183 replies to this topic

[Bartholomew bartholomew]

What do missles do now after max range if they do not explode?

Why was the base package not 1,500,00 Cbills.

And why was AC2 range nearly cut in half?

Edited by Bartholomew bartholomew, 15 April 2014 - 02:16 PM.

[IceCase88]

Bishop Steiner, on 15 April 2014 - 01:45 PM, said:

Large C-Bills Bundle: 6,500,000 C-Bills for 4000 MC

this seem off to anyone else? 4000 MC buys a 10,000,000 cbill mech. I get there being some devaluation, but this seems a little severe.

What Bishop said. Maybe it is the price of buying a hero and reselling it. It's a terrible value. The only bonus I guess is if they run +30% sales like they do with MC.

[Tannhauser Gate]

Werewolf486, on 15 April 2014 - 02:03 PM, said:

New Bundles:
• Small C-Bill Bundle: 1,100,000 C-Bills for 800 MC
• Medium C-Bills Bundle: 2,400,000 C-Bills for 1600 MC
• Large C-Bills Bundle: 6,500,000 C-Bills for 4000 MC

Does this mean that in the future I can spend some of my almost useless C-Bills to buy MC in the same fashion? So I could buy 4000MC with 6,500,000 C-Bills? If not I find this practice very unfair to those of us who grind for our c-bills in the F2P fashion and think it's outrageous only those who want to purchase MC with real money can buy the Hero mechs. I think we should be able to exchange our C-Bills for MC!

i.e. Oh, all that grinding work.. such a toil playing and enjoying the game for free. What a travisty that I have to actually play the game to earn cbills... so unfair. I think we should be able to ruin MWO's profit potential and torpedo the f2p model by being able to buy MC with no money at all. Outrageous..

[Naduk]

Werewolf486, on 15 April 2014 - 02:03 PM, said:

New Bundles:
• Small C-Bill Bundle: 1,100,000 C-Bills for 800 MC
• Medium C-Bills Bundle: 2,400,000 C-Bills for 1600 MC
• Large C-Bills Bundle: 6,500,000 C-Bills for 4000 MC

Does this mean that in the future I can spend some of my almost useless C-Bills to buy MC in the same fashion? So I could buy 4000MC with 6,500,000 C-Bills? If not I find this practice very unfair to those of us who grind for our c-bills in the F2P fashion and think it's outrageous only those who want to purchase MC with real money can buy the Hero mechs. I think we should be able to exchange our C-Bills for MC!

how then are pgi going to pay their bills and keep the game running ?
servers are not free
insane internet connections for those servers are most certainly not free
developers are not free
technicians that keep their hardware are not free
customer support is not free
advertising is not free

there must be content in the game that makes people excited to spend coin on
if they feel forced they are likely to just leave instead (depending on how often they feel that way)
if they feel there is nothing worth purchasing they can also leave

there is a fine line for success in a free to play system
your desires would tip that balance towards no profit
no profit = dead game

free players do not need hero mechs
they need mech bays, there should be a way to get those for cbills (15mil for a hanger sounds about right)
this way they can grow their mech collection slowly and thus build the desire to own a hero more over time

[Tatula]

I want to exchange my c-bills for MCs. When is THAT patch coming out?

[LastPaladin]

Grendel408, on 15 April 2014 - 11:34 AM, said:

How is this fair for the Free2Play players in MWO when a paying player can just drop MCs for C-Bills?

As opposed to just buying mechs for MC and saving those c-bills for other stuff? What's the difference?

Just eyeballing the packages, it seems like you are really getting hosed if you buy them. You could buy most any mech for MC and sell it off with all the parts and I think you would get a better return on c-bills than buying these packages.

[LastPaladin]

Ted The Prussian Striker, on 15 April 2014 - 12:41 PM, said:

By nerfing every weapon that is working, PGI forces you and others to re-learn an aspect of the game you already mastered.

