103 replies to this topic

[hammerreborn]

No

[Woozle]

Purlana, on 24 July 2013 - 12:48 PM, said:

Then ask PGI for a hardcore mode? Most people would not like to see a mech they spent days working on destoryed after 1 battle...

See that hero mech you just bought? Sorry it got destroyed, please pay another $10. Thanks!

There have already been suggestion threads on hardcore mode. And I have no illusions about the fact that it will never be implemented. Because, as I said before, PGI has already gone down the path of F2P. The point you make about losing a "Hero Mech" is painfully ironic in this discussion; think about it. What makes that pilot a "hero"? The fact that they spent real money!

[Purlana]

Woozle, on 24 July 2013 - 12:57 PM, said:

There have already been suggestion threads on hardcore mode. And I have no illusions about the fact that it will never be implemented. Because, as I said before, PGI has already gone down the path of F2P. The point you make about losing a "Hero Mech" is painfully ironic in this discussion; think about it. What makes that pilot a "hero"? The fact that they spent real money!

Yeah a hero to PGI, because they help keep the company up and running...?

Edited by Purlana, 24 July 2013 - 01:04 PM.

[Davers]

Telemetry, on 24 July 2013 - 05:17 AM, said:

With all the complaints about everyone running assaults and heavies and all the complaints about matchmaking missmatches, boating, etc. It occurred to me that bringing back balance in part means bringing back consequences.

By consequences, I mean Expenses. Here is a quick list of expenses and why it might help:

- Initial cost of dropping by tonnage: This will reflect the space used in a drop ship, fuel costs, etc. It also serves as a balance mechanism to make players have to decide what mech makes sense based on their financial situation. Mecwarriors have to worry about the bottom line. Certain drops for factions can reduce the costs.

- Repair costs: We used to have this. It simply costs more to repair an expensive mech with more expensive armor, weapons, structure. Again, this would make pilots decide whether it makes sense to alwasy drop that D-DC or Stalker boat. Having a relatively high repair bill for large beam weapons would limit boating.

- Rearm costs: Another item we used to have. Missles and Ballistics were balanced in previous games by the costs or rearming them. Bringing this back will reduce the AC/Missile boating.


So, applying something like this would have a good effect by balancing how many times someone could drop assault mechs and actually make money. If players could make more money with lighter mechs, it would cause the player base to think more about what to drop.

Also, there needs to be more use for currency in game to balance the economy. The drop costs are part of that equation. Once CW comes in, maybe there are costs for fuel to get to a certain system. Costs for intel on certain worlds, etc.

This is all just food for thought on how to balance the game without resorting to just tuning weapon damage and heat.

Missile boating is completely canon so why do you want to punish it?
Some of your thoughts about logistics (both you and others in the thread) are interesting. I had some similar ideas in another thread, long ago. But I would be very surprised if we got the deep CW experience everyone wants.

Hythos, on 24 July 2013 - 06:21 AM, said:

What then, is the point of Rental 'Mech's?

If people want to make money on a consistent basis? Run something that won't cost 100-200K per match. This will force more stock units into play, along with lower-value machines (IE, not the 'flavor of the month).
Rearm and Repair is a satisfactory method of limiting the 'high value' (typically assault) -heavy matches.

Because stock units are in anyway effective, right? Pretty sure the general impression was that trial mechs were overheating death machines, the use of which would make you a liability to your team and just stat padding for your opponent.

Hythos, on 24 July 2013 - 06:29 AM, said:

That's correct - people seemed to play wiser, and safer. Less missle-boats over-all (needed to be mentioned as people are now complaining that LRM's are again over-powered). Since R&R was removed, we've seen droves of players suicide and quit the match for fast cash/xp(?apparently it was fast?) - and extreme loss of tactics. Capping has no purpose, and cash from Conquest has little benefit.
With R&R, players fight harder, wiser, and are more focused on maximizing the amount of gains per round (IE, conquest capping). This would force an increase in usefulness of Mediums due to speed, cost (inexpensive vs heavy + assaults) ... yet another element that seems to be a popular talking-point / complaint.

