57 replies to this topic

[Hotthedd]

Drunk Canuck, on 02 August 2016 - 03:04 PM, said:

If you want to balance factions, you put a cap on active players per faction and tell everyone else to suck it up and go elsewhere. In other words, if your players aren't dropping in FP with any frequency, your unit members wouldn't count against the cap.

Yeah, I'm sure that preventing players from being in/dropping for the faction of their choice would go over really well. Problem solved.

That was sarcasm

[iLLcapitan]

I keep hearing units 'exploit' CW and I got no friggin clue what is ment by that.
'Exploiting' meaning 'playing' their dedicated gamemode?
Sorry if somebody exploits you.

[Davegt27]

when CW first started there was no secondary generators and no cover over Omega
well it was the first or second drop when a spider jumped on top of omega and started blasting away
I was like what a great idea wish I had thought of it

but cries went out and the game was changed

also when CW started we could send a few light mechs in while the rest of the team fought in another area and could take down
the gens and omega and win the day

again cries went out saying exploit and the game was changed

as the game sits now some units could wipe out a faction and or march to terra anytime they wanted
that's not a balanced long living CW game mode

[L A V A]

Davegt27, on 03 August 2016 - 05:49 AM, said:

that's not a balanced long living CW game mode

That's not a balanced long living game period.

Like I said before, if there were millions playing the game, the whole galactic war thing would work.

But since there isn't, it means all the resources dedicated to creating this game mode has essentially been wasted.

[Spider00x]

Sader325, on 01 August 2016 - 12:51 PM, said:

Make it so mercs can drop any mech they want, and take contracts based on the planet (no week long contracts).

And you got yourself a deal.

For once I actually agree with Sader, and Im a Loyalist.

Mercs should be allowed to bring whatever they want into CW, It would dynamically change the game meta I think in a good way. HOWEVER, the monetary rewards are a lot lower like less than half for what a loyalist would receive. This would make sense logically being that mercs historically bring wartime requisitioned gear to the field, think of it as the repair cost for maintaining their mercenary company assets. This would also push newer players into being loyalists as to where they could make money easier to purchase mechs, and only wealhier more experienced players would go merc in smaller groups were money to a lot of these guys is no longer the driving force as to why they play the game. Honestly it should be a 4 to 1 loyalist to merc ratio.

I also think every loyalist house should have a different set of trial mechs, those trial mechs and load out should be voted for on the forums. So for example Steiner could have an Atlas as a trial where Liao might have Cataphract trials and as a Default have the paint scheme and pattern of that faction for lore/ immersion purposes. Those trial mechs should change every three months to keep up with the meta.

But thats my idea in a nut shell, as far as paying money to attack different planets that might be a little to niche and micro for newer players to understand. But I agree there are some simple lore solution that could add a lot of value here and fix some of these population/ bucket issues.

A lot of what was talked about during the round table was buckets, Im totally fine with these house alliances and I think Russ is too. When the population starts to increase then and only then maybe start breaking the alliances and going back to individual houses. Like call it a stretch goal only achieved with player activity in FW.

Edited by Spider00x, 03 August 2016 - 09:43 AM.

[Kin3ticX]

id like to maybe try a unit cap but consider this

there are some units with 500 people and they no longer even play and they really really wont play with 100 people.

[Spider00x]

Kin3ticX, on 03 August 2016 - 09:51 AM, said:

id like to maybe try a unit cap but consider this

there are some units with 500 people and they no longer even play and they really really wont play with 100 people.

It would be easier if PGI put in some kinda of mechanic so you could see the last time someone logged on, OR if they havnt logged on in say 30 days they go into some kinda 'sleeper mode' as to were they wouldnt count towards increased recruitment fees.

On the other hand I dont think a hard cap of say a 100 people isnt unreasonable. Given the state of FW at this time having a buncha smaller focused units would be better for the game than just a handful of mega units dominating all over the place. Pugs need to be carried so they can get a taste of victory and get hooked on the game. When they see the key to success is to be in/ form a unit they will and hence ad to the desperatly needed loyal and active player base.

Edited by Spider00x, 03 August 2016 - 09:56 AM.

