Jump to content

Will You Still Play Is Mechs After The Pts Goes Live?

BattleMechs Balance

108 replies to this topic

#101 Lupis Volk

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 2,126 posts
  • LocationIn the cockpit of the nearest Light Battlemech.

Posted 09 March 2017 - 12:38 PM

View PostWolvesX, on 09 March 2017 - 03:44 AM, said:

Sums it up very well!

MWO has a historic low player count for a reason.

I for one would only come back to try my Roughnecks. Until then i'll be playing other games.

PGI really reminds me of Gaijin Entertainment but without the strong Russian nationalistic pride and cold war era repression of dissent. They have a "we know that's best" attitude.

#102 FireStoat

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Tracker
  • The Tracker
  • 1,053 posts

Posted 09 March 2017 - 04:47 PM

We've seen this on the forums a few times now, but I'll toss it up again.

http://steamcharts.com/app/342200#All

Steam is a good source of new players to this game. The forums there are active for people who play a wide range of games, and word of mouth counts for a lot. The trend for the past year has been abysmal. Yes, many players of this game use the stand alone client and don't even browse Steam's forums. But if the game was healthy with a population that was increasing from all sources, that trend would show up on the chart and it flat out doesn't.

Goals that this change to the game are once again listed here.

https://mwomercs.com...session/#design

Of the four design goals that were disclosed, of which there's been a lot of contention as to whether they were met or not, were 3 more undisclosed goals that were left out of the post.

1) increased cost in Cbills & Experience to established players.
2) increased grind in time to 'recover' what is being 'taken away' from invested time from established players and the status their mechs already have.
3) decreased mobility / agility to all mechs across the board that could only partially be recovered, resulting in a flat global nerf.

It's up to you guys to decide if what's going to be released will effect a change in the trend of the game having an increasingly smaller player population. All I'm seeing is a short term increase followed by the trend resuming as bitter established players cease to support the game or worse - take up a smear campaign to hurt the company over the issue of what they're about to lose in regard to their time investment.

#103 oldradagast

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 4,833 posts

Posted 09 March 2017 - 08:13 PM

View PostFireStoat, on 09 March 2017 - 04:47 PM, said:


It's up to you guys to decide if what's going to be released will effect a change in the trend of the game having an increasingly smaller player population. All I'm seeing is a short term increase followed by the trend resuming as bitter established players cease to support the game or worse - take up a smear campaign to hurt the company over the issue of what they're about to lose in regard to their time investment.


When a company reaches the point of holding existing customer's purchases hostage and then charging them to get them back - and PGI's plan is just a step short of this literally - you know it's time to turn out the lights and move on. It's downhill from here for MWO, and no pile of new tech or random new mechs is going to change that if everyone is basically stuck regrinding the mechs they already have... or expected to give them up because of planned obsolescence.

Edited by oldradagast, 09 March 2017 - 08:13 PM.


#104 Kmieciu

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Urban Commando
  • Urban Commando
  • 3,437 posts
  • LocationPoland

Posted 11 March 2017 - 06:13 AM

View Postoldradagast, on 09 March 2017 - 08:13 PM, said:


When a company reaches the point of holding existing customer's purchases hostage and then charging them to get them back - and PGI's plan is just a step short of this literally - you know it's time to turn out the lights and move on.


Especially when the president of said company publicly mocks his paying customers by calling them "cheapskates" for buying mechs (and mechbays) instead of modules.

#105 QuePan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 109 posts
  • Locationcapital district NY

Posted 11 March 2017 - 12:26 PM

View PostKmieciu, on 11 March 2017 - 06:13 AM, said:


Especially when the president of said company publicly mocks his paying customers by calling them "cheapskates" for buying mechs (and mechbays) instead of modules.

while he was saying it in "jest" its a shock effect and to me a insult to PAYING customers, and that's exactly it for me at least , im not a whole F2player ,Because of HOW the module system worked i planned out that i could buy X modules and have money to purchase mechs (CBill and Mechpacks and equipment for those mechs and spend MC on X amount mechbays based on earnings in gameplay for the Cbill mech and gear purchases . while i havent been playing as long as others so my Cbill banking is not as high how i choose to play shouldn't be punished for a game economy that really doesn't exist that is protected by the MC purchases wall . while you can buy mechs with CBills you cant buy mechbays with it . while you can "Earn" a couple thru other means ingame , most mech bays are bought with CASH . which means if you have a large stable your either buying mech packs or bays or a lucky streamer that gets every mech thrown at you . thats the dynamic here .

#106 oldradagast

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 4,833 posts

Posted 12 March 2017 - 09:27 AM

View PostKmieciu, on 11 March 2017 - 06:13 AM, said:


Especially when the president of said company publicly mocks his paying customers by calling them "cheapskates" for buying mechs (and mechbays) instead of modules.


It's also utter insanity on top of being insulting. If people spent more money buying modules per mech (vs. swapping them), they'd have less money available to buy new mechs to fill their mech bays (purchased with real money) or to outfit the mechs in their latest mech-pack (also purchased with real money.)

Does Russ even know how his company makes money? Mech-packs, dang it! Forcing people to regrind their existing mechs over and over with every skill maze change will discourage people from buying mech packs, which is about the only way they make money. Lunacy.

#107 soapyfrog

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 409 posts

Posted 12 March 2017 - 10:40 AM

Yup. Of course if they remove respec costs entirely, reduce skill point prices to about 20k per, then my module refund might actually cover the cost of skills more or less, and I might not be completely dissuaded from keeping up my spending habits.

With things as they stand, PGI attempting to bankrupt me and imposing a time (xp) cost to respec, I have no motivation to spend money, and vastly reduced motivation to play.

#108 Koshirou

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 827 posts

Posted 12 March 2017 - 11:30 PM

I won't be playing Inner Sphere Mechs. Nor will I be playing Clan Mechs.

#109 R Valentine

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Heavy Lifter
  • Heavy Lifter
  • 1,744 posts

Posted 13 March 2017 - 06:38 AM

We're playing on an "alternate timeline" anyways. Just say, "the clans won. Inner sphere is conquered. Now we all only pilot clan tech". That's how PGI wants this game to go, right?





3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users