117 replies to this topic

[KageRyuu]

Actually unless the Assault skimps a lot on leg armor it'd be best to core the rear because so far legging hasn't been listed as a possible way to kill a mech by the devs, though I'm fairly certain if you take out both legs they'll still go down, but that's at most twice as much armor on center torso to chip though . Not to mention they can't shoot what's behind them after all.

Edited by KageRyuu, 16 June 2012 - 07:20 PM.

[Draco Argentum]

CCC Dober, on 16 June 2012 - 10:51 AM, said:

Thankfully we don't have tiered vehicles and none of that "I'm bigger than you because I paid and you didn't".
More like, "Check ma chrome bra!"

Chrome bras sound like they'd be uncomfortable.

KailKromier, on 16 June 2012 - 11:24 AM, said:

I would think that if the Devs were going to implement Premium stuff, it would more than likely be premium Clan Tech, like Clan SSRMS or Clan Double heatsinks, things that make a good difference in battle but will not unsettle the games inate gameplay mechanics.

A mech that strolls onto the field with $100 in clan tech might last the whole game...or it might simply get vaporized by a well placed Gauss round from a small mech to the cockpit....Ya dont know.

Oh look, we already have someone claiming P2W stuff isn't really pay to win because skilled players can beat a wallet warrior. MWO isn't even in open beta yet and its already happening. Even if the devs do turn this into a crappy p2w game there will still be fanboys defending it as 'totally not pay to win'. In addition you liked your own post.




The other lesson to be learned from WoT and LoL is that an ELO system is a must. WoT matches can be eye clawingly frustrating when you have terrible players. LoL uses ELO and after a certain point every match is fun.

[Phaid Knott]

Yup, the Premiums do eliminate the grind. But one of the issues is thus, if a player purchases something (that has different stats) thats ONLY available in the cash shop (and you can't eventually grind towards it) you'll always get the allegations of "PTW". And like I said the mindset of the player changes, you "own" something that you have purchased...if its changed then you feel ripped off. With a sub model you never had this friction in the playerbase, I dunno why many newer MMOs don't just go with a $5 monthly sub (after all its not that much money, and many would indeed think again at paying the full $15 that seems to be the industry standard fee for a sub). A FTP game isn't "free to run" however you do need a revenue stream. Sometimes the cosmetic changes might not sell well enough to fund the game, and you might "need" to start selling stuff like Clan Mechs to keep the game alive.

I'm all for the Devs offering different mechs in the cash shop (after all a 50 ton mech is a 50 ton mech....the different is just in appearance), what has me worried is the theory of Clan mechs/tech (or "special" mech lab options) ONLY being available in the cash shop. Sure it would be a big seller, but it would cause a lot of friction. I'm of that age where I still consider Clan stuff as "new" (and didn't like how it affected the old boardgame....very few IS players for quite a few years until they added clan tech to IS mechs).

[Puppies]

I play WoT and have played BTech for over 25 years - I say that everything should be accessible to all players but it should be a question of grind - if you want to pay real cash then you should be allowed to skip the grind and get that shiny Atlas now but it will cost you $xx - whereas if you have the time then grind away and get it sometime down the road, for free.

Nobody is disempowered, nothing becomes uber overkill and the devs still get their cash

[jjuurriijj]

Puppies, on 17 June 2012 - 01:19 AM, said:

I play WoT and have played BTech for over 25 years - I say that everything should be accessible to all players but it should be a question of grind - if you want to pay real cash then you should be allowed to skip the grind and get that shiny Atlas now but it will cost you $xx - whereas if you have the time then grind away and get it sometime down the road, for free.

Nobody is disempowered, nothing becomes uber overkill and the devs still get their cash

Agree, though grind mustn't be *too* harsh. In WoT it just destroyed the game in combination with the rage the game could instil in a person after just a few games.

[Elsior]

I am a long-term World of Tanks player.

