99 replies to this topic

[Telmasa]

Nope, no wall of text this time. It's all in the title.

Consumable Warrior Online, folks: is this really the way we want it?

UAVs? How about swapping Angel ECM for actual Guardian ECM like from MW4? How about expanding maps so that light mechs can actually do their intended role of scouting and flanking?

Air strikes and artillery strikes? How about some Arrow IV's and Long Toms?

Cool Shots? How about some normal coolant flush? (Heck, you could even quirk it that way.)


Give me Mechwarrior, not consumable Call of Duty with robots.

[FupDup]

Paulconomy said:

I like money sinks.

[Nightmare1]

Or, how about we just leave all that in there and simply add in those extra weapon systems? Frankly, the Consumables seem fairly well balanced and don't differ significantly from consumables in any other games. Whether it's frag grenades in PS2, smoke grenades in Ghost Recon: Phantoms, combat pets in Star Trek Online, throwing axes in Lord of the Rings Online, or any other consumable in any other MMO or online game, it is all simply part of the online, Free-to-Play formula. Get over it.

[Mercules]

Telmasa, on 26 April 2015 - 05:04 PM, said:

UAVs? How about swapping Angel ECM for actual Guardian ECM like from MW4?

I'd still use UAVs since they see past cover I'm using. I'd rather send something expendable up than hump the hill and get cored at the top.

Telmasa, on 26 April 2015 - 05:04 PM, said:

How about expanding maps so that light mechs can actually do their intended role of scouting and flanking?

Has nothing to do with ECM but I do want to see this.

Telmasa, on 26 April 2015 - 05:04 PM, said:

Air strikes and artillery strikes? How about some Arrow IV's and Long Toms?

Long Toms are rarely mech mounted as they become almost useless. Typically they are off board assets... a bit like the consumable.

Telmasa, on 26 April 2015 - 05:04 PM, said:

Cool Shots? How about some normal coolant flush? (Heck, you could even quirk it that way.)

How about neither?

Telmasa, on 26 April 2015 - 05:04 PM, said:

Give me Mechwarrior, not consumable Call of Duty with robots.

Okay... I'll happily have them get rid of all consumables, let's bring back Repair and Rearm, shall we? The game needs a money sink someplace and has none other than consumables.

[Zoid]

Consumables might as well just be a tax on CW, since you really shouldn't go in without a full set of them.

The only problem is that without them, there would be nothing to discourage deathballing and camping at all. Deathballing happens anyway but you can punish it with some well-placed artillery.

Maybe introduce Long Tom artillery and remove the consumables, then give the Urbanmech some Long Tom quirks .

[bad arcade kitty]

please, introduce long toms :3

[Telmasa]

Nightmare1, on 26 April 2015 - 05:10 PM, said:

Or, how about we just leave all that in there and simply add in those extra weapon systems? Frankly, the Consumables seem fairly well balanced and don't differ significantly from consumables in any other games. Whether it's frag grenades in PS2, smoke grenades in Ghost Recon: Phantoms, combat pets in Star Trek Online, throwing axes in Lord of the Rings Online, or any other consumable in any other MMO or online game, it is all simply part of the online, Free-to-Play formula. Get over it.

All of those games sound terrible & not like (former) Mechwarrior games at all.

Get rid of the "Free-to-Play-(gimmick)" formula. There's no way PGI makes enough money off of consumable microtransactions to justify that, versus giving us a version of Mechwarrior that we can all enjoy better, want to play more, and thus pay more for premium time. mech bays, and mechs.

Edited by Telmasa, 26 April 2015 - 05:38 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Mercules, on 26 April 2015 - 05:16 PM, said:

Okay... I'll happily have them get rid of all consumables, let's bring back Repair and Rearm, shall we? The game needs a money sink someplace and has none other than consumables.

Just curious, why exactly does there need to be a money sink?

[FupDup]

WM Quicksilver, on 26 April 2015 - 05:39 PM, said:

Just curious, why exactly does there need to be a money sink?

