481 replies to this topic

[Sandpit]

MAX909, on 29 July 2014 - 05:17 PM, said:

so we earn extra money that then gets taken off us seems so pointless,

and i like stock mechs i try to complete basic skills before changing a mech apart from the armor it builds a nice cash pile to customize with and thats half the fun

i'd be pretty annoyed if i took an expensive mech out and lost because what your suggesting is that of the loss money (25,000-100,000) c-bills i'd have to pay some/all/all+some banked c-bills

although if it was capped at 25,000 i could live with no win no spoils although i think i'd be leagaly entitled to my 50% bonus for prem time so if i died with out doing anything all i'd receive is 25000 for the loss +12500 prem time bonus repair bill maximum of 25000= something i don't really like but think would be the only to fairly balance it without screwing people to hard for using their hard earned custom chassis

the point is you don't ALWAYS, meaning EVERY single time, take that kind of mech. As harsh as it may sound that's a good way to get some more diversity on the field. You have to use something OTHER than that other mech once in a while. Doesn't mean you can't play it, a lot, tons even, just means that if you have a string of REALLY bad matches (i'm talking like 8+ here) then you MIGHT, at some point, have to switch out to a different mech for a few matches to offset any losses incurred. I'm sorry but there's no "punishment", it's a fact of life, if you squander limited resources, there are less resources to go around, this leads to higher expenses. That's got to be represented in an economy.

Do you see the difference in "Why should I be punished for taking this specific build every single time I play"
and
"You can take whatever you want, whenever you want, you jsut might have to realize that there's more than one mech and build to play in the game." and no, the whole "that's too restrictive and unfriendly" negates the difference. This is a CW thing we're talking about. Consider it like this, CW would be the "league" for PGI. That means there's got to be some different rules to play in the "league". Don't want to participate in the league or want other options to play outside of the league sometimes? Go for it, solaris deathmatch all you want, but don't expect CW to cater to that playstyle. Don't expect "stompy stompy 100 ton death machine dakka dakka dakka all the time"

MAX909, on 29 July 2014 - 05:17 PM, said:

so we earn extra money that then gets taken off us seems so pointless,

and i like stock mechs i try to complete basic skills before changing a mech apart from the armor it builds a nice cash pile to customize with and thats half the fun

i'd be pretty annoyed if i took an expensive mech out and lost because what your suggesting is that of the loss money (25,000-100,000) c-bills i'd have to pay some/all/all+some banked c-bills

although if it was capped at 25,000 i could live with no win no spoils although i think i'd be leagaly entitled to my 50% bonus for prem time so if i died with out doing anything all i'd receive is 25000 for the loss +12500 prem time bonus repair bill maximum of 25000= something i don't really like but think would be the only to fairly balance it without screwing people to hard for using their hard earned custom chassis

I also wouldn't expect premium time NOT to help offset those costs. It gives more incentive to buy it in the first place

[Davers]

Sandpit, on 29 July 2014 - 06:04 PM, said:

the point is you don't ALWAYS, meaning EVERY single time, take that kind of mech. As harsh as it may sound that's a good way to get some more diversity on the field. You have to use something OTHER than that other mech once in a while. Doesn't mean you can't play it, a lot, tons even, just means that if you have a string of REALLY bad matches (i'm talking like 8+ here) then you MIGHT, at some point, have to switch out to a different mech for a few matches to offset any losses incurred.

LOL If that's the case, why even have R&R? You know I am not a fan, but if I was, I would want it to be much harsher than that!

[Joseph Mallan]

Davers, on 29 July 2014 - 06:25 PM, said:

LOL If that's the case, why even have R&R? You know I am not a fan, but if I was, I would want it to be much harsher than that!

You mean like having to use a Trial Mech until you can fix your regular ride if you don't have a back up?

[Davers]

Joseph Mallan, on 29 July 2014 - 06:28 PM, said:

You mean like having to use a Trial Mech until you can fix your regular ride if you don't have a back up?

I dunno. But "losing 8+ really bad matches might make you want to switch mechs" doesn't seem like it would actually do ANYTHING.

