576 replies to this topic

[James The Fox Dixon]

Sandpit, on 06 November 2012 - 10:00 PM, said:

??? rofl That one made me chuckle
I champion helping free players in all areas. Handing them money doesn't help them get better at the game or get involved in the game. Letting them learn how to play without getting stomped does especially when they're still getting their feet wet.
Should they have to run those Jenners once in a while to help pay the bills? Absolutely. Should I? Of course. I fail to see how that limits them from buying more expensive stuff also.
I'm a bit disappointed in the way you disregard an entire post but to each their own.

The economy is fine where it's at. Giving more money isn't going to change new player experience. Lowering costs of items isn't going to solve it either. Changin the entire new player experience is what will change how free players enter the game. As far as "founders bonuses" free players are welcome to purchase some premium time and get the ONLY advantage I, as a founder, get. That's kinda the whole point behind it.

Who said anything about giving players free money? I didn't, so you're strawmanning. I'm talking about earning money through rewarding players for their role and for their performance. You obviously disagree since you think opening your wallet is the better solution. However, there are plenty of other players, founders and free, that vehemently disagree with you the economy is fine. Some of these free players have posted up about how they're not referring their friends to play or they're now not playing because they are *not* being rewarded for their performance or their role. That is what the problem is with the economy. Discuss that to begin with, not your fanciful little strawmen that you are so fond of.

Sandpit, on 06 November 2012 - 10:04 PM, said:

Hmmm......

Ok, I'm not saying there isn't a struggle. I'm saying the struggle is there for a reason and justified in my opinion. I'm a founder but I get no bonus other than the free premium time I have. I run mechs that are expensive but I also run mechs that aren't to help sustain those expensive repair bills. TS, C3, premies, etc. is a completely different subject. You can win as a lone wolf style player with a little teamwork just as easily as a premie on TS.
Placing you in games against people with similar skill and experience would drastically help new players win more and thus earn more.

Winning more does not mean you earn more. Heck, I've even shown you how it doesn't earn you more, but that you lose. I put numbers to it and showed you through examples. Read the original post and contradict the examples I've given. Go on prove that you earn more.

Edited by James The Fox Dixon, 06 November 2012 - 10:08 PM.

[LogicSol]

James The Fox Dixon, on 06 November 2012 - 09:53 PM, said:

Finally, we get to the crux of the matter. You do not want free players to have a competitive mech nor experience the level 2 equipment. The only mech options then are Commandos and Jenners with zero upgrades and ammunition costs. Thanks for that confirmation.

So you think losing money on a win is where economy needs to be?

Free players can Invest time, earn cbills, play whatever they want.The only thing they can't play with is a Lo Wang.

[James The Fox Dixon]

LogicSol, on 06 November 2012 - 10:09 PM, said:

Free players can Invest time, earn cbills, play whatever they want.The only thing they can't play with is a Lo Wang.

The disconnect you have with the object between your ears is that you can't earn c-bills with a mech heavier than a light that has no upgrades or ammo is truly amazing.

[Sandpit]

James The Fox Dixon, on 06 November 2012 - 10:06 PM, said:

Who said anything about giving players free money? I didn't, so you're strawmanning. I'm talking about earning money through rewarding players for their role and for their performance. You obviously disagree since you think opening your wallet is the better solution. However, there are plenty of other players, founders and free, that vehemently disagree with you the economy is fine. Some of these free players have posted up about how they're not referring their friends to play or they're now not playing because they are *not* being rewarded for their performance or their role. That is what the problem is with the economy. Discuss that to begin with, not your fanciful little strawmen that you are so fond of.



Winning more does not mean you earn more. Heck, I've even shown you how it doesn't earn you more, but that you lose. I put numbers to it and showed you through examples.

Again you always make me smile with your vaguely disguised snarky comments

The economy doesn't reward players who play badly but manage to eek out a win. The economy doesn't reward players who play loose with expensive goodies.
The economy rewards players who play well, manage resources, and balance what mechs they use and when.

Your approach only makes sure more players have easier access to all the most expensive stuff at all times with no regards to how hard it really is to afford it all. You can't hand players something for nothing. You continuously speak of fixing the economy but there's nothing to fix. A player can make it quite easily the way it is handled now. They don't get to drive the porsche every day and have to take the old prius out once in a while to save some money on gas now and then to pay for that shiny new sports car

[James The Fox Dixon]

Sandpit, on 06 November 2012 - 10:12 PM, said:

Again you always make me smile with your vaguely disguised snarky comments

The economy doesn't reward players who play badly but manage to eek out a win. The economy doesn't reward players who play loose with expensive goodies.
The economy rewards players who play well, manage resources, and balance what mechs they use and when.

