50 replies to this topic

[Lukoi Banacek]

Deathlike, on 27 April 2017 - 12:37 AM, said:

I still don't see the "generosity" honestly in their current plan.

Under the current plan, if you spend a few minutes figuring out what you need/want in terms of GSP you can have your cake and eat it too.

You bought 10 × 10% range modules let us say. They cost you 20mil. You can get rid of those 10% mech enhancers for 10mil. Its always been that way.

Under the new PTS, they intend to give you slightly more value in GSP, for those modules. You take the GSP and turn around and get essentially, that 10 × 10% bonus back.

But here is the sexy part. You are also getting HSP on mechs you have mastered. Unlike GXP or HXP, you dont have to pay cbills to apply them to mechs as you remaster the thing.

So for the same 10 mastered and moduled mechs you have effectively gotten paid twice in xp and cbills,,..theyve moved the cbill cost to the tree vice the modules. With HSP mastering your mechs (including the module bonus value because they are giving you 91 SP vice the 72 you actually "spent" in equivalent grind previously), you can save or sell the GSP (by selling the modules before PTS goes live). Profit.

Under tho old system, you would get more cbills up front via pure refund, but get less credit towards the mastery/module component in xp AND zero cbills put toward those.

So you have to spend cbills (because again, no modules in new system means that expense is spread through out the tree). You have to spend cbills to remaster, xp and cbills for the gap between old and new system and your net grind time is worse.

What you are losing here is a choice, yes. But that choice was actually made when you bought a mech....what many of you are asking for (and I understand it) is a do over. You might have mechs that you dont intend to remaster, so the cbills would be a more flexible currency you can put towards newtech or mechs. But saying its unfair somehow or we are getting screwed, is really a misnomer. You can actually come out ahead in nearly every situation by figuring out the gap between your HSP and GSP, projecting how much GSP you want to stockpile and selling a bunch of other modules for cbills if you want the flexibility. Being able to revert mechs back to "max" for free, stockingpiling GSP for future mech maxing and experimentation all saves you a TON of cbills in future mech leveling (since gxp and hxp also cost cbills to apply) and you can sell the balance.

Its not the best option for the guy who wants pure cbills....but the gamr runs on multiple stovepipes of currency and all equate to manhour investment. And you are capable of making a huge profit in manbours with the current reimbursement plan. Its not intuitive, and PGI isnt showing it well, but its very clearly right there for the snatching.

No one wants their sense of progress curbed, myself included. This reimbursement is actually exploitable in your facor unless you actually prefer to grind more for xp and would orefer straight up cash for just the modules (much of which you will spend in the mech mastering process) The only person that comes out breaking even in that scenario, is the guy who gets refunded enough modules to equip as many mechs as they own and intend to master or more modules.

I have 50ish sets if modules. If I intend to remaster or fully master only that many mechs total, in the future, then full cbill refund is actually better for me. But for every mech I buy and master over that number, Im effectively paying in extra grind that I coukd have avoided by accepting the current PTS.

[Dogstar]

Archer Magnus, on 27 April 2017 - 06:21 AM, said:

As far as I can tell that XP is lost, which I would gladly spend MC to transfer.

Hmm, try calling support or asking how to transfer XP to GXP as a separate thread, your question is getting lost in the deluge

[Cy Mitchell]

vandalhooch, on 26 April 2017 - 10:22 PM, said:

Lukoi and Mischief,

I think you guys are vastly overrating the value of XP in your views on the value of the current exchange.

For a new player in the current system, GXP is strongly limiting resource as it takes a long time to accumulate enough to begin to unlock modules.

However, in terms of man-hours playing the game, useful quantities of C-bills is far, far more limiting to typical players than XP (in any form).

I am a player who does not spend a lot of time grinding. I find that the XP and GXP are the limiting factors for me. Not the C-Bills. C-Bills seems to come easily and I usually have more than I need. But then I do not buy a bunch of Mechs for C-Bills either.

For me, the GSP method of refund is fantastic because I am getting back both C-Bills and GXP in a very generous package that allows me to level up all the Mechs I want to level and bank paid SPs so that I will not have to grind out the leveling on my next few new Mechs. PGI has been very generous with their calculations in the GSP refund system and it benefits me greatly.

I understand that some people are expecting a full refund in C-Bills of every module they ever purchased and want to use those funds for buying Mechs and Civil War era equipment that will coming in a little over a month. I hope PGI can find a way to satisfy them while not scrapping the GSP system that is so beneficial to many of us.

[Appogee]

MischiefSC, on 26 April 2017 - 08:37 PM, said:

Here's what an actual refund would look like.

All the cbills you spent on all modules would be refunded 100%.

All the GXP you spent both on mechs and skills would be refunded as GXP.

All the mech specific XP you spent on a mech to skill it up would get refunded as XP specific to that mech, just as it is today.

Isn't that exactly what PGI proposed to do last time...?

[Mister Blastman]

After some testing on PTS, I LIKE the new refunds they are giving us. I am content, no, thrilled that they listened.

I'm happy.


People, stop complaining, don't mess up a GOOD thing.

[Lukoi Banacek]

@Vandal, I am not even counting GXP value in my calculations to demonstrate how valuable this reimbursement is. All extra mech xp/gxp is just a bonus. Im only addressing GSP/HSP since they incorporate cbill costs, unlike XP.

How much in cbills/gxp do you stand to make purely from modules if they just do a straight refund.

The calculate how many of your mechs you will want to remaster (because you prob wont remaster some,of them). Factor in the gap cost between a pure refund vice the 91 point system PGI intends to use, and thats the cost against your module refund you are going to eat, to remaster whatever mechs you want. Whats left is the cbills you might have left to spend on new gear. And all future mechs purchased you will have nothing to master them qith save gxp, which costs cbills to apply, so your grind will continue immediately.

