724 replies to this topic

[SpeedingBus]

Mr Beefy, on 26 October 2014 - 04:17 PM, said:

So you are really gonna try to say the MM change/role back did not revolve around players behavior???? What was up with the huge up roar and all the rage droppers, sometime up to 4 players leaving a match if it wasn't the game mode they wanted???

Haha I actually didn't know people were doing that never got to play till they reverted the MM. I can't believe people rage against MM that much but when they lower cbill earning for some people its "fine".

[Livewyr]

SpeedingBus, on 26 October 2014 - 04:19 PM, said:

But your not in that thread that appeared Tuesday? I have actually stopped playing because of terrible reward system they have added of bunch of rewards that you may never get or it happens one time in the entire game while taking away cbills from damage/assists/kills. How did they think this wasn't going to happen? assuming people are getting all these new rewards 3-4 times in pugs is a terrible assumption.

I was in some of those threads, countering the "omg rewards suck!" with "not for me" which pointed it at player behavior.

[SpeedingBus]

Livewyr, on 26 October 2014 - 04:21 PM, said:

Umm, here is a hint:

Removing the hardlocked game mode selection literally took away any player behavior in the game. Everything that happened was random, mechanical, and almost entirely independent of player behavior. (Since they could not ensure their game mode.)

But it's cool. You guys keep liking each others' posts regardless of content. I think it's adorable.

Apparently you don't know how the new MM actually worked because it wasn't random what so ever. The new system tallied the votes for people in the right elo range and whatever mode had the most votes won.... dear god that's so random and intolerable. Also I would love PGI to throw out numbers for assault and conquest because they all end up with 1 side being killed and objective being ignored.

[Torgun]

KraftySOT, on 26 October 2014 - 10:50 AM, said:

Low is subjective.

Its relevant in that people are saying a grind, in a video game, is too hard. Thats kind of ... first world problems.

Theres plenty of people making bank right now, taking advantage of the system as its intended to be taken advantage of. If youre not making bank, there are legitimate, illegitimate reasons for that. Legitimate reasons are, I dont have time, im not very good, etc...but you cant say a system is broken, or needs to be altered in a way that suits you, based simply on your esoteric level of enjoyment.

Which is all it comes down to.

You dont LIKE the grind...so the grind must be bad.

Thats fine, im not harping on anyone for that. What im harping on is when you say the cbill payout is low, when you do nothing but complain, instead of doing what they people are doing who arent getting low payouts. On top of that...no one but you is choosing to spend money. I dont. Game works just fine. The problem is between your perspective and your expectations, not the pay system or the cbill return.

Real life troubles are irrelevant when talking about how things feel too tough in a game, you know because it's a game. And since it's a game, my personal enjoyment of it is exactly the only thing I need to refer to when I judge whether something about it is good or bad. Why else would anyone play a game if not for having fun and enjoy it.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Livewyr, on 26 October 2014 - 04:22 PM, said:

I was in some of those threads, countering the "omg rewards suck!" with "not for me" which pointed it at player behavior.

The amount of rewards you can get in a match is sometimes beyond nice. If you play well enough there is plenty reward.

[SpeedingBus]

Livewyr, on 26 October 2014 - 04:22 PM, said:

I was in some of those threads, countering the "omg rewards suck!" with "not for me" which pointed it at player behavior.

So let me get this straight you only earn these rewards if you play PGI way regardless of how hard you carried your team makes sense? Nope

I also love how we show you people screenshots of carrying there team but get sub par rewards because they didn't play PGI new way and you still act like it was bad player behavior.

Edited by SpeedingBus, 26 October 2014 - 04:42 PM.

[Livewyr]

SpeedingBus, on 26 October 2014 - 04:27 PM, said:

Apparently you don't know how the new MM actually worked because it wasn't random what so ever. The new system tallied the votes for people in the right elo range and whatever mode had the most votes won.... dear god that's so random and intolerable. Also I would love PGI to throw out numbers for assault and conquest because they all end up with 1 side being killed and objective being ignored.

Oh it was still random: people generally maintained their exclusions, changing nothing, which was the birth of the rage threads. Player behavior did *not* change. The consequences of their behavior was changed.

And it was still random... it was not direct "voting." If you read the CC post... it was voting to increase the odds.

SpeedingBus, on 26 October 2014 - 04:39 PM, said:

So let me get this straight you only earn these rewards if you play PGI way regardless of how hard you carried your makes sense? Nope

Playing according to the role warfare pillar in a team game? Are you shocked that Rambo is not highly rewarded?

[Mr Beefy]

Livewyr, on 26 October 2014 - 04:21 PM, said:

Umm, here is a hint:

Removing the hardlocked game mode selection literally took away any player behavior in the game. Everything that happened was random, mechanical, and almost entirely independent of player behavior. (Since they could not ensure their game mode.)

Playing according to the role warfare pillar in a team game? Are you shocked that Rambo is not highly rewarded?

But it's cool. You guys keep liking each others' posts regardless of content. I think it's adorable.

Liking post randomly you say with out reading the entire content??? Not a chance, unless it is one of the three that just keep spamming the same old same with nothing to add to the real problem and the topic.

