17 replies to this topic

[Mercer Skye]

Disclaimer; It's fully well conceivable that I may rant a touch and am likely covering things that people have covered in the past. I'll try to keep things as short as possible, however. Okay, on with it;

I. Salvage as more than just a cbill payout

Okay, so as it is now, you get X amount of cbills for percentages of 'mech left on the field at the end of a match. On the flipside, however, there are pay offs for blowing things apart on a'mech. Which is all fine and dandy, keeps you from leaving that ECM intact on the DDC so you can eke out a few more 'bills.

BUT, what if the percentage of the 'mech left when it goes down was translated into a chance to salvage it? Ripping the cockpit out of that DDC mentioned earlier leaves the rig above 80% intact, and translates to a 60% chance that the chassis is salvaged at the end of the match. (the 60% is just arbitrary, though percent left probably shouldn't translate directly). Also means whatever equipment was still intact can also be removed and distributed. (ECM, Artemis missile launchers, medium lasers, etc)

The first hiccup you run into however are MC bought variants. I don't imagine everyone would be able to get behind the idea of allowing the lowly 'freebie scrub' to be able to salvage a Boar's Head from a defeated opponent. And we can only imagine the outrage that would ensue from the first salvaged gold-skinned Masakari. Easiest solution, in my most humble opinion, is to consider MC variants as 'under insurance.' So there is no way for the MC purchased rig to ever actually be lost, but still allows the(a) base variant to be salvaged (BH has different hardpoints than an RS, but they're close). So that solves the issue of 'dupes' from MC 'mechs. Can't get them any way other than buying them with MC, as a salvaged version is just a regular model.

Also, all equipment/weapons still intact at the end of the match from the losing side would be piece-mealed and distributed. Speaking of distribution, my idea here would be tying salvage 'rights' to match score. Every single 'mech and piece of gear is itemized in cost order, and distributed in a 'Suicide King' manner. Top score gets the juiciest 'mech salvage, and then hits the bottom of the payout list, second the next best 'mech salvage, so on and so forth until the last standard heatsink is passed out.

But what if the player has no 'mechbay slots free? Ah, here's where we entice the typically free to play player into spending a little cash. When cycling back to the home client after a match, they get a 'payout' screen that shows them everything they pulled at the end of the match. Obviously, with the option to sell everything for it's resale value (some people just like cold hard cbills), or the option to send it to the 'mechbay (Who doesn't need 50 AC20's?). If there are no bay slots open for a 'mech, there's a convenient pop up that gives the option to purchase a new slot for their newly acquired ride.

II. Return of Rearm and Repair

This section is actually just here to say that we'd need a return of rearm and repair. But, if there's salvage in place, there might have to be further adjustments to how repurchasing a 'mech works.

III. Eject/Surrender

If it's completely conceivable that you could lose a 'mech due to fighting in a match, there should be a 'save me' button at some point. Would have to be 'locked' at the start of the match, and only activate after some kind of checkpoint is reached. 50% of your 'mech or less intact, ten minutes have passed, etc. To avoid people trying to abuse this, could make it to where they lose the 'mech regardless at the end of a loss, or maybe just a 50% reduction in R&R costs, or possibly even just a 'freeze' of sorts so that the opposing team can still earn cbills for damage done/component destructions on the opposing 'mech.

IV Immersion vs Fun

Ok, so for some of us, the whole idea of 'risk vs reward' and it's incentive to play to the best of our ability is the greatest thing since sliced bread. To others, it would be a huge turn off to the game if all the work they put into building their 'sweet ride' went down the pipes because some 'newb' across the map 'haxzor'd' their cockpit off. So, the system would most likely have to be tweaked over time to make sure that the game stayed fun instead of turning into a mutual understanding that you or your opponent just shutdown/eject after X number of kills (Although, given some of the fiction/lore, that wouldn't be such a terrible thing for being 'true to form' for Battetech).

V Abuse and Scoring

Ok, so recently we saw an implementation of rewards for using UAV or other counters effectively and intelligently. But, there are still some pretty huge disparities between fighting/capping in regards to match scores and payouts. Not to mention that recently there seems to be a rather large increase in the number of people that 'rage out' of matches and leave their team at a disadvantage (One whole lance d/c'd out because they didn't want Terra Therma the other night). Unfortunately, I have no good answer for this.

Maybe any d/c's on a team go towards that team's salvage at the end of a match.

