276 replies to this topic

[D V Devnull]

Luscious Dan, on 18 January 2018 - 02:18 PM, said:

Shoot I'm gonna miss the current challenge because my phone and laptop won't connect via personal hotspot properly and I'm not at home

Well, I missed a day at the danged start too. Just means, since there's no time extensions being given, that we both won't have it perfect.

~D. V. "Figures... oh well..." Devnull

[Baron Blitz Fokheimer]

MovinTarget, on 18 January 2018 - 03:18 AM, said:

Please stop projecting that I'm trying to be some "mouthpiece". That would be like me asserting you are some kind of Ombudsman or "voice of reason". There is nothing in my comments that indicate that I have any misbegotten notions of my role in this.

Am not and never claimed to be. I am merely arguing in my best interest, but at least providing rational arguments in doing so. Meanwhile, most of the responses are of the "well this is how they made it so you're just gonna have to deal with it, neener" variety. What exactly does that add?

MovinTarget, on 18 January 2018 - 03:18 AM, said:

If you've decided that you are going to buy nothing but chicken nuggets for the rest of your life and McDonalds suddenly has a flash sale where you get a free shake with the purchase of a burger... Did they target you for exclusion? Is that some sort of bias?

That's the thing: I don't feel targeted by this. I think it's bad event design/oversight that can at the very least be corrected in the future. The issue here is that people who don't have a pony in the race (those who wouldn't in the least bit be affected if the event conditions didn't discriminate) are arguing against this. It's kind of like if you were to complain that you don't buy chicken nuggets because they're too salty, only to have a bunch of people who don't even eat chicken nuggets start yelling about how the nuggets are just fine the way they are.

James Argent, on 18 January 2018 - 07:54 AM, said:

No, that's reductio ad absurdum and you know it. You blindly won't even consider purchasing anything from half of the things they offer, no matter what it is. It could be the perfect mech for you but because it's on the wrong 'side' you won't open your wallet. You don't have to purchase everything on a side for your artificial limit to harm PGI's bottom line. You're making a fungibility argument in an artificial scarcity environment.

They put in the work to provide two tech bases from which to choose to purchase. You're telling them to f-off with all the work they put into Clan mechs without even looking at them because you have a misplaced RPing stick up your backside regarding QP, a portion of the game which has no RPing. They owe you and people like you nothing in regard to configuring events.

We aren't mouthpieces or white knights...we're just people who see a lot of whining about self-imposed nonsense and became tired of it.

Playing both sides wouldn't make me spend any more money on the game than I already do; it would just be spent differently. And the players who are willing to buy everything (or at the very least more than half of everything) are unlikely to limit themselves to a single account.

Loyalists shouldn't cost them any lost sales. You aren't limited to a single account.

[MovinTarget]

You could make an argument about time, but your argument cannot be about money since the majority of tech is available for cbills which, yes, can be bought for money, but are more typically a result of your time investment. Surely you have one mechbay to spare for a clan mech right?

But i get it, you primary conceit is that players that are willing to invest in both sides should not be rewarded more than those that invest in only one. Is that a fair and snark free distillation?

My conceit is simply that expecting everyone's specific and personal choices to be equally reward-able at every turn is unrealistic. We all get screwed at some point, it doesn't matter if you are a whale or one of Russ' beloved "cheapskates". This isn't a PGI thing, this is a life thing.

[Xaat Xuun]

heh, my clan alt is taking a bit longer with his only IS mech that can fit just 1 er med, on match 8 right now, at least it's not Polar highlands, sucks on that map with that IS Mech, have to suicide run in just to get some damage

[Buenaventura]

At least there were some okish trial mechs to do the clan ERML part with. Needed more matches with IS because I rarely mount ERML as backup weapons, way too hot.

[D V Devnull]

MovinTarget, on 18 January 2018 - 06:53 PM, said:

You could make an argument about time, but your argument cannot be about money since the majority of tech is available for cbills which, yes, can be bought for money, but are more typically a result of your time investment. Surely you have one mechbay to spare for a clan mech right?

But i get it, you primary conceit is that players that are willing to invest in both sides should not be rewarded more than those that invest in only one. Is that a fair and snark free distillation?

My conceit is simply that expecting everyone's specific and personal choices to be equally reward-able at every turn is unrealistic. We all get screwed at some point, it doesn't matter if you are a whale or one of Russ' beloved "cheapskates". This isn't a PGI thing, this is a life thing.

