269 replies to this topic

[soapyfrog]

Don't newbies get a huge glut of c-bills in their first 25 matches? I don't think that's been changed.

Anyway the nerf to earnings hurts newbies and bad players substantially less than experinced/good players. This is due to the base rewards for playing and also for resource gain in conquest have not been nerfed; so if you accomplish little in a match you will earn very close to what you would have pre-nerf anyway, whereas if you get a bunch of kills, assists, component destruction etc all those rewardshave been nerfed.

In my experience, 12v12 solo drop is also harder for good players, as it's harder to have a determinative impact on the game with more mechs on the field. For newbies it will actually tend to pull them closer to a 50:50 win/loss rate as their incompetence has similarly less impact.

Nerfing income does suck don't get me wrong, but the effect is more heavily going to be felt by good players.

[DemonRaziel]

soapyfrog, on 15 August 2013 - 09:29 AM, said:

Don't newbies get a huge glut of c-bills in their first 25 matches? I don't think that's been changed.

8 mils, from what I have been told recently. Helps immensly to get your first 'Mech, maybe even two, if you are smart about it and also go with lighter chassi. From then on, the real grind begins.

But you are right, the less experienced players will probably not be affected THAT much, as they weren't earning muny CBills in the first place for their actions. But regardless of your experience, the salvage drop will be felt be everyone.

[Chronojam]

Alex Wolfe, on 15 August 2013 - 01:26 AM, said:

Games are entertainment, not neccessity. There are many alternatives if you don't enjoy a game. If a game isn't fun, there's no pressure to persevere/pay, you can just uninstall and move on.

You can't force players to pay by making their unpaid experience unpleasant. You have to make the core game fun and enticing, and the paid experience even more attractive. Instead free players have to go through torture to even have a shot at playing the bare-bones game, maybe, somewhere down the line if they persevere? Not happening, and we've been saying that since R&R got introduced (and, luckily for all involved, removed).

Less C-bills per match for everyone, even worse new player experience (didn't think it was possible, trials that overheat in 3 salvos then cool down for 90 seconds not punishment enough for picking up the game?), premium time for veterans and loyal fanbase devalued.

I'm sure this was all well-thought out, and in no way can backfire horribly.

Did you make this? It is fantastic and I would like to use it.

[DevilCrayon]

Niko Snow, on 14 August 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

It's easier to test and adjust this way: By first reducing the overall reward, we can observe the telemetry of how much less players are making overall during this period of time and thus make better judgement on the value of future rewards.

This also helps reduce the possibility of over-shooting our adjustments and giving away too many rewards. In such a scenario, we would have to nerf those rewards permanently and be left with much upset from any players who had grown accustomed to those greater reward levels.

In our current development: We can confidently counter frustrations with the current rewards implementation with the knowledge that more rewards will be coming, similarly to when rewards were previously adjusted last year.

Your other concerns should be addressed in future communications from the Dev Team on the upcoming rewards.

It really would have been nice for this to have been more clearly explained in either the patch notes or the creative update, so we know what to expect..

[Lucian Nostra]

Hotthedd, on 14 August 2013 - 04:14 PM, said:

What if they did not realize they had been overpaying us until recently?

The simple fact is that cadets still get their bonus, and those of us who have been playing for a long time *should* have plenty of C-bills by now, unless we have been spending everything we make on the newest shiniest toys. In real life, we would call these people "spoiled" or "entitled".

If they didn't know until recently... than we're more doomed than any naysayers have been talking about. If it really took them a year to go "whoops!" on.. how many matches a day?

No I don't think they just realized it, it's just standard PGI practice say your doing it for one reason than state something else later as the real reason, than come in say we plan to add more later...

1) We're reducing rewards to compensate for 12v12 and you should make about the same
2) yeah you where all making to much
3) we'll be adding other features later to the economy



so which one is it?

Edited by Lucian Nostra, 15 August 2013 - 11:48 AM.

[Accursed Richards]

Hotthedd, on 15 August 2013 - 07:08 AM, said:

So, you are upset about a "pay cut" with fake money in a pretend universe?

Maybe you should unionize.....

Why would people complain about receiving too much free fake money?

Yep, I have all the mechs I want, and lots of C-bills. Why would that damage my credibility? IRL, if you were facing bankruptcy, you would find a financial advisor that had lots of money UN-credible?

Hotthedd, on 15 August 2013 - 08:36 AM, said:

I lose credibility because I play the same game as everybody else, started as a newbie when you could actually LOSE C-bills from a bad match, and accumulated C-bills from playing? Are you arguing that I should not have more C-bills simply because I have played (grinded) longer than you? You feel entitled to have everything I have because.....fair?!?!

