190 replies to this topic

[ZortPointNarf]

Big MO, on 12 March 2017 - 10:27 AM, said:

Well, if I used all those Cbills to buy enough modules that I didn't need to swap them around, I would.have a lot fewer mechs. This would mean I would have bought a lot less MC to purchase mech bays. Is that really what they want me to do?

This honestly is my biggest gripe with having to pay CB for the upgrades, CB has been used to buy equipment and mech upgrades and then most importantly for me to buy additional mechs.
I have bought 100 mech bays in just under a year as I like collecting, collecting modules didn't really appeal to me as I could re-use them so I spent my CB on getting mechs, which led to me spending MC. The new system would just slow this rate of buying additional mech bays way down, and the minimum of 150(50% mech-bay sales)+75 (one-shot) MC I spend per mech. I am by no means a whale, maybe more of a porpoise, but I think PGI are cutting off a big stream of revenue. (maybe I am wrong and their numbers tell them differently)

My biggest disappointment with the new tree is that they didn't monetise it by allowing players to spend MC in mastering mechs as well as the CB cost instead of a pure GP cost.

I am super excited to see the tree, and give it a proper test (could only get one game on PTS due to low player numbers), I think even with its' faults it's a step in the right direction, even if it needs a few tweaks. I do think it will be a enhancement on the current module system for new players, but it is very complex compared to the current one. Sometimes simplest is best, but I am hopeful that enough players are familiar with tech trees to be able to get it. (Skill tree sounds wrong, call it what it is, it's a tech tree)

Just over a week, can't wait

[Liveish]

S0ulReapr, on 12 March 2017 - 11:33 PM, said:

Still not a "generic all mechs are the same except for different skins so people won't whine" shooter.

There will always be bad mechs.

[Lupis Volk]

live1991, on 13 March 2017 - 01:15 AM, said:

There will always be bad mechs.

And i will love them to death.

[PFC Carsten]

FWIW, my resason for bein a „cheapskate on an island“: I mostly play one mech for longer periods of time, so I am fine with owning only one set of modules apart from a possible FP dropdeck's outfitting. I change the modules once or twice a day, so not much quality of life lost here compared to someone switching mechs constantly.

[Kmieciu]

PFC Carsten, on 13 March 2017 - 01:42 AM, said:

I change the modules once or twice a day.

I've got 5 set of modules for my 182 mechs.
I outfit 5, which takes less than 5 minutes and then I can play for the whole evening. I mark those mechs are favourite, so I don't have to hunt for modules.

The next time I play I can use a whole different group of mechs.

To get a full set of modules you need 18 000 000 C-bills.
I earn, on average , 152 061,69 C-bills per match.
18 000 000 / 152 061,69 = 118, 373 matches
My average match takes 6,28 minutes.

TL:DR: It takes me over 12 hours of match-time (excluding waiting in queue) to get a full set of modules for one mech. Or I could take 1 minute to swap modules.

Edited by Kmieciu, 13 March 2017 - 03:28 AM.

[MovinTarget]

S0ulReapr, on 12 March 2017 - 07:42 PM, said:

Until PGI removes "A BATTLETECH GAME" from their logo, I expect "A BATTLETECH GAME" as advertised.

Please cite the MW/BT game out there that does a better job of living up to the brand...

Every single one of them will be flawed in that ridiculois estimation unless its turn-based. Once you introduce RTS elements into the mix, interpretations of movement and game mechanics are up for interpretation... this means that everyone can have a very different idea of how it could be implemented.

I am sure some things could be done better but don't act high and mighty unless you are willing to offer up a gold standard to measure up to.

Flawed or not, its the best thing we've got atm...

Edited by MovinTarget, 13 March 2017 - 03:32 AM.

[Kmieciu]

PFC Carsten, on 12 March 2017 - 07:03 AM, said:

Thought MWO`s history Russ managed to alienate:
- founders
- battletech lore enthusiasts
- people who wanted a fair balanced game
- f2p players (are there even any left?)
and now:
- whales who buy a lot of mechpack but don't play enough to get modules

Right now, the only people left are the ones who are fine with power creep, buying power with real $$$ and only use a handful of the best mechs.

