30 replies to this topic

[Luminis]

As a new player, I don't feel obliged to buy IS 'Mechs. Or that they're the better deal.

A Timberwolf might be pretty expensive. 15 million C-Bills is quite a lot compared to some of the IS chassis, true. I can't strip its engine, either. But I just bought my third TBR variant and I can run it with the exact same loadout I feel comfortable with. I just stripped the OnmiPods from my TBR-C, stuff them into my TBR-D and I'm ready to go. I don't need to adhere to any sort of quirks or whatever to build a viable, well running 'Mech.

Mastering the Timberwolf costs me three chassis and whatever loadout I feel comfortable with. My Thunderbolt, though? Well, I might continue to use the engine that came with the chassis (if it matches up to the build on the second TDR variant, I suppose), but there's a decent chance I'd be running Large Pulse Lasers on one variant and Medium Pulse Lasers on another - due to the quirks.

IS 'Mechs have all those costs attached to them (Double Heat Sinks, Ferro Fibrous, Endo Steel, XL Engines, different STD Engine sizes, quirk adapted weapons) while most Clan 'Mechs are mostly "what you see is what you get".

[carnivorouswinds]

Just change the Battlemech buying paradigm. Would you like to buy this chassis variant equipped or stripped? It would save both sides from having to buy redundant parts AND cut down on the amount of grind overall. Clan purchases would have the option of buying with or without omnipods/equipment as separate options. IS could choose between engine or "other."

What mechwarrior in their right mind buys **** they don't need? This is a quality of life improvement I expected a long time ago.

[Ragnahawk]

carnivorouswinds, on 01 January 2016 - 06:30 PM, said:

Just change the Battlemech buying paradigm. Would you like to buy this chassis variant equipped or stripped? It would save both sides from having to buy redundant parts AND cut down on the amount of grind overall. Clan purchases would have the option of buying with or without omnipods/equipment as separate options. IS could choose between engine or "other."

What mechwarrior in their right mind buys **** they don't need? This is a quality of life improvement I expected a long time ago.

Better yet, make it so you can build your mech before you purchase it. That would be so much cooler.

[Ratpoison]

Every time someone whines about inequal costs between IS and Clan, they post nothing but a bunch of heresay and guesswork, without ever bothering to do any real math. And of course they conveniently ignore that omnipods means you often only have to keep and master one variant, whereas mastered IS mechs require you to maintain mech bays and gear for each variant that you like.

Clan is cheap as hell, on mechbays, on time spent, and on cbills. It seems some are just too dumb to see past the illusion of the higher price tag.

[CupraZero]

Rexxxxxxxxx, on 21 December 2015 - 08:08 AM, said:

...
(below are rough numbers)
Clan 75 Ton mech mastering cost = $45 Million
IS 75 Ton mech mastering cost = $25 Million
...

Wrong Numbers.

An Orion with a Timberwolf-ish loadout costs about 10,8 Million C-bills. WITHOUT ENGINE.

So even when you strip your Engine everytime you switch Mechs (does anybody really do that?!) youre at ~32 Million C-bills + ~6 Million for one XL.

Makes it 38 Million vs 45 Million. Not that big difference.

But wait...
You cant buy two more XLs of the same Rating for the difference. So you end with 3 usable Timbers but only 1 Orion for your Drop Deck...
Neather of them wins this calculation-contest.

[Monodominant]

I have to say that as a new player the 15 million price tag IS what kept me from buying a clan mech which I would have preferred (Timber Wolf as everyone said its a good investment).

So I went with a quickdraw and have grinded myself the 3 variants for it while using the same XL engine on each (an XL 300).

What does this mean? That I can play 1 match at a time. Doesnt matter if I died first or last, I cant pop out and get into another match and maximise my fun (not spectating but playing) nor my GXP nor my XP nor my C-bills.

It also means I end up with 1 mech I know and 3 mechs that are trial on the CW drops.

All my Unit mates have suggested Timber wolves, Storm Crows and Hellbringers as the starting mechs but I just dont see me doing that given the startup cost. Maybe for a veteran with millions banked that is not a big deal but for a new player when I see the price tag on those I just turn tail.

Hence why I stick with IS and I doubt I am the only one.