Aside from the already mentioned problematic match-making system and spotting mechanics, the reason why newbies get turned off by the game after reaching Tier 5-6 is because it is all about UPGRADES. In many cases, the only way to contribute better to the battle (and consequently to your winning rate) is by tiering up. So the whole game and each and every battle feels like an endless grind.

Once you reach Tier IX and X, you can't play your top tanks constantly because they cost too much to run, even in a victorious battle.

The fact that MWO allows customisation means that it allows for sidegrades. And from I gather so far, each class of 'Mech has a role to play. Firepower and armour come at the cost of mobility, keeping the game balanced.

[CCC Dober]

Yeah, the idea of role warfare requires/encourages specialisation. There won't be Mechs that can do it all, unlike some tanks in WoT (early T54 and later IS7 come to mind here). Even if firepower, mobility and armor are covered by Clan Omnis (wich we can take as a given at some point), they may still depend on Scout Mechs, thus rendering them blind and vulnerable. There's a good chance that IS Mechs will dominate in this area and the assorted support capabilites (artillery is not very popular with the Clans and frowned on). Couple that with numerical superiority or increased production capacities or better logistics and it may just be enough to stem the tide. Still needs some love though.

[Horizon]

When I bought a premium tank in WoT (Valentine), I didn't really feel much superiority. It's got great competition with other free tanks in the game. To me, the premium tanks in WoT are merely short-cuts to some greater tanks in the game. Note that this reply is in regard to reading the first few sentences of the OP. Lawl

Well, I'm feeling hopeful about the balance despite looking at WoT.
So yeah... Dunno what to say... .... .... How 'bout them c-bill boosters!?

Edited by Horizon, 17 June 2012 - 03:05 AM.

[Elsior]

Horizon, on 17 June 2012 - 02:59 AM, said:

When I bought a premium tank in WoT (Valentine), I didn't really feel much superiority. It's got great competition with other free tanks in the game. To me, the premium tanks in WoT are merely short-cuts to some greater tanks in the game. Note that this reply is in regard to reading the first few sentences of the OP. Lawl

Valentine is underpowered. I got it for free because I was a Closed Beta Tester. I sold it after four games, lol.

I have played nearly every medium and heavy tanks in the game. I'd say Lowe is at par with the Tiger II and Type 59 is overpowered. So the problem is Tier VIII Premium Tanks. At lower tiers, they are balanced.

Edited by Elsior, 17 June 2012 - 03:03 AM.

[tweeder]

I really don't think the Devs at PGI would have taken on MW:O without doing some extensive research into the presentation of their F2P model.

With what they have announced, so far, it seems that the game will indeed be tailored more to the skill of the players as opposed to P2W (1:55, more specifically 2:43). They have said that there will be purchasable content that will expedite the game in some aspects (here), but again, this seems to hint more around xp/c-bill boosts.

One of the major things we all need to remember, though, is that MW:O is not a start up like LoL or WoT, but the reboot of an extremely popular game for PC players. The last direct game for PC (outside of LL) was MW4, and the player base for that, which was extensive, is coming back in full force to play this game. Given that, and the fact that the game is intensely skill based, I see MW:O becoming a major e-sport in the near future which will help PGI, the community, and the game all around.

For now though, we shouldn't grasp at straws of speculation based on other games. MW:O is MW:O...not WoT. Let the game come out and then we can all analyze the information and give opinions based on the actual game.

Edited by tweeder, 17 June 2012 - 03:05 AM.

[Horizon]

Elsior, on 17 June 2012 - 03:03 AM, said:

Valentine is underpowered. I got it for free because I was a Closed Beta Tester. I sold it after four games, lol.

I have played nearly every medium and heavy tanks in the game. I'd say Lowe is at par with the Tiger II and Type 59 is overpowered. So the problem is Tier VIII Premium Tanks. At lower tiers, they are balanced.

