229 replies to this topic

[Mystere]

Bilbo, on 17 September 2014 - 08:02 AM, said:

So the defending unit is going to pay for the solo players that came to defend their planet when they couldn't.

Well, they better do so ... especially if they want to keep that planet.

[MeiSooHaityu]

R&R in a F2P game is just too tricky to implement. PGI won't want to give out too much C-Bills as it is to promote premium time and Hero mechs, so R&R might result in negative C-Bill matches. That tied to a grind mechanic is a bit too burden-some.

R&R might be better for a standard game model, but F2P seems to not be quite right for something like R&R.

[Hardin4188]

Lupin, on 17 September 2014 - 08:04 AM, said:

Was there not talk in open beta days of hard core mode? R&R be added to CW or an opt-in hard core mode. Adding risk and reward to the game.

I think hard core mode went out the door when third person was forced upon us against our wishes.

[waterfowl]

Oh god no.

R&R is completely pointless.

Unless it's significant, there's no point. And if it's significant, we won't be making Cbills anymore.

It was absolutely terrible in beta, and there's absolutely no reason to bring it back right now. All it did was punish you for losing, which is not fun.

Edited by waterfowl, 17 September 2014 - 08:17 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

waterfowl, on 17 September 2014 - 08:17 AM, said:

Oh god no.

R&R is completely pointless.

Unless it's significant, there's no point. And if it's significant, we won't be making Cbills anymore.

It was absolutely terrible in beta, and there's absolutely no reason to bring it back right now. All it did was punish you for losing, which is not fun.

i guess you mileage varied GREATLY from mine, cause I had a great time in CB.

[waterfowl]

Hardin4188, on 17 September 2014 - 08:14 AM, said:

I think hard core mode went out the door when third person was forced upon us against our wishes.

Yes, the implementation of an optionable and toggleable feature is akin to ****

hyperbole much?

[Mothykins]

PewPew2, on 17 September 2014 - 08:07 AM, said:

I'm glad to see my question cause this kind of discussion. Something that I think PGI should really look into is giving extra rewards for people who use standard engines, internal structure etc. That seems to be the easiest thing to implement that makes the most sense.

They need to give better rewards, fullstop.

Conquest, for example. I drive Locusts 70% of the time, so I cap like a mad man, yeah? Don't deal much damage, but it's stopped us from losing many, many times.

I get nothing for this. We even win with resources? Nothing.

I run 20 tons. I dish out around 250 damage, spot like a mad man, draw the entire opposing team around, generally play the damn hero as I ping idiots so they chase me back to the Stalker sitting around the corner and I get nothing.

I usually end a match dead, or critical.

R&R would ruin me. Bonuses for running well under ton, for capping, for denying enemys resources, etc. would be amazing and make it maaaybe workable; high risk, high reward. As opposed to high risk, no reward.

I Don't Dislike R&R as a concept. Just, with how things are currently it doesn't work. I seem to be getting up in peoples grill, but they seem to want to stifle the game economy even further. Give me an actual working system instead of trying to balance the game this way.

[Dolph Hoskins]

I think R&R would be a neat feature in CW on a unit level. Like some sort of logistics and upkeep based off of how many planets, battles, and losses the unit has had to deal with.

This sounds good as long as there are not ways to scam cbill generation into the system.

[waterfowl]

Joseph Mallan, on 17 September 2014 - 08:18 AM, said:

i guess you mileage varied GREATLY from mine, cause I had a great time in CB.

I find it hard to believe that pressing the "repair" button after 50% of matches made beta fun for you.

[CDLord HHGD]

I miss the concept of RnR and I do feel it needs to be back in.... HOWEVER, I'd like to see the following changes:

RnR negated for Cadet eligible players (meaning, no costs for those learning the game).
Certain aspects of RnR affected by faction, for instance, AC rounds cost less for Davions, Armor is less for Steiners, etc... And to have this fluctuate depending on the state of CW (like they have envisioned faction mech prices and discounts).

[Almond Brown]

Joseph Mallan, on 17 September 2014 - 03:41 AM, said:

Cause players don't want a challenge, they want pokemon games. I personally liked R&R, it made it feel like I was maintaining a war machine in the game. We are Playing as Mercs. Mercs don't get free rides. They have to buy their equipment. Standing armies have all the gear provided free. once all requisition forms are filled out and submitted in triplicate, and still can get lost in transit. Which BattleTech had tables to simulate.

WAR is not cheap. R&R was a good way to bring it home. I love stomping the yard as much as the next player, but without a price to be paid it is much less immersive.

R&R added the thinking to this shooting game.

So then the only fair way to bring it to CW is to strip all Accounts of C-Bills and off we go. Mechs Bays are all reset to Stock and off we go. Otherwise there will be those who are thinking about spending their 250 million C-Bill Stock pile while others, new incoming players to CW, that will be cursing the fact their Cadet Bonus bought them 1 Mech, perhaps 1 system upgrade (after weapons) and now fighting makes further gain nearly pointless.

If not reset, then you gimp what might have been a thinking man with a burden that keeps him a Cro-Magnum.

[Joseph Mallan]

waterfowl, on 17 September 2014 - 08:21 AM, said:

I find it hard to believe that pressing the "repair" button after 50% of matches made beta fun for you.

paying the price of waging war did not affect my fun in the least. Then again I got to laugh about it on Comms with the Law. Maybe that helped. I was almost never without money in my pocket after a match, so paying for repairs didn't seem a problem. Like I said YMMV.