[The Basilisk]

Ok lets try this with an example:

Banshee 3M with 3LPLs and 5MPLs:
18,215,227 C-Bills

Executioner D with just roughly comparable ( and ****** ) loadout 3 CLPLs 5ERMLaser 2DHS
17,505,967 Base + 1,542,408 for mods = 19,048,375 C-Bills ....

Ok there is a difference of 833148 C-bills....wow thats an absolutely risiculously abhorable difference of 8 Matches or even less to play for getting Clan Tech.

Next thing is...nearly no IS Mech is realy viable with its stock engine.
While you may be able to change engines around your stock ones will offten go into the recycler ( loss of money ) or just lay around till they are usefull. But same goes for clan Omni pod modules.

I don't see too harsh differences between both sides.

A large positive point is that the higher base tech level of clan mechs prevent players from beeing COMPLETELY useless in their first matches with their new Mechs.

Edited by The Basilisk, 04 February 2016 - 01:39 AM.

[Jack Spade Ward]

The Basilisk, on 04 February 2016 - 01:32 AM, said:

Ok lets try this with an example:

Banshee 3M with 3LPLs and 5MPLs:
18,215,227 C-Bills

Executioner D with just roughly comparable ( and ****** ) loadout 3 CLPLs 5ERMLaser 2DHS
17,505,967 Base + 1,542,408 for mods = 19,048,375 C-Bills ....

Ok there is a difference of 833148 C-bills....wow thats an absolutely risiculously abhorable difference of 8 Matches or even less to play for getting Clan Tech.

Next thing is...nearly no IS Mech is realy viable with its stock engine.
While you may be able to change engines around your stock ones will offten go into the recycler ( loss of money ) or just lay around till they are usefull. But same goes for clan Omni pod modules.

I don't see too harsh differences between both sides.

A large positive point is that the higher base tech level of clan mechs prevent players from beeing COMPLETELY useless in their first matches with their new Mechs.

why would change to clan tech? Wich is in fact, worse? And you compare a damn good mech like the Banshee to a crappy thing like the Executioner? Really?
Ill tell you a secret, omni-mechs (omni podes, whatever) are so overated!

[Cyberace]

Rattazustra, on 01 January 2016 - 10:12 AM, said:

The problem here is basic commitment psychology.

I think most people will agree that the majority of all NEW players wants to have a mech of their own as soon as possible.
So the new player gets himself a mech and unless he has very specific interests, it will likely be an IS mech, since they are so much less expensive.

Does it matter that with dual heatsinks, probably endoframe and an engine swap they are not? Nopey. That does not play much of a role because most of all new players simply do not know that. On top of that, having a mech and then optimizing it with further investment is more attractive than not having that mech.

So the new player gets himself an IS mech, often medium or heavy these days. The next thing he wants to due is most likely mastering the mech and getting all the skills up. For that he needs two more mechs from that very same chassis.

So now he has three IS mechs and he decides to look at community warfare. What do you think he'll do? He'll try to mold the mechs he has into a dropdeck. If he fills it up with trial mechs chances are good he'll end up buying one of the chassis he thus got used to.

Every step further down that road only makes it worse. The step to switch sides becomes higher and higher. When you have multiple IS mechs it is simply not attractive to do all the grinding again from zero.

But it gets worse!

IS has all champion mechs as trials. Thus players gain more XP with these trials. Clan? Nope. Only half of the trials are champion mechs and even that is a very recent development.

On top of that there are hero mechs. They are quite attractive for grinding C-Bills and... they simply do not exist for clan players. There is no clan champion mech in the game. Sure, there are the invasion models that you got from the big clan packages, but those are not the same, because you cannot just buy them like you can buy a hero mech. I'd LOVE to have an invasion Mad Dog, but I cannot have it.


So new players have it easier getting into IS mechs, easier to build up a force of them and more available options that help with grinding. They got hero mechs and a lot more champion mechs. On top of that there was even a time when ALL the clan mechs were locked behind a paywall. This too kept many players away from that faction. Inequalities like that are horrible in a game that is supposed to be competitive.

This guy said it best, There is a barrier cost for new players. Does anyone really want to sit around and grind 12~15million cbills for a clan mech(using a heavy mech as its the most popular and an approximate cost) as a new player to the MWO universe? At least you can upgrade your IS mechs piece by piece, instead of having this giant cost up front.For a person on a TIME budget, this is extremely prohibitive.