[C E Dwyer]

Sarsaparilla Kid, on 12 March 2017 - 04:22 PM, said:

You must have missed this post...module swapping was even a tool tip suggestion!

https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__5648753

Also, if you think about it...the people that were cutting corners on modules and engines were buying new mechs instead and were probably buying and spending more MC on mechbays and/or mechs than those who took the time to acquire full sets of modules, so even in that case, Russ is still talking about the people who spent real money on his game.

Yes he did, and he's been saying damn stupid stuff like this since closed beta. He would be, had he not managed to some how raise the capital for this niche game, be a virtual nonentity in the gaming industry. If you look at the products made under the various and now discarded company names it's not really that surprising.

P.G.I though do have the licence so we're stuck with them.
People have a choice to support this and have a slim sliver of hope that P.G.I will make it good before we die, or stop supporting it, and watch it whither.

I'm as pissed off about the comments as many are, until mechcon I bought everything plus, I'm still not sure that I'll ever spend a cent here again, I'm certainly not going to spend anything, until I see for myself, how screwed up the new tech is going to make this game.

A few people want this game to crash and burn, because they're under some delusion about some other company taking up where P.G.I leave off.

This isn't going to happen none will ever touch this game outside of turn based again. Anyone tempted to do so will just have to come here and read the forums to go woah I'm not walking into that **** storm.

So think about it hard before you walk, this is far from perfect, and in the hands of the clueless, who's staff are on a permanent damage limitation exercise, but it's the only practical realistic option.

[Reno Blade]

Duilliath, on 12 March 2017 - 10:31 AM, said:

I would say, to follow your example, that this is more like your favorite restaurant switching from free disposable napkins to charging an additional $10 to every meal for the "luxury" of a napkin. I have no problem with them making a c-bill sink to compensate for the loss of modules, but make it reasonable.

I think that example could be changed to represent the economy closer...

Current eco
Were you going to your favorite drive-in /self-service diner, you would get a plate with your meal (Mech) and could get a plastic cup of water (your quirks).
If you want coffee, you have to buy the thermo-cup that comes with it ... where the cup cost you 10$ +1$ for the coffee but you can keep the cup (module).
Ofc you would have to pay for the cofffe every time you use your fancy cup (1$), but you would not need to buy a new cup (reusable module).

having a meal often with coffee will save you a lot money, as you already have the thermo-cup.

Flaw: we could swap our cup with the coffee (weapon/sensors modules) without paying for the coffee. (and we basically only unlocked another cup holder slot on mastery)


Now moving to the PTS economy:
your meal now comes with ceramic cups (owned by the restaurant) where your coffee is served in and this will always cost you 2$ (Skill point cost per meal/Mech).
If you have a meal with a coffee every day, you are spending more $ after some days than the previous offer with the thermo-cup.
But if you'r not drinking coffee every day (e.g. not unlocking Seismic sensor skill nodes) you are saving yourself some $.

In the short term it's cheaper in the long term it's costing you more.


Conclusion:
I think this is a money-sink intended to keep players to spend XP and CBills after years of playing MWO.
Nowadays players sit on 200+ mechs AND lots of XP/CBills they can't even use for anything (outside of multiple modules).

There is no need to use Premium Time, Convert XP-GXP or buying multiple similar/same mech variants once you have such large mech stables.

To have a constant "goal" for the players AND to give a "reason" to spend MC for PT/GXP, this system change is needed/helpful.
Why?

You can get mechs faster, but to master(skill completely) and experiment(changing skills you didn't unlock before), you will need to spend a bit more over the long run.
AND you will benefit much more by using PT and GXP-conversion by speeding up mastering and experimenting -> which is the main income for F2P game (to reduce the grind).

[MovinTarget]

I just wish they would have made it so instead of this GXP/Module refund idea which does favor the heavily invested (in modules anyway), they simply had a way to grant every Mastered Mech Variant 91 Skill Points -not for each copy of a variant, only once- and some subset (75-78?) for each elited mech.

Then you refund 50% GXP/Cbills and that should cover most people's basic'd mechs + lee-way for tinkering.

This would placate the majority of the playerbase and maybe give them some willingness to delve into the skill tree for new mechs (with leftover GXP/Cbills from refund?) until they get a feel for the changes and maybe, just maybe, buy into it.