[Bilbo]

waterfowl, on 17 September 2014 - 08:21 AM, said:

I find it hard to believe that pressing the "repair" button after 50% of matches made beta fun for you.

I can't speak for Joseph, but shooting big stompy robots made CB fun for me. I also didn't have any trouble making money in the original iteration so there is that.

[MoonfireSpam]

Cavale, on 17 September 2014 - 07:52 AM, said:

See, that? That's Pay to Win. PGI Already said no, never to that.

Ok some dictionary stuff.

Pay to win - Stuff people can only access by paying (e.g. Gold ammo in WoT)
Pay for convenience - All content available, grinding required for free, or pay to unlock it (e.g. Hearthstone card packs, MWO).

Hell could even implement something like stock parts immune to R&R as costs covered by Planetary Governor / Merc unit / Major Houses (pick a fluff version you like) so even if you have a bad run, can still make C-bills back. Custom work is covered by individuals.

And if you're good you keep bringing in money and get to run "infinite" since you always cover your costs.

Oh for even more immersion, R&R can be influenced by outside factors.
Cap a planet with PPC manufacturing capability - cheap PPC refits
Fight in own territory defending - less R&R costs (maybe offset by reduced salvage or something)
Fight way away from your home territory/broken supply lines - huge R&R costs / limited resupply due to supply lines. Salvage kept almost all your own.
Capping merchant planets - sell salvage for increased C-bills

Now players incentivised to fight for galaxy. Shifting loadouts due to circumstance. Maybe more interesting.
etc. etc.

Edited by MoonfireSpam, 17 September 2014 - 08:31 AM.

[Hardin4188]

MeiSooHaityu, on 17 September 2014 - 08:11 AM, said:

R&R in a F2P game is just too tricky to implement. PGI won't want to give out too much C-Bills as it is to promote premium time and Hero mechs, so R&R might result in negative C-Bill matches. That tied to a grind mechanic is a bit too burden-some.

R&R might be better for a standard game model, but F2P seems to not be quite right for something like R&R.

Well that's the point of it though. Like I said in world of tanks they have a system where the more expensive tanks and more expensive ammo costs more to repair and rearm. This design is to encourage more people playing the lower tiers. Now mwo obviously doesn't have tiers and tech trees so the balance is different, but there is still a way to implement it.

Don't get me wrong I'm just playing devil's advocate here and am glad that this game doesn't have repair and rearm, but getting rid of it because the player's developed bad tactics is a bad excuse. That's a problem with a toxic player base.

[CDLord HHGD]

That's a good point. I wonder if we can get so granular in our contracts that our employer covers the costs?

[Joseph Mallan]

Almond Brown, on 17 September 2014 - 08:23 AM, said:

So then the only fair way to bring it to CW is to strip all Accounts of C-Bills and off we go. Mechs Bays are all reset to Stock and off we go. Otherwise there will be those who are thinking about spending their 250 million C-Bill Stock pile while others, new incoming players to CW, that will be cursing the fact their Cadet Bonus bought them 1 Mech, perhaps 1 system upgrade (after weapons) and now fighting makes further gain nearly pointless.

If not reset, then you gimp what might have been a thinking man with a burden that keeps him a Cro-Magnum.

I could go for this. It isn't like I didn't do it several times during CB. One addendum, MC Mech Purchases are not erased. That would be quite cruel.

[Mystere]

Cavale, on 17 September 2014 - 07:52 AM, said:

Wow, neuter me more. No one will ever run a Locust. Or most lights and mediums. Survivability is too low. Thank you for making 1/2 of my 'mechs even less viable. Great.

During the days of R&R, I actually ran my cheap but still nasty-if-ignored Mechs to accumulate enough c-bills to bring out my tricked out but extremely expensive ones. Heck, it was so fun and so rewarding doing so I started taking out the latter less often.

YMMV of course.

Cavale, on 17 September 2014 - 07:52 AM, said:

As for making it so you can't go bankrupt losing constantly, why even have R&R then? Wowo, no consequence for losing constantly. It's like R&R doesn't need to be a thing.

The keys words were "not go entirely bankrupt".

How can you do this? Well, since you're such a ****** so-called "Mechwarrior", you will only be given easy but low paying contracts ... like patrol a dark and icy planet for 10 days using mechs supplied by the paying entity.

[Zyllos]

R&R should only exist at the CW level for Units and Factions, not at the player level.

An individual player should never feel the cost of R&R but Units should be exposed to R&R by way of the Unit Coffer.

As Units perform actions, the cost comes out of the Unit Coffer. So, if you field a mech and get damaged/die in combat, the R&R comes out of the Unit Coffer. This exposes the Unit to the economics of the state of the Inner Sphere.

But no individual player loses money from a fight due to R&R. Their own individual C-Bill account works just like now. But, for a Unit to continue fighting in CW, the Unit has to make money in some fashion (by contracts, taxes, and donations) to allow for ample supplies for R&R.

[Mystere]

Hardin4188, on 17 September 2014 - 08:14 AM, said:

I think hard core mode went out the door when third person was forced upon us against our wishes.

It's still entirely possible:

Mystere, on 16 September 2014 - 10:06 PM, said:

So how about a radical idea. Bring the Clan vs. IS balance close (perfect balance is impossible) and then still implement 10 Clan vs. 12 IS?

The Clans were supposed to be better skilled. So let those skills show and have success playing as the Clans highly dependent on skill. Call it "hard mode". (and yes, I am serious)