1049 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

ShadowWolf Kell, on 10 April 2016 - 08:12 PM, said:

That's not surprising given the Kodiak has been the most anticipated Clan Assault since the Clans were announced. The Archer brings nothing new really, the Phoenix Hawk is nothing more than another medium laser vomit boat at it's core and the Viper is a Nova with an even easier to core CT basically since it shares the same geometry.

And this game is SOOOO friendly to Missiles.

Also, Archer sales were directly impacted by the half *** 7 day lead up with wrong info posted, horrible quirks, and general laziness where they posted Screenshots of Sean Lang's stupid pet build as Desktops and for the ARC-2R "Stock Loadout".

Add in the Will they won't they fix the Quirks thanks to Paul saying they weren't "finalized" and were being change, only to have Russ then yank the rug out from under people by getting stubborn and holding fast.

I can tell you for a certainty, that it ended up with record cancelled orders and refunds. I know it even caused some people to cancel on the Kodiak and not trust PGI enough to consider the PXH at all.

Simply put PGI screwed up the Archer release every way imaginable on what was already the 3rd/4th choice popularity wise of the Alpha Lance ... and yet I still see 3-4 every single drop.

Go figure.

Imperius, on 10 April 2016 - 08:07 PM, said:

The same guy who seems to flip flop on that criteria and give non-answers to both sides like a politician... If you stay in the past too long you become a part of it. Sales are telling the tale for me and I bet the Kodiak sold better than the Phoenix Hawk, Archer, and the Viper.

Which is irrelevant... because he still makes the call. And "his position at this time" is scraping the bottom of the barrel of 3053.

So you can argue with us about Dark Age mechs all you want...and it makes zero difference, because the guy in charge has (for now) said no.

So the rest of us are speculating and posting on the barrel scrapings. You can dislike it all you want, but you're arguing with the wrong people.

[Imperius]

LastKhan, on 10 April 2016 - 08:23 PM, said:

Sega is still around just not as a console company. Mostly arcades and games.


Eh, curious buyers, collectors, and the nostalgic crowd will buy it. Suggesting that PGI are a-okay of selling said particular whatever mech. You, yourself claiming they "aren't good mechs" or "they have no nostalgia" is just an opinion and that being the case no one is forcing you to buy said mech. If sales do end up being on the low side then PGI will just have to discuss that amongst themselves, they dont certainly need you as their bank account body guard.

Well 4 mechwarrior games excluded a lot of them for a reason. As for the banker comment, so far out of the 6 of you that constantly go back and fourth with me in the only one concerned about making PGI money, while your trying to just play time police for the sake of annoying me.

[Lucian Nostra]

Imperius, on 10 April 2016 - 08:36 PM, said:

Well 4 mechwarrior games excluded a lot of them for a reason. As for the banker comment, so far out of the 6 of you that constantly go back and fourth with me in the only one concerned about making PGI money, while your trying to just play time police for the sake of annoying me.

Oh I didn't realize you had an inside line to Microsoft when MW4 was being designed when you where what 13? Please expound apon the reasons MW4 didn't have said mechs I am interested to know your insider knowledge

[LastKhan]

Imperius, on 10 April 2016 - 08:36 PM, said:

Well 4 mechwarrior games excluded a lot of them for a reason. As for the banker comment, so far out of the 6 of you that constantly go back and fourth with me in the only one concerned about making PGI money, while your trying to just play time police for the sake of annoying me.

Wat? How the hell would you know why and how Mirosoft game's reasoning to excluded certain mechs? were you there at that meeting, in that same board room? lol

you are concerned about PGIs bank account when they really dont need you to. If they take a hit im 99% sure they wont go to you for economic advice.

[Bishop Steiner]

Lucian Nostra, on 10 April 2016 - 08:40 PM, said:

Oh I didn't realize you had an inside line to Microsoft when MW4 was being designed when you where what 13? Please expound apon the reasons MW4 didn't have said mechs I am interested to know your insider knowledge

MW3 and 4 skipped a lot of mechs, because they never went into deep support, like MWO has. MW2 Mercs ran a ton of these designs, and is still considered the best of the entire franchise.

Also one should note a lot of the mechs they DID add in MW3 and 4 are one nobody really clamors after, like the Firefly, Clint IIC, strider, Chimera, Longbow, Hauptman , etc.