I guess my position is "I don't think R&R will do what people want and thus it should not be implemented. But if it has to be implemented, it should be totally brutal."

I am still waiting on what R&R is supposed to be targeting. No one has given any specifics yet.

[Joseph Mallan]

Davers, on 29 July 2014 - 06:36 PM, said:

I dunno. But "losing 8+ really bad matches might make you want to switch mechs" doesn't seem like it would actually do ANYTHING.

I guess my position is "I don't think R&R will do what people want and thus it should not be implemented. But if it has to be implemented, it should be totally brutal."

I am still waiting on what R&R is supposed to be targeting. No one has given any specifics yet.

Not having R&R has me running an XL in an Atlas without CASE! When we had R&R I ran a standard and had CASE. We would be running more sensible Builds if there was a price to pay for having all the Bells and Whistles!

As for the switching Mechs... I am not playing Poke'mon, I have 2 Atlas and a Jenner with no engine... and 2mil in the bank. I AM a Merc!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 29 July 2014 - 06:42 PM.

[Cimarb]

Davers, on 29 July 2014 - 06:36 PM, said:

I dunno. But "losing 8+ really bad matches might make you want to switch mechs" doesn't seem like it would actually do ANYTHING.

I guess my position is "I don't think R&R will do what people want and thus it should not be implemented. But if it has to be implemented, it should be totally brutal."

I am still waiting on what R&R is supposed to be targeting. No one has given any specifics yet.

I am not speaking for anyone else, but for ME, Repair and Rearm is what allows us to start having an actual economy.

With R&R, it will actually matter what mech you use, because your R&R costs will be dependent on the supply of parts. If you are a Kuritan that pilots a Dire Wolf, you will be paying out the Yin AND Yang to repair and rearm it. Running low on money? Better pull out that Dragon for a bit!

With supply of parts important, it gives you a reason to fight for "that one planet over there" that has a Victor manufacturing plant.

With planets that matter, you have a reason to defend planets, fight for planets, and care about what is actually going on.

If none of that matters, why both even having CW?...

[Sandpit]

Davers, on 29 July 2014 - 06:36 PM, said:

I dunno. But "losing 8+ really bad matches might make you want to switch mechs" doesn't seem like it would actually do ANYTHING.

I guess my position is "I don't think R&R will do what people want and thus it should not be implemented. But if it has to be implemented, it should be totally brutal."

I am still waiting on what R&R is supposed to be targeting. No one has given any specifics yet.

I was using that as an extreme example because there's always someone who says "I'm being punished by running this particular mech and build" which is always just a ridiculous argument. It sets up a system where yes, expensive gear is expensive to keep up with. Cheap gear is cheap to keep up with. Just like every other economy, real or fake, that's ever existed.

Cimarb, on 29 July 2014 - 06:47 PM, said:

I am not speaking for anyone else, but for ME, Repair and Rearm is what allows us to start having an actual economy.

With R&R, it will actually matter what mech you use, because your R&R costs will be dependent on the supply of parts. If you are a Kuritan that pilots a Dire Wolf, you will be paying out the Yin AND Yang to repair and rearm it. Running low on money? Better pull out that Dragon for a bit!

With supply of parts important, it gives you a reason to fight for "that one planet over there" that has a Victor manufacturing plant.

With planets that matter, you have a reason to defend planets, fight for planets, and care about what is actually going on.

If none of that matters, why both even having CW?...

exactly

[Davers]

Joseph Mallan, on 29 July 2014 - 06:40 PM, said:

Not having R&R has me running an XL in an Atlas without CASE! When we had R&R I ran a standard and had CASE. We would be running more sensible Builds if there was a price to pay for having all the Bells and Whistles!

As for the switching Mechs... I am not playing Poke'mon, I have 2 Atlas and a Jenner with no engine... and 2mil in the bank. I AM a Merc!

I have no idea what you do with your Cbills. Honestly I can't fathom how little you have. You must have found a way to electronically burn them.

[Noesis]

Choice, consquences, purpose, objectives, challenges ..... I see useful potential to embelish CW with this suggestion.

