246 replies to this topic

[Outlaw2]

Orzorn, on 05 March 2012 - 08:34 PM, said:

Not much reason for c-bills if they aren't going to be important at some point, eh? I fully expect all but the most successful groups to have to struggle, at least somewhat, with repair, rearm, and customization while not breaking the bank.

Out of game costs (C-bills) in this game will be a necessary evil to allow PGI to make a profit. Its not the ideal way to balance the game by any means. It shouldn't be the main factor to determine game balance. It should play second fiddle to an in-match balancing system..such as BV.
Sure out of game costs are going to factor in, since even with BV match restrictions, somebody has to break the bank and take the high BV mech (which will naturally cost more c-bills out of game to buy/repair/maintain). More important matches could have higher BV values attached to them. It could be random or each planet might have a set Battle Value so teams know exactly what they are getting themselves into.

The main reason to have BV is for gameplay diversity, so that a narrow strip of games content isn't the only thing worth using...ESPECIALLY in competitive matches.

Edited by =Outlaw=, 05 March 2012 - 09:11 PM.

[Kedoyn]

I say 'available'=yes but some should have a high enough c-bill cost to not be purchaseable on day 1 of playing. I know this technically makes them unavailable but they are still 'unlocked'

[Saybin Iacere]

I want my assault please.

[Juwansomadis]

I think you should start out with what everybody else starts out with. That being said, players should have basic mechs and equipment and should look forward to unlocking the more advanced gear and chassis such as the Atlas. They should charge players who want to unlock advanced mechs sooner through real life currency and leave it free for those who want to take their time to get them.

Edited by Juwansomadis, 05 March 2012 - 09:24 PM.

[Halfinax]

Thomas Hogarth, on 05 March 2012 - 08:55 PM, said:

You're not trying to be offensive by ignoring most of a post and focusing on one part? Also, not trying to be offensive, but accusing me of assuming what others play, while assuming I'm speaking of how I play? (and by extension, assuming how I play?)

No, you're trying to be offensive. Or at least hamfisting yourself into doing a really good job at it.

Again I wasn't trying. sorry you took such great offense to it. The reason I said this was because you keep saying everyone is going to use what you deem to be the coolest 'Mech, and you assume that everyone is going to want to do front line fighting. I guess my conclusion was that you assume other's would play that way, because it was how you your self would play. In most cases that would generally be a correct conclusion. I apologize for my mistake.

Thomas Hogarth, on 05 March 2012 - 08:55 PM, said:

MW4 was an example of players being free to choose what they want. In that game, it sounds like we both played the same way. I like taking the underrated mediums personally. But you know as well as I do that lights and mediums are by far the most under-represented class in MW4. Sure, MWO with it's role warfare might shift that down some, but going from 85% heavies and assaults to 75% heavies and assaults isn't big enough of a jump.

In MW4 there was little to no incentive to play anything but the heavier weight classes as all matches were TDM, and the only role was killing the other guy. Assuming that MW:O is going to follow this same formula would fly in the face of the evidence at hand.

Thomas Hogarth, on 05 March 2012 - 08:55 PM, said:

Which is why I suggest an earnings bias towards lights and mediums, while making heavies and assaults more difficult to impossible to generate a profit in. You'd have to run your light/medium to pay for your assault. I don't see a major issue with this.

I concur a heavier chassis should cost more to repair, but I don't think it should exceed match earnings. Potentially eat up all earning from a match undoubtedly, but it shouldn't exceed those earnings.

Thomas Hogarth, on 05 March 2012 - 08:55 PM, said:

Why not? In WOT, they do it so even top-tier players are in tier V matches to make money, thus providing a healthy amount of lower tier games.


In MWO, it could provide a healthy amount of lights/mediums in relation to heavies/assaults.

WoT is not a role based game it's a tank sim. Punishing players for playing their role and as a result disallowing them from the potential to purchase new chassis or equipment wouldn't sit well. Also unless you actively seek out the territory control mode you do not have to play it in WoT. Forcing players to use chassis and/or roles that they are unfamiliar with so that they can earn money to fix their usually ride while simultaneously having their battles have an impact on the meta game of territory control is overly punitive to them, and their teammates.




The table top gameplay was irrelevant so I excluded it. It wasn't avoidance of a subject.

Edited by Halfinax, 05 March 2012 - 09:21 PM.

[Orzorn]

=Outlaw=, on 05 March 2012 - 09:05 PM, said:

Out of game costs (C-bills) in this game will be a necessary evil to allow PGI to make a profit.

Woah woah. C-bills are earned in game, not bought with real money.