Hello, MovinTarget... I believe it's time I put an end to this argument between you and Baron Blitz Fokheimer, and by extension, any others involved in the argument. By the way, due to having Mechs on both sides, I am a neutral party to this argument. I'm just really sick of it going on this long. Anyway, down to the details...

Your thought that someone willing to invest in both sides should not be able to get more than those only investing in one is incorrect. I believe Baron Blitz Fokheimer's intent was that those who invest in both would then have access to all the rewards, however, those who invested in just one side should still have access to half, instead of being blocked out and given absolutely nothing. PGI should have splitted the rewards on the MG Challenge in order to accomodate this. At least then, those Role-Playing Loyalists who don't have Mechs from the other side would at least be able to get just half of the rewards, but would still have to understand that they would need to get a Mech from the opposing side in order to get to the other half of the reward pile. But, the shutout-style conditions that have been set up are indeed a tad unfair to those who should have access to at least only half of the rewards. That's why there are people upset on this thread in regard to the reward-handling.

---

Now as for me, I've got Mechs on both sides, so while I may have missed the first day, at least I'll be able to do the other challenges.

On other notes... Sadly, I think the lacking timing on any Announcement and Bad Event Launch should have Required an Extra 24 hours on Day #1, but that didn't happen either. I'm sure a lot more than just me and a few others got screwed out of doing Day #1.

Also, I'm a little angry that my completion displays from Previous Events on the New System beyond two weeks ago are disappearing. I would have liked (and I bet others, as well) to be able to access that in perpetuity, just like the '/tournaments' url, but somebody didn't think about allowing the database to maintain it. Damned cheap, if you ask me.

Also, having piloted an I.S. ER Med. Laser barrage, and then a Clan ER Med. Laser barrage, I think the I.S. one is more powerful currently. The Clan ER Med. Lasers seem to need a decrease in Heat by 0.15, bringing it down from 6.3 to 6.15 Heat per Laser. Right now, Clan ER Med. Lasers just run Too Hot by comparison. At least to my view, the Inner Sphere is OverPowered right now.

Which reminds me... Clans are overdue for a Drop Deck Tonnage Boost. They need 5 more for Scouting, and 10 more for Invasion. There are certain I.S. Mechs running about right now for which there is no Clan answer available in response to them at this time.


~Mr. D. V. "Trying to settle arguments, and also stopping by with my other thoughts..." Devnull

[MovinTarget]

D V,

Real crux of this discussion is there are consequences to our choices. There is a guy I know that plays *only* Spiders, dunno if he's still playing but if you saw someone named "The Amazing Spider-Man" dropping... well, he lived up to his name. If he made a decision to play only spiders and there were challenges for something other than spiders, should he be mad?

If someone decides to RP in a game that is so thin in depth that most RP constraints are managed in just one facet of the game (FP) or by external leagues... Should they be mad/surprised if there are challenges that ignore the RP facet? Should anti-FP players be mad that *occasionally* there are FP challenges or that some FP challenges are specifically for factions of which they are members?

Considering these particular challenges are in QP and not FP, how can PGI be responsible for everyone's decisions that prevent them some participating in *some* challenges?

If you want to say, "Thanks, but I can't do this b/c of the way you designed it" and leave it at that. That would be fine.

It's is when people that made conscious decisions that limit their capacity to participate and then blame PGI (or on a grander scale any other entity in life) for their loss of opportunity, without recognizing their own complicity. That's what I'm addressing, because if it's not somebody that refuses to buy any clan mech, it will be somebody that refuses to use regular MG or ER Medium lasers on principle, or doesn't believe in using SRM6s w/o Artemis. They are probably out there.

It seems that no matter what PGI does there will always be someone who gets screwed and maybe we all should acknowledge that they are not beholden to any one of us, regardless of how much IRL $$$ we put into the game or how much time we've spent in drops or how many forums we've warriored in.

I mean, it would be more reasonable to argue that each challenge be 2 days instead of one seeing how there are probably more people that will miss a challenge due to IRL things than the inability to purchase a cheap mech for cbills.

But if you miss a challenge, its not the end of the world is it? I used to be OCD about this game but actually thanks to things *exactly* like this, I've broken free because ITS JUST A GAME, I can't get *all* the goodies on all 3 of my accounts for every challenge, I just don't have the time.

The other thing is that most human beings are more likely to notice/remember all the things that seem to stack against them and forget all the good stuff, like all the free swag they may have collected over the years that PGI didn't *have* to provide.

Bottom Line: If you are not having fun you are doing something wrong.