Your approach only makes sure more players have easier access to all the most expensive stuff at all times with no regards to how hard it really is to afford it all. You can't hand players something for nothing. You continuously speak of fixing the economy but there's nothing to fix. A player can make it quite easily the way it is handled now. They don't get to drive the porsche every day and have to take the old prius out once in a while to save some money on gas now and then to pay for that shiny new sports car

So no you can't disprove anything in my first post and decided to strawman once again. Bravo!

[Sandpit]

James The Fox Dixon, on 06 November 2012 - 10:14 PM, said:

So no you can't disprove anything in my first post and decided to strawman once again. Bravo!

Again there's nothing to "disprove" because the economy isn't broken. Your idea (just my opinion) doesn't fix what the issue really is.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Sandpit, on 06 November 2012 - 10:15 PM, said:

Again there's nothing to "disprove" because the economy isn't broken. Your idea (just my opinion) doesn't fix what the issue really is.

Actually, there is something to disprove like my numbers for one. Oh you can't because you don't have any facts to disprove it. You see, I have facts and you have an opinion. Facts>Opinions

Here is a fact for you from the first post:

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.

Defeat the numbers, go ahead defeat them.

Edited by James The Fox Dixon, 06 November 2012 - 10:22 PM.

[Sandpit]

James The Fox Dixon, on 06 November 2012 - 10:20 PM, said:

Actually, there is something to disprove like my numbers for one. Oh you can't because you don't have any facts to disprove it. You see, I have facts and you have an opinion. Facts>Opinions

No, the only "fact" you have is that handing out more money at the end of a round gives players more money to use and sustain themselves...... uhm duh? lol
The fact is that new players getting dumped into games with experienced players, lack of tutorial options, no training, and complete lack of lobby in the game is what hurts free and new players. These items being fixed would result in players getting better, playing more evenly matched fights, and having more fun in general than handing them more money after a fight.
The FACT of the matter is that your solution is just a band-aid. It says "Here's more money kids now go have fun even though you're not really getting anything more out of the game than you were before."
Throwing money into the economy doesn't fix anything. It merely masks the issues that do cause a barrier between the game and new free players enjoying it.
Just because you like your opinion and think that's the way to save the game doesn't make it fact sir
The economy doesn't need a fix, the way players are integrated into it and the game in general are what need to be fixed.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Sandpit, on 06 November 2012 - 10:25 PM, said:

snip

Thread derailment and trolling again. I thought you had really wanted to discuss the problem rationally, but I was wrong. Shame on me for trying to talk to you rationally; shame on you for doing it a second time.

Defeat the numbers or be ignored for being a troll.

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.

EDIT: Let's clarify the hours in regards to a casual player that plays about 2 hours a night. For the 18 hours spread into 2 hour increments they would earn enough c-bills to buy a second variant in 9 days. For the 29.3 hours, it will be 15 days. Can you honestly sit there and tell us all that economy is fine?

Edited by James The Fox Dixon, 06 November 2012 - 10:34 PM.

[Satet]

Sandpit, on 06 November 2012 - 10:25 PM, said:

The economy doesn't need a fix, the way players are integrated into it and the game in general are what need to be fixed.

This is demonstrably incorrect, unless you see no problem with free players being totally unable to use any custom mech larger than a light. Just because the lack of information and other problems exist does not mean the economy is peachy. Dixon has clearly proven that the current economy simply doesn't work if the goal is to provide realistic access to players who do not wish to invest money up front.

If the goal is to either force new players to pay or leave, then the economy is structured correctly.

[CrashieJ]

I'm an F2P and this is the point I've been trying to hammer in to people every corner I pass... if you run a bill of 150,000 c-bills every endmatch, even without dying... you should probably not be that mech as much as you are

BIG EXPENSIVE MECHS ARE BIG... AND EXPENSIVE. you paid 9 million in acquisition of this walking planet fortress, prepare to pay for it's upkeep. seriously, how daft are you people? Atlases and other assault mechs were a rare sight on the field for a reason, the rent is too damn high for those things. those things are to ensure victory at the expense or well... expenses. DUH,

stop whining and play as something more profitable... like a commando. besides LRM boats need solid locks, we're tired of losing lock every half second because you dont know how teamwork... uh... works.

