60 replies to this topic

[THOR HAMMER]

Sorry 10,000,000 Cbills is a lot for a fully skilled mech it should be cut in half. And the GXP is insane 55,000 GXP ?. I have been playing since the beginning and maybe have earned 500,000 maybe 1mil GXP I would only be able to skill 10 of my 100 + mechs that are already skilled and mastered that is insane all that time and work for nothing ? . It should be 10,000 GXP at MAX the main cost should be MXP I think 60,000 / 100,000 MXP would be sufficient . Not everyone here has 16 hours a day to play this game COME ON .Beside the players like me that play 1 hour a night maybe a few on the weekends are the REAL ones !!! Paying !!! for this game pumping in the cash so you free to play players have a server to play on. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Edited by THOR HAMMER, 11 February 2017 - 07:49 PM.

[Dee Eight]

So grind then... really... the current "mastery" system just stops improving the mech after some 59k experience. What difference does it make if the mech is "mastered" or not yet under the new system other than epeen / ego bragging ?

[Lukoi Banacek]

Because you can no longer swap modules between mechs to save costs, mech to mech, once you have more than a handful you are paying more per mech to master them. Simply mathematical fact, and it's been demonstrated time and again.

Picking specific circumstances to tie things to merely masks this.

The cost to buy/build the mechs remains the same. The doubling of XP required and the amount of c-bills due to the "module" effects being tied directly to the mechs under the new system, means having a stable of more than a few mechs will cost you more. What ever your stockpile of modules is, whatever amount of "sets" you were comfortable with, was about the same as 50% cost in the current system. That means that at 40 sets of modules (i.e. I can equip 40 mechs simultaneously), under the PTS I'll have enough c-bills (not xp mind you) to master 80 under the new system.

Sounds great right? Except I used my ~40 sets to equip 190 mastered mechs, so under the new system, I'll have enough cash to "master" less than half that number. And I lose flexibility in rotating the modules from mech to mech.

Guess what...PGI sat down, relooked the math and figured out that the players were right at how extreme this was. Hence the month delay in rolling out the new model.

The skill-tree is interesting and sure to make tinkerers happy someday, but it's placeholder values were much too high. PGI is going to end up reducing them and rightly so.

p.s. "Sure those of us with 150 mechs are gonna have it a bit rough but do you honestly play all 150 regular enough to worry about needing them competitive? I know I don't."

Good for you. I do on the other hand, rotate through almost all of my mastered mechs. Of the 274 I currently own, I definitely tweak, tinker with and play 150+ easily enough. And frankly it's besides the point. I mastered those mechs, I shouldn't be gutted in order to master them again. While I don't necessarily think we should get all 91 SP's grandfathered in, there should be some equivalency grandfathered in 1 for 1 for each mastered mech. Whether PGI considers that 59 points or some other fairly larger proportion of the 91SP, it's time and energy already committed to this game that I shouldn't be forced to repeat. Simple as that.

After module refund etc, I'll be well over a billion with 300m currently cached for mech purchases, refits, mechlabbing etc. I shouldn't have to spend the entire billion+ to get "some" of my fleet back to where I had it.

And calling out PGI for their failure to catch a pretty glaring math problem, disenfranchising a ton of players of their time/cash investments, isn't the ranting of a "spoiled toddler" so please keep your insulting, myopic over-generalizations to yourself. Most of these opinions are based on observable facts that most people calmly pointed out. Ad hominem attacks on people who disagree with your premise out of the gate, shows alot about ya mate. Might want to consider that in the future.

Edited by Lukoi Banacek, 11 February 2017 - 09:01 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

Dee Eight, on 11 February 2017 - 08:09 PM, said:

So grind then... really... the current "mastery" system just stops improving the mech after some 59k experience. What difference does it make if the mech is "mastered" or not yet under the new system other than epeen / ego bragging ?

Because the skill tree is a straight-up performance buff, and even one that is being used to control game balance by giving IS larger values than the Clans, it means a bunch of 'Mechs are now stuck at worse performance levels than they were.

Skills are not trade-offs. They give people who have spent more time playing a strict leg up on those who haven't, an advantage they should only have through personal ability.

