87 replies to this topic

[Black Mage]

I have played WOT since it was in beta. MWO has some very blatant similarities in gameplay mechanics. This is not to say that it will ruin the game. The mechanics work in WoT.
WoT has been extremely successful. The amount it has grown from when I first played it way back in Beta is absolutely amazing.
I look forward for MWO to do the same.



For anyone who is trying out WoT. Just a heads up. When I first started playing, all that was in the game was the Russians and germans. Each only had one SPG, Heavy, Medium, and TD line. That will give you a view on how much an MMO can grow in 2 years. Hopefully MWO can do the same!!!

[Toothman]

Bluey, on 24 February 2012 - 09:55 AM, said:

Allow me to dissapprove your view
Its a game who pays most wins most

Absolutely not. There is nothing buyable that is that good. Gold ammo is grossly expensive and only marginally better. The pay tanks are crap compared to a fully upgraded unpayed tank of the same level. There is no pay to win. Just pay to be mediocre

[BigDuke66]

There is more to buy than crappy tanks and ammo, sum that up and you will see that it's pay to win, of course one has to be still a good tank commander but it helps to buy anything that is useful because in the end some of it will save your ***.

[Joeseph Pierce]

Ewig, on 24 February 2012 - 04:35 AM, said:

You must look WORLD OF TANKS! you well see perfect model of gameplay for MWonline

sorry, I'm not very good writing in English

but I love the MW universe and is my duty to show you a successful project in a similar field.

http://worldoftanks.ru/game/

Golden Bullets? NO THANK YOU.

that is all...


But seriously, i think that a mix between TF2 and WoT would be best.

[Aethon]

Ewig, on 24 February 2012 - 04:35 AM, said:

You must look WORLD OF TANKS! you well see perfect model of gameplay for MWonline

sorry, I'm not very good writing in English

but I love the MW universe and is my duty to show you a successful project in a similar field.

http://worldoftanks.ru/game/

So, you think it would be a good idea to have Tandem-charge missile warheads, and armor-piercing ammo, but only purchaseable with real-world money?

No, thank you.

[moerker]

WoT and horrible coding, esp when it comes to 40 ton of artillery vanish 2 meter infront of you when it hides in a tiny bush. And shells that disapear after you fired. Or Shells that bounce, pointblank of a rear on a tank is only so much bigger then the shell its shot by. I can go on and on.... I dont want things like this in MWO.

And not to forget the "P2W" (a.k.a The Wallet Warriors) love that nickname

Edited by moerker, 31 May 2012 - 07:00 AM.

[Swissky]

TL;DR message: WoT is a good but flawed game that MWO should still learn from but not model itself on.

Wow, lots of hate for WoT in this here thread.

As a med- long time WoT player (~3k games) few things to add:

1) First and foremost, I sincerely hope that MWO is not modeled on WoT because (a) I don't want to play another WoT game and ( it has serious flaws

2) To dismiss WoT completely is utterly stupid. Of course lessons will be learned from that game, both from its flaws and its successes. I don't think anyone can seriously tell me this game has not been at least somewhat influenced by it, and I think MWO will be a better game because of WoT's existence

Some flaws of WoT:
- It's not Pay2Win if you have half a clue what you're doing, but it is Free2Bore. Attempting to grind tanks in that game without a premium account is akin to eating rusty razor blades, it's horrendous. Hopefully MWO will be much less work for people who don't pay.
- There's too much random chance. Penetration rolls are frustrating, as are "critical hits" which damage a module but result in no damage to the HP, this is infuriating. I don't mind fires so much as this mechanic can be used effectively by skilled players, ammo racking is a bit silly though.
- Feature creep. Implementing easy and obvious content like maps and premium tanks while pushing off important features like alternative game modes.
- Not sure how this one could be solved, but people are so bad at this game... I've rage uninstalled several times, always because of other players being morons.

Debunking some myths:
- It's not Pay2Win with the exception of gold ammo, which although stupid, is not as much as a problem as you might think. It's expensive and generally frowned upon in non-competitive play. The Pay2Win myth is propagated by poor players who become frustrated at their impotence and quite typically blame the game mechanics.
- The premium tanks are a cashcow for WG, but aren't actually much different to their peers:
>Lowe's are about on the same level as King Tigers, but tend to be driven by idiots so I see them as much less of a threat.
>KV-5 is a joke if you have half a brain cell and know where to shoot.
>Type 59 most certainly one of the best tier 8 mediums but it has some serious drawbacks. It's gun is poor for its tier and it hasn't got great accuracy. The biggest issue with this tank is it preys on peoples ignorance. Having knowledge of angling and knowing where to shoot (do NOT shoot the lower glacis as some people recommend) is the key here, and can be reliably penetrated frontally from >180 penetration, which is common on tier 7 heavies/TDs and tier 8 mediums.