[Sandpit]

James The Fox Dixon, on 06 November 2012 - 10:28 PM, said:

Thread derailment and trolling again. I thought you had really wanted to discuss the problem rationally, but I was wrong. Shame on me for trying to talk to you rationally; shame on you for doing it a second time.

Defeat the numbers or be ignored for being a troll.

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.

again you make me chuckle sir
No amount of disregarding my posts or calling me names changes my statements or points. Nor does using a quote to snip it

Again a custom Catapult is an expensive mech. Now, your numbers show that that mech build is completely sustainable. The player at a 50% win rate makes enough money to repair and rearm that mech using exclusively that mech. So you've just shown a player can run that mech all they want and pay for it AND earn money. Thank you for proving my point that the economy isn't "broken"

Now can a player run that mech exclusively and make enough money to buy another mech and continuously upgrade? Yup, according to your numbers they can. That means the economy works.

Now can a player do this quickly? Nope, but that's not the promise. If you want to do it quickly that's where the F2P model comes in. If you want to bypass grinding for stuff you pay for it. That's the entire basis of the model.

[LogicSol]

James The Fox Dixon, on 06 November 2012 - 10:12 PM, said:

The disconnect you have with the object between your ears is that you can't earn c-bills with a mech heavier than a light that has no upgrades or ammo is truly amazing.

Again, this is patently false.
i run a medium mech, with ES Internals, Double heat sinks and the LRMs switched for SRM6s, with a bigger engine to boot.
It CAN"T LOSE MONEY, even for a free player. 75k max repair/rearm bill.
Absolute worst case? it goes even. On average a free player will earn between 20-40k on a loss, and 40 and 125k on a win.
Last patch I had a K2 with an AC.20 and a gauss, not exactly a pushover, worst case repair bill with that was 90-100k.
So yea, a free player would lose as much as 25k from a loss with it, but will make 50-100k on a win.
You can even make money with an atlas, as long as you don't go missile heavy with it. Or heck You CAN go missile heavy with it, and simply not pay for a rearm, you still get 75% of your ammo and no re-arm bill.

In other words, you are wrong.

[KhanCipher]

IMO the best way to fix the whole issue is to hardcap repairs at 20% of total pay (before c-bill bonuses) or remove the repair system, before the whole "we don't want to see nothing but XL, Endo, Ferro, DHS, Gauss, LRMs, and Atlas every battle!" crowd shoots this down. Think about what you're supporting, are you supporting a game, or a WoT copy? If your answer is a game, then actually think of ways to make the game more friendly to free players, they are the people you have to please or the game will fall down and never get up... again.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Sandpit, on 06 November 2012 - 10:37 PM, said:

snip I have nothing to add so I'm going to troll.

Well at least you're honest about it. I would recommend that everyone ignore your posts in this thread from now on so we can get back to constructively discuss the problems with the economy.

LogicSol, on 06 November 2012 - 10:37 PM, said:

Again, this is patently false.
i run a medium mech, with ES Internals, Double heat sinks and the LRMs switched for SRM6s, with a bigger engine to boot.
It CAN"T LOSE MONEY, even for a free player. 75k max repair/rearm bill.
Absolute worst case? it goes even. On average a free player will earn between 20-40k on a loss, and 40 and 125k on a win.
Last patch I had a K2 with an AC.20 and a gauss, not exactly a pushover, worst case repair bill with that was 90-100k.
So yea, a free player would lose as much as 25k from a loss with it, but will make 50-100k on a win.
You can even make money with an atlas, as long as you don't go missile heavy with it. Or heck You CAN go missile heavy with it, and simply not pay for a rearm, you still get 75% of your ammo and no re-arm bill.

In other words, you are wrong.

Your numbers are off. If a f2p player in a K2 has a repair bill of 100k and makes only 130k in a match they will make 30k just like I used in my example. They will not make as much as you say they will. Anyone can see that math error and laugh at it, which is what I'm doing now.

Also, the 75% rearm means that if you do not have enough ammo in the build to begin with you will run out quickly in a match. This will diminish your earnings even further because of less damage done, kill assists, and kills which affects your bonus rewards. Not exactly working out in your favor now is it?

Edited by James The Fox Dixon, 06 November 2012 - 10:45 PM.

[Sandpit]

James The Fox Dixon, on 06 November 2012 - 10:41 PM, said:

Well at least you're honest about it. I would recommend that everyone ignore your posts in this thread from now on so we can get back to constructively discuss the problems with the economy.



