108 replies to this topic

[HIemfire]

palebear, on 23 March 2012 - 08:21 PM, said:

I'm not sure why, but after reading the OP I was overwhelmed by the thought of 12 v 12 battles full of half-armoured Jenners charging each other... lol

During the Succession Wars, which we are just now leaving in the game timeline, this was actually a fair possibility to see on a battlefield. It wouldn't always have been the case, but parts were harder to come by.

DrHat, on 24 March 2012 - 05:51 AM, said:

So you honestly think...really truly honestly think, that they will make a game where you can reach a point where the only way for you to continue playing, is if you spend real life money? Seriously?
It may be an issue that they are working on and and as such there is no real answer to yet, however there is something to be said here about reasonable probability.

It doesn't matter how much it will cost to repair your mech, it doesn't matter how much money you will have, it doesn't matter under which circumstances you might choose to field a partially repaired mech - Really it doesn't matter, because anything else is an assumption where the goal seems to be a desire to want to be treated unfairly so you can raise a fuss about it. I mean this in the nicest way possible with no foul undertones of any kind and I hope you can see my point..you would have to be unbelievably determined to want to be in an unreasonable situation to make this kind of assumption

Unfortunately what you outline here is a fairly common preconception DrHat. Probably a misconception when it comes to this game though.

rafgod, on 24 March 2012 - 04:53 PM, said:

So, you'd drop at the start of a match, thereby making sure the team you were on starts off 12 on 11. Probably will earn you a few spots on various 'blacklists'.

You misread, Dlardrageth stated that if there is not a system to "black list" abusive players that he/she (cannot tell gender from typing) will start basically keeping a list of those that he/she encounters or hears about from those they trust and if those abusive players popup in a match on his/her side Dlardrageth would drop from the match. Atleast that is what I got from what was written.

[Naduk]

I love this place.
Fans have a fear, devs swoop in and put us to rest on the issue.

Personally Id prefer it to be more harsh than forgiving some of my favorite moments in MW2:mercs were not having enough to repair a mech.
So I would do drastic things like sell some weapons/ammo/mechs to pay for the labor, its something that Merc-corp owners would realistically have to face and I would like to see it stay that way... when you hit the bottom of the barrel you come up with some cleaver ways out of your problems.

Bryan already said it wont be to rough, but at the same time i really hope its not to easy, why bother requiring repairs if you are guaranteed to be fixed up even if you lose, surely if that's the case you should just remove the idea anyway.

I would like to see a system where you can do missions or contracts where a mech is assigned to you but you get stuff all pay.
The trade off being you have stuff all fee's to deal with so that smaller pay is 100% profit.
OR/AND
Perhaps the inital starting mechs are cheaper to repair to the point its hardly a concern but any mech you buy later on costs you dearly
so you will always have something fresh to pilot even if your big daddy is in the shop.

[LackofCertainty]

Nick Makiaveli, on 23 March 2012 - 09:09 AM, said:

Also, this isn't a team game. It's a game where individuals can choose to make teams. Baseball is a team game, MWO isn't.

Wrong. So far the only announced modes are team modes. Just because some people don't coordinate with you well doesn't mean that it's not a team game. According to your logic, Basketball isn't a team game, because you can choose to hog the ball.

[Catharsis]

00dlez, on 24 March 2012 - 11:47 AM, said:

I agree, but I think that OP's point was implying that these people would simply quit and that's a concern for the community. If players don't mind losing, theres no issue with mech repairs after losses. I also play killing floor

True. If players do quit due to frustration that is created by a certain game mechanic, that would not be good for the community and the MechWarrior franchise as a whole. I think something all of the veterans (myself included) have to remember is that, if we want this game to succeed we have to be open to making a few sacrifices for the sake of marketability. I think the ultimate goal and larger picture here is that we want to see a resurgence of the combat simulator PC games of the 90s. Battlemechs included.


-Aside-
I think between this, Killing Floor, and Guild Wars 2, my online life will be tied up for the next few years

Edited by Catharsis, 24 March 2012 - 10:42 PM.

[Anvil Dragon]

I believe this is why training missions get mentioned. No cash or Experience but you can try things.

Greener teams should take lower cash / experience contracts. Simpler goals and environment. (1s & 2s)

Moderate and difficult contracts would get normal experience but the cash amounts would differ.

So contracts could go say on a scale of zero to ten. Zero being a training run and say five for a city. Not sure yet what kind of hell-hole a ten would be. What environments are a one and what is a five will likely sort themselves out with game play. Green teams will get trounced by very experienced teams in ones so hopefully experienced teams won't sandbag, fives everyone is taking damage no matter the experience differences and greens should just stay away. If a green team goes for a high value contract... they did it to themselves.

The difference in cash earned should help sort the teams.

Edited by Anvil Dragon, 24 March 2012 - 10:53 PM.

