25 replies to this topic

[LokkenJP]

Greetings.

I posted this same question on the thread "Russ Bullock taking questions on Founders now", but I've just stopped by a message by him leaving the thread, so no more answers there (for now at least).

So, here goes again, in case someone could help me: I've purchased the Elite founder pack with a Catapult (unfortunately I cannot afford the Legendary one, which should solve my problem...), and I'm worried about my Founder mech choice.

Some MMO-FPSs out there (namely World of Tanks) have focused money-grinding classes / tiers of vehicles... Using WoT as an example, money grinding is almost exclusive of medium vehicles of medium tiers.
Light vehicles or lower tiers earn too little currency (but also have lower maintenance, thus having a rather small profit), and heavier vehicles of higher tiers have higher payouts, but extremely higher maintenance costs, resulting usually in even money balance in the best case, and net loss of money most of the time.
Meanwhile, other f2p games like Navyfield for example, rely on higher tier/heavier vehicles to get the biggest amount of ingame cash.

As the prime advantage of Founder mechs is the cBill grinding bonus, It would be extremely useful to know how money making is going to work in MW:O. Is c-Bill grinding (almost) exclusive of one of the weight classes? Light/Medium/Heavy/Assault? Or can any class be as profitable as the others? Will the medium class be superior here? Or the bigger, the better cBill-maker? Will the Assault class (or any other) be designed as a cBill sink?

Thanks in advance for the answers.

Regards

L

[BlindProphet]

We don't know is the best answer that can be given. Those that do know (as of the latest beta client whatever that is) can't say anything due to the NDA.

My assumption is that more expensive mechs will cost more to repair...on the other hand they can take a lot more punishment and deal out more damage.

So...again we just don't know.

[FrDrake]

What we know about c-bill generation:

It's based on the different roles (scouting, attacks etc.)

Light mechs are cheaper to repair, assaults most expensive

You have to reload ammo for your weapons which cost cbills

There may or may not be bonus cbills for somehow getting salvage

Founders mech gets a 25% bonus to cbill generation


What we don't know:

How much the upkeep of a given mech is per match

How the different roles get comparable cbill generation (killing a mech worth way more than scouting, or just a little?)


Only thing we can conclude:

Pick a mech that supports your playstyle and you will naturally acheive more of that mech's objectives, which I would assume leads to more cbill generation.

[John Wolf]

There are still a lot of unanswered questions, but the mech that suits your playstyle is likely your best bet. Barring that, one that fits well into a group you're going to play with frequently if possible.

[MiniChiken]

If you chose the catapult because you like being a fire support mech then you will be fine, don't sweat it. If you chose the Catapult because it's your favorite mech, then you might have a bad time.

[Bryan Ekman]

All Founder's Mechs have the same bonus. Upkeep varies by weight class. The heavier a Mech the more upkeep (repair/rearm). The balance out the risk, we balance out the rewards as well. Players will find that no matter which Mech the field, they will earn proportional rewards.

[Huscarl]

So we know for sure that the Elite mechs get a 25% C-Bill gen?

I'm glad it's not more. I've got one, so I'm not bitter but I think any more than that will render the other mechs in the class obsolete by utility and thus cause an over-abundance (and a seriously fking boring one) of the same goddam elite mech in each weight class on each side.

Variety is the spice of life and I want to see every much in the game in every match regularly, forcing me to adapt and learn and think on the run, I get sick seeing 1/3 of the entire team in WoT using the same 3 premium vehicles.

In the future I'd like to see any further "premium" mechs be limited to COSMETIC bonuses. Judging by the amount of people that bought Legendary it's clear to see the community is keen to lay down their money for incremental bonuses, and for their love of BT.

I would pay $10 for camo/skins for a mech easily, or "unique" mechs (as long as they're balanced).


I went for the Atlas elite, reasoning that there's more chance I can repeatedly play Assaults without having to top-up the registry in smaller mechs, one AC20 is NOT enough.

