193 replies to this topic

[El Bandito]

razenWing, on 13 April 2017 - 04:10 AM, said:

Oh come on, which Hero doesn't have something that a straight upgrade over Cbill version? Also, no one is paying 15 dollars for Champions. The only one that I've ever considered is the SNV Galaxy. Otherwise, unique camo ranks like dead last on my incentive to buy using real money.

And you know better than this... which online DLC (and this is pretty much DLC) doesn't sell something that's better than the free version? Pure cosmetic costumes always sell between 3-5 dollars, not 15 +. So no, argument void.

1. The majority of the Heroes (especially the older ones) are not considered straight up upgrade over C-Bill variants.

2. Champion mech gives extra XP, not C-Bills, so you are completely incorrect in comparing Hero mech to Champion version.

3. This is a multiplayer only arena game. Pay to perform scheme is downright inappropriate in such type of games. So your counter-argument was dead even before it started.

[DRlFTER]

I'm getting a refund. I bought the heroes to have the opportunity to try new and interesting loadouts. It's a lot of cash to shell out for that luxury. If they don't want to provide that experience, I don't see the need to provide my dollars. Simple math is simple.

[Snowbluff]

this sucks. The SHC is a punishing mech to play, and losing the ECM will hurt it.

[Jingseng]

Whatever. It's a reasonable change, but no one will use it for the ecm torso.

I'm more irritated by that one guy that keeps saying "jesus box".

I'm also much more interested in the feels coming about from needed balancing/non "paywall" being achieved by NON CANON. I await the hysterics.

[Kiyoshi Amaya]

Snowbluff, on 13 April 2017 - 05:01 AM, said:

this sucks. The SHC is a punishing mech to play, and losing the ECM will hurt it.

Not really, as you could change the L/T for the B variant. But it really does need something besides a fancy paint job and c-bill boost.

[Tordin]

I got what I looong wanted, at LEAST 1M hardpoint in the left torso. So yeah, Im gonna get that. Never bothered much with ECM anyway.
ECM, certain modules like radar derp are all addicting and turns into cruthces. Im no crutch pilot, I like to learn the though way. Makes better pilots they say



Minus the cigarette, thats a crutch too

Edited by Tordin, 13 April 2017 - 05:41 AM.

[Snowbluff]

Tordin, on 13 April 2017 - 05:37 AM, said:

I got what I looong wanted, at LEAST 1M hardpoint in the left torso. So yeah, Im gonna get that. Never bothered much with ECM anyway.
ECM, certain modules like radar derp are all addicting and turns into cruthces. Im no crutch pilot, I like to learn the though way. Makes better pilots they say
Minus the cigarette, thats a crutch too

With as much tonnage the SCH has dedicated to ancillary equipment, it needs it. I would own them in the first place if I didn't want to play them sneaky.

[Lucian Nostra]

In other news I think I'm going to refund my Mist Lynx hero purchase. Cbill variant offers the same torso E hardpoints so it's a pretty pointless hero.

[R Valentine]

Needed to be done. If you don't like the heroes now, don't buy them. Not complicated. I'd never order a mech before I knew its exact hard point locations and geometry ahead of time. Stuff like that can always change ahead of release. Don't pre-order. Plain and simple.

[Agent1190]

razenWing, on 12 April 2017 - 09:56 PM, said:

Bad call. This is such a terribad call by PGI.

On a marketing standpoint, once you released something that got people to open up their wallet, you don't stab them in the back because you hear how people complain about your p2w models. If after metadata research after release and you find that they are indeed OP, you can always fix by adding neg. quirks. This has been done many many times and have NEVER been a problem.

From a straight up player and paying customer point of view, this is complete horseshat. The issue goes beyond whether EXE or SHC (which btw, who is making these calls that they will be OP? The players? WTF? Are a select few players running PGI now? How are nerf/buff decisions not done through metadata but by theorycrafting players? Are you kidding me...) will be OP. This is about PGI introducing something that's different. Call it p2W is you will, but so effing what? Has any of the previous 50 hero release broke the game? So why is PGI getting scared this time around?

ALL of the previous 50 hero releases can be constituted as p2w. But that's the whole point of paying 15 bucks+ for ONE mech. Why else would the players be paying money for cbill assemble-able parts? It's a principle issue. You want people to give you money, you gotta offer incentives.

Maybe there are enough old people in this game that they are only single game players (only play 1 game) and don't know what a true p2w is. But what PGI is doing with their Heroes is NO WHERE CLOSE to being a true p2w. I play Jurassic World: The Game on mobile. A few months ago, they introduced a VIP system where all the VIP creatures you can get is like 50% more health and damage. THAT is p2w.

