29 replies to this topic

[Abisha]

Rhaythe, on 14 April 2015 - 11:55 AM, said:

As a light pilot, I want reasons to run my light versus Mechs with Bigger Guns. Right now I have to make my own (ECM; NARC'ing; Hitch-hiking on a Crab's backside in my Urbie; etc). While C-bills are nice, cash is hardly gameplay.

ain't that obvious?, you run a light mech because you think you can solo that assault and make it your bi**h.
their is no other reason to go light

[Apnu]

ibex230, on 10 April 2015 - 08:08 AM, said:

Add a dynamic cbill bonus to the weight classes with least use. I.e. the lower the queue number, the higher the bonus.

Cbill bonus helped conquest back to life, you think it could work to balance out queue times as well?

I like this idea.

I'd go even further and put it in CW as well. The lighter you drop, the bigger a multiplier you get on your payout. Especially for the clans. It both fits the lore and it gives them a c-bill bonus for already expensive mechs.

Now if we could move the clans into stars of 5 and limit them to two stars per wave per match, I bet we could un-nerf their weapons. As an IS loyalist, I'd take that trade.

[bad arcade kitty]

btw it would be fair
light mechs tend to get lower scores anyway i.e. a lower payment, a lower chance to get some damage-related achievement, so a c-bill bonus for playing them wouldn't hurt

[James Warren]

I think its a good idea.

The Heavy weight class is the most popular because people enjoy dealing damage (which, as mentioned already, is the primary focus of the game at this stage).

C-Bill incentives for the less popular weight classes won't change that, but will certainly have a positive effect on the queues.

bad arcade kitty, on 14 April 2015 - 02:13 PM, said:

btw it would be fair
light mechs tend to get lower scores anyway i.e. a lower payment, a lower chance to get some damage-related achievement, so a c-bill bonus for playing them wouldn't hurt

That's true - even with the bonus rewards for scouting, captures, using NARCs, TAG, etc most light 'mechs do not earn as much as the average heavy 'mech. Even if circumstances change and the heavy or assault class ends up with the bonus (ie upon release of popular light/medium 'mechs), the shorter queue times should still justify the shorter grind times in PGI's eyes.

Edited by James Warren, 15 April 2015 - 01:51 PM.

[ShadeofHades]

WarHippy, on 10 April 2015 - 09:15 AM, said:

No thanks. First off bonuses don't really fix the "problem". Some people don't need the c-bills and will continue to play what they want, some won't like being forced to play mechs they don't like just to earn a little more c-bills, and bonuses don't fix the reason people are not playing certain mechs to begin with. The only acceptable way to fix the queue balance(assuming it needs to be fixed) is to give people a real reason to play other mechs beyond arbitrary income boosts. More avenues for winning and being rewarded for it beyond slugging it out, more and varied game mechanics that different classes of mechs can take advantage of that others can't, and clearer more defined role warfare are what we need to be working towards not silly income boosts that only at best obscure the underlying problems.

Counterpoint:
I have mechs I like to play in each weight class - some days I consider one over the others, other days I go with the percentages and have fun with whichever chassis the queues need. I suspect that I would be persuaded by bonuses much more strongly, while not feeling coerced in any way...and I expect there are some other folks like me in the system.

Don't get me wrong, I fully support fixing the bad and role-oriented chassis and game modes to get them more use and usefulness, but a bit more queue balance would certainly be achievable by waving some cbills in our faces.

[J0anna]

ibex230, on 10 April 2015 - 08:08 AM, said:

Add a dynamic cbill bonus to the weight classes with least use. I.e. the lower the queue number, the higher the bonus.

Cbill bonus helped conquest back to life, you think it could work to balance out queue times as well?

While this sounds like a very good idea, let me remind you something:

PGI does not believe rewards are too low, and have said so.

Maybe that isn't clear, so perhaps:

PGI does not believe rewards are too low, and have said so.


