3036 replies to this topic

[Helsbane]

Adding PTW items = full on ******** crazy.

Just go to a monthly fee and be done with it. You can have the money I'm not giving Blizzard anymore after Pandaland Adventures dropped.

[Norris J Packard]

Josef Nader, on 04 March 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Or he means the C-Bill option gives you two inferior flushes per match, whereas the MC one gives you a single big flush.

Okay Josef, let's agree to disagree on this.

However, even if it only allows for one flush (for either payment method), that means I could quite possible just evaporate more than half of my heat on my D-DC. That's quite a lot.

[matux]

Dirk Le Daring, on 04 March 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Seems there is a lot of confusion. May I suggest a very short (10 seconds) vid showing the function of coolant pod. This may dispel a lot of fears. Maybe. Just a thought, and it is understood if this will breach development secrecy.

Nope just going to add fire to the rage.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Viper69, on 04 March 2013 - 05:27 PM, said:

Was anyone really surprised this was going to happen when they changed their stance on 3PV?

I always expect my 5 year old to misbehave.

But I'm still disappointed when it happens.

Yes PGI are like a bunch of 5 year olds.

[Hawks]

If they're that strapped for cash maybe we could do a fun run, organise a telethon or throw a charity rock concert, something like that. I'm pretty sure Bono would be on board.

Anything to avoid ******* coolant flush.

[AntiCitizenJuan]

PGI told us why it's dumb. Why they are dumb has not changed.
PGI is now dumb.

[Budor]

Dirk Le Daring, on 04 March 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Seems there is a lot of confusion. May I suggest a very short (10 seconds) vid showing the function of coolant pod. This may dispel a lot of fears. Maybe. Just a thought, and it is understood if this will breach development secrecy.

The rage is not about the function off the module (yet) but about the difference in the varaints (cbill vs. mc). I dont want a video showing his wallet...

[Bloody Moon]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 March 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

You actually have to multiply this by 8. Because you could theoretically see 8 P2W players vs 8 F2P players.

Make that 12 as we'll eventually get there. >.>

[FromHell2k]

Dirk Le Daring, on 04 March 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Seems there is a lot of confusion. May I suggest a very short (10 seconds) vid showing the function of coolant pod. This may dispel a lot of fears. Maybe. Just a thought, and it is understood if this will breach development secrecy.

It wouldn't. Why? Wouldn't change the fact > 3 MC-Modules = 9 CB-Modules.

[Dirk Le Daring]

BladeSplint, on 04 March 2013 - 05:27 PM, said:

Won't help, coolant pods have to place in the game at all, pay or not.

That was quick. Regardless, they are coming.

[Orzorn]

Josef Nader, on 04 March 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Or he means the C-Bill option gives you two inferior flushes per match, whereas the MC one gives you a single big flush.

That's what I thought as well. The entire post of Paul's is fraught with bad use of plurals and singulars. Notice that, as you read, he refers to the combine effects of the two tiers of C-bill flush as "the c-bill one".

Either way is ridiculous. If you read it like Norris has, then heat is no longer an issue. If you read it like I am, its pay 2 win.

[Gandalfrockman]

No-one will take a game with an MC only Consumable granting a competitive advantage seriously as an e-sport.
I don't even like e-sports... I loath them, I think they are asinine, and even I can see how this screws that pooch.

[Moromillas]

Vividos, on 04 March 2013 - 04:52 PM, said:

first off, the item stats everyone is referring to are examples which are subject to change and not yet in game - so sit down and shut up.

You lose a lot of respect points and get a lot of weird looks when you start off a conversation by tell them to shut up.

Yes, as it is (on paper), it's pay to win. You basically pay for an extra module slot. Yes I will be testing and providing feedback, etc. If they are going the pay to win route, that's just not something I can get behind. If you don't like the fact that I don't like that, too bad.

[LethalMezzle]

Vividos, on 04 March 2013 - 04:52 PM, said:

first off, the item stats everyone is referring to are examples which are subject to change and not yet in game - so sit down and shut up.

This is not a point in your favour.The fact these ideas are subject to change is precisely why people are complaining en masse to encourage PGI to not implement these ideas - the whole point of 'subject to change' is so that testing can be done, feedback can be received, and content adjusted accordingly. Telling us to 'sit down and shut up' because the idea hasn't been implemented yet makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Vividos, on 04 March 2013 - 04:52 PM, said:

second, even using the proposed coolant flush as an example, i would rather have the c-bill version. any halfway intelligent player would. 2 smaller flushes are better than 1 large flush. period. if you dont agree you are wrong. this isnt a question of opinion this is a fact that holds true in any competitive game. in fact, in many mmo's you cant use talent/skill/whatever points to turn big heals or damaging abilities into over time effects. because it's desired. that's what min-maxers want. the number of times one big flush would be preferrable over 2 smaller ones would be such a small number, so incredibly dwarfed by the number of times 2 smaller flushes would be preferrable...it's just something intelligent people wouldnt even need to think about. it's obvious.
so go ahead, implement them as is. i am perfectly fine with that.

