310 replies to this topic

[Evil Goof]

Deathlike, on 01 February 2017 - 08:44 AM, said:

It could be argued you'd be paying to win in a Rifleman, but that doesn't disallow the fact that there are terrible hero mechs too, like the Pretty Baby. Just because they are behind a paywall doesn't mean they can't suck too, not just be really good.

One could've argued the Black Widow (Marauder hero) is P2W to a degree. It provides something no other 75-ton IS mech can do... allow for 4 AC5 high mounted dakka. I'm not so sure how popular after the heat generation increase, but before that nerf, it could easily be called P2W then and just as much now (to a lesser degree).


Back when PGI did their first "beta" tourney (we're talking pre-MWOMC) when this was done before Clans the most prominent mechs on the field were Embers (Firestarter hero) and Dragon Slayers (Victor hero). Back then, it could easily be determined P2W. They were the most dominant mechs in their brackets at the time.


Meta can determine whether things are great or not, and when the optimal option (it doesn't have to be the best mech overall, just best in variant for that chassis is enough) is gated behind a paywall... again... they are considered P2W.

Sorry replying with an alt.

So you have clearly explained your view that being the best mech in its chasis makes it pay to win. Yet current flavour of meta could certainly cloud things and make something that was p2w one day and not the other.

I am not trying to be a douche here. When something is so subjective it makes more sense in my opinion to simplify the issue a bit. This is why I say you can't call something p2w if it is only considered such as being the best of it's chassis because that scope is too broad defining what winning is and too narrow in not considering other options in it's weight class.

Another thing to consider is that hero's are not able to be used in MRBC. So it won't be an issue for the top skilled guys in this game. Even if it was I suspect it still would not be the go to light.

If you look at the overall picture a player can do just as well and not have the paywalled hero. The best paywalled variant of a subpar mech doesn't skew the balance of the game in favour of the player who spent the money. There is no area measurable in this game and commonly used as a reference for success or winning that the Purifier makes an impact unless you are extremely focused and include Kitfox performance only. For a game with this many mechs and this many options I am having a hard time swallowing the argument that this isn't fair.

Another thing that has to be considered is that if Hero mechs aren't interesting or compelling enough, no one but die hards would buy them. So outrage at the minutiae not only risks PGI's financial health (if they were to listen which is quite possible given enough outrage) it could put the game at risk. If they were inclined to move in the opposite direction because it felt the community was overreacting, the effects could be equally as bad.

Whether we like this crap business model or not, PGI makes it's money by selling mech packs. They seem to have worked incredibly hard at making sure there are enough mechs and variety and that the ones available for space bucks are not utter garbage. I bought at least two of my Timby's for space bucks and I here they are pretty good when someone besides me is behind the controls...

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Evil Goof, on 01 February 2017 - 08:11 PM, said:

Another thing to consider is that hero's are not able to be used in MRBC.

You do know why those are not able to be used in MRBC right, I'll give you a hint, it is to avoid P2W (including limited time paywalls)?

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 01 February 2017 - 09:54 PM.

[Evil Goof]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 01 February 2017 - 09:54 PM, said:

You do know why those are not able to be used in MRBC right, I'll give you a hint, it is to avoid P2W (including limited time paywalls)?

Is it to avoid an advantage from a mech that is behind a paywall or to prevent a mech that would not be used because there are better options but is the best of its particular chassis?

Or is it just to completely avoid any mech that is for real money?

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Evil Goof, on 01 February 2017 - 11:20 PM, said:

Is it to avoid an advantage from a mech that is behind a paywall or to prevent a mech that would not be used because there are better options but is the best of its particular chassis?

Both since the duplicate rule means there isn't just Cheetah spam, Kodiak spam, Night Gyr spam, etc, etc.
The Oxide and Summoner loyalty pods probably would've been used during the next season if they were allowed, both turn a mediocre chassis into a good one. So in some cases having better options for a particular chassis can actually become YOUR version of P2W.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 02 February 2017 - 06:40 AM.

[G4LV4TR0N]

Revis Volek, on 01 February 2017 - 07:38 PM, said:

None of them are better or worse then any of the others except for the Purifiers Pay walled ST pods.


They dont have anything in the CT's that make any one better or worse then another, except there is that one thats cost $$$ which is really good compared to the others stuff.