Whereas the most popular of the entire franchise? Featured:
Inner Sphere[edit]
Battle Suit
Hornet
Commando
Mongoose
Battle Hawk
Javelin
Urbanmech
Jenner
Panther
Raven
Assassin
Cicada
Clint
Sentinel
Whitworth
Vindicator
Wolf Trap
Centurion
Crab
Grim Reaper
Hunchback
Trebuchet
Dragon
Quickdraw
Bombardier
Catapult
Jagermech
Flashman
Orion
Rakshasa
Awesome
Hatamoto-Chi
Salamander
Thug
Victor
Zeus
Stalker
Cyclops
Highlander
Mauler
Annihilator
Atlas

[Imperius]

Bishop Steiner, on 10 April 2016 - 08:36 PM, said:

And this game is SOOOO friendly to Missiles.

Also, Archer sales were directly impacted by the half *** 7 day lead up with wrong info posted, horrible quirks, and general laziness where they posted Screenshots of Sean Lang's stupid pet build as Desktops and for the ARC-2R "Stock Loadout".

Add in the Will they won't they fix the Quirks thanks to Paul saying they weren't "finalized" and were being change, only to have Russ then yank the rug out from under people by getting stubborn and holding fast.

I can tell you for a certainty, that it ended up with record cancelled orders and refunds. I know it even caused some people to cancel on the Kodiak and not trust PGI enough to consider the PXH at all.

Simply put PGI screwed up the Archer release every way imaginable on what was already the 3rd/4th choice popularity wise of the Alpha Lance ... and yet I still see 3-4 every single drop.

Go figure.


Which is irrelevant... because he still makes the call. And "his position at this time" is scraping the bottom of the barrel of 3053.

So you can argue with us about Dark Age mechs all you want...and it makes zero difference, because the guy in charge has (for now) said no.

So the rest of us are speculating and posting on the barrel scrapings. You can dislike it all you want, but you're arguing with the wrong people.

God forbid people would tell PGI that scraping the bottom of the barrel is a bad idea. Well at least you admit I'm trying to change the game for the better. While you sit in 3053 with your click and fan the flames that are gonna cause a serious issue sooner than later.

Well there is not too many things I'm wrong about. So guess we will see how it goes.

I wasn't wrong about steam retention numbers... http://steamcharts.com/app/342200

[Lucian Nostra]

Bishop Steiner, on 10 April 2016 - 08:46 PM, said:

MW3 and 4 skipped a lot of mechs, because they never went into deep support, like MWO has. MW2 Mercs ran a ton of these designs, and is still considered the best of the entire franchise.

Also one should note a lot of the mechs they DID add in MW3 and 4 are one nobody really clamors after, like the Firefly, Clint IIC, strider, Chimera, Longbow, Hauptman , etc.

Whereas the most popular of the entire franchise? Featured:
Inner Sphere[edit]
Battle Suit
Hornet
Commando
Mongoose
Battle Hawk
Javelin
Urbanmech
Jenner
Panther
Raven
Assassin
Cicada
Clint
Sentinel
Whitworth
Vindicator
Wolf Trap
Centurion
Crab
Grim Reaper
Hunchback
Trebuchet
Dragon
Quickdraw
Bombardier
Catapult
Jagermech
Flashman
Orion
Rakshasa
Awesome
Hatamoto-Chi
Salamander
Thug
Victor
Zeus
Stalker
Cyclops
Highlander
Mauler
Annihilator
Atlas

And there is a LOT of mechs there nobody would push for in MWO and theres even more in the Mektek packs I see that are being asked for here that got put out there and more that again I can't see people really trying to get in MWO.

Seem far more likely the Devs in MW4 sat around and picked mechs they liked and could model in blockasstronic graphics easily

[Bishop Steiner]

Lucian Nostra, on 10 April 2016 - 08:52 PM, said:

And there is a LOT of mechs there nobody would push for in MWO and theres even more in the Mektek packs I see that are being asked for here that got put out there and more that again I can't see people really trying to get in MWO.

Seem far more likely the Devs in MW4 sat around and picked mechs they liked and could model in blockasstronic graphics easily

yeah, and consider how many canon chassis they DID add in the Mektek MW4... not going to add stuff that people weren't asking for, usually.