Because I can see that as it stands, it will be arguable that players like myself that have not intentionally "paid to win" will have this advantage (skill notwithstanding, LOL) in that because I have bought basement mechpacks and played tons with that Premium time and bought 1.6+ BILLION in modules, I'll suddenly have the means to skill up tons of mechs out of the gate, and while I'm glad they didn't decide to bork me in the tail...

I can see how this does suddenly give those of us that just happened to play the game a certain way without intention of acquiring an advantage... yeah, I can see how its a little unfair to others...

This is why I advocate for just granting all Mastered/Elited Mechs an initial set of free Skill Points, it maintains the level playing field, at least initially...

Yeah, took me a bit to fully wrap my head around the implications, but I think I got it...

[MrKvola]

MovinTarget had a good suggestion there - just unlock SPs based on the mastery level of each 'mech owned. C-bill reimbursement for modules is perhaps not necessary for some people when SPs are unlocked. GXP spent should probably still be reimbursed though (at least partially).

Or perhaps give the player a choice on how to transition their account to the new system:
1. unlock SPs based on mastery level, do not refund modules and XP
2. refund modules and XP

I'm OK with SPs costing c-bills and XP to buy in the new system (after it is rolled out on the live servers). I'm pretty sure all can adjust and go with it moving forward. Adjusting the c-bill costs just improves this bit, even if the increased XP grind stays.

Suggestion: how about discounting SP cost by say 20% for each additional owned chassis variant (should variant duplicates also count)? Minimum would be 20% for the 5th 'mech of a chassis owned. Reason to implement: incentivize players to get those other variant that may not be the big cheese. Also could use familiarity with chassis as reasoning. Players still get to spend c-bills on upgrades and grind out SPs for their additional variants/duplicates of 'mechs. Grind volume is already raised by means of SP cost for the first variant. Total grind in case I would want duplicates/more variants is more manageable than what was suggested. I do not have an exact idea how to stop people from buing 5 'mechs and levelling just the 5th and other caveats, but I'm pretty sure we could come up with something if this is considered.

I'll also probably be OK to work through all the 'mechs and assign SPs myself. Don't need to do that in one go, I suppose I could make "skillup time" before I actually start dropping and skill up some 'mechs before dropping in them later in that session. Still I expect the effort to be north of 10 hours for me. Which is quite a lot.

Suggestion: Could we please have Skill Tree templates? What they should do: A Skill Tree template should be a saved pre-set of SPs (creation: select and apply SP's for a 'mech, click a "save as template" button, use template slot, name it) which would enable to instantly populate the Skill Tree with saved nodes. It would then be possible to adjust the nodes before applying changes. I believe this would be a huge click and time saver for the Skill Tree and a very welcome feature of the system.

I'm not OK however to be punished for playing the game before the new system will be introduced. Because that is what will be happening if the current conversion scenario is implemented.

I'm also not OK with having to pay with playtime for re-specs. What is the reason? To make us grind EVEN MORE in case we just want to try out something else? And punish players for trying out perhaps stupid or funny builds (which still would be kinda optimized)? I'd rather be doing something else than grinding XP for one 'mech over and over in case I make choices that just don't pan out well or if I want to have some fun. I probably already paid the c-bill cost for those bad decisions.

I believe it is good for the game to evolve and improve, but I do not agree with evolution steps that were proposed for this change as I feel that they will be detrimental to the overall game experience. Also it seems that due to low popularity of this update in the current form population may drop significantly, which is basically the opposite of what this update is aiming to achieve (bring something new, also increase grind -> expected playerbase and time spent in-game increase).

PGI, please, speak to us.

Edited by MrKvola, 13 March 2017 - 06:27 AM.

[MovinTarget]

MrKvola, on 13 March 2017 - 06:23 AM, said:

I'm also not OK with having to pay with playtime for re-specs. What is the reason? To make us grind EVEN MORE in case we just want to try out something else? And punish players for trying out perhaps stupid or funny builds (which still would be kinda optimized)? I'd rather be doing something else than grinding XP for one 'mech over and over in case I make choices that just don't pan out well or if I want to have some fun. I probably already paid the c-bill cost for those bad decisions.

One week Premium Time code plz? Just don't activate it until *AFTER* you are done re-speccing so you get to enjoy it!

[MrKvola]

MovinTarget, on 13 March 2017 - 06:29 AM, said:

One week Premium Time code plz? Just don't activate it until *AFTER* you are done re-speccing so you get to enjoy it!