At the end of the day, if an EXE approach with 4 missiles, he is not tougher to take down than 1 with just 2. His missiles is not doing more damage. His health is not doubled. Yes, his M slots are twice as otherwise, but are there no 4 M slots mechs in game? Are there no 4M slots assaults in game? Are the amount of hardpoints borderline ridiculous compare to peer mechs? (Honestly, if anything, UV has more of a case to being P2W for having 8 ballistics) No? Don't look like P2w to me.

The loudest complainers seem to match up with the "Wallets closed" club. If they can't pay for nice things, why should anyone else?

If we keep paying for content, then their ultimate goal will never come about: the slow death of MWO.

[Agent1190]

El Bandito, on 13 April 2017 - 04:57 AM, said:

1. The majority of the Heroes (especially the older ones) are not considered straight up upgrade over C-Bill variants.

Ilya
Misery
Boars Head
Yen lo
Pirates Bane
Top Dog
Oxide
Arrow
Firebrand
Jester

Some hero mechs that are straight up upgrades from CBill only variants, whether it's engine size or hard points or both. Granted, the Yen Lo is less relevant in this list now that the AH is back, but for a while, it was the only Centurion that could carry an AC20. You can debate the utility and effectiveness, but not that it's an upgrade you could only purchase with real money.

Edited by Agent1190, 13 April 2017 - 07:38 AM.

[El Bandito]

Agent1190, on 13 April 2017 - 07:36 AM, said:

Ilya
Misery
Boars Head
Yen lo
Pirates Bane
Top Dog
Oxide
Arrow
Firebrand
Jester

Some hero mechs that are straight up upgrades from CBill only variants, whether it's engine size or hard points or both. Granted, the Yen Lo is less relevant in this list now that the AH is back, but for a while, it was the only Centurion that could carry an AC20. You can debate the utility and effectiveness, but not that it's an upgrade you could only purchase with real money.

And how did you get to this conclusion based on these mechs you listed? Of those on the list, I think only the Ilya, and maaaybe the Firebrand are considered straight upgrades. Misery is behind 4N in terms of usability, and Boar's Head is so far behind meta, that only the introduction of LFE might make it a better Atlas, due to its engine rating. Then again, Atlas-S with LFE could still be better.

Edited by El Bandito, 13 April 2017 - 08:22 AM.

[Cy Mitchell]

El Bandito, on 13 April 2017 - 08:03 AM, said:

And how did you get to this conclusion based on these mechs you listed? Of those on the list, I think only the Ilya, and maaaybe the Firebrand are considered straight upgrades. Misery is behind 4N in terms of usability, and Boar's Head is so far behind meta, that only the introduction of LFE might make it a better Atlas, due to its engine rating. Then again, Atlas-S with LFE will still be better.

Ummm, according to the P2W advocates, P2W has nothing to do with a hero being meta. All that matters is that the hero offers unique hardpoints or geometry that MIGHT make it superior to the free variants of the same chassis in SOME scenarios.

It can be argued that a precedent has now been established that any hero Mech past, present or future cannot offer unique attributes that could make it superior to comparable free Mechs. Therefore, Mechs such as the Pirates Bane, Black Widow, Jester, Ilya, Oxide, Firebrand, et al should have free variants available.

When you open a can of worms.......................

Edited by Rampage, 13 April 2017 - 08:20 AM.

[El Bandito]

Rampage, on 13 April 2017 - 08:18 AM, said:

Ummm, according to the P2W advocates, P2W has nothing to do with a hero being meta. All that matters is that the hero offers unique hardpoints or geometry that MIGHT make it superior to the free variants of the same chassis in SOME scenarios.

It can be argued that a precedent has now been established that any hero Mech past, present or future cannot offer unique attributes that could make it superior to comparable free Mechs. Therefore, Mechs such as the Pirates Bane, Black Widow, Jester, Ilya, Oxide, Firebrand, et al should have free variants available.

When you open a can of worms.......................

The debates around here are less about pay to win, but more about pay to perform better--as exemplified so clearly by the Hellbringer Hero, with that 1 more energy RT. And that is wrong. The Hero should never be straight upgrade over C-Bill one.

And since we are talking about omnimechs, with their swappable min-max omnipods, this Agent guy should not have even brought up IS Heros in the first place, since those are battlemechs with fixed hardpoints.

Edited by El Bandito, 13 April 2017 - 08:30 AM.

[Mystere]

El Bandito, on 13 April 2017 - 08:27 AM, said:

The debates around here are less about pay to win, but more about pay to perform better ...

Huh?! This thread sure has fooled me.

[Bishop Steiner]

Lupis Volk, on 12 April 2017 - 10:08 PM, said:

Oh if K-9 get's the forumite treatment.......i'll fly to Canada to give them the angrily written letter personally and show them my locked wallet.

