724 replies to this topic

[Assiah]

hybrid black, on 27 October 2014 - 08:09 AM, said:

I did not say it was good but he said its putting players off and i simply referenced a game with a worse grind and a huge player base

and I think I fairly well refuted your claim by pointing out that WoT is not popular due to its mechanics but due to its accessibility, much like angry birds. An advantage MWO does not have. There is more factors to the success or failure of a games business model than just game play. So again, how is the fact that a game has an objectively worse grind make MWO's grind ok?

[KraftySOT]

Akulla1980, on 27 October 2014 - 07:06 AM, said:

Simple fact is life now moves at a faster pace. A lot of people dont have time that the used too. We are all getting older and our priorities change. Many of us cant invest the time that they want into the game anymore. So getting little progress from what effort we put in is turning some of us off the game. At the same time having to purchase the new packs to get new content so the oldies dont have to wait forever isnt helping either.

And thats the games fault how? If they increase cbills for casual players, hardcore players just make that much more, and those hardcore players are who spends cash. If they can get more for free...they pay less.

The fact remains that there is more "free money" in the pot, youre just not getting a slice of it because you dont want to change your playstyle.

And someone said this game isnt growing?

Then why did they hit the maximum players on their servers, without getting rid of servers, for the first time ever two weekends ago?

[Arkbird_]

Mystere, on 27 October 2014 - 08:08 AM, said:

The underlying idea is to reward what is considered "good" and discourage what is "bad".

As for John James Rambo specifically, if his wishes to continue his killing streaks (i.e. stat whoring) then he should be made aware that there is financial disincentive to his continued refusal to obey orders.

His orders? What is this boot camp? This is a GAME if he wants to go rambo in a way that hurts his team then he should be punished solely on the fact that he contributed to a loss. Much more should be weighed on win or loss as good playstyles that win will thrive while bad ones that lose will die out. It really is as simple as that when you are dealing with this much diversity.

There comes a point when you need to accept that punishing new players heavily for the sake of "playing the right playstyle" is never going to grow the game population. Lack of diversity stagnates games and this new rewards system has stagnated it considerably. Especially when this forced playstyle revolves around huddling close and behind teammates with tag and narc and stealing kills while shooting teammates in the back if they get between you and your kill. I do not see this as something that should be encouraged. Is it a legitimate playstyle? Yes. Should all other playstyles suffer to accommodate it? NO. New players (and many veterans) that do not like playing tagwarrior will leave as nobody wants to waste their time here earning nothing.

[hybrid black]

Assiah, on 27 October 2014 - 08:26 AM, said:

and I think I fairly well refuted your claim by pointing out that WoT is not popular due to its mechanics but due to its accessibility, much like angry birds. An advantage MWO does not have. There is more factors to the success or failure of a games business model than just game play. So again, how is the fact that a game has an objectively worse grind make MWO's grind ok?

I have no problem with the grind i push 2-3 mill an hour..
And if your mind wot is worse then mwo but its not i guess you can't think passed point and click and got ***** in it

[SpeedingBus]

hybrid black, on 27 October 2014 - 08:37 AM, said:

I have no problem with the grind i push 2-3 mill an hour..
And if your mind wot is worse then mwo but its not i guess you can't think passed point and click and got ***** in it

You do not push 2-3mil in a hour so why lie that's getting an income for 180k+ in 6 matches. Also even if the average player was making 2-3 mil a hour PGI would be nerfing rewards so fast it would make your mech spin so that's apparently not the case.

[Assiah]

hybrid black, on 27 October 2014 - 08:37 AM, said:

I have no problem with the grind i push 2-3 mill an hour..
And if your mind wot is worse then mwo but its not i guess you can't think passed point and click and got ***** in it

I would suggest you work on your reading comprehension. I said that the grind in WoT is objectively worse than what it is in MWO, a statement you yourself agree with, in fact the entire crux of your argument was "WoT has a worse grind, but its still popular".

As for me being good or bad in WoT, I don't play it, I tried it out long ago and found that it didn't interest me, I'd much rather play something like company of heroes for my WW2 tank fix, but that's because I prefer an RTS over point and click tank adventure games.