Maybe have it in place that both teams walk away with salvage from the other team (Personally dislike this idea, but it's an option)

VI Other potential benefits

There are a lot of threads that have recently cropped up about boating high end weaponry, pinpoint damage, etc. Part of the reason people do this, in my opinion, is a 'why not?' situation we have at the moment. There is no incentive at all for people to build rigs more conservatively than they need to. So why not cram a huge XL and a pair of ac20's on a Jager? Not like you have any risk of losing any of it by being taken out during the course of a match.

With a salvage system or even just a return of Rearm and Repair (R&R is on the backburner, I know), there in returns a risk to boating high impact weaponry and expensive space savers vs building more modest rigs that can be performed well in. Maybe now the min/maxers cramming two ac20's now move on to one ac20 and an ac2, or even just a pair of MGuns and a battery of medium lasers. Not going to fix all of it, I'm sure, but now there's a good incentive to pack only what you absolutely need to do well.

--------

Thanks for reading, and again, my apologies if I'm just beating a dead horse, I'm sure I'm not the first or most original propagator of these ideas, it's just a horrendous undertaking using the forum search function to find a thread worth posting in. I'm also sure there are a couple poll options I failed to include, and someone will be kind enough to point out.

Edited by Mercer Skye, 30 December 2013 - 06:48 AM.

[Prezimonto]

While I love the idea of salvage, I think there's much easier ways to incorporate it into the game, that won't **** off every casual player around.

Imagine, with the emergence of clan tech, that at the game end screen we earn the rights to bid on clan tech (regular IS tech is still purchasable out of game). Clan tech is very rare and goes back to the faction you work for, they release it piece by piece to players who fought and those players can bid cbills for the tech. If they did well in the match they get multipliers so even people not rolling in dough have a chance to earn some decent tech. Once clan tech has been around a while you occasionally drop a mech, starting with small odds on even small mechs. This would be the only way to start playing with Clan tech in an IS faction.

So how do you play as clan? Buy a mech, but it only drops with Clan. Have several free Clan mechs for trial every week.

So RnR... I love the idea, as it gives a method of balance. The problem is it can't be linked to only out of game cbills. What I recommend is instead play short campaigns(3 to 5 matches in series)... where you commit your drop ship of mechs, and you always get most of your supply back. But in every match you have to take and hold depots (points on the map) to get full supply at the end of the match, and these are in addition to the actual map objectives. Every match you don't get supply you start down 15% on ammo/ton, or repaired armor, or slower engine, or poorer cooling. These stack up over the course of the campaign.

What this does is it ties repair and rearm back into the game play. Instead of theory crafting the most powerful mech players have to make decisions... do I take a laser (with zero ammo) or an AC that might be become less effective over time. Do I take an XL engine that is harder to repair(more likely to be damaged and perform poorly over time without repairs) or the heavy standard engine? ect...

[Mercer Skye]

Spoiler

Prezimonto, on 30 December 2013 - 07:11 AM, said:

</p><p>While I love the idea of salvage, I think there's much easier ways to incorporate it into the game, that won't **** off every casual player around.</p><p><br></p><p>Imagine, with the emergence of clan tech, that at the game end screen we earn the rights to bid on clan tech (regular IS tech is still purchasable out of game). Clan tech is very rare and goes back to the faction you work for, they release it piece by piece to players who fought and those players can bid cbills for the tech. If they did well in the match they get multipliers so even people not rolling in dough have a chance to earn some decent tech. Once clan tech has been around a while you occasionally drop a mech, starting with small odds on even small mechs. This would be the only way to start playing with Clan tech in an IS faction. </p><p><br></p><p>So how do you play as clan? Buy a mech, but it only drops with Clan. Have several free Clan mechs for trial every week.</p><p><br></p><p>So RnR... I love the idea, as it gives a method of balance. The problem is it can't be linked to only out of game cbills. What I recommend is instead play short campaigns(3 to 5 matches in series)... where you commit your drop ship of mechs, and you always get most of your supply back. But in every match you have to take and hold depots (points on the map) to get full supply at the end of the match, and these are in addition to the actual map objectives. Every match you don't get supply you start down 15% on ammo/ton, or repaired armor, or slower engine, or poorer cooling. These stack up over the course of the campaign. </p><p><br></p><p>What this does is it ties repair and rearm back into the game play. Instead of theory crafting the most powerful mech players have to make decisions... do I take a laser (with zero ammo) or an AC that might be become less effective over time. Do I take an XL engine that is harder to repair(more likely to be damaged and perform poorly over time without repairs) or the heavy standard engine? ect...</p><p>

While I can respect wanting to keep it more fair for casuals, I don't see how the essence of my idea hurts them any. It's a direct set of rewards for performance in a match. And the goal isn't necessarily to punish people for playing what they want, but more just tune their rewards so there's a better incentive to do more than run forward and shoot things in the face to die a loud, explosive and grisly death (Which seems to be the best method for 'farming' cbills at current).