Two small flushes being better than one big one? I would agree, but you're ignoring the fact that module slots are limited. Having two small flushes is better, but it also takes up two modules as opposed to one, which is a module I could have spent on something else.

I think the ability to have more modules will more than make up for the downside of having one big flush as opposed to two small ones.

Vividos, on 04 March 2013 - 04:52 PM, said:

third, you guys are talking as if you're the ONLY PERSON IN THE ENTIRE WORLD WHO IS SELFISH AND WANTS TO PLAY THE GAME FOREVER WITHOUT INVESTING A PENNY.
take a look around. you're not the only one. in fact, you are legion. now THINK about that fact. if you and SO MANY OTHER PEOPLE dont want to pay for things, then it's not like EVERYONE you fight against are going to be using them.

fourth, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CONSUMABLE ITEMS PURCHASED WITH MC.
CONSUMABLE.
REAL MONEY PURCHASE.
do you HONESTLY think that even amongst the paying players that we all just having excess money falling out of all our orifaces? even amongst paying players, this will be a SCARCELY purchased item. and you know what? the VAST MAJORITY of the times the MC version will be used will be in things like TEAM matches and COMPETITIVE PLAY where the two teams will have already agreed whether or not to be using them.
yes, there will be a random use of one or two here or there in PUG's but its not like everyone and their mother EXCEPT YOU and except EVERYONE on YOUR team will be using them.

99% of the coolant flushes you will use or will see others use will be c-bill variety.

This is a free-to-play game - it's not selfish to not purchase in-game items, it's the entire point of the business model!

As horribly as you have put this, there's a valid point here. If the MC cost is pretty steep, I don't think people are going to be so eager to throw money out the window like that, and since the majority of players play for free I think that the number of people using these items is going to be relatively rare.

But the relative infrequency of their use does not remotely justify this decision. Even if consumable items turn out to not be pay-to-win, or so prohibitably expensive that it's not worth bothering with, they are still a bad idea - I don't want to start a fight only to have an artillery barrage just drop on my head out of the blue. I don't want to be fighting an enemy only for him to suddenly drop his heat 35% and gain an advantage.

Consumable items will add absolutely nothing to gameplay, might tip MWO off the very narrow precipice it's currently on into pay-to-win territory, and will just throw up balance issues that the game doesn't need. That is why people are angry.

Vividos, on 04 March 2013 - 04:52 PM, said:

now if you want to reply to this thread, kindly use your brain before posting. the forums today are filled with people i want to vomit on in protest of their right to speak their opinion.

Obliged, shame you didn't manage to use some common courtesy and/or basic grammar and formatting before posting.

Edited by LethalMezzle, 04 March 2013 - 05:30 PM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Bloody Moon, on 04 March 2013 - 05:28 PM, said:

Make that 12 as we'll eventually get there. >.>

Very true.

And once again match maker will not be taking consumables into account.

[Royalewithcheese]

verybad, on 04 March 2013 - 05:22 PM, said:

It's almost as useful as NARC, only more expensive... That's way overbalanced!

I'm gonna run this on my A1 narcboat. Y'all better watch out.

[Chrithu]

Just wanted to add some things to keep in mind especially for those swinging the "1 slot vs 2 slot" argument:

• As per the collant flush example the CBill versions can be used independently and only the used up CF must be replaced, while the MC version must be used as a whole. Based on the values of cooling 15% and 20% I'd say both CBill versions are each well enough to get away with one override so you can override twice with the CB version and once with the MC versions. Or just use the medium CF and spare one slot for something else.
  
• Used up consumables need to be restocked after each match. This leaves room for balancing things over price and we all know that PGI loves to overprice the MC stuff.
  
• There are also more regular modules to come that also use up module slots.
  
• 2 and 3 in my view make the scenario of someone using all slots for MC versions of consumables on a regular basis very unlikely.

Edited by Jason Parker, 04 March 2013 - 05:29 PM.

[Viper69]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 04 March 2013 - 05:28 PM, said:

I always expect my 5 year old to misbehave.

But I'm still disappointed when it happens.

Yes PGI are like a bunch of 5 year olds.

If you follow them on Facebook, you are not far from the truth. Their trend of infantile memes lately is only supportive of your assertion.

[JokerVictor]

I.... agree... with Malice. GODD*MN YOU PGI!!

[Shumabot]

INAPPROPRIATE NAME 0001, on 04 March 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Who precisely would join a game BECAUSE it has a p2w feature?

The rich?