146 replies to this topic

[Mercules]

I don't see it as an "unfun grind". Hopping into a match, even in a Trial Mech is a hoot. I think the issue is with fragile egos. "I'm not winning so I must not be having fun.Waaaaaaah!" Winning is fun but it does not equal fun. You can have fun in a crappy mech. It has taken a lot of time to teach my kids this, but I think I have succeeded.

The base game play is fun, even when being blown up and in a Trial mech you don't lose money for being blown up. No consequence for learning to play only REWARD in that you get a small amount of money.

The other issue is entitlement. "Mr. X over there has that. I want that. I don't care that he worked or paid for that. I want it now and for free!". Another thing I've tried to teach my kids, things you earn and buy yourself mean more to you than things given to you. My daughter learned this after she had to pay for her second iPod touch after sending the first through the wash and dryer. In fact she now does her own laundry just to check her pockets again.

[QuantumButler]

Mercules, on 29 November 2012 - 10:37 AM, said:

I don't see it as an "unfun grind". Hopping into a match, even in a Trial Mech is a hoot. I think the issue is with fragile egos. "I'm not winning so I must not be having fun.Waaaaaaah!" Winning is fun but it does not equal fun. You can have fun in a crappy mech. It has taken a lot of time to teach my kids this, but I think I have succeeded.

The base game play is fun, even when being blown up and in a Trial mech you don't lose money for being blown up. No consequence for learning to play only REWARD in that you get a small amount of money.

The other issue is entitlement. "Mr. X over there has that. I want that. I don't care that he worked or paid for that. I want it now and for free!". Another thing I've tried to teach my kids, things you earn and buy yourself mean more to you than things given to you. My daughter learned this after she had to pay for her second iPod touch after sending the first through the wash and dryer. In fact she now does her own laundry just to check her pockets again.

Yeah, playing 50+ matches in beercans that overheat after 2 shots and die if looked at funny sure is fun.

just because you enjoy driving rusty nails into your flesh doesn't mean everyone else does.

[Godmoney]

Punish new players even more than they are now.

Smart. Real smart.

I guess if you lose most your matches the game will just force you out via economics. Sounds like a great plan for growth and encouraging new players to join.

Super well thought out OP. I'm sure the dev's will hop all over this brilliance.

[Roland]

Blaank, on 29 November 2012 - 02:35 AM, said:

You would not make any money ever. Even the best players would be running negatives.

During early beta, when repair costs were in the millions for XL engines, I still made huge amounts of money.

So, no... good players actually don't run negatives, even with significantly higher repair costs. Of course, you made a lot more money in salvage back then too.

[Opposition]

Murku, on 29 November 2012 - 04:13 AM, said:

Battletech is one of those games that assumes people with access to multi-million cbill machines would risk them (contracts must eventually average out at a 50% chance of losing your machine, with a little less chance of dieing yourself) for less than 1/10th their value.
I don't really believe anyone would do that. Much better to sell the blasted thing and live in luxury for the rest of your days off the proceeds. So, in our reinvention ala MWO playing has to be worth our while. Remuneration bonds, ammo supplimentation, free access to workshops and materials, surely any prospective employer would need to offer such to get us to risk our breadwinning gear?

This post has it right on. After my first match I said to myself "Why would a pilot risk their mech (not to mention their lives) for a job that pays 5% of their mech's worth and doesn't allow them to claim significant battlefield salvage."

Then I figured it out: "Ah, they take the jobs because they have contracts that indemnify mech losses (hence why we don't permanently lose mechs when we lose a battle), and cover significant amounts of repairs and supplies (up to 75%)."

[EPICTHEFAIL]

Max Liao, on 29 November 2012 - 10:01 AM, said:

Well then, the 'average person' (using your definition) is a selfish, lazy, entitlement driven, instant gratification buffoon.

I'm having perfect fun with my Founders mess turned off. And I didn't have any money banked up either. So, while the journey is a slow one, every 15 minutes or so I get to blow up (or be blown up by) more pixel-'mechs, so I'm perfectly okay with that. I get to play, and at some point in the future I'll be able to upgrade my current or buy a new 'Mech. I fail to see the issue.