[Hotthedd]

Spider00x, on 03 August 2016 - 09:39 AM, said:

For once I actually agree with Sader, and Im a Loyalist.

Mercs should be allowed to bring whatever they want into CW, It would dynamically change the game meta I think in a good way. HOWEVER, the monetary rewards are a lot lower like less than half for what a loyalist would receive. This would make sense logically being that mercs historically bring wartime requisitioned gear to the field, think of it as the repair cost for maintaining their mercenary company assets. This would also push newer players into being loyalists as to where they could make money easier to purchase mechs, and only wealhier more experienced players would go merc in smaller groups were money to a lot of these guys is no longer the driving force as to why they play the game. Honestly it should be a 4 to 1 loyalist to merc ratio.

I also think every loyalist house should have a different set of trial mechs, those trial mechs and load out should be voted for on the forums. So for example Steiner could have an Atlas as a trial where Liao might have Cataphract trials and as a Default have the paint scheme and pattern of that faction for lore/ immersion purposes. Those trial mechs should change every three months to keep up with the meta.

But thats my idea in a nut shell, as far as paying money to attack different planets that might be a little to niche and micro for newer players to understand. But I agree there are some simple lore solution that could add a lot of value here and fix some of these population/ bucket issues.

A lot of what was talked about during the round table was buckets, Im totally fine with these house alliances and I think Russ is too. When the population starts to increase then and only then maybe start breaking the alliances and going back to individual houses. Like call it a stretch goal only achieved with player activity in FW.

Mercenaries should have the highest earning potential, otherwise what reason would they have for being mercenaries?
On the flip side, just being a merc should incur costs in transportation, logistics, repair, and restocking ammunition.

[Spider00x]

Hotthedd, on 03 August 2016 - 09:57 AM, said:

Mercenaries should have the highest earning potential, otherwise what reason would they have for being mercenaries?
On the flip side, just being a merc should incur costs in transportation, logistics, repair, and restocking ammunition.

The reason to be mercenary as described above is the ABILITY to bring whatever mech you want to the field and be able to play around the FW map. While that might not be directly a monetary advantage it certainly is one from an enjoyment perspective.

The 'restocking cost' as you described is the 'in-game' reason why they would be receiving less income.

Edited by Spider00x, 03 August 2016 - 10:00 AM.

[Commander A9]

I experienced the bug where you could bring Inner Sphere mechs into a Clan dropdeck last night, and I got to tell you, it was pretty exciting.

So, yes, why not let mercenaries bring any mech of choice into combat? Hell, I paid for most of my Clan mechs with my hard-earned C-Bills. All 18,750,000 of them. So why shouldn't I be allowed to bring them into any fight I'm in?

Edited by Commander A9, 03 August 2016 - 10:53 AM.

[Hotthedd]

Spider00x, on 03 August 2016 - 09:59 AM, said:

The reason to be mercenary as described above is the ABILITY to bring whatever mech you want to the field and be able to play around the FW map. While that might not be directly a monetary advantage it certainly is one from an enjoyment perspective.

The 'restocking cost' as you described is the 'in-game' reason why they would be receiving less income.

I'm talking about realism, though. The reason people become mercenaries throughout history is the potential (important, I said POTENTIAL) ability to make more money. Nobody in the BT universe would ever become a mercenary if it meant automatically less money. If a mercenary does well, the payout minus costs should be more than the typical Loyalist's wages.

Loyalists have the added advantage of having a say in the planets under attack, as well.

I am not a fan of mixed dropdecks, there would have to be a downside to it.

[Spider00x]

I strongly disagree being a mercenary means freedom to fight where and when you want that freedom comes at a cost. Being a loyalist means you are career military that needs monetary incentive otherwise everyone would be mercenary like it is now. There are currently more Mercenaries than loyalists and almost every comp team is mercenary. Being a loyalist means you are locked in a course of action come hell or high water. Mercenary rewards should never out pay loyalists whose supplies are covered by their patron goverments.

On the subject of mixed clan and IS drop decks I don't see a notable advantage in quick play I doubt I would either in CW.

[Spider00x]

Commander A9, on 03 August 2016 - 10:52 AM, said:

I experienced the bug where you could bring Inner Sphere mechs into a Clan dropdeck last night, and I got to tell you, it was pretty exciting.

