10 replies to this topic

[James The Fox Dixon]

If you are a founder or premium player who thinks the economy is fine then this thread is not for you. Your opinion does not matter, so you should go troll elsewhere. With that caveat let us continue.

I put together a thread in the suggestion forum that looks at the economics of the game and shows how the current economy punishes non-founders and non-premium time players. The current system has been discussed to death in closed beta and now into open beta. Part of it was a complete revamp of the system that rewards a player based upon what they bring into a match and their performance during the match. This thread has been ignored by the developers and they have not made any comments about how they intend to fix the current economic problems.

This is from my example in the thread.

http://mwomercs.com/...n-weight-class/

Quote

If a f2p player earns 150k for a nearly perfect match, but suffers 2 tons of standard armor damage, loses a Gauss Rifle, and uses 6 tons of ammo; minus any repair costs to internal structure and other expenses like engines and heat sinks. His/her repair cost is going to be 20,032+10,500+120,000=150,532. They will incur a net loss of 532 C-Bills for winning the match and not dying. Taking the same damage and losing the match, earning 75k, they will incur a net loss of 75,532 C-Bills.

Looking at the numbers, you can see that no matter what the player does in winning the match they will always end up in the red as a free player. The only alternative they have is for free players to pilot something like a Commando or a Jenner without any of the upgrades in order to make money. However, mech ownership is the least attractive option over running nothing but trial mechs. For trial mechs, this is pure profit for the player and leads to no incentive to buy a mech nor pay MC for additional mech slots in the garage.

This is further compounded by the skill system that requires a player to buy three mech variants of the same chassis in order to gain the bonuses. With ammo based builds they will never be able to afford a second or third chassis in a reasonable amount of time. A reasonable amount of time in this discussion is about 3 hours worth of matches regardless of winning or losing. Given that newer variants cost a lot more due to level 2 equipment on them it will take them about 8 or more hours to be able to afford a second variant while using their current variant. Mech customization is off the table since that will only cause higher repair and rearm costs that further diminishes their earnings.

For example, a player is running an A1 Catapult with 6xLRM5's and 10 tons of ammo, it will take them an average of 180 matches @ a rate of 30k earnings for a win to afford a second Catapult variant. They will end up losing money to the tune of 10k or more on a loss. The average time to get the money together, at a 100% win rate, is 1080 minutes (average match time of 6 minutes) or 18 hours. This isn't a really attractive option since no one can achieve a 100% win/loss ratio, so let's look at 50% win/loss with 30k for a win and 10k for a loss. To buy the subsequent variant will require 293 matches for an average time of 1,758 minutes or 29.3 hours for the free player.

As it is shown that the current economic is unsustainable for a free players since they will leave out of frustration due to the lack of progress. They are not being rewarded for the chosen role/playstyle they were promised. Yes, PGI did promise all players that they would be rewarded for playing a role. This is what the Developer's Blog 3 states in the beginning,"Role Warfare is a term used for applying in-game mechanics and features, which assist a player in optimizing the game for their style of gameplay." It adds this at the end, "Players are now truly allowed to customize their gameplay experience to suit their play style which in itself is fairly new to on-line FPS/RPG titles." However, this isn't true according the economic system that PGI has put into place. Players are not rewarded for playing how they want to play, but are punished for choosing a role due to how the economic system is currently implemented. One key thing to note in both of PGI's statements that they refer to players not free to play players or founders or premium time players. This means they are referring to all players regardless of the other factors.

The summation of the economic system in place and that PGI has been repeatedly told about the economic system not working correctly that they simply do not care about it. They would rather drive players from the game than fix it by implementing a comprehensive reward system that accounts for mech weight and in game performance. I welcome a developer to come in to discuss the economic model and to prove me wrong that they do not care about their free players.

Edited by James The Fox Dixon, 06 November 2012 - 05:39 PM.

[anonymous175]

I've forwarded this thread to Katface.