Funny I don't share you opinion on players not having a choice in there behavior....when you get dropped in a match you didn't like, or couldn't pick, I think a player is completely in control of their actions in that game, and if they drop out in rage because of it in protest.... they damn sure are not gonna help their team win the match based on game mode primary objectives for the given match.

Anyways back on topic...all these little side issues will tend to work them selves out and we can all get on to some really fun drops!

SpeedingBus, on 26 October 2014 - 04:27 PM, said:

Apparently you don't know how the new MM actually worked because it wasn't random what so ever. The new system tallied the votes for people in the right elo range and whatever mode had the most votes won.... dear god that's so random and intolerable. Also I would love PGI to throw out numbers for assault and conquest because they all end up with 1 side being killed and objective being ignored.

Thank you....good point, and back to the heart of the matter of why they got ignored in the first place! LOW C-BILL EARNINGS!

Back on page two, three, or so of this 16 page bomb, I posted a match that I had showing how a Good team played match did not reward worth a crap....very detailed. No response or answer to my question about it... Not that this is or should be the mindless argument and claims discussed when trying to find out why things are the way they are and how to really fix the problem.

Edited by Mr Beefy, 26 October 2014 - 05:26 PM.

[Assiah]

BLOOD WOLF, on 26 October 2014 - 04:37 PM, said:

The amount of rewards you can get in a match is sometimes beyond nice. If you play well enough there is plenty reward.

Define "plenty reward". Cause the most I've seen for a non premium and non hero mech payout is just at or over 250k, keep in mind this is the exception not the rule. Now while I will agree that that kind of pay out is serviceable, I would hardly call it an acceptable reward for fully carrying a team. Also you are claiming that because the top tier is doing fine (your opinion) that there should be no change for the bottom. I fail to see how you being able to carry a team and make a "good" payment helps your average player who is still looking at an 80 hour grind for his next chassis. Please enlighten me on how the top tier of players being able to make a just barely acceptable amount of cbills per match is going to help with player retention.

[Alexander MacTaggart]

I've fallen way behind on this topic (am currently on page 11) so apologies if someone else has brought this up recently, but I wanted to point this out:

I'm not going to name names, but the people posting in this thread against raising income (and typically using strawman arguments like claiming others are saying "ERMEHGERD I WANT MORE MONEY FOR FREE!" and variations thereof) are missing one thing:

Income (for everyone but pro top-tier players) has been reduced. It has been reduced before (when the match format went from 8v8 to 12v12, and before that when repair & rearm was removed). People (including those who are against any sort of income raise now) were actually making more money in the past than they are now.

Nobody is asking for free money. We are asking to not have our income lowered even more than it already has been.

[Mr Beefy]

Alexander MacTaggart, on 26 October 2014 - 04:52 PM, said:

I've fallen way behind on this topic (am currently on page 11) so apologies if someone else has brought this up recently, but I wanted to point this out:

I'm not going to name names, but the people posting in this thread against raising income (and typically using strawman arguments like claiming others are saying "ERMEHGERD I WANT MORE MONEY FOR FREE!" and variations thereof) are missing one thing:

Income (for everyone but pro top-tier players) has been reduced. It has been reduced before (when the match format went from 8v8 to 12v12, and before that when repair & rearm was removed). People (including those who are against any sort of income raise now) were actually making more money in the past than they are now.

Nobody is asking for free money. We are asking to not have our income lowered even more than it already has been.

And.... that if they boost it back up by 30-50% many problems that are in game right now with team play issues, will start to fix them selves within the month. Add the nice bonus for the cap rewards, base taken or defended... and the c-bill whoring and exploiting player that choose to play that way will stay and earn more, or they will take a break from the game if it freaks them out so badly.

[Mystere]

SpeedingBus, on 26 October 2014 - 12:38 PM, said:

Why? I am not buying a hero mech because they are extremely over priced and if you disagree money must mean nothing to you. Also with me making less with the new reward system it actually makes less sense buying premium right now.

Oversimplification doesn't really work on people who actually do time-motion-money analysis.

$30 is less than an hour's work and I value my free time a whole lot more than that. As such, buying a hero mech for several days or weeks of fun is a very easy decision. YMMV of course.

Now if someone wants to collect all hero mechs, that's their decision.

Also, here's some math:

Any Hero Mech:

Purchase Price = $30

Play Time = 30 Days (minimum)

That's $1 per day, less if played for more than 30 days.

Diablo 3:

Purchase Price = $60

Play Time = 7 days (actual time played)

That's $8.57 per day.

Note that this "calculation" does not reflect the fact that I found Diablo 3 "disappointing" (to put things ever so mildly ) and that playing it some more was just going to be a waste of my time.

[SpeedingBus]

Livewyr, on 26 October 2014 - 04:42 PM, said:

Oh it was still random: people generally maintained their exclusions, changing nothing, which was the birth of the rage threads. Player behavior did *not* change. The consequences of their behavior was changed.

And it was still random... it was not direct "voting." If you read the CC post... it was voting to increase the odds.