[Mason Grimm]

Orzorn, on 05 March 2012 - 09:19 PM, said:

Woah woah. C-bills are earned in game, not bought with real money.

This, until confirmed or denied, is actually speculation.

Technically, being able to purchase cbills with real life money doesn't give you a tactical advantage over any other player since any player can earn just as many cbills as you purchase. The only difference is time. I can see a model for this in the micro-transaction shop at some point in the future.

[Thomas Hogarth]

Halfinax, on 05 March 2012 - 09:19 PM, said:

In MW4 there was little to no incentive to play anything but the heavier weight classes as all matches were TDM, and the only role was killing the other guy. Assuming that MW:O is going to follow this same formula would fly in the face of the evidence at hand.

I do allow for a big shift in the demographic based on that, for sure. I just don't think it'll be enough to result in a 50% light/medium 50% heavy/assault split on it's own.

Halfinax, on 05 March 2012 - 09:19 PM, said:

I concur a heavier chassis should cost more to repair, but I don't think it should exceed match earnings. Potentially eat up all earning from a match undoubtedly, but it shouldn't exceed those earnings.

(gonna combine-o-rama here, since it's the same point)

WoT is not a role based game it's a tank sim. Punishing players for playing their role and as a result disallowing them from the potential to purchase new chassis or equipment wouldn't sit well. Also unless you actively seek out the territory control mode you do not have to play it in WoT. Forcing players to use chassis and/or roles that they are unfamiliar with so that they can earn money to fix their usually ride while simultaneously having their battles have an impact on the meta game of territory control is overly punitive to them, and their teammates.

Roles are not based on weight class.

A Panther is a pocket sniper 'Mech with the mobility of a heavy. A Hunchback is just as effective a brawler as a heavy. The Trebuchet provides very comparable fire support to heavier designs. There are plenty more examples. Just because it's light does not mean it's fast and lightly armed.

I claim that you could fill every role with every weight class. Therefore, there should realistically be no role punishment. Use of chassis they are unfamilar with... You might have something there, but that's part of the balance. I see no problem with expecting everyone to be familar with at least one light or medium to make c-bills.

Edited by Thomas Hogarth, 05 March 2012 - 09:36 PM.

[Orzorn]

Mason Grimm, on 05 March 2012 - 09:21 PM, said:

This, until confirmed or denied, is actually speculation.

Technically, being able to purchase cbills with real life money doesn't give you a tactical advantage over any other player since any player can earn just as many cbills as you purchase. The only difference is time. I can see a model for this in the micro-transaction shop at some point in the future.

I far more expect them to allow us to purchase special currency that can only be spent on certain things. League of Legends did it the same way. The only items in the game that you could not purchase with that purchased currency was runes, which augmented your character abilities. Those you had to earn yourself. Everything else, runebooks, heroes, IP boosts (IP being the in-game currency that you earned, and the only currency you can buy runes with) skins, could all be bought with real cash.

So I personally expect repairs (and perhaps, by extension, mechlab costs) to be the only thing you can't pay for with real cash. Mechs, weapons, c-bill boosts, and aesthetic items (hula girls) will most likely all be purchasable.

Edited by Orzorn, 05 March 2012 - 09:35 PM.

[Outlaw2]

Orzorn, on 05 March 2012 - 09:19 PM, said:

Woah woah. C-bills are earned in game, not bought with real money.

Honestly now. The C-bill system will be in place there so players can spend money to get C-bills faster (one way or another). This is F2P 101. Its NOT there for the good of game balance, and shouldn't be used as such.

Edited by =Outlaw=, 05 March 2012 - 09:36 PM.

[Orzorn]

=Outlaw=, on 05 March 2012 - 09:36 PM, said:

Honestly now. The C-bill system will be in place there so players can spend money to get C-bills faster (one way or another). This is F2P 101. Its NOT there for the good of game balance, and shouldn't be used as such.

And yet League of Legends, the CREATOR of the western free to play model, throws that in your face. You can not purchase Influence Points (the in-game earned currency). You can, however, purchase IP-boosts, which increase the rate at which you earn IP. You still have to play, however, to get the IP. And, as I said in my other post, IP was important in that it is the only currency by which you can buy runes, the most important thing to have in the game. Without those, many hero builds don't work (can't jungle Amumu without runes). Everything in the game can be purchased with real cash EXCEPT for runes and Influence Points.

This forces players to, you know, actually play the game, even if they have a fat wad of cash to spend. You can not allow players to max out their strength without player a single game. If you could purchase c-bills, that's exactly what you're allowing. League of Legends knew it, and I'm sure PGI knows it as well.

