53 replies to this topic

[Jman5]

Fut, on 17 April 2014 - 10:59 AM, said:

Nice post. You clearly put a lot of time and effort into it.

One thing though;



There is no cost to drop, no down side to dying - every single match you gain some Cbills, even if you died in the first little bit, and your team lost, you will come out ahead.

I can see how that wording could be confusing. What I meant is that best case scenario the Conquest reward model would come out even to a theoretical Assault/Skirmish reward model with identical stats. However, in practice and over time you're going to make more money playing assault/skirmish. I didn't mean you would actually lose money, you're just losing potential money by playing Conquest over Assault/Skirmish.

In Economics this would be referred to as Opportunity Cost.

Edited by Jman5, 17 April 2014 - 12:19 PM.

[Not A Real RAbbi]

SnagaDance, on 17 April 2014 - 12:15 AM, said:

Don't these stats just record you having the module/consumable equipped? My Locust have arty and UAV equipped, but I don't use them often because the circumstances are not right. No nice cluster of enemies for instance, or hardly any missile mechs on my team. It still counts as a battle I've 'used' that consumable if I'm not mistaken.

Yeah, that's right. They record W/L with the module equipped, regardless of whether you used it or not. And I don't always used the equipped consumable modules, either.

It IS a way to get a better understanding, if not a FULL understanding, of what's enabling your successes and failures out there.

Running a UAV, I'll deploy it maybe every other match. I'm 1/1 since the wipe with UAV equipped, and I only used it one of those two times. After a few dozen drops, I'll have a better idea.

BUT (big one, too), if you've done better in matches with Artillery Strike than without, you probably also remember if you used it a lot or not, and how that affected the outcome. Each of us will be able to recognize for himself whether it truly was a factor in the W/L ratio, or if it's just coincidence in correlation.

That said, also note that unused expendables don't cost a thing to re-equip. ;-)

[AssaultPig]

Consumables almost certainly don't make up their cost in terms of cbill earnings. UAVs come the closest to doing so since a well-timed UAV will do far more to swing a match than an airstrike, but it still seems pretty unlikely you'd come out ahead overall.

the whole guide can be summed up as 'get as many assists as possible,' really. Savior assists are better but they're hard to deliberately engineer.

[Wildstreak]

Well, there should be a range total of what someone can achieve in each game.

Certain things should be presented as ranges rather than fixed amounts. Take Kill for example, you show a flat 4300 and 2100, is that per kill? Thing is, not everyone is going to get a lot of kills, players will see that when playing. A person who can get a lot of kills will get more money in Assault/Skirmish while someone who gets less will get more money in Conquest due to the Resource Bonus.

I had that myself. When I started, I made more money in Conquest than Assault because, being new, I did not score a lot of kills but there are ways of winning Conquest even when outnumbered so I got more money there. Now, I think my CB rewards are more even out since lately I get more kills due to skill improvement when shooting.

I find certain different values strange, matter of fact I find all except Resource strange, all but that one should be the same. Then for Assault, add in a bonus for either Destroying Enemy Team or Taking their Base, for Skirmish add in a bonus for Destroying Enemy Team. That should be the only CB rewards different between the match types. Might encourage more team play in non-Conquest matches instead of the, "I am out for myself," mentality sometimes seen.

Resource reward for losing Conquest should be half the winning one.

Jman5, on 10 April 2014 - 10:44 AM, said:

Don’t stick around after you die if you’re trying to maximize your cbills.

Why not, you make it sound like a player loses money for spectating. If true, it needs to be fixed, people should not be punished for spectating, possibly assisting in chat.

[Not A Real RAbbi]

Merchant, on 17 April 2014 - 12:58 PM, said:

Why not, you make it sound like a player loses money for spectating. If true, it needs to be fixed, people should not be punished for spectating, possibly assisting in chat.

