62 replies to this topic

[Kartr]

Thorn Hallis, on 03 March 2012 - 02:02 PM, said:

Yes, but why should they implement something like that when they allready award the player with C-Bills and Xp based on that players performance?

Because its part of the lore and the universe. It also gives people a way to acquire new equipment that they might be able to put on their 'Mech depending on how the 'Mechlab works.

Contract money: Pays the bills.
Victory bonus: Pays for the extras.
Salvage: Parts to sell or use to modify your ride.
XP: Shows how you're pilot is growing more skilled with every battle.

[Nighthound]

Kartr, on 03 March 2012 - 03:37 PM, said:

Because its part of the lore and the universe. It also gives people a way to acquire new equipment that they might be able to put on their 'Mech depending on how the 'Mechlab works.

Contract money: Pays the bills.
Victory bonus: Pays for the extras.
Salvage: Parts to sell or use to modify your ride.
XP: Shows how you're pilot is growing more skilled with every battle.

Wow, that would be realy bad .... I think.

1. The loser gets no victory bonus and has repair costs vs. the victor would get a C-Bill Bonus plus Salvage? Either Salvage or C-Bills not both, otherwise you would be in deep trouble after a few losses or on top of the food chain after a few victories with nearly no chance to change that.
2. Modifing a IS Mech is (sticking to canon) nearly impossible. Those Mechs are not designed to allow that, with the exception of minor stuff. Modifing comes with Omni Technology and for the IS, that means well after 3055 (again sticking to canon).

Edited by Nighthound, 03 March 2012 - 05:23 PM.

[Thorn Hallis]

Kartr, on 03 March 2012 - 03:37 PM, said:

Because its part of the lore and the universe. It also gives people a way to acquire new equipment that they might be able to put on their 'Mech depending on how the 'Mechlab works.

Contract money: Pays the bills.
Victory bonus: Pays for the extras.
Salvage: Parts to sell or use to modify your ride.
XP: Shows how you're pilot is growing more skilled with every battle.

That would get players to much c-bills - something which isn't supposed to happen, I guess.

[Pvt Dancer]

Kartr, they will not have salvage in the game. It has never been mentioned by the devs and if anything they have stated several times, emphatically I might add, that people, once they buy something, will not lose it. Salvage means when /you/ lose, you /really/ lose and have to buy new equipment to replace the stuff salvaged from your mech, or even a new mech itself. That will drive away new players faster than making them all wear noob tags.

I really think, from everything I have read, that the Devs are going to use a system like World of Tanks... with key changes. Every mech chassis will be available to purchase from the start, so you have to assume that every player will start out with a certain amount of C-bills. This is a change from WoT right away. You will be grinding at least two things... C-bills, and pilot experience. Once a pilot unlocks something, it will never be taken away from them. This is where modules come into play. To me, it feels like unlocking a Tank in WoTs and unlocking all the extra equipment options for it.

Every weapon you buy is yours. It has not been stated if you can then remove a weapon from a mech once installed on it. This leads to a couple of routes... can you sell a chassis for X amount of C-bills, with scaling cost for additional equipment purchased or removed? Will you need to spend C-bills to add or remove weapons/equipment on a mech, or do you need RL money to remove weapons?

The Devs have not mentioned Tech level yet, and since they have not released a mech from outside the 3025 Technical Read Out (8-0) and not a single 'new' mech from the 3050 book, you have to assume that your going to start out at the basic tech level from that first book. I mention this because this could be a area where costs could come in.

The goal of the game is two-fold. They still want to make money and have us spend RL money in some way or another. The other goal is to make a game so balanced and enjoyable that will draw in more players than your hardcore MW/BT fans. One sure fire route is to avoid the mistakes made by a game like WoT with 'gold tanks' and 'super rounds'. The good thing about WoTs is that, end of the day, a gold tank is a dead end. That every real tank is accessible to every player, premium or free... just takes the free players alittle longer.

In that regard, you will get X amount of money, even if you lose, more if you win. You will get more if you meet your mission objectives, kills, ect. They have already stated that they are planning on doing 16 vs 16, 4 lances per side, one lance per weight category (if you read between the lines) and the total will probably be based by certain tonnage. Tossing it out there blind... 750 tons per side.

I hope I am wrong in some points, it will be interesting to see how it really turns out and how Faction points play into it. But there will not be 'travel time', there will not be a player driven economy, there will not be salvage. There will be no way in heck for an account to be able to aid, boost, or enhance in any way another account in a F2P game that has a half a brain by the Devs, just to avoid exploitation, plat farmers, and a player making several accounts just to enhance a single main account.