Because this:

[Beastbear]

WM Quicksilver, on 26 April 2015 - 05:39 PM, said:

Just curious, why exactly does there need to be a money sink?

because back in the day gearing a mech took about 2 days for even average players, and left the "gotta collect em all" pros got bored enough waiting for new content PGI decided to nerf the hell out of it

Edited by Beastbear, 26 April 2015 - 05:56 PM.

[Ragtag soldier]

the problem with the maps isn't that they're small, it's that they're arena style maps and really only suited for moving in a large group. we don't have trees that provide cover, and built up city areas are generally along the fringes of the actual combat of maps that do have them so it's easy to get spotted & focus-fired.

i dunno why you tossed a backhanded attempt to complain about ECM, save that you're not very good at predicting where the enemy is likely to move and run into them a lot.

[Quxudica]

Nightmare1, on 26 April 2015 - 05:10 PM, said:

Or, how about we just leave all that in there and simply add in those extra weapon systems? Frankly, the Consumables seem fairly well balanced and don't differ significantly from consumables in any other games. Whether it's frag grenades in PS2, smoke grenades in Ghost Recon: Phantoms, combat pets in Star Trek Online, throwing axes in Lord of the Rings Online, or any other consumable in any other MMO or online game, it is all simply part of the online, Free-to-Play formula. Get over it.

Consumables a horrible mechanic. UAVs, Strikes and Coolant should not be magical cards we pull out of our mechs asses, they should be equipment that take tonnage and crit slots that we have to incorporate into our builds.

Consumables as they stand are horribly balanced. There's no downside to bringing any of them, no trade offs and no thought to be invested. The 40k price tag is a joke for all but the worst players even with the craptastic earnings we currently make, it's an annoyance at most. There is so much potential depth that could be mined from each of the current consumables if they were turned into equipment and fleshed out, but instead they remain a half-assed tacked on addition.

[Telmasa]

Ragtag soldier, on 26 April 2015 - 06:04 PM, said:

the problem with the maps isn't that they're small, it's that they're arena style maps and really only suited for moving in a large group. we don't have trees that provide cover, and built up city areas are generally along the fringes of the actual combat of maps that do have them so it's easy to get spotted & focus-fired.

i dunno why you tossed a backhanded attempt to complain about ECM, save that you're not very good at predicting where the enemy is likely to move and run into them a lot.

Go look at the average MW4 map, then come back here and take a look.

It's very different. Alpine Peaks is probably the only map in the game that recalls old MW maps, and *that* has the derpy half-cliffside mountain the middle that everyone just circlejerks around in pug matches. Without that mountain, that map would be way more fluid and variable in how it's played out. Which I see as a good thing.

The reason I pointed it out, though, is mostly because the lane-style, or as you put it, "arena" maps we have, force chokepoints & don't really allow scouting mechs to flank or scout (though Caustic Valley is another exception, I suppose).

Right now, that 'scouting' role is mostly being performed by UAV spam. That's both a result of how the maps have been designed, and the overwhelming ability of ECM to cloak everything within its range, as currently implemented.

So if UAVs get taken out, ECM/scouting would then become a big issue. If you fix both things - with expanding the maps and fixing ECM so it has roles & uses but doesn't single-handedly blank out information warfare the way it does - then removing UAVs, as a balance matter, is no longer a problem.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Beastbear, on 26 April 2015 - 05:52 PM, said:

because back in the day gearing a mech took about 2 days for even average players, and left the "gotta collect em all" pros got bored enough waiting for new content PGI decided to nerf the hell out of it

So to stop a very small group of people from getting bored, everyone has to suffer?

Another interesting thought, if people are getting bored shortly after buying new mechs, maybe there is a problem with the core of their game.

[Eider]

The problem with maps.. any maps even new bigger maps is the same as current maps. There is no real reason to split your team up, the most effective method of victory is blob warfare.

[bad arcade kitty]

Quxudica, on 26 April 2015 - 06:11 PM, said:

The 40k price tag is a joke for all but the worst players even with the craptastic earnings we currently make, it's an annoyance at most.

yeah, you will be in plus after the match ends... but will you earn more than if you didn't use that uav or art strike? if not it's a waste

Eider, on 26 April 2015 - 06:39 PM, said:

There is no real reason to split your team up, the most effective method of victory is blob warfare.

unless it's conquest

[Nightmare1]

Telmasa, on 26 April 2015 - 05:36 PM, said:

All of those games sound terrible & not like (former) Mechwarrior games at all.

