257 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

Alan Davion, on 26 April 2017 - 12:20 PM, said:

Believe me Bishop, I want the game to move forward just as much as you do, but I also want fair compensation for the time and effort I've put into the game.

If I were to sell all my modules right now I'd get 84.5 million C-bills for it. And I bought those long, LONG before this arbitrary date that PGI has set where if I let it go through I'll get jack-f***ing-shite for them.

Meanwhile, if someone bought the same modules I have after this totally arbitrary date, they'd be getting the full 169 million C-bill refund for it.

THAT is what I'm complaining about, because THAT is not fair to me for all the time it took me to save up GXP to level up those skills. To save up the C-Bills to buy those modules.

And you bought them, knowing you'd get **** in resale. And you bought them, to buff your gundams.

Now you want to get the skill points to buff your gundams AND the money back on top, to buy more gunz n gundams, which means you are actually looking for MORE than "fair" compensation.

Sorry bro, I'm in the EXACT same position you are in...as is everyone. And somehow, not feeling remotely buttpuckered over it.

I AM, HOWEVER, FEELING BUTTPUCKERED OVER THE DAMN COMMUNITY HOLDING PROGRESS HOSTAGE.

Lukoi Banacek, on 26 April 2017 - 12:23 PM, said:

I'm a closed beta founder and clearly a whale, codenamed "cheapskate" by Russ. You can keep up with the hyperbole, I'm talking facts and realistic expectations. You're not getting screwed without lube. You're merely not getting what you'd prefer.



Bishop, I've got news for you; you've never provided me an insight or "news" on these forums. But I agree that we agree on this issue. Appreciate the echoing regardless however.

Whether you wear blinders when I post or not, not really anything I lose sleep over. But hey, glad we agree here.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 26 April 2017 - 12:23 PM.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Deathlike, on 26 April 2017 - 11:09 AM, said:

Let's just say PGI decided to "remove" engines...

Except they aren't. What they are doing is replacing a system with another that provides the same effect.

You bought a bonus for your mech(s) i.e. a weapon range module +10% at a known cost, with a known depreciation.

PGI is replacing that bonus with a coupon good for ANY of the bonuses available under the new system. If you're worried you're going to get too many bonuses and cannot use them (undervaluting them) you can still preemptively sell them at the known, original, depreciated rate.

It's not perfect, but it's absolutely equitable.

It also addresses the windfall conundrum and the issue of incentives to encourage MC purchases to keep the company viable.

I recognize it strikes at the sense of fairness because it doesn't line up with what they said (as noted, they are pretty consistent in that area), but it does addresses both equities of the consumer (us) and them as the business trying to stay in business. Not perfect, but not a screw-over.

Do some math, figure out what GSP stockpile you're comfortable with, sell the excess modules for liquidity. That's a very solid option here (and one I intend to utilize myself, since I don't need 300+ mechs worth of GSP). The 50% modules + the 100% I'll receive reimbursement for, will give me quite the good sized stockpile of cash, more GSP than I need and it's reasonable easy to do.

All that has the caveat however, of....waiting till PGI announces the date, the patch, the whatever cuz Gawd knows it might change again and I don't wanna sell off a bunch of modules only to find out they caved and decided to give us full cash value anyway! (so by all means, keep on lobbying fellas....I like free stuff too).

Bishop Steiner, on 26 April 2017 - 12:24 PM, said:

Whether you wear blinders when I post or not, not really anything I lose sleep over. But hey, glad we agree here.

It's not blinders when you don't offer up something that's not already been said. It's repetitive, but again, glad we agree here.

[Bishop Steiner]

Lukoi Banacek, on 26 April 2017 - 12:32 PM, said:

All that has the caveat however, of....waiting till PGI announces the date, the patch, the whatever cuz Gawd knows it might change again and I don't wanna sell off a bunch of modules only to find out they caved and decided to give us full cash value anyway! (so by all means, keep on lobbying fellas....I like free stuff too).

I like free stuff too.