[Davers]

Sandpit, on 29 July 2014 - 06:56 PM, said:

I was using that as an extreme example because there's always someone who says "I'm being punished by running this particular mech and build" which is always just a ridiculous argument. It sets up a system where yes, expensive gear is expensive to keep up with. Cheap gear is cheap to keep up with. Just like every other economy, real or fake, that's ever existed.

But lighter mechs need that expensive equipment to be viable more than heavy or assault mechs. So they will either be slower or have less firepower than they do now.

PPCs, Gauss, and regular ACs are cheap to run. Much cheaper than LRMs! Much cheaper than LB-10X! So R&R is totally meta compliant.

These are the weapons and mechs that will be punished by R&R.

Here is a meta Dragon Slayer's cost in Cbills: $13,654,5000
meta Cataphract: $13,420,953
meta Shadowhawk: $12,122,635

They all cost about the same. So R&R in no way limits the choice of any of these builds. Running an assault is almost no different than running a medium. But most people would agree that an assault has more damage (and thus Cbill) potential, so R&R will actually be easier on the assault mech. This is MW:O economics- it doesn't make sense.

[Noesis]

Just make repair costs for XL engines more similar to STD engines.

It would still retain the larger initial investment costs and fragility, but you don't have to have similar ratios with repair cost options for this specific tech to help make R&R workable. This then might help to bring the overheads more linearly significant with mech class sizes to make the economic factors more correlated with damage potential. (At least as per the current game orientation).

Edited by Noesis, 29 July 2014 - 07:40 PM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Davers, on 29 July 2014 - 06:56 PM, said:

I have no idea what you do with your Cbills. Honestly I can't fathom how little you have. You must have found a way to electronically burn them.

Buy a Mech, Mod it, grind it, sell it get next wash repeat. I'm a Merc, not a corporate mogul!

[Sandpit]

Davers, on 29 July 2014 - 07:23 PM, said:

But lighter mechs need that expensive equipment to be viable more than heavy or assault mechs. So they will either be slower or have less firepower than they do now.

PPCs, Gauss, and regular ACs are cheap to run. Much cheaper than LRMs! Much cheaper than LB-10X! So R&R is totally meta compliant.

These are the weapons and mechs that will be punished by R&R.

Here is a meta Dragon Slayer's cost in Cbills: $13,654,5000
meta Cataphract: $13,420,953
meta Shadowhawk: $12,122,635

They all cost about the same. So R&R in no way limits the choice of any of these builds. Running an assault is almost no different than running a medium. But most people would agree that an assault has more damage (and thus Cbill) potential, so R&R will actually be easier on the assault mech. This is MW:O economics- it doesn't make sense.

you can use it to do that if you want though. You're still working off of the premise of what R&R used to be, outside of context within a CW campaign with a dynamic economy representing win.losses supplies, supply lines, strategic planets, etc.

[Joseph Mallan]

Sandpit, on 29 July 2014 - 08:02 PM, said:

you can use it to do that if you want though. You're still working off of the premise of what R&R used to be, outside of context within a CW campaign with a dynamic economy representing win.losses supplies, supply lines, strategic planets, etc.

Did you know a Green Mercenary Mechwarrior made a BASE 720 C-bills a month(give or take). You were not paid by Kill, or damage done, If you killed a enemy Mech Your COMMAND got the carcass not you necessarily. Players here are spoiled rotten.

[Vassago Rain]

Joseph Mallan, on 29 July 2014 - 08:07 PM, said:

Did you know a Green Mercenary Mechwarrior made a BASE 720 C-bills a month(give or take). You were not paid by Kill, or damage done, If you killed a enemy Mech Your COMMAND got the carcass not you necessarily. Players here are spoiled rotten.

Did you know that an eve ISK is so valuable, ordinary people will never amount to even 100?

Did you know that this piece of fluff has no bearing on eve's gameplay, because everybody is a special snowflake uber cloned mercenary with black shades, silver hair, and cyborg components?