Where does this prevailing sense of entitlement in our society come from? Why does everyone today believe they deserve a participation trophy? The rewards will be tweaked.

So by your own admission, you raked in the money in the many, many months between R&R being dropped and last weeks change. So you had ample time to stockpile money and get all the Mechs you were interested in. And now you want to pull the ladder up after you, and for new players to have a harder time than you did at their experience level.

I'm quite impressed you can then use the word "entitlement" without cracking up into laughter.

(edit) And if you're going to play the seniority card, take a look to the left of this post.

Hotthedd, on 15 August 2013 - 08:36 AM, said:

There are LEGITIMATE concerns with the game. Crying about fake money that you "earn" from PLAYING, is just pathetic.

Whining about whining isn't really any more impressive than simply whining.

And it's interesting how you talk about the money change like it's a complex issue that will drag work away from real issues. It isn't. Put the values back to their old state, done.

Edited by Accursed Richards, 15 August 2013 - 12:03 PM.

[Araevin Teshurr]

It's only a ploy to get people to play and stay interested.
When it goes live, you will be paying for repair costs, and going into the red with XL engines and such. Life will get harsher.

In terms of the cost of premium mechs, well, they are premium, and the game is free, so that is the main thing you will be paying for. World of Tanks and similar games are all the same, they are free, but if you want the good gear, you have to pay. PGI is not employing buddhist monks who sleep in the park and have no worldly possessions. They have to make a living.

Free games are not for you mate. You should buy a game that charges a subscription, then you can't complain about paying because you do. 8-)

I do agree that the premium mechs could be a bit cheaper. Would rather sell 1000 mechs at the price of 5 bucks, then a dozen at 25. The lower the cost, the more the demand. I'm a founder, and I have not purchased any premium mechs since, they are simply not needed at this time.

Peace.

Hotthedd, on 14 August 2013 - 05:49 AM, said:

There is no R&R, so all of the money is profit. I would be all for raising the C-bill reward IF there was risk involved.

[Chronojam]

Relaed, on 15 August 2013 - 12:07 PM, said:

It's only a ploy to get people to play and stay interested.
When it goes live, you will be paying for repair costs, and going into the red with XL engines and such. Life will get harsher.



Peace.

Can you cite this?

Discontent.

[Kenok]

Relaed, on 15 August 2013 - 12:07 PM, said:

In terms of the cost of premium mechs, well, they are premium, and the game is free, so that is the main thing you will be paying for. World of Tanks and similar games are all the same, they are free, but if you want the good gear, you have to pay. PGI is not employing buddhist monks who sleep in the park and have no worldly possessions. They have to make a living.


Peace.

Sounds like you want pay to win. This game isn't really that though because you can almost get equal mechs with enough cbills but MC mechs do come with the best stuff already. If PGI want to keep making a living, they need to stop hurting customer relations. When gamers no longer have faith at all in the company, they will not invest in it. I haven't spent a dime on World of tanks either.

[Alex Wolfe]

Chronojam, on 15 August 2013 - 10:57 AM, said:

Did you make this? It is fantastic and I would like to use it.

Yup.

Feel free as long as it's non-commercial use blah blah the usual stuff.

[Chronojam]

I still don't understand why they felt it was necessary to implement this "ghost recession" without explanation and so close to launch, when they'd ideally want to have long-time players invite new blood and reassure folks there isn't a painful grind.

[Xeno Phalcon]

Niko Snow, on 14 August 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

It's easier to test and adjust this way: By first reducing the overall reward, we can observe the telemetry of how much less players are making overall during this period of time and thus make better judgement on the value of future rewards.

This also helps reduce the possibility of over-shooting our adjustments and giving away too many rewards. In such a scenario, we would have to nerf those rewards permanently and be left with much upset from any players who had grown accustomed to those greater reward levels.

In our current development: We can confidently counter frustrations with the current rewards implementation with the knowledge that more rewards will be coming, similarly to when rewards were previously adjusted last year.

Your other concerns should be addressed in future communications from the Dev Team on the upcoming rewards.

Hmmm while I do not agree with how this was done (im not entirely convinced) I can accept that as a plausibility - I suppose for now you can consider me at least mollified.

Im still somewhat concerned about new players, as I can't imagine future rewards helping them get into the game as effectively as they were prior to the 12v12 addition and c-bill reduction.

[Airborne Thunder]

Niko Snow, on 14 August 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

It's easier to test and adjust this way: By first reducing the overall reward, we can observe the telemetry of how much less players are making overall during this period of time and thus make better judgement on the value of future rewards.

This also helps reduce the possibility of over-shooting our adjustments and giving away too many rewards. In such a scenario, we would have to nerf those rewards permanently and be left with much upset from any players who had grown accustomed to those greater reward levels.

