293 replies to this topic

[o0Marduk0o]

Adeptus Odren, on 14 November 2012 - 03:55 AM, said:

A lot of people just want to play with the mechs they have without having to grind just for C-Bills. People like me, for instance, who can't play all the time because of work and family.

You want to play with any mech, with any loadout and without thinking about the match outcome. What a bad gameplay. You can't run an assault mech and dying all the time, you're not supposed to run the mech then. Be happy that your pilot can't die, lol.

James The Fox Dixon, on 14 November 2012 - 04:08 AM, said:

FF is not useless when you have only so much free tonnage, but a lot of free crits and you want max armor. Logic fail.

Artemis doesn't stack with SSRMs and SRMS+Artemis cost the same amount for reloads as SSRMs. Logic fail.

The speed is what I wanted for my mech, so regardless of your opinion if it's negligible it doesn't play a factor. A speed increase is a speed increase. Logic fail.

Ammo has always been in the legs. It's not the location that matters, but the actual cost of it in conjunction with the match earnings. Logic fail.

He is helping you and telling you your faults and you keep on failing. You are so wrong on so many layers.

[Ultrabeast]

James The Fox Dixon, on 14 November 2012 - 05:14 AM, said:

Is that with or without premium? I am a very good player with this build, so your opinion means jack and squat to me. Just because someone wins a tournament doesn't mean jack either.

It's easy to make cbills/xp if you perform well in each match. Assists, spotting, damage done, components destroyed, kills and wins. You can't do any of those, not my problem. We rolled nothing but Trial Mechs in closed beta for a week once and did fine.

[ForceUser]

James The Fox Dixon, on 14 November 2012 - 05:14 AM, said:

Is that with or without premium? I am a very good player with this build, so your opinion means jack and squat to me. Just because someone wins a tournament doesn't mean jack either.

The XP of other players shown at the end of the match is without premium taken into account, thus why I said Unmodified.

Also, who said anything about who won tournaments. Tournament builds are used by ALL the teams playing in the league and tournaments. It's highly competitive thus the builds in these matches are the best of the best regardless of cost. It just so happens that the best of the best builds are not the most expensive. Why not make use of these builds?

And again, just imagine how well you WOULD be doing with a better build? That's my point, no doubt you are a good player, but with a better build you could be much better.

[Khobai]

If you dont let bad players run expensive mechs, the game just turns into the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Good players will have such a huge advantage over bad players because they can run better mech designs on top of being better players. That downward spiral would be terrible for the game.

Anyone should be able to pilot any mech they want regardless of their skill level. That's just common sense and it makes the game entirely skill based; because if a bad player and good player are in the same exact mechs, the only remaining factor is skill.

Edited by Khobai, 14 November 2012 - 05:22 AM.

[James The Fox Dixon]

o0Marduk0o, on 14 November 2012 - 05:18 AM, said:

He is helping you and telling you your faults and you keep on failing. You are so wrong on so many layers.

In your opinion and your opinion doesn't matter to me. This, however, has nothing to do with the economy which is the point of this thread. It's amazing how much you and him deflect away from the problems of the economy for free players.

[Joseph Mallan]

ForceUser, on 14 November 2012 - 05:12 AM, said:

Big stompy robots is PLENTY to fill the other half

At least for me.

I see... [Freud]When I show you this cigar, what do you think of?[/Freud]

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 14 November 2012 - 05:21 AM.

[ForceUser]

Khobai, on 14 November 2012 - 05:19 AM, said:

If you dont let bad players run expensive mechs, the game just turns into the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Good players will have such a huge advantage over bad players because they can run better mech designs on top of being better players.

Anyone should be able to pilot any mech they want regardless of their skill level. That's just common sense and it makes the game entirely skill based; because if a bad player and good player are in the same exact mechs, the remaning factor is skill.

A new page so I have to repeat it again

The best equipment is NOT the most expensive to buy or run. The rich players have no more advantage as a poor player since the best builds do not cost the most.