As for you earning 2-3 mil an hour, I'm real happy for you, you seem to be making triple what some of us are, and are either running premium time + hero or you have learned to game the system, or both. Your success is anecdotal, and your results are not typical.

[Screech]

They need to remove weapon specific bonuses from the game. It places an artificial ceiling on people not using these systems.

Remove these bonuses and then re-balance overall earnings.

I don't mind grinding for cash, I just don't want to be forced into play styles I do not like.

Teamwork is NOT determined by what you pick in the mech-bay.

If we need to increase ROLE rewards that is fine but do it after they remove weapon specific bonuses.

[Mystere]

Assiah, on 27 October 2014 - 08:07 AM, said:

Well if you are going to try to steer into that, you steer into the idea of punishing player behavior vs rewarding player behavior, which we talked about, at length, in this very thread. To reiterate a point, if you punish player behavior, especially if that behavior is not being great at the game, that player will consider if he should continue spending time with the game. If you want to make a better impact, you want to reward the good players for doing well while still letting the bad players make headway.

The major problem with punish based behavioral government systems is that they run on the idea of do this (or don't do this) or else, which works if the person who's behavior you want to modify has limited options, but when they have multiple options, including go elsewhere, they will likely choose the other option. Reward based behavioral government works much better for getting players in games to play a certain way, with punishment being held for the worse offenders (banning someone from the game). Now we can debate on if average and below average players are being punished with the current payouts if you want, but keep in mind you already hold the opinion that the system is built for that as is and its right in your own post.

There is a huge difference between discouraging something and outright punishment. And which is why I provided an "out":

Mystere, on 27 October 2014 - 07:51 AM, said:

I am also of the opinion ( ) that merely raising earning rates is not a good solution. I think the better solution is to increase the types of actions being rewarded to account for more legitimate play styles.

Some types of rewarded actions can be specifically tailored to apply only to new players, hopefully to steer them into doing what is considered by the game as "good" behavior.

And as I have also already hinted, John James Rambo will in all likelihood continue to do as he pleases anyway because he is more concerned with his stats (i.e. kills and wins).

As for the perpetually/hopelessly/intentionally bad players who continually serve as a detriment to any team they play with and any match they go into, let me ask you a question: How would you want to deal with them? In my view MWO just isn't the game for them.

[Joseph Mallan]

Alexander MacTaggart, on 27 October 2014 - 07:58 AM, said:

If by 'financially discourage his behavior' you mean have him go play a different game, sure.

But do you really want to drive players away like that?

If all they are here for is the payday... Yes. Thinking. Mans. Game.

[hybrid black]

SpeedingBus, on 27 October 2014 - 08:43 AM, said:

You do not push 2-3mil in a hour so why lie that's getting an income for 180k+ in 6 matches. Also even if the average player was making 2-3 mil a hour PGI would be nerfing rewards so fast i would make your mech spin so that's apparently not the case.

300k a game is easy to get and with a group 400k is easy( i should correct this its easy for a good player)

[Assiah]

Mystere, on 27 October 2014 - 08:46 AM, said:

There is a huge difference between discouraging something and outright punishment. And which is why I provided an "out":

No there isn't, discouragement is a punishment based behavioral control tactic. The only difference in your mind is the severity of that punishment, it is still telling someone that what they are doing is not right and you will penalize them for it.

[Joseph Mallan]

The Boz, on 27 October 2014 - 06:19 AM, said:

Wow has never surpassed 13m IN THE WORLD, let alone in the US.
Also, your grasp of perspective and orders of magnitude is lacking.

Oh I wish I hadn't deleted the link I got that figure from. It was a breakdown of the total population of WoW, including by class and gender. Gimme a minute I'll find it again.

EU realms had 13.4 Million

27 Million players?

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 27 October 2014 - 08:56 AM.