[Adran]

ingramli, on 11 February 2017 - 06:57 PM, said:

No it is worse off. I got 3 mechs to work with after 9 weeks with the old system, with the new system, i only got only 1 mech in hand after 9 weeks, it is NOT the same.
In addition, i dont pay for module again in the old system, i just sweep it between my mechs when i use it.

Uh.... if you actually USE all 3 of those mechs forever, you're in the minority. You know that, right? I'd rather get the 1 mech I actually want and max it than get the mech I want and 2 junkers I hate that will be sold at the first opportunity.

[ingramli]

Adran, on 11 February 2017 - 09:59 PM, said:

Uh.... if you actually USE all 3 of those mechs forever, you're in the minority. You know that, right? I'd rather get the 1 mech I actually want and max it than get the mech I want and 2 junkers I hate that will be sold at the first opportunity.

As a casual player, the usefulness of the 2nd and 3rd variants is one my the main concern in buying a new set of chassis. So far i acquired Warhammer and Timber Wolf, both have couple of decent variants, and for Timber Wolfs, i can even sweep omnipods and use them in a similar fashion, that is how a casual player like to play with limited amount of time, i am not the majority, though.

[Adran]

ingramli, on 11 February 2017 - 10:17 PM, said:

As a casual player, the usefulness of the 2nd and 3rd variants is one my the main concern in buying a new set of chassis. So far i acquired Warhammer and Timber Wolf, both have couple of decent variants, and for Timber Wolfs, i can even sweep omnipods and use them in a similar fashion, that is how a casual player like to play with limited amount of time, i am not the majority, though.

I'm a casual player too. If not for the occasional free mech/bay, I'd only have the 4 slots I started with. That said, I can understand wanting to get only mechs you want. This does the same damn thing without the added requirement of having more mech bays and buying the other mechs aside from exactly what you want. Under the new system, you can now choose to get that mech that doesn't have 2 good other variants, but does have the one you want. That's an improvement. The time investment is just as long as if you had to get the 3 mechs before, but now you don't. If the mech also has other variants you want, well its going to take longer to master all of them, but I still feel its a good improvement overall.

[Sorbic]

Without the rule of 3 I wouldn't mind a highish (maybe 85-90k,) cbill requirement for new unskilled mechs. However they need to offer a very steep discount to already mastered/elited mechs for which we've already bought 3 variants.

"So the old system I worked it out as follows..." You're projecting your own experiences onto others. 174 mechs and I've never done what you describe. In fact I have 4-6 (heh 5 Urbies) of 9 different variants and 3 of most everything else.

"Once you have aquired all your mechs and theoreticly mastered them so that you can put modules in all the slots that pushes the price to 173 million." This type of action would be inconsistent with the previously described swap and sell mentality and drastically skews numbers from what they would actually be. In fact following the norm, esp for new players, in which people swap modules then the calculations are way off as the module purchase is often a one time thing. It also doesn't account for costs saved from having a things like an expensive XL engine/weapon that came with another variant.

Overall your direction is correct in that it won't be as big an impact as it might seem for new mechs but this doesn't address those who already own unlocked mechs. Plus even if the overall costs for everything was comparable there's the fact that many players won't be getting new mechs (a drive to play) as often.

TLDR. PGI, maybe a small adjustment to skill prices for NEW mechs and a drastic discount for those we have already elited/mastered.

[kapusta11]

I agree that people are overreacting, here's some basic math

Lets assume you want to master Night Gyr mechs

Each cost 14m
Under current model you have to pay 14x3 = 42m
Let's assume you want to keep 2. Selling one will give you 4.5 mil back, 42 - 4.5 = 37.5m
Swaping one set of modules (Adv zoom, Radar derp and at least 1 weapon range module) will cost you 2 + 6 +3 = 11m
In the end we're looking at 48.5m

Under new system
14x2 = 28m
To get bonuses you had with skill trees from the live servers you need about 50 skill points, so 28 + 5x2 = 38 m
Another 4.1 mill for each mech will give you Adv zoom, Radar derp, weapon range, AND Seismic, AND weapon projectile speed/laser duartion, thus 38 + 4.1x2 = 46.2 m


Without modules we're looking at 37.5 vs 38 m
With modules, and under new skill trees you get more of those, it's 48.5 vs 46.2 m, you're actually saving 2.3 m
Yes, I didn't account for module swaping between more than just 2 mechs but first: it's a pain in the аss and second: unless you have 1 set of modules for all of your 100 mechs the net loss is really small in the end. And if you have 100-200 mechs bought with real money, what did you spend your c-bills on? You must be sitting on a mountain of expensive modules that will be refunded.

