35 replies to this topic

[cazidin]

Greetings Mechwarriors. Today I have a simple question. Why is ANYONE asking for a single mech purchase with mechpacks? The rule of 3 for mastery may be gone, sure, but each of the chassis have different loadouts and, as the new skill tree will be unique to each individual mech, it makes sense to have these variants or be forced to respect.

Nevermind the fact that PGI would most likely sell singles at $10 or $15, giving much greater value to the bundle packs. Why get less for more money?

[FupDup]

I can guarantee that if PGI does it, the "mechs per dollar" ratio will be lower. Just like how the current model generally gives you less bang for your buck than the old waves of four did.

[Gas Guzzler]

FupDup, on 08 December 2016 - 11:41 AM, said:

I can guarantee that if PGI does it, the "mechs per dollar" ratio will be lower. Just like how the current model generally gives you less bang for your buck than the old waves of four did.

B-b-b-but more flexibility!!

[Bud Crue]

cazidin, on 08 December 2016 - 11:38 AM, said:

Greetings Mechwarriors. Today I have a simple question. Why is ANYONE asking for a single mech purchase with mechpacks? The rule of 3 for mastery may be gone, sure, but each of the chassis have different loadouts and, as the new skill tree will be unique to each individual mech, it makes sense to have these variants or be forced to respect.

Nevermind the fact that PGI would most likely sell singles at $10 or $15, giving much greater value to the bundle packs. Why get less for more money?

Because some mechs are utterly redundant from a potential load out perspective -especially under the new system (as far as we can tell). Example why should I have to buy an Archer-2R as part of the basic pack if I already have a Warhammer-7S. From just a potential load-out perspective, they are functionally identical (6E and 3M hardpoints). Lots of mechs are like this.

[cazidin]

Bud Crue, on 08 December 2016 - 11:43 AM, said:

Because some mechs are utterly redundant from a potential load out perspective -especially under the new system (as far as we can tell). Example why should I have to buy an Archer-2R as part of the basic pack if I already have a Warhammer-7S. From just a potential load-out perspective, they are functionally identical (6E and 3M hardpoints). Lots of mechs are like this.

That may be true, so see point 2. Redundant mechs with similar hardpoints can have different loadouts without demanding you spend MC to get a full refund, or C-Bills and have to grind it over. Plus, the Archer and Warhammer have VERY different geometry and play very differently.

[WarHippy]

cazidin, on 08 December 2016 - 11:38 AM, said:

Greetings Mechwarriors. Today I have a simple question. Why is ANYONE asking for a single mech purchase with mechpacks? The rule of 3 for mastery may be gone, sure, but each of the chassis have different loadouts and, as the new skill tree will be unique to each individual mech, it makes sense to have these variants or be forced to respect.

Nevermind the fact that PGI would most likely sell singles at $10 or $15, giving much greater value to the bundle packs. Why get less for more money?

Well a lot of people only leveled 3 mechs to begin with because they wanted to fully unlock the one mech they actually want. Yes, the 3 mechs would have different loadouts, but maybe only one has the loadout you actually want to use? Without the requirement for 3 people are going to be a lot more picky on what they buy.

[Bud Crue]

cazidin, on 08 December 2016 - 11:45 AM, said:

That may be true, so see point 2. Redundant mechs with similar hardpoints can have different loadouts without demanding you spend MC to get a full refund, or C-Bills and have to grind it over. Plus, the Archer and Warhammer have VERY different geometry and play very differently.

You just answered your own question. If potential load out is the same, and you want the diversity of playing different styles tha you mention, just get two of the mechs with the better geometry and better hard point locations.

[FupDup]

Bud Crue, on 08 December 2016 - 11:50 AM, said:

You just answered your own question. If potential load out is the same, and you want the diversity of playing different styles tha you mention, just get two of the mechs with the better geometry and better hard point locations.

I.e. pick either the Reaver or 3A from the Roughneck pack because the four other variants are pretty much useless.

It's kind of sad that the business model is designed to force you to play mechs that are gimped just to play the "fun" good mechs. Sometimes the bad variants aren't even by accident, but by deliberate choice (e.g. Roughneck was made purely by PGI so there is no excuse there).