[James Argent]

D V Devnull, on 19 January 2018 - 05:32 AM, said:

Your thought that someone willing to invest in both sides should not be able to get more than those only investing in one is incorrect. I believe Baron Blitz Fokheimer's intent was that those who invest in both would then have access to all the rewards, however, those who invested in just one side should still have access to half, instead of being blocked out and given absolutely nothing. PGI should have splitted the rewards on the MG Challenge in order to accomodate this. At least then, those Role-Playing Loyalists who don't have Mechs from the other side would at least be able to get just half of the rewards, but would still have to understand that they would need to get a Mech from the opposing side in order to get to the other half of the reward pile. But, the shutout-style conditions that have been set up are indeed a tad unfair to those who should have access to at least only half of the rewards. That's why there are people upset on this thread in regard to the reward-handling.

I still maintain that it's a smart business decision for PGI to structure rewards such that this useless RP carryover to QP is discouraged. He SAYS he's no more likely to spend money on the game if he had twice as many mechs from which to choose, but that's only because he's already made the decision to limit himself and he's trying to justify that decision. Worse, he's doing it with the logical fallacy that your choices aren't limited unless you've already purchased everything on one side.

[MovinTarget]

D V Devnull, on 19 January 2018 - 05:32 AM, said:

Hello, MovinTarget... I believe it's time I put an end to this argument between you and Baron Blitz Fokheimer, and by extension, any others involved in the argument. By the way, due to having Mechs on both sides, I am a neutral party to this argument. I'm just really sick of it going on this long. Anyway, down to the details...

Your thought that someone willing to invest in both sides should not be able to get more than those only investing in one is incorrect. I believe Baron Blitz Fokheimer's intent was that those who invest in both would then have access to all the rewards, however, those who invested in just one side should still have access to half, instead of being blocked out and given absolutely nothing.

If this were *always* the case, I would see your point. However, at this time is it rare to have a challenge that requires both IS and Clan tech.

I don't know why they chose to do that. Perhaps to encourage more cross-tech users. I.don't.know.

Be that as it may, such challenges are the exception, not the rule. So again, express displeasure, but don't act like its the end of the frickin' world, especially those that have had ample time to acquire the resources to feasibly accomplish the challenge, yet refuse to do so.

[Electroflameageddon]

Laser challenge done!

I won a Stormcrow a while back, so I kitted it out with ERML and did it in one match.

It took me 2 matches with my Urbie.

Now I'm looking at some of the Clan Mechs I won during various events to kit them out with SRM-6's. I have a Linebacker, a Kit Fox which already has SRM-6's and a Hunchback IIC. Something will work I'm sure.

I think my biggest problem will be winnowing down which IS mech to use for this challenge.

Good thing I played events which gave me Clan Omnimechs as prizes.

[D V Devnull]

To James Argent & MovinTarget ---

As I noted before, I'm just a Neutral Party in regard to this matter. I'm just tired of the arguing. Let's simply hope that PGI has better consideration in the future for people who don't have Tech from both sides like we do, or that they're a tad more up-front with matters. Also, let's hope that PGI does a better job of pre-announcing Events before they actually happen, or that they're going to give more time on the first part when they're late in announcing on launch. I'm also equally tired of poor Event design and handling.

~D. V. "Geez... I didn't need the salt directed at me as well... I just wanted everyone to calm down." Devnull

[MovinTarget]

Yeah, I didn't necessarily mean you were the one countering, and I get you are trying to be a peacemaker.

I agree a bit of notice would have been appreciated from PGI on the announcement and such. They do make head scratching decisions, I just don't know if they are always just flying by the seat of their pants or if there is a method that we are not privy to (and yes, I have my suspicions, lol).

I just get salty over S.S.S.

[WarmasterRaptor]

PGI cannot possibly account for a minority of « one tech » accounts...

And even less be the ones accountable for a player’s choice lol
They did NOT made you do anything.

Otherwise, next event lets have it give 50mc just for login in... so everybody gets to get the reward regardless of choice !
Except those that won’t feel like connecting, which should allow them to complain about the unfairness of PGI right ??

[James Argent]

Electroflameageddon, on 19 January 2018 - 09:21 AM, said:

I won a Stormcrow a while back, so I kitted it out with ERML and did it in one match.

Use this for your SRM6 mech too.

[Electroflameageddon]

James Argent, on 19 January 2018 - 11:19 AM, said:

Use this for your SRM6 mech too.

Thanks, I'll see what the load out looks like and take it out for a run or two.

[Hauptmann Keg Steiner]

I'm not even sure how RP prevents you from using tech from the other side. Clantech is based off of Star League-era IS tech (and they still have some examples in mothballs, depending), and the Inner Sphere was using captured/sold/gifted Clantech as soon as they could get their hands on it.