[Lucian Nostra]

Imperius, on 10 April 2016 - 08:51 PM, said:

God forbid people would tell PGI that scraping the bottom of the barrel is a bad idea. Well at least you admit I'm trying to change the game for the better. While you sit in 3053 with your click and fan the flames that are gonna cause a serious issue sooner than later.

Well there is not too many things I'm wrong about. So guess we will see how it goes.

I wasn't wrong about steam retention numbers... http://steamcharts.com/app/342200

Yes we all know player retention is because of mech selection which by the way is massive, and has nothing to do with the fact that game is an arena shooter and gets stale pretty fast. Oh and it totally punishes casual players trying to group with their friends

Edited by Lucian Nostra, 10 April 2016 - 08:58 PM.

[CK16]

It is opinions, the older wales want to keep off the time jump for awhile to get all their toys, while the younger ones want to jump and get theirs. Either way there is a winner and a loser in this situation.

I hate waiting, I can not think of anyone that enjoys waiting. But I understand both sides while still having my opinions, guys it is ok to disagree on this. I am sure PGI has had these same discussion ALOT as well, you dont think they realize both sides. But both of you I think are getting to personally invested Bishop wants his oldies and Impy is very much move forward. BUT we can not have the Mk.II till we jump the time line, other wise we break all hell open in the forums asking for X,Y, and Z.

[Imperius]

Lucian Nostra, on 10 April 2016 - 08:40 PM, said:

Oh I didn't realize you had an inside line to Microsoft when MW4 was being designed when you where what 13? Please expound apon the reasons MW4 didn't have said mechs I am interested to know your insider knowledge

Knowing them they most likely have stats from all the previous games and what was most popular at TT events. Microsoft is always making their games by getting user research.

[Imperius]

Lucian Nostra, on 10 April 2016 - 08:58 PM, said:

Yes we all know player retention is because of mech selection which by the way is massive, and has nothing to do with the fact that game is an arena shooter and gets stale pretty fast. Oh and it totally punishes casual players trying to group with their friends

Actually I wasn't referring to mech packs being the decline of steam player retention. It was the lack of a single player safe place for them to climb the learning curve absent from 3-4 yr vet elitists and CW farmers.

[Bishop Steiner]

CK16, on 10 April 2016 - 09:02 PM, said:

It is opinions, the older wales want to keep off the time jump for awhile to get all their toys, while the younger ones want to jump and get theirs. Either way there is a winner and a loser in this situation.

I hate waiting, I can not think of anyone that enjoys waiting. But I understand both sides while still having my opinions, guys it is ok to disagree on this. I am sure PGI has had these same discussion ALOT as well, you dont think they realize both sides. But both of you I think are getting to personally invested Bishop wants his oldies and Impy is very much move forward. BUT we can not have the Mk.II till we jump the time line, other wise we break all hell open in the forums asking for X,Y, and Z.

That's actually not the case. That's a pretty big generalization, actually.

I've been pretty explicit that I think that a time jump in 2017 is probably ideal, if they have the resources free to prep the future tech needed. And this despite being one of the guys who would most benefit from it staying in the 3050s.

What do you think the odds are of me ever seeing my Vulcan, Assassin, Jackal, etc with a January 2017 timeskip? And yet I'm still pulling for it, because we do need more content, including stompy robot content and weapons to stave off burnout.

What I'm NOT willing to do is jump in half assed before they are ready to commit and support and make a bigger mess.

I have the patience and overall vision to understand most of the issues involved and not go off half cocked.

Let's also remember they are in some sort of financial deal to share art assets with HBS. They aren't just giving Battletech the models as charity. How much good does a Mad Cat mkII or Uziel do that side of their business plan? How many Mechs of the 3025 era did they agree to deliver for the partnership?

We don't have those details, but it's yet another thing being conveniently ignored.

[Lucian Nostra]

Imperius, on 10 April 2016 - 09:05 PM, said:

Knowing them they most likely have stats from all the previous games and what was most popular at TT events. Microsoft is always making their games by getting user research.

You do uuuh realize a lot of mechs released in MW4 in 2000 where part of the 3067 tech readout which was delayed to 2002 because FASA went under right? sorta yeah.. marketing for the upcoming TRO more than any popularity of designs

[Imperius]

Bishop Steiner, on 10 April 2016 - 09:09 PM, said:

That's actually not the case. That's a pretty big generalization, actually.