Say that to yourself, and say it often. So what would you, (lets pretend you are PGI) hearing this great suggestion about balancing weight classes with cbills, but believing that rewards are fine, do? Ah Ha, here's the answer: You create a dynamic balance program that updates every 15 minutes and:

Highest weight class rewards multiplier - 0.75
Second highest weight class rewards multiplier - 0.9
Second lowest weight class rewards multiplier - 1.1
Lowest weight class rewards multiplier - 1.25

So unless you want to spend even more time trying to make cbills and mastering mechs, be careful what you ask for.......

[Burktross]

you should just get a proportional bonus for killing players based on how much better their elo is than yours and how much heavier they are.

(warning, arbitrary numbers ahead. Not representative of the final rewards)
For example, a God-tier elo Atlas killing a decent Orion will net the killer 6k
A bellow average Locust killing an elite Dire Wolf will net the killer 18k

[bad arcade kitty]

Moenrg, on 14 April 2015 - 06:16 PM, said:

While this sounds like a very good idea, let me remind you something:

PGI does not believe rewards are too low, and have said so.

Maybe that isn't clear, so perhaps:

PGI does not believe rewards are too low, and have said so.


Say that to yourself, and say it often. So what would you, (lets pretend you are PGI) hearing this great suggestion about balancing weight classes with cbills, but believing that rewards are fine, do? Ah Ha, here's the answer: You create a dynamic balance program that updates every 15 minutes and:

Highest weight class rewards multiplier - 0.75
Second highest weight class rewards multiplier - 0.9
Second lowest weight class rewards multiplier - 1.1
Lowest weight class rewards multiplier - 1.25

So unless you want to spend even more time trying to make cbills and mastering mechs, be careful what you ask for.......

because your coefficients are terrible and would decrease the whole c-bill income for players, they shouldn't be so severe and so carelessly applied

the coefficients should be weighted on the actual percentage of weight classes and also (preferably) on the average income in the weight class not to change the whole income while giving rare weight classes some neat bonuses and some minor penalties to the more popular classes

a good percentage would look something close to 1.2, 1.1, 1.0, 0.9, definitely not 1.25, 1.1, 0.9, 0.75

[Frostiken]

Techorse, on 10 April 2015 - 09:06 AM, said:

This has been suggested tons of times and I'm all for it. However, it looks like increased C-Bill earnings will never happen.

Which is funny because without increased C-Bill earnings this game won't last long on steam. The Steam community hated the grind of warthunder, so I highly doubt they'll put up with this.

Not to be toxic or anything, I just want to make it clear that C-Bill earnings need a bit of a boost.

Agreed. Without boosts of any kind you're looking at like 50k bills per match if you lose (which you will do, a lot), and maybe 120k if you win (varies based on performance).

To buy the cheapest, shittiest mech in the game, the Commando, you have to play on average 20 rounds. Want to upgrade to a not-****** engine, which you're going to have on the only mechs you can afford on a peasant's salary? That's nearly 50 games required, on top of the 20 for the Commando.

What's that? You wanted to put some not-****** weapons and get some Endo Steel and DHSs so you're actually vaguely competitive? Add another 25 games!

So in order to get a Commando to be even viable, you're looking at having to play over 100 games. If you figure it's 10 minutes per game, that's about 16-17 hours just to get the shittiest, cheapest, lousiest mech in the game. If you want some skills on it, you have to do it THREE TIMES OVER AGAIN just to unlock other ****** Commando variants.

lol

Edited by Frostiken, 14 April 2015 - 07:55 PM.

[WarHippy]

ShadeofHades, on 14 April 2015 - 05:56 PM, said:

Counterpoint:
I have mechs I like to play in each weight class - some days I consider one over the others, other days I go with the percentages and have fun with whichever chassis the queues need. I suspect that I would be persuaded by bonuses much more strongly, while not feeling coerced in any way...and I expect there are some other folks like me in the system.

Don't get me wrong, I fully support fixing the bad and role-oriented chassis and game modes to get them more use and usefulness, but a bit more queue balance would certainly be achievable by waving some cbills in our faces.

I alluded to the fact that some would play other mechs with c-bill incentives for whatever reason they may have, but my underlying point was that it didn't fix the reason it is the way it is to begin with. It also has the potential side effect of frustrating people who want to earn more but now feel forced to play mechs they do not like to get those bonuses.