Gotta agree.. Since... Well, the Churchill doesn't seem powerful at all, and the Valentine is slow, weak firepower, but makes up for it in armour. As of yet I'm only on my StuGIII, still getting use to the high tier stuff. I want to comment on how scary the high tier large tanks are... So frightening.

[Thanassis79]

OMG! Will people please stop about the 'gold tanks' vs.'founder mechs'?

1. It's the same mechanic, so you know what you are gonna get.
2. I really wanna rip someone's head off when they declare that Gold Tanks are better, they aren't (take it from me).

This crap really has to stop. Do not compare games when there isn't enough intell.

-Ever fought with the tier3 French tankdestroyer?
- ...I did... Still regret it, worst tank ever! (prefer the Marder any time)

- Is KV5 the king of tanking in Tier 8?
- Uhu, yes it is. Untill it meets a KV4 that will blast it, clean it up and sels it for old iron.

There are numerous other examples... PLEASE STOP THE RANT ON WoT GOLD TANKS IF YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT!
even all those people who are directly comparing tanks here (like the american version - maybe a spoiler here - you need to use them differently).

You can either diminish your weakness or play towards your strength.

[CCC Dober]

@Than
No need to go nuclear on us. We've covered most of your arguments already and as far as experience goes we can trump that as well. Chill man. I don't wanna see greed and profit ruin great game concepts if I can help it. And make no mistake, WoT as a game is ruined. The concept is great, but the actual implementation and philosophy is fatally flawed. If anything, WG is solely focussed on short term gains, rather than long term (customer retention). They are shooting their own foot and as long as they don't feel the pain, they will continue to do so. Exploiting underdeveloped markets and customers lack of options only works for a while and their days are counted. MW:O and other newF2P titles will see to that. The CEO of Crytek has made it clear that they will move into the F2P market. Check that out and see what WG can hold against that. Not much I'd say. The professionals are taking over.

[Lord Exalted]

Beazle, on 16 June 2012 - 11:14 AM, said:

I think a lot of the problems i see expressed about WoT aren't going to be an issue with MWO for the simply reason that there are no "Tiers" in Battletech. You will never face an issue where you out maneuver, out gun, and just plain out play another player only to have your shots "Ding" off the other players heavier armor.

This is because in BT mechs all have access to the same weapons. Lights can mount weapons just as big as Heavies, just not as many of them. There is also no "penetration" mechanic, armor is ablative in nature. If you keep pinging away with the smallest gun you can get, you'll kill him eventually, without having to aim for "weak spots", although shooting them in the back is generally quicker.

Exactly even if they added premium mechs the only really difference would probably be cosmetic. The only disturbing things they could really do is make clan tech all premium.

[GHQCommander]

It is a business people, what do you expect.

They don't hold you at gun point and make you hand over your money. The terms are clear, you have a choice to buy or not. A truly good gamer can still do well in an F2P without putting money into it. Any gamer who thinks otherwise should probably give up right now.

Money makes the world go around and it will make your Mech spin around when someone with plenty money rips you apart. Sooner or later this game will go pay to win, once they have got what they want out of the loyal fan base. Give it maybe 2-3 years.

That is business, I love it.

[GHQCommander]

Thanassis79, on 17 June 2012 - 03:13 AM, said:

OMG! Will people please stop about the 'gold tanks' vs.'founder mechs'?

1. It's the same mechanic, so you know what you are gonna get.
2. I really wanna rip someone's head off when they declare that Gold Tanks are better, they aren't (take it from me).

This crap really has to stop. Do not compare games when there isn't enough intell.

-Ever fought with the tier3 French tankdestroyer?
- ...I did... Still regret it, worst tank ever! (prefer the Marder any time)

- Is KV5 the king of tanking in Tier 8?
- Uhu, yes it is. Untill it meets a KV4 that will blast it, clean it up and sels it for old iron.