I don't like having development pushed even further back. At this point, I'd rather lose value (which we are not here, not claiming that) than wait while whiners whine for more freebies.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Bishop Steiner, on 26 April 2017 - 12:33 PM, said:

I like free stuff too.

I don't like having development pushed even further back. At this point, I'd rather lose value (which we are not here, not claiming that) than wait while whiners whine for more freebies.

Yea, I wish the process would speed up as well, but introducing dramatically flawed and relatively fixable things to say "we did something" isn't always a great idea either.

The PTS just started. They've already gotten alot of feedback and I'm sure it'll keep coming. Hopefully they make the needed tweaks and get this thing popping. It's definitely not going away.

[Lupis Volk]

Bishop Steiner, on 26 April 2017 - 08:52 AM, said:

Sadly, these forums have ever proven that faith in the intelligence of humanity is misplaced.

As a wise man once said: "a single human is smart, a group of them is the dumbest thing you'll ever see"

[WarHippy]

Prosperity Park, on 26 April 2017 - 08:07 AM, said:

You bought modules to improve mech performance. This includes sensor upgrades, weapon mods, etc.


You did not buy them as if they were trade bonds. You did not buy modules for the sake of using them as a C-Bill reservoir for later liquidation. You did not buy them for the sake of laundering Cbills and refusing to equip them on your Mechs.

Face it, if you bought modules, it is because you wanted to spend your Cbills on weapon mods, sensor upgrades, etc. If you didn't want these things, you would not have bought those modules.

In exchange for your modules, you are getting skill points that act as weapon mods, sensor upgrades, etc. You are exchanging upgrades for upgrades.

If you are complaining about this, then you have to openly admit that you bought modules for the sole sake of selling them back later, and *not* to equip them on your Mech to improve performance.

I don't think anyone here is that stupid. So, please, drop the act and stop complaining. I know you are not that dumb, I have faith in you.

As much as it pains me and for that matter makes me feel dirty I have to agree with Mr. Park.

Lily from animove, on 26 April 2017 - 08:55 AM, said:

it's not the same bonuses I paid for, as said I bought tomatoes not carrots, but you are not able to see the difference obviously. Guess telling you is like teaching a blind person about colors.

Bonuses can and have changed in the past. As for buying a tomato you are not being refunded a carrot you are being refunded something that can be a carrot, tomato, or turnip depending on how you use it. One module converts into roughly 67 skill points that you can use in 67 different ways.

Lily from animove, on 26 April 2017 - 08:55 AM, said:

The module was a bonus to be swapped around at any time for no costs, the new bonus you can buy is a one shot bonus for a single emch. Thats like comparing all you can eat with a single steak. if you hve a limited need for food, you won't see the difference but others may see the possibilities for an all you can eat. But I would surely not pay for an all you can eat that includes just a single steak.

I'm willing to bet most people like myself have and would spend a lot more on a single really good steak than I would at the vast majority of all you can eat buffets.

Lily from animove, on 26 April 2017 - 08:55 AM, said:

bad unobjective comparison is unobjective. So I guess Bishop and his argument about intelligence is right, some people cannot simply compare facts because they can't even gather comparable facts anymore. Analytical thinking is truly a sparce feature here in the forum.

I think most of us have a rather over inflated opinion of our intelligence when it comes to other people and their perspectives versus our own. I certainly know I do because every time I come here I feel like a mental giant talking to a bunch inbred neanderthals.

PhoenixFire55, on 26 April 2017 - 08:56 AM, said:

I've purchased items with specific set of characteristics, i.e. module that gives set % of improvement and that can be freely moved and used in all of my mechs. I am neither retaining these characteristics with the new system, nor am I getting a refund of what I've spent in order to obtain them.

That % has changed in the past so nothing was truly set. Either way the system and how it worked is changing. Sometimes changes are for the better and sometimes they are for the worse, but they are still going to change.

[WarHippy]

Bishop Steiner, on 26 April 2017 - 11:06 AM, said:

And this, is where you are wrong.