Edited by Orzorn, 05 March 2012 - 09:44 PM.

[TwitchTv Morkani]

Wraeththix Constantine, on 05 March 2012 - 02:31 PM, said:

One hope's there's some compelling reason to have something other than Assaults in the game.

Vanilla Battletech was fun because there was scarcity. You made due with what you had, and if someone dropped a beafy heavy or an assault, that meant some serious butt was getting served. It also meant that side was willing to risk massive resources to that operation. It was like going all-in in poker. There was a reason to try to kill the meat and save the mech. If you scored a cockpit kill on a heavy/assault, it wasn't as much that you dropped it, it was that you just scored a rare resource.

Back to the poker analogy, Every single hand is an "all-in" case, since there's no negative reprocussions for betting with everything you have.

I think it'd be cool if there was a repair cooldown on your mechs. You're allowed to "bind"/"synchronize" to say 3 lights, 3 mediums, 2 heavys, and 1 assault. If your assault gets raped on a drop, then it will take you say 80 hours IRL to repair it. You can either log out, or man up and drop something else.

So, I guess back OT, I don't think people should have to grind up the mech classes (though maybe they need some rank/xp to use a certain one within that rank, some rarer config or something). But I think there should be reasons to field a balanced lance, as well as bonuses for under-tonning.

THIS!!!!
+100

(I've been waiting 7 pages for someone to really put forth an idea that gives me hope people are understanding what i was trying to do with the poll.)

Origionally, I was hoping for something where you "unlock" certain mechs, either going from lights to heavy's (my origional idea), to having 1 of each class unlocked & working to unlock the other mechs with xp/cbills (my origional idea evolved), to finally the ideas expressed in Wraeththix Constantine's post, (i'm completely in love with this idea) certain mechs repairing immediately (pulling these numbers out of thin air), others taking an hour, others taking 3 hours, and finally assaults taking 6 hours (assuming mech was destroyed)

Side note: For those bringing the discussion to P2W or really anything involving real cash, please discuss this in a different thread.
The main reason I started this poll was I was concerned there will be a large number of people playing the same mechs. Please let's try to keep the discussion on thoughts and idea's that will accomplish this goal.

ps:Wraeththix Constantine, sorry about editing the quote a bit to highlight the parts I wanted to emphasize.

Edited by Morkani, 05 March 2012 - 11:21 PM.

[Outlaw2]

Orzorn, on 05 March 2012 - 09:42 PM, said:

And yet League of Legends, the CREATOR of the western free to play model, throws that in your face. You can not purchase Influence Points (the in-game earned currency). You can, however, purchase IP-boosts, which increase the rate at which you earn IP. You still have to play, however, to get the IP. And, as I said in my other post, IP was important in that it is the only currency by which you can buy runes, the most important thing to have in the game. Without those, many hero builds don't work (can't jungle Amumu without runes). Everything in the game can be purchased with real cash EXCEPT for runes and Influence Points.

This forces players to, you know, actually play the game, even if they have a fat wad of cash to spend. You can not allow players to max out their strength without player a single game. If you could purchase c-bills, that's exactly what you're allowing. League of Legends knew it, and I'm sure PGI knows it as well.

LoL is actually a perfect example of what Im talking about.

The grind to acquire the game's currency is put in place solely to encourage you to eventually spend money so that you can get content faster. It will be the same with C-bills in MWO. Whether or not you can directly buy c-bills with real money doesn't matter. The c-bill system will eventually encourage many players to spend money so they can avoid the grind (or some of it anyway). Thats the purpose of the c-bill system. Thats the purpose of any F2P game's currency. It was not created with the intention to balance the game...which is my original point.

Edited by =Outlaw=, 05 March 2012 - 10:14 PM.

[Orzorn]

=Outlaw=, on 05 March 2012 - 10:02 PM, said:

LoL is actually a perfect example of what Im talking about.

The grind to acquire the game's currency is put in place solely to encourage you to eventually spend money so that you can get content faster. It will be the same C-bills in MWO. Whether or not you can directly buy c-bills with real money doesn't matter. The c-bill system will eventually encourage many players to spend money so they can avoid the grind (or some of it anyway). Thats the purpose of the c-bill system. Thats the purpose of any F2P game's currency. It was not created to balance the game...which is my original point.