Edited by kapusta11, 12 February 2017 - 01:47 AM.

[Malcolm Vordermark]

Its cheaper provided you only intend to get one of each chassis and you never intend to respec. That gap closes fast if either of those things is not true.

The upfront cost doesn't bother me so much as the respec cost. That just feels too much like throwing away cbills.

On the other hand, I'm not going to spend 9 million to master mechs I rarely use, and I'm not going to use mechs that I have no intention of mastering. Eliminating the chance of a nostalgia purchase from me, and now I won't even look to get them on their cbill release.

So it may be cheaper, but it feels worse.

[The Lighthouse]

Oh god, here we go. Let's do this simple.

Say you want to master a mech which cost you 6m to buy.


1. Old system, very first mech.

6m x 3 = 18m total. Both important modules cost 6m each, thus total of 12m.

After you mastered them, you only want to keep a single mech. So you sell two back for 50%. You gained back 6m.

Total spent for mastering a 6m mech with full modules : (18-6)+12 = 24m total.


2. New system, very first mech.

6m, then 9.1m for mastering, total of 15.1m total.


Ok, it seems new system gives me better deal, for now. Then how about 10 mechs?


3. Old system, after 10 mechs.

6m x 30 - 3m x 20 = 120m

But you can swap modules, so the module still costs 12m.

120 + 12 = 132m for old module.


4. New system, after 10 mechs.

6m x 10 + 9.1m x 10 = 151m


You are already beginning to have worse deals. How about 50 mechs?

6m x 150 - 3m x 100 +12 = 612m

6m x 50 + 9.1m x 50 = 755m

As you have MORE mechs, you lose more cbills in new system.


In order to make new system worthwhile, The cbill cost of the mech has to exceed 9.1m. That's assuming you swap engines like mad, don't sell excessive/useless items, etc.


And then, suddenly you decided that you want to keep 2 mechs out of three. Back to 10 mechs situation.


6m x 30 - 3m x 10 + 12 = 162m for old system.

6m x 20 + 9.1m x 20 = 302m for the new system.

Now the new system only gives you benefit if you buy a mech that costs 18.2m or higher. There is no mech that costs more than 18.2m in MWO.


People will get benefit in new system ONLY when they keep only 1 variant out of the chassis, AND the cost of the mech is more than 9.1m. It is super specific situation and as far as I know plenty of people usually/tend to get more than one variants because some chassis actually provide very different playstyle based on the variant.


No matter how you try to sugarcoat this, new system, in general situation, is worse deal for the majority of the people.


....But seriously, cbill cost / exp point issues are NOT the main issue of the new system. It is the least problematic at best.
Here is my post explaining why this whole new system has to be thrown away.

https://mwomercs.com...age__p__5606365

Edited by The Lighthouse, 12 February 2017 - 12:02 AM.

[The Lighthouse]

And OH snap, I completely forgot about re-spec cost. It will chew your cbill income apart so fast you would not believe your own eyes.

Edited by The Lighthouse, 11 February 2017 - 11:56 PM.

[Elizander]

System's fine if you just want 4 mechs. System is broke for people with 100-200 mechs.

[DaManiac]

You guys are all number cruncher, go back to counting beans.

People don't give a **** about having a stable of 250 competitive mechs. Or your calculations.

Why do people have urban mechs? Because they are fun to try and goof around in. This new system means NOBODY, will buy an urban mech because it will be a waste of money upgrading, everyone will only run meta/competitive builds from now on.

You think new players will give a damn how much it cost to upgrade when the first game they play, they are at a loss of why they are so incredibly bad at the game because they are running stock when everyone else is running meta builds. Think of how fun it's gonna be when every assault is a Quad AC KDK-3, every heavy a poptart Night Gyr, ever med is a Griffin brawler and every light is a ACH 6 SPLs.