A mech without Modules was never fully mastered. The Modules were the end game OF said mastery.

I have never found that argument to be valid.(Keep in mind we are on the same side this go round) Mastery of something does not require the purchase of add-ons to master it. I can master driving a particular car without adding a hood scoop or some other mod that helps me eek out a little more performance, and the same is true for mechs. Mastery is independent of modules.

Deathlike, on 26 April 2017 - 11:09 AM, said:

The logic doesn't hold though.

Let's just say PGI decided to "remove" engines... and moved to a "nicer" system where upgrading engines would not be as onerous as it is now... like you would spend some amount of C-bills to upgrade or downgrade your engine, instead of buying an entire engine as you do now.

Well, this means that one that has spent tonnes of C-bills for the number of engines would get the equivalent shaft.

So long as they give an equivalent amount of tokens for free upgrades and downgrades to an engine I really wouldn't have a problem with it. Which is essentially what is happen with the skill system. Modules(engines) are being removed and we are being given GSP(upgrade/downgrade tokens) as a replacement. Sure, c-bills would be more useful, but I can understand why they want what was spent before on the old system to be spent on the new rather than other things unrelated to the skill tree.

[Deathlike]

Lukoi Banacek, on 26 April 2017 - 12:32 PM, said:

Except they aren't. What they are doing is replacing a system with another that provides the same effect.

You bought a bonus for your mech(s) i.e. a weapon range module +10% at a known cost, with a known depreciation.

PGI is replacing that bonus with a coupon good for ANY of the bonuses available under the new system. If you're worried you're going to get too many bonuses and cannot use them (undervaluting them) you can still preemptively sell them at the known, original, depreciated rate.

It's not perfect, but it's absolutely equitable.

It's not equitable if it's not even close 1 to 1.

I can get plenty of coupons to anything in the real world, yet the actual value is probably much less (like any retail store chain). Coupons that I excess of and cannot use is useless.

If a store chain isn't selling X product well enough, it gets sold off at a discount... simply just to recoup shelf space.

In a digital environment, none of this is relevant. Modules are not a commodity that are meant to be traded in any sense, so the value is literally what PGI dictates them to be. Unless the return is back to 1 to 1, it is not equitable. It's like asking for a mechpack refund and getting only 50% of it back with other 50% returned to you in equivalent MC. When you ask for a refund and you paid for it, you BETTER get ALL of it back. Coupons for things you didn't want/ask for doesn't count. Fortunately C-bills is not real money (although you could spend MC for C-bills in the worst conversion rate possible). Ask for C-bills AND NOT alternative currency is pretty reasonable request, no matter how you look at it.

Quote

It also addresses the windfall conundrum and the issue of incentives to encourage MC purchases to keep the company viable.

I stop caring when people suggest there's an economy. There is no economy to speak of.

Quote

I recognize it strikes at the sense of fairness because it doesn't line up with what they said (as noted, they are pretty consistent in that area), but it does addresses both equities of the consumer (us) and them as the business trying to stay in business. Not perfect, but not a screw-over.

Do some math, figure out what GSP stockpile you're comfortable with, sell the excess modules for liquidity. That's a very solid option here (and one I intend to utilize myself, since I don't need 300+ mechs worth of GSP). The 50% modules + the 100% I'll receive reimbursement for, will give me quite the good sized stockpile of cash, more GSP than I need and it's reasonable easy to do.

All that has the caveat however, of....waiting till PGI announces the date, the patch, the whatever cuz Gawd knows it might change again and I don't wanna sell off a bunch of modules only to find out they caved and decided to give us full cash value anyway! (so by all means, keep on lobbying fellas....I like free stuff too).

I already did some math and concluded I'd have more GSP than I'd have mechs. That's a problem and I'm pretty sure I won't respec every mech I currently own, so no.. I simply do not want GSP. I want C-bills. End of story.