Get rid of the "Free-to-Play-(gimmick)" formula. There's no way PGI makes enough money off of consumable microtransactions to justify that, versus giving us a version of Mechwarrior that we can all enjoy better, want to play more, and thus pay more for premium time. mech bays, and mechs.

You and I have already been over this before, so it's beside the point for me to debate you this time around. Suffice to say, MWO is simply using a standard formula right now that's really not worth getting worked up over. No, it isn't like former MechWarrior titles, but then again, Consumables aren't the only thing in this game that are different from previous titles. You can't compare MWO to the previous titles because they are, in essence, entirely different animals now. Also, you can't really say that PGI doesn't make enough money off the sales because you don't have access to their revenue sheets. What you say you would enjoy more is not necessarily true for the rest of us. Frankly, I like having UAVs in the game because I believe it is more realistic, forces us to be more cognizant of our surroundings, and provides more of an information warfare role (especially for Lights) than previous titles did.

...And with that, I'm done with you. Like I said, we've been over this before, so any other reply you have for me is not worth my time.

Quxudica, on 26 April 2015 - 06:11 PM, said:

Consumables a horrible mechanic. UAVs, Strikes and Coolant should not be magical cards we pull out of our mechs asses, they should be equipment that take tonnage and crit slots that we have to incorporate into our builds.

Consumables as they stand are horribly balanced. There's no downside to bringing any of them, no trade offs and no thought to be invested. The 40k price tag is a joke for all but the worst players even with the craptastic earnings we currently make, it's an annoyance at most. There is so much potential depth that could be mined from each of the current consumables if they were turned into equipment and fleshed out, but instead they remain a half-assed tacked on addition.

Consumables should not take up tonnage. An arty or air strike is simply a marker and a radio call; no tonnage required. A UAV may weigh two-hundred pounds, but again, it is much less than a ton or even half a ton. Implementation as consumables is about the only logical option for such things, unless PGI built a "Support Suite" that offered the functionality of two Cool Shots, two Strikes, and a UAV all at once at the cost of a ton and two crit slots (or one ton and a head-only mounting). I think we can all agree that would be rather ridiculous though.

You say that they are horribly balanced. Frankly, I disagree. I ran out of Premium Time recently and have been rediscovering what the normal earnings are for a pugger's match if you lose. You only make between 80,000 and 90,000 C-bills on a good loss without Premium Time or a Hero Mech. Two Consumables would easily wipe that out and leave you with nothing, or next to nothing. On a couple bad losses recently, I actually lost about 10,000 C-bills. I think the price tags are more than reasonable as they are.

Also, you have to remember, Consumables are really only effective against players who don't practice situational awareness. Granted, good players may fall victim on occasion, but, generally speaking, they will be mobile and aware enough to elude such things. I see UAVs shot down almost as fast as they are launched and strikes evaded all the time. What I do not see often, however, are strikes killing or dismembering Mechs, or UAVs sitting in the air for two minutes while LRM boats rain down death and destruction as these ForumWarriors claim. In fact, I actually find both strikes and the UAV consumable to be worth less than their 40,000 C-bill price tag, and have switched over to Cool Shots as my primary Consumable now.

[Telmasa]

Nightmare1, on 26 April 2015 - 07:06 PM, said:

You and I have already been over this before, so it's beside the point for me to debate you this time around. Suffice to say, MWO is simply using a standard formula right now that's really not worth getting worked up over. No, it isn't like former MechWarrior titles, but then again, Consumables aren't the only thing in this game that are different from previous titles. You can't compare MWO to the previous titles because they are, in essence, entirely different animals now. Also, you can't really say that PGI doesn't make enough money off the sales because you don't have access to their revenue sheets. What you say you would enjoy more is not necessarily true for the rest of us. Frankly, I like having UAVs in the game because I believe it is more realistic, forces us to be more cognizant of our surroundings, and provides more of an information warfare role (especially for Lights) than previous titles did.

