32 replies to this topic

[Gremlich Johns]

No score, but it reads like 70%

link to site and article here

[Heffay]

Quote

[color=#535353]A premium subscription is mandatory if you don’t want to get drawn in a series of infinite boring battles just to raise some cash[/color]

lol...

Quote

[color=#535353]All of these choices are bound by one supreme rule: weight. [/color]

rofl....

[Sandpit]

Heffay, on 09 November 2013 - 08:19 PM, said:

[/size]

lol...


[/size]

rofl....

I was really ready to agree with you on this one Heffay but you just completely took those two lines completely out of context. For those that would like a bit more of the review it's worth a read. I'd agree with a lot of what's in the review although I would have worded mine a bit differently.

Just to clarify Heffay's out of context quotes

Quote

[color=#535353]All of these choices are bound by one supreme rule: weight. Every mech has a limit, and overloading a mech is not possible. A wide choice of modules for targeting, sensors, ECM, antimissile, coolant (just to name some) as well as some Mech perks you get from your experience point complete the options at your disposal. This is without doubts the best aspect of this game: almost every player will end with a unique loadout that fits best, without a “must have” build or mech to stick on.[/color]

Quote

[color=#535353]A premium subscription is mandatory if you don’t want to get drawn in a series of infinite boring battles just to raise some cash. You’d think a game so deep and tactical rewards wise players managing ammo or sparing his mech from excessive beating. Wrong. The choices made by the devs about repair/rearm costs were so messed up they simply had to get rid of it. How much credits you’ll get is just a matter of win or lose, kills and kills-assist. End of story. That explains well why the game is literally engulfed with premium Mechs: the boost of premium mech plus premium account makes the grind far easier.[/color]
[color=#535353]If you want to have fun without pain and frustration it’s better to check your credit card funds.[/color]

See Haffay? That's an unbiased example of what you should do if you're going to quote someone. Not taking things slightly out of context.

I don't agree with the "have to buy premium" wordage which makes it sound like the "grind" here is unreasonable. Other than that I think it's a pretty accurate review overall.

[Heffay]

So you're saying a premium account is mandatory?

[Sandpit]

Sandpit, on 09 November 2013 - 08:30 PM, said:

I don't agree with the "have to buy premium" wordage which makes it sound like the "grind" here is unreasonable. Other than that I think it's a pretty accurate review overall.

Heffay, on 09 November 2013 - 09:09 PM, said:

So you're saying a premium account is mandatory?

You really don't read posts do you?

[Roadbeer]

Heffay, on 09 November 2013 - 09:09 PM, said:

So you're saying a premium account is mandatory?

No, and neither is the articles author, granted it was worded poorly, they do make the distinction of premium time and hero mechs as a way to alleviate the 'grind' (really hate that word in reference to this game).

As was pointed out, those two little snippets you decided to post up are completely taken out of context. Remind me to fact check all future posts of yours.

[Heffay]

Roadbeer, on 09 November 2013 - 10:34 PM, said:

No, and neither is the articles author, granted it was worded poorly, they do make the distinction of premium time and hero mechs as a way to alleviate the 'grind' (really hate that word in reference to this game).

His point about premium time was completely off base. The game isn't engulfed with hero mechs. It isn't an infinitely long grind without premium time. You yourself and Sandpit have argued against those points in the past. Why do you choose to argue otherwise today?

Win, lose or kills/assists isn't the only factor that determines how much money you make. TAG, spotting, NARC (lol), savior, defender, cap assists, component destruction... those all factor (sometimes heavily) into the money you make. Do you use a consumable or not? There are ways to maximize your revenue without the "mandatory" requirement of premium time.

And heat concerns is also something to consider when building a mech. It is not controlled solely by weight.

Some of the comments in that article are inaccurate. That is what I'm commenting about. It's not a bad article, I just found those parts funny.

Edited by Heffay, 10 November 2013 - 04:22 AM.

[Randalf Yorgen]

Heffay, on 10 November 2013 - 04:01 AM, said:

[/size]

His point about premium time was completely off base. The game isn't engulfed with hero mechs. It isn't an infinitely long grind without premium time. You yourself and Sandpit have argued against those points in the past. Why do you choose to argue otherwise today?