[TKG]

Garth Erlam, on 24 February 2012 - 08:59 AM, said:

I think the quote "there are parts that are similar to World of Tanks" fits. Keep in mind there's no 'tiered' 'Mech system, so that kind of ruins the comparison right there.

Thank GOD. If anyone knew what it took to get to a T30 only to have World of Gaming screw the tech tree, it's elite crew and my entire teir climb.... then move the entire statistics accumulated on that ride onto some other tank thus making appear as if I'd never driven the tank... >.< I'm glad they aren't using at least the tier system.

In short...I worked to get an atlas and an Urbanmech got delivered instead by FedEx.

[Jason Phoenix]

Why am I even reading this BS ?!?

[JP Josh]

chipeloi, on 24 February 2012 - 05:19 AM, said:

Hes right
Its hard getting advanced units you realy need to work for them, so when you get them its all the more rewarding, also this alows people to get use to there tanks because playing a heavy is nothing like a light or even medium.
Most of the things you can buy with money are only slightly better then the normal stuf (the Type-59 not included)
If you buy the premium then you get double exp and money, sounds a bit mutch, its not, making a 1000 exp a battle and the total cost of upgrading your tank and then getting the next one up runs in the 100.000's at the mediums and gos up, up ,up
I'm having a hell of a lot of fun running around with a "light" tank and when i want a change of pace i'll go to my mediums or heavys and the other way around.
They are making a profit, and keeping there players happy and people comming back for more.

So yes they do need to look on how W.O.T's works especialy how they keep there Paying costumers happy.
You give people things like heavy's to soon and it will reck the game, running around in an heavy realy means you are a veteran (and i don't mean the bought heavy tanks)

Just my 2 cents , saying no to something so similar to Mechwarrior Online would be foolish, learn from them and put the best idea's to use.

go back to WoT and stay there also the type 59 shoot the top part of the front armer not the bottom and aviod shooting turrent other than that all the armer is paper.

[TKG]

Actually since a lot of T59 drivers like to hug, the commanders cupola on the right is the softest part of the turret high chance to kill crew and do lots of repeatable internal damage.

[moerker]

Well i should have enough beneath my feets to make my claims about WoT. search for - moerken on WoT. Even thou i havent played it for almost a year.

[Aethon]

I just want to know what a 'turrent' is.

[Thirteen]

MWO should have no common with WOT otherwise it's going to be fail

[Reported for Inappropriate Name]

no. and shame on you for suggesting mech warrior online should step on its userbase for money. The only thing world of tanks succeeds in is lying to you until they've already gotten a large chunk of your money and quite frankly if I see the same thing happening here I will leave. I no longer support business practices that ruin things I like just so they can nickel and dime. and don't even get me started on "matchmaking". or as I like to call it, the "frustrate you until you spend money" mechanic.

oh sure in russia it's successful, and in us/rest of eu it's not doing too badly, but you need to consider that currently it is the only armored warfare, specifically tank warfare mmo on the market, regardless of the fact that it's an arcade game it has the market cornered and as such can do whatever the hell it pleases.

but then you have things like random number generators, a broken(working as intended) matchmaking system, and a language barrier. and clear developer bias actually now that i'm listing off what I don't like about world of tanks. These are the same people that chat banned me for a week when I went into analysis as to why randomness makes a poor competitive environment, and why maps with only a few points of attack leads to a large number of stalemates compared to more open and free flowing maps. all war gaming cares about is your money. that is it. game balance? stable gameplay? only unless it threatens to lose them money do they even attempt to make a change and even then- even the russian player base is having a hard time understanding what the developer's beef is with the entire german line.

but I digress. IGP, I love your company and the developers under you. I've bought a few of your games and enjoyed every one, but if you murder this game in the name of quick money I will loathe you from then on.

