68 replies to this topic

[slide]

For those of you that argue that R&R rewards the rich and punishes the poor (new), explain how that is different to what we have now?

If I take my min/max'd Jenner D with streaks out against a new Jenner D they will still be just as dead whether R&R is there or not. The only difference is it might have cost me a bit more to do it.

If you want a truly "fair" playing field for new players then you might as well just let everyone take whatever they want and get rid of c-bills altogether. This is obviously not going to happen because it will also not allow PGI to make money selling mechs.

I've been playing long enough now that I can buy anything I want without regard to cost and min/max it immediately. I have an inherent advantage over anyone that is poor or new.

On the other hand a properly implemented economy, where supply and demand for mechs and parts and costs for bigger mechs/better tech cost more, might make me consider what I take on a regular basis.

As it is now there is no reason not to take the best(FOTM)/biggest, stompiest mech you can devise which when mixed with new/poor players stomps them. The problem is amplified even further if you drop with a group.

If the economy truly can't be used to limit the number of assault/heavy mechs taken to each game then a hard limit needs to be invoked. For example a 2L,3M,2H,1A and if the 500 people lining up in there 6ppc stalkers cant find a match, then consider driving something smaller for a while.

[FupDup]

slide, on 29 May 2013 - 07:02 PM, said:

For those of you that argue that R&R rewards the rich and punishes the poor (new), explain how that is different to what we have now?

If I take my min/max'd Jenner D with streaks out against a new Jenner D they will still be just as dead whether R&R is there or not. The only difference is it might have cost me a bit more to do it.

If you want a truly "fair" playing field for new players then you might as well just let everyone take whatever they want and get rid of c-bills altogether. This is obviously not going to happen because it will also not allow PGI to make money selling mechs.

I've been playing long enough now that I can buy anything I want without regard to cost and min/max it immediately. I have an inherent advantage over anyone that is poor or new.

On the other hand a properly implemented economy, where supply and demand for mechs and parts and costs for bigger mechs/better tech cost more, might make me consider what I take on a regular basis.

As it is now there is no reason not to take the best(FOTM)/biggest, stompiest mech you can devise which when mixed with new/poor players stomps them. The problem is amplified even further if you drop with a group.

If the economy truly can't be used to limit the number of assault/heavy mechs taken to each game then a hard limit needs to be invoked. For example a 2L,3M,2H,1A and if the 500 people lining up in there 6ppc stalkers cant find a match, then consider driving something smaller for a while.

The difference is that the nubcake will have a dramatically harder time grinding up to a min-maxed StreakJenner of his own, whereas you will barely be affected if RnR were reinstated.


Also, an economy doesn't really make people decide to stop min-maxing. All it means is that they'll have to wait until they stockpile enough cash to do it, and then roflstomp everyone they encounter. It'll be even easier because their competition will be in underarmored SHS noobtraps and the like.

Edited by FupDup, 29 May 2013 - 07:09 PM.

[Pater Mors]

slide, on 29 May 2013 - 07:02 PM, said:

For those of you that argue that R&R rewards the rich and punishes the poor (new), explain how that is different to what we have now?

Seriously?

You in a fully tricked out Jenner vs. a new player in a stock Jenner? So you get a tiny repair bill for roflstomping and he gets a huge repair bill for having to entirely repair his busted up ride? Match after match after match after match? I don't care what the new players skill level is, it will take an infinite amount of time for the new player to ever reach your level.

If you get to keep all the c-bills you currently have and he has to start with basically nothing, how do you ever expect him to be able to afford to be competitive. One bad match and suddenly he's pretty much back to zero spacebucks and has to start the grind all over again vs. someone with hundreds of millions of c-bills who doesn't even have to think before clicking the 'Repair' button?

Would you still feel the same if the devs decided to wipe everyone's accounts and Mechs before reinstating R&R? I doubt it.

Whatever your smoking, it's blocking your ability to think rationally.