Win, lose or kills/assists isn't the only factor that determines how much money you make. TAG, spotting, NARC (lol), savior, defender, cap assists, component destruction... those all factor (sometimes heavily) into the money you make. Do you use a consumable or not? There are ways to maximize your revenue without the "mandatory" requirement of premium time.

And heat concerns is also something to consider when building a mech. It is not controlled solely by weight.

Some of the comments in that article are inaccurate. That is what I'm commenting about. It's not a bad article, I just found those parts funny.

Well if you think about it Heffay, if they did their research over just the last few weeks they will have seen a lot of "CHAMPION MECHS" (trial mechs) and Founders Mechs which someone not totaly engrossed in the game might think are HERO MECHS and there is also the recent release of teh Boars Head and now the Jester. I can see where they got the Hero Mechs idea from.

With the button at the bottom to ADD PREMIUM TIME on the start page and also the info on the end match page "With Premium Account you would have recieves XXXX C-bill and XXX xp. I can see how someone who only played for a couple of days would jump to this conclusion as well. It all makes sense to me if I think that this guy avoided the already reported "Heavily BIASED and NEGATIVE forums" in other words, he didn't come in here, he tried to find out for himself, maybe even did an interview with one of the Devs? and tried to put it out there for different people to see and maybe understand.

Most of what you listed in the middle is a type of assist, Spotting assist, Targeting assist (THIS you can now get with consumables UAV), Kill Assist, Cap Assist. Everything else is either a kill or destruction. Remember that componant destruction reduces rewards at the end of the match. You are right to say that there are EFFICIENT ways to make Money without Premium time, but how much more would you make using those tactics AND having Premium time. That's what he was getting at is a round about way, very round about, like going from London to Paris VIA Hong Kong.

His statement about weight is absolutely correct, everything is ruled by weight, you mention heat, well Heat will cause you to shut down, 6 er-PPCs will actually blow you up but it's all weight in the end if you actually want to play and as you said Maximize your earning. Blowing up at the start nets you very little reward and handicaps your team leading more than likely to a loss. If you are building a somewhat reasonable build HEATSINKS (weight and crits) MUST be taken into concideration. Even if it's to not take any, use only small, slow firing weapons and have them all on cain fire (Streaks and Small Lasers) Weight is still the final decider. to take BAP or 3 heatsinks.... hhmmm.

I can see the humor in what you posted but I can also see where Sandpit and Roadbeer are coming from when they point out your snippets, I call them snippets not to be insulting but because that is what they were. Sandpit I thought did a very good job showing the difference between a snippet and a full quote and in showing how that changes the context greatly. I know you were just having fun and yes it was funny... to a point.

Roadbeer has always been against the word "GRIND" with regards to this game. You're not stopping "Questing" to go "Fishing" and then "Cooking" to level those skils and the Pilot tree gets Mech XP and GXP just from playing. if people are "Grinding" to earn C-bills are they actually PLAYING THE GAME or are they just trying to be able to brag that they have every chassie and varrient maxed out. If they are "MAX-ers" they really aren't players, they are the only ones who actually have anything close to a "GRIND" and it's one that they put on themselves.

I've been in since before founders was even thought of and I only have tried 23 varrients of about 10 chassies. I'm not obsesed with opening them all and so I'm not "Driven" to the point of being an ashhat in game. I actually enjoy the game and have fun with it, even when my Jenner is reduced to a side torso and a leg and so can anyone new who comes to the game who isn't obsesed with "Bragging Rights and Got to have them all" This is why I hope they are very careful when they bring in Achievements to this game. they could really ruin it for we happy little people.

Edited by Randalf Yorgen, 10 November 2013 - 05:06 AM.

[Heffay]

Well, Sandpit and Roadbeer are generally very intelligent posters. I have no idea why they decided to go all off on my post. Must be bored late at night.

[Randalf Yorgen]

that or they were suffering a huge sugar rush from having just stomped around in Cake... errr K town for a while.