[Joseph Mallan]

Vassago Rain, on 29 July 2014 - 08:12 PM, said:

Did you know that an eve ISK is so valuable, ordinary people will never amount to even 100?

Did you know that this piece of fluff has no bearing on eve's gameplay, because everybody is a special snowflake uber cloned mercenary with black shades, silver hair, and cyborg components?

Ah but the pay scale is not fluff. It is a rule in the Mercs Handbook for unit Expenses. There is even a whole equation for determining how much each Warrior makes based on Rank. So the Fluff you compared my post to was... quaint.

[Wintersdark]

Joseph Mallan, on 29 July 2014 - 06:40 PM, said:

Not having R&R has me running an XL in an Atlas without CASE! When we had R&R I ran a standard and had CASE. We would be running more sensible Builds if there was a price to pay for having all the Bells and Whistles!

As for the switching Mechs... I am not playing Poke'mon, I have 2 Atlas and a Jenner with no engine... and 2mil in the bank. I AM a Merc!

Not "we", you.

Well, I'd run quasi sensible builds, too, but I'm pretty much a BT/MW fan first and foremost.

However, the vast majority of players will simply exploit it as much as possible, and do things just like they did before (unrepaired, minimally armed mechs, etc) just resulting in even more random matches than we have already.

A major concern of mine - and one I'm not looking for an answer to, as it's mostly a balancing issue (and no, that doesn't mean it will just magically be balanced away) - is how Elo becomes exploitable with R&R.

That is, you run low-cost crappy mechs (busted up, unrepaired zombie cents was the old thing, what gets used now depends on how R&R was balanced) and drift lower in the Elo scale as a result without deliberately losing. It's a slow drift as a result, due to the increased randomness in matches, but you get there. Then, out comes the tuned mechs for a nice, long, profitable killing streak where you have little chance to lose much of anything.

You can take bad builds and lose now, then get easy wins, but there's no real reason to do that. With R&R in play, though, there is.

[Joseph Mallan]

Wintersdark, on 29 July 2014 - 08:24 PM, said:

Not "we", you.

Well, I'd run quasi sensible builds, too, but I'm pretty much a BT/MW fan first and foremost.

However, the vast majority of players will simply exploit it as much as possible, and do things just like they did before (unrepaired, minimally armed mechs, etc) just resulting in even more random matches than we have already.

A major concern of mine - and one I'm not looking for an answer to, as it's mostly a balancing issue (and no, that doesn't mean it will just magically be balanced away) - is how Elo becomes exploitable with R&R.

That is, you run low-cost crappy mechs (busted up, unrepaired zombie cents was the old thing, what gets used now depends on how R&R was balanced) and drift lower in the Elo scale as a result without deliberately losing. It's a slow drift as a result, due to the increased randomness in matches, but you get there. Then, out comes the tuned mechs for a nice, long, profitable killing streak where you have little chance to lose much of anything.

You can take bad builds and lose now, then get easy wins, but there's no real reason to do that. With R&R in play, though, there is.

Please let them exploit not being repaired. That would add flavor to the matches as well. Have you heard of the Wilson's Hussars? Not all Merc Companies went into combat with pristine Rides and full ammo bins.

[Gryphorim]

Seeing as it is a related topic, here is a link to some C-Bill earnings tabulation I put together.

http://mwomercs.com/...-earning-table/

The concept I want to convey the most out of this, is a sort of "soft R&R"
Multipliers for running cheap.
Representative of savings in repairs/upkeep.
Running Std Engine? 1.2 times multiplier on end of match earnings.
Running a stock build? Cumulative 1.75 multiplier!

Make stock mech the mech to drive if after big match winnings.

[Wintersdark]

Joseph Mallan, on 29 July 2014 - 08:27 PM, said:

Please let them exploit not being repaired. That would add flavor to the matches as well. Have you heard of the Wilson's Hussars? Not all Merc Companies went into combat with pristine Rides and full ammo bins.

Flavour, yes. But you'll find a huge majority of players would rather their teammates be fully repaired than be useless zombie cents facing tuned Stormcrows.

I get where you're coming from, but PGI has to cater to that huge, obnoxious majority.