Your numbers are off. If a f2p player in a K2 has a repair bill of 100k and makes only 130k in a match they are capped at 30k just like I used in my example. They will not make as much as you say they will. Anyone can see that math error and laugh at it, which is what I'm doing now.

Again your snarky remarks and attempts to bait me make me chuckle sir

I'll continue to debate the issues on-topic as I see fit.
The economy adjustments you recommend simply don't fix anything. It just makes it easier for new players to make a little money after a match. It solves nothing other than getting them into mechs and better equipment faster. Unfortunately this won't fix anything.

KhanCipher, on 06 November 2012 - 10:39 PM, said:

IMO the best way to fix the whole issue is to hardcap repairs at 20% of total pay (before c-bill bonuses) or remove the repair system, before the whole "we don't want to see nothing but XL, Endo, Ferro, DHS, Gauss, LRMs, and Atlas every battle!" crowd shoots this down. Think about what you're supporting, are you supporting a game, or a WoT copy? If your answer is a game, then actually think of ways to make the game more friendly to free players, they are the people you have to please or the game will fall down and never get up... again.

That's my point though. I want to see the game get new guy friendly. Giving them more money after a match doesn't solve the issue though.

[Dakkss]

Man, I really hope the Devs are reading this - it's a good insight between different players' opinions and experiences with the economy.

IMHO, The economy right now is awful - I typically run Medium mechs, get slightly more than I do with trial mechs (If I win), unless I have upgrades. If XL Engines, DHS, Endo-Steel and Ferro-Fibrous are so costly to the point where you make less money than the trial mechs, then really, what is the point?

[James The Fox Dixon]

Sandpit, on 06 November 2012 - 10:45 PM, said:

Again your snarky remarks and attempts to bait me make me chuckle sir

I'll continue to debate the issues on-topic as I see fit.
The economy adjustments you recommend simply don't fix anything. It just makes it easier for new players to make a little money after a match. It solves nothing other than getting them into mechs and better equipment faster. Unfortunately this won't fix anything.


That's my point though. I want to see the game get new guy friendly. Giving them more money after a match doesn't solve the issue though.

Yeah you don't want them in anything other than a light mech and not have upgrades. Let me guess you want to stomp them into the ground in your uber death machine that they have no hope of ever competing against.

Dak Darklighter, on 06 November 2012 - 10:47 PM, said:

Man, I really hope the Devs are reading this - it's a good insight between different players' opinions and experiences with the economy.

IMHO, The economy right now is awful - I typically run Medium mechs, get slightly more than I do with trial mechs (If I win), unless I have upgrades. If XL Engines, DHS, Endo-Steel and Ferro-Fibrous are so costly to the point where you make less money than the trial mechs, then really, what is the point?

Sandpit and LogicSol think that you're making too money as a free player. They want you to spend several months before you can progress to your next variant or getting your first mech. Fortunately, the majority of the player base sees that this is a problem and agrees with you and I. Have hope.

Edited by James The Fox Dixon, 06 November 2012 - 10:51 PM.

[Sandpit]

Dak Darklighter, on 06 November 2012 - 10:47 PM, said:

Man, I really hope the Devs are reading this - it's a good insight between different players' opinions and experiences with the economy.

IMHO, The economy right now is awful - I typically run Medium mechs, get slightly more than I do with trial mechs (If I win), unless I have upgrades. If XL Engines, DHS, Endo-Steel and Ferro-Fibrous are so costly to the point where you make less money than the trial mechs, then really, what is the point?

But I think that's a good thing to an extent. It forces you to keep a couple of "cheap" mechs around to put into your play rotation once in a while.
Here's the thing. Right now we're all pretty much grinding and earning some cash. hardcore players are probably all sitting on top of a mountain at this point anyhow.
Once you've established a nice little bankroll that expensive mech losing you 50k in a game doesn't hurt. If you have 20 million c-bills losing a few k once in a while isn't going to affect you. BUT, you had to grind a little here and there use some less optimized builds on occasion to get there. It isn't going to hurt the economy that not everyone can pilot the most expensive stuff all the time every match.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Cure for a mountain of c-bills: buying MC for mech bays and get more mechs. This earns PGI money. Your way doesn't generate money for PGI and that does hurt PGI's bottom line. Right now the game is not friendly to free players nor do those players want to stick around much less spend money. Naw, you'd rather the free players to be in trial mechs so you can roflstomp them into the ground in your uber death machine.