158 replies to this topic

[Inkarnus]

so much truth in your post blinkin
but most ppl like to scream and ***** about
things, instead of redirecting there hate and
work out something dealable
they say NO to RandR
instead of saying
how can we optimize RandR to adapt it to
this scenario now and so that
EVERYBODY WINS
and not only the PPC SNIPER WARRIOR of DOOM

[Skydrive]

Inkarnus, on 09 July 2013 - 03:15 PM, said:

so much truth in your post blinkin
but most ppl like to scream and ***** about
things, instead of redirecting there hate and
work out something dealable
they say NO to RandR
instead of saying
how can we optimize RandR to adapt it to
this scenario now and so that
EVERYBODY WINS
and not only the PPC SNIPER WARRIOR of DOOM

Perhaps a few have said just no with no reason... not sure. Read each post once, don't want to do that again. Anyways, there is not much point in discussing how to optimize RnR right now unless you want to talk fiction (as in PGI would not do so right now, or if they did, it would be like giving everyone Jetpacks like people were promised a few decades ago, and I doubt that would be too safe). RnR is in no way a good fix for things right now, and would just make it broken. Wait for them to take care of the current meta, and go from there. The only way to truly discuss RnR is if you knew what the future would hold, and if their fix to the sniper meta will work or not. I expect their attempt to fix it will be in two months from now at the latest, but should be sooner I hope.

EDIT: Forgot to mention this before, but if/when they reintroduce RnR, there is a good chance that CASE would be alot more useful in mechs with an XL engine in order to reduce the repair bill.

Edited by Skydrive, 09 July 2013 - 07:19 PM.

[Tezcatli]

blinkin, on 09 July 2013 - 03:10 PM, said:

yup there will be some that will do this, but most won't because they can accomplish the same thing by using a cheaper mech. everybody panics and screams P2W!, but what if the pay to win environment is better over all than the current system. there might be a few that dump money into the game so they can be unskilled in their assault mech and in the mean time there will also be many more who actually utilize medium mechs and don't ALWAYS immediately grab the closest cheese builds.

no this would reduce the disparity between new players and established players, hardcore players gain nothing from this and if their cbills are steadily siphoned away eventually the ones who just play a lot will be separated from those that actually have skill. at some point we should pay at least a little attention to how accessible this game is to new players or it will die. we need some sort of middle class to allow for upward mobility for the new players. right now the community is far too top heavy.

You're assuming these people have to be skilled to use these weapons. The only way you force people out of the cheese builds is if you make the cost so ridiculously high that even when used well they still take a C-bill hit.

At that point it's just another grind for a new player or even established player to deal with. And frankly I'm sick of the grind as it is. So I imagine new players will be more turned off if the most powerful weapons are kept out their reach, but they're wrecked in game by people paying or willing to play a lot to get them.

[blinkin]

Tezcatli, on 09 July 2013 - 10:24 PM, said:

You're assuming these people have to be skilled to use these weapons. The only way you force people out of the cheese builds is if you make the cost so ridiculously high that even when used well they still take a C-bill hit.

At that point it's just another grind for a new player or even established player to deal with. And frankly I'm sick of the grind as it is. So I imagine new players will be more turned off if the most powerful weapons are kept out their reach, but they're wrecked in game by people paying or willing to play a lot to get them.

it will certainly drive most out of the cheese builds, because those cheese builds tend to be expensive and they will likely take care of each other. the cheese builds aren't always on the winning team, and what generally happens to the losing team? the majority of them die. if players are regularly losing money when they die, they will most likely change tactics. assault mechs and FOTM builds didn't take over while RR was in place.

at the time SRM catapults were incredibly powerful. able to cripple or destroy most mechs with a single volley, BUT there were very few players who were good enough to overcome the repair costs. most matches my catapult C4 was the only cat on the field designed to brawl. it was actually very surprising on the few occasions when i saw others and they were either extremely skilled players that would offer a good fight or i would punish them harshly for desecrating the build. these machines were absurdly powerful and also incredibly rare because very few could afford to run them.

and i think new players will generally get MORE tired of being constantly brutalized by other players who just outright have better equipment. being utterly inferior to other players simply because they have played longer NOT because they are better is in my opinion far worse than having some extra grind.

[Khobai]

PGI removing repair/rearm was one of their few good decisions. Look at why the previous MechWarrior games had repair/rearm costs. It was so the player had to decide whether or not to spend the money to repair the mech they just salvaged... but in MWO there is no salvage and there is reason to ever not repair your mech. Therefore the player has no choice. And without choice, repair/rearm costs were pointless.