as for you pirhana games, your story writing and plot isn't the best i've seen, but then again you've primarily worked on sequels, which from my understanding do not allow much creative direction, and movie titles which by nature are cash grabs, although I did enjoy the transformers game not for the plot but for the action, and this leads me to my point. I fail to see how a company that puts together such good looking titles (primarily for consoles thus far taken into consideration, we all know how their hardware is terribly inferior)could possibly botch a battletech game, mmo or not. Now while I understand the usual model is to keep your players grinding and spending money I can only hope that on the competitive end it is balanced and you provide space for a community to grow. this is quite possibly the first mech warrior mmo, which means there won't be much competition to motivate you, but the fact that the team making this game is apparently comprised of mech warrior fans is very reassuring. I know at this point I've probably insulted you and i'm teetering on the edge of a read only ban, but I would like to leave one bit of wisdom from all my years of being a fat basement dwelling neckbeard;

many companies make games in the pursuit of money, which would be fine if we were talking about a blender or a television. when it comes to entertainment it's more about giving people new experiences on a platform that doesn't disrupt their immersion too much, so if your goal is money, instead of copying what has worked so far and giving customers more of the same, take the initiative to expand on them, get involved with your community, accept feedback and constructive criticism regardless of what kind it is, but always apply your own resources and experience to evaluate this information well because in the end it's your decision to make changes and additions regardless of how much your community pressures you. many ideas look great on paper but it's good to avoid complications by fiddling with them first on your own time. good entertainment is what makes money in the long run because while you can fool people for a short while it always catches up to you. a good example of this is the old republic, may it sink in peace DING DONG BANNU amen.

but I digress. so far everything I've seen from your studio relating to this game has looked very interesting, and only my cynicism from the current state of the gaming "industry" is keeping me reserved, please don't disappoint us with a cash grab.

Edited by Battlecruiser, 31 May 2012 - 10:30 AM.

[Haroldwolf]

WoT is the last game I want to see MW:O modelled after. I'm sure these devs are powered by caffine not Vodka.

Edited by Haroldwolf, 31 May 2012 - 09:56 AM.

[CompleteTanker]

WoT has one thing that I heartily approve of.

There is no lobby.

You select your tank, you choose your loadout (such as it is), you press "Battle".

[Warenwolf]

Battlecruiser, on 31 May 2012 - 09:53 AM, said:

and don't even get me started on "matchmaking". or as I like to call it, the "frustrate you until you spend money" mechanic.

How does spending money in WoT gives you a better matchmaker? The game has it mistakes (game engine that supports only one core, 0-damage hits, huge increase in difficulty once you reach tier 4, over saturation with tier 8 premiums, community relations rivaling those of KGB) but the amount of haters in this thread is ridiculous.

This game shouldn't be copy of WoT but that discussion is moot because it wont be (I am not interested in playing WoT with Mechs).

[Atayu]

I played WOT since early beta I want MWO to be so much more.

1. MWO better not have gold ammo like WOT=pay to win
2. MWO the mechs are customizable not just go through upgrades tell its done.
3. In WOT you know how a tank is armed as soon as you see it, but in MWO the armor speed weapons can all very.
4. Tech trees and pilot exp. in the 2 will work way different.
5. WOT dev's lie to there client base, MWO crew at PGI dose not seem like those kinds of people.
6. WOT has a problem with the bait and switch, sale something 4 real money thats good in game then after they have sold enough nerf it so it is not as efficient. Then a month later release the next one to take its place rinse repeat.

With the huge disappointment that is now WOT I hope MWO is much further away then allot of people are thinking they will be. Wot had promise but was made in to a money grab pay to win game.

[Kartr]

Paul Inouye, on 24 February 2012 - 10:24 AM, said:

And now introducing BattleMech Tier 1's!

Urbanmech!!

Drachenwolf, on 24 February 2012 - 11:15 AM, said:

ahem!! umm scuse me?? a tank compared to a battlemech hmmmm let me seeee nooo I think a running, Jump jet carrying arsenal of Lasers and missiles with the ability to submerge under water just might outfight a tank LOL for those of you who never piloted a mech before? I feel deeply grieved for you. btw yes ive done the wot thing. So just speaking from experience. cya in my sites yall.

Funny thing about BattleMechs submerging, it shouldn't be possible. If tonnage is really a measure of mass (it can't be) then the density of the Atlas is less than that of water meaning it can't submerge, it'll just float on it's back.