"Time is money." -(many wise men and women over the course of human history)

If you're spectating, you're NOT fighting. That's time you COULD be spending in another match, earning even more C-Bills.

So, yeah. You DO lose money for spectating. If it's worth the lost earnings to learn from watching your teammates, then go right ahead. If you're just trying to grind up money, and not particularly interested in learning at the moment, then hop in another mech and go grind some more.

For instance, when the Locust came out, some of us rotated from one variant to the next. I'd run the LCT-1V(P), get killed, exit right away, hop in the LCT-3M, get killed, exit right away, hop in the LCT-3S, etc. In an hour, you'll get at least one more match completed by skipping spectating. That's 50-100k CB more per hour, give or take.

Yes. Spectating costs C-Bills. It certainly does. Because it takes time. And time, my friends, is money.

[Atlasian]

Jman5, on 17 April 2014 - 09:20 AM, said:

No but there should be for the winners at least. However in practical terms dying prematurely cuts off almost all future earnings. You can't get a savior kill or component destruction if you're dead.

This tells me that shutting down a Mech to avoid enemies and survive a battle (e.g. when the rest of your teammates are destroyed) is plain useless (unless you intend to ambush them). It would then be a better choice to rush to your death hoping to earn a few points of damage in return.

[Not A Real RAbbi]

Atlasian, on 18 April 2014 - 07:14 AM, said:

This tells me that shutting down a Mech to avoid enemies and survive a battle (e.g. when the rest of your teammates are destroyed) is plain useless (unless you intend to ambush them). It would then be a better choice to rush to your death hoping to earn a few points of damage in return.

That depends on the situation (again, disregard Jersey Shore). If you're facing fewer enemies, and one or more of them is badly damaged, then you could earn another kill (and likely some assists for your fallen teammates) by a good ambush.

A smart enemy team, upon realizing that is is hunting down one last survivor of its enemy, will band together and hunt that one down as a team. If you're that last survivor, you're going to get focused by them, and if they've got any significant firepower remaining at all, you're not likely to last long. Saw this two nights ago. Guy in a fresh Jagermech (I think? It was heavy, anyhow.) sat out most of the match. When the rest of us were out, and it was down to just him, he got cut from fresh to dead in under half a minute, and didn't get a single kill. Had he been able to shut down somewhere out of sight, and wait out the enemy, he might have been able to ambush and knock down at least one of the enemy mechs. MAYBE. Or, maybe not. But facing them down in the open didn't work out too well for him, and no one got any more C-Bills for his effort.

I'm simply suggesting that it's not black-and-white, but kinda situational. Some times, it's better to face the odds head-on. Some times, better to try the ambush. Some times (as I tried and ALMOST succeeded two nights ago in another match), it's cool to run off, circle back around, and try to pick off a weak straggler that's trying to chase you down and finish the job. It's just not so simple as DO or DON'T.

[Jman5]

Atlasian, on 18 April 2014 - 07:14 AM, said:

This tells me that shutting down a Mech to avoid enemies and survive a battle (e.g. when the rest of your teammates are destroyed) is plain useless (unless you intend to ambush them). It would then be a better choice to rush to your death hoping to earn a few points of damage in return.

If the game is lost, yes just get it over with ASAP. If you're on the winning team, hiding is pretty useless too unless it is temporary to avoid a nearby enemy. You want to be active and participating to gain cbills.

[Kin3ticX]

I'd just like to mention that Jman5 has hundreds of millions of C-bills and he prices it in how many hunchbacks it can buy. Just like when i'm holding a $5 dollar bill and i'm thinking about my $5 foot-long sub sammich.

[Wildstreak]

TheRAbbi, on 17 April 2014 - 02:48 PM, said:

"Time is money." -(many wise men and women over the course of human history)

If you're spectating, you're NOT fighting. That's time you COULD be spending in another match, earning even more C-Bills.

