104 replies to this topic

[Crockdaddy]

fbj, on 21 April 2016 - 02:00 PM, said:

I really like tacos and bacon

Can I do a 1/2 like on this? I love bacon ... tacos meh.

hybrid black, on 21 April 2016 - 11:54 AM, said:

WoT is a f2p game and gives out way more

So all your points are invalid

No one buys Premium times they get it with mech packs
And my unit size has nothing to do with it I don't care about the MC I would rather them remove it and just give the unit cbills that are slightly usefully

I think Hybrid the issue is WoT is wildly popular and makes so much money that it borders on stupid ... thus they can easily go big rewards to keep their player hard core base hooked. I do agree and I'd rather see strong Cbill rewards than MC.

[Clownwarlord]

Why are MC rewards so small?

Well while some say it would cause inflation of MC and ultimately take away money from game development I will leave that alone because it already has been stated.

The other reason I can think of why is because if you only get a small amount to make taking that planet worth something you are going to have to stay there to get your 'money's' worth out of it. So it basically helps keep units tied to a faction as well as rewarding them (while small is still something) for their participation in CW.

[Luscious Dan]

Assigning MC to the unit for redistribution is a joke, and obviously it's designed to provide incentive to split up the big groups. What's the bigger problem, low population or having some groups be too big??

Instead it should just be part of the individual rewards for Faction Play. If each account had a chance to earn up to 10MC per day by winning a faction play match, it would keep people motivated to play and I don't think it would be worth the time to farm either with a web of alt accounts. Think of it like the CW version of x2 First win of the day XP bonus (except it's one per account, not per mech). Throw in a minimum match score to keep people honest.

Having a small amount of MC distributed among the entire group is just a lot of coding for not enough reward to actually mean anything. I don't see that little bit of MC actually increasing the player base for Faction Play like adding an individual reward would.

But what do I know, I'm just a puggernaut looking for a reason to bother playing Faction Play matches...

Edited by Luscious Dan, 21 April 2016 - 02:47 PM.

[Stealth Raptor]

a friend came up with this about mc:

Even at the theoretical maximum (360 planets with tags on, 10 planets taken every attack phase), the 5400 mc generated per day would take roughly three years to equal the 6,183,330 MC that Stocking Stuffer 2015 generated.

[hybrid black]

clownwarlord, on 21 April 2016 - 02:40 PM, said:

Why are MC rewards so small?

Well while some say it would cause inflation of MC and ultimately take away money from game development I will leave that alone because it already has been stated.

The other reason I can think of why is because if you only get a small amount to make taking that planet worth something you are going to have to stay there to get your 'money's' worth out of it. So it basically helps keep units tied to a faction as well as rewarding them (while small is still something) for their participation in CW.

Well had 6 tags the last time I looked send we ste still planning on switching factions when the time comes. if we could have more then 6 planets it would maybe make larger units stay in one place but, then no one else in that faction would be getting planets.

You then run in to the problem of smaller units not felling rewarded in that faction so they move so a faction with even smaller units then, those smaller units fell pushed out and switch to find rewards.

No matter what PGI does with FW it will not work for two reasons. One is that the population of MWO is to small for such a game mode. Two the player base of MWO would rather complain then adapt to the change in game, economy and, out of drop meta. Any one that denies that there is out of game meta going on or thinks it is bad for the game is the true problem with MWO

[Deathlike]

Stealth Raptor, on 21 April 2016 - 02:47 PM, said:

a friend came up with this about mc:

Even at the theoretical maximum (360 planets with tags on, 10 planets taken every attack phase), the 5400 mc generated per day would take roughly three years to equal the 6,183,330 MC that Stocking Stuffer 2015 generated.

So, you're saying we're fighting against Scrooge McMech?

[DarklightCA]

Scout Derek, on 21 April 2016 - 01:43 PM, said:

You know what, I have a little bet, why don't we let you see what happens when we allow that to happen? I'm not going to discuss this anymore, as that seems like the best solution.

When that happens and we see the results, I'll either consider your opinion invalid, or consider your opinion valid. Much easier and ends the discussion.

We'll be talking about this again when it happens. until then, keep going with your opinion, and try to win over people with Increasing the amount of MC by fifty-fold.

First of all I said nothing about increasing it fifty-fold, yet you are telling me I am the one who doesn't read back.. Further I don't have to see what happens because I already know what happens. As I've stated it's already proven by other games so it doesn't matter if you consider my "opinion" valid considering it's not my opinion but already proven game design by more successful games.

[pwnface]

hybrid black, on 21 April 2016 - 03:04 PM, said:

[REDACTED]

To be fair you kind of are being an unrelenting douche.

You've both voiced your opinions and you should both move on.

Insulting a moderator for disagreeing with your opinion isn't going to get you anywhere.

Edited by Scout Derek, 21 April 2016 - 03:08 PM.
removal of an unconstructive post.