[Tekadept]

Pater Mors, on 29 May 2013 - 07:19 PM, said:

Would you still feel the same if the devs decided to wipe everyone's accounts and Mechs before reinstating R&R? I doubt it.

You know what , if this was a true beta? Sure that would already be on the cards but it isn't so lets leave that discussion for another QQ thread.

Ok lets say next week they bring in RnR, and to make your concept of fair and wiped everyones account. Ok everyone is on a level playing field. What happens to people who join a month after that? they will then be at a disadvantage as you had an extra month to get cbills over them. Everybody at some point is going to start at nothing, That is where ELO comes in, as I have played a heap of games I should have a higher ELO I will not be matched against poor scrub newbies with my nice shiny XL engine equipped mechs, and as far as PGI is concerned ELO is working as intended so that solves that problem

Edited by Tekadept, 29 May 2013 - 07:48 PM.

[slide]

Actually I could care less if they wiped the stats, went through that 6 or 7 times during closed beta.

My question was how is it different, your answer is none except maybe for time. Which brings me back to the second question why bother with a grind at all?

It would seem any type of grind unfairly punishes new players anyway so why have it?

I agree the R&R system we had punishes less experienced players more than others. Which is one reason it was removed. It does not mean that another system couldn't work.

A simple version could be based on the cost to repair mechs to a stock condition.

New guy takes new Jenner and dies. Rewarded full cost to repair to stock (or just auto repaired). + match rewards.

I take min/max Jenner and Die. Rewarded full cost to repair to stock=lose 3-5mmilion c-bills. Would really need to consider whether that XL was worth it.

Basically the further you get from stock the more expensive it is to run. I guarantee you'll see less 6ppc stalkers when they have to buy 6 new ppc's every time they die.

Similarly the larger the mech the more it costs to run.

Edited by slide, 29 May 2013 - 08:09 PM.

[Pater Mors]

Tekadept, on 29 May 2013 - 07:47 PM, said:

You know what , if this was a true beta? Sure that would already be on the cards but it isn't so lets leave that discussion for another QQ thread.

Ok lets say next week they bring in RnR, and to make your concept of fair and wiped everyones account. Ok everyone is on a level playing field. What happens to people who join a month after that? they will then be at a disadvantage as you had an extra month to get cbills over them.

Exactly my point. And those new people are going to have a much harder time than the first players and so on and so on, the difficulty rising exponentially for each set of new players that comes in each month.

Quote

Everybody at some point is going to start at nothing, That is where ELO comes in, as I have played a heap of games I should have a higher ELO I will not be matched against poor scrub newbies with my nice shiny XL engine equipped mechs, and as far as PGI is concerned ELO is working as intended so that solves that problem

Yeah right. ELO works great now, I totally trust it to be fair in an economically dominated environment.

When your answer amounts to, "things are meant to be unfair, deal with it." it's not a good answer.

slide, on 29 May 2013 - 07:52 PM, said:

Actually I could care less if they wiped the stats, went through that 6 or 7 times during closed beta.

Not stats, everything. All the Mech's you've bought, customizations you've made and c-bills you've earned go down the drain too with the exception of possibly Hero/Founders Mechs.

Quote

My question was how is it different, your answer is none except maybe for time. Which brings me back to the second question why bother with a grind at all?

It's different because currently the grind is rewarding, even if you're losing a lot. With R&R it is only rewarding to two groups of people:

1) The Rich who won't notice anyway.
2) People who want to roleplay a Battletech experience in a FPS game.

Neither of those are good enough reasons to bring back R&R in any version.

Quote

It would seem any type of grind unfairly punishes new players anyway so why have it?

Not true at all. The current grind is not a punishment for old dogs or new players and it's relatively easy to skip if you're happy to dole out some real $.

Quote

I agree the R&R system we had punishes less experienced players more than others. Which is one reason it was removed. It does not mean that another system couldn't work.

A simple version could be based on the cost to repair mechs to a stock condition.