I'm realizing however that the only real drawback to the system is that established players will already have a huge leg up on incoming players (which hopefully there will be a whole lot of those in the coming year).

In the end, I just want to see something more dynamic than 'amass cbill fortune, show off shiny paint jobs: Online.' Anything that feels more immersive than a time-grind FPS.

Make me work for my gear, durn it!

[Malleus011]

I rather like the base idea, and would link it to Community Warfare - you can play casual skirmishes/training missions/C-Bill grinders as much as you like, but if you want to take a planet, you've got to commit a Battlemech (and perhaps risk losing it). (comment; I'm not sure how Hero and MC purchased 'mechs would figure into that?)

Granted, a lot of balance tweaking would need to be done to keep the fun in the game; if 'mechs can be lost, then the grind to recover one might need to be shorter. Alternately, perhaps one would use a lot more affordable mediums to tackle CW maps.

[Airborne Thunder]

Repair and Rearm: NO! It is hard enough now to grind for C-bills. We don't need anything to slow down that process (especially with clan mechs coming out soon).

Edited by Airborne Thunder, 01 January 2014 - 06:22 PM.

[Modo44]

Shut up about R&R already. Without an AI to milk for salvage, literally any such system punishes new players while providing abuse opportunities for veterans. It sounded great on paper, but even PGI understood that it has no place outside of a single player campaign.

I agree that it would be more interesting to get salvage as parts instead of cash, but remember that one weapon can be worth multiple average match incomes. How, exactly, can it be done? Salvaging damaged weapons that cost X Cbills to repair? Only cheap stuff as salvage?

[Mercer Skye]

Modo44, on 02 January 2014 - 12:31 AM, said:

Shut up about R&R already. Without an AI to milk for salvage, literally any such system punishes new players while providing abuse opportunities for veterans. It sounded great on paper, but even PGI understood that it has no place outside of a single player campaign.

I agree that it would be more interesting to get salvage as parts instead of cash, but remember that one weapon can be worth multiple average match incomes. How, exactly, can it be done? Salvaging damaged weapons that cost X Cbills to repair? Only cheap stuff as salvage?

To address the very first line. NO, I will NOT shut up about R&R, and quite frankly don't much care for the tone. Regardless, I'll aim to keep it civil as I respond.

I honestly believe it's very doable. As far as abusive to new players, I call shenanigans. It's not like a vet is capable of bringing every 'mech they own to a match. It's also not like they can't incorporate 'new player friendly' lobby options for those starting out when UI 2.0 comes around.

Addressing the 'one weapon is worth multiple matches;' That's kind of the point. There is a reason that canon setups 'suck' compared to how we can build them in the game. At current, there is NO downside to purchasing the best equipment past grinding the cash for it (which has become so horrible because they removed R&R). In the lore, and how it would work 'for reelz' is that you have to balance what you bring to your budget. Which is by far, imo, why the Clans are capable in such a relatively short span, to create an overwhelmingly advantageous gap in technology over the Inner Sphere. They eliminated for the most part the need to build cost effectively (Monetarily, they did have limited resources).

If we actually had to pay to repair our rigs (Actually wouldn't mind myself having to wait real time while it happened, either), it would naturally incentivize people to run more conservative builds. Fewer XL engines 'just because,' fewer high damage pin point alphas (Even those people rolling in the cbills are going to feel the sting of constantly losing decked out Gausscats or BoomJagers), which in turn gives a bit more wiggle room in just how powerful a weapon can be (Not that I want unbalanced weapons, but the more problematic, is likely the more costly as well).

There's also another 'safety net' that can be implemented here. Implement it to where your last slot cannot be destroyed at all. Or your last four slots.

All I'm really wanting to put out there, is just because it wasn't exactly an awesome system when first shown, doesn't mean it couldn't be re-implemented correctly and it surely would be an increased level of complexity and dynamics that would lend to the feel of the game. Most merc units are on the verge of folding because of the costs of keeping 'mechs up and running. How immersive is it when a Merc company out there is going to be capable of fielding lances of Atlases every match, always?