This systems KILLS the variety, nobody will spend that many CBills upgrading a mech for FUN.

Charge me a monthly fee and give me a complete game that is not based on how much time I put in.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

Adran, on 11 February 2017 - 10:25 PM, said:

I'm a casual player too. If not for the occasional free mech/bay, I'd only have the 4 slots I started with. That said, I can understand wanting to get only mechs you want. This does the same damn thing without the added requirement of having more mech bays and buying the other mechs aside from exactly what you want. Under the new system, you can now choose to get that mech that doesn't have 2 good other variants, but does have the one you want. That's an improvement. The time investment is just as long as if you had to get the 3 mechs before, but now you don't. If the mech also has other variants you want, well its going to take longer to master all of them, but I still feel its a good improvement overall.

Then you are irrelevant and nothing you have to say has value... this is a free to play game. So either you buy content or you ARE content, I am not saying that you have to spend a single dollar. What I am saying is that I do not care about nor should PGI or anyone else care anymore about what you think than what the beacon in the middle of the domination circle thinks... cause you are both the same thing, content for the people who financially support the game. I play plenty of games were I am the content cause I do not spend any money in it, I also do not go on their forums and preach about the game should be catered to me either.

Edited by I_AM_ZUUL, 12 February 2017 - 12:45 AM.

[Adran]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 12 February 2017 - 12:44 AM, said:

Then you are irrelevant and nothing you have to say has value... this is a free to play game. So either you buy content or you ARE content, I am not saying that you have to spend a single dollar. What I am saying is that I do not care about nor should PGI or anyone else care anymore about what you think than what the beacon in the middle of the domination circle thinks... cause you are both the same thing, content for the people who financially support the game. I play plenty of games were I am the content cause I do not spend any money in it, I also do not go on their forums and preach about the game should be catered to me either.

... I'm just gonna be frank here. This is rude as hell, and mostly inaccurate anyway. I'm fairly sure a large chunk of the player base is like me, and spends little (if any) money on this game. This game isn't really good enough to warrant what little money I do make going into it, despite being fun. That's probably true for most of the player base. That said, MOST of the player base is probably not spending a ton of money on it either, and thus, according to you, should not be able to input their opinion? Sorry, but no. If that is true, MWO needs to die. And would, because the bulk of the player base would lose interest if the 1% chose everything and they had no input.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

Adran, on 12 February 2017 - 12:49 AM, said:

... I'm just gonna be frank here. This is rude as hell, and mostly inaccurate anyway. I'm fairly sure a large chunk of the player base is like me, and spends little (if any) money on this game. This game isn't really good enough to warrant what little money I do make going into it, despite being fun. That's probably true for most of the player base. That said, MOST of the player base is probably not spending a ton of money on it either, and thus, according to you, should not be able to input their opinion? Sorry, but no. If that is true, MWO needs to die. And would, because the bulk of the player base would lose interest if the 1% chose everything and they had no input.

Do you seriously not understand how FTP games are modeled? Either you pay for Content or you are Content... that is just the facts of reality, reality which does not happen to be concerned about your personal feelings in your safe place. So.. if you do not think the game is good enough to spend money, that fine. You also do not get to talk about it either since you have no investment in it... if you quit playing then that is absolutely meaningless to the financial health of the game or PGI, you do not pay for Servers or Modeling or Map creation (which PGI is seriously behind in producing) or anything else. So I will say it again.. nothing you say has VALUE here, feel free to go discuss what should be done in game that you feel are good enough for you to invest your money in since it is warranted there.

edit: than that 1% of us would be alone keeping the servers on and playing each other... cause the ONLY reason the game exists is because of players who invest their money in it, so THEY are the only ones who make those servers stay on. You are just Content... which is fine, so get over it.

Edited by I_AM_ZUUL, 12 February 2017 - 01:10 AM.

[kapusta11]

The Lighthouse, on 11 February 2017 - 11:52 PM, said:

1. Old system, very first mech.

6m x 3 = 18m total. Both important modules cost 6m each, thus total of 12m.

After you mastered them, you only want to keep a single mech. So you sell two back for 50%. You gained back 6m.

