310 replies to this topic

[Nik Reaper]

Also, comparing now you can compare the best scoring 5 ErML adder ( during those leader board events ) with the 5 ErML kitfox but with ecm and JJs ... a few DHS less, but manageable and effective.

Also, get this through the head all P2W debaters, paying for power , no matter how little or much, that can only be bought with real money is what is here being called P2W, no real win is involved, only a power multiplier bought with money.

If repair and rearm come back in the form they were before , all premium time and hero mechs would be P2W because with out them most wouldn't be able to afford running competitive mechs while those who pay would, even though they were using same tech.
So P2W in these discussions = pay for power , and if it is not evident that +4 high mounted energy hardpoint is power then please stop participating in this discussion.

Edited by Nik Reaper, 30 January 2017 - 04:53 PM.

[G4LV4TR0N]

So what is this power you are talking about essentially? More points in some static leaderboard that is artificialy calculated probably in similar way to game scores after match? Where you can farm points by using some cheap tricks like putting TAG on every build even when not having any LRM/LRM partner in group? Also you are talking about PUG QP games, right? Or when you score most damage after game? Because if so, then I have scored over 1000 damage on every Kit Fox variant multiple times and I can do it over and over. It's how you play not what you play with. Perhaps indeed KFX-PR is bit more consistent and bit better on average in this, but I don't see any "power" here, just slight edge. For brawling builds I've said before, no matter how many small lasers you will boat, with similar loadout things like ACH or Nova will easily beat you 1v1 and both are C-Bills mechs. Yet I don't see people starting topics on how ACH is broken and should be removed from MWO. Should I start one?

Edited by G4LV4TR0N, 30 January 2017 - 06:44 PM.

[Deathlike]

G4LV4TR0N, on 30 January 2017 - 06:41 PM, said:

So what is this power you are talking about essentially? More points in some static leaderboard that is artificialy calculated probably in similar way to game scores after match? Where you can farm points by using some cheap tricks like putting TAG on every build even when not having any LRM/LRM partner in group? Also you are talking about PUG QP games, right? Or when you score most damage after game? Because if so, then I have scored over 1000 damage on every Kit Fox variant multiple times and I can do it over and over. It's how you play not what you play with. Perhaps indeed KFX-PR is bit more consistent and bit better on average in this, but I don't see any "power" here, just slight edge. For brawling builds I've said before, no matter how many small lasers you will boat, with similar loadout things like ACH or Nova will easily beat you 1v1 and both are C-Bills mechs. Yet I don't see people starting topics on how ACH is broken and should be removed from MWO. Should I start one?

People have complained before about the ACH, and been unsuccessful (due to potatoness). Most of the time the people complaining have never driven lights or understood how quickly they can go at highest levels of the game.

[Nik Reaper]

Right , oki, I need to know, from what you speak of, what is in your opinion theoretically actually too much power?
Also, if I'm reading what you said correctly you have no problem if all non top of what they do mechs, ei. most of them have a money only varient that is about as good as those other top mechs?

I would ask you to consider the fact: if you can consistently do more damage in one setup you will win more , in that setup, this is proven to be statistically true, so that would be the power I speak of.

Edited by Nik Reaper, 30 January 2017 - 07:21 PM.

[Scout Derek]

Deathlike, on 30 January 2017 - 06:48 PM, said:

People have complained before about the ACH, and been unsuccessful (due to potatoness). Most of the time the people complaining have never driven lights or understood how quickly they can go at highest levels of the game.

Especially with the way tech was and how it was quirked back then.

Not only did it have no penalties to XL (since there were none), but the thing had structure quirks, and weapon quirks. And then it's slim profile made people go mad for aiming. So imagine a Locust. Now put a Clan XL in it, and give it armor of a 30 ton mech, and then give it jump jets, ecm. Nightmare fuel for assaults.

I am mostly proficient in most mechs, and I can say, that the thing was a monster at the beginning due to how more advanced players took advantage of the population who didn't understand it, and it's quirks.

Probably after the removal of its quirks, the 8/8 pod set, and the XL engine nerfs, did it get pegged down. It's still a fearsome opponent, just not as dangerous as it used to be.

[Deathlike]

Scout Derek, on 30 January 2017 - 07:21 PM, said:

Especially with the way tech was and how it was quirked back then.

Not only did it have no penalties to XL (since there were none), but the thing had structure quirks, and weapon quirks. And then it's slim profile made people go mad for aiming. So imagine a Locust. Now put a Clan XL in it, and give it armor of a 30 ton mech, and then give it jump jets, ecm. Nightmare fuel for assaults.

I am mostly proficient in most mechs, and I can say, that the thing was a monster at the beginning due to how more advanced players took advantage of the population who didn't understand it, and it's quirks.