It's not anything that will be implemented soon, and may not ever show up again at all, but I will not be quiet about my belief that it would add something important and pertinent to the game.

[Modo44]

If you give new players a crutch, veterans will find a way to abuse it (e.g. find cheap builds that play horribly but do not cost much to repair). If not, you punish literally half the player base, including most new people (buy your first mech, get stuck forever with repair bills you can not pay). Provide a specific way around both issues together, or shut up.

[Mercer Skye]

Again, no, I will not be 'bullied' into quiet on the topic.

Cbill payouts that reward 'moderate' usage, and punish 'extravagant' usage for one. As in, no matter what, if you run a standard engine and relatively low caliber weaponry, you're 90% likely to walk away with at minimum a modest profit. The more you deck your rig out, the more likely you are to walk away in the red.

And if you were to have these vets rolling in garbage builds, so what? It's a lot easier to take down a Blackjack boating small lasers than it is a fully 'monstered' out DDC with twin UACs, ECM coverage, Large Lasers, 3x ALRM10 and the ability to use it. All I'm seeing there is an easier time for newer players to amass some funds, while vets go ahead and 'farm some cbills.'

And I'm assuming you think the payouts would remain near the same as they are at the moment. They would definitely be needed to bump up a considerable amount. Maybe not enough to buy a brand new Atlas every time, but enough to keep one running, or even deck out a decent light.

I don't think it has a thing to do with the dev's ability to do so that it was removed, I believe it has more to do with the fact that their limited resources have kept them from tuning the idea into something challenging and enjoyable to work with.

We will see it again, and what I find funny, and a touch disheartening, is that this is the only point that's being contested. Was the rest not worth considering? I pretty much summized the R&R part as I know it would need a thread all it's own to get up and running proper.

[Modo44]

Mercer Skye, on 04 January 2014 - 09:10 AM, said:

Cbill payouts that reward 'moderate' usage, and punish 'extravagant' usage for one. As in, no matter what, if you run a standard engine and relatively low caliber weaponry, you're 90% likely to walk away with at minimum a modest profit. The more you deck your rig out, the more likely you are to walk away in the red.

And I'm assuming you think the payouts would remain near the same as they are at the moment. They would definitely be needed to bump up a considerable amount. Maybe not enough to buy a brand new Atlas every time, but enough to keep one running, or even deck out a decent light.

Illustrating my point. Advanced/good player = optimized low-tech builds that cost little to repair, allowing full milking of the boosted income, further increased by better play. New/bad player = bough a Gauss Rifle to make my mech awesome, can't aim, can't pay to repair it, FML...

Mercer Skye, on 04 January 2014 - 09:10 AM, said:

We will see it again, and what I find funny, and a touch disheartening, is that this is the only point that's being contested. Was the rest not worth considering?

Only if you remove the R&R part entirely. It was tried. It was bad. It was removed. Good riddance.

Please remember that literally half the players lose more than they win, by design. There is no "once you get good enough, it will be OK" mechanic, because it is guaranteed that many players will never get "good enough", regardless of how you define that limit. To put it in economic terms, R&R would put off many casual players, i.e. paying customers.

Edited by Modo44, 04 January 2014 - 09:41 AM.

[Mercer Skye]

It was poorly implemented, which is why it was yanked. We'll have to agree to disagree that it could be brought back without it breaking people.

It just as easily could be an incorporation of a salvage mechanic, but then we end up in the same relatively 'hollow' gameplay we have now, where people only ever move up. There's no risk, and it's all reward, and looks at other games out there that ride that example.

No incentive to perform better, at all (and granted, they really need some decent tutorials and a Mechepedia of some sort, not just links to sarna and mechspecs), just means you have the same stagnant pool of 'newbs' that just keep lobbing gauss shots at each other's side of the map. Because, really, what incentive does any player in this game at current have to do better than 'rawr, charge, and boom!'?

[Deadmeat313]

I would like to see both R&R and Salvage re-introduced to the game.

True, the R&R method in Beta was not working correctly, but that does not mean the whole idea is trash.

The main problem actually was the very high cost of ammo. An LRM boat pilot could expect to earn nothing from a match even on a win, as all his earnings were pissed away on reloads.

The important part is risk/reward balance. I could take a cheap Mech out, and come away with a moderate profit even if the thing is shot out from under me - or I could go full power. An upgraded Mech should perform better and earn me more money in a match, but cost more to repair if it is knocked out.