Edited by Deathlike, 26 April 2017 - 01:08 PM.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Deathlike, on 26 April 2017 - 01:07 PM, said:

I already did some math and concluded I'd have more GSP than I'd have mechs. That's a problem and I'm pretty sure I won't respec every mech I currently own, so no.. I simply do not want GSP. I want C-bills. End of story.

So, sell the modules at 50% value, which you ALWAYS KNEW WAS THE RETURN RATE ON THEM and enjoy the 100% reimbursement you get from the ones that are marked "post-announcement date" by PGI. End of story.

p.s. if you think there is "no economy" when it comes to PGI remaining profitable, idk what to tell you. They have a vested interest in people buying MC and balance the incentive of that vice trying to pressure people to buy it. The ingame economy (or lack thereof) isn't the one my posts refer to in the slightest.

[Bishop Steiner]

WarHippy, on 26 April 2017 - 01:05 PM, said:

I have never found that argument to be valid.(Keep in mind we are on the same side this go round) Mastery of something does not require the purchase of add-ons to master it. I can master driving a particular car without adding a hood scoop or some other mod that helps me eek out a little more performance, and the same is true for mechs. Mastery is independent of modules.

except that PGI was always explicit that was the skill tree endgame, you equip the modules to complement and max out your loadout.

So it kind is the case, whether you accept it or not, bro. Just saying.

[Nameless King]

Prosperity Park, on 26 April 2017 - 08:07 AM, said:

You bought modules to improve mech performance. This includes sensor upgrades, weapon mods, etc.


You did not buy them as if they were trade bonds. You did not buy modules for the sake of using them as a C-Bill reservoir for later liquidation. You did not buy them for the sake of laundering Cbills and refusing to equip them on your Mechs.

Face it, if you bought modules, it is because you wanted to spend your Cbills on weapon mods, sensor upgrades, etc. If you didn't want these things, you would not have bought those modules.

In exchange for your modules, you are getting skill points that act as weapon mods, sensor upgrades, etc. You are exchanging upgrades for upgrades.

If you are complaining about this, then you have to openly admit that you bought modules for the sole sake of selling them back later, and *not* to equip them on your Mech to improve performance.

I don't think anyone here is that stupid. So, please, drop the act and stop complaining. I know you are not that dumb, I have faith in you.

Then why are we getting anything back at all, just reset to 0 for everyone.

MechaBattler, on 26 April 2017 - 08:28 AM, said:

They're converting modules into skill points. That's how I see it. So you still get what you had in a fashion. And if it's true that you can sell them half price and still get the GSP. I think that's pretty good.

Skill points I dont need so not really a good deal for me

[Deathlike]

Lukoi Banacek, on 26 April 2017 - 01:15 PM, said:

So, sell the modules at 50% value, which you ALWAYS KNEW WAS THE RETURN RATE ON THEM and enjoy the 100% reimbursement you get from the ones that are marked "post-announcement date" by PGI. End of story.

p.s. if you think there is "no economy" when it comes to PGI remaining profitable, idk what to tell you. They have a vested interest in people buying MC and balance the incentive of that vice trying to pressure people to buy it. The ingame economy (or lack thereof) isn't the one my posts refer to in the slightest.

Did I not already mention that modules bought AFTER Dec 2016 qualify for 100% full C-bill refund? You'd still have to figure out how many modules apply to the GSP portion. I'm still unsure how they don't screw up that refund.

Edited by Deathlike, 26 April 2017 - 01:35 PM.

[WarHippy]

Bishop Steiner, on 26 April 2017 - 01:18 PM, said:

except that PGI was always explicit that was the skill tree endgame, you equip the modules to complement and max out your loadout.

So it kind is the case, whether you accept it or not, bro. Just saying.

Still going with the bro nonsense?
They were explicit that modules were end game content not end game skill tree. Even under the old/current skill system you are mastered(it literally says its mastered so apparently PGI disagrees with PGI) once you unlock that last skill regardless of you putting modules on a mech or not. Heck, you can sell the entire mech and it is still mastered.