And if this offends you, find a mirror.

How about someone who values their own time and would rather not spend it doing something they do not enjoy, if at all possible? Don`t get me wrong, I`m enjoying my time with pretty much a pure trial setup (saving up for something that has more armor than my shirt), however this may not apply to everyone. Dismissing someone who doesn`t share your opinion as beneath you in some way is asinine, to say the least.
Some people do not want to spend hard-earned money on an entirely virtual, intangible commodity that may or may not turn out to be inferior to what they already have. This is doubly true given the current pricing system, which is a bit extreme compared to most F2P setups. Even ignoring this, attempting to balance the game via systems almost entirely outside the main gameplay is a terrible idea.

[Godmoney]

Mercules, on 29 November 2012 - 10:37 AM, said:

I don't see it as an "unfun grind". Hopping into a match, even in a Trial Mech is a hoot. I think the issue is with fragile egos. "I'm not winning so I must not be having fun.Waaaaaaah!" Winning is fun but it does not equal fun. You can have fun in a crappy mech. It has taken a lot of time to teach my kids this, but I think I have succeeded.

The base game play is fun, even when being blown up and in a Trial mech you don't lose money for being blown up. No consequence for learning to play only REWARD in that you get a small amount of money.

The other issue is entitlement. "Mr. X over there has that. I want that. I don't care that he worked or paid for that. I want it now and for free!". Another thing I've tried to teach my kids, things you earn and buy yourself mean more to you than things given to you. My daughter learned this after she had to pay for her second iPod touch after sending the first through the wash and dryer. In fact she now does her own laundry just to check her pockets again.

I wonder why losing football teams have a hard time attracting new athletes? Huh, what a mystery.

You saying winning doesn't equal fun? Oh really? Huh, I guess the majority of human's on earth had it all wrong then huh? You must know better than the rest of humanity.

You know about that MMA fighter who has 20 losses and 1 win? Yeah because he doesn't exist. You know about the well supported NBA franchise that looses 90% of their games? Oh yeah, it doesn't exist.

I guess you know human nature better than all of us stupid humans.

[Devils Advocate]

It doesn't surprise me that a gold founder is suggesting this. Prices with founders or premium are all completely manageable.

Right now you have the economical option of letting the game refill 75% of your ammo which basically trades tonnage in your mech for increased profits or you can spend less weight on ammo and more cash on it every round. That seems like a reasonable trade for me, especially in a death match game type. People are going to need that ammo in Conquest or Dropship but right now it would be stupid to spend the absurd amounts some types of ammo require for matches where half of the time you're going to be rushed and murdered.

Personally I don't think you should be allowed to join a game without repairing your mech first as that seems suicidal and silly to me so I'm not a fan of that, but the economical vs weight efficient tradeoff seems reasonable.

Edited by Devils Advocate, 29 November 2012 - 10:50 AM.

[Max Liao]

EPICTHEFAIL, on 29 November 2012 - 10:44 AM, said:

How about someone who values their own time and would rather not spend it doing something they do not enjoy, if at all possible?

Then don't play.

EPICTHEFAIL, on 29 November 2012 - 10:44 AM, said:

Dismissing someone who doesn`t share your opinion as beneath you in some way is asinine, to say the least.

They are beneath me - and others like me. I made the effort to play the game - a game in which I disagree with MANY design philosophies - within the context of the game system. I started with trial 'Mechs and PUGging then moved on to grouping and Founders. If people are going to whine about not having instant gratification and being equal to someone who has paid to support the game, practiced for months, and found an 8+ group of people in which to team up, they deserve nothing more than complete derision.

[QuantumButler]

Max Liao, on 29 November 2012 - 10:54 AM, said:

Then don't play.

They are beneath me - and others like me. I made the effort to play the game - a game in which I disagree with MANY design philosophies - within the context of the game system. I started with trial 'Mechs and PUGging then moved on to grouping and Founders. If people are going to whine about not having instant gratification and being equal to someone who has paid to support the game, practiced for months, and found an 8+ group of people in which to team up, they deserve nothing more than complete derision.