So, yeah. You DO lose money for spectating. If it's worth the lost earnings to learn from watching your teammates, then go right ahead. If you're just trying to grind up money, and not particularly interested in learning at the moment, then hop in another mech and go grind some more.

For instance, when the Locust came out, some of us rotated from one variant to the next. I'd run the LCT-1V(P), get killed, exit right away, hop in the LCT-3M, get killed, exit right away, hop in the LCT-3S, etc. In an hour, you'll get at least one more match completed by skipping spectating. That's 50-100k CB more per hour, give or take.

Yes. Spectating costs C-Bills. It certainly does. Because it takes time. And time, my friends, is money.

OK, with that clarified, I would have to disagree one one point.

Spectating can be for learning but also to ensure you making Winning money instead of Losing through Intelligence sharing.

Example, last night after I died on Caustic, I watched as my team got down to 4-5 players while the other had 2 in an Assault match. Figuring the enemy was under Turret protection, I went through all team members and noted their condition then said in chat how they all were on their way to being cored (no CT armor on any, a couple with red CT internals) so shouldn't go towards turrets. Don't know if they saw the message or not but they did avoid the enemy base and we won by most kills on time out.

Point is, a dead player can share intelligence like that spectating, live players cannot see the condition of other live allies. Also while watching one player, a dead one can report on enemies near that player to live allies nearby who do not see what is happening, think of it as being an intel officer who has access to all data from frontline units but is in the rear, the intel guy is not fighting but assisting in promoting teamwork through data sharing thus increasing chances of winning. Doing that could increase CB and definitely increase XP if the team wins.

So if you disconnect, you may not be there to assist in that manner and lose bonuses for that match even though you started another in a different Mech.

[Not A Real RAbbi]

Excellent point, Merchant, and one I forgot to mention. Sharing info with your teammates after being killed out? It can help a LOT. Thanks for adding that!

[Jman5]

Merchant, on 18 April 2014 - 12:05 PM, said:

OK, with that clarified, I would have to disagree one one point.

Spectating can be for learning but also to ensure you making Winning money instead of Losing through Intelligence sharing.

Example, last night after I died on Caustic, I watched as my team got down to 4-5 players while the other had 2 in an Assault match. Figuring the enemy was under Turret protection, I went through all team members and noted their condition then said in chat how they all were on their way to being cored (no CT armor on any, a couple with red CT internals) so shouldn't go towards turrets. Don't know if they saw the message or not but they did avoid the enemy base and we won by most kills on time out.

Point is, a dead player can share intelligence like that spectating, live players cannot see the condition of other live allies. Also while watching one player, a dead one can report on enemies near that player to live allies nearby who do not see what is happening, think of it as being an intel officer who has access to all data from frontline units but is in the rear, the intel guy is not fighting but assisting in promoting teamwork through data sharing thus increasing chances of winning. Doing that could increase CB and definitely increase XP if the team wins.

So if you disconnect, you may not be there to assist in that manner and lose bonuses for that match even though you started another in a different Mech.

I think we are getting away from the topic at hand and drifting off into the speculative.

The bottom line is this: On an average weekend with an average number of wins and losses, the more games you play the more money you make. Leaving when you die increases the number of games you can play in a finite period of time. It's that simple.

If sticking around and coaching your teammates increases your chances of winning and thus increases your cbill/hour we would need some sort of cold hard metric of measuring this. Unfortunately it's pretty much impossible to tell whether your actions was the difference that won the game. When writing this guide I tried my best to steer away from speculative methods to increase your cbill/hour precisely because it's impossible to prove.

Look at the end of the day you do what you want. If sticking around is more fun and feels more rewarding, go for it. However, unless I can find some way to measure number of wins your coaching earns versus the number of cbills you would have earned playing in new games, I am going to keep advising people to disconnect and get into another game. All I know for sure is that if I can play 12 average games in a day I'll earn more than if I can play only 10 average games in a day.

[opcow]

Great post! Really helpful.