Playing according to the role warfare pillar in a team game? Are you shocked that Rambo is not highly rewarded?

Are you shocked I wasn't playing rambo and I stayed with assault lance but guess what I still got less cbills even doing a ton damage,assists and kills.

[Mr Beefy]

Mystere, on 26 October 2014 - 04:58 PM, said:

Oversimplification doesn't really work on people who actually do time-motion-money analysis.

$30 is less than an hour's work and I value my free time a whole lot more than that. As such, buying a hero mech for several days or weeks of fun is a very easy decision. YMMV of course.

Now if someone wants to collect all hero mechs, that's their decision.

Also, here's some math:

Any Hero Mech:

Purchase Price = $30

Play Time = 30 Days (minimum)

That's $1 per day, less if played for more than 30 days.

Diablo 3:

Purchase Price = $60

Play Time = 7 days (actual time played)

That's $8.57 per day.

Note that this "calculation" does not reflect the fact that I found Diablo 3 "disappointing" (to put things ever so mildly ) and that playing it some more was just going to be a waste of my time.

Are you pointing us to the new mastery packs??? Because if you are, these type of packs were not around until recently and well.... we have already been played out the painful grind, many of us have the Heros we want.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Assiah, on 26 October 2014 - 04:51 PM, said:

Define "plenty reward". Cause the most I've seen for a non premium and non hero mech payout is just at or over 250k, keep in mind this is the exception not the rule. Now while I will agree that that kind of pay out is serviceable, I would hardly call it an acceptable reward for fully carrying a team. Also you are claiming that because the top tier is doing fine (your opinion) that there should be no change for the bottom. I fail to see how you being able to carry a team and make a "good" payment helps your average player who is still looking at an 80 hour grind for his next chassis. Please enlighten me on how the top tier of players being able to make a just barely acceptable amount of cbills per match is going to help with player retention.

"a large or sufficient amount or quantity; more than enough".

If you play well, even without premium time

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 26 October 2014 - 05:05 PM.

[Assiah]

Mystere, on 26 October 2014 - 04:58 PM, said:

Oversimplification doesn't really work on people who actually do time-motion-money analysis.

$30 is less than an hour's work and I value my free time a whole lot more than that. As such, buying a hero mech for several days or weeks of fun is a very easy decision. YMMV of course.

Now if someone wants to collect all hero mechs, that's their decision.

Also, here's some math:

Any Hero Mech:

Purchase Price = $30

Play Time = 30 Days (minimum)

That's $1 per day, less if played for more than 30 days.

Diablo 3:

Purchase Price = $60

Play Time = 7 days (actual time played)

That's $8.57 per day.

Note that this "calculation" does not reflect the fact that I found Diablo 3 "disappointing" (to put things ever so mildly ) and that playing it some more was just going to be a waste of my time.

Thats some fine math there, shame it only proves you have a system to judge how much YOU wish to spend in a game. The problem with your argument that you are making is this. You are saying that in order to compete in this game you must spend money, otherwise you can suffer. Which is again, a call to punish a free player for not paying, rather than rewarding a paying player for paying. That is an argument that leads to a failed free to play game.

Also before you claim that free players somehow owe PGI for hosting the game, remember these players are still providing something to the game, population. Without your free players, its just the small number of players who are willing to spend money on the game, which at that point, why did you make a free to play game.

[SpeedingBus]

Mystere, on 26 October 2014 - 04:58 PM, said:

Oversimplification doesn't really work on people who actually do time-motion-money analysis.

$30 is less than an hour's work and I value my free time a whole lot more than that. As such, buying a hero mech for several days or weeks of fun is a very easy decision. YMMV of course.

Now if someone wants to collect all hero mechs, that's their decision.

Also, here's some math:

Any Hero Mech:

Purchase Price = $30

Play Time = 30 Days (minimum)

That's $1 per day, less if played for more than 30 days.

Diablo 3:

Purchase Price = $60

Play Time = 7 days (actual time played)

That's $8.57 per day.

Note that this "calculation" does not reflect the fact that I found Diablo 3 "disappointing" (to put things ever so mildly ) and that playing it some more was just going to be a waste of my time.

Comparing a full fledged game to a chassis in a game.... awful comparison.

[Assiah]

BLOOD WOLF, on 26 October 2014 - 05:05 PM, said:

"a large or sufficient amount or quantity; more than enough".

If you play well, even without premium time

good you read the first part, now read the rest.

[Telmasa]

I'm making 80,000-180,000 cbills a match without any premium just fine...I don't see what the problem is with how it is right now.


Granted, I rarely have games where I get less than 300 damage (like when getting hit by 5 arty strikes kinda makes it difficult), but still.

Edited by Telmasa, 26 October 2014 - 05:12 PM.

[Telmasa]

I should add though, I DO see a problem with the exorbitant prices for weapon modules.

Mech modules being expensive is fine, but forking up 3 million for every little upgrade for ML or streak SRM 2s is pretty...extravagant.

If weapon modules were, say, 1 million each, I bet folks wouldn't feel *quite* as much that there's not enough income.