Not true. If you can't win in Kit Fox without KFX-PR Side Torsos then you simply suck in Kit Fox. Face it kid.

[Mcgral18]

G4LV4TR0N, on 02 February 2017 - 09:56 AM, said:

Not true. If you can't win in Kit Fox without KFX-PR Side Torsos then you simply suck in Kit Fox. Face it kid.

No, you don't get it
You can win in a Cute Fox, assuming the team doesn't full Potato it

With twice the firepower, you can carry more Potato, pure advantage, behind a paywall

[G4LV4TR0N]

1795 games total on various Kit Fox chassis here. Arguing with people who don't even own KFX-PR. Never said KFX-PR is bad but I will never call it "pay to win". And double firepower argument has been denounced few pages earlier, no need to repeat.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

G4LV4TR0N, on 02 February 2017 - 10:12 AM, said:

1795 games total on various Kit Fox chassis here.

Number of games is cool, but that doesn't mean you have full understanding. I mean Johnny Z was second place on the leaderboards for number of wins (and I'm sure he did it in his PHX-R) but that doesn't mean he is even good at this game (or at understanding the best way to play the PHX-R). I have seen people who have played as long as I have and still not understand what makes a mech good swearing up and down that their stock plus variant is amazing and wonderful (and no, that was not aimed at you Resto).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 02 February 2017 - 11:01 AM.

[VitriolicViolet]

people seem real confused about a pretty basic concept.

If a variant of the Highlander was released with a 360 engine cap and extra energy hardpoints but was only available for MC then that would also be pay-to-win. doesnt matter how much the mech sucks if you can get one that doesnt and it costs money thats pay-to-win. its been that definition in every game ive played.

Pay-to-win: Pay to win is when a game company sells stuff that gives an in game advantage through micro transactions.
doesnt mention **** about winning a match just in-game advantage. the Purifer is an in-game advantage over other Kit-foxes, unless you dont like the idea of variants being balanced against each other.

[G4LV4TR0N]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 02 February 2017 - 11:00 AM, said:

Number of games is cool, but that doesn't mean you have full understanding. I mean Johnny Z was second place on the leaderboards for number of wins (and I'm sure he did it in his PHX-R) but that doesn't mean he is even good at this game (or at understanding the best way to play the PHX-R). I have seen people who have played as long as I have and still not understand what makes a mech good swearing up and down that their stock plus variant is amazing and wonderful (and no, that was not aimed at you Resto).

So you claim that I don't understand Kit Fox, because I claim that you and your buddies are wrong when stating that KFX-PR is "pay to win" because I claim that if you are bad Kit Fox player you will still lose in KFX-PR and if you are good Kit Fox player you will win without KFX-PR. Is that what it's all about?

[Bombast]

vandalhooch, on 01 February 2017 - 07:14 PM, said:

Not sure how you get 8 lasers on a mech with 7 energy hardpoints.

Secret access to the Blazer?

[Evil Goof]

VitriolicViolet, on 02 February 2017 - 11:46 AM, said:

people seem real confused about a pretty basic concept.

If a variant of the Highlander was released with a 360 engine cap and extra energy hardpoints but was only available for MC then that would also be pay-to-win. doesnt matter how much the mech sucks if you can get one that doesnt and it costs money thats pay-to-win. its been that definition in every game ive played.

Pay-to-win: Pay to win is when a game company sells stuff that gives an in game advantage through micro transactions.
doesnt mention **** about winning a match just in-game advantage. the Purifer is an in-game advantage over other Kit-foxes, unless you dont like the idea of variants being balanced against each other.

No.

You are deciding that pay to win means pay to have the best version of a mech. Not taking a look at the overall picture of what the paywalled mech can do versus other free mechs or its overall impact on the game. So your narrow view is 'winning' means winning one chassis race.

I could accept pay to win also including the ability to do well in the game. So I am not just focusing on winning meaning winning a match but also personal victories as well. However as long as there is a free Arctic Cheetah, there is no appreciable advantage the Purifier has.

You suggesting that variants be balanced against each other is also not applicable as they aren't balanced against each other at all. Most IS chassis have one that is clearly stronger. The also have different roles so not being completely equal isn't really that important to begin with.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Evil Goof, on 02 February 2017 - 12:24 PM, said:

You are deciding that pay to win means pay to have the best version of a mech.