[James The Fox Dixon]

ForceUser, on 14 November 2012 - 05:19 AM, said:

The XP of other players shown at the end of the match is without premium taken into account, thus why I said Unmodified.

Also, who said anything about who won tournaments. Tournament builds are used by ALL the teams playing in the league and tournaments. It's highly competitive thus the builds in these matches are the best of the best regardless of cost. It just so happens that the best of the best builds are not the most expensive. Why not make use of these builds?

And again, just imagine how well you WOULD be doing with a better build? That's my point, no doubt you are a good player, but with a better build you could be much better.

I'm reminded of street racing and cars. You can have the hottest car around, but if you are a crappy driver you will lose. Conversely, you can have a not so hot car, but have an excellent driver. Guess who will win a race? It will be the not so hot car with the excellent driver. The same is true for mechs etc... It's the pilot not the machine.

[El Penguin]

The title should be changed to "DROPPING IN BAD TEAMS SHOULD PUNISH EXPENSIVE MECH BUILDS".

I'm not sure why some want less options to be viable choices other than that's how they are in the lore or think people should grind to play expensive mech builds or else it's boring.

If everyone is going to be equipping lets say XL engines if the price is affordable on a loss than that seems to be a balancing issue than people just want high tech stuff. All the sidegrades should be balanced in the first place. Why should repair costs scare people away from using it? You already have to save up cash to purchase it in the first place anyway. How about increase that instead?

I feel these high costs just lower the options available to choose from, mostly free players and pub players.

[Khobai]

Quote

The best equipment is NOT the most expensive to buy or run. The rich players have no more advantage as a poor player since the best builds do not cost the most.

Yeah but thats because the cbill costs are poorly balanced. Like why is an atlas 10,000,000 cbills when its completely outclassed by a jenner?

[ForceUser]

James The Fox Dixon, on 14 November 2012 - 05:22 AM, said:

I'm reminded of street racing and cars. You can have the hottest car around, but if you are a crappy driver you will lose. Conversely, you can have a not so hot car, but have an excellent driver. Guess who will win a race? It will be the not so hot car with the excellent driver. The same is true for mechs etc... It's the pilot not the machine.

And then you have a driver with exactly the same skill level as the excellent driver but a much better designed car.

[Valore]

Khobai, on 14 November 2012 - 05:19 AM, said:

If you dont let bad players run expensive mechs, the game just turns into the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Good players will have such a huge advantage over bad players because they can run better mech designs on top of being better players. That downward spiral would be terrible for the game.

Anyone should be able to pilot any mech they want regardless of their skill level. That's just common sense and it makes the game entirely skill based; because if a bad player and good player are in the same exact mechs, the remaining factor is skill.

Or they could find a mech that is equally good but less expensive. Why is that never something people mention?

If you want to run something completely tricked out, and you lose, why do you expect the ability to keep doing that should be acceptable?

Your argument only holds water if the absolute best mechs were the most expensive. This is not the case. The most tricked out mechs are not always the best. Sometimes? Yes. Always? No.

Unless you somehow consider a LRM A1 with Artemis and a crapton of LRM ammo coming out the arse and loaded with FF, XL engines and DHS the best mech.

Edited by Valore, 14 November 2012 - 05:26 AM.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Valore, on 14 November 2012 - 05:24 AM, said:

Or they could find a mech that is equally good but less expensive. Why is that never something people mention?

If you want to run something completely tricked out, and you lose, why do you expect the ability to keep doing that should be acceptable?

Your argument only holds water if the absolute best mechs were the most expensive. This is not the case. The most tricked out mechs are not always the best. Sometimes? Yes. Always? No.

Unless you somehow consider a LRM A1 with Artemis coming out the arse and loaded with FF, XL engines and DHS the best mech.

What is your opinion about what I wrote from FM: Mercs?

[ForceUser]

Khobai, on 14 November 2012 - 05:24 AM, said:

Yeah but thats because the cbill costs are poorly balanced. Like why is an atlas 10,000,000 cbills when its completely outclassed by a jenner?

This is a WOT mentality and it does not apply to this game. The atlas is good at what it does: Take damage and put out damage. A jenner is good at what it does: Dodge damage gather info and harass. A bad player in one will always lose to a good player in the other.

