47 replies to this topic

[Angel of Annihilation]

Stefka Kerensky, on 09 November 2014 - 07:01 AM, said:

The new reward system is fair: fat heavy asses, doing nothing but stealing kills from 900/1000m, coming to play after 5-6 minutes the match is started.... earn less. And this is good too.

Here is the issue.

Those fat heavy asses are Assault mechs traveling at 54 kph vs an Ice Ferrets 142 kph so yes, unfortunately it does take them 5 mins to get into position. Additionally many of these mechs mount long range weapons specifically because it does take 5 mins to get into range plus they have the extra tonnage to do so. Third, these fat heavy asses do the lions share of the damage which ironically leads to the lions share of the kills (I know, it is a shocker that more firepower producing more damage, equals more kills....I mean who would have thought?).

Further, even when these mechs do get into the battle, they don't have the opportunity to earn the same rewards because they don't have playstyles or characteristics that can take advantage of the new rewards system. For example your not going get many flanking opportunities in a Dire Wolf or Atlas because your always going to be in the thick of battle facing your enemies.

This means that alot of mechs who are strongly contributing to the battle in their own way are getting alot less rewards than mechs who might not be contributing as much but can take advantage of the system.

[Joseph Mallan]

Viktor Drake, on 10 November 2014 - 06:22 AM, said:

Further, even when these mechs do get into the battle, they don't have the opportunity to earn the same rewards because they don't have playstyles or characteristics that can take advantage of the new rewards system. For example your not going get many flanking opportunities in a Dire Wolf or Atlas because your always going to be in the thick of battle facing your enemies.

LIAR!
I garner LOTS of flanking bonuses simply by staying with the other assaults and move off to flank the target the Dire is brawling with. My Atlas is Dire Wolf fast so its easy to hang with them. I get lots of flanking bonuses when I do my thing.

[STEF_]

Viktor Drake, on 10 November 2014 - 06:22 AM, said:

Here is the issue.

Those fat heavy asses are Assault mechs traveling at 54 kph vs an Ice Ferrets 142 kph so yes, unfortunately it does take them 5 mins to get into position. Additionally many of these mechs mount long range weapons specifically because it does take 5 mins to get into range plus they have the extra tonnage to do so. Third, these fat heavy asses do the lions share of the damage which ironically leads to the lions share of the kills (I know, it is a shocker that more firepower producing more damage, equals more kills....I mean who would have thought?).

Further, even when these mechs do get into the battle, they don't have the opportunity to earn the same rewards because they don't have playstyles or characteristics that can take advantage of the new rewards system. For example your not going get many flanking opportunities in a Dire Wolf or Atlas because your always going to be in the thick of battle facing your enemies.

This means that alot of mechs who are strongly contributing to the battle in their own way are getting alot less rewards than mechs who might not be contributing as much but can take advantage of the system.

I mastered Atalai, quite slow.
Time to get at position for assault depends on the maps, that are tiny, except a few. 2 minutes max.
Assaults have rewards: exactly the ones you mention: great dmg, high kills and from distance.
The mechs with low income were lights and medium, (with lower firepower, so less dmg etc.) and now they can have same more, it's fair, imo.
That said, in pugs, I see a lot of assault, and whale in particular, going in position lately on porpose. I see a lot of "crafty" whale, just sitting on drop position for 2-3 minutes, and only move toward enemy when the other one did the "dirty job", so they can get easy kills, despite the obvious loss.
If with new reward system they get less c-bills, I'm happy.

I want to add this, regarding long range mechs : I was a sniper, and an happy one. Then PGI decided to nerf (quite) to death snipers (cause whiners, I believe).
For me it would be AWESOME if PGi decide to start a "sniper reward": such as, for istance, dmg from 7/800 m ---> xxx reward;
kill from 7/800m ----> yyy reward.
This would fix assault problem in a fair way,
AND I would like to try to snipe again, instead of the never-ending brawler circus we have now,... with its brawler rewards.

[Danghen Woolf]

Stefka Kerensky, on 10 November 2014 - 07:01 AM, said:

I mastered Atalai, quite slow.
Time to get at position for assault depends on the maps, that are tiny, except a few. 2 minutes max.
Assaults have rewards: exactly the ones you mention: great dmg, high kills and from distance.
The mechs with low income were lights and medium, (with lower firepower, so less dmg etc.) and now they can have same more, it's fair, imo.
That said, in pugs, I see a lot of assault, and whale in particular, going in position lately on porpose. I see a lot of "crafty" whale, just sitting on drop position for 2-3 minutes, and only move toward enemy when the other one did the "dirty job", so they can get easy kills, despite the obvious loss.
If with new reward system they get less c-bills, I'm happy.

