391 replies to this topic

[Pater Mors]

Thomas Covenant, on 02 June 2013 - 11:43 PM, said:

Not currently.

Well with elo maybe, that factor makes it ambiguous. But that could be used to justify anything. There will and to some extent already are determined matches.

Yes they do. Explain how someone is disadvantaged in this game (without all the Disney "oh dear, they may never fulfil their potential" stuff) and how it relates to pay to win.

Keep in mind pay to win means that people paying real money have a significant advantage over people playing the game for free. Did Founders P2W? Do founders Mechs confer a significant in-game advantage to their pilots?

[Thomas Covenant]

You tell me to not use my point by dismissing it as silly. Well you don't want to have a conversation.

[Sephlock]

Thomas Covenant, on 02 June 2013 - 11:40 PM, said:

"Cheshire Cat."

The prankster is often regarded as the teacher in many societies and legends.

Don't the Japanese ones do creepy stuff like trick you into eating relatives and such?

[employee24601]

Too many convoluted metaphors make baby Jesus cry.

[Thomas Covenant]

It could be a significant advantage, this "oh dear" point of mine, but no, that is not a requirement to identify it. I will discuss to what extent, but until something is changed, it is there.

Edited by Thomas Covenant, 02 June 2013 - 11:53 PM.

[AlexEss]

i still think thomas is just sore he can not have his -9ah.

but if it makes him feel any better. they day we actually see p2w scenarios being introduced to this game i'l make my voice heard. but for now i think pgi/igp strike a very sound balance between paid content and free content, especially when it comes to balance between the two. there is no hero mech i feel is op (in fact most of them could be seen as up)

[Thomas Covenant]

AlexEss, on 02 June 2013 - 11:54 PM, said:

i still think thomas is just sore he can not have his -9ah.

Gimme my 9ah!

Quote

but if it makes him feel any better. they day we actually see p2w scenarios being introduced to this game i'l make my voice heard. but for now i think pgi/igp strike a very sound balance between paid content and free content, especially when it comes to balance between the two. there is no hero mech i feel is op (in fact most of them could be seen as up)

I do to, I feel this might be an oversight, or they probably plan to address it with CW and faction points. It is important as I see it to do something for free players and hero mechs (upholding the philosophy that the money path "gets it here faster").

Edited by Thomas Covenant, 03 June 2013 - 12:06 AM.

[Sephlock]

Pater Mors, on 02 June 2013 - 11:46 PM, said:

the Disney "oh dear, they may never fulfil their potential" stuff

[Thomas Covenant]

The Platypus, on 02 June 2013 - 10:49 PM, said:

Just don't play the P2W card when it is clearly not the case to try and get your argument across.

I won't. I really believe there is a problem. Otherwise I might be trolling the mechwarrior meme thread.

Edited by Thomas Covenant, 03 June 2013 - 12:45 AM.

[Ralgas]

Sephlock, on 02 June 2013 - 11:57 PM, said:

where the heck do you get the time to dig all of these vids up?

[Sephlock]

Ralgas, on 03 June 2013 - 12:14 AM, said:

where the heck do you get the time to dig all of these vids up?

The same place that this guy gets his weapons.

[Thomas Covenant]

You give Paul a run for his money.

[Pater Mors]

Thomas Covenant, on 02 June 2013 - 11:49 PM, said:

You tell me to not use my point by dismissing it as silly. Well you don't want to have a conversation.

That's because it is silly. Pay-to-win has a clear definition. You pay money and then you win. MWO is, at worst, pay to skip the grind.

In a current match 1v1 me in my Trebuchet or my HGN and someone else in Yen Lo or the X5 or Heavy Metal or Misery, I have an equal chance of beating them. Don't say I don't because I do and I've done it and so has everyone else and I have been beaten by them as well. That's why no one except you is crying "P2W!" like they were when Coolant was announced.

I will address the points of your argument when you realize that you're actually arguing for what you perceive as a fairer content delivery system which is a separate thing entirely. I might actually agree with some of those points but there's no reason to discuss them with you if you continue to default everything to Pay-to-win.

[Thomas Covenant]

If you have a condition I must meet, before you will "address" the point of my argument, then you are asking me to bend over backwards with the promise you will pat me on the head when I get there.

My point has been made extensively in this thread. It has NOTHING to do with mech vs mech, but rather individual varied performance.

Edited by Thomas Covenant, 03 June 2013 - 12:55 AM.

