3036 replies to this topic

[Noobzorz]

Helmer, on 04 March 2013 - 06:46 PM, said:

From your perspective, I can see where it might seem that way. But the "forum riots" and masses of negative posting and vitriol work against those trying to post intelligently. It just makes it more difficult to sift through the hate, and get to the content.
The volume of posts does help, but the bashing does not. Expressing displeasure is good, that's the kind of post that helps. However, there's a big difference between "I dislike coolant, and here is why" and "OMERGAAAWD PAUL, WHY DO YOU SUCK SO BAD?!?"
The non constructive hateful posts do only 3 things , 1) Make that poster feel better (not a bad thing) 2) Encourage more vitriol 3) Get over looked because they offer nothing constructive to the conversation.



And for the record Paul sucks because he's a Pepsi drinker.


Cheers.

Ok. That's fine. You smashed all of the threads together and made them all essentially unreadable, but I get it, you wanted to limit the board space. But come on. I even read through all the forums and changelogs to make sure I wasn't talking out my butt when I said this, but this is by far the most major change to the game since the open beta began. It makes sense that the forums should be focused on this issue. Moreover, not all of this criticism was constructive. For instance, I would argue that it is axiomatic that pay to win is bad, and a post that politely refers to that fact is as constructive as it is possible to be.

That is to say, if it isn't insulting Paul's mom or his teeth or his pepsi habits or whatever, and it is saying "This is not acceptable," then that is valid constructive criticism. There is an easy way to fix this. Remove it.

Moreover, this wasn't the response about things like the Raven 3L, SSRMs, or the AC/2, all of which have numerous topics devoted to them without constructive suggestions.

I think you can understand why we would be skeptical, and why the response to this so far smacks of censorship and image control.

[MoonUnitBeta]

Moromillas, on 04 March 2013 - 06:51 PM, said:

Paul's post about this is very clear. Yes, what we have is on paper, and yes, it is pay to win. That is what we're talking about here, basically comparing these specific modules (C-Bill vs MC versions) on paper. I'll explain it again.

The C-Bill version totals at 35%.
The MC version totals at 35%.

The C-bill version takes up two module slots.
The MC version takes up one module slot.

You basically pay for the use of an extra module slot, thus pay to win.

15% extra heat flush is hardly pay to win. I dunno what drugs you are on but you should stop them.

I can run away from you, take no damage, and line you up and kill you without the need for a heating flush module. and I'm already down 20% heat. Oh what's that? You used YOUR MC modules? Well that sucks doesn't it.

Edited by MoonUnitBeta, 04 March 2013 - 06:56 PM.

[Tarman]

Helmer, on 04 March 2013 - 06:51 PM, said:

Yeah , but I'm also an ***** and just a forum janitor, so .... you know.... take that into consideration too.



Cheer.

You're also the only green most of us give a crap about, because you actually get out of your cruiser and chat up the locals no matter how violent they're getting. Community policing involves being in and a part of the community as well as the thread-jockeying stuff, so you're doing it right.

[Ancient Demise]

Coolant adds an entire new level to the game. It completely changes heat management and having it as a pay for function can make things very unbalanced. There was a time coolant was 'removed' from mwll which changed it across the board. It was more fun, but everyone was on the same footing. To have heat management rules different for some people that pay MC is absurd.
If they made coolant pods cost cbills, take up one critical spot, and had a chance of exploding when hit, MAYBE I would feel differently. But probably not, because coolant is not around until 3053.

But then, when has the MW technology timeline stopped them before? We already have Angel ECM.......

I was honestly about to buy a few more months of premium time. Now I am not so sure that is a good idea.

Edited by Ancient Demise, 04 March 2013 - 07:00 PM.

[MoonUnitBeta]

Dihm, on 04 March 2013 - 06:49 PM, said:

I dislike coolant flushing because it makes no logical sense.

How is it possible that you can flush an entire mech's coolant at the push of a button without it taking up any weight?

I am greatly disappointed in this decision.

Then I hope you are pleased to hear that 35 != 100

[Psikez]

Tarman, on 04 March 2013 - 06:56 PM, said:

You're also the only green most of us give a crap about, because you actually get out of your cruiser and chat up the locals no matter how violent they're getting. Community policing involves being in and a part of the community as well as the thread-jockeying stuff, so you're doing it right.

Helmer costs 500 MC and flushes 35% of the communities rage everytime PGI does/says something silly

[RedDragon]

Ancient Demise, on 04 March 2013 - 06:57 PM, said:

Coolant adds an entire new level to the game.

No it doesn't. It just gives an advantage to high-heat builds. If you build balanced configs that don't constantly overheat, you won't get much out of it. But if you run nonsense configs like 6 PPC Stalkers, you'll get one free shot before shutting down.

[stjobe]

MoonUnitBeta, on 04 March 2013 - 06:54 PM, said:

Says the guy that needs the coolant flush!

No, I see what your saying, but facts are I CAN take two modules for 35%, and you can take the MC one, and we'll still be on the same line.
The only part you might have an advantage is that you can stuff more modules on, but that's hardly an I WIN button that everyone is suggesting this is.
Because really? 15% more heat flush is hardly the epitome of a winning game. And you only get the 15% bonus once. Let's get real.

You CAN'T take two modules if you're in an un-mastered Stalker, for example. It has only a single module slot. If everything else is equal, and we're both in un-mastered Stalkers, the MC consumable does 15% more cooling than the largest CB consumable. That's pay to win.

And if you CAN take two modules for 35%, I can take one module for 35% and an Air Strike. That's pay to win as well.