I thought he was saying until pgi busy gets their act together be want going to buy one or something akin to that. Didn't know people were still rumbling over the Resistance Heros, TBH. But I have been pretty distracted of late.

[Pariah Devalis]

Rampage, on 13 April 2017 - 08:18 AM, said:

Ummm, according to the P2W advocates, P2W has nothing to do with a hero being meta. All that matters is that the hero offers unique hardpoints or geometry that MIGHT make it superior to the free variants of the same chassis in SOME scenarios.

It can be argued that a precedent has now been established that any hero Mech past, present or future cannot offer unique attributes that could make it superior to comparable free Mechs. Therefore, Mechs such as the Pirates Bane, Black Widow, Jester, Ilya, Oxide, Firebrand, et al should have free variants available.

When you open a can of worms.......................

Seems there is a bit of a divide in the community. See, I view a difference between "pay to diversify" and "pay for better options."

Example of "diversification" would be if, say, the SHC hero came with a 1M RT and LT. In this case, the LT M hardpoint would be brand new, but directly competing with the existing ECM LT of the Shadow Cat. Meanwhile, the 1M RT would not outclass any C-Bill omnipods.

"Paying for better options," however, would be like its former RT, with 2M only available for real money. The only missile RT on the SHC for C-Bills was limited to 1M, meaning there was a straight paid advantage, there.

Frankly, what surprises me is that they didn't throw in a token 1E LT on the SHC hero. Between the C-Bill 1M LT omnipod they are putting out and the existing ECM ST, along with the 3B torso which maybe will see some use with HMG, having a 1E LT option would have rounded things out beautifully.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 13 April 2017 - 08:50 AM.

[Cy Mitchell]

El Bandito, on 13 April 2017 - 08:27 AM, said:

And since we are talking about omnimechs, with their swappable min-max omnipods, this Agent guy should not have even brought up IS Heros in the first place, since those are battlemechs with fixed hardpoints.

So you are saying that it is OK that some of the Inner Sphere BattleMech heroes are clearly better performers than the free variants of their chassis but it is not OK that any of the Clan omni-Mechs can offer something that is better? Interesting.

Pariah Devalis, on 13 April 2017 - 08:49 AM, said:

Seems there is a bit of a divide in the community. See, I view a difference between "pay to diversify" and "pay for better options."

Example of "diversification" would be if, say, the SHC hero came with a 1M RT and LT. In this case, the LT M hardpoint would be brand new, but directly competing with the existing ECM LT of the Shadow Cat. Meanwhile, the 1M RT would not outclass any C-Bill omnipods.

"Paying for better options," however, would be like its former RT, with 2M only available for real money. The only missile RT on the SHC for C-Bills was limited to 1M, meaning there was a straight paid advantage, there.

Frankly, what surprises me is that they didn't throw in a token 1E LT on the SHC hero. Between the C-Bill 1M LT omnipod they are putting out and the existing ECM ST, along with the 3B torso which maybe will see some use with HMG, having a 1E LT option would have rounded things out beautifully.

I never had an issue with changing the variants or making them available for C-Bills. What really bothered me was the misuse of P2W as a rallying cry to incite the mob mentality that is ever present on this forum and reddit.

My other concern is the impact on the company's bottom line and the longevity of the game based on marketability. I know this decision will cost them sales. They are going to have to find some way to make the purchase of a hero attractive if it cannot bring something unique to the game. Camo and C-bill bonus ain't gonna get it IMO.

Edited by Rampage, 13 April 2017 - 09:07 AM.

[Ultimax]

Lupis Volk, on 12 April 2017 - 09:41 PM, said:

Removing build diversity for the sake of placating those who wouldn't buy said mechs in the first place is stupid.

The only thing many players asked for was to have CBill versions, we didn't ask for them to change the loadouts.

They made that decision on their own.

[El Bandito]

Rampage, on 13 April 2017 - 09:00 AM, said:

So you are saying that it is OK that some of the Inner Sphere BattleMech heroes are clearly better performers than the free variants of their chassis but it is not OK that any of the Clan omni-Mechs can offer something that is better? Interesting.

And just like that you mistook my intention. I repeatedly said in multiple posts that pay to perform better is wrong, no matter the type of mechs. The point is that omnimechs are very obvious when it comes to pay to perform, because it can easily min max using every variant's omnipods, which means if a Hero omni has a pod that is straight up superior to all C-Bill variants, then that's pay to perform, and should not be encouraged.

Battlemechs are more debatable because their hardpoints are fixed, and can be varied enough to not be clear just which variant is straight up better. Jager-DD vs. Firebrand, for example.

Edited by El Bandito, 13 April 2017 - 09:16 AM.