So, yes, why not let mercenaries bring any mech of choice into combat? Hell, I paid for most of my Clan mechs with my hard-earned C-Bills. All 18,750,000 of them. So why shouldn't I be allowed to bring them into any fight I'm in?

I think I was in that match against you on taiga I remember dropping my legend killer in the last round them stopping seeing a red dorito above an enemy rifleman it was weird I paused then I was like 'shiiit' and starting shooting.

[BSK]

Zolaz, on 01 August 2016 - 12:40 PM, said:

you make it cost too much.

After all the threads in this subforum about FP being dead, too low populated, not having enough incentives - THAT was your idea to come up with? How many members does your unit have? Or are you a lonewolf who doesn't want to be in one?

[Hotthedd]

Spider00x, on 03 August 2016 - 11:23 AM, said:

I strongly disagree being a mercenary means freedom to fight where and when you want that freedom comes at a cost. Being a loyalist means you are career military that needs monetary incentive otherwise everyone would be mercenary like it is now. There are currently more Mercenaries than loyalists and almost every comp team is mercenary. Being a loyalist means you are locked in a course of action come hell or high water. Mercenary rewards should never out pay loyalists whose supplies are covered by their patron goverments.

On the subject of mixed clan and IS drop decks I don't see a notable advantage in quick play I doubt I would either in CW.

The "freedom" is the freedom to make more money (if you do well), but at the risk of making almost nothing (if you do very poorly) due to the out of pocket costs.
Paid military personnel get the same combat pay whether they win or lose a battle.

[Spider00x]

Hotthedd, on 03 August 2016 - 01:19 PM, said:

The "freedom" is the freedom to make more money (if you do well), but at the risk of making almost nothing (if you do very poorly) due to the out of pocket costs.
Paid military personnel get the same combat pay whether they win or lose a battle.

Surely however mercenaries have to pay repair/ rearming fees where loyalists don't. Again this is why they would earn less money. Components and mechs destroyed need to be repaired that costs c bills. You can keep the house mercenary payouts percentage fluxations the same.

[Hotthedd]

Spider00x, on 03 August 2016 - 02:03 PM, said:

Surely however mercenaries have to pay repair/ rearming fees where loyalists don't. Again this is why they would earn less money. Components and mechs destroyed need to be repaired that costs c bills. You can keep the house mercenary payouts percentage fluxations the same.

To be clear, I am saying Loyalists will get a standard payout, but mercenaries would have a lower potential floor and a higher potential ceiling.

[Spider00x]

Right I mean if they stomped the enemy team sure, more risk more reward.

[B0oN]

Does any of you actually know how much career military up to rank Lieutenant (which is what I think would command a company of mechs) earns ?

I don´t really think its that much ...

And you guys really wanna translate that into this game ?
Well, if that notion suceeds I´m just having all the more incentive to stay a warrior of any Clan, because CASTES ^^

[xX PUG Xx]

For me that is what defines a Mercenary, they are a soldier for hire and they are rewarded on their performance. A contract would have a retainer fee, so the Merc would earn this simply for putting themselves in harms way and the remainder would be paid upon succesful completiton of the contract/mission.

For example:

IDI take on a defence contract on the planet New Syrtis on behalf on House Davion, each drop is worth 250,000 CBills for a successful defence. 75,000 is paid regardless of the outcome but each IDI pilot must choose to either wait the specified amount of time or pay the CBill (or MC) value to have the refit "fasttracked".

The value of the refit could be a generalised value, 15k for a Light upto 100k for an Assault for instance or it could be specific to the individual 'Mech. However I feel having a general value is both simpler for coding purposes and fairer for the pilot to figure out if it is worthwhile taking a certain 'Mech. This system would also be open to contract manipulation by PGI to encourage or discourage certain weight classes or even particular 'Mechs on any given contract.

For the Loyalist pilot they have a flat rate "paycheck" regardless of they win or lose. This would be a lower value, 150k cbills for example, however they do not have "refit" costs to contend with.

**just wanted to add that the in-game payments would be unchanged, this is purely for "contract" payments on each drop. **

Edited by xX PUG Xx, 03 August 2016 - 04:40 PM.