And saying it's not a big deal is just trying to deflect the issue. Much lesser percentages than 15% have been fought tooth and nail over in just about every PvP game out there.

[Moromillas]

MoonUnitBeta, on 04 March 2013 - 06:55 PM, said:

15% extra heat flush is hardly pay to win. I dunno what drugs you are on but you should stop them.

I can run away from you, take no damage, and line you up and kill you without the need for a heating flush module. and I'm already down 20% heat. Oh what's that? You used YOUR MC modules? Well that sucks doesn't it.

Yeah, you're really not worth my time are you. I've tried to explain it multiple times now, and each time you just plug your ears and go "la la la-." Now you're just gonna move on to cheap pot shots, well good luck with that. Just **** off.

[Windies]

Bagheera, on 04 March 2013 - 06:52 PM, said:

100% agreed. Unbelievable. Kinda in the same boat. I'm not likely to rage quit, but I am likely to play considerably less and much less likely to spend money. More important than just the coolant flush itself, is the design direction one can infer from its addition. Consumables announcement aside, this takes the game in a direction I was hoping it would avoid.

I'm not really surprised, I knew this design direction would come the moment that funds started to dry up and honestly I think it's been the primary goal for a long time.

I won't be surprised when Community Warfare comes a long and has MC buy in's, or Clan Mechs make an appearance and they are MC only for the first 3 months, with large advantageous. Hero Mechs were the test bed to see how the community would respond to MC only mech content. Then they will probably push out Hero Mechs with larger advantage's, maybe even some that are hidden like how the YLW had certain increases to it's turning radius and speeds.
So really, I was expecting something like this, but it's on of those things where even though you were expecting it you honestly kind of wish you had been wrong.

[MoonUnitBeta]

Moromillas, on 04 March 2013 - 07:01 PM, said:

Yeah, you're really not worth my time are you. I've tried to explain it multiple times now, and each time you just plug your ears and go "la la la-." Now you're just gonna move on to cheap pot shots, well good luck with that. Just **** off.

Yep because 15% heat and not knowing anything else about other consumables must surely mean pay to win.

/clap clap.

lol you're not worth my time either. glad you're gone.

[Noobzorz]

MoonUnitBeta, on 04 March 2013 - 06:29 PM, said:

I understand it clearly. It's that you need me to spell everything out to you that's the sad part. You still haven't proven me wrong. We don't know enough to even possible create an argument that ends in a conclusion. That's the point.

What a daft position to take. This is analogous to an experienced StarCraft player seeing StarCraft patch notes and not knowing exactly what the changes entail; in case you are not a StarCraft player, the notion is laughable.

We have a good idea of how MWO works. We have a good idea of how F2P works. We are being given explicit information. Unless he has told us facts that are untrue, we know more than enough to be very afraid.

If you are reserving judgment, that's fine (as in dubious, but fine), but what you should be expressing is that "there is more they aren't telling us." The information they have given us is more than sufficient to draw a conclusion, and for the vast majority of the player base, that conclusion aught to be that this is extremely bad news.

[Osa Eris Xero]

Helmer, on 04 March 2013 - 06:46 PM, said:

And for the record Paul sucks because he's a Pepsi drinker.

Cheers.

Well there's your problem right there. We get that sorted and we're over half way towards having this whole thing turned around.

[Riogar Daylighter]

Consumables fine by me. Arty and airstrike are kinda cool. Coolant flush?!?! Hells no. No matter what percentage it flushes or how many you can carry it should not be allowed. From the start there was no coolant flush ever. Polls say we don't want it. Posts like this say we don't want it. I could care less if you had to buy consumables with MC only just NO FREAKING COOLANT FLUSH!!!!

Think about it it would take them nothing to make it so it takes care of 100% of your heat because it's already there. Take it out. I'm not going to threaten to quit because lord knows I had 0 time to play and if Russ is reading this look me up. I was going to start serious play time when the CW rolls out. Now I'm rethinking that decision. Not a threat a statement of fact.

[Easyvue]

If they made it a permanent module but had one use per match (with 2 tiers both cbill only) then it wouldn't be a big deal. You can monetize things but not ones that directly affect game play like this, it is not worth the bad press and rage.

If you guys are low on money and need a way to monetize consider dropping your MC prices, I know I will never get more MC unless the price drops or goes on sale, if it was more like .99 or 1.99 a mech I know I would be more open with my wallet versus 30 dollars. One mech vs Arma 3 alpha for the same money? Mech will lose every time.

[Osa Eris Xero]

Tarman, on 04 March 2013 - 06:56 PM, said:

You're also the only green most of us give a crap about, because you actually get out of your cruiser and chat up the locals no matter how violent they're getting. Community policing involves being in and a part of the community as well as the thread-jockeying stuff, so you're doing it right.

This^1000

[urmamasllama]

it seems a lot of people don't understand the problem. no matter what if there is a feature in the game that can be only aquired through money it breaks the balance of the free to play model. it doesn't matter that there is a free equivalent that is similar. if there is ever an item that has a direct iimpact on gameplay that can only be aquired with money it is pay to win

[Clubs]

The MC coolant shouldn't exist.

They should price the CBill Coolants in a fashion that if someone uses them regularly they won't have the CBills for Mechs, thus they spend money/MC on Mech or other item purchases.

Frankly I would rather see Endo, FF and DHS as having an MC purchase option over the Coolant and you know people would do it on the DHS.

[Zervziel]

I still think this is a rather trolly stratagem by PGI. Announce consumable coolant flushes. Buff flamers and add Infernos. If this happens then the coolent flushes are forgiven if and only if they make a satisfying pop when super heated with searing plasma.

[Omigir]

no Poll?