[MovinTarget]

IdToaster, on 19 January 2018 - 12:36 PM, said:

I'm not even sure how RP prevents you from using tech from the other side. Clantech is based off of Star League-era IS tech (and they still have some examples in mothballs, depending), and the Inner Sphere was using captured/sold/gifted Clantech as soon as they could get their hands on it.

To be fair, I've put limits on my playstyle, albeit only temporarily, but they weren't under the guise of Role Playing. It was more like "I'm going to build an alt account that uses only Urbies, Maulers and Stalkers for FP!"

...but that was an alt account so I guess its different because I never restricted my main account...

[D V Devnull]

MovinTarget, on 19 January 2018 - 12:47 PM, said:

It was more like "I'm going to build an alt account that uses only Urbies, Maulers and Stalkers for FP!"

Would that be an UrbanTarget that could benefit from an UrbanMech-IIC in order to be able to play on the Clan side of things?

~D. V. "I had to ask... LOL..." Devnull

[MovinTarget]

D V Devnull, on 19 January 2018 - 01:12 PM, said:

Would that be an UrbanTarget that could benefit from an UrbanMech-IIC in order to be able to play on the Clan side of things?

~D. V. "I had to ask... LOL..." Devnull

Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyybe?

Though I got a free Linebacker Prime from an event so I can safely say I never BOUGHT a clan mech... (just some Omnipods)

Edited by MovinTarget, 19 January 2018 - 02:36 PM.

[Baron Blitz Fokheimer]

D V Devnull, on 19 January 2018 - 05:32 AM, said:

Hello, MovinTarget... I believe it's time I put an end to this argument between you and Baron Blitz Fokheimer, and by extension, any others involved in the argument. By the way, due to having Mechs on both sides, I am a neutral party to this argument. I'm just really sick of it going on this long. Anyway, down to the details...

Your thought that someone willing to invest in both sides should not be able to get more than those only investing in one is incorrect. I believe Baron Blitz Fokheimer's intent was that those who invest in both would then have access to all the rewards, however, those who invested in just one side should still have access to half, instead of being blocked out and given absolutely nothing. PGI should have splitted the rewards on the MG Challenge in order to accomodate this. At least then, those Role-Playing Loyalists who don't have Mechs from the other side would at least be able to get just half of the rewards, but would still have to understand that they would need to get a Mech from the opposing side in order to get to the other half of the reward pile. But, the shutout-style conditions that have been set up are indeed a tad unfair to those who should have access to at least only half of the rewards. That's why there are people upset on this thread in regard to the reward-handling.

Pretty much this. Had there been two separate events, one per faction, there wouldn't have been any complaints.

MovinTarget, on 19 January 2018 - 06:32 AM, said:

If you want to say, "Thanks, but I can't do this b/c of the way you designed it" and leave it at that. That would be fine.
...
But if you miss a challenge, its not the end of the world is it?

No one's saying this is the end of the world, threatening to cancel pre-orders, et cetera. We're just providing negative feedback so that hopefully next time we'll have better thought-out, inclusive events. Think of it this way: our request doesn't affect you in the least bit, nor does it affect PGI's bottom line (loyalists aren't going to suddenly start buying opposite side tech for MC, even if they do break their RP tendencies and get something just for event completion). So instead of using all that energy to argue against us, you could have simply said "hey, I agree, PGI please split the events or change the event conditions to be more inclusive" and this would have created a net positive benefit for the community.

James Argent, on 19 January 2018 - 07:17 AM, said:

I still maintain that it's a smart business decision for PGI to structure rewards such that this useless RP carryover to QP is discouraged. He SAYS he's no more likely to spend money on the game if he had twice as many mechs from which to choose, but that's only because he's already made the decision to limit himself and he's trying to justify that decision. Worse, he's doing it with the logical fallacy that your choices aren't limited unless you've already purchased everything on one side.

No, I wouldn't spend any more money than I already do because I wouldn't spend over $2,000 on this game. Whether I get, say, 8 IS packs, or 4 IS packs and 4 Clan packs, doesn't really matter because I'm not going to be buying 9 or more packs instead of 8.

Your argument only holds for players who only occasionally buy something that they are interested in, which could mean lost sales if those players are loyalists and are skipping mechs whose stats they'd otherwise appreciate. However, such players are unlikely to be loyalists to begin with (the two archetypes are contradictory).

Finally, and once again, you aren't limited to one account.

Edited by Baron Blitz Fokheimer, 19 January 2018 - 06:08 PM.