It really does. It doesn't matter how you implement the system. Anything which takes the c-bills out of the pilots pocket arbitrarily, increases the grind 10x and makes playing frustrating since a few losses can potentially set you back to square one.

If you're just going to set arbitrary caps on the amount you need to spend to repair a trashed Mech, then I don't see the point of even introducing the system. All that is, is a c-bill sink.

Quote

New guy takes new Jenner and dies. Rewarded full cost to repair to stock (or just auto repaired). + match rewards.

I take min/max Jenner and Die. Rewarded full cost to repair to stock=lose 3-5mmilion c-bills. Would really need to consider whether that XL was worth it.

Basically the further you get from stock the more expensive it is to run. I guarantee you'll see less 6ppc stalkers when they have to buy 6 new ppc's every time they die.

Similarly the larger the mech the more it costs to run.

If you're just going to remove the Repair entirely from anyone not running a custom build (by essentially gifting them the repair cost regardless of how they performed) then how are you going to stop people stockpiling C-bills until they have so much money that it doesn't matter if they have to buy 6 new PPC's ever match for 20 matches? When you have 600,000,000 c-bills in your account do you really care if your Ubermech gets trashed once in a while? Especially since you'll be rolfstomping 90% of matches against stock mechs?

Edited by Pater Mors, 29 May 2013 - 08:26 PM.

[Tekadept]

Pater Mors, on 29 May 2013 - 08:24 PM, said:

When your answer amounts to, "things are meant to be unfair, deal with it." it's not a good answer.

Why is it not a good answer? It IS life and applies to everything including gaming. I can afford a gaming mouse that is $65 and allows me to adjust DPI on the fly to more accurately land my shots at longer ranges vs a scrub who has a $10 mouse. Shall I Gimp myself to make it fair and use a steering wheel to aim?

Back when RnR was in , it did NOT reward just the rich, it rewarded people who weighed up the risks of running Expensive builds vs a more economical cheaper to repair build. yes you had the potential to LOSE money on a match OMG NO. but you also had the potential to rake in a LOT more then yo do now. It ebbed and flowed, was it "Perfectly" balanced? No but it wasn't as bad as some people seem to make it out to be and helped balance out matches.

I do find it funny (And I'm not necessarily aiming this at people in this thread just an observation over the months) That people will complain "oh noes, no RNR" yet next post they will make is "OMG STOP THE CHEESE".

May I ask Pater Mors were you in closed beta and Experienced RnR? I'm not flaming, just wondering if your opinion is based on your theory of what RnR is/was like or based of your "experience" of it? honestly curious.

If we get RnR, they can wipe everything of mine I wont care, So long as My founders MC is Refunded I can still be back where I am in no time at all.

Edited by Tekadept, 29 May 2013 - 09:01 PM.

[slide]

Pater Mors, on 29 May 2013 - 08:24 PM, said:

Not stats, everything. All the Mech's you've bought, customizations you've made and c-bills you've earned go down the drain too with the exception of possibly Hero/Founders Mechs.

I understood what you meant, As I said been there, done that. As long as they refund my MC I don't care.

In fact it just amplifies the whole have/not situation. Reason: I'll take my 50000 MC they owe me. Buy a mech (probably an Atlas RS), strip it, sell it and upgrade my founders mech(s). So there you go, match 1 of newest reset and I'm stomping about in the best mech in town, whilst all the other "free" players have to grind away for weeks again. (this is seriously P2W by the way)

Seriously the only real thing I'll lose is XP and I've got so much of that now I really don't care either.

If you want a "fair" approach experienced players need some sort of continuous Cbill/XP sink, otherwise sooner or later they become irrelevant. Keeping the disparity between stock and modded mechs also needs to be kept smaller. If it's not R&R, what is then? It's certainly not what we have now.