[rolly]

Or giving people that flexibility will garner high sales since people will be closer to micro transactions. It would make products more attractive to a greater audience and help address burnout customer mechpack fatigue.

[cazidin]

Bud Crue, on 08 December 2016 - 11:50 AM, said:

You just answered your own question. If potential load out is the same, and you want the diversity of playing different styles tha you mention, just get two of the mechs with the better geometry and better hard point locations.

If I'm to understand your and WarHippy's responses, the answer is basically "I'd rather pay $20 for a single mech, instead of three when I might not use or want the other two." That, to me, seems terribly inefficient. Assuming PGI made the first variant free, and had two tiers of reinforcements, you could spend $30 or more for the 3 mechs instead of the $20 we pay now.

Perhaps my question was misunderstood. I'm asking not why you'd want only a single mech, I'm asking why demand to pay for only one instead of getting three which could be very useful. This will only result in us most likely paying a lot more for a lot less, knowing PGI and other businesses, and the tradeoff is artificial flexibility, when really, at worst, we could get a few million extra C-bills and possibly a spare engine or two from this deal.

[Dimento Graven]

Hey man, don't dis the 'Pokémon of Robots' marketing model.

"Gotta get 'em all!!!™"

Edited by Dimento Graven, 08 December 2016 - 11:58 AM.

[Bud Crue]

cazidin, on 08 December 2016 - 11:56 AM, said:

If I'm to understand your and WarHippy's responses, the answer is basically "I'd rather pay $20 for a single mech, instead of three when I might not use or want the other two." That, to me, seems terribly inefficient. Assuming PGI made the first variant free, and had two tiers of reinforcements, you could spend $30 or more for the 3 mechs instead of the $20 we pay now.

Perhaps my question was misunderstood. I'm asking not why you'd want only a single mech, I'm asking why demand to pay for only one instead of getting three which could be very useful. This will only result in us most likely paying a lot more for a lot less, knowing PGI and other businesses, and the tradeoff is artificial flexibility, when really, at worst, we could get a few million extra C-bills and possibly a spare engine or two from this deal.

No not at all. If my choice is 3 mechs for $20 or 1 mech for $20, I'll chose 3 everytime. But if I think 2 of those three mechs are really lame, I'm only making that purchase and grinding those mechs just to master the one I want. If under the new scheme that need to grind 3 is removed, then I can still make that same analysis, and then just buy the one good mech...
for c-bills.

[MechaBattler]

Frankly. They should just add a reason for wanting all three mechs. People can't be happy with not having to grind out 3 mechs. Now they're going to complain when they don't want to buy 3 for $20, which is already pretty cheap.

[FireStoat]

If the new mech for sale is an Omnimech, it's incredibly pointless to buy more than one with individual quirks being phased out and no longer needing 3 mechs to be mastered. One could argue that yeah, you might want more than one of the chasis because you want them to specialize in two different directions. I could see that if you really like the mech design. Three is kind of overkill now for Omnimechs with this new system.

[chucklesMuch]

I think that there is still be a place for packs. Though they might want to change the pack structure again... Seven of the same mech seems a bit of overkill especially with the set of three going... Or like another said in a different thread, give a small xp bonus for having multiplies of the same chassis... give us a reason to want them.

And with there being re-spec cost etc i'm still planning on having/keeping multiples of each chassis, maybe even multiples of the same variant if there are compelling reasons to have two different skill trees for the same variant. (but more like 2-4, not 7!)

There are exceptions... ie will probably get a Spider 5K now... previously never purchased it as I didn't want the two level any other variants... soon I won't need to

[RestosIII]

My only explanations are PGI plants, or people are actively trying to throw away their money because they're terrible consumers. To all of the people saying "I don't plan on using all but one of the variants!", I have something to point out. That means you get to sell those other variants, and get extra mechbays+c-bills+equipment in addition to the one variant you'll use! And no, PGI is not going to do the math and sell us mechs at the amount that they would be if you cut the mech packs into 1/3rd. If you teach them that it's okay to sell one mech a piece, they'll be selling it for $10-$15 per mech, ripping you off like never before. Please don't ruin it for people that actually use more than the "best" mechs, and make us pay stupid amounts of money for it.

Edited by RestosIII, 08 December 2016 - 01:43 PM.