R&R didn't make players better. In fact it proved a significant portion of players were willing to throw their team to the wolves by refusing to R&R and entering matches with damaged mechs and suicide grinding.

Murphy7, on 24 July 2013 - 06:50 AM, said:

It put value on retreat and an attempt to preserve war materiel.

Whenever there is talk about R&R there is always someone who says "R&R is great, as long as there is a way I can avoid it by retreating!"

Telemetry, on 24 July 2013 - 09:08 AM, said:

Seems some of the posters to this thread believe that there needs to be an equal playing field no matter how much effort/time is put into learning how to get better. I see nothing wrong with awarding good, tactical play and penalizing reckless and bad play via xp/c-bills and R&R.

Those posters who are complaining about the "grind". Are you serious? This game currently has absolutely NO GRIND! None! It's almost a simple arcade type game, which is not in the spirit of Battletech/Mechwarrior.

I am advocating a system that is in the spirit of the game universe that FASA created so many years ago.

There is nothing wrong with having to earn something so that you appreciate it more. It's a lot like real life in that way. Life isn't fair and we can't change the rules, we adapt and work hard if we want to succeed, or we don't.

Just food for thought.

My entertainment should be fun. Being forced to play mechs I don't like, or being prevented from playing the mechs I do is not fun. I will never understand the "more grind= more fun" arguments. Players are already penalized for poor matches by earning less Cbills/EXP. Why isn't it enough that a bad player loses? Why must he be punished too?

Woozle, on 24 July 2013 - 11:38 AM, said:

Oh, how I wish.

The sad fact is that since PGI chose to do F2P, it has completely watered down the heritage from the BattleTech universe.

A friend of mine who plays and I had a conversation about this the other day. We both have played TT and all the various MechWarrior titles.

In the original BattleTech universe, and most of the video games, mech warriors were elite warriors and mechs were rare and expensive. Contrast that with MW:O, where people who have never piloted a mech before are given an Atlas. Kerensky must be rotating in his grave at several thousand RPM!

Please keep the flavor text out of the actual game play. If a new player wants to play an Atlas they should be allowed. If there are 'too many' heavy and assault mechs around it is because the game rewards them more than lighter mechs.

[Jack Lowe]

James The Fox Dixon, on 24 July 2013 - 12:52 PM, said:

I don't want it to apply to individual players. I'm totally against that. We spoke at length on the subject the past couple of days and we're on the same page when it comes to R&R being a function of CW. As it stands now, it doesn't make sense since it punishes the players as the rewards do not scale to cover the cost even on a win.

K then I misunderstood your original OP. I would love to get into this discussion with u at greater length. Perhaps other similarly minded individuals would also like to participate. We get something hammered out that we believe will be workable, and fair and we post it up in the suggestions thread here, also at NGNG. Since they have actual verbal comms. with the devs. perhaps they'll bring it up in a podcast. See what kind of response we get back. Even if it's rather noncommittal as PGI is being very hush hush on CW details at least we may get our views expressed. We might also get even a vague idea of whether these issues are also on their radar and being addressed in some fashion. I'm just lurking on the forums atm but I'll pop back on to chat with u whenever u have the time.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Jack Lowe, on 24 July 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

K then I misunderstood your original OP. I would love to get into this discussion with u at greater length. Perhaps other similarly minded individuals would also like to participate. We get something hammered out that we believe will be workable, and fair and we post it up in the suggestions thread here, also at NGNG. Since they have actual verbal comms. with the devs. perhaps they'll bring it up in a podcast. See what kind of response we get back. Even if it's rather noncommittal as PGI is being very hush hush on CW details at least we may get our views expressed. We might also get even a vague idea of whether these issues are also on their radar and being addressed in some fashion. I'm just lurking on the forums atm but I'll pop back on to chat with u whenever u have the time.

How about tonight on C* NA?

[Jack Lowe]

roger that

[Koniving]

No one commented on my way to implement it repair and rearm, without it ever hurting new players or even having to apply to anyone unless they use upgrades or an excessive amount of ammo?
Was on page 2. This direct-links it.