I want to add this, regarding long range mechs : I was a sniper, and an happy one. Then PGI decided to nerf (quite) to death snipers (cause whiners, I believe).
For me it would be AWESOME if PGi decide to start a "sniper reward": such as, for istance, dmg from 7/800 m ---> xxx reward;
kill from 7/800m ----> yyy reward.
This would fix assault problem in a fair way,
AND I would like to try to snipe again, instead of the never-ending brawler circus we have now,... with its brawler rewards.

If the bonuses were specific like headshots for example I would agree on a long range bonus. Rewarding sniping for sniping sake is going to do little more than encourage more sniper builds. I enjoy using my Uller with a gauss rifle and 2 ER mediums, I can do some long range damage but can also get in the mix of things if I need to. I think that skill based rewards should be added, accuracy bonuses for example.

[Joseph Mallan]

Danghen Woolf, on 10 November 2014 - 07:10 AM, said:

If the bonuses were specific like headshots for example I would agree on a long range bonus. Rewarding sniping for sniping sake is going to do little more than encourage more sniper builds. I enjoy using my Uller with a gauss rifle and 2 ER mediums, I can do some long range damage but can also get in the mix of things if I need to. I think that skill based rewards should be added, accuracy bonuses for example.

Not a bad thing. Unless you don't hit what you are trying to. Reward the roles for fulfilling the role's responsibility.

[Danghen Woolf]

Joseph Mallan, on 10 November 2014 - 07:17 AM, said:

Not a bad thing. Unless you don't hit what you are trying to. Reward the roles for fulfilling the role's responsibility.

I agree that role based rewards should be more finely tuned. The move that was made with the patch was in the right direction but I would still like to see things expanded. The MM in Solo is better at grouping mechs together than it has been e.g. fewer SDRs with assault lances but I think their could be more rewards for teamwork to encourage people to work together. I would like to see the lance and company commander slots used more often and rewards based on effective use of those positions.

[STEF_]

Danghen Woolf, on 10 November 2014 - 07:10 AM, said:

If the bonuses were specific like headshots for example I would agree on a long range bonus. Rewarding sniping for sniping sake is going to do little more than encourage more sniper builds. I enjoy using my Uller with a gauss rifle and 2 ER mediums, I can do some long range damage but can also get in the mix of things if I need to. I think that skill based rewards should be added, accuracy bonuses for example.

90% agree.
In BT we have pleanty of role, so it would be great to have reward based on role.
If a pilot like to snipe, he fits a sniper role, so his own reward would be fair. For now we have only brawler reward.

Accuracy bonuses would be awesome, that would make the trick for those liking to fight at distance, but it shouldn't be given for a hit done below 400 m.

[Danghen Woolf]

Stefka Kerensky, on 10 November 2014 - 07:35 AM, said:

90% agree.
In BT we have pleanty of role, so it would be great to have reward based on role.
If a pilot like to snipe, he fits a sniper role, so his own reward would be fair. For now we have only brawler reward.

Accuracy bonuses would be awesome, that would make the trick for those liking to fight at distance, but it shouldn't be given for a hit done below 400 m.

I agree that there are plenty of roles in BT, and many mechs can transition into another role pretty quickly as the situation develops. I can discuss the ways that I wish MW:O was more like TT all day but that is not the point of this thread. I thnk that an accuracy bonus is an accuracy bonus... but the weapons themselves should be grouped. Basing match accuracy off of LRMs for example would make people less likely to use them. I think it should be based off of a weapons optimal range, even if I can hit targets out at 700m with my AC/20 does not mean I am using it in the best way.

[Bishop Steiner]

Burktross, on 09 November 2014 - 07:04 AM, said:

Sorry dude, but my Hunchback is by no means a scout. You don't speak for all the mediums here :^(

Cool story. Interesting the title says IFR (Ice Ferret) and not HBK (Hunchback) eh?

[Cerlin]

Troutmonkey, on 10 November 2014 - 03:54 AM, said:

What were your earnings before and what are they now? Because under the old system I never saw sub 100k wins unless we base rushed, and now it's an all too common occurrence. The old system paid out handsomely for assist, and getting 130-160k games was very frequent, and games beyond that and up into 240k easily possible with good damage and kills.

These games below all show sub 100k Victories, and while these scores are "average" they paid out better in the previous system between 120k and 170k. No matter how you look at it income has drastically fallen. There's no denying it. If the US economy dropped by this much there'd be panic in the streets and we'd be seeing the next great depression.

Stop kill stealing and do more damage.