Honestly, it takes a bit, but read all of the Dev Q&As... it will probably answer alot of the Original Posters questions and concerns. This is a very interesting thread, and really deep, but when one deals with the unknown, one can only, at the end of the day, speculate. Till it comes out, we are only guessing.

Edited by Pvt Dancer, 04 March 2012 - 04:37 AM.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

@Pvt Dancer - they have said 12 v 12 ie company sized battles.

[IceSerpent]

Nighthound, on 03 March 2012 - 05:22 PM, said:

2. Modifing a IS Mech is (sticking to canon) nearly impossible. Those Mechs are not designed to allow that, with the exception of minor stuff. Modifing comes with Omni Technology and for the IS, that means well after 3055 (again sticking to canon).

That's not entirely correct. It is possible to modify an IS mech, but it takes some quality time in a full-blown repair shop, plus large amount of c-bills. Omni technology allows one to easily swap weapon pods in the field, assuming that a different set of pods is available. I've never heard of omni tech allowing one to create a brand new weapon pod on the fly, so I think it's just a hot-swap between a given number of variants.

[Saren21]

Thorn Hallis, on 29 February 2012 - 08:20 AM, said:

I imagine a system like World of Tanks, where even a losing battle generates some credits (based on the individual performance), which is mostly enough to repair and rearm your tank in the lower tiers.

I think thats the best way to do it and maybe have your first light mech be repaired for free and just add the cost of ammo or wep repairs (like in WoT) to blance it out this way you will make money on your mech and you can work off the fixes to your higher teir mechs.

[Larry Headrick]

The way i have always thought of omni mechs is the side torso/arms are removable easily and can be replaced by other torso/arms already fited and ready to bolt on to the mech.

center torso legs staying the same and all weapons/engine/gyro/bla, bla, bla, in the center torso/legs stay the same, and in the mech.

This is how i see it working.

[Colorfinger]

I think it is possible that what organization you belong to will affect how you are 'paid'.

For example a Merc would get higher payout per battle, higher win bonus, and lower salary but would have to cover his own costs in regards to repair. A House warrior on the other hand would get higher salary, lower pay out per battle, and lower win bonus and would have basic repair costs covered by the house. The net difference would be close to zero but it would play out differently for different style players.

In addition, salvage could be in the game in the form of either cbills (lists the 'salvage' and its value but only actually gives you the cbills) or part storage (gives you the actually 'salvage' parts which can be used to repair your mech IF they match your mech. Otherwise they need sold for cbills). This wouldn't make the rich too rich if the devs give values to the salvage and win bonus money that is reasonable. If the goal is that the winners get a total value (contract + win bonus + salvage) of 100 and the losers get a total value of 50 then the breakdown could be a simple 100 and 50 or it could be (50 + 25 + 25). In the end, it is all the same result but breaking it down gives more depth and feel. In addition, that 25 in salvage would be variable. Sometimes you get 15, sometimes you get 35 but it all averages out in the end.

[Kartr]

Nighthound, on 03 March 2012 - 05:22 PM, said:

Wow, that would be realy bad .... I think.

1. The loser gets no victory bonus and has repair costs vs. the victor would get a C-Bill Bonus plus Salvage? Either Salvage or C-Bills not both, otherwise you would be in deep trouble after a few losses or on top of the food chain after a few victories with nearly no chance to change that.
2. Modifing a IS Mech is (sticking to canon) nearly impossible. Those Mechs are not designed to allow that, with the exception of minor stuff. Modifing comes with Omni Technology and for the IS, that means well after 3055 (again sticking to canon).

1. If you don't win why should you get a bonus? Contracts or repair could/should be balanced so that you make some money no matter what. There needs to be incentive to win, or you'll have people jumping into a game and then walking away until its over like in public matches over on WoT. Also the loosers aren't loosing the weapons/'Mechs that the winners get as salvage, they keep everything they have salvage is generated for the winners. Think winners captured a supply depot and got some weapons from it. Its actually similar to how it works in WoT, if you win you get a very nice bonus.

2. Its not nearly impossible to modify IS 'Mechs, its just very costly. OmniMechs allow for hot swapping of weapons in the field, or before a new campaign and isn't expensive or difficult at all.

Thorn Hallis, on 04 March 2012 - 02:22 AM, said:

That would get players to much c-bills - something which isn't supposed to happen, I guess.

That entirely depends on how much repair costs, contracts, bonuses and 'Mechs/equipment cost. The exact values can always be adjusted to get it where the devs want, that has nothing to do with getting salvage plus a victory bonus.