In our current development: We can confidently counter frustrations with the current rewards implementation with the knowledge that more rewards will be coming, similarly to when rewards were previously adjusted last year.

Your other concerns should be addressed in future communications from the Dev Team on the upcoming rewards.

It's kind of like Pawn Shops. They low ball you in the beginning with the intent of meeting you somewhere in the middle hoping you feel like you got a good compromise when in reality you just got taken.

[Fabe]

maybe they should just take away all payment and give us everything for free so instead of buying mechs and stuff we'll just choose a mech slap on what ever stuff we want and then hit launch.No more havening to worry about blanching the economy

Edited by Fabe, 15 August 2013 - 03:53 PM.

[Big Giant Head]

Niko Snow, on 14 August 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

It's easier to test and adjust this way: By first reducing the overall reward, we can observe the telemetry of how much less players are making overall during this period of time and thus make better judgement on the value of future rewards.

This also helps reduce the possibility of over-shooting our adjustments and giving away too many rewards. In such a scenario, we would have to nerf those rewards permanently and be left with much upset from any players who had grown accustomed to those greater reward levels.

In our current development: We can confidently counter frustrations with the current rewards implementation with the knowledge that more rewards will be coming, similarly to when rewards were previously adjusted last year.

Your other concerns should be addressed in future communications from the Dev Team on the upcoming rewards.

Telemetry is based on overall players right?
How can you distinguish new player from Expert player in new account (with cadet bonus).
Because, maybe just maybe, expert player that cannot afford for mech bay or doesnt get premium bonus got bored with grinding and decided to build new account to abuse the system just so he can have fun?

And plus grinding is supposed to be fun, but I will not talk about pre-game lobbies, better gameplay and other stuff.
And I really do appreciate that you came out and said what it needed to be said - I just wanted to point out the obvious problem

Edited by Big Giant Head, 15 August 2013 - 04:53 PM.

[Big Giant Head]

Fabe, on 15 August 2013 - 03:53 PM, said:

maybe they should just take away all payment and give us everything for free so instead of buying mechs and stuff we'll just choose a mech slap on what ever stuff we want and then hit launch.No more havening to worry about blanching the economy

They should do some kind of Testing mode of Mechlab and Battlefield for beginners or players that want to test out mechs for free.
It would help a lot of players

Edited by Big Giant Head, 15 August 2013 - 04:55 PM.

[Skoll Lokeson]

All this means for me is that it'll take longer to save up for new 'mechs (that's fine IMO) and that I won't have to use $/MC as often to by more mechbays (I'm ok with that too). (I make less fake money while PGI/IPG makes less real money).

I play because I think 'mech combat is fun. If I thought playing the game was a chore I wouldn't care about getting more 'mechs - I'd play something else. But that's just my take on it and I'm not a grinder/collector type player.

[Takony]

Big Giant Head, on 15 August 2013 - 04:55 PM, said:

They should do some kind of Testing mode of Mechlab and Battlefield for beginners or players that want to test out mechs for free.
It would help a lot of players

Make new account, collect your cadet bonus, get the mech you want to try, rinse, repeat.
That idiotic workaround is what we have now.
Hopefully with UI 2.0 we will have the option to "lend" a mech for testing ground run, with the customization/build we want to try, not the stock build nobody uses anyways.

[WarHippy]

Relaed, on 15 August 2013 - 12:07 PM, said:

It's only a ploy to get people to play and stay interested.
When it goes live, you will be paying for repair costs, and going into the red with XL engines and such. Life will get harsher.

First off where has this ever been said?

Relaed, on 15 August 2013 - 12:07 PM, said:

In terms of the cost of premium mechs, well, they are premium, and the game is free, so that is the main thing you will be paying for. World of Tanks and similar games are all the same, they are free, but if you want the good gear, you have to pay. PGI is not employing buddhist monks who sleep in the park and have no worldly possessions. They have to make a living.

Free games are not for you mate. You should buy a game that charges a subscription, then you can't complain about paying because you do. 8-)

I do agree that the premium mechs could be a bit cheaper. Would rather sell 1000 mechs at the price of 5 bucks, then a dozen at 25. The lower the cost, the more the demand. I'm a founder, and I have not purchased any premium mechs since, they are simply not needed at this time.

Peace.

What do hero mechs have to with this thread? He complained that the cost of regular mechs was to high and not worth buying with real money, and now it is even more time consuming to buy mechs with the reduction in c-bill earnings even with premium time.

Chaos.

[Odins Fist]

Niko Snow, on 14 August 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

Thank you again for your feedback and patience while we continue to adjust the game’s economy.

"WE"..??? I didn't know you were on the "DEV" team..

Edited by Odins Fist, 16 August 2013 - 10:16 AM.