I did grind out two timber wolves w/out premium time(i now use it, was not sold on the game at that time), and it took for god damn ever. Even with using a timberwolf I bought with MC.

And unless the chassis is really not preferred, It's just not economical to sell off the extra variants. It becomes really tedious to switch load outs if you have a few set-ups you like to run. "Hold on guys I sold off my other two timberwolves, let me switch all my omnipods, weapons, armor values, and modules". That would get old. Also, the Center torsos cant be switched, and pending the chassis, this can be a big deal(debatable i suppose).

Sum it up:

New player wins game on non premium time doing 250 damage and making ~175k.

*looks at cost of Clan mechs*
*looks at cost of IS Mecgs*
*goes with IS mechs*

[Void Angel]

Clan 'mechs do not cost more to master - you simply pay the costs up front. If you compare the c-bill costs between a fully-upgraded Inner Sphere 'mech and a Clan 'mech of the same tonnage - particularly if you are comparing competitive or meta builds - you'll find the costs to be quite similar. So, this assertion that the Clans are more expensive is wrong.

Now, you could argue that it's partly correct if you are planning on selling the "extra" chassis off, but most players will tell you not to do that - you never know when you're going to want another 'mech. In fact, on this note the Clans have the advantage, not the Inner Sphere, because in nearly all cases an Omni is an Omni is an Omni; only when the CT of one variant has a hardpoint or fixed equipment does it matter, so you can sell off that third Timberwold (which won't fit in your drop deck) if you truly want to. The Inner Sphere, on the other hand, gets quirks on a per-variant basis, and so the chassis you sell off today may become the optimal chassis for you later as quirks are adjusted and the game metas change. So the absolute cost is emphatically not more for the Clans by any reasonable measure - I've had people try to split hairs about omnipods, but it just doesn't pass muster. Even if you end up with an Inner Sphere chassis that you never upgrade, or obsessively swap engines around, the difference is marginal at best.

The perceived costs, on the other hand, are much greater, like Rattazustra points out on page 1. How much of a problem this presents is difficult to determine from a user standpoint, however. Not only do we not have access to demographic data sets related to performance, it's hard to isolate the effect (if any) of this particular factor from other confounding variables (such as aesthetics and player perceptions.)

Player opinions and common wisdom are particularly hard to separate; it's the Thomas Theorem in action - "if men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences." As an anecdotal example, take World of Warcraft. When I played that game, the common wisdom was "Alliance for Raiding, Horde for PvP." The idea was that the Horde's racial cooldowns were better for killing other players, while the Alliance's cooldowns were better for tackling raid content. This was a load of road apples; most racials were primarily useful for PvP, though the Alliance consistently undervalued theirs. However, this myth was so commonly and confidently repeated that many players who wanted to tackle raid content shifted toward the Allance - we were outnumbered on my PvP server literally two to one. This caused a real advantage in the Alliance, because they had more raiders - good or bad - available, so their best guilds had a larger pool of talent to draw from and compete for. But that wasn't the only factor in play, either! The Alliance also had mechanical advantages (dwarf priests and Paladins) that allowed them to more easily pass and farm certain raids, accelerating their progression. And players who didn't know or care about raiding advantage would pick their faction based on aesthetics - the Alliance had pretty, happy-fantasy characters with a broader appeal, while the aggressive, bloody-minded people like me went Horde (I know people personally who refused to play Horde until Blood Elves were released.) Which of these factors was "the" reason the Alliance outnumbered the Horde? Well, none of them - they all played a part, and the relative importance of each factor was impossible to determine from the player perspective. Eventually, Blizzard equalized the aesthetics somewhat, giving space-goat-people to the Alliance and pretty-elves to the Horde; later they gave the Alliance werewolves, and the Horde got goblins for the "short, comically annoying people" crowd. They also allowed both factions to access all the classes (whereas Shamans and Paladins were faction-specific before,) and as far as I know server populations are much more even now.

So what I'm saying here is that the "higher cost" argument is simply a bad one - but the "higher perceived cost" argument does hold water, though its impact is hard to determine.

Edited by Void Angel, 12 February 2016 - 11:50 AM.

[patoman]

Just looking at it in game the mechs cost more in credits.

The other stuff, contributes to it, but easiest thing to see, is in same class the mechs cost more than double.