[Alistair Winter]

Read. My. Lips.


Hardcore mode.



No, I'm not talking about first person view.

[Dan Nashe]

I dislike R and R costs because they punish you for doing battle and giving it your all. In an 8-2 win who pays r and r on the winning team? The brawlers and scouts. Who profits?Snipers, missile boats, and people who refuse to engage in the fight.

Similarly, the enemy has full armor and good weapons, and you show up in a hunchback with a 200 engine, standard everything, and medium lasers. Congrats, you just screwed over your team for money.

But don't suggest balancing by cost. While truly cheap weapons often are bad, the lb 10x is not better than a ppc. It would be nonsensical.

From a gritty realism point of view? Just not I terested in playing eve. More importantly, if powerful requires big upkeep, premium players win. Hello pay to win.

Now if you want to add in a small cbill bonus for playing mediums or 100 percent stock mechs (here's an idea, replace trial mechs with this week's stock mechs, and reward people for playing them (let them buy skills and make 25 percent more money than custom builds).although it will need a different elo score for when you're running this months stock builds.

The big thing is, I just don't want this game to be about money Because p2w if nothing else. Not to mention pvp. Economic games are more fun solo and coop. I don't want to play eve (it's an awesome game.... if you're in to that kind of thing).

Edited by DanNashe, 24 July 2013 - 01:39 PM.

[Waking One]

Repair and rearm only means that the most effective mech is even better.

[Tangelis]

Repair and Rearm as a concept is an excellent idea, in practice however not quite so. In order for it to function the way its intended too would require a working economy via real salvage, markets and trade. We really don't have that and a player run economy is probably the last thing MWO needs. I love the idea and in a lot of ways probably would bring a missing element of balance to the table, but MWO would have to be a lot more detailed than it is for it to serve it's function without breaking peoples spirits.

[Gallowglas]

This subject comes up a lot. I definitely don't agree with R&R, at least in the form we've seen previously. Think about it this way: people who play well already get rewarded at a higher rate than those who don't. Add R&R to the mix and you're just widening that gap. It will do absolutely nothing to encourage me to suddenly start playing a light mech or prevent me from running the mechs I do well in. If anything, it would actively encourage me to run heavier, more min/maxed, less experimental builds to keep from losing ground.

Secondly, if you don't like mechs running away to hide now, you'd hate it when the game mechanics actively encourage that behavior.

I just don't think it accomplishes or discourages what you think it does.

What I would like to see is actual equipment salvage, perhaps with equipment variants that can only be acquired via salvage.

Edited by Gallowglas, 24 July 2013 - 03:06 PM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Hythos, on 24 July 2013 - 06:29 AM, said:

That's correct - people seemed to play wiser, and safer. Less missle-boats over-all (needed to be mentioned as people are now complaining that LRM's are again over-powered). Since R&R was removed, we've seen droves of players suicide and quit the match for fast cash/xp(?apparently it was fast?) - and extreme loss of tactics. Capping has no purpose, and cash from Conquest has little benefit.
With R&R, players fight harder, wiser, and are more focused on maximizing the amount of gains per round (IE, conquest capping). This would force an increase in usefulness of Mediums due to speed, cost (inexpensive vs heavy + assaults) ... yet another element that seems to be a popular talking-point / complaint.

Just so you know back in Closed Beta I used an Atlas built with an Archers load out... and 11 tons of ammo. I never went broke, even on a loss I normally broke even or lost 50K tops. R&R also brought with it more AFKs an a greater mix of Mechs cause everyone used what made them the most money.

[Taemien]

I was netting about 70-100k per match in my tricked out Founder's Catapult with an XL engine. R&R never crossed my mind. RnR with Hero/Champion/Founders mechs tilts toward the pay to win venue, not fully, but tilts in the general direction.

It also doesn't hinder assaults or heavies. It doesn't hinder more advanced equipment (since they win more). And like Capper said, it only hurts those who lose, especially newbies.