[KraftySOT]

PV Phoenix, on 27 October 2014 - 08:36 AM, said:

His orders? What is this boot camp? This is a GAME if he wants to go rambo in a way that hurts his team then he should be punished solely on the fact that he contributed to a loss. Much more should be weighed on win or loss as good playstyles that win will thrive while bad ones that lose will die out. It really is as simple as that when you are dealing with this much diversity.

There comes a point when you need to accept that punishing new players heavily for the sake of "playing the right playstyle" is never going to grow the game population. Lack of diversity stagnates games and this new rewards system has stagnated it considerably. Especially when this forced playstyle revolves around huddling close and behind teammates with tag and narc and stealing kills while shooting teammates in the back if they get between you and your kill. I do not see this as something that should be encouraged. Is it a legitimate playstyle? Yes. Should all other playstyles suffer to accommodate it? NO. New players (and many veterans) that do not like playing tagwarrior will leave as nobody wants to waste their time here earning nothing.

Yes it will. Because theres ten thousand battletech players who are waiting for this game to not suck, so they can either come aboard, or come back.

No one cares about the CoD MOAR CBILLS!!!! crowd or what they think honestly. This is why this thread s 24 pages long with only 3 people whining consistently about the payouts, and NO dev will touch this with a 10 foot poll.

If you dont like it. Theres the door.

Weve got plenty of people waiting to take your spot.

Edited by KraftySOT, 27 October 2014 - 08:57 AM.

[hybrid black]

Assiah, on 27 October 2014 - 08:46 AM, said:

I would suggest you work on your reading comprehension. I said that the grind in WoT is objectively worse than what it is in MWO, a statement you yourself agree with, in fact the entire crux of your argument was "WoT has a worse grind, but its still popular".

As for me being good or bad in WoT, I don't play it, I tried it out long ago and found that it didn't interest me, I'd much rather play something like company of heroes for my WW2 tank fix, but that's because I prefer an RTS over point and click tank adventure games.

As for you earning 2-3 mil an hour, I'm real happy for you, you seem to be making triple what some of us are, and are either running premium time + hero or you have learned to game the system, or both. Your success is anecdotal, and your results are not typical.

Ok so your did not really play wot so stop chirping little bird and fly away

[Mystere]

PV Phoenix, on 27 October 2014 - 08:36 AM, said:

His orders? What is this boot camp? This is a GAME if he wants to go rambo in a way that hurts his team then he should be punished solely on the fact that he contributed to a loss. Much more should be weighed on win or loss as good playstyles that win will thrive while bad ones that lose will die out. It really is as simple as that when you are dealing with this much diversity.

There comes a point when you need to accept that punishing new players heavily for the sake of "playing the right playstyle" is never going to grow the game population. Lack of diversity stagnates games and this new rewards system has stagnated it considerably. Especially when this forced playstyle revolves around huddling close and behind teammates with tag and narc and stealing kills while shooting teammates in the back if they get between you and your kill. I do not see this as something that should be encouraged. Is it a legitimate playstyle? Yes. Should all other playstyles suffer to accommodate it? NO. New players (and many veterans) that do not like playing tagwarrior will leave as nobody wants to waste their time here earning nothing.

And which is why I said this in another post:

Mystere, on 27 October 2014 - 07:51 AM, said:

I am also of the opinion ( ) that merely raising earning rates is not a good solution. I think the better solution is to increase the types of actions being rewarded to account for more legitimate play styles.

By doing these, I am trying to steer the ongoing "debates" to more legitimate questions such as what constitutes "performance" and "legitimate play styles", as well as diffrentiating between "being a hero" and "doing stupid things".

I have it covered.

Remember that even sports (i.e. football) have rules on what can and cannot be done. As such, consider the rewarded "playstyles" in the same light.

[Assiah]

KraftySOT, on 27 October 2014 - 08:56 AM, said:

Yes it will. Because theres ten thousand battletech players who are waiting for this game to not suck, so they can either come aboard, or come back.

This is bait, but I'm going to bite anyway.