Total spent for mastering a 6m mech with full modules : (18-6)+12 = 24m total.

You don't sell mechs for 50%, and they don't cost 6m once upgraded, selling a mech that you have no intention to keep is a huge loss.

Let's look at the actual numbers. Say you want to master Warhammers, base chassis cost 6m, DHS upgrade is 1.5m, Endo steel is 0.7m, selling STD engine is 0.8m, selling upgraded chassis without engine is 1.5m, XL300 engine cost 4.9m

Thus 6x3 + 1.5x3 + 0.7x3 - 0.8x3 -1.5x2 + 4.9 = 24.1m for one mech and 25.6 for two. 36.1m/37.6m with modules

Under new system it's 6x2 + 1.5x2 + 0.7x2 + 4.9 - 0.8x2 + 9.1x2 = 37.9m for TWO mechs with full set of "modules" on each.

50 skill point give the same bonuses old skill trees used to provide so 2 WHM whithout "modules" cost 6x2 + 1.5x2 + 0.7x2 + 4.9 - 0.8x2 + 5x2 = 29.7m


In the end we're looking at:
2 mechs, no "modules":
Old skill trees 25.6m vs new skill trees 29.7m (4.1m loss)
2 mechs with "modules":
Old skill trees 37.6m vs new skill trees 37.9m (300k loss)

Thus with new skill trees and in case of IS mechs you lose about 2m per mech that you want to "master" (get the bonuses fo the old skill trees) and if you had only ONE set of modules (let's be honest here, it's never one, and not even two) up to another 4m per mech to get all module bonuses. The price of getting "modules" is lower the more module sets you had under the old system down to 150k per mech.

In case of clan mechs you lose about 500k per mech that you want to master and the price/saving range of modules is +/- 2m. Yep, in theory you would save about 2m if all mechs that you have were clan mechs and all of them were equiped with 12m worth of modules.

Edited by kapusta11, 12 February 2017 - 01:45 AM.

[Adran]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 12 February 2017 - 01:07 AM, said:

Do you seriously not understand how FTP games are modeled? Either you pay for Content or you are Content... that is just the facts of reality, reality which does not happen to be concerned about your personal feelings in your safe place. So.. if you do not think the game is good enough to spend money, that fine. You also do not get to talk about it either since you have no investment in it... if you quit playing then that is absolutely meaningless to the financial health of the game or PGI, you do not pay for Servers or Modeling or Map creation (which PGI is seriously behind in producing) or anything else. So I will say it again.. nothing you say has VALUE here, feel free to go discuss what should be done in game that you feel are good enough for you to invest your money in since it is warranted there.

You don't seem to understand the way people work. I could waste my time arguing, but I think I'll just say it again. You are a rude, obnoxious ***. Hope you continue having a horrible life. Have fun spending your $10,000 on a game destined to die sooner or later. I'll continue giving actual feedback that will matter more than your insults, and having fun.

And for the record, I don't invest my money in ANY game. I invest my money in the real world, where it actually matters. Games are for fun.

[PraetorGix]

Cementi, on 11 February 2017 - 06:41 PM, said:

See this is what baffles me.

Lets look at a fairly cheap mech say 3 million cbills. We wont even pay to upgrade the engine or structure but Im sorry double heat sinks are nessesary. Torture playing a mech with out them. That makes the cost 4.5 million each or a total of 13.5 million total. 9 weeks at your rate of play. Now add in 15 million worth of modules for a total of 28.5 million for what a total of 19 weeks at your rate of play.

Same mech under the new system. 4.5 plus 9 is 13.5 million so a total of 9 weeks. The difference being you now have a mech that has all the efficiencies and more modules than you could have even put on under the old system in 9 weeks. 9 weeks not 19. Please tell me again how this new system is worse for you?

*edit* Everyone seems to forget to add in the cost of 2 mechs that you do not need and for many do not pilot after they master the one they want.

No, you seem to keep conveniently forgeting that buying 3 and selling 2 mechs WAS NOT THE NORM before. Maybe you like 1 variant of each chassis or maybe you're just blatantly lying to validate your point, but many others chose to keep more than 1 variant, myself included. Now, how is this new system better in the aforementioned case is something that eludes me and apparently you as well.