There are numerous other examples... PLEASE STOP THE RANT ON WoT GOLD TANKS IF YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT!
even all those people who are directly comparing tanks here (like the american version - maybe a spoiler here - you need to use them differently).

You can either diminish your weakness or play towards your strength.

Exactly, this game ain't even going to be pay to win from the beginning so not much point in talking about it.

I been on real pay to win games and helped to take out players who have spend hundreds on the game. That is fun. I spend money myself but casually.

On Battlestar Galactica Online, rich people buy big ships, upgrade them too the max, they are powerful. Until a group of 20 smaller, weaker players gang up on them and tear them a new one for trying to be so brave. However, paying more still increases the chances of winning more, it just does not make a player better at the game, if anything they get stupid and take risks, It results in their investment giving them better chances, but does not result in it being impossible for none paying players.

[CCC Dober]

@GHQ
If you paid more attention to what Russ wrote, you would have found that we are in for the long haul. Expect 5-10 years (and possibly a port to CryEngine4). That is way beyond the average lifetime of games today. As a business you don't get anywhere near if you start to get greedy. The competition will see to it. That is the market and I love it

[Phaid Knott]

Horizon, on 17 June 2012 - 02:59 AM, said:

When I bought a premium tank in WoT (Valentine), I didn't really feel much superiority. It's got great competition with other free tanks in the game. To me, the premium tanks in WoT are merely short-cuts to some greater tanks in the game. Note that this reply is in regard to reading the first few sentences of the OP. Lawl

Well, I'm feeling hopeful about the balance despite looking at WoT.
So yeah... Dunno what to say... .... .... How 'bout them c-bill boosters!?

Kinda makes my point, the very fact this is an issue and causes a difference of opinion (shall we say). Now if that issue wasn't there wouldn't that be a good thing?

[Phaid Knott]

Thanassis79, on 17 June 2012 - 03:13 AM, said:

OMG! Will people please stop about the 'gold tanks' vs.'founder mechs'?

1. It's the same mechanic, so you know what you are gonna get.
2. I really wanna rip someone's head off when they declare that Gold Tanks are better, they aren't (take it from me).

This crap really has to stop. Do not compare games when there isn't enough intell.

-Ever fought with the tier3 French tankdestroyer?
- ...I did... Still regret it, worst tank ever! (prefer the Marder any time)

- Is KV5 the king of tanking in Tier 8?
- Uhu, yes it is. Untill it meets a KV4 that will blast it, clean it up and sels it for old iron.

There are numerous other examples... PLEASE STOP THE RANT ON WoT GOLD TANKS IF YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT!
even all those people who are directly comparing tanks here (like the american version - maybe a spoiler here - you need to use them differently).

You can either diminish your weakness or play towards your strength.

As far as I know the founder Mech feature a special "skin" that will be only available to those that put money in before launch (help mark out those that were interested before launch. No-where has any mention been made the a founder mech has any advantage (other than you will not have to buy it using in game currency. So no, its not comparing Founder Mechs to a "Gold" tank.

Yup the first Premiums weren't that good, and they didn't actually sell that well (cause and effect). Issue is do you feel that any FTP/Hybrid game should offer an "combat" advantage for RL cash?

Fine if you do, thats your opinion. But don't you feel that it is indeed causing a split in the playerbase. I'm for an FTP game to generate revenue because it keeps the game running. Just wondering if there arn't better alternatives to what WoT tried to do.

[Draco Argentum]

Phaid Knott, on 17 June 2012 - 02:33 PM, said:

As far as I know the founder Mech feature a special "skin" that will be only available to those that put money in before launch (help mark out those that were interested before launch. No-where has any mention been made the a founder mech has any advantage (other than you will not have to buy it using in game currency. So no, its not comparing Founder Mechs to a "Gold" tank.

Actually they come with a c-bill generation boost as well so they are broadly similar to WoT premiums. The catapult also seems to have a slightly different hitbox, but its a longer nose so its likely detrimental.