[Zervziel]

So because I'm a Founder, my opinion suddenly no longer matters...because, yeah, that's how you get people to listen to you is to say their opinion is invalid no matter what.

[Katface]

Zeno Scarborough, on 06 November 2012 - 05:27 PM, said:

I've forwarded this thread to Katface.

I will be reviewing this thread over a bowl of cereal, be prepared for a well thought out response complete with verbs and nouns.

[FunkyFritter]

I agree that the economic model needs an overhaul, but using ammo-heavy mechs hurts your argument given the 75% free rearm.

[Death Knell]

Zervziel, on 06 November 2012 - 05:29 PM, said:

So because I'm a Founder, my opinion suddenly no longer matters...because, yeah, that's how you get people to listen to you is to say their opinion is invalid no matter what.

Because you're kind of being a **** about it already. You're also oblivious to the plight of the free player.

[Leetskeet]

Well of course they don't.

They seemingly have no idea what they're doing.

I basically make 30-40k~ for a win in a mech that survives without any equipment destroyed. It's completely legit.

Yep.

[Death Knell]

Leetskeet, on 06 November 2012 - 05:33 PM, said:

Well of course they don't.

They seemingly have no idea what they're doing.

I basically make 30-40k~ for a win in a mech that survives without any equipment destroyed. It's completely legit.

Yep.

And that's another reason why I think the OP didn't want founders to comment. You make 40k for a win, I make 200,000 or more on a win in my founder's, with my premium on.

[James The Fox Dixon]

FunkyFritter, on 06 November 2012 - 05:33 PM, said:

I agree that the economic model needs an overhaul, but using ammo-heavy mechs hurts your argument given the 75% free rearm.

The free 75% rearm hurts players anyway since they have less ammo to expend in a match that leads to lower rewards based upon damage. This further causes lower income earnings for matches. In the near future that 75% rearm is going to be nerfed to 25% which leads to a greater economic plight than what we currently have.

Edited by James The Fox Dixon, 06 November 2012 - 05:44 PM.

[multiplesanta34]

Death Knell, on 06 November 2012 - 05:35 PM, said:

And that's another reason why I think the OP didn't want founders to comment.  You make 40k for a win, I make 200,000 or more on a win in my founder's, with my premium on.

That's another thing too. Everyone always says how much they average in a win, but it should be balanced against a loss, because that's what new players mostly do, especially with the current matchmaking system. I thought averaging 70,000-75,000 was pretty tight before, but after getting an owned mech and factoring in repair and re-arming i'm much better off in trials. I would imagine this is the opposite effect the developers are trying to achieve.

[Helmer]

This topic is being closed as it has been reported as inflammatory and defamatory.

Statements such as "that they do not care about their free players." "PGI Doesnt Care about the economy" and
"This thread has been ignored by the developers" are defamatory and insulting.

The OP is making derogatory statements about PGI and making assumptions as to their motives, and PGIs views on this current topic.


Per this Post - "These are private forums and as mentioned numerous times, posting is a privilege and not a right."


I would encourage anyone with issues to constructively post without the negativity , crassness, and insults that contribute nothing to a friendly community.
Passion is a great thing, however, passion should be a positively harnessed force to enrich our mutual community, not damage it. This is the first and ONLY attempt at a Mechwarrior title in a decade, I suggest we all do our best to SUPPORT it. Negativity, even when wrapped around valid complaints, is a cancer to communities.

Per the Code of Conduct

Harassing or Defamatory


This category includes both clear and masked language and/or links to websites containing such language or images which:

• Insultingly refer to other characters, players, Piranha Games Inc. employees, or groups of people
  
• Result in ongoing harassment to other characters, players, Piranha Games Inc. employees, or groups of people

If a player is found to have participated in such actions, he/she will:

• Be given a temporary ban from the forums, depending upon severity

Harassment takes many forms, and is not necessarily limited to the type of language used, but the intent. Repeatedly targeting a specific player with harassment can lead to more severe action. The idea behind this is to prevent any one player from consistently being uncomfortable in the forums.


Cheers.