[Pater Mors]

Tekadept, on 29 May 2013 - 08:42 PM, said:

May I ask Pater More were you in closed beta and Experienced RnR? I'm not flaming, just wondering if your opinion is based on your theory of what RnR is/was like or based of your "experience" of it? honestly curious.

Unfortunately no, I wasn't in closed Beta as I didn't even know this game existed at the time.

My opinion is based on a couple of things:

1) The genre of this game is not conducive to the full on immersion that some people would like to see.
2) Experiences with other games with repair systems (Diablo 3 was horrible for this for a while until they changed it. You could barely take a few hits without losing half your gold in repair costs).
3) Balancing by economy never works and always ends up in a rich vs. poor mentality. This is acceptable in a game like EVE or WoW but in a shooter makes a lot less sense.

Quote

Why is it not a good answer? It IS life and applies to everything including gaming. I can afford a gaming mouse that is $65 and allows me to adjust DPI on the fly to more accurately land my shots at longer ranges vs a scrub who has a $10 mouse. Shall I Gimp myself to make it fair and use a steering wheel to aim?

This is a really poor example, simply because the developers have zero control over what hardware you bring to the table. Also, I guarantee you that I can make good shots with my crappy Microsoft mouse too.

You can't give the oldest, richest players all the advantages simply because they're the oldest and the richest and that's what this equates to in any scenario.

It's comparable to suddenly having a persistent profile in Counter-Strike that makes you pay for your own medical bills when you get shot. Suddenly, all the rich players have it easy because they can just load up on body armour and sniper rifles while all the poor players are screwed because they have pistols and no armour and have to pay to heal after each match.

[Pater Mors]

slide, on 29 May 2013 - 08:50 PM, said:

I understood what you meant, As I said been there, done that. As long as they refund my MC I don't care.

In fact it just amplifies the whole have/not situation. Reason: I'll take my 50000 MC they owe me. Buy a mech (probably an Atlas RS), strip it, sell it and upgrade my founders mech(s). So there you go, match 1 of newest reset and I'm stomping about in the best mech in town, whilst all the other "free" players have to grind away for weeks again. (this is seriously P2W by the way)

I agree and it's one of the main reasons I don't like the thought of R&R.

Quote

If you want a "fair" approach experienced players need some sort of continuous Cbill/XP sink, otherwise sooner or later they become irrelevant. Keeping the disparity between stock and modded mechs also needs to be kept smaller. If it's not R&R, what is then? It's certainly not what we have now.

Again, I agree. Once Mastered there's not really any reason to keep playing a given chassis other than grinding c-bills and there certainly needs to be more incentive than that to keep people interested.

R&R, however, introduces too many problems into the equation. I don't have the answer for what should do those jobs and I didn't claim to, but I do know that R&R in any meaningful form will be a detriment to game play.

[M0rpHeu5]

Quoting this from a similar thread couse i coulden't say it better.
We are better of without repair and rearm couse:

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

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.

[Tekadept]

Quote

1. It hurt new players much more than veterans.

ELO

Quote

2. it rewarded afk farming and other exploits.

AFK Farming has been Fixed

Quote

3. It punished good players who spread damage by torso twisting and allowed players to grief each other by picking a damaged mech apart.

True to a degree, you will get more damage done to your armour, but that is cheaper then letting somebody core your right torso with an XL in it, and by torso twisting to spread damage you should be in the battle longer doing with the potential to earn even more $$$$.

Quote

4. It hurt solo players much more than pre-made groups.

Not really unless you suck so much you have business using a computer I played solo for quite a while before I got baked, and I had no problem, again ELO.

Quote

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?

I am mixed on this on TBH, but I have never seen a game where all weapons are truly balanced, its just not possible, everybody will QQ on everything. lets just give every mech a single weapon .. there balanced other games do this, weapons cost more or have to be "unlocked", and are Definately more OP and yet that is fine?

Quote

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.