Agreed to an extent, but you seem to be thinking that I was claiming C-bills were going to balance the game. I never claimed that. They are PART of what balances the game. New players will buy cheaper mechs so they won't have to deal with larger repair and refit costs. You earn c-bills from missions, we know this. You will have to repair, we know this. Buying cheaper mechs lets you spend less both on the mech and its costs, letting you pool cash faster for "better" mechs. It will not balance the game on its own, but it will help create a better diversity. So long as there is an influx of new players, there will be a set of cheaper budget mechs on the battlefield, unless those players plan to spend cash right out of the starting line.

And that's something that PGI does want to happen. You'll get a set of stubborn players who won't spend money, but you'll also have a set that will spend the money for non-budget mechs to, as you put it, avoid the grind. If you can't purchase c-bills, then repairs WILL mean something for those new players. A player with an Atlas that just got slagged will have an expensive repair bill, and they will have to deal with that fact. This only further pushes players to spend more money to perhaps purchase a c-bill boost. This ensures that players who went the further mile to spend money in the first place (to purchase that big shiny Atlas), will continue spending money.

So, yes, it does have a huge part to play in PGI's business model, but it is also a balancing factor (not a large one, but it is a factor). I myself will not purchase a large mech right out of the gate because I want to save my c-bills for customization (not to mention, I'm not really a fan of larger mechs).

Quote

Please let's try to keep the discussion on thoughts and idea's that will accomplish this goal.

Sorry, but I thought it was a necessary, and somewhat parallel discussion, at least when discussing repair costs relating to mech size.

[Outlaw2]

Orzorn, on 05 March 2012 - 10:19 PM, said:

So, yes, it does have a huge part to play in PGI's business model, but it is also a balancing factor (not a large one, but it is a factor). I myself will not purchase a large mech right out of the gate because I want to save my c-bills for customization (not to mention, I'm not really a fan of larger mechs).

Its a secondary (and minor) match balancing factor I could live with, but I will be very disappointed if its the main driving force determining which mechs teams will take to the battlefield.

Edited by =Outlaw=, 05 March 2012 - 10:28 PM.

[TwitchTv Morkani]

i've expanded a little bit on that idea i loved in this thread, do you think something like this would help to encourage people to play many different roles?

lights with no damage .... available to drop immediately after game is over
lights with only armour damage ..... available to drop after 10 minutes or an extra 5k cbills spent for immediate repair
Lights with armour & Crit's damage .... available to drop after 15-45 minutes or 10k to 50k cbills (depending on how much crit dmg)
Light completely destroyed .... available to drop after 1 hour or 75k cbills spent for immediate repair

medium with no damage .... available to drop immediately after game is over
medium with only armor damage .... available to drop after 20 minutes or an extra 25k cbills spent for immediate repair
medium with armor & crit damage .... available to drop 30 - 60 minutes or an extra 50k - 100k cbills (pending on crit dmg)
medium completely destroyed .... available to drop after 2 hours or 150k cbills spent for immediate repair

heavy with no damage .... available to drop immediately after game is over
heavy with only armor damage .... available to drop after 2 hours or an extra 150k cbills spent on repair
heavy with armor & crit damage ..... available to drop after 2.5 or 3.5 hours or 200k to 300k cbills spent on repair
heavy completely destroyed.....available to drop after 4 & 1/2 hours or 400k cbills spent on repair

assault with no damage .... available to drop immediately after game is over
assault with only armor damage .... available to drop after 4 hours of repair or 350k cbills spent on repair
assault with armor & crit damage .... available to drop after 6 to 8 hours or 500k to 700k cbills spent on repair
assault completely destroyed ..... available to drop after 12 hours or 1mil cbills spent on repair

OF COURSE, I just pulled these numbers out of thin air, i don't know what the weight of cbills are, the wait time's i'm sure need to be adjusted from what i suggested, & the whole thing would be a sliding scale no two repairs would be the same.

Edited by Morkani, 05 March 2012 - 11:53 PM.

[Thomas Hogarth]

Morkani, on 05 March 2012 - 11:46 PM, said:

i've expanded a little bit on that idea i loved in this thread, do you think something like this would help to encourage people to play many different roles?

