WarHippy, on 23 February 2017 - 08:36 AM, said:
The refund of XP, GXP, and c-bills does not cover enough to get close to where we are now. That is why it is a punishment. The more mechs you have bought(something PGI has encouraged) the farther in the hole you are. The basic skills in the old system had no c-bill cost, and modules could be moved around freely. Under the old system if I had 2 of the same mech setup differently for different roles they shared the same skill tree, however under the new it requires you to spend XP and C-bills for both which effectively doubles the costs.
I will refer you to the math I post just above to slambot. If you want players to be able to prepare mechs for the competitive mode of this game, FP, it helps to make those improvements more accessible. Being able to fully max out a mech in the new system costs less than a single radar deprivation module in the current system. Buying radar deprivation for 4 mechs in the current system while leaving the other module slots empty will cost 24 million compared to the 21.84 million to max out 4 mechs in the new system. That creates a much more level playing field for people looking to make their mechs as competitive as possible. As also stated in the reply to slam bot, the savings that module swapping allows does not apply to anyone looking to build competitive mechs for FP until AT LEAST 84 million c-bills are invested in the current system. That sum allows the maxing out of 15.38 mechs in the new system, allowing not just a minimally viable drop deck to be made, but 15 tailored options before the 2 options hit a matched "zero point". The added benefit is that those could be 15 completely different chassis compared to 5 in the current system.
Quote
A head start with regard to XP only, but still behind what we had before.
Even if you only use 50 points to get kind of close to current skills ignoring the module skills it will cost 600,000,000 c-bills to pay for 200 mechs which was free under the old system. I won't have anywhere near that even with the module refund, and that ignores the fact I could have the benefits of modules on the old system by swapping them around which means I would need 91 points to get similar performance.
Refer to above, where the savings provided by module swapping for people playing FP starts at no less than 82 million c-bills. If you wanted to compare a single mech for the "same abilities" for QP purposes, that starts at 21 million c-bills, assuming all 5 of those modules apply to all of your other builds. That is just short of maxing out 4 tailored mechs in the new system. I agree, those of us who have more than 15 mechs and play FP will be required to grind more c-bills than module swappers. But what about those who have large stables and only remove modules when changing weapons load outs? Those who have purchased 50 or more modules and leave them on mechs. Should their c-bill investment lose meaning compared to those who saved by module swapping?
Side by side, if you transfer the module system and XP upgrades system together, the mech is not fully invested in until those 58,000xp plus that minimum of 21 million c-bills in the current system, 4 module exceptions excluded. Gaining the benefits of high multiple cost modules for just over a quarter of the price, meeting the actual FULL potential of the mech is still much cheaper, not to mention the number of 6 million c-bill modules that would be included in that before we address the 3-million c-bill weapon upgrade equivalents. Yes there is a c-bill cost now, but the pay out in module related improvements is closer to 6 fold.
Quote
It matters because both systems result in very different purchase habits. Had we had the new system from the start I wouldn't have made the same purchases I have made under the old.
I'll grant you that purchase habits would almost surely be different. The actual out come would be minimally affected though. In the scenario we have now, c-bills will be the primary shortage. Despite that shortage, it doesn't take away mechs you have already purchased and can simply be likened to a case of "buying a new mech before you finish fully upgrading the last one". The currency compensation remains exactly the same regardless of which system is used when, and just means that you will have mechs yet to be mastered in the new system, but you will already have the investment of acquiring them completed. This is really just an argument of wanting Master Badges on every mech in your garage rather than you being shorted the effort you put in.
Quote
I'm sorry, but you are deluding yourself if you think this new tree is actually more engaging. These are the same damn stats we have been using all along +/- a few percentage points. All they are doing is moving them around. Instead of modules you pick from a list you have skill nodes that you pick from a list that do the same thing. Instead of quirks you get those either partially baked into base stats or added to the skill tree. We are being given the illusion of choice. Maybe they will find a way to make it more meaningful, but right now this is just more of the same with a new GUI.
No need to be sorry. Because these are trees upgrading the functionality of mechs, they are likely to be dealing with the similar values as before with some modified values or upgrade categories. That is simple fact. The original post of this thread explains that they felt too little trade off was an issue with the first iteration and that they aim to force more of a trade off in the next round. We'll have to wait and see to what extent they push that trade off, but I still find the ability to ignore less useful upgrades and invest those points into upgrades that have a meaningful benefit to me much more interesting than our current universal upgrade tree. Even if the customization from the first PTS is where they stop, it is still more choice than the current system. Hopefully they push it much farther in the next iteration.
Quote
As the saying goes there is a sucker born every minute.
I really don't mean any offense with that statement, but it just seems pretty clear we are never going to come to any understanding.