Hmmm, same could be same for current meta, People are being forced into Poptarts and 5ppc Stalkers to be "competitive". In regards to RnR? I was never "forced" into a mech I didn't like, worst case you tweaked your loadout a bit or just pulled out our XL and dropped in a standard for a few matches.

Quote

Smart play IS rewarded.

Are we playing the same game if your talking about Cbills/XP? The difference between playing Extremely smart and extremely dumb is that marginal.

PS. I hope everyone here does realise that us discussing this is a moot point anyway, for or against PGI dont care about what either of us say so just dont get all riled up ppl and feel like you have to "WIN" this Discussion.Take this as a bit of fun to discuss each others points of view as that's all this is

Edited by Tekadept, 29 May 2013 - 09:35 PM.

[Und3rSc0re]

I dont get why new players are running around in shs bare stock mechs? Dont they get over 20 mil cbills just for playing trial mechs? Why are they going out and driving stock mechs with millions of cbills in the bank.

People cry about rr being reimplemented if it was completely overhauled, people cry about little multiplicative measures put in such as 30% more cbills on mediums only without any kind of rr system involved. I bet if pgi just made every mech free and pulled cbills people would cry about that as well huh.

Well when september comes around i hope you rr haters arent crying about assault warrior online. There is no matchmaking in the world that can fix the heavy amount of players playing heavys and assaults.

There needs to be incentive for playing mediums period. Else get ready for 6 assaults on each team when 12v12 comes out. Gonna be so fun guyzz, who needs diversity in mwo? Assault mechs were the majority on the battlefield anyway lul.

[Pater Mors]

Und3rSc0re, on 29 May 2013 - 09:38 PM, said:

Well when september comes around i hope you rr haters arent crying about assault warrior online. There is no matchmaking in the world that can fix the heavy amount of players playing heavys and assaults.

There needs to be incentive for playing mediums period. Else get ready for 6 assaults on each team when 12v12 comes out. Gonna be so fun guyzz, who needs diversity in mwo? Assault mechs were the majority on the battlefield anyway lul.

Again, I agree with you wholeheartedly but R&R is not the incentive we're looking for.

Different styles of play need to be rewarded other than just damage/kills and different game modes need to be implemented to encourage other styles of play. IMO those are much better measures to take, even if R&R was going to be introduced after that.

As it stands people play assaults and heavies because that's what the game rewards. When other rewards are implemented, the styles of play will change again. When scouting is as profitable as doing 600 damage with a kill or two and 5 assists then you will start seeing the meta change.

[slide]

M0rpHeu5, on 29 May 2013 - 09:10 PM, said:

Quoting this from a similar thread couse i coulden't say it better.
We are better of without repair and rearm couse:

My thoughts on those points,
1. Yes it did in the form we had, that needed to change
2. there are better ways to deal with AFKs and the 75% rearm was stupid to begin with
3. I disagree that it really punished those players because the cost of armour was minor compared to an xl or guass rifle which you were protecting by not dying
4. This is true as 8 man ROFLstomps were prolific, it is somewhat better now but not perfect
5. In game weapon balance is needed, true, and the economy wont solve that. It will however increase peoples choices on what should/not be taken.
6. Lights and Mediums should be the work horses. Not bring an assault or go home which is what we have now. They do have a role, it's just that it is always done better by something bigger (except maybe fast scouting) as there is no limits on what to take there is no need.

The OP asked if R&R would make a difference to gameplay, What we had NO. But a better/fairer version of it, in IMO will. The fact is it it's open slather on what we take now, for new players it's just a matter of grinding to get the mech they want (usually a FOTM) at which point the keep banking cbills/xp until they buy something else or don't care any more. At which point they get bored and leave or wait until CW arrives.

For me R&R would present another challenge and bring more immersion to the game. As it stands now I can do what ever I want at any time and I already own all that I want. The only consequence I have is dying or losing which until CW comes is irrelevant as well.

[Und3rSc0re]

Pater Mors, on 29 May 2013 - 09:43 PM, said:

When scouting is as profitable as doing 600 damage with a kill or two and 5 assists then you will start seeing the meta change.