lights with no damage .... available to drop immediately after game is over
lights with only armour damage ..... available to drop after 10 minutes or an extra 5k cbills spent for immediate repair
Lights with armour & Crit's damage .... available to drop after 15-45 minutes or 10k to 50k cbills (depending on how much crit dmg)
Light completely destroyed .... available to drop after 1 hour or 75k cbills spent for immediate repair

medium with no damage .... available to drop immediately after game is over
medium with only armor damage .... available to drop after 20 minutes or an extra 25k cbills spent for immediate repair
medium with armor & crit damage .... available to drop 30 - 60 minutes or an extra 50k - 100k cbills (pending on crit dmg)
medium completely destroyed .... available to drop after 2 hours or 150k cbills spent for immediate repair

heavy with no damage .... available to drop immediately after game is over
heavy with only armor damage .... available to drop after 2 hours or an extra 150k cbills spent on repair
heavy with armor & crit damage ..... available to drop after 2.5 or 3.5 hours or 200k to 300k cbills spent on repair
heavy completely destroyed.....available to drop after 4 & 1/2 hours or 400k cbills spent on repair

assault with no damage .... available to drop immediately after game is over
assault with only armor damage .... available to drop after 4 hours of repair or 350k cbills spent on repair
assault with armor & crit damage .... available to drop after 6 to 8 hours or 500k to 700k cbills spent on repair
assault completely destroyed ..... available to drop after 12 hours or 1mil cbills spent on repair

OF COURSE, I just pulled these numbers out of thin air, i don't know what the weight of cbills are, the wait time's i'm sure need to be adjusted from what i suggested, & the whole thing would be a sliding scale no two repairs would be the same.

Neat concept. Also, kind of nebulous without an idea of how much you earn a mission, but I will say that 500k to 700k is low for armor+critical damage, IIRC.

[Mautty the Bobcat]

Psydotek, on 03 March 2012 - 07:34 PM, said:

I think that they all should be available for your first mech. Making some unavailable creates a false sense of desirability for certain more "powerful" mechs which will lead to the trend of everybody stomping around in an Atlas or some other assault class mech.

This is the exact reason I want every 'starter' mech available at launch, to show all them assault lovers the pain a mixed lance of mediums and lights can bring to the field in a real battletech style simulation game.

[Scar]

Garth Erlam, on 05 March 2012 - 02:12 PM, said:

I'll do what I can to explain here, Scar:

1) There's no way, ever, we'll have exact 50/50 matches between 'Mechs. It is never going to happen, and has never happened in any game ever (including Chess)

2) The idea is to balance the classes as much as is possible. IE. yes most of the time an Atlas will beat a Commando 1v1, but as long as it isn't 70% of the time, say, it's more fun. IE. an Atlas beats a Commando 60% of the time, but a Commando beats, I dunno, a Jenner 60% of the time, and a Jenner beats an Atlas 60% of the time. Something like that is more what I'm talking about.

3) I understand that 'firepower is firepower', but consider the methods of using them. A guy with a rocket launcher has a lot of firepower, but the sniper who takes him out in one shot has much less - yet he still killed him. The idea is that the different 'roles' work together to prevent one from being superior. So Sure 12 atlas' is strong, but so is 12 Centurions, or 12 Jenners, etc. However as I said, the chance of a team being entirely one 'Mech is going to be super low. And I think you'll find that newer, less experienced players will assume an Atlas is the best, only to die to a Jenner and then reconsider

Excuse me, Garth - but your last post confused me pretty much.

I'm not sure if i understand it correct. Does this mean that you're(the devs) balancing Assault and Scout classes for 1 vs 1 open combat??? If so, don't you fear that it may devalue the heavier classes? How is it possible that the reconnaissance unit can stand against the assault in 4 out of 10 fights?! Of course i agree that it may be possible in some cases, as ambushes - for example, but in the average open fight?! And who would need to build the 100 tonnes Assault if he can be beaten by the 30 tonnes Scout nearly in every second fight?

I thought in BT universe Assault in your sector of responsibilty - it's always a "oh my god!" class problem, just like in the MW'2009 trailer. And I'd give the Scout not more than 0.1 against the Assault. Finally, it's a Scout, come on - it's supposed to be a recce platform, not a killer of Assaults or any other class, may be except the other Scout.

Pretty strange to hear that. Scout, as i said before, very valuable team class, but make it nearly as potent in open fight as a specialized heavy assault platform...

Quote

And for the 'what will stuff cost' people - nothing has been carved into stone yet, however I can promise we are not planning to do some weird method where a kick-*** variant of a 'Mech can only be purchased with real money.

Glad to hear it, really - i think so-called 'premium tanks' isn't a great idea.

Edited by Scar, 06 March 2012 - 03:51 AM.

[pudge131]

Morkani, on 03 March 2012 - 08:20 PM, said:

well, i could be wrong here, but from what it looks like, the skills to put towards certain mechs aren't a significant difference. +2.5% torso twist?,

Yeah I agree with this, the way that themechs can eventually be modded does not seem to make too much of a difference. Even if it is +2.5% over multiple times.