[hybrid black]

pwnface, on 21 April 2016 - 03:06 PM, said:

To be fair you kind of are being an unrelenting douche.

You've both voiced your opinions and you should both move on.

Insulting a moderator for disagreeing with your opinion isn't going to get you anywhere.

He even edited your post about me lol

[Scout Derek]

pwnface, on 21 April 2016 - 03:06 PM, said:

To be fair you kind of are being an unrelenting douche.

You've both voiced your opinions and you should both move on.

Insulting a moderator for disagreeing with your opinion isn't going to get you anywhere.

I've already moved on, however, hybrid dog has violated quite a bit of the CoC already, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt by not already taking action.

you this is to you hybrid, I'm not abusing my power if I feel that there is something within your posts that are in violation of the CoC.


And If I really was, I would have already deleted Deathlike's and Darklight's opinions.

[hybrid black]

Scout Derek, on 21 April 2016 - 03:10 PM, said:

I've already moved on, however, hybrid dog has violated quite a bit of the CoC already, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt by not already taking action.

you this is to you hybrid, I'm not abusing my power if I feel that there is something within your posts that are in violation of the CoC.


And If I really was, I would have already deleted Deathlike's and Darklight's opinions.

So sad that you delete constructive comments that you do not agree with to help the game

Edited by hybrid black, 21 April 2016 - 03:13 PM.

[Scout Derek]

DarklightCA, on 21 April 2016 - 02:50 PM, said:

First of all I said nothing about increasing it fifty-fold, yet you are telling me I am the one who doesn't read back.. Further I don't have to see what happens because I already know what happens. As I've stated it's already proven by other games so it doesn't matter if you consider my "opinion" valid considering it's not my opinion but already proven game design by more successful games.

But you are agreeing with the fact that MC should be increased. Sorry about that, pressure of the moment as they say hmm?

But regardless, this is all opinion until you have numbers or data, just because a company is successful in what it does doesn't mean that another company can achieve the same results doing the same thing.

[pwnface]

Back on topic:

Everyone thinks the MC rewards are too low.

PGI can improve this by increasing the rewards per planet and removing the hard cap for maximum MC earned per phase.

[Omaha]

Scout Derek, on 21 April 2016 - 11:51 AM, said:

It's a F2P game hybrid, this isn't a game that we already paid for. If it was, then I'd say "Yes, I agree with you".

But I don't agree with you, because it's a F2P game and PGI needs revenue, which comes from mech packs and MC currency, as well as a few other things. And that's it, that's all the revenue they get from this game, which is F2P.

If you take away one of their prime money sources for this game, you're essentially asking them to jump up the prices of Mech packs, or any other future items that may come out in order to counteract the fact that they give out free premium currency. 2700 MC? I can buy a hero medium-small hero, or Perma Camos, Warhorns, Premium stuff. Within 2 months of playing I can almost have enough for Mech bundles.

They could also, just work harder, making more then one mech pack a month. I'm just saying. Anyways, not that I agree personally with anything here in this thread. Be thankful it's free mc.

The thing that I thought was kinda lame, about all of this mech packs thing. Was I've heard them say they are milking out the mechs, to make the game last longer. So when they made every mech there is in Battletech. That's it? They just give up on it? These dudes and dudettes are pretty creative ppl, I never understand why they just cant make new stuff and actually start writing new battletech tech into the game eventually. I don't like knowing about shelf lives.

Edited by Omaha, 21 April 2016 - 03:18 PM.

[Scout Derek]

pwnface, on 21 April 2016 - 03:13 PM, said:

Back on topic:

Everyone thinks the MC rewards are too low.

PGI can improve this by increasing the rewards per planet and removing the hard cap for maximum MC earned per phase.

Okay, so how much do you propose? I propose the formula earlier, which accounts to 490 a day based on 100 man unit.

Omaha, on 21 April 2016 - 03:13 PM, said:

They could also, just work harder, making more then one mech pack a month. I'm just saying. Anyways, not that I agree personally with anything here in this thread. Be thankful it's free mc.

They could, which would be nice and yield more content at a faster pace than usual.

[pwnface]

Scout Derek, on 21 April 2016 - 03:17 PM, said:

Okay, so how much do you propose? I propose the formula earlier, which accounts to 490 a day based on 100 man unit.

New MC reward proposal:

First 5 planets are worth 25MC per phase.
Second 5 planets are worth 20MC per phase.
Third 5 planets are worth 15MC per phase.
Fourth 5 planets are worth 10MC per phase.
Any additional planets beyond the first 20 only give 5MC per phase.
No maximum MC earnings.

Let's say a unit in CW owns 30 planets.
First 5 x 25 = 125
Second 5 x 20 = 100
Third 5 x 15 = 75
Fourth 5 x 10 = 50
Last 10 x 5 = 50
Total = 400MC

(these values could be adjusted or up for debate but provides us a base line)

Each attack phase this unit would earn 400MC or 1200MC per day.
Planets expire every 12 days but could be shortened to 7-10days to keep units more active.