[Inkarnus]

maybe it was a good dicision at that time with all that bugs to randr
but looking how prevalent afterwards the FOTOM builds reign supreme there DOOM
i would have gladly payed RandR so that i would see less of em and onlfy
take players who are skilled to take this fotom builds and not
the average joe since he wont be able to afford the costs
and the pro would bash you anyway in any mech setup
but he would be on the edge too with elo losing
on a consistent base !!

[DogmeatX]

Yesterday I dropped with a friend and we ended up on a side with 7 (SEVEN) assaults. The only non assault was a Centurion. The SEVEN assaults were a mix of Atlases, Highlanders and Stalkers.

The enemy team did not have 7 assaults.

Needless to say it was an absolute slaughter. For the other side, and both of us thought it was pretty crazy too (not in a great way either)

Assaults should be more rare on the battlefield, not making up the bulk of it. This happened because of no risk/penalty (and possibly matchmaker as well, but still pretty ridiculous)

[MustrumRidcully]

Khobai, on 09 July 2013 - 10:44 PM, said:

PGI removing repair/rearm was one of their few good decisions. Look at why the previous MechWarrior games had repair/rearm costs. It was so the player had to decide whether or not to spend the money to repair the mech they just salvaged... but in MWO there is no salvage and there is reason to ever not repair your mech. Therefore the player has no choice. And without choice, repair/rearm costs were pointless.

There's actually salvage in M:WO. It's just not very much, nothing compared to building your entire lance from wrecks you shot yourself (Mechwarrior 3 was awesome in that regard.)

But the other Mechwarrior games had two other differences:
- They were PvE games. R&R didn't exist in multiplayer modes, only in PvE, and PvE is designed to give the player a reasonably good chance of winning.
- And if you fail, you can always load an earlier save.

No savegames or PVE in MW:O.

[stjobe]

DogmeatX, on 10 July 2013 - 12:43 AM, said:

Yesterday I dropped with a friend and we ended up on a side with 7 (SEVEN) assaults. The only non assault was a Centurion.

This is an almost daily occurrence for me. I usually drop in a light (Commando), sometimes in a medium (gotta master those Blackjacks!), and I'm quite often the only thing under 60 tons on both teams. Just about every match, in fact. The seven-assault team is not as common as the seven heavies and assaults, but it does happen regularly enough.

I blame a faulty risk-reward structure, as in there's no risk at all since R&R went away, and the reward structure heavily favours assaults and heavies.

Of course, the current weapon balance also heavily favours assaults and heavies, so that contributes as well.

The poor matchmaker probably does the best it can, but if 90-95% of the population drops in heavies and assaults because that is the most favourable option, there's not much it can do.

There was a study made a few months ago about the make-up of drops (made by having people send in end-of-match screens and tallying the different 'mechs), and it found lights to be just 11% of the drops. I can't imagine that number being greater today, more likely it's even less.

PGI has their work cut out for them if they want to achieve any semblance of BattleTech weight distributions (30% lights, 40% mediums, 20% heavies, 10% assaults).

The main point here is that there's no risk element. R&R was such a risk element.

[Inkarnus]

looking at DayZ it just fun because there is a risk !
looking at MWO it would create a true depth to this game again!
beneath put in FOTM build bash newbs or player who dont want to FOTM!

How did PGI call MWO?
They called it a THINKING MANS SHOOTER
not much left from that atm

Edited by Inkarnus, 10 July 2013 - 02:07 AM.

[Skydrive]

Pretty sure there is something that will kind of stop the weight difference of teams when CW comes in, since you should only be given a max weight feature... atleast for protecting or attacking territories.

[James The Fox Dixon]

I remember the days of when there was repair and rearm that made any ammo based build a losing proposition. At 54k per ton of SSRM, 27k per ton for SRM, etc.. the biggest cost in the old R&R system was ammo. On the other side of the coin, you had the rewards system where if you had won the match in an ammo based build that you would still lose money due to the high cost for repairs and rearms. I used to have screenshots of my Streak Kitty where we had won the match, but I would end up losing 100k or more on the repairs and rearms. To say the least, I stopped playing MW:O because I could never earn enough money to buy my third Catapult variant.

Edited by James The Fox Dixon, 10 July 2013 - 06:55 AM.

[stjobe]

James The Fox Dixon, on 10 July 2013 - 06:46 AM, said:

I remember the days of when there was repair and rearm that made any ammo based build a losing proposition. At 54k per ton of SSRM, 27k per ton for SRM, etc.. the biggest cost in the old R&R system was ammo. On the other side of the coin, you had the rewards system where if you had won the match in an ammo based build that you would still lose money due to the high cost for repairs and rearms. I used to have screenshots of my Streak Kitty where we had won the match, but I would end up losing 100k or more on the repairs and rearms. To say the least, I stopped playing MW:O because I could never earn enough money to buy my third Catapult variant.