[Namwons]

i dont know about you guys but first thing im doing to building a "farming mech". a light scout for pure recon to stay out of the fight as long as possible to sustain the least amount of damage. low maintenace cost (besides electronics maybe) to high pay gain. i see it as the easiest mech to make money on.

[LordDeathStrike]

MechaKitsune, on 23 March 2012 - 08:09 AM, said:

Guessing it will work similar to World of Tank's system, in that repairs will be affordable even on the C-Bills you will earn from a loss.

Larger, more expensive mechs later in the game may cost more to maintain, but your early mech(s) should cost relatively little to repair. I'm sure the devs wont let anyone fall into a black hole of inability to afford simple repairs.

it should scale such that if you die and your team loses, you get enough to cover getting back into the fight, as long as you didnt friendly fire your team (i still think people that friendly fire should pay to fix the dmg auto deducted from their cbills even if it puts them negative balance).

this way your cronic losers will be able to play as cannon fodder, but wont be able to buy new stuff till they start to suck less and win more, or at least live longer by not plowing in stupidly and dieing costing their team any chances at winning.

if you live longer and do objectives and still lose, you should make more then if you die right away from being stupid.

if you are on the winning team, but didnt do anything, you shouldnt get ****, if you are on the losing team and didnt die or do anything, you shouldnt get ****.

end of match rewards should be doled on on a basis of objective related points, dmg done to enemies, dmg taken from enemies and chasis taken into battle (basically the bigger the mech the more bonus pay so you can get it fixed, and if you are really good and dont need repairs then you get enough money to buy the other toys i guess).

[Steel Talon]

Quote

dmg taken from enemies

What u should get from taking dmg?

[TeaL3af]

I thing I'd prefer it if the game doesn't have repair costs and everything comes back after the match. Just removes a fairly pointless feature that doesn't add anything to the actual gameplay experience.

[DrHat]

Or this could be a case of "Everyone has a set of starter mechs" or maybe just "A starter mech" that never breaks and that you can always use thus you wouldnt have this problem.
I'm not even sure if thats a good solution however the point is that I doubt very much that we will be put in the situation where we can no longer play, that is an absurd assumption in my opinion.

[Carl Wrede]

DrHat, on 25 March 2012 - 07:34 AM, said:

Or this could be a case of "Everyone has a set of starter mechs" or maybe just "A starter mech" that never breaks and that you can always use thus you wouldnt have this problem.
I'm not even sure if thats a good solution however the point is that I doubt very much that we will be put in the situation where we can no longer play, that is an absurd assumption in my opinion.

This solution works very well in WoT so yes.

[Ghostrider45]

one thing none of you have though of is if your working for a House are a merc unit they will have spare mechs and they may cover the cost to make repairs mechs if damged !!! think about that..

[Tannhauser Gate]

I think this is nothing to worry about. Yes MWO is based on skill rewards but this one of those details that is built into the basic balance of the game. Youre not going to be stuck in a position where youre broke and devoid of mechs. There will a balancing mechanism. Ive heard already that mechs will be repaired for you to a basic level for free. My guess is that there will be other free basic equipment (surplus?). Maybe your mech will be repaired to TRO variant specs for free but anything custom will cost ya. We dont know yet.

Whichever way PGI does it, Im sure its part of the balance of the game and nothing we need to worry about imo.

[Nick Makiaveli]

LackofCertainty, on 24 March 2012 - 08:06 PM, said:

Wrong. So far the only announced modes are team modes. Just because some people don't coordinate with you well doesn't mean that it's not a team game. According to your logic, Basketball isn't a team game, because you can choose to hog the ball.

I addressed this later I do believe. My point was that you don't have to be part of a organized team BEFORE the match etc. Basketball, in organized play, is a team sport as you belong to the team prior to the start. Ain't semantics a *****?

[Shepherd]

@ Bryan Eckman and the whole carrot and stick thing:

I think that if you balance it so that you lose money for any match, people will view it as a stick scenario. The game is a reward unto itself, and that goes for both the actual combat and the whole money/xp thing. You wouldn't take XP away from a player who lost, would you? You'd just give them less XP at the end of the match. So why not do the same for the C-Bills they earn? If you get blown up straight out of the gate, then your costs of repair will be high. If you last the whole match without taking any serious hits, yoru repair cost will be low. So consider the player who did very well to have gotten a bonus; don't consider the player who did very poorly to have suffered a penalty.

Say you get 100 C-Bills for the match. It should never cost more than 100 C-Bills to repair your mech. Frankly it should never cost more than 90 C-Bills to repair your mech, that way the player who loses still gains something monetarily. The player in the Awesome who was on a great team, played smart himself, never used any ammo and took only a few hits from some dude's Jagermech at extreme range for very light damage.. maybe he pays out 5 C-Bills for repairs and he nets 95 C-Bills to go towards his new Banshee 5S. The player who rolled out a Hunchback, noob-ran straight up the middle and got lit up like a firecracker spends 90 C-Bills to repair it all and nets 10 C-Bills and a hard-won lesson in tactics.

