ammo and don´t do much more damage compared to energy weapons. With PPC/ERPPC i can even support my LRM/SSRM-carrying teammates. Being forced to buy ammo after every match wouldn´t make the ballistic weapons more appealing.

[Vassago Rain]

Halconnen, on 19 May 2013 - 02:01 AM, said:

I joined too late to see the R&R system, but doesn´t it promote the usage of energy based weapon systems? I already started to dislike ballistic weapons cause they´re heavy, need ammo and don´t do much more damage compared to energy weapons. With PPC/ERPPC i can even support my LRM/SSRM-carrying teammates. Being forced to buy ammo after every match wouldn´t make the ballistic weapons more appealing.

Here's what you missed.

By default, the game was set to automatically repair and refill your ammo. Smart people turned this off, and used clever tricks to bypass the system, thus resulting in a welfare state, where PGI paid for 75% of your bullets. And then you got dropped into matches with broken grind mechs that ruined your chances of making money.