And that's (part of) the reason nobody's arguing for going back to that system. People are arguing for introducing a new system that doesn't have the drawbacks the old system had. Exactly what that system would look like isn't well defined, but one thing is clear: It's not the old R&R system.

[Caviel]

R&R is taxation/money sink with no benefits and nothing more. The second you incorporate any sort of performance, mech class, or equipment based modifications, you additionally cause an economic rift in the player base.

stjobe, on 10 July 2013 - 07:08 AM, said:

And that's (part of) the reason nobody's arguing for going back to that system. People are arguing for introducing a new system that doesn't have the drawbacks the old system had. Exactly what that system would look like isn't well defined, but one thing is clear: It's not the old R&R system.

As I said earlier in the thread, it would require figuring out a new R&R process that equally impacts veteran/economically established players as much as new players, doesn't overly punish lower skill players that lose more often than they win, and can't be circumvented by P2W processes of selling MC purchased mechs to negate the system entirely.

Good luck.

[James The Fox Dixon]

stjobe, on 10 July 2013 - 07:08 AM, said:

And that's (part of) the reason nobody's arguing for going back to that system. People are arguing for introducing a new system that doesn't have the drawbacks the old system had. Exactly what that system would look like isn't well defined, but one thing is clear: It's not the old R&R system.

I did have a system that I wrote up way back in closed beta and reposted it at the beginning of open beta. I believe that you read that thread, but if you didn't I'll recap it.

The system increased the rewards of the actions of the players while taking into account what a player brought into the match. The costs for R&R were the same. I got flamed over the course of 40+ pages of the various threads discussing it by players that thought the system was fine at the time.

I am not opposed to R&R if it is done correctly and if PGI implements community warfare. Until then, keep R&R out of the current call of duty mech clone.

[Tezcatli]

blinkin, on 09 July 2013 - 10:41 PM, said:

it will certainly drive most out of the cheese builds, because those cheese builds tend to be expensive and they will likely take care of each other. the cheese builds aren't always on the winning team, and what generally happens to the losing team? the majority of them die. if players are regularly losing money when they die, they will most likely change tactics. assault mechs and FOTM builds didn't take over while RR was in place.

at the time SRM catapults were incredibly powerful. able to cripple or destroy most mechs with a single volley, BUT there were very few players who were good enough to overcome the repair costs. most matches my catapult C4 was the only cat on the field designed to brawl. it was actually very surprising on the few occasions when i saw others and they were either extremely skilled players that would offer a good fight or i would punish them harshly for desecrating the build. these machines were absurdly powerful and also incredibly rare because very few could afford to run them.

and i think new players will generally get MORE tired of being constantly brutalized by other players who just outright have better equipment. being utterly inferior to other players simply because they have played longer NOT because they are better is in my opinion far worse than having some extra grind.

So you're not trying to remove cheese builds. You're just trying to keep it out of the hands of the general population? Everyone who is disorganized or below average.

[Inkarnus]

Tezcatli, on 10 July 2013 - 08:46 AM, said:

You're just trying to keep it out of the hands of the general population? Everyone who is disorganized or below average.

No since there is ELO you can bet that you WILL DIE equally even with that nomnom builds
so you wouldnt take it in the first place but if you would do it. It would be a gamble.
heared about Risk Reward anybody?

[Zultor]

R&R should be brought back with the following changes:

- you must repair the mech to 100% before MM would allow you to enter match
- No free armor, equipment, etc except ammo (see point below)
- Trial mechs never cost the player money to R&R (battle cost, salvage, etc are still calculated and if you profitted than it is added to cbill balance but if you were negative than your cbill balance is unaffected). ELO would reduce exploiting.
- Trial mechs should only be lights and mediums thus forcing people who play in heavies and assaults to have positive cash flow and support themselves
- Ammo should be reloaded free and to 100% (to avoid balance issue between energy and ammo weapons)
- Cost balancing should be done through the weapon itself (larger more exotic weapons should cost a lot, etc)

[blinkin]

Tezcatli, on 10 July 2013 - 08:46 AM, said:

So you're not trying to remove cheese builds. You're just trying to keep it out of the hands of the general population? Everyone who is disorganized or below average.

there are plenty of ways to eliminate cheese builds outright. getting rid of the mech lab would take care of it completely, BUT then we take away choice.

i prefer adding a penalty that encourages players to take more reasonable mechs, instead of spamming all of the BFG9000 builds.

and from what i saw when RR was still going the percentage of the population that could consistently run such builds was low enough that you rarely even saw one per match. like i said before i was often shocked when a saw another SRM catapult in a match.