As to Mech loss / salvage:

Non-MC Mechs could degrade each time they are lost in a fight. Maybe the 10th time it is destroyed it is lost for good?
If it is destroyed but not lost, it may permanently lose weapons and equipment that would need to be replaced.
Possibly, parts/salvage from another chassis of the same Mech could be used to keep an old Mech functional?

At the same time, 1-2 Mechs from the losing team are awarded randomly to members of the winning team. These Mechs will be in a sorry state and will need work to make them functional. The other winners are awarded salvaged equipment.

These are not Mechs removed from losing players. The situation could exist that a Cataphract is salvaged from the battlefield, while the player who had his CTF destroyed in that match still has his. No one will notice or care.

The player could either sell a salvaged chassis for C-Bills, or store it in a separate bay (The Salvage Bay) until repaired + activated. Thus there is no need to buy a Mech Bay for it straight away.

The repair and activation of a salvaged Mech should cost far less than buying a new one.


Running out of Money:

The above system assumes that a balance has been achieved so that actually LOSING money should be somewhat rare. Even so, there remains the possibility that some players may manage to get several XL engined Atlases killed for little gain or something. What would be needed is a Faction Mech. These would be Medium Mechs supplied by whatever faction the player signs up to. They are owned by the Faction, so the player is not responsible for repair/rearm costs. Any earnings are pure profit.

The downside is that they are stock builds. You only get the fun of modifying/upgrading your own Mechs.


The Overall Aim:

What benefits do R&R + Salvage bring to the game?

1) A risk/reward mechanic with an economic flavour. Currently, new players have to start with stock builds while the vets get to stomp on them with pimped builds. If the vets are given a reason to maybe want to economise, then the playing field will be balanced somewhat.

2) Players are given the opportunity to pilot Mechs that they might not have gone and bought. That will mix up their Mech labs nicely. Or you might get exactly what you wanted for Christmas.

3) Everyone's depots will fill with useful tat like BAPs and DHS, along with an eclectic assortment of guns etc. If you need money you could have a clear out.


The Risks:

1) Those super-elite players who never die and never lose a Mech (like me! LOL) will benefit greatly from all the increased match rewards.

2) The meta may change to emphasize cheap-yet-dangerous builds. I for one don't see a problem with this.

[BLOOD WOLF]

So-pay for your damaged engine, and components+ammo+armor. sounds like fun. even when i make 200k a match my mech is blown to ****. this idea doesn't work because not every player even makes 100k per match nor do some veteran players. you cant use personal preference that only applies to a few for the basis of everybody. I do think this can be brought back and i know they can do so without delving to people c-bills, so i would be in favor if done right

[HeavyRain]

Risk/Reward may sound good as a concept and I would like to see it run on the test server for a month for evaluation, but there is one major problem i see with it.
It all has to do with real money, translated into MC for this game.
If my MC-bought mechs are protected from salvage, then I have a clear advantage over non-paying players, I can run whatever I like and I am not afraid of losing it, so p2w rears its ugly head. It's a safe bet that all the "Units" in this game will run MC mechs and just bring the minmaxed builds that we all know and love.
If my MC-bought mechs are NOT protected and I can potentially lose them, then I can RAGE against PGI for all reasons imaginable. Here are some examples:

- Your matchmaker gave my team 3 Locusts and 2 Trial Highlanders while the enemy had 4 ECM Atlases and 5 AC40 Jagers, I lost my expensive Stalker,not fair, I WANT MY MONEY BACK.

- I got stuck on your buggy map and didn't have the chance to shoot back when they discovered me, I lost my expensive Stalker,not fair, I WANT MY MONEY BACK.

- Your HSR was so bad last match that I kept shooting that Spider and not registering any damage, he just laughed and fired his 4 machine guns at me, I lost my expensive Stalker,not fair, I WANT MY MONEY BACK.

- The changes you implemented on LRM/SRM/Gauss/AC/PPC etc. made them OP and I they are so broken that I was summarily stomped on, I lost my expensive Stalker,not fair, I WANT MY MONEY BACK.

And so on and so forth.
That's the biggest problem i see with the possibility of losing things that you have paid for.

[Myomes]

Carebears will win this vote, op. This isn't eve online. I really wish it was, because only with an Eve online or Abandonedrealms winner take all gameplay type do choices of mech to field/cost/loss probability determine what you use and where, and make the game more interesting and ultimately, more stimulating and satisfying. I wouldn't be willing to lose atlases unless it was for a VERY good cause, such as defending a key base from being taken over that would result in the loss of mech production or an entire planet for my faction. So I guess CW would have to work at that.