That's kind of a poor choice of proverbs, especially since you are focused on mastering some of these awful mechs just to get a Master badge. It would be more appropriate to say "to each his own" as we are really butting heads over Master Badging vs. mech prioritization and the trade offs of old system mech swapping costs vs. new system upgrade attainability.
Quote
There are ways to make the trees a great deal more interesting and meaningful. So far what has been given is just more of the same. I am all for them improving things, however while this new version is an improvement it still has a long way to go.
I agree that that there is still work to be done. Also, this new version being an improvement, albeit not yet complete, is still reason enough to go forward.
Quote
True, however the end result of the refund should not put you further behind than where you were. Perhaps if only the skill nodes that center around modules had a c-bill cost this wouldn't be so bad, but so long as all the skill nodes have a c-bill cost and respecs cost anything the new system will be a poor replacement for an already poor system.
I could understand isolating cost to the modules if the c-bill costs would become significantly higher. However, the massive reduction in cost for the potential to gain even more "module" abilities makes the price tag a more than reasonable tradeoff. On top of the individual per mech savings to max out its potential, we have the fact that this lower cost to maximize a mech puts players on much more even footing in competitive matches by reducing the modular gap created by the current systems extreme costs. This addresses both fairness in competitive modes a much more realistic scenario in that you have typically have to purchase physical upgrades (insert care metaphor from above here). This is hardly a poor replacement, especially that those currencies are being earned in every single match you play.
Quote
That is unacceptable for many of us as it completely devalues what we had previously done.
Could elaborate on the devaluation of those currencies? Mech prices won't be changing, c-bill costs for modules are drastically reduced. XP costs per a mech are raised about 25% which is the only place that we are actually losing, and that isn't a reduction in value as that cost now helps reduced c-bill cost for modules by at least 15.56 million to maximize a mech. As far as I can tell, a Master Badge now requires maxing out a mech as opposed to leaving 5 modules worth of improvement to be made. This could be a game of semantics really, but it seems to be rooted in intense need to Master Badge your stable all at once.
Quote
Sorry buttercup, but I have never played Pokemon. However, this statement clearly illustrates your lack of understanding in what people are annoyed with. People are not upset that they are adding more pokemon(mechs) beyond the 151. They are upset that after a patch only 50 of the 151 pokemon(mechs) they had still retain their previous functionality.
My understanding of people's annoyance is that extremely expensive modules that could be swapped are no longer swappable, that c-bills are required to upgrade in the new system, despite reducing modular costs of mechs by no less than 16 million c-bills, and that the Master Badge will denote the maximization of a mech as opposed to being able to leave module slots open and still refer to it as a master. To draw a more fair comparison of the pokemon, the current system allows you to give you to buy a limited number of stones (modules) that improve certain abilities of your pokemon (mech), and to say that you have fully maximized the potential of all of them, when in reality you only have a enough stones for a few of them at a time, but still claim that all of them are fully mastered. The new system is essentially saying, you are elite if you maxed out the free upgrades, but the pokemon is not a master until it retains its status of not being able to further improve.
WarHippy, on 23 February 2017 - 08:55 AM, said:
Let me sum up SuperFunkTrons response to you. "You are dumb, your opinions are wrong, and you are a fraud for playing within the system as designed." You never should have bought all of those mechs, and you should have bought modules for every single one you did buy because it only counts if you did. Don't worry that you feel frustrated to the point you may not buy more mechs or that you may sell many of the ones you currently have because the guy that was already buying less than you is somehow going to make up for the lack of future purchases by you.
People really like to misinterpret what I'm trying to say. I did not call the player the fraud but pointed out the system that creates the fraud. It comes down to simple naming. A master mech should have no room for further improvement, thus making it the highest level it can be. A mech that has all of its module slots filled should be a master mech. In the case of module swapping, the Master Badge should come when it is full, and be removed when it is missing them. If someone feels the need to master every mech in they own before moving on to the next, that is a personal choice. It won't change anything for those who don't prioritize Master Badging or don't care to put the investment into mastering mechs they don't care for anyways. Even with the probability of the majority of my mechs will not be Master Badged, I will still continue to buy new mechs that I like simply because that is what I want to do. If I'm looking for a new challenge, then I'll bother with those that I don't use often and worry about Master Badging them only then.
Your post makes it really clear that Master Badging is your chief priority and that every mech you own deserves a Master Badge even if it isn't fully loaded out. Those who have invested many more c-bills in modules would be the only ones really punished for actually investing into the complete mastery of their mechs because their actual larger c-bill investment would be devalued.
Pokemech collecting in itself is fun, but being a fanatic and wanting to be a Pokemech master by Master Badging every mech you own at once is obviously a larger commitment.
11