[StriplingWarrior]

Bryan Ekman, on 21 June 2012 - 06:25 AM, said:

All Founder's Mechs have the same bonus. Upkeep varies by weight class. The heavier a Mech the more upkeep (repair/rearm). The balance out the risk, we balance out the rewards as well. Players will find that no matter which Mech the field, they will earn proportional rewards.

Forgive me if I offend. This^ sounds like the usual noncommital song and dance-which is cool, I understand where you are coming from. However there are a lot of people singing the same song on our end though, and it is in direct opposition to yours. They want..no, are anxious to give you their money but have a need for more information before doing it. I have $120 sitting in my pocket, right now with MW:O's name on it. I am holding out for more information, I shouldn't but...
Some of these guys don't have the disposable income to just drop the money, they need to be more circumspect about how they spend their funds.

Lets ask point blank

On an average round of play(mech not destroyed, some damage to weapons and mech) is a Heavy/Assault mech going to consistantly net more C-bills than a light or a medium?

or

Is there going to be a "set" amount of funds recieved for accomplishing mission objectives(based on contract type whatevers)with modifiers based on damage, spotting, capture, kills, what have you so that it is possible to lose money in a light mech and an assault but not as likely in the light because of the lower maintainance/upkeep cost?

again I am sorry if I could have phrased this better. I mean no offense.

respectfully
Jon

[Calem]

That 25% bonus should end up nicer that 25% when taking costs into account: Profit is what’s left once you deduct all costs from your income.

If costs were (hypothetically, I don’t think it’ll be that much, but I don’t know) as high as 2/3^rd your income per match, you’d compare

100 – 66,6 = 33,4 profit (normal mech)

to

125 – 66,6 = 58,4 profit (founder’s mech),

Comparing profits of

58,4 / 33,4 = 175% would mean founders gain +75% more net profit per match.

The real question is how much total costs per match will be. The higher the costs, the more useful the founder’s mech bonus will be.

[Bryan Ekman]

StriplingWarrior, on 21 June 2012 - 06:45 AM, said:

Is there going to be a "set" amount of funds recieved for accomplishing mission objectives(based on contract type whatevers)with modifiers based on damage, spotting, capture, kills, what have you so that it is possible to lose money in a light mech and an assault but not as likely in the light because of the lower maintainance/upkeep cost?

again I am sorry if I could have phrased this better. I mean no offense.

respectfully
Jon

This is essential correct, except you will have proportionall risk vs reward. Cost are less for lights, but you make less money. Costs are high for assault, so you make more money. The net yield after repairs is going to be similar.

Non one class will make NET CB faster.

[Lomack]

They have to set up the game so that when you first start out, you can make money, even if you don't have a Founder mech or premium service. IF they fail to do this people will stop playing when they can't even repair.

Since there are a variety of mech classes (light, medium, etc.) available from the start, every type of mech has the ability to make money. I am sure PGI will keep them relatively balanced.

So assuming the above is a given (it would be pointless if it weren't). A PPC should cost the same to repair on day 1 as it does on day 501. It can't cost more just because your better at using it a year and a half later. So your starting mechs should have no problem generating cbills. If they do its a game design failure that I am sure PGI will fix.

Where there may be a challenge in costs, and we can't really know till we get better information is the repair costs of advanced technology. There may come a point that unless you play well the cost to repair any mech (of any size) that is armed with XL engines, FF armor, Tag, Ultra ACs etc become tough to manage without some kind of bonus.

[Torcip]

Bryan Ekman, on 21 June 2012 - 07:11 AM, said:

This is essential correct, except you will have proportionall risk vs reward. Cost are less for lights, but you make less money. Costs are high for assault, so you make more money. The net yield after repairs is going to be similar.

Non one class will make NET CB faster.

Really glad to hear this, the WoT model of having different classes come out with different amounts of money was always the dumbest thing I've ever heard, you shouldn't be forced to play a class you don't like just to make a respectable amount of cash.

However, if you were to come out of a match as an assault untouched by some miracle, would you be making a large amount of c-bills compared to doing the same as a light mech?

Edited by Torcip, 21 June 2012 - 07:50 AM.

[Loki Farseer]

It's going to depend on how they calculate things. Period.