This explains so, so much.

You're an irredeemable gold, a lost cause, you have perma-gold vision seared into your retinas, time to just tune you out.

Edited by QuantumButler, 29 November 2012 - 10:57 AM.

[Godmoney]

Max Liao, on 29 November 2012 - 10:54 AM, said:

Then don't play.

They are beneath me - and others like me. I made the effort to play the game - a game in which I disagree with MANY design philosophies - within the context of the game system. I started with trial 'Mechs and PUGging then moved on to grouping and Founders. If people are going to whine about not having instant gratification and being equal to someone who has paid to support the game, practiced for months, and found an 8+ group of people in which to team up, they deserve nothing more than complete derision.

LOL, I've spent over 60$ and I'm not a founder. You're point again? I don't see it. I've spent well over 500$ on League of Legends. I've spent well over 100$ on GW2. I've spent well over 100$ on Super Monday night Combat.

So that means my opinion matters more on those games even though I have't played LOL in 6 months? HAHA, spoken like a true teenager.

[SpiralRazor]

ShadowDarter, on 29 November 2012 - 02:32 AM, said:

the ecconomy of war in MWO, should be a large part of the game, a lot of discussions are on how bad it is. My opinion is that it should be a major part of how everyone takes to battle, another layer of complexity to the game. In all seriousness, there are to many games out there that offer a free ride or at least a cheap way out. Running a Mech is a very expensive affair and that was commented upon in just about all of the books. Open for discussion, folks no flaming or trolling lets look at the other side of the discussion.

Worst idea you could ever implement for the majority of the playerbase.

[Stormur Herra]

There's currently no point to the fights other than earning money so this is an incredibly terrible idea.

Maybe once they put in CW and the fights are part of something larger it makes sense to bring a fancy expensive mech that will probably lose you money each fight.

[Roland]

EPICTHEFAIL, on 29 November 2012 - 10:44 AM, said:

How about someone who values their own time and would rather not spend it doing something they do not enjoy, if at all possible?

Then you pay real money, get MC, and use that to buy stuff in game.

This is kind of the fundamental basis of the business model here. You are allowed to trade money for grind. It's a fairly common model in F2P games.

Do you want to not have to spend any money, and ALSO not have to grind? Sorry, that's not an option.

[Max Liao]

QuantumButler, on 29 November 2012 - 10:56 AM, said:

This explains so, so much.

You're an irredeemable gold, a lost cause, you have perma-gold vision seared into your retinas, time to just tune you out.

I don't know what 'gold' means in this case, but if it inspires this reaction from you I'll accept it.

Godmoney, on 29 November 2012 - 10:58 AM, said:

LOL, I've spent over 60$ and I'm not a founder. You're point again? I don't see it. I've spent well over 500$ on League of Legends. I've spent well over 100$ on GW2. I've spent well over 100$ on Super Monday night Combat.

So that means my opinion matters more on those games even though I have't played LOL in 6 months? HAHA, spoken like a true teenager.

Engrish is your friend. My money doesn't make my opinion matter more, it means I get better shiny pixels in game. It means I can better afford to supersize my 'Mech, give it bling, and better handle the R&R cost - as it should be. If you construe anything else from that, that's on you.

[Stormur Herra]

Joseph Mallan, on 29 November 2012 - 07:10 AM, said:

Your/my Atlas uses more materials to make repairs with(armor, IS, Myomar etc), Our Atlas carry bigger, more expensive weapons. Our Atlas should cost more to repair by volume alone.

By that token, the Atlas should earn more just by dropping because what pilot in their right mind would agree to bring it instead of a Jenner if the contract didn't scale up that much.

[Stormur Herra]

Godmoney, on 29 November 2012 - 10:41 AM, said:

Punish new players even more than they are now.

Smart. Real smart.

I guess if you lose most your matches the game will just force you out via economics. Sounds like a great plan for growth and encouraging new players to join.

Super well thought out OP. I'm sure the dev's will hop all over this brilliance.