...And with that, I'm done with you. Like I said, we've been over this before, so any other reply you have for me is not worth my time.

I don't need to see their profit sheets.

I know basic economics. Lowering prices can increase your revenue much higher than increasing prices does, because demand increases at lower prices.

It's the same principle here. You remove the microtransactions for consumables, you might see a small loss, but it would improve the game overall, meaning more people playing & more often, meaning more transactions going on elsewhere, with the end result of higher profits.

Quote

Consumables should not take up tonnage. An arty or air strike is simply a marker and a radio call; no tonnage required. A UAV may weigh two-hundred pounds, but again, it is much less than a ton or even half a ton. Implementation as consumables is about the only logical option for such things, unless PGI built a "Support Suite" that offered the functionality of two Cool Shots, two Strikes, and a UAV all at once at the cost of a ton and two crit slots (or one ton and a head-only mounting). I think we can all agree that would be rather ridiculous though.

You say that they are horribly balanced. Frankly, I disagree. I ran out of Premium Time recently and have been rediscovering what the normal earnings are for a pugger's match if you lose. You only make between 80,000 and 90,000 C-bills on a good loss without Premium Time or a Hero Mech. Two Consumables would easily wipe that out and leave you with nothing, or next to nothing. On a couple bad losses recently, I actually lost about 10,000 C-bills. I think the price tags are more than reasonable as they are.

Also, you have to remember, Consumables are really only effective against players who don't practice situational awareness. Granted, good players may fall victim on occasion, but, generally speaking, they will be mobile and aware enough to elude such things. I see UAVs shot down almost as fast as they are launched and strikes evaded all the time. What I do not see often, however, are strikes killing or dismembering Mechs, or UAVs sitting in the air for two minutes while LRM boats rain down death and destruction as these ForumWarriors claim. In fact, I actually find both strikes and the UAV consumable to be worth less than their 40,000 C-bill price tag, and have switched over to Cool Shots as my primary Consumable now.

All I'm seeing here is an argument that happens to prove that consumables are paying to win. What you seem to be saying is that it's only really viable if you have premium time to cover the cost.

That's a terrible way for the game to work.

World of Tanks, *still*, has tons of problems and frustration in its playerbase because of the inclusion of "gold ammo" that just is magically better than regular ammo in every way - and it used to only be available for real cash currency. It only got worse when it was available for credits.

Balance works when everything has trade-offs. Consumables HAVE no trade-offs aside from the price tag. That makes it unbalanced. Arrow IVs and Long Toms require tonnage, ammo, and crit space, so those are balanced ways to bring in 'splash' weaponry that can combat the 'blob' (which, again, has alot to do with the maps forcing the blobs, which is why I keep saying we need bigger/wider maps).

And if consumables are only "good against players without situational awareness", why is it that all players in this game of any kind of skill use it? Why would anybody bother using it against "good players" if it weren't effective?

The fact of the matter is that it's always effective, all the time. Enemy shooting down UAVs? Just launch so many that they can't shoot them all down in time before your push starts. Enemy capable of dodging airstrikes? Aim it behind them or on their head so they can't see it - or better yet in the middle of a fight when there's no opportunity to react.

Playing Clay Pidegon Simulator online just to avoid the UAV spam alone is extremely boring, repetitive, and annoying. I want it to end.

[Ace Selin]

I almost never use consumables, but i get they are a tactic, i dislike Arty / Airstrikes and their overuse though.

[Nightmare1]

Telmasa, on 26 April 2015 - 07:30 PM, said:

Playing Clay Pidegon Simulator online just to avoid the UAV spam alone is extremely boring, repetitive, and annoying. I want it to end.

Then quit. I don't see very many people griefing about Consumables other than you. Even the once prolific anti-Strike threads of yesteryear have died out finally. Folks have accepted Consumables and are moving on; you should too.

Ace Selin, on 26 April 2015 - 07:33 PM, said:

I almost never use consumables, but i get they are a tactic, i dislike Arty / Airstrikes and their overuse though.

I agree, generally, although I don't mind strikes. I don't use them as much as I used to these days, but I still think they are cool to see deployed on the field. They definitely add a bit more depth and realism, I think.