[Roadbeer]

Heffay, on 10 November 2013 - 05:19 AM, said:

Well, Sandpit and Roadbeer are generally very intelligent posters. I have no idea why they decided to go all off on my post. Must be bored late at night.

C'mon Heffay, you know that you and I are basically on the same side more than half the time. It was a fair review, and even more, I have to credit the author for taking the time to 'inbed' themselves with a unit to get a better handle on the game. This was more than a thumb-nail sketch that most reviewers give, and in my opinion, it is the best review to date.

Admittedly, the author made some bad choices in the way they described things (which you pointed out), but the context in which they were used was spot on, and the way you snipped those phrases out seemed to in someway discredit the article, because you removed all context of the paragraphs they were used in.

Someone who doesn't frequent the forums consistently isn't going to understand the esoteric concept of heat mitigation (Ghost Heat) or the fundamental goal of the economy (is there one?), or the ever-changing meta, so they are going to phrase it as best as they can, for their target audience, which ISN'T us. We know the game, and have our opinions of it. a "Review" is for the unenlightened masses who aren't going to know about those concepts either, so it's the reviewers job to tell them what they're going to see, without the foreknowledge of why they're seeing it.

In short, I thought the review was fair, and I thought your review of the review wasn't.

[Bucannen85]

Quote

Even more, the number of maps available (most of them very well made) is quite poor and below average for a game of his genre. Maybe this is the reason devs made a “funny” choice: claiming the same exact map, with ambient lightning shifted from day to night can be called and introduced ingame as a “new” one! This sounds like a joke in times where many games have dynamic day/night cycle (look at Planetside 2!). If they lack good map designers, we could expect to see “dusk” and “dawn” version of the same bunch of maps in the future.

I don't agree with this a 100% but the last two sentences did make me laugh. The article does a good job of reflecting the current state of the the game, thanks for the post.

[Sandpit]

Heffay, on 10 November 2013 - 05:19 AM, said:

Well, Sandpit and Roadbeer are generally very intelligent posters. I have no idea why they decided to go all off on my post. Must be bored late at night.

All I pointed out was that your quotes were a misleading. You can't pick a single sentence and take it out of context you want to be credible. It's the same thing media loves to do. They take one comment to use as a soundbite and many times take it completely out of context.

THAT'S what I was pointing out. Too many people around here just love to take all this evidence and factual information and editorialize it with their opinions in hopes that others will then accept their opinion as fact. That's been the onyl thing I've ever called you out for. You have a lot of valid points sometimes, especially when you're ripping apart those that do that, but then you turn around and do the same thing. By doing that you just tear down your own credibility.

[Deathlike]

Randalf Yorgen, on 10 November 2013 - 05:06 AM, said:

With the button at the bottom to ADD PREMIUM TIME on the start page and also the info on the end match page "With Premium Account you would have recieves XXXX C-bill and XXX xp. I can see how someone who only played for a couple of days would jump to this conclusion as well. It all makes sense to me if I think that this guy avoided the already reported "Heavily BIASED and NEGATIVE forums" in other words, he didn't come in here, he tried to find out for himself, maybe even did an interview with one of the Devs? and tried to put it out there for different people to see and maybe understand.

I actually hate that little message on that end match page. I understand you want to find ways to promote Premium Time, but it can look obnoxious or needy. If there was a button to show the info (it would be hidden by default), the perception wouldn't be there.

Edited by Deathlike, 10 November 2013 - 11:32 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Sandpit, on 09 November 2013 - 08:30 PM, said:

I was really ready to agree with you on this one Heffay but you just completely took those two lines completely out of context. For those that would like a bit more of the review it's worth a read. I'd agree with a lot of what's in the review although I would have worded mine a bit differently.

Just to clarify Heffay's out of context quotes







See Haffay? That's an unbiased example of what you should do if you're going to quote someone. Not taking things slightly out of context.