A jenner with a large XL engine, FF, Endo and DHS cost about as much or more than an atlas with a std engine, 3 Llas and a gauss with DHS no ES and No FF.

Edited by ForceUser, 14 November 2012 - 05:29 AM.

[Valore]

James The Fox Dixon, on 14 November 2012 - 05:26 AM, said:

What is your opinion about what I wrote from FM: Mercs?

Which one, sorry? Haven't followed the thread too closely, kinda playing and browsing in between drops with the guys

[Scratx]

James The Fox Dixon, on 14 November 2012 - 05:22 AM, said:

I'm reminded of street racing and cars. You can have the hottest car around, but if you are a crappy driver you will lose. Conversely, you can have a not so hot car, but have an excellent driver. Guess who will win a race? It will be the not so hot car with the excellent driver. The same is true for mechs etc... It's the pilot not the machine.

This.

Give a crap/new pilot the best mech in the world and he'll just crash and burn it.

[ForceUser]

Scratx, on 14 November 2012 - 05:29 AM, said:

This.

Give a crap/new pilot the best mech in the world and he'll just crash and burn it.

And yet people complain about this saying it's not fair.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Valore, on 14 November 2012 - 05:27 AM, said:

Which one, sorry? Haven't followed the thread too closely, kinda playing and browsing in between drops with the guys

Depends upon the following contract stipulations for economics that pertain to MW:O as it currently stands: Payment Multiplier, Overhead, Salvage, and Support.

Equipment Rating grants the following bonuses: Payment Multiplier, Overhead, Salvage, and Support. The equipment rating goes from F (the worst level) up to A* (the best level). The higher the level, the more money you make.

Rating/Payment Multiplier/Overhead/Salvage/Support
A*-3.5/+5%/+5%/+5%
A-3.0/5%/0/5%/0
B-2.7/0/0/0
C-2.4/0/0/0
D-2.1/-5%/0/0
F-1.5/-5%/0/0

Payment Multiplier multiplies the base amount of the contract that ranges from 0.8 to above 5.0. Without mission types and employers the only thing in MW:O is equipment rating. As you can see that a top of the line mech with all of the upgrades will make more money in a match than a non-upgraded mech. The mission has a base payout that is multiplied by the Payment Multiplier.

Overhead is how much it costs to maintain your Mech in between matches. It covers expenses that aren't compensated by the contract i.e. upgrades.

Salvage is how much you can recover and claim as your own. This is a percentage beginning at 0% all the way up to 100%.

Support is split into two categories of straight support and battle loss compensation. Straight support is for the payment of salaries of your entire staff while battle loss compensation is the amount that is paid to you for damages incurred in combat. In MW:O, only battle loss compensation is important.

Now this system also encompasses pilot skill levels etc... It means that bringing out the big bad Atlas or ammo dependent build makes enough to cover its costs through all of the multipliers. This system makes MW:O's system look like a feel good welfare program for free players that actually punches them in the face for playing the game in an owned mech.

[FunkyFritter]

ForceUser, on 14 November 2012 - 05:22 AM, said:

A new page so I have to repeat it again

The best equipment is NOT the most expensive to buy or run. The rich players have no more advantage as a poor player since the best builds do not cost the most.

Which begs the question, why is some equipment more expensive in the first place? Suppose there are two mech setups that are equal in strength and serve the same role, except one is dramatically more expensive than the other. Why would anyone use the more expensive setup? Why is it in the game in the first place?

[ForceUser]

So wait, the guys with the most expensive mechs get the most money...

Really?

FunkyFritter, on 14 November 2012 - 05:36 AM, said:

Which begs the question, why is some equipment more expensive in the first place? Suppose there are two mech setups that are equal in strength and serve the same role, except one is dramatically more expensive than the other. Why would anyone use the more expensive setup? Why is it in the game in the first place?

It's in the game because it's in TT. Most of the costs come from there as well.

As to why someone would run it, you'll have to ask James The Fox Dixon