Aren't you deciding what pay to win means yourself...?

Evil Goof, on 02 February 2017 - 12:24 PM, said:

Not taking a look at the overall picture of what the paywalled mech can do versus other free mechs or its overall impact on the game.

I'm pretty sure that is irrelevant because the overall picture isn't just balance on a macro level (which is actually what you are talking about), but micro level as well.

G4LV4TR0N, on 02 February 2017 - 12:17 PM, said:

So you claim that I don't understand Kit Fox

I claim that posting a number of games played in a mech is not evidence of understanding a mech, nothing else. What you infer from that is all on you.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 02 February 2017 - 12:41 PM.

[Deathlike]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 02 February 2017 - 12:34 PM, said:

I claim that posting a number of games played in a mech is not evidence of understanding a mech, nothing else. What you imply from that is all on you.

We've had too many people claiming that the KDK-3 was fine... even before BOTH nerfs to it with the obvious evidence of it being the dominant mech overall (even post-nerf).

But hey... the Mist Lynx is "fine", because reasons.

[Evil Goof]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 02 February 2017 - 06:39 AM, said:

Both since the duplicate rule means there isn't just Cheetah spam, Kodiak spam, Night Gyr spam, etc, etc.
The Oxide and Summoner loyalty pods probably would've been used during the next season if they were allowed, both turn a mediocre chassis into a good one. So in some cases having better options for a particular chassis can actually become YOUR version of P2W.

Yes I think you are probably right about it being there to ensure both.

You say my version of pay to win, which is taking the term literally and not expanding it to fit what I choose, such as your idea of being the best of a single chassis. I am saying your version is not easy to accept.

First, although people have argued rather foolishly, there are several commonly accepted measures in the game that point to both team victory (game mechanics) and personal success (stats and leaderboards etc..). Niether of these is appreciably affected by the Purifier. This is mostly do there being other mechs available for free that are just as good or better.

Second, being the best in one chassis is just that. 'Winning' one chassis is not winning the game or having an overall advantage someone who didn't buy it couldn't have. There is no ongoing Kitfox competition with prizes or glorious stats to hold over the head of those who don't have it. This isn't a game revolving around Kitfox's and their success.

So my version is stepping back, taking the term seriously and at face value, and looking at the overall impact in the game.

Your version however is limited to a personal interpretation of what winning means and is focused entirely on one chassis. Your pay to win means, pay to get the best version of a chassis, which isn't even the best in it's weight class....

Man, how much flame and vitriol was flying around when the Oxide was top of the heap in lights? I mean 13 pages of people arguing about a crappy mech becoming almost bearable....

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Evil Goof, on 02 February 2017 - 12:45 PM, said:

You say my version of pay to win, which is taking the term literally

As Yeonne pointed out several times, you are adding in your own context to what winning means in this case, not the rather loose definition. So you are not actually taking it literally, but I'm sure you will keep thinking you are.

Evil Goof, on 02 February 2017 - 12:45 PM, said:

There is no ongoing Kitfox competition with prizes or glorious stats to hold over the head of those who don't have it.

There have been events that are chassis specific and I doubt that will be the last we will see of them. Heroes being better than the regulars in this case are actually very much a problem.

Evil Goof, on 02 February 2017 - 12:45 PM, said:

So my version is stepping back

This should tell you a lot, your version is purely a macro level, nothing more. It isn't the full picture.

Evil Goof, on 02 February 2017 - 12:45 PM, said:

Your version however is limited to a personal interpretation of what winning means and is focused entirely on one chassis.

It isn't limited...it is both micro and macro level because it INCLUDES your "literal" defintion as well. The only limited definition ends up actually being your own.

Evil Goof, on 02 February 2017 - 12:45 PM, said:

Man, how much flame and vitriol was flying around when the Oxide was top of the heap in lights? I mean 13 pages of people arguing about a crappy mech becoming almost bearable....

At one point it was more than bearable (pre-Kodiak), it was one of the best lights in the game (and not the pitiful level of best we see now).

[Evil Goof]

Deathlike, on 02 February 2017 - 12:38 PM, said:

We've had too many people claiming that the KDK-3 was fine... even before BOTH nerfs to it with the obvious evidence of it being the dominant mech overall (even post-nerf).