[Mawai]

Stefka Kerensky, on 09 November 2014 - 10:20 PM, said:

Quite agree about XP.
About "low c-bills whiners" I'm a little bit annoyed. Every day someone whines about it and PGI seems to hear whiners and flamers a little to much recently.
I really like the new "team work based" reward system, while the old one was simply unfair.
I can understand why some players whine, they liked the old unfair system. It should be good if some PGI dev write down "deal with it" clearly.

I disagree

The system is new and different. The actions required for rewards may be different. However, I think PGI needs to listen to both the whiners and those who are saying nothing. They need to analyse the data. As someone pointed out, PGI seemed to think the rewards were fine with the TAG/NARC bug giving rewards for all damage and not just LRMs. If that is the case then incomes will certainly have fallen in line with the bug fix in which case one might expect rewards to now be lower.

However, PGI resists putting out any numbers ... perhaps because they are busy with CW implementation and have no one to spare to analyse the data. If that is the case then I'd suggest that they throw a couple of thousand dollars towards a contract and hire a contractor from the community who signs an NDA and produces the numbers for them. To be honest, there are probably qualified people in the community who would do the analysis for free given access to the data.

Anyway, the bottom line is that decisions like this need to be based on numbers, not feelings and it will take some time for the community to adapt play styles to pick up on the rewards. I know that personally, so far, I have been not doing nearly as well in either lights or heavies ... but I've been away and have not played since the quirks were introduced so things may have changed.

[Why Run]

Trying to make an extremely shallow game more interesting by forcing players into a stupid playstyle is asinine. The new rewards are another secret credit nerf, but as I expressed last time around, they hurt the NEW players the most. This only lengthens the gap between the haves and have nots, and will slowly eat this game alive. Nope, it won't hurt those of us who have money to spend, who have already bought or earned Cbill booster mechs, but the new "rewards" will absolutely devour a new player. Good luck getting a Locust, much less a Cbill Timberwolf. Oh well, I do not even know why I wandered back here after a few weeks, the latest "rewards" was the nail in the coffin for me. No way I'm wasting time for even less cbills, and I've spent way too much on this game already...

[Mawai]

Cerlin, on 10 November 2014 - 07:48 AM, said:

Stop kill stealing and do more damage.

He is driving a light mech ... "protected light" ... and although I have seen some folks put up big numbers in lights it is FAR from the norm. Also, usually large damage from a light is done by the ECM sniper versions of spiders/ravens ... most of the skirmish lights run significant risks engaging and one wrong turn will usually be the end of them ... if a light doesn't last to the end of the match the damage numbers are smaller.

Finally, when will folks learn that there is NO SUCH THING as kill stealing in a team game. Period. If your team mates ignore you and let you solo some guy from the other team ... all they are doing is increasing their chances of losing and letting the opponent do far more damage than he should before he dies. So you win the duel ... your center torso armor is stripped and the next opponent you meet alphas you to death ... on the other hand ... a team mate helps, the opponent dies fast and you survive your next encounter as well. More power to the team. The goal of the game is to eliminate opponents as FAST as possible while taking as LITTLE damage as possible ... and that ALWAYS means running multiple to one fights whenever possible.

[Joseph Mallan]

Why Run, on 10 November 2014 - 08:19 AM, said:

Trying to make an extremely shallow game more interesting by forcing players into a stupid playstyle is asinine. The new rewards are another secret credit nerf, but as I expressed last time around, they hurt the NEW players the most. This only lengthens the gap between the haves and have nots, and will slowly eat this game alive. Nope, it won't hurt those of us who have money to spend, who have already bought or earned Cbill booster mechs, but the new "rewards" will absolutely devour a new player. Good luck getting a Locust, much less a Cbill Timberwolf. Oh well, I do not even know why I wandered back here after a few weeks, the latest "rewards" was the nail in the coffin for me. No way I'm wasting time for even less cbills, and I've spent way too much on this game already...

Funny, staying with your Lance and focus firing your enemy to death from Oblique angles is...Stupid and Asinine. Guess the Armed Service is doing it wrong. Please go tell the Infantry how stupid it is to do those things! I wanna watch the results.

[Joseph Mallan]

Mawai, on 10 November 2014 - 08:14 AM, said:

I disagree

The system is new and different. The actions required for rewards may be different. However, I think PGI needs to listen to both the whiners, The New Happy Players and those who are saying nothing. They need to analyse the data. As someone pointed out, PGI seemed to think the rewards were fine with the TAG/NARC bug giving rewards for all damage and not just LRMs. If that is the case then incomes will certainly have fallen in line with the bug fix in which case one might expect rewards to now be lower.

You left out a group. You cannot have a clear picture if you don't listen to all the factions.