So you do get cbills for assists that happen after you leave the match?

[Modo44]

opcow, on 19 April 2014 - 08:12 AM, said:

So you do get cbills for assists that happen after you leave the match?

No, only for the ones killed before you left. It still brings more Cbills if you take that potential hit, and immediately drop again in another mech.

[opcow]

ah cool, thanks

[Jman5]

opcow, on 19 April 2014 - 08:12 AM, said:

Great post! Really helpful.

So you do get cbills for assists that happen after you leave the match?

If you leave after you die you'll get full rewards for that game including things like assists when an enemy dies eventually, or salvage if your team winds up winning after you leave. If you leave before you dying you only get the rewards you have earned up to that point.

Hence why it pays to just leave after you are dead.

Edited by Jman5, 19 April 2014 - 01:15 PM.

[Unnatural Growth]

Jman5, on 19 April 2014 - 01:13 PM, said:

If you leave after you die you'll get full rewards for that game including things like assists when an enemy dies eventually, or salvage if your team winds up winning after you leave. If you leave before you dying you only get the rewards you have earned up to that point.

Hence why it pays to just leave after you are dead.

Your source for this please?

I have always been told, and understood it to be, that if you leave a match, you only get the assists on enemies that are ALREADY dead at the point in time you leave. REGARDLESS on if you are dead or alive when you leave. If you leave early, you only get assists you have earned up to that point.

Please show your source for this information if you are saying it is not so.

That would be a game changer for me.

Thanks.

[Jman5]

OldOrgandonor, on 20 April 2014 - 06:00 AM, said:

Your source for this please?

I have always been told, and understood it to be, that if you leave a match, you only get the assists on enemies that are ALREADY dead at the point in time you leave. REGARDLESS on if you are dead or alive when you leave. If you leave early, you only get assists you have earned up to that point.

Please show your source for this information if you are saying it is not so.

That would be a game changer for me.

Thanks.

Just tested this in a game so I am 110% sure now. You can try it out too if you want.

Basically what I did was make a note of how many cbills I had, then I tagged 5 mechs with my ER LL, died, and then quit after noting the damage. Then I waited for the game to end checked to see if I won or lost. (profile)

So I tapped 5 mechs, did 70 damage, died before anyone and quit. The game was a loss and I earned 45,970 cbills.

Win/Loss: 25,000 cbills
70 damage: 1,470 cbills
3 assists: 19,500 cbills

= 45,970 cbills.

If assists only counted while you were in game I would have only earned 26,470 cbills because no one died until after I died and left.

[Not A Real RAbbi]

Sidebar related to observing in game after your mech is destroyed:

In Ghost Recon, playing in The Combat Zone's 5v5 ladder, we used to use TeamSpeak for our team. Cool thing the game did? It stopped you from actively communicating with your teammates in MP once you were dead. It didn't stop the TS chatter, though. Also, it allowed you to continue viewing from the position of your dead body for the remainder of the match.

OGR was a sneaky-peeky kind of game, since most kills were one-shot deals, and even an injury would basically cripple you for the remainder of the match. Being all sneaky-peeky like it was, KNOWING where even one of your enemy's guys is at was a HUGE advantage. So, we tended to continue spectating through our dead body's perspective once dead, and sharing anything we saw through TS.

Of course, if you know your enemy is doing that, and you remember exactly where one of his bodies lay, you might try to draw him out of hiding by tapdancing on his fallen ally's corpse. Even if that guy's dead, your presence shows up on friendlies' maps, and he'd also likely report your presence, activity, and direction of departure. This could be manipulated.


TL;DR: there's some value to staying in your mech once it's killed, too, so as to share with teammates what you can see from it's position.

[990Dreams]

Solid advice.

I'd Machine Guns for snagging kill assists too, and if you think you're a good shot and fight at close ranges, a high-caliber Autocannon ensures you get the damage for a kill/kill assist in.