Probably after the removal of its quirks, the 8/8 pod set, and the XL engine nerfs, did it get pegged down. It's still a fearsome opponent, just not as dangerous as it used to be.

It didn't need quirks in the first place (although let's laugh @ the LBX quirk for obvious reasons).. just like the KDK-3, and yet it got them and then some.

If it's not powercreep recognition at its most blatant level (at the time), I don't know what is.

[FupDup]

Deathlike, on 30 January 2017 - 07:26 PM, said:

It didn't need quirks in the first place (although let's laugh @ the LBX quirk for obvious reasons).. just like the KDK-3, and yet it got them and then some.

That's a pretty bad comparison because the KDK-3 is an assault mech while the Cheeto is a light. Lights are inherently bad by virtue of the construction rules unless they have massive quirks or the stars align in their design (e.g. missile Jenner IIC has a pretty big punch).

Let's face it, the quirkless Cheetah is not nearly as valuable to its team as a quirkless Mad Cat, Night Gyr, Kodiak, etc. Unless you can think of some kind of broad measure that buffs all lights without giving them quirks, then ALL lights need quirks to be worth as much to their team as a bigger mech (with some needing a lot more quirks than others of course).

Edited by FupDup, 30 January 2017 - 07:42 PM.

[Scout Derek]

Deathlike, on 30 January 2017 - 07:26 PM, said:

It didn't need quirks in the first place (although let's laugh @ the LBX quirk for obvious reasons).. just like the KDK-3, and yet it got them and then some.

If it's not powercreep recognition at its most blatant level (at the time), I don't know what is.

Yep. But at the time, I don't think anyone thought it was going to be THAT good when we first saw the in-game model. No one knew until it appeared in the patch.

Then the rage began. lol.

FupDup, on 30 January 2017 - 07:30 PM, said:

That's a pretty bad comparison because the KDK-3 is an assault mech while the Cheeto is a light. Lights are inherently bad by virtue of the construction rules unless they have massive quirks or the stars align in their design (e.g. missile Jenner IIC has a pretty big punch).

Let's face it, the quirkless Cheetah is not nearly as valuable to its team as a quirkless Mad Cat, Night Gyr, Kodiak, etc. Unless you can think of some kind of broad measure that buffs all lights without giving them quirks, then ALL lights need quirks to be worth as much to their team as a bigger mech.

I think a better example of a overquirked mech would be the locust SPL, back around the time of the Wild Wild Quirky West (as a Fellow Nova Cat friend and Clansman once told me ) the thing had weapon quirks that made assault mechs pee their pants if they saw one of them coming for it; if there were two then it'd **** it's pants and go down quickly.

But to add, the Cheetah is indeed not as valuable as the heavies. When we apply them to Faction Play, they're not worth taking, unless you like bringing Assault mechs and need the lighter chassis to complement the drop deck. In Quick Play, they're rarely seen these days. Usually Lights I see are Oxides, Locusts, and oddly enough Adders alongside Kitfoxes recently.

[Deathlike]

FupDup, on 30 January 2017 - 07:30 PM, said:

That's a pretty bad comparison because the KDK-3 is an assault mech while the Cheeto is a light. Lights are inherently bad by virtue of the construction rules unless they have massive quirks or the stars align in their design (e.g. missile Jenner IIC has a pretty big punch).

Let's face it, the quirkless Cheetah is not nearly as valuable to its team as a quirkless Mad Cat, Night Gyr, Kodiak, etc. Unless you can think of some kind of broad measure that buffs all lights without giving them quirks, then ALL lights need quirks to be worth as much to their team as a bigger mech (with some needing a lot more quirks than others of course).

I usually talk more about relative to their weight classes, not so much on the overall view of things (I mean KDK-3 is still god tier/Tier 0 over everything).

[MacClearly]

Nik Reaper, on 30 January 2017 - 04:47 PM, said:

Also, comparing now you can compare the best scoring 5 ErML adder ( during those leader board events ) with the 5 ErML kitfox but with ecm and JJs ... a few DHS less, but manageable and effective.

Also, get this through the head all P2W debaters, paying for power , no matter how little or much, that can only be bought with real money is what is here being called P2W, no real win is involved, only a power multiplier bought with money.

If repair and rearm come back in the form they were before , all premium time and hero mechs would be P2W because with out them most wouldn't be able to afford running competitive mechs while those who pay would, even though they were using same tech.
So P2W in these discussions = pay for power , and if it is not evident that +4 high mounted energy hardpoint is power then please stop participating in this discussion.