[Bishop Steiner]

Stefka Kerensky, on 10 November 2014 - 05:03 AM, said:

With previous system my income was around 100/120000 for victories, 80/90000 for defeats
Now I have around 20/30000 more average; but above all when I do well I can double or triple my income

About yours, they are very low income indeed, but very few rewards too.
Maybe your are doing too few "things". I'm referring to the left/right side showing a little side-bar.
What mech were you using? What game style?
I tend to use medium mechs or fast heavies, and I try to do "everything", helping every friendly mechs, etc. and moving a lot (I've always played so, anyway)



In this screenshot I didn't make an huge income, but still, take a look at the "vertical side bar".

edit: without premium time this income would be 144.448 c-bills

while I agree with your premise? TBH, I am usually too concerned with tactics, strategy and battle to m"maximize" earnings that way. While scouting and other roles certainly needed a buff, your primetime battlers and such should also be compensated, as all the scouting, flanking and such are for naught if you don't have facetanking DWs and Atlases breaking things.

For instance, what you say works well for IFR, Ravens, etc.

What about for less mobile mechs?

I flanked, sniped, killed a bloody dire wolf solo, etc, on the way to saving my teams bacon on canyon country the other day.

Not a horrible match, no, but an outlier.

To break 200k, I have to make heavy combat units do things they were never designed for? Should I drop a laser for a tag and pretend my slow 50 ton ac20 carrier is supposed to be a spotter? (something far better done by an ECM carrier?). Was I supposed to zip all over the map at 71 kph?

No.

I did what I was supposed to. I pretty literally saved the match (ask Meisoohaityou, he was there) because until I flanked we were down, and at the end it was 2 on 5. Other matches you got a Victor go buck wild and destroy 7 mechs....for 200k.

Scouts, skirmishers, etc do need the boosted rewards. But it should not PUNISH heavy combat units and other roles who best contributions to the team are by doing what they are supposed to. WRECK FACE.

Does that mean on occasion, you would see a VTR that gets a ton of spotting, flanking, proximity, etc assists "break" the system? Possibly. But IMO, if that VTR manages to "game the system" and still destroy the OpFor, brawly assault style? Homie just earned every penny.

You talk about Roles, and I agree with ya on a lot of things, but you have to remember, missile boat, sniper, brawler, tank, etc? All legit and crucial roles, too.

[STEF_]

Why Run, on 10 November 2014 - 08:19 AM, said:

forcing players into a stupid playstyle is asinine.

Nobody forces nobody. You would be free to choose your own role, and your own playstyle with your fair rewards.

Previous reward system was asinine, and without any doubt.

[Joseph Mallan]

Danghen Woolf, on 10 November 2014 - 07:31 AM, said:

I agree that role based rewards should be more finely tuned. The move that was made with the patch was in the right direction but I would still like to see things expanded. The MM in Solo is better at grouping mechs together than it has been e.g. fewer SDRs with assault lances but I think their could be more rewards for teamwork to encourage people to work together. I would like to see the lance and company commander slots used more often and rewards based on effective use of those positions.

Indeed, But the question is how do you rate that Success? It definitely can use some looking into after all Command IS one of the Pillars/Roles. And one Whoa-fully under rewarded

[MeiSooHaityu]

Bishop Steiner, on 10 November 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:

...I did what I was supposed to. I pretty literally saved the match (ask Meisoohaityou, he was there) because until I flanked we were down, and at the end it was 2 on 5. Other matches you got a Victor go buck wild and destroy 7 mechs....for 200k....

Bishop was a God D*** surgeon with that Hunchback 4G. Bishop was actually getting razzed by the other team because they hated how vicious he was with that A/C20.

It was an awesome match to watch. I just wish I represented a bit more. The Thunderwub only netted me one kill. At least I got to watch Bishop play LOL.

Yea, he saved the match. It was cool to watch.

Edited by MeiSooHaityu, 10 November 2014 - 08:35 AM.

[Danghen Woolf]

Joseph Mallan, on 10 November 2014 - 08:32 AM, said:

Indeed, But the question is how do you rate that Success? It definitely can use some looking into after all Command IS one of the Pillars/Roles. And one Whoa-fully under rewarded

EA has it close with the way they have it in Battlefield 4, the squad leader can assign obtectives, e.g. attack, defend, priority target, etc and the squad gets bonus points for completeing those objectives, e.g. captures the target, kills enemies capturing the target, kills the market priority target. Having a lance commander be able to say mark the AS7 as a priority target and the lance takes it down = bonus points. Having point Bravo marked for capture and the lance capturing it = bonus points. Having the company commander assign a point to defend on skirmish and having mechs within a given area kill an enemy = bonus points. Give people reasons to take those positions and reward everyone based on their performance in them. Maybe give achevements based on them, Successfully defend 100 times, Kill 50 mechs within 100m of defend point, etc.