That could be the plan, I suppose, but instead it just forces me to play less and less. I really can't be bothered much, at this point, going back and reworking builds on dozens of mechs just to make them effective every time PGI throws a dart at the nerf board.

[Raggedyman]

LastPaladin, on 15 April 2014 - 02:48 PM, said:

Just eyeballing the packages, it seems like you are really getting hosed if you buy them.

From Nikolai's post it looks like they are aimed at being a quick cash injection for a specific purchase, rather than a steady and regular supply, so having a 'poor' conversion rate makes sense. Plus it'll keep the focus on gameplay, which is groovy.

Edited by Raggedyman, 15 April 2014 - 03:30 PM.

[Wildstreak]

LOCUSTS, LOCUSTS, LOCUSTS!!!!!!
WHO HOO!
YEAH!
Locust-1M, the Mech people wished the 3S was and cheaper!
Locust-1E, ye....
uh
mmmm
uh huh
15 degrees less torso twist and all weapons in the arms.
Debatable in use. Cheaper than the 3M though. So losing a second AMS equals another Energy hardpoint and less torso twist? Odd.

Shadow Hawk-2D, a slight variation on the 2D2. Never played so I don't know if this is a big deal.
Shadow Hawk-2K is hereby christened the ZOMBIE HAWK.

Battlemaster-3M, just say 85 ton Aweome with a Ballistic.
Battlemaster-3S, more Energy, less Missile of the 1S.

C-Bills for MC, don't know the math if this is worth it. If this is to allow items currently without MC prices like weapons, equipment, modules, etc. to be bought with MC, why not just give them a MC price? if the cost is less than 1MC, make packages.

AC/2 & AC/5
Well, the AC/2 may not fire as much but that will be balanced by not overheating much either.
I do not understand AC/5 changes.
I also do not get how the AC/2 is no longer the longest range Autocannon, that was ALWAYS one of its selling points. Now AC/5, Gauss, LBX, Ultra and ER PPC have longer ranges than the AC/2. If this range reduction sticks, then all the other ACs need range reduction.

More use for smaller SRMs on lighter Mechs nicely scaled too.

[Zanathan]

I might have missed the memo but I thought the launch module was scheduled for this patch (15th April).

[CrashieJ]

Zanathan, on 15 April 2014 - 03:37 PM, said:

I might have missed the memo but I thought the launch module was scheduled for this patch (15th April).

it was pushed back to I think June or another 90 days due "internal problems"

it was mentioned in the podcasts I think but all I heard from NGNG-108 was "OUR LEAGUE IS THE BEST, IT IS GOING TO BE THE BEST, YOU JUST WAIT AND SEE, LOOK AT ALL THE STUFF WE HAVE PLANNED BUT DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO, WE HAVE BIG PLANS FOR MWO, JUST YOU WAIT AND SEE" from the mouth of Russ and Sean Lang.

I kinda stopped listening 3 minutes through.

[Zerberus]

Lockgor, on 15 April 2014 - 12:16 PM, said:

Apparently missles will no longer explode upon reaching maximum range? Sounds fun.

Not really, I was just in teh wonderful situation of being able to see teh boat firing from 1050 away and jsut stand still to watch the fireworks.

My anticipation was met by a lot of , well, nothing, they just disappeared

[Zanathan]

gavilatius, on 15 April 2014 - 03:49 PM, said:

it was pushed back to I think June or another 90 days due "internal problems"

it was mentioned in the podcasts I think but all I heard from NGNG-108 was "OUR LEAGUE IS THE BEST, IT IS GOING TO BE THE BEST, YOU JUST WAIT AND SEE, LOOK AT ALL THE STUFF WE HAVE PLANNED BUT DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO, WE HAVE BIG PLANS FOR MWO, JUST YOU WAIT AND SEE" from the mouth of Russ and Sean Lang.

I kinda stopped listening 3 minutes through.