Pay to win... To win. You can try and change the definition but words have meaning. When people try and expand a term to include what the term does not cover in it's very definition you are always going to have problems. So you have this idea what it means that falls out of what it means at its very basic face value. Then you can expand your argument to include whatever you like.

Pay to win is just that and pay for power is something else. You can try to shut down an argument all you like by expanding it to include your definition but those terms are not an easy sell to someone like me is going to stay literal and never budge because it is impossible for me to learn and accept everyones own interpretation.

This is why communication is so important and why language is powerful. We write laws in the stuff.

So since I am steadfastly literal and feel it is important when having a debate to be so, the Purifier is not pay to win because it doesn't give someone an unfair advantage that can't be done on a chassis for cbills. Being the best choice for it's chassis, especially since it is overall not great to begin with, can't be described as p2w. I think that is why they offered value for this crappy mech but where very careful to not make the Stormcrow or Warrant spectacular.

[Y E O N N E]

You are trying to address a question of scope through language rules. That's like trying to figure out what to wear tomorrow by observing the sub-atomic structure of the universe.

If I have KFX A and he has KFX B, and my KFX does not have access to the kinds of builds that his does and his builds are objectively superior because of it, it's Pay-2-Win in that particular scenario. It is really that simple.

[Mechwarrior4670152]

Yeonne Greene, on 30 January 2017 - 09:06 PM, said:

If I have KFX A and he has KFX B, and my KFX does not have access to the kinds of builds that his does and his builds are objectively superior because of it, it's Pay-2-Win in that particular scenario. It is really that simple.

So you can beat up other Kit-Foxes.

Wow

So much win

Totally going to carry your team that way.

Totally going to win matches.

Good job.

Great argument

Edited by Wence the Wanderer, 30 January 2017 - 09:39 PM.

[MacClearly]

Yeonne Greene, on 30 January 2017 - 09:06 PM, said:

You are trying to address a question of scope through language rules. That's like trying to figure out what to wear tomorrow by observing the sub-atomic structure of the universe.

If I have KFX A and he has KFX B, and my KFX does not have access to the kinds of builds that his does and his builds are objectively superior because of it, it's Pay-2-Win in that particular scenario. It is really that simple.

No it is not that simple. Language is simple and trying to make an end run around it to fit your narrative is convoluted. You can't just bend things to include what you think they mean to support your argument. Simply isn't valid.

Edit: Just for added emphasis, sticking to simple and basic literal meaning of words is the complete opposite of being overly complicated. Am actually a bit surprised you framed it that way since I am saying basically to keep it simple.

Edited by MacClearly, 30 January 2017 - 09:44 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

MacClearly, on 30 January 2017 - 09:41 PM, said:

No it is not that simple. Language is simple and trying to make an end run around it to fit your narrative is convoluted. You can't just bend things to include what you think they mean to support your argument. Simply isn't valid.

But it is. This is not a problem of language, this is a question of action and mechanics. You are contorting it into a problem of language because your position is otherwise at-risk by the numbers.

[Nik Reaper]

MacClearly, on 30 January 2017 - 09:41 PM, said:

No it is not that simple. Language is simple and trying to make an end run around it to fit your narrative is convoluted. You can't just bend things to include what you think they mean to support your argument. Simply isn't valid.

Edit: Just for added emphasis, sticking to simple and basic literal meaning of words is the complete opposite of being overly complicated. Am actually a bit surprised you framed it that way since I am saying basically to keep it simple.

Ok, so if we just say PGI stop selling power you will get on board? oki good to know, I also want to stop calling "black" persons black as they are really brown, so every argument and conflict involving "black" people is non existent as I see them as shades of brown as black is a lack of reflected light... so it must not be happening eh..

Also how naive must you make your self to be if the words Pay To Win in an online game must mean those exact words, a button press that let's you win no matter what... If there is an example of just this anywhere please point it out for me... exodia is kinda close but you still need luck to get all the parts...

Selling power tips the balance in favor of those who have it ei. those who paid for it, they might not win over skill but in case of similar skill , depending on how much power was sold, they can have a large advantage, that will statistically turn in to a larger win percentage. So you could say it Pay To Win a larger percentage of games... kinda long.

Edited by Nik Reaper, 30 January 2017 - 10:05 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

MacClearly, on 30 January 2017 - 09:41 PM, said:

Edit: Just for added emphasis, sticking to simple and basic literal meaning of words is the complete opposite of being overly complicated. Am actually a bit surprised you framed it that way since I am saying basically to keep it simple.

That doesn't work because what constitutes "winning" is not constrained to a given scope. You have to pull that part of the equation out of your a**.