Did you ever consider that the grind is one of the reasons these mythical "ten thousand" players think that the game currently sucks, or that punishing them for wanting to use valid tactics that aren't deathballing is one of their reasons claiming the game sucks. You don't speak for every battletech fan, so please stop trying.

hybrid black, on 27 October 2014 - 08:56 AM, said:

Ok so your did not really play wot so stop chirping little bird and fly away

this is also bait, and quite honestly the kind of argument I would expect from a 9 year old. If you want to disprove my claim, make an argument, not an insult.

Edited by Assiah, 27 October 2014 - 09:02 AM.

[KraftySOT]

hybrid black, on 27 October 2014 - 08:56 AM, said:

Ok so your did not really play wot so stop chirping little bird and fly away

Yeah, he makes statement about WoT, then goes on to say he never actually played WoT.

Troooooooll

Assiah, on 27 October 2014 - 09:00 AM, said:

This is bait, but I'm going to bite anyway.

Did you ever consider that the grind is one of the reasons these mythical "ten thousand" players think that the game currently sucks, or that punishing them for wanting to use valid tactics that aren't deathballing is one of their reasons claiming the game sucks. You don't speak for every battletech fan, so please stop trying.

Nope. Go to a con and ask them. Its resoundingly apparent what drives them away.

Time to kill.

Board game players are not into action games. Period.


By the way I was JUST at Dragon*Con two months ago talking about this with a room full of battletech players.

Its time to kill. They can speak for themselves on the issue. Go to the next big Con and ask them yourself.

Edited by KraftySOT, 27 October 2014 - 09:01 AM.

[Vassago Rain]

KraftySOT, on 27 October 2014 - 08:34 AM, said:

And thats the games fault how? If they increase cbills for casual players, hardcore players just make that much more, and those hardcore players are who spends cash. If they can get more for free...they pay less.

The fact remains that there is more "free money" in the pot, youre just not getting a slice of it because you dont want to change your playstyle.

And someone said this game isnt growing?

Then why did they hit the maximum players on their servers, without getting rid of servers, for the first time ever two weekends ago?

A little fun fact here.

An actual professional, after PGI let slip what their equipment actually was, calculated that if it's the best brand, and they're running it at max potential, with the best components, and have everything optimized, they could host a mere 9000 players at any given time.

As in, 9000 people could be logged into MWO and playing games simultaneously. No more, and that was in a best case dream scenario, where they had the best of the best - which they did not.

They recently moved from the old IGP center to a new, unspecified one, but it doesn't seem they have expanded. A PGI guy on reddit's been saying that they're thinking of expanding, but they've yet to do any of it. Simply, they moved from location A, to location B, and upgraded to modern hardware that has the same capacity as the old.

Draw your own conclusions from that.

[Alexander MacTaggart]

Joseph Mallan, on 27 October 2014 - 08:49 AM, said:

If all they are here for is the payday... Yes. Thinking. Mans. Game.

The payday is part of the game. It costs money to buy new mechs, upgrade them, tweak them.

People getting more money means they are buying more mechs. Which means they are buying more mechbays, and paint jobs, and cockpit items.

There is literally no downside to rolling back the income 'nerfs' - even hero mechs and premium time would end up being MORE valuable with a higher base income!

At this point you are arguing just to be contrary. It's not like even if income was increased people would suddenly have all 150+ variants in the game in 3 months. And guess what, if someone DID somehow manage to collect every mech in the game, that means he bought 145+ mechbays from PGI! And I feel it kind of safe to say that if someone is that committed to this game, he probably bought some paint colors and camo for at least some of his mechs - maybe even cockpit items too.

There is literally no reason for this game to have such low income rates; it demonstrably hurts monetization.

[Vassago Rain]

KraftySOT, on 27 October 2014 - 08:56 AM, said:

Yes it will. Because theres ten thousand battletech players who are waiting for this game to not suck, so they can either come aboard, or come back.

No one cares about the CoD MOAR CBILLS!!!! crowd or what they think honestly. This is why this thread s 24 pages long with only 3 people whining consistently about the payouts, and NO dev will touch this with a 10 foot poll.

If you dont like it. Theres the door.

Weve got plenty of people waiting to take your spot.

lol okay.

Does sound familiar, though. Hmmm, where have I heard things like this before...