Fair enough. I was basing my dates on the original state of the inner sphere thread:

April 1-April 15^th – Launch Module – in depth description already in a command chair post.

June 17^th – Clan Invasion.

Given they have no major plans for May, they probably can comfortably push it back till then. And I'm not sure what the Clan Invasion is either - I assumed it was just the release of clan mechs as opposed to anything spectacular like new features or an in-game event.

[Solis Obscuri]

Since when have AC/2s actually been a problem that they have to keep getting nerfed?

[Pyrrho]

Joe Decker, on 15 April 2014 - 12:03 PM, said:

Well I believe they will make more Cash that Way - which will help their financial Situation. On the other Side I am pretty sure in the long Run it will reduce the Activity of Players. This whole Plan might only work if they can attract a lot of new Players to the Game at the same Time...

If they are making cash from selling C-bills which reduces player activity, they are effectively turning a loss into a profit. Less activity means less server overhead. A lot of previous activity was generated because players needed C-bills. Instead of PGI paying server costs to provide players with C-bills, now they are taking payments for C-bills and spending less on server costs... PGI Win!

[Kesslan]

Seriously? People complaining this much about the MC to C-Bill packages?

What are you, blind? This has always been a possibility in game since you could buy a mech for MC. You have always been able to buy a mech for MC, and then sell it, along with it's equipment for C-Bills. The only difference with this package is the conversion ratio and not needed an empty mech bay and cutting out a few extra steps (Buy the mech, find it on your list, sell it with the equipment on it, wash rinse repeat till you have all the C-bills you want or run out of MC).

Honestly the fact that they just made a flat out package won't have any effect on how much the people who buy C-Bills with MC play the game because those who have done so in the past will simply continue doing so and maintain the same activity levels as they always have as long as their interest in this game is held and in doing so they will keep the game so many of you enjoy playing FOR FREE, free to play and operational.

Some one has to foot the bills for the servers and all the employees at PGI.

It's like complaining you don't have a car in real life because no one will give you one for free.

Solis Obscuri, on 15 April 2014 - 04:33 PM, said:

Since when have AC/2s actually been a problem that they have to keep getting nerfed?

Since AC/2s have held the highest DPS weapon slot in the game for some time. By the looks of things they finally got dethroned in that area.

[Solis Obscuri]

Kesslan, on 15 April 2014 - 04:41 PM, said:

Since AC/2s have held the highest DPS weapon slot in the game for some time. By the looks of things they finally got dethroned in that area.

Lower DPS than the AC/20, actually, and with a tendency to spread damage over any kind of moving target, and a worse heat/damage ratio than any of the other ballistic or missile systems? AC/2s were more entertaining than deadly.

But I guess any weapon system that delivers damage in any form other than massive pinpoint alpha strikes has to get nerfed out of the game before we get Clan ERPPCs and Clan Gauss Rifles.

[Kesslan]

Solis Obscuri, on 15 April 2014 - 04:54 PM, said:

Lower DPS than the AC/20, actually, and with a tendency to spread damage over any kind of moving target, and a worse heat/damage ratio than any of the other ballistic or missile systems? AC/2s were more entertaining than deadly.

The AC20 may have higher DPS but has what? 1/10th the range?

I've killed plenty of things no problem with AC2s at considerable range and there's a reason the 3-4 AC2 builds have lasted so long even when Ghost Heat came in to nerf them. I've also been on the recieving end of such mechs and getting caught in an extreme range AC2 barrage still hurts and is far more problematic than someone rocking an AC20 unless you're in close range.

[Hannibal Chow]

For crying out loud PGI enough with the awful weapon "balancing" !!

As a community its fairly obvious that we all generally hate it, and frankly you have plenty of real issues in game to fix - STOP IT!!!

and try fixing the actual issues instead of just catering to whinging noobies who can't figure out how to duck!

[Kjudoon]

Oh, I dunno. I'm loving the AC nerf. Brawlers are sure loving it too.