OP you didn't think this one through did you? RnR was taken out because it doesn't work in this game. Too much has to change for it to be worthwhile. So much that this wouldn't be the same game.

I'm chalking this up along with convergence. Not happening in MWO. Wait for MW6. Its a dead horse topic, a redundant topic, and over all just pointless to keep going on about.

[Jack Lowe]

Koniving, on 24 July 2013 - 01:29 PM, said:

No one commented on my way to implement it repair and rearm, without it ever hurting new players or even having to apply to anyone unless they use upgrades or an excessive amount of ammo?
Was on page 2. This direct-links it.

Actually I did comment on it although in an indirect fashion. Yours was the post to which I referred. It's a nice general framework. It IMO requires some tuning and polish but you definitely have the right general idea. In fact I dare say after a bit more consideration you'll start to see that it's not only a good idea to help balance things a bit. It's going to be damn near a requirement for any hope of having a reasonably consistently stable meta and CW.

[Koniving]

Jack Lowe, on 24 July 2013 - 04:07 PM, said:

Actually I did comment on it although in an indirect fashion.

Found it, but yesh very indirect and hard to see.

James The Fox Dixon, on 24 July 2013 - 01:17 PM, said:

How about tonight on C* NA?

Jack Lowe, on 24 July 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

roger that

I wants in! I'll be in the AFK channel of there until you guys are ready to meet up.

[Hythos]

Joseph Mallan, on 24 July 2013 - 03:05 PM, said:

Just so you know back in Closed Beta I used an Atlas built with an Archers load out... and 11 tons of ammo. I never went broke, even on a loss I normally broke even or lost 50K tops. R&R also brought with it more AFKs an a greater mix of Mechs cause everyone used what made them the most money.

AFK'ing wasn't as popular as that, though there were still a high amount of disconnects

[XANi]

Why only R&R ? If your mech gets destroyed and you lose match your mech should be taken from you and given as scrap cbill reward to opponent, so for next 40 matches you will be forced to run in one of 4 great trial mech builds.

And, of course, if you mech get headshotted, your pilot dies so all XP goes bye bye.

I feel that those features would add a ton of depth to the game and totally not discourage new players from playing. After all, if you love your mech s much you grinded 2 weeks to buy and fit it, you will love to do it again and again.

[Koniving]

Taemien, on 24 July 2013 - 03:11 PM, said:

I was netting about 70-100k per match in my tricked out Founder's Catapult with an XL engine. R&R never crossed my mind. RnR with Hero/Champion/Founders mechs tilts toward the pay to win venue, not fully, but tilts in the general direction.

It also doesn't hinder assaults or heavies. It doesn't hinder more advanced equipment (since they win more). And like Capper said, it only hurts those who lose, especially newbies.

OP you didn't think this one through did you? RnR was taken out because it doesn't work in this game. Too much has to change for it to be worthwhile. So much that this wouldn't be the same game.

I'm chalking this up along with convergence. Not happening in MWO. Wait for MW6. Its a dead horse topic, a redundant topic, and over all just pointless to keep going on about.

One, 25% cbill bonus + your premium. Yeah you won't notice it. But you'd still have lower income.

It was removed because people would abuse it by simply not repairing or rearming. They had no requirement to do so. And so they'd go from match to match barely alive, crippled, or they'd set up bots.

However if it's introduced in a way that it won't affect anything but upgraded mechs carrying lots of ammo, then it becomes more of a balancing tool that won't impair regular players. The goal of it is not to run people into the dirt drowning in debt but to make you consider whether or not the XL engine, the extra ammo, etc., was really worth it.

This links back to my first post here on page 2 but it goes back to my thoughts on a fair way to make "everyone" happy including those who don't want to deal with R&R.
New players, faction players won't even see it unless they start equipping DHS, Endo, Ferro, Artemis, or carrying lots of ammo.
The repair and rearm is automatic, there's no choice in whether or not you repair the mech so it cannot be abused or allow you to run with a broken mech.
It also has a way to deal with bots since using a bot would get you nothing at all by botting.