[Sephlock]

For what its worth, only a few Hero mechs are even worthy of consideration: At the top of the list are the Heavy Medal, Ilya Muromets, and whichever Dragon hero is the good one (and that one is at the bottom of the top, so to speak). Next comes the X-5, and then the Misery. At the bottom is TDK, which is too light to take advantage of it's hardpoints, and is basically a gimpy jenner as far as I can tell (aside from the ability to move its arms from side to side, which isn't that big of a concern in a fast mech), the red headed stepchild Dragon hero, and the Pretty Ugly Baby, which has a hardpoint layout that matches its paint job.

I really doubt that any of the stuff unique to the hero mechs is enough to make a difference, aside from maybe Ilya's 3x ultra autocannon build in certain circumstances, or the X-5 prior to all the missile nerfage, or the Misery if you count blowing up and dying due to a gauss explosion as "making a difference", which it technically is .

[Pater Mors]

Thomas Covenant, on 03 June 2013 - 12:54 AM, said:

If you have a condition I must meet, before you will "address" the point of my argument, then you are asking me to bend over backwards with the promise you will pat me on the head when I get there.

My point has been made extensively in this thread. It has NOTHING to do with mech vs mech, but rather individual varied performance.

Which cannot possibly be pay to win! Because it's subjective, totally. You keep contradicting your own point.

What you are arguing for is that the current system is not fair because not everything is available for c-bills and doesn't allow everyone to experience the entire game, a completely different argument from pay-to-win which is where something is unavailable for c-bills that is significantly better than anything else in the game.

I'm not sure how you get that mixed up. It's not ambiguous at all. I am not offering to pat you on the head. Some of the things in this thread are good ideas (from multiple people) but the common thing they all share is they have nothing to do with addressing a problem that is pay-to-win.

[Thomas Covenant]

Quote

subjective

Lets say a player plays to do the most damage. He tries all the mechs he likes. He finds on average he does the most damage in a variant of highlander with a certain loadout. He has objective data showing which mech he is capable of doing the most damage with. Other players trying this same test sometimes find a different mech to get the best result on average. Do you see? It's not an opinion when you can show this by trying it for yourself. It is superstition, to suggest everyone performs the same way all the time. You will see tendency to do better, and they will vary from person to person when you have things that are balanced but different.

You may not see it as pay to win because the mech has no advantage. But the player has to pay for an advantage, perhaps only sometimes but still has to pay, for an objective advantage.

You may see this as small advantages to be missed. But there will certainly be very unique hero mechs, to which there already are, and that difference translates to advantage in the right hands.

If someone is very good with a certain feature, say missiles, and very good with a certain mech chassis, perhaps the Cicada, a hero mech that offered a combination of the two might offer a far greater advantage to the player than anything else.

Edited by Thomas Covenant, 03 June 2013 - 01:43 AM.

[Pater Mors]

Thomas Covenant, on 03 June 2013 - 01:18 AM, said:

Lets say a player plays to do the most damage. He tries all the mechs he likes. He finds on average he does the most damage in a variant of highlander with a certain loadout. He has objective data showing which mech he is capable of doing the most damage with. Other players trying this sometimes find a different mech to get the best result on average. Do you see?

Yeah I've read all your arguments. That is not pay to win. You are arguing for a better content delivery system, one that allows players the full range of Mechs with revenue streams gathered elsewhere. Drop the pay to win stuff and your argument suddenly has a lot more credibility even though I still don't necessarily agree with it.

Pay to win confers exclusive advantages to someone who pays real money. Unless the top 100 players of MWO all use Hero Mech's exclusively to win matches, then your argument is invalid. That is the objective fact we're looking at here.

[Sephlock]

Thomas Covenant, on 03 June 2013 - 01:18 AM, said:

Lets say a player plays to do the most damage. He tries all the mechs he likes. He finds on average he does the most damage in a variant of highlander with a certain loadout. He has objective data showing which mech he is capable of doing the most damage with. Other players trying this same test sometimes find a different mech to get the best result on average. Do you see? It's not an opinion when you can show this by trying it for yourself. It is superstition, to suggest everyone performs the same way all the time. You will see tendency to do better, and they will very from person to person when you have things that are balanced but different.

You may not see it as pay to win because the mech has no advantage. But the player has to pay for an advantage, perhaps only sometimes but still has to pay, for an objective advantage.

You may see this as small advantages to be missed. But there will certainly be very unique hero mechs, to which there already are, and that difference translates to advantage in the right hands.

But most of the hero mechs are so poopy that cannot possibly happen unless the MechWarrior has a really unique set of eccentricities that manifest when he pilots. Like, he twitches uncontrollably when he takes certain actions:

Edited by Sephlock, 03 June 2013 - 01:40 AM.

[Thomas Covenant]

No that is not what I am saying. If you don't think I am saying hero mechs are pay to win, as in, "pay for a tactical advantage" then you have not taken in my argument. I'm sorry but no.