What LOL OMG this is genius now i can scout in my atlas making big bank while i mow down 5 guys this is so gud.

[Pater Mors]

Und3rSc0re, on 29 May 2013 - 09:48 PM, said:

What LOL OMG this is genius now i can scout in my atlas making big bank while i mow down 5 guys this is so gud.

I can only assume by that post, that you just want to shoot big stompy robots and anyone that has any other sort of role warfare in mind can get stuffed.

[Und3rSc0re]

Pater Mors, on 29 May 2013 - 09:51 PM, said:

I can only assume by that post, that you just want to shoot big stompy robots and anyone that has any other sort of role warfare in mind can get stuffed.

Scouts in any game makes barely anything so you would have to only make lights and mediums gain these scouting bonuses. Which not only will 1. Make people qq. 2. have to make big bank just to sway the assault player crowd "scouting is boring" 3. potentially turn assault warrior online into light warrior online since lights can move faster and scout more etc.

Scouting will never make more than pure carrying in any game period. Thats why you have never ran into a game where scouts get paid the most bank huh?

Edited by Und3rSc0re, 29 May 2013 - 09:58 PM.

[Pater Mors]

Und3rSc0re, on 29 May 2013 - 09:57 PM, said:

Scouts in any game makes barely anything so you would have to only make lights and mediums gain these scouting bonuses. Which not only will 1. Make people qq. 2. have to make big bank just to sway the assault player crowd "scouting is boring" 3. potentially turn assault warrior online into light warrior online since lights can move faster and scout more etc.

Scouting will never make more than pure carrying in any game period. Thats why you have never ran into a game where scouts get paid the most bank huh?

Except for Battlefield, where being a scout nets you HUGE profits in XP for doing your job properly. Easily as much as driving the biggest tank and getting ALL TEH KILLZ!!!1 In fact, getting kills in Battlefield means practically nothing compare to playing your role correctly and the roles are rewarded well:

If you're a medic and you spend your time reviving and healing, you'll get paid more than straight killing.
If you're an engineer and you spend your time repairing, anti-tanking or driving, you'll get paid more than straight killing.
If you're a soldier and you spend time rearming your mates and laying down suppression fire, you'll get paid more than straight killing.
And finally, if you're a scout and you spend your time scouting, spotting for your team and laying ambushes you'll get paid more than straight killing.

MWO has one role that gets paid - Do The Most Damage. Why would anyone scout with that kind of meta going on? But, if you start rewarding other roles (scouting, fire support, skirmishing, brawling, information warfare) as much as the Big Guy With Guns then those roles will start being filled.

Edit: Granted you don't get paid in spendable currency in Battlefield, you get paid in XP and unlocks but the principle is the same. Role warfare is rewarded more than just shooting at the other team indiscriminately until one side is all dead.

Edit2: I also never said that scouts should be paid more than damage dealers. I said that the rewards should be comparable so that both roles are fulfilling to play.

Edited by Pater Mors, 29 May 2013 - 10:19 PM.

[Tekadept]

Pater Mors, on 29 May 2013 - 10:11 PM, said:

MWO has one role that gets paid - Do The Most Damage. Why would anyone scout with that kind of meta going on? But, if you start rewarding other roles (scouting, fire support, skirmishing, brawling, information warfare) as much as the Big Guy With Guns then those roles will start being filled.

When pugging I do agree with this, Do the most damage will be the primary concern as a PUG.Its not just there is no reward from doing the role, theres no reward or appreciation from your PUG mates so why bother? even if you get rewarded more for doing recon why bother as its just to hard to relay that information to you team effectively with textchat.

BF3 is a bad example for roles, Yes there are roles and you do get rewarded for that role, but People spam the **** outta them at the detriment of the team and say hey its my role.. and that is an even worse game for unbalanced weapons (At least it was when I last played it 8mths ago)