[Peter2k]

RestosIII, on 08 December 2016 - 01:30 PM, said:

My only explanations are PGI plants, or people are actively trying to throw away their money because they're terrible consumers. To all of the people saying "I don't plan on using all but one of the variants!", I have something to point out. That means you get to sell those other variants, and get extra mechbays+c-bills+equipment in addition to the one variant you'll use! And no, PGI is not going to do the match and sell us mechs at the amount that they would be if you cut the mech packs into 1/3rd. If you teach them that it's okay to sell one mech a piece, they'll be selling it for $10-$15 per mech, ripping you off like never before. Please don't ruin it for people that actually use more than the "best" mechs, and make us pay stupid amounts of money for it.

A hero cost 15$
A pack of normal mechs 20$

One mech would be 10$, it's not going to be a fair third of 20$
That's unrealistic

What PGI should do is keep the options we have now
And add an a la carte option for 1 variant of you're choice

People will still be thinking about it, sometimes you do have interesting choices in one pack
2 at 10$ would already give 3 mechs in a normal pack, but with items on top

Frankly I have no idea why an ultimate pack sells for the exact amount of money if you would add them individually

Would expect 5$ off for instance

[cazidin]

Peter2k, on 08 December 2016 - 01:42 PM, said:

A hero cost 15$
A pack of normal mechs 20$

One mech would be 10$, it's not going to be a fair third of 20$
That's unrealistic

What PGI should do is keep the options we have now
And add an a la carte option for 1 variant of you're choice

People will still be thinking about it, sometimes you do have interesting choices in one pack
2 at 10$ would already give 3 mechs in a normal pack, but with items on top

Frankly I have no idea why an ultimate pack sells for the exact amount of money if you would add them individually

Would expect 5$ off for instance

Hmm... so, a la carte I can spend $20 for 2 mechs, instead of $20 for 3. This option doesn't seem particularly appealing to me, at all, even if it's only $15 for 2, I'd still most likely throw more money away for less. A good deal is only ever good to for the business, not the consumer. Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #103.

[Dr Wubs]

Why does PGI sell foolish $20 packs when you can get so many more mechs, loadouts, and geometry for $70?

I'd like to pre-order a single mech so I can play it on release and not wait several months for it to be available as a single. Is that so wrong? Bear also in mind the early adapter content that would naturally still be included in this purchase.

Why do thousands of people pay hundreds of dollars for temporary digital content when they could use the same money to buy a whole stack of other complete AAA games?

I'm a big boy living debt-free with a reasonably well-paid job and I don't need some random yahoo on the internet's free financial counseling. I'll decide what I want to pay for.

Why do people who are committed to paying $20 for 3 mechs get butthurt over someone else requesting an option that does not affect them?

If this was just trolling, then know that I won't be responding further. If it wasn't trolling, then know that I also will not be responding further.

Good Day,

DW

Edited by Dr Wubs, 08 December 2016 - 03:31 PM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Bud Crue, on 08 December 2016 - 11:43 AM, said:

Because some mechs are utterly redundant from a potential load out perspective -especially under the new system (as far as we can tell). Example why should I have to buy an Archer-2R as part of the basic pack if I already have a Warhammer-7S. From just a potential load-out perspective, they are functionally identical (6E and 3M hardpoints). Lots of mechs are like this.

But that is only some mechs. I would like to point to the upcoming Marauder IIC as an example. Aside from the Freebie, Early Adopter mech, all the variants are significantly different enough to warrant owning each one of them. Additionally there is no way in hell that I will know what one or ones I will find exciting to play until I have built out and played each variant a few dozen times in game.

Also you bring up the Archer and the Warhammer and asking why would you chose one over the other and the answer is because they are two different shaped mechs. The type and number of hardpoints on a mech only accounts for maybe 20% of the value of a build. Location of those hardpoints makes a massive difference. Hitbox size and shape make a massive difference. Hell the overall height, weight or length of a mech can make a massive difference and this is before taking into account such things as the movement archetype, torso twist and pitch angles, twist and pitch speeds, accel and decel values, arm range of motion, type of arm actuators available, etc.

Then there is the simple fact that many people might want to buy two of the same variant just so they can specialize different builds on them.

So no, the Mech Pack isn't going way and will still be very relevant in the future.