But hey... the Mist Lynx is "fine", because reasons.

Oh no...

Yeah I thought that the KDK-3 was fine after the quad UAC/10 was toned down. I didn't think it wasn't the best mech in the game or that the UAC/10, UAC/5 build wasn't easy to use and have success in. I simply felt there was enough counters to it not to just destroy it because it was really good. I wanted to see it countered with perhaps an IS mech that was equally good too.

Before you think that I am biased and was running around enjoying total god mode in a KDK-3, I actually have twice as many matches in the Spirit Bear (srm, lbx/20 build) because I found that build being masc capable and loaded with all the splat much more fun. I was also better at it. Also half of the time in the KDK-3 I spent doing with dual ppc/guass cause I wanted to get better with landing the two at the same time.

[Ori Disciple]

What, specifically, makes the Purifier so damn better than the other variants? I'm seriously not really seeing it. Is it the 4 energy hardpoints on the torsos? They really don't seem to add all that much to it, since the left torso only has 2 crit slots available. I guess if you REALLY have a massive stigma against putting guns on arms. Usually, from my experiences at least, people don't tend to bother with my arms.

[Evil Goof]

As Yeonne pointed out several times, you are adding in your own context to what winning means in this case, not the rather loose definition. So you are not actually taking it literally, but I'm sure you will keep thinking you are.

No I am doing the exact opposite. As I have explained several times you are never going to sell that being the best of one chassis is an acceptable way to measure winning or success in the game. Doing anything else is playing fast and loose with what winning means when you are only talking about winning one chassis race, which isn't a thing and is not measurable in the game.


There have been events that are chassis specific and I doubt that will be the last we will see of them. Heroes being better than the regulars in this case are actually very much a problem.

We just had one for the Bushwacker and I placed well for not being too good. You know what though...the event was only open to people who spent money period. They did also break it up by having a category for every available variant. Have there been events where this has not been the case?


This should tell you a lot, your version is purely a macro level, nothing more. It isn't the full picture.

Oh it tells me a whole lot. It tells me you are using a term without knowing what that term means. What I am doing is looking at it from the perspective of its overall impact on the game. Where it places in its weight class. Why it makes sense in this case for PGI to inject life into an overall underperforming light.

What you are doing on the other hand is looking at it only in comparison to other Kitfox's...


It isn't limited...it is both micro and macro level because it INCLUDES your "literal" defintion as well. The only limited definition ends up actually being your own.

Wrong. You are making up what winning or success means that is not easliy measured by anyone other than yourself. Second you are looking at it from the limited perspective of one chassis and excluding comparison within its own wieght class. That view is not only limited it is asinine. Luckily PGI is likely not going to consider such thinking seriously in any way, shape or form. How could they?

At one point it was more than bearable (pre-Kodiak), it was one of the best lights in the game (and not the pitiful level of best we see now).

Until what? The release of the Artic Cheetah? The Oxide? I have not at any time seen it being even decent until now. I have only seen this mech as one of the bottom dwellers in its class, and even now with the Purifier, there are other lights that I would still take over it for being able to have the same firepower, more speed, and better jump capability.

[Mcgral18]

Ori Disciple, on 02 February 2017 - 01:06 PM, said:

What, specifically, makes the Purifier so damn better than the other variants? I'm seriously not really seeing it. Is it the 4 energy hardpoints on the torsos? They really don't seem to add all that much to it, since the left torso only has 2 crit slots available. I guess if you REALLY have a massive stigma against putting guns on arms. Usually, from my experiences at least, people don't tend to bother with my arms.

...seriously?

2 Crit slots, to effectively use 2 one crit Lasers?
That isn't exactly rocket science.


It has both high mounts, and doubles your potential count of best hardpoints for the class.
4 ERMLs in the torsi is outright better than 4 ERMLs in the arms, because it also allows you to take ECM, and additional lasers (but heat may argue against that).

It allows for the optimal number of 6 E hardpoints, to boat your choice, or even 7 SPLs effectively with ECM (max of 3 without the Hero)


Otherwise, you're stuck with a single big laser on a small robot, and that just doesn't work. You need many small ones, because the big ones don't give you the return required.