Just grab the Mech that makes you happy/fits your playstyle and at least you can have fun even if you don't maximize your C-Bill making.

[Steven Dixon]

I imagine taking things like XL engines will make the mech much more expensive to repair, which helps balance out the advantage of having those upgrades.

Edited by Steven Dixon, 21 June 2012 - 08:01 AM.

[ScrapIron Prime]

And honestly, the smart money is on NOT taking an XL engine. Yes you benefit from it in the short term... until you have to pay to repair all those extra engine crits... or shut down from losing a side torso.

I'll be interested to see how they implement that. An assault mech with an XL engine traditionally sucks down damage like it was a heavy, a heavy with an XL absorbs damage like it's a medium, and a medium or light with an XL... is suicide.

[Lonenut]

XL Engines should just basically have less armor in torso areas before you go critical.

[Calem]

Bryan Ekman, on 21 June 2012 - 07:11 AM, said:

The net yield after repairs is going to be similar.

Non one class will make NET CB faster.

I can see this being the case balanced around regular mechs, however the founders mechs may play out differently.

a) Given that heavier mechs earn more, but have higher expenses (stated)
assuming that founder mechs won't be penalized with higher costs (people wouldn't understand)
c) assuming that the 25%-bonus is applied to gross cbill income and not net profit (reasonable assumption as you guys mentioned a guy entering another game without repairing, so it's not tallied up after a match and likely done in 2 interfaces, meaning cbill-bonus can't be applied to net bonus but indeed gross income)

I'd conclude that the higher the income, the higher the +25% bonus will be, and this would directly translate into a profit plus. Cbill-grinding would be most effective on a founder's atlas.


Granted, it's all assumptions on my side, they might be wrong and/or I may be missing something. The devs should know best and time will tell soon enough.

[1stStrike86]

Bryan Ekman, on 21 June 2012 - 07:11 AM, said:

This is essential correct, except you will have proportionall risk vs reward. Cost are less for lights, but you make less money. Costs are high for assault, so you make more money. The net yield after repairs is going to be similar.

Non one class will make NET CB faster.

But doesnt't that mean when i'm playing with an energy weapon based assault mech AND i'm verry good in avoiding dmg, I'll make more CB...compared to the same thing with a light mech

[XIRUSPHERE]

I would like to know if there is any intention on making high class mechs essentially C-bill drains without a premium boost and a really good match. It's one thing about WOT that's a massive pain in the ***, spend a month or more grinding and wind up with a high tier vehicle that with premium and a match where you get 2-4 kills and do lots of scouting you still wind up losing creds even on a win.

Having to grind just to play a credit draining class mech would just be blah.

[FrDrake]

1stStrike86, on 21 June 2012 - 09:04 AM, said:

But doesnt't that mean when i'm playing with an energy weapon based assault mech AND i'm verry good in avoiding dmg, I'll make more CB...compared to the same thing with a light mech

Min-maxing the system is still min-maxing the system. If you want to pigeonhole your playstyle into that one niche and you are as good at avoiding damage as you can be (which in a 12v12 deathmatch anyone who thinks they're going to be surviving most matches is dreaming) then yes given the information provided here I would say you could make more of a profit than someone else. But really where I think your savings is going to come in is in the taking no damage part, and I think that is going to be alot harder than people think it will be, to avoid all damage.

Based on how he's worded it above I am drawing these conclusions:

Scouting/supporting isn't worth as many cbills as straight up damage. He used the phrase risk versus reward several times which leads me to believe the guy getting the last hits is at a cbill advantage.

This also leads me to believe that if you can excel at doing things normally reserved for the big guns in a jenner, you may find a much easier profit flow. Of course being able to get kills in the Jenner will require pilot skill and luck.

And when it comes down to it I'm fine with a stronger pilot who takes a bold risk (Atlas hunting in the Jenner) come out ahead of the same guy doing it in an Atlas. I'm going to bet by the way it's worded that cbills for kills relates to the tonnage destroyed (killing a hunchback not worth as much as killing an atlas), to fit in with this risk vs. reward system.