Pvt Dancer, on 04 March 2012 - 04:28 AM, said:

Kartr, they will not have salvage in the game. It has never been mentioned by the devs and if anything they have stated several times, emphatically I might add, that people, once they buy something, will not lose it. Salvage means when /you/ lose, you /really/ lose and have to buy new equipment to replace the stuff salvaged from your mech, or even a new mech itself. That will drive away new players faster than making them all wear noob tags.

I'm not saying the loosers will loose equipment. The salvage would come from the "objective" the NPC supply depots, etc. This isn't to penalize loosing its to encourage participation. If you get a victory bonus for winning and salvage participating, then people are less likely to bot (set the computer up to jump in matches so they can level up/gain money without actually playing) because they wouldn't get any salvage if their team won.

Pvt Dancer, on 04 March 2012 - 04:28 AM, said:

The goal of the game is two-fold. They still want to make money and have us spend RL money in some way or another. The other goal is to make a game so balanced and enjoyable that will draw in more players than your hardcore MW/BT fans. One sure fire route is to avoid the mistakes made by a game like WoT with 'gold tanks' and 'super rounds'. The good thing about WoTs is that, end of the day, a gold tank is a dead end. That every real tank is accessible to every player, premium or free... just takes the free players alittle longer.

I disagree about the "gold tanks," they're a great way to get money, especially in a BT game. You place extremely rare tanks in the cash shop. That way hard core fans who love those rare 'Mechs will spend the money on them, while those who don't care will just play the C-bill tanks. Some other ideas for money items can be found here.

Pvt Dancer, on 04 March 2012 - 04:28 AM, said:

In that regard, you will get X amount of money, even if you lose, more if you win. You will get more if you meet your mission objectives, kills, ect. They have already stated that they are planning on doing 16 vs 16, 4 lances per side, one lance per weight category (if you read between the lines) and the total will probably be based by certain tonnage. Tossing it out there blind... 750 tons per side.

12vs12 or "company" strength battles. Also the X amount of money more if you win sounds like a Contract and Victory bonus to me. Salvage can be handed out based on kills/damage/assists.

Pvt Dancer, on 04 March 2012 - 04:28 AM, said:

I hope I am wrong in some points, it will be interesting to see how it really turns out and how Faction points play into it. But there will not be 'travel time', there will not be a player driven economy, there will not be salvage. There will be no way in heck for an account to be able to aid, boost, or enhance in any way another account in a F2P game that has a half a brain by the Devs, just to avoid exploitation, plat farmers, and a player making several accounts just to enhance a single main account.

I don't see why there can't be salvage, its not game breaking in the least and it doesn't go against what has been said.

Larry Headrick, on 04 March 2012 - 12:35 PM, said:

The way i have always thought of omni mechs is the side torso/arms are removable easily and can be replaced by other torso/arms already fited and ready to bolt on to the mech.

center torso legs staying the same and all weapons/engine/gyro/bla, bla, bla, in the center torso/legs stay the same, and in the mech.

This is how i see it working.

Except that's not how it works. You can swap out weapons no matter where they are. The idea is more that the chassis has weapon bays or hard points instead of having fixed mounts. This allows the techs to quickly and easily swap equipment out, just like swapping a 20mm cannon in a wing pod vs a missile rack on the F-4 Phantom or other jets.

There's actually likely less physical change when it comes to the appearance than IS 'Mechs because an Omni is already designed to take every kind of weapon.

[Insidious Johnson]

Economic equality. BAH! Might as well have player equality where the unskilled get bonuses and the elite twitchbot style players have penalties. That way we can skip the entire story, call it a draw, sell mech plushies, and no one cries during the entire month the game would last under those conditions.

It should be easy to learn but painfully hard to earn a cbill. Your cbills should have value to you for effort put into it. The weak get eaten, the good get fat and lazy, the tables eventually turn. That is the way of all things. Attempting to mess with it and get a free ride to the top, then set up permanent residence there castrates the very verile essence of the struggle to get there. It is time to decide whether to sit on the porch or run with the big dogs.

[NikkoKilla]

This topic is interesting. I have only just heard of the F2P concept when I stumbled on MWO. Having been an avid fan of the franchise up until now, I have proudly purchased each game prior, including expansions etc. That being said, I can feel comfortable about investing an amount of money roughly equal ($45 - $65) to a boxed package, in a strictly online experience if it provides a similar level of enjoyment.

Based on what I have seen so far, I have no doubt that MWO will do so.

However, what gives me an unsettling feeling is the looming reality that, over time, further investments may be required to maintain a level of play that I am seeking (as the community advances, naturally the individual wants to keep up!). The only way I can be OK with this is if the improvement in content equals or exceeds the added investment required to maintain the desired level of play.