[TorinZ]

I ended up with enough GSP to skill out 99 more mechs. I don't really think I would buy 99 more mechs. So I wouldn't mind having an option after patch to be able to maybe trade in some of my GSP to CBills. I would still keep a few thousand of my GSPs for sure, who doesn't like skilling up a mech instantly. If 1 GSP is worth 45,000 CBills + some XP, I don't think it would be horrible to allow players to make the trade for some CBills.

That being said, I don't really care either way. I will monitor what PGI does after all the feedback and then decide if I want the 9K+ GSP or if I sell off some modules to get some CBills back before the patch. They got their use in over the years, I am ok with the 50% of my costs back. It was nice to see the ledger for the breakdown. I bought more modules than I thought.

Also was nice that we are getting MC refunded for all those old MC Consumable rewards. Bonus, more camos/warhorns for my mechs!

[Lukoi Banacek]

Deathlike, on 26 April 2017 - 01:34 PM, said:

Did I not already mention that modules bought AFTER Dec 2016 qualify for 100% full C-bill refund? You'd still have to figure out how many modules apply to the GSP portion. I'm still unsure how they don't screw up that refund.

I referred to those mechs previously. I agree, it's not a clean mechanism. Doesn't change the underlying point I'm making however. How will they screw it up/not screw it up? Idk...we'll all have to wait and see how implemented, like anything else they've tried to accomplish around here.

[DAYLEET]

Dakota1000, on 26 April 2017 - 09:08 AM, said:

It is really surprising around here to see how many people prefer being ripped off. It doesn't make any sense that people would fight against the option to get a full refund when it only provides a benefit to them and otherwise harms nothing else.

I calculated that i would need to unlock about 160 skills for each mech be to ready to be customised how i want. At 160 skill per mech Ill have for about 35 new mech worth of GSP which pays for the xp and the cbills for unlocking. The xp made playing will be used to customise the mech as i play them and replay them. Cbills does not begin to do that.

Would i like to have 350million cbills? sure! Would it lessen the grind on my new mech and let me enjoy them instantly rather than later? Nope. I like GSP, its going to be more useful for me. Sure Civil War is gona hit hard our cbills wallet and maybe youd like to buy a hundred mech in a day with cbills but id rather have a good time playing my mech fully unlocked and use the earning 100% for gears and refeat rather than have a lot of cbills but still have to grind.

[Heffay]

I have a nice compromise: What if PGI would let you spend MC to convert your GSP to c-bills!

[Bishop Steiner]

Heffay, on 26 April 2017 - 01:54 PM, said:

I have a nice compromise: What if PGI would let you spend MC to convert your GSP to c-bills!

while not 100% opposed to the idea, really don't need another layer of junk added to further delay skill tree, just for a few hemorrhoidal opinions.

[DAYLEET]

VanillaG, on 26 April 2017 - 10:47 AM, said:

As others have said, the reason the GSP for modules feels bad is the modules were used to increase the performance of a fully mastered mech. Since my fully mastered mech is getting 91 SP there is no need for a large amount of GSP to round out a mech. Sure I will use some to tweak the tree after spending my free 91 SP but I cannot see myself spending 6578 GSP (enough for 72 mechs) in a reasonable time frame on my existing mechs. Especially when I will be sitting on 460K of GXP.

If PGI had refunded less than 91 SP for fully mastered mechs the GSP would feel more useful. As it stands right now, the majority of my GSP can only be used on new mechs that I need to purchase.

You can only USE 91 skill at once but there is 242 to chose from and unlock, thats a pretty important distinction to make. Ill need around 160 for a single weapon type mech if i want to customise it the way i want when i play it. It does not cost 91 gsp to skill a mech, you just get one loadout.

[Heffay]

Bishop Steiner, on 26 April 2017 - 02:05 PM, said:

while not 100% opposed to the idea, really don't need another layer of junk added to further delay skill tree, just for a few hemorrhoidal opinions.

(It was a trap... you weren't supposed to walk into it!)