Jump to content

Why Are We Still Be Charged To Rearm/disarm Artemis?


8 replies to this topic

#1 JayVrb

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 507 posts

Posted 08 July 2013 - 09:16 PM

I figure it could be a one time purchase, then you can swap in and out since... you know, you already bought it??? Doesn't make any sense why I should have to dish out a half grand every single time.

#2 Angel of Annihilation

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Infernal
  • The Infernal
  • 8,881 posts

Posted 08 July 2013 - 10:33 PM

Yeah I kind of think this is BS as well. It really makes it hard to switch up builds to test their effectiveness for a few matches before setting on something. Same goes for DHS and Ferro as well. About the only one I think should cost is Endo since unlike the rest of the stuff your mechs structure isn't exactly a "bolt on" component.

#3 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 08 July 2013 - 11:04 PM

Not that you'd ever take dhs off, but yeah.

Not gonna change though, its this way because reasons.

We've bitched about it all along to no avail

#4 Amsro

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 3,437 posts
  • LocationCharging my Gauss Rifle

Posted 09 July 2013 - 05:21 AM

So you keep C-Bill farming. Rack em up buy premium time!! <_<

#5 Angel of Annihilation

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Infernal
  • The Infernal
  • 8,881 posts

Posted 09 July 2013 - 06:51 AM

View PostWintersdark, on 08 July 2013 - 11:04 PM, said:

Not that you'd ever take dhs off, but yeah.

Not gonna change though, its this way because reasons.

We've bitched about it all along to no avail


Yeah the reason is that it is a C-bill sink. Basically a way for them to get C-bills out of circulation and in general slow down the progression. Still it isn't a GOOD c-bill sink. Honestly I am not sure why they didn't leave in repair and rearm. Too lazy to balance it correctly I guess.

#6 BlackIronTarkus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 357 posts
  • LocationBehind you, breathing on your neck.

Posted 09 July 2013 - 07:48 AM

You are aware that a game need some kind of money sink right?

#7 JayVrb

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 507 posts

Posted 09 July 2013 - 08:44 AM

View PostBlackIronTarkus, on 09 July 2013 - 07:48 AM, said:

You are aware that a game need some kind of money sink right?


Yeah... me thinks they have PLENTY of other ways to make money and this is just a game of grab@$$

#8 Ragnar Darkmane

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 459 posts
  • LocationLuthien

Posted 09 July 2013 - 09:47 AM

The devs stated multiple times that they won't remove the rearm costs because they want to simulate the RL (well, in the lore) cost of having a team of engineers rip out half the internals to replace a component and put everything back in place.
I'm alright with it, at least we don't have to pay for ammo or repairs (now THAT would suck).

#9 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 26,888 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 09 July 2013 - 09:54 AM

View PostRagnar Darkmane, on 09 July 2013 - 09:47 AM, said:

The devs stated multiple times that they won't remove the rearm costs because they want to simulate the RL (well, in the lore) cost of having a team of engineers rip out half the internals to replace a component and put everything back in place.

Then why don't I get charged for swapping engines or weapons?





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users