Seems kind of mechanistic I know, but keep in mind for those of us new to the concept of F2P, the idea of making one larger payment amount and then enjoying the investment indefinitely, at first may be more appealing than the option of FREE!!! with large incentives to continue to put in small amounts of cash over a given time.

Thoughts?
~Katz

[Nick Makiaveli]

IceSerpent, on 04 March 2012 - 09:14 AM, said:

That's not entirely correct. It is possible to modify an IS mech, but it takes some quality time in a full-blown repair shop, plus large amount of c-bills. Omni technology allows one to easily swap weapon pods in the field, assuming that a different set of pods is available. I've never heard of omni tech allowing one to create a brand new weapon pod on the fly, so I think it's just a hot-swap between a given number of variants.

First off, we start off as beginning mech pilots, so where would we get access to the technology and equipment to modify our mechs? For an obscene amount of money, I'm sure all that could be rented/hired./etc, but that doesn't sound like justification to do the work to include salvage when just giving us cash would work.

Second, omni is clan tech and we can't play as Clanners at launch. So again, why put something in that can just as easily be done with cash as a reward?

**edit**
PS: @OP Your English is quite good, for the record. A few odd phrases and punctuation with an occasional misspelled word, but then again you did as well or better than some native speakers here Not that I have room to talk, I only remember a few words of German and most of them would get me banned

Edited by Nick Makiaveli, 04 March 2012 - 04:47 PM.

[Kartr]

WhenKatzComes, on 04 March 2012 - 04:41 PM, said:

This topic is interesting. I have only just heard of the F2P concept when I stumbled on MWO. Having been an avid fan of the franchise up until now, I have proudly purchased each game prior, including expansions etc. That being said, I can feel comfortable about investing an amount of money roughly equal ($45 - $65) to a boxed package, in a strictly online experience if it provides a similar level of enjoyment.

Based on what I have seen so far, I have no doubt that MWO will do so.

However, what gives me an unsettling feeling is the looming reality that, over time, further investments may be required to maintain a level of play that I am seeking (as the community advances, naturally the individual wants to keep up!). The only way I can be OK with this is if the improvement in content equals or exceeds the added investment required to maintain the desired level of play.

Seems kind of mechanistic I know, but keep in mind for those of us new to the concept of F2P, the idea of making one larger payment amount and then enjoying the investment indefinitely, at first may be more appealing than the option of FREE!!! with large incentives to continue to put in small amounts of cash over a given time.

Thoughts?
~Katz

The problem is that Online games aren't a one time cost to the company that makes them. You have to keep servers running, you have to pay people to fix balance issues, you have to come out with new content etc. This means you can't just sell boxes and expect to make a profit over the long run. MMO's in the past got around this with monthly subscriptions, but that's fairly restrictive as people have to be willing to spend the money for access to the whole game when they may only be interested in a small part. With F2P you can put a price on just about everything and people can buy it piecemeal, getting only the things that are desirable to them. Also people are more likely to try your game and even spend a few bucks if they can try it without having to pony up first.

If it was a box you bought then you'd have to pay a monthly sub as well, so either way you're paying money in the future. This way you at least get the choice of how much and when you pay it. If you don't want to pay money you can still play, you just won't get access to certain things, or maybe not progress as fast.

The main worry with F2P is that you're not going to have the self control to not spend lots of Real-Bills. Personally I only let myself spend as much money a F2P game as I would on a subscription for it, which helps keep me from spending money on all the goodies. The other worry that players have to keep in mind is that the game might start selling things that give players with Real-Bills an advantage.

[LackofCertainty]

Michael Wolfe, on 29 February 2012 - 03:53 PM, said:

So the game is primarily a tactical combat game with no thought given to conquering planets and solar systems? (Sorry I come from Eve, arguably the best MMO in regards to territorial sovereignty and realistic economy). Without a system to produce raw materials, make materials into items you wish to purchase (and items you salvage back into raw materials) C-Bills will lose value as the game progresses and as the players become more advanced (through inflation & accumulation of C-Bills)

League of legends is an example of a F2P game with ingame currency that remains valuable. Champions cost a -lot- of currency and the LoL team cranks out a new champion every couple weeks. (for reference lol games average 30-45 minutes long and you need to do around 40-50 games to afford a new champion) I have played LoL since open beta, have around 2,000 games played, and I still am unable to keep up with the rate they release champions.

MWO could work the same way. Given the massive pool of mechs and variants the devs have to draw from, I could easily see the main drain of C-bills being the cost of buying new mechs/variants. Repair costs should be more limited to "this is a big encouragement for you to try to end the fight in a functioning mech, instead of blindly charging at the enemy and alpha striking until you die" rather than a large drain on your wallet, or else you could have a situation where less skilled players are stuck with a barely functioning mech that they can't afford to repair.