That way nobody runs out of money because they're terrible - they just earn new mechs slower because they have to spend so much on repairing their busted up 'mechs. Or they spend some real-person money to get the ride they hope will improve their luck!

[Kycer]

Imo MWO should adopt the psr ( public sever rating ) system it would flurish the game better as it will group skill level in a much better not to reduce the fun of the game. Then there is the RANKED ratings which most hardcore or elite players roam into.

About the c- bills i think it would be wise to be putting buffer that at a certian PSR or RR your repair bills will be reduced by a certian ammount to comphentate the losses you deal with or the skill level you are. So that it would not deter new players or casual players like myself nor stress up elite or hardcore players. I've personnaly been in competitions before so i think unneccessary stress caused by unskilled or unlikables ruins the gameplay for most hardcore fans.

The ratings are gained through wins and role warfare. This should get sme elite scouts up because they might be held up because of unskilled lance mates . This would also improve the role warfare playstyle that dev's are searching for . I would suggest 40% of points goes to wins while 60% goes to role warfare for the rating increases if the dev's are keen on role warfare.

Scouts will be judges ammount of info they relay to the team , lock ons on TAGS , and general time of interception.

Skirmishers and sentinels will be judged through damage delt and recieved, ammounts of frags and also remaining forces after battle.

Commanders will be judged through orders issued , orders completed and total role warfare ifficientcy.

Psr will start at mid range 1500 and increase 100 or 50 per round depending on roles and wins . Losses the same with losses and lack of role play .

PSR OR RR. That is has a 500 difference will not be able to join each other. Like a 1150 Rating player cant intrude a 1650 ratings game.


But i would also suggest team or lance ratings will be a good system so that friends play togather wont be disturbed by their PSR or RR .




Just my contribution to MWO . Now i need my beer and axe !

Edited by Kycer, 25 March 2012 - 06:41 PM.

[DrHat]

Shepherd, on 25 March 2012 - 05:35 PM, said:

@ Bryan Eckman and the whole carrot and stick thing:

I know I'm not Bryan Eckman and that I can't answer for him, so I won't. I will just take the occasion to throw my own two cents at your text..I hope you don't mind.

Shepherd, on 25 March 2012 - 05:35 PM, said:

I think that if you balance it so that you lose money for any match, people will view it as a stick scenario. The game is a reward unto itself, and that goes for both the actual combat and the whole money/xp thing. You wouldn't take XP away from a player who lost, would you?

Actually I would and it would depend entirely on how the system was structured that would determine how much- or if I would do it. In fact there are plenty of cases where a system that punishes you with taking away XP would be entirely warranted and/or viable, so your assertion is far from an immediate default choice one way or the other, on the contrary I think it is in fact missing the point.

Shepherd, on 25 March 2012 - 05:35 PM, said:

You'd just give them less XP at the end of the match. So why not do the same for the C-Bills they earn? If you get blown up straight out of the gate, then your costs of repair will be high. If you last the whole match without taking any serious hits, yoru repair cost will be low. So consider the player who did very well to have gotten a bonus; don't consider the player who did very poorly to have suffered a penalty.

If you didn't complete your contract and your mech got damaged, guess what? You will be left with a number in red with a minus in front, that simple.
The assumption here again arises with thinking that you must at all times be rewarded for everything you do, no matter what you do and how you do it - This plays right into the popular mode of thinking that goes "Everyone is a winner!" well that just isn't the case and I think it would be in many Mechwarriors' minds, an insult to them to come at them with ingratiating smiles and tones of "Don't worry you still won a little" as any real outcome worth having when you know you lost.

Shepherd, on 25 March 2012 - 05:35 PM, said:

Say you get 100 C-Bills for the match. It should never cost more than 100 C-Bills to repair your mech. Frankly it should never cost more than 90 C-Bills to repair your mech, that way the player who loses still gains something monetarily. The player in the Awesome who was on a great team, played smart himself, never used any ammo and took only a few hits from some dude's Jagermech at extreme range for very light damage.. maybe he pays out 5 C-Bills for repairs and he nets 95 C-Bills to go towards his new Banshee 5S. The player who rolled out a Hunchback, noob-ran straight up the middle and got lit up like a firecracker spends 90 C-Bills to repair it all and nets 10 C-Bills and a hard-won lesson in tactics.

That way nobody runs out of money because they're terrible - they just earn new mechs slower because they have to spend so much on repairing their busted up 'mechs. Or they spend some real-person money to get the ride they hope will improve their luck!