Oh, he's even cleverer than you think! Let's say you start out winning 60% of your matches. After a bunch of the frequent losers drop out and you no longer have them to beat up on, suddenly you find yourself losing most of your matches. Then you're losing money too and can just quit! Pretty soon the game is played by like 100 bad-***** who now lose half their games because everyone else is just as uber as they are. Luckily they bought all their stuff when the "training wheels" were still on so they don't need MC or C-Bills ever again. The sheer brilliance of it is blinding.

[EPICTHEFAIL]

Max Liao, on 29 November 2012 - 11:09 AM, said:

I don't know what 'gold' means in this case, but if it inspires this reaction from you I'll accept it.

Engrish is your friend. My money doesn't make my opinion matter more, it means I get better shiny pixels in game. It means I can better afford to supersize my 'Mech, give it bling, and better handle the R&R cost - as it should be. If you construe anything else from that, that's on you.

My eyes are actually burning from the sheer entitlement radiating out of your post. Not to be rude or anything, but the suggestion that you should have an innate advantage simply because you spent more money on the game than the other guy is utterly moronic. PGI have been trying (and failing, admittedly) to avoid that. Guess why? Because it would completely destroy the player base, and believe it or not, 50 people who are fanatical enough to dump hundreds of dollars into a game do not a thriving community make. Just because you need to perhaps compensate for personal issues by pubstomping does not mean everyone else does.

EDIT:

Roland, on 29 November 2012 - 11:09 AM, said:

Then you pay real money, get MC, and use that to buy stuff in game.

This is kind of the fundamental basis of the business model here. You are allowed to trade money for grind. It's a fairly common model in F2P games.

Do you want to not have to spend any money, and ALSO not have to grind? Sorry, that's not an option.

Good job missing my point entirely. What I meant was that someone who does not enjoy the initial experience will simply jump ship and go somewhere the ingame economics aren`t driven by LSD overdose. Someone who starts out is going to play a bit, die to a swarm of streakcats, lagjenners, and the assorted insufferable staples of MWO, see that they earned very little to show for it in C-Bills, then head over to the MC store and see that an Atlas costs as much as a good game during a Steam sale.

Since we lack a means of try-before-you-buy test runs a`la TF2, the average player will not be willing to risk dumping a load of money on an overengineered dumpster. The choice is to either dump a load of money on something that may or may not suck, or grind for a month and have to make that choice anyway, with the same probable outcome, or run off and play an F2P that is actually somewhat of a known quantity.

Edited by EPICTHEFAIL, 29 November 2012 - 11:37 AM.

[De La Fresniere]

In the books, do they get their mechs blown up every 20 minutes?

This is a video game. Just repairing and buying a mere 25% of my ammo, I would barely break even if I didn't have Premium. If I had to replenish ammo fully I'd lose a lot of cash even on a win.

You say "please take off the training wheels", but you're asking to make the game unplayable.

If anything I'd remove repair and rearm bills from the game and just add a penalty for dying (fixed 50,000, or 500-1,000 per ton, or whatever balances best), just enough that you'd still make a bit of cash on a loss.

I haven't been playing lately. I could have brought myself to temporarily bear with the foggy maps and ridiculous weapon imbalances for some C-bills, but it'd take like fifty matches to get a single new mech and fifty more to gear it up, and then I'd start making even less cash because my repair bills would just increase.

You want to make it worse?

I try to be polite, but... sorry, that's just plain stupid.

[QuantumButler]

EPICTHEFAIL, on 29 November 2012 - 11:23 AM, said:

My eyes are actually burning from the sheer entitlement radiating out of your post. Not to be rude or anything, but the suggestion that you should have an innate advantage simply because you spent more money on the game than the other guy is utterly moronic. PGI have been trying (and failing, admittedly) to avoid that. Guess why? Because it would completely destroy the player base, and believe it or not, 50 people who are fanatical enough to dump hundreds of dollars into a game do not a thriving community make. Just because you need to perhaps compensate for personal issues by pubstomping does not mean everyone else does.

For the record, what this guy just said about Max? THAT is what being a gold means.A stuck up elitist who thinks paying money makes him better than everyone else and that the opinions of freeplaying scum don't matter.

Edited by QuantumButler, 29 November 2012 - 11:26 AM.