As to people "wanting their money back" because a game gets balanced and nerfs their FoTM ride, well you got your jollies and now you cant anymore. Stop being completely ******* selfish. If you buy anything in game, you have to recognize that it's your problem to consider whether you want to spend the money on something that will completely disappear in a few years time anyway, or at very least, be useless when you stop playing the game altogether.

Modo44, on 04 January 2014 - 09:30 AM, said:

Illustrating my point. Advanced/good player = optimized low-tech builds that cost little to repair, allowing full milking of the boosted income, further increased by better play. New/bad player = bough a Gauss Rifle to make my mech awesome, can't aim, can't pay to repair it, FML...


Only if you remove the R&R part entirely. It was tried. It was bad. It was removed. Good riddance.

Please remember that literally half the players lose more than they win, by design. There is no "once you get good enough, it will be OK" mechanic, because it is guaranteed that many players will never get "good enough", regardless of how you define that limit. To put it in economic terms, R&R would put off many casual players, i.e. paying customers.

its funny, R&R was one of the core pillars to support Community Warfare, and they completely folded and got rid of it without doing ANY balancing on it to make it work, unlike all the little tricks and lazy attempts to balance heat, guns, lasers, ppcs, etc.

[fandre]

A system from veteran for veteran players. Beginners, casual and non paying players would be thrown out of the game simply by getting easily killed or doing a lot less dmg than veterans and/or players with maxout mechs.

It takes days or weeks (for me as casual player) to cumulate enough c-bills for a module, mech or engine, fighting with the same mechs everytime. Bring in R&R or losing the mech would make the game unplayable in a fun way, forcing me to play the trial mechs all the time.

To be honest: I would support slight rearm cost for projectile weapons as a way of balancing them.

Edited by fandre, 06 January 2014 - 01:05 AM.

[Deadmeat313]

You are all aware that battle rewards have been nerfed into the ground after R&R was removed, right?

When R&R was in the game, rewards could be MUCH higher. It meant that survival was at least as important as dealing shed loads of damage.

One reason R&R failed during Beta was the prevalence of 12-man organised teams vs PUGs. Being a new player with no in-game friends REALLY hurt back then. PGI have since pretty much fixed that problem.

As a PUGer now, you have roughly 50% chance of winning any battle. That would give you a reasonable chance of (-A-) survival, and (-B-) getting in on the Salvage Lottery.

For R&R to work, the rewards would need to be shifted back up again so that even if you get your cockpit shot off early on and your team gets curbstomped you still come out with some money after repairs etc.

That is if you do badly. On an average day you'll be acquiring a sackful of random parts salvage, with a couple of refurbishable Mech chassis to boot!

Edited by Deadmeat313, 06 January 2014 - 05:16 PM.

[Mercer Skye]

I was thinking, and discussing with a couple of guild mates; What if this system that I was talking about was how Community Warfare played out?

Say, when it starts, and I imagine they might do 'seasons' of some sort, you flag X number of 'mechs to take into CW. The current game modes we have now are still there for just blowing off some steam, but the CW 'missions' are more in depth, and don't necessarily require destruction of all of your opposing team. As in, the rewards for capturing or securing a location are much greater than those for destroying all of the opposition.

This way, everyone has a relatively even footing going into CW, whether they're fresh to the game or have experience from Beta to now.

Those 'mechs you flag for CW are your ante, what you are willing to risk to participate in the conflict. Or, you can just opt out all together, and continue with the regular game modes. But, if you ante up, you risk losing those 'mechs that you enter into the fray, as well as expanding your CW 'mech bay (bam, another source of income, as you'd have to spend money on CW 'mech bays as well as your regular ones).

Of course, this would also mean that it might need to be that CW 'mech bays would need to alleviate the restriction of needing three variants of a 'mech basic'd out before you can master them.

I think for CW, this could be a very dynamic way for it to work. It would also allow them some 'safety net' for restricting only IS 'mechs for the first couple of 'seasons' so that we can still have that IS vs IS going on before the 'real' invasion happens.

Edit; This would allow MC-mechs to remain 'risk free' when CW rolls out. You only have the chance to lose them if you flag them for CW. But, it also means that if you don't flag them for such, you won't be able to use them.

Might also mean another micro-transaction for PGI to put out where you can MC back in if you're blown away, though for CW, there would always be Facton 'mechs available to pilot, so that you couldn't be fully knocked out of that leg of the game.

Edited by Mercer Skye, 06 January 2014 - 07:53 PM.