If he still made money he doesn't learn and if he does it will be a lot slower and more childish in the sense of handholding that again, in my opinion of course, boils down to saying "Well you still earned a bit of money little darling but wouldn't you rather want MORE money? Hm?" oh please, nothing beats a good pummeling of your precious toys because you decided caution with something or someone unfamiliar was not for you as a method for teaching you what you're up against. How you deal with this information is up to you of course.
Now you are of course not entirely wrong in what you say about balancing in some sense needs to correspond to your achievements or non-achievements if you like, however I think that is to be something considered after the fundamental system wouldn't you agree?

Finally I again apologize for not being mr. Eckman but I couldn't resist. Have a nice day!

Edited by DrHat, 25 March 2012 - 06:38 PM.
typos T_T

[Wyzak]

I think that the way things are likely to be structured, ensuring someone can never make less c-bills then they spend on repairs is a bad idea.
You want to have a subconscious prod that "this will be your minimum par level for performance int he future" otherwise you won't feel the need to learn. While rewarding you with enough for all possible repairs at the end of every match isn't a bad idea, it will lead to huge balances of c-bills floating around, with no way to match realistically to canon the amounts of money that independent owner/operators SHOULD have. The only game balance mechanics which can counteract this are to artificially raise the price of new mechs into the hundred-million c-bill range, or artificially lower repair costs to the point they make no sense in canon, and both of those methods seem unacceptable to me.

[Zhanna Kerensky]

Personally, I am not in favor of a player skill hierarchy system (differentiation between rookie, veteran, and hotshot level players), otherwise, what are House/unit ranks for already? Moreover, the challenge for a skilled player to function in a group with a bunch of newcomers is much higher and rewarding (it should yield more XP and C-bills) than teaming up with hotshots only. For this reason I would love to see a gaming mode in which players available online that belong to a specific House or the mercenaries community will be assigned at random for some MWO missions/campaigns. This would also boost the social aspect in MWO, ensuring more communications between players, playing for the same faction, take place and, thereby, supporting the team spirit in the different factions.

The idea of a leased mech or starting only in a light mech will render the game less enjoyable and attractive to first time players and I think each newbie should have the chance to play any of the introduced/featured mechs right away.

What about the drop game mode, somewhere I read that the player's mech will be respawned up to 4 times, if I remember correctly (without repair in between or will there be accumulated final repair costs, e.g. C-bills x 4 ?).

Some people will not have tons of time to spend the whole day playing MWO in gaming clans (there are actually people known to exist who have a life besides MWO and other computer games) and will probably not bother with developing a fancy mech pilot career with unique skills, multiple mechs, high ranking and awards, etc. and in the little time these people have they just want to get into the action of the game directly without having to involve in extensive training, character design, and briefing sessions ... a quickstart gaming mode would definitely accomodate these players and I hope the developers will take this into consideration.

In general, the Houses should pay the salary of their military personnel, although with higher rank comes higher salary but also an increase in repair costs once the mech is being upgraded from its minimum standard configuration.

How will the damage be saved though during the game (?) .... what if a mech is almost destroyed during a battle (and the repair bill is likely to be very high) and the player logs out before getting destroyed, so that neither the experience from the battle counts nor will the player have to carry the repair costs then? This would cause interruptions in the game flow but can such loopholes be avoided? Similarly, can it be avoided that some people will get two mechs and beef one of the mechs up with the money they receive if they lose all the time with the other one, so that one will be upgraded from the money all the time and the other one never gets repaired beyond the minimum standard confuguration and is just there for in-game money grinding (banning equipment, C-bills, or weapons transfer between mech types would certainly prevent this)?

How will the damage be assessed in MWO? If I shoot to kill and someone else does it, too, and both weapons hit the enemy mech at the same time, will the XP and C-bills' rewards be split between both of us? Will specific mission objectives be rewarded with C-bills, or the time in which a mission is completed, or how many enemy mechs/units have been hit or destroyed based on either the enemy pilots skill or the enemy mech type and armament or both (the higher the rating, the higher the XP and C-bills)?

I also agree with those that do not want to disencourage players new to the game or those who cannot spend countless hours playing/training the game, but there are countless factors that should be taken into consideration when determining mission rewards. Howoever, IMHO there should always be enough C-bills available (based on each player's House or merc unit contract salary and that C-bills could also be invested/saved with ComStar, yielding interest!!!) to restore the chosen mech systems in the minimum standard configuration (no matter if it will be a Locust or an Atlas) without having to begin the next battle with a damaged mech (unless it is a mech with advanced equipment which will result in higher repair costs that could exced the mission earnings then and temporarily downgrading the mechs equipment in the case of longer losing streaks may then be necessary).

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Anvil Dragon, on 24 March 2012 - 10:52 PM, said:

Not sure yet what kind of hell-hole a ten would be.

All I know if they'll need all the help they can get when I'm hired...