Oh yes, how about compensation for that sweet premium time spent in the SkillTreeLab post-transition clicking away these 23,296 clicks (256 'mechs times 91 SPs). I'd like that too.

[Anunknownlurker]

The number of precious egos reacting to what was a stupid, throwaway comment by Russ is quite staggering. It was SO clear what he meant by "cheapskate" that I am astonished that people are actually upset by it!

It wasn't funny, it wasn't clever, it wasn't even accurate but please, grow up a bit and don't be offended where no offence is given.

[MovinTarget]

Jimmy DiGriz, on 13 March 2017 - 07:02 AM, said:

The number of precious egos reacting to what was a stupid, throwaway comment by Russ is quite staggering. It was SO clear what he meant by "cheapskate" that I am astonished that people are actually upset by it!

It wasn't funny, it wasn't clever, it wasn't even accurate but please, grow up a bit and don't be offended where no offence is given.

I agree with you 100% unfortunately it was gasoline on the fire for many...

[WarHippy]

SuperFunkTron, on 12 March 2017 - 11:48 AM, said:

Could you describe exactly what you believe is reasonable? at 45,000 c-bills a node, maxing out a mech costs 4,095,000 c-bills as of the NGNG podcast. Considering that each mech will get upgrades that reflect at least a few modules in the new system, how is 4.1 million c-bills not reasonable compared to the approximate 18 million c-bills for just 4 in the current system? That is less than 25% of the cost for a much larger benefit.

I would be happy if they removed c-bill costs from all nodes related to old skills and quirks, and then they can put whatever price tag they want on nodes involving modules like seismic and radar derp. That way they keep their c-bill sink without punishing anyone be they mech collector or obsessive compulsive module buyer. It really isn't that complicated.

[Rogue Jedi]

I proudly admit to being a cheepskate when it comes to modules, and somewhat lazy when it comes to moving equipment.

when Faction play came out I had not got enouth modules in total to fully outfit a dropdeck, from my 100+ Mechs at the time, these days I have about 15 Mechs with full modules ^{(and several more with some modules but not fully outfitted)} out of 209 Mechs total ^{(and 240 bays yes I have sold several Mechs)}

The vast majority of My Mechs are ready to go, I have maybe 30 Mechs which are not, so about 180 Mechs which are fully outfitted except for modules.

I have about 100 modules in total ^{(, not counting consumablesdoing a count up with over 200 Mechs is not fun, including 19 unequiped modules in my inventory)} and I have unlocked all the Mech modules, and about 3/4 of the weapon modules, so I should be able to master at minimum 60 Mechs ^{(probably more like 80-100)} with the cbills and xp I have on hand straight after the patch.

I do not know about other players but 60 mastered Mechs is more than enough for me, I only have about 20 I use semi reguraly, I usualy elite the chassis, if I love any varients I will keep going back to them and end up mastering them, and probably stick on a few modules, if I do not realy like the chassis after eliting the best varient I usualy set it aside, and sell the worst/most hated varient(s) if/when I need the cbills.

[MrKvola]

WarHippy, on 13 March 2017 - 08:24 AM, said:

I would be happy if they removed c-bill costs from all nodes related to old skills and quirks, and then they can put whatever price tag they want on nodes involving modules like seismic and radar derp. That way they keep their c-bill sink without punishing anyone be they mech collector or obsessive compulsive module buyer. It really isn't that complicated.

Actually with the increased XP grind the economics just may work out OK in the end, especially with the 45k c-bill price tag (you need to farm 18k more XP in the new system anyway).

[MovinTarget]

MrKvola, on 13 March 2017 - 08:50 AM, said:

Actually with the increased XP grind the economics just may work out OK in the end, especially with the 45k c-bill price tag (you need to farm 18k more XP in the new system anyway).

On the plus side, if you are constantly skilling up each node(s) as you can afford it, you'll actually be able to upgrade your mech in a quasi-steady progression as opposed to now where you need to hoard up to 6k/8.5k/21.5k just to unlock a skill...

Small consolation for some, I know, but...

[Marius Evander]

A full module cost refund must be given because the majority of playerbase took russ at his word over 4 months ago and have spent 4 months buying modules instead of mechs with the knowledge would get full cost back. Ive bought about 40 modules in last 4 months only because i was told will get full refund so you can drop that idea movingtarget.