I don't agree with the "have to buy premium" wordage which makes it sound like the "grind" here is unreasonable. Other than that I think it's a pretty accurate review overall.

this is the line that lost me
"This is without doubts the best aspect of this game: almost every player will end with a unique loadout that fits best, without a “must have” build or mech to stick on"

Sorry, but anyone who actually plays extensively knows this is the exact opposite of the truth. That open ended configarability is and always has been the death of actual diversity in every MW title that tries it. And it is made worse her eby the weapon balance issues we still see,

[Roadbeer]

Bishop Steiner, on 10 November 2013 - 11:36 AM, said:

this is the line that lost me
"This is without doubts the best aspect of this game: almost every player will end with a unique loadout that fits best, without a “must have” build or mech to stick on"

Sorry, but anyone who actually plays extensively knows this is the exact opposite of the truth. That open ended configarability is and always has been the death of actual diversity in every MW title that tries it. And it is made worse her eby the weapon balance issues we still see,

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. You don't need to hump the meta to do well or have fun. The option to min/max is there, but you are hardly required to adhere to a cookie-cutter template.

[Bishop Steiner]

Roadbeer, on 10 November 2013 - 11:40 AM, said:

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. You don't need to hump the meta to do well or have fun. The option to min/max is there, but you are hardly required to adhere to a cookie-cutter template.

didn't say you HAVE to.

but 90% of people DO, and to play competitively, you really do. You can run whatever you want in PUGland, which is why PUGing to me is more fun. That said, I seldom see much individualization, it's usually the identified meta build for every chassis out there.

[Deathlike]

Bishop Steiner, on 10 November 2013 - 11:42 AM, said:

didn't say you HAVE to.

but 90% of people DO, and to play competitively, you really do. You can run whatever you want in PUGland, which is why PUGing to me is more fun. That said, I seldom see much individualization, it's usually the identified meta build for every chassis out there.

Well, I tried to run a 1 ERL + 2 med Commando-1B build for a bit (I'm sure a similar build for the TDK would work), but decided to lean more towards the "standard-ish" 3 med + SSRM2 since those arms get shot off often enough. I probably should try more patience or something. Oh well.

Edited by Deathlike, 10 November 2013 - 11:50 AM.

[Sandpit]

Bishop Steiner, on 10 November 2013 - 11:36 AM, said:

this is the line that lost me
"This is without doubts the best aspect of this game: almost every player will end with a unique loadout that fits best, without a “must have” build or mech to stick on"

Sorry, but anyone who actually plays extensively knows this is the exact opposite of the truth. That open ended configarability is and always has been the death of actual diversity in every MW title that tries it. And it is made worse her eby the weapon balance issues we still see,

There's always exceptions to the rules though. I'm perfectly competitive with my energy builds. But I also understand when I'm using a build like that I can't play it and use the same tactics I will with other more popular build types.
When people talk competitive on here they're generally talking about what I consider the game within the game. You basically have two levels of competition right now. 12v12 is a basically a player driven metagame within the game. You have to actively seek out 11 other players and purposefully put yourself into that very specific game mode.

To say that that's the "competitive" portion of the game, in my opinion, is wrong. Everyone who plays the game is playing competitively. It's just not the elite (for lack of a better term) portion. Once CW launches those not playing 12v12 will have just as much impact on the metaverse that 12v12 will have even if they use completely different tactics and builds. 12v12 is almost a completely separate game but thsoe outside of that niche still have impact on the game universe.

That's in no way bashing on 12v12 at all, I just feel that it's a bit misguided to view that as the "competitive" portion of the game. I hope that makes sense. 12v12 would almost be like the private player driven leagues of old while the rest of us are playing just as competitively without having to adhere to the self-imposed regulations of a league. There's nothing wrong with either style of play but I think those that play in 12v12 often forget there's an entire population in the game outside of that, which does not adhere to their ideas and because of that there's almost a completely separate game being played.

EDIT: Typos

Edited by Sandpit, 10 November 2013 - 01:17 PM.

[Alaskan Nobody]

I have to wonder if me and Heffay have more in common than I would like....
(Here is a hint: I am not very good with context, and the associated implications)

Edit: forgot to shrink the second line.

Edited by Shar Wolf, 11 November 2013 - 09:24 PM.