Edited by LackofCertainty, 04 March 2012 - 05:35 PM.

[NikkoKilla]

Kartr, on 04 March 2012 - 05:22 PM, said:

The problem is that Online games aren't a one time cost to the company that makes them. You have to keep servers running, you have to pay people to fix balance issues, you have to come out with new content etc. This means you can't just sell boxes and expect to make a profit over the long run. MMO's in the past got around this with monthly subscriptions, but that's fairly restrictive as people have to be willing to spend the money for access to the whole game when they may only be interested in a small part. With F2P you can put a price on just about everything and people can buy it piecemeal, getting only the things that are desirable to them. Also people are more likely to try your game and even spend a few bucks if they can try it without having to pony up first.

If it was a box you bought then you'd have to pay a monthly sub as well, so either way you're paying money in the future. This way you at least get the choice of how much and when you pay it. If you don't want to pay money you can still play, you just won't get access to certain things, or maybe not progress as fast.

The main worry with F2P is that you're not going to have the self control to not spend lots of Real-Bills. Personally I only let myself spend as much money a F2P game as I would on a subscription for it, which helps keep me from spending money on all the goodies. The other worry that players have to keep in mind is that the game might start selling things that give players with Real-Bills an advantage.

I can deffinitely appreciate that, especially in the context of a market thats moving towards instant gratification and small purchases. I just want to be optimistic in thinking that everything awesome about the Battletech universe... the lore, the community, the fantastic embodiment of the spirit of the franchise that comes to life in a medium that we can take part in visually like the video game market... I hope this movement towards F2P is conducted such that players like myself never feel like turning back =]

basically I'm psyched and threads like this seem to be a.. hopefully unncessary evil =]

~Katz

[cardinal vice]

Sorry to start out this spectacular thread with a pet peave, but if I see 'loose' one more time my head might explode.

Losing a battle will not drop your tier... it will slow down your progression within your chosen chassis. You will still earn pilot XP and chassis XP, just not as much. You will still earn enough to keep your mech functional and ready for the next battle, but it might not be 100%.

This will reinforce the 'role warfare' mechanics, as it will encourage you to accomplish your mission as effectively as possible. Rely on your lance-mates and team to kick the snot out of those jerks without hanging you out to dry. It will punish the maveric pychos who don't know how to play well with others and decide they need zerg all by themselves.

C-bills will not be available to buy with real-life currency. Unless the dev team decides to destroy the F2P model and go P2W, we will be using our phat loots from salary/contract payments to upgrade our chariots or trade in for that default version of a different chassis that we like.

With this in mind, upgrading an Atlas will not cost anymore than upgrading a Commando. The default chassis will even be around the same C-bill range (with trade-in) and the mission pay will be scaled to meet the minimal needs for the mech repair/reload. Who would take a job without a chance to break even? There will be enough... even if you lose... to keep you eligible for the next match, and every run earns XP.

So what's the flipside? I can walk and talk and chew bubble gum. Loads of C-bills coming out my ears and I've got my ride pimped to the max. What do I do with all this moolah?
Well... without a trade-in, a default chassis would be really expensive. Purchasing an extra mech would take a metric crap-load of C-bills, but then you'd have the opportunity to fulfill different roles within your lance and experience another side of the strategy.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Why do you say C-bills will not be available for real currency - as long as everything can be bought with C-bills it's not P2W it's convenience. If I am a casual gamer of average skills and not in a team I should forgo a mech model I want because it would take me a year of playing to accumulate enough C-bills (after paying for repairs, ammo etc) to grt it?

[cardinal vice]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 05 March 2012 - 09:14 AM, said:

Why do you say C-bills will not be available for real currency - as long as everything can be bought with C-bills it's not P2W it's convenience. If I am a casual gamer of average skills and not in a team I should forgo a mech model I want because it would take me a year of playing to accumulate enough C-bills (after paying for repairs, ammo etc) to grt it?

I have no doubts that unlocking mech models will be a main F2P revenue. I do not believe the models reserved for real currency will be available to purchase with C-bills... Pirahna would lose too much income by offering a way to circumvent their online store, imo.

If C-bills are dedicated to upgrading, repairing, reloading and customizing, players that purchase C-bills with real currency would have a tactical advantage. They would always have 'top of the line' equipment without ever earning it from game play.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Then if my play is such that I loose more often than I win I have to give up playing the game because I can't earn enough C-bills in game to actually repair my mech?
PGI have said that everything such as mechs etc can be purchased with in-game currency.