Lets math it out?

How many mechs do you own that are currently mastered, how many do you intend to remaster once the Sat gows live, and how many cbills worth of modules you own and lets compare options.

[orcrist86]

MischiefSC, on 26 April 2017 - 10:25 PM, said:

My bad then, I took what you said as saying PGI was trying to refund the value in the old system into the newer system, which includes cbills in the cost.


That GXP you'd get back as GXP, true enough.

So you'd only ever master 15 mechs? Not getting new mechs?

Fair enough. However for most people, both people with more than a few mechs and who would get new mechs in the future, the new system PGI has offered is vastly more generous. Also I sorta like the idea of being over-refunded so much I can max out mechs I probably would have never bothered to master up.



I'm saying the new system is vastly, vastly more generous than the old system. Hence I've been mocking people who are saying the new system is 'cheating' them. I'm putting into context exactly how much better the new refund option is than the old one. So much so that people are now raging that they don't get everything from both systems at the same time.

Apology accepted. I think this whole change has got people a bit heated and its going to take some time for people to analyze the implications and most importantly slow down in their response to all the flame throwing. Not gonna lie, so far I'm mostly ok with how the system will work.

[justcallme A S H]

slide, on 26 April 2017 - 11:22 PM, said:

I can see what you are saying, but also remember that under the new ST each individual mech has it's own skill tree. So you could buy a Warhammer BW and skill it up to do Ballistics and a second BW to do Laser vomit (perhaps not the best example but you get the point). This would save a lot of the re-skilling you are talking about. Of coarse you need to have mechs and Mech bays which requires Cbills and MC

This is where an over abundance of GSP could come in really handy.

Oh yeah totally agree. It would save some but not all. I'd need 3 MX90 for example lol, although given they are about to take a ballistic velocity hit, they might be a sub-par choice

I think after the 'dequirkening' & timeline arrives and the dust settles that I'll have to sell all crap variants and buy more of the good ones, to avoid this issue (gimme my cbills PGI!).

It will take flavour from the game though. Active players having to buy multi-chassic of the same variant, going to make it quite bland.

I have enough GSP to Master more mechs than I currently have, that is, excessive.

Dogstar, on 27 April 2017 - 06:08 AM, said:

Your math sucks. That module might be infinitely reusable but it only fits on one mech at a time

Given you can only drop one mech at a time, or 4 if FP, not sure of the point.

Edited by justcallme A S H, 28 April 2017 - 01:38 AM.

[Khobai]

Im fine with 50% cbills and 50% GSP for module compensation.

that way the cbill economy doesnt get screwed up because you could sell modules for 50% cbills anyway

but also the 50% GSP makes me feel not screwed out of the full value of my modules and rewards me for the inconvenience of switching to a new skill system which I feel is in every way inferior to what we had before.

because lets make no mistake about it. the new skill system is terribly flawed and not really better than what we had before.

they couldve easily expanded on the module system and made the module system work by turning skills/quirks into modules and giving mechs categorized module slots. And that wouldve been far better than what we have now or whats on PTR.

So yes I should get properly and fully compensated for having to deal with an awful new skill system I never really wanted in the first place. Id be more willing to take a loss if the new skill system was good. But its not. This garbage skill system is not worth me losing tens of millions of cbills in account value over.


So these are the three options that I see:

1) do nothing leave the game the way it is.

2) give me 100% cbill or 50% cbill and 50% GSP compensation. add this crappy new skill system I hate as is.

3) come up with a vastly improved skill system I actually like and id be willing to accept an account value loss for its implementation. then maybe you can sell me on a 0% cbill refund.

Edited by Khobai, 28 April 2017 - 01:57 AM.

[vandalhooch]

Rampage, on 27 April 2017 - 06:45 AM, said:

I am a player who does not spend a lot of time grinding. I find that the XP and GXP are the limiting factors for me. Not the C-Bills. C-Bills seems to come easily and I usually have more than I need. But then I do not buy a bunch of Mechs for C-Bills either.

For me, the GSP method of refund is fantastic because I am getting back both C-Bills and GXP in a very generous package that allows me to level up all the Mechs I want to level and bank paid SPs so that I will not have to grind out the leveling on my next few new Mechs. PGI has been very generous with their calculations in the GSP refund system and it benefits me greatly.

I understand that some people are expecting a full refund in C-Bills of every module they ever purchased and want to use those funds for buying Mechs and Civil War era equipment that will coming in a little over a month. I hope PGI can find a way to satisfy them while not scrapping the GSP system that is so beneficial to many of us.

I get your position and totally agree that many players like you are seeing a benefit from the current iteration. The problem in my eyes is that some players, who have invested many, many hours in earning C-bills for modules, are being asked to sacrifice what we earned in order to get the same benefit as those who didn't.

Once again, I'm willing to make that sacrifice but a little recognition from the first iteration whiners that this iteration is not fair to me would be nice. No amount of their rationalizing changes the fact that I end up with either massive quantities of functionally useless GSP or only half of the resources I already earned through hours and hours of extra play time. Their own hours and hours of play time resources are not being converted into worthless currency or being cut in half.

[Deathlike]

Lukoi Banacek, on 27 April 2017 - 06:21 AM, said:

Under the current plan, if you spend a few minutes figuring out what you need/want in terms of GSP you can have your cake and eat it too.

No, that's the problem. I asked for steak and got cake. I didn't ask for cake, so I demand a refund.

It's not that complicated.

Edited by Deathlike, 29 April 2017 - 04:39 PM.