[MacClearly]

Nik Reaper, on 30 January 2017 - 09:47 PM, said:

Ok, so if we just say PGI stop selling power you will get on board? oki good to know, I also want to stop calling "black" persons black as they are really brown, so every argument and conflict involving "black" people is non existent as I see them as shades of brown as black is a lack of reflected light... so it must not be happening eh..

Also how naive must you make your self to be if the words Pay To Win in an online game must mean those exact words, a button press that let's you win no matter what... If there is an example of just this anywhere please point it out for me... exodia is kinda close but you still need luck to get all the parts...

People are much more complex and how they want to be referred is not a reasonable thing to bring up in this conversation because of the possibility of controversy.

You are, whether you like it or not, talking about pay for power and not pay to win. Please also pay attention to what I am saying because I certainly never gave you any conditions that would put me on your side.

So you can't make people accept your personal definition or what you have expanded it to mean and argue that you are right. You will always be wrong because I will always be able to say that's what you have decided it means and not what the term actually means. I reject that. I don't follow your personal definition. You can with cbills buy an Artic Cheetah and that mech is (arguably I suppose) better. I think there are several mechs in that class that are available and have similar attributes that are on par. I don't have the data but the fact the Purifier isn't common and certainly isn't dominating the battlefield in any appreciable way, I think I have the edge in the argument here.

[Nik Reaper]

Well, as always you have the "right" to think what ever you want, such as that those omnipods don't give power and that everything is right with the world and that everything means exactly what it sounds to mean... I would ask you film your life and broadcast it, it would win some reality show awards, heck I'm laughing already.

Anyhow, if you will not except the fact that this discussion is about our relative outrage about selling power for cash, weather you agree or reject this business practice, there really should be no more discussion about what this topic is about, as you have been clearly told several times. PGI is selling power, that is in turn increasing the win % of those using that power correctly and this is the discussion about that.

If you will argue about the fact that the dragonslayer was not power when it was good, that summoner thunder titz were not power while they were good, and that purifier side torso omnipods are not power.. well go ahead , there are more than enough those skilled enough here to point out the misguidedness of that.

Edited by Nik Reaper, 30 January 2017 - 10:22 PM.

[MacClearly]

Yeonne Greene, on 30 January 2017 - 09:56 PM, said:

That doesn't work because what constitutes "winning" is not constrained to a given scope. You have to pull that part of the equation out of your a**.

Really? That is a huge leap off a bridge in logic there.

Winning in this context has shifted to mean many things to many people but the underlying 'scope' is if this mech is better than mechs that can be bought for cbills. Others have argued no, it is what makes it the best Kit Fox that we are considering.

However this a game where you have many choices to complete objectives or 'win'. That is substantive and quantifiable by in game mechanics. I don't pull the 'victory' or 'defeat' screen at the end of a match out of my a**.

Not sure even at this point if you are arguing a point or just taking issue that I am not buying an argument if it is backed by expanding the definition of a term to fit their argument. Do you have an opinion on the issue or are you just interested in trying to argue with me?

[MacClearly]

Nik Reaper, on 30 January 2017 - 10:20 PM, said:

Well, as always you have the "right" to think what ever you want, such as that those omnipods don't give power and that everything is right with the world and that everything means exactly what it sounds to mean... I would ask you film your life and broadcast it, it would win some reality show awards, heck I'm laughing already.

Anyhow, if you will not except the fact that this discussion is about our relative outrage about selling power for cash, weather you agree or reject this business practice, there really should be no more discussion about what this topic is about, as you have been clearly told several times. PGI is selling power, that is in turn increasing the win % of those using that power correctly and this is the discussion about that.

If you will argue about the fact that the dragonslayer was not power when it was good, that summoner thunder titz were not power while they were good, and that purifier side torso omnipods are not power.. well go ahead , there are more than enough those skilled enough here to point out the misguidedness of that.

First I wasn't around for the Dragonslayer being anything but garbage so no idea what you are talking about. Been playing for about 11 months.

My second point is that the high mounts on the Loyalty Summoner were just nerfed. So apparently despite that it will be available eventually for everyone, PGI felt the same as your position and anecdotally it certainly seemed to be a top performing mech not available to everyone. This is actually what is the basis of my argument that the Purifier is not the same because unlike the poptarting Summoner which had no comparable chassis (from the data and arguments that I have seen) the Kit Fox hero actually has competitors that are available and not only that are arguably better.

Correct me if I am wrong, but your position appears to be that because it is the best Kit Fox, it is pay for power. My assertion is that because you can get something equal, this is more akin to a novelty mech. It is for people who are krazy for Kit Fox, and the hero is the best one.

So I am clearly Ok with this business model because it provides value for a mech especially if a person happens to be a huge fan and it still provides equal power even if it is available on a separate or different chassis altogether.