This makes it more rewarding for smaller units who don't have the manpower to hold 30+ planets but still gives reasonable rewards to larger units.

1200-1500MC per day for the most winningest units in CW that have 100+ members doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

Edited by pwnface, 21 April 2016 - 03:25 PM.

[Scout Derek]

hybrid black, on 21 April 2016 - 03:12 PM, said:

So sad that you delete constructive comments that you do not agree with to help the game

This is not constructive:

hybrid black, on 21 April 2016 - 12:01 PM, said:

Well maybe PGI should of made less of a garbage game to keep the steam players..... oh wait they listen to people like you that make it worse lol

Or this:

hybrid black, on 21 April 2016 - 02:55 PM, said:

There's not really much point in talking to him other then to troll him. His face is so coverd in PGIs **** he can't see

And I already explained;

Scout Derek, on 21 April 2016 - 03:10 PM, said:

I'm not abusing my power if I feel that there is something within your posts that are in violation of the CoC.


And If I really was, I would have already deleted Deathlike's and Darklight's opinions.

[hybrid black]

Scout Derek, on 21 April 2016 - 03:24 PM, said:

This is not constructive:




Or this:



And I already explained;

Yes they are all constructive to the conversation at hand.

[DarklightCA]

Scout Derek, on 21 April 2016 - 03:13 PM, said:

But you are agreeing with the fact that MC should be increased. Sorry about that, pressure of the moment as they say hmm?

But regardless, this is all opinion until you have numbers or data, just because a company is successful in what it does doesn't mean that another company can achieve the same results doing the same thing.

If that's the case than so is your arguement against increasing MC rewards as there is nothing to prove that it would take money away from PGI. What PGI is providing as planetary rewards for a ENTIRE UNIT is extremely pitiful, so pitiful that it has all units stumped as to how they even give it away or divide it.

I am not asking PGI to increase rewards 50x, I am asking them to adjust the planet generation higher than what it is as well as remove the ridiculous cap which serves no purpose but to eliminate any competitive element in the gamemode and hinder successful units from being rewarded for being successful.

There are many games other than World of Tank's that have a simular system that works for their game, I used World of Tanks because as a game it's the most like MWO. They give away bigger premium currency to clan's who are roughly the size of your average MWO unit and it has no effect on their profits because even as their rewards are larger, it's adjusted enough that the clan's have enough to spread around so players are actually rewarded for conquering territory but not too much where those clan's can get enough of it where they can replace real money for content. It will work with MWO, the only thing that is different is the premium currency that needs to be adjusted to where it's good for MWO.

[Scout Derek]

hybrid black, on 21 April 2016 - 03:28 PM, said:

Yes they are all constructive to the conversation at hand.

And I quote the CoC, which has been placed as a spoiler to save space

Spoiler

STAFF ABUSE


Engaging in any of the following actions is forbidden:

• Impersonating members of PGI staff or the volunteer moderator team.
  
• Griefing or violating the Code of Conduct when engaging with or referencing members of PGI staff or the volunteer moderator team.
  
• Negatively calling out members of PGI staff or volunteer moderator team, either as a group or individually, in topics, comments, or other communications.
  
• Demanding a public response or acknowledgement of topics, comments, or other communications.

Threats, Bullying, and Personal Information



Cyber-bullying has no place in MechWarrior Online or any of the PGI services. Any attempt to threaten or disturb the private and/or public real life of any player is treated with extreme severity and will not be tolerated. Threatening other players or engaging in insults, accusations, or negative behavior that references or involves real life identities or personalities is forbidden. Releasing personal or identifying information about another player using PGi services is forbidden.

SPAMMING / TROLLING / UNCONSTRUCTIVE BEHAVIOR


Engaging in any of the following actions while using PGI services is forbidden:

• Excessively communicating the same phrase, similar phrases, or pure gibberish.
  
• Sending the same communication in multiple areas.
  
• Creating forum threads about existing topics.
  
• Creating duplicate or similar threads about an existing topic for further discussion in more than one forum.
  
• Sending communications for the purpose of causing unrest.
  
• Causing disturbances, such as picking fights, making off topic posts that derail a discussion, or insulting other individuals.
  
• Communicating non-constructive comments.
  
• Abusing Report features by sending false alarms, nonsensical messages, or reporting activities that do not violate the Code of Conduct or Terms of Use.
  
• Responding to a topic of conversation with ‘IBTL’, ‘TLDR’, ‘+1’,’yawn’, ‘ok’, ‘bump’, or any other fad or low-effort statements.
  
• Posting farewells, such as “I quit”, “I’m done”, “I’m leaving”, and any similar variations.
  
• Posting threads, content, or communications in areas that do not relate to the posted content.
  
• Post or communicate requests and/or demands for responses

Edited by Scout Derek, 21 April 2016 - 03:35 PM.