I've been pretty explicit that I think that a time jump in 2017 is probably ideal, if they have the resources free to prep the future tech needed. And this despite being one of the guys who would most benefit from it staying in the 3050s.

What do you think the odds are of me ever seeing my Vulcan, Assassin, Jackal, etc with a January 2017 timeskip? And yet I'm still pulling for it, because we do need more content, including stompy robot content and weapons to stave off burnout.

What I'm NOT willing to do is jump in half assed before they are ready to commit and support and make a bigger mess.

I have the patience and overall vision to understand most of the issues involved and not go off half cocked.

Let's also remember they are in some sort of financial deal to share art assets with HBS. They aren't just giving Battletech the models as charity. How much good does a Mad Cat mkII or Uziel do that side of their business plan? How many Mechs of the 3025 era did they agree to deliver for the partnership?

We don't have those details, but it's yet another thing being conveniently ignored.

Yes because the next 3 clan mechs have everything to do with HBS game that is set in 3025 where you and many of the other older players seem to belong.

[CK16]

Bishop Steiner, on 10 April 2016 - 09:09 PM, said:

That's actually not the case. That's a pretty big generalization, actually.

I've been pretty explicit that I think that a time jump in 2017 is probably ideal, if they have the resources free to prep the future tech needed. And this despite being one of the guys who would most benefit from it staying in the 3050s.

What do you think the odds are of me ever seeing my Vulcan, Assassin, Jackal, etc with a January 2017 timeskip? And yet I'm still pulling for it, because we do need more content, including stompy robot content and weapons to stave off burnout.

What I'm NOT willing to do is jump in half assed before they are ready to commit and support and make a bigger mess.

I have the patience and overall vision to understand most of the issues involved and not go off half cocked.

Let's also remember they are in some sort of financial deal to share art assets with HBS. They aren't just giving Battletech the models as charity. How much good does a Mad Cat mkII or Uziel do that side of their business plan? How many Mechs of the 3025 era did they agree to deliver for the partnership?

We don't have those details, but it's yet another thing being conveniently ignored.

My mistake on saying some but I do see why you want to wait as well to get a few more chassis you do want your self. This is no issue as I will not ever say no to someone's mech. But I understand the concern of skipping maybe decent mechs. But I think we both know not everything will be added. Some just cant offer enough from other chassis, bad designs. ect.

[ShadowWolf Kell]

Lucian Nostra, on 10 April 2016 - 09:15 PM, said:

You do uuuh realize a lot of mechs released in MW4 in 2000 where part of the 3067 tech readout which was delayed to 2002 because FASA went under right? sorta yeah.. marketing for the upcoming TRO more than any popularity of designs

Not to mention a lot of the designs added into the base game were NOT popular mechs. They became popular over time after release, but weren't at release.

Some of the very popular ones because dogs and lost favor. That carried on into MWO. Summoner and Mad Dog, I'm looking at you.

Edited by ShadowWolf Kell, 10 April 2016 - 09:20 PM.

[Lucian Nostra]

Imperius, on 10 April 2016 - 09:13 PM, said:

I doubt he'll would break open its the same 6 people fighting me... Hardly a lot of people and hardly hell. These forums are a shadow of what they used to be. Most likely due to letting the trolls sit here and play.

The only change i've seen in the forums over the years is that before people would say "I want this mech!" and people would either agree or say they want a different mech

Now it's "I want this mech!" and people yelling it's redundant or doesn't run the meta well or doesn't feature high mounts so it's DOA. Than offering up some other mech with some of the same problems instead.

[ShadowWolf Kell]

Lucian Nostra, on 10 April 2016 - 09:24 PM, said:

The only change i've seen in the forums over the years is that before people would say "I want this mech!" and people would either agree or say they want a different mech

Now it's "I want this mech!" and people yelling it's redundant or doesn't run the meta well or doesn't feature high mounts so it's DOA. Than offering up some other mech with some of the same problems instead.

I kind of miss the days of all new mechs being DOA and becoming the new FoTM.

RIP pre Quirkening when that was possible.

Edited by ShadowWolf Kell, 10 April 2016 - 09:26 PM.

[LastKhan]

ShadowWolf Kell, on 10 April 2016 - 09:25 PM, said:

I kind of miss the days of all new mechs being DOA and becoming the new FoTM.

RIP pre Quirkening when that was possible.

I miss when CW was fresh and new and there was a sense of community and clan / IS politics.