3036 replies to this topic

[Dihm]

MoonUnitBeta, on 04 March 2013 - 06:58 PM, said:

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

Your math is off, they never said how much actual coolant is injected, only that it provides, at max, a 35% reduction in heat. That does not mean that you only flush 35% of your coolant.

35% of something still weighs something, anyway.

[stjobe]

Riogar Daylighter, on 04 March 2013 - 07:05 PM, said:

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.

And Garth says on page two of this threadnaught that it invalidates the heat mechanic:

Garth Erlam, on 06 December 2012 - 09:39 AM, said:

It's actually because it invalidates heat as an issue in a team vs. team environment.

Funny what difference three months make, isn't it?

Edited by stjobe, 04 March 2013 - 07:09 PM.

[p4r4g0n]

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

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.

QFT

All other things being equal, a mech using CB coolant will always be disadvantaged against a similar mech using the MC coolant just because of the additional module slot. The disadvantage will be even greater if better modules start showing up. The P2W Rubicon has probably been crossed with this.

Edited by p4r4g0n, 04 March 2013 - 07:10 PM.

[Omigir]

Are there hugs being handed out in here? Can I has hug?

[MoonUnitBeta]

Dihm, on 04 March 2013 - 07:08 PM, said:

Your math is off, they never said how much actual coolant is injected, only that it provides, at max, a 35% reduction in heat. That does not mean that you only flush 35% of your coolant.

35% of something still weighs something, anyway.

I think they clarified to say it was 35% of total heat.

[Noobzorz]

Easyvue, on 04 March 2013 - 07:06 PM, said:

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.

Yeah the MC prices are out of control.

Proposition 1: Preorder The Last of Us.

Proposition 2: Buy 2 hero mechs.

And now this?

It's unfortunate, because I thought they were going to start to go the other way. If you charged me $15/mth to play this game and unlock ****, damn right I'd bite.

[Osa Eris Xero]

Dihm, on 04 March 2013 - 07:08 PM, said:

Your math is off, they never said how much actual coolant is injected, only that it provides, at max, a 35% reduction in heat. That does not mean that you only flush 35% of your coolant.

35% of something still weighs something, anyway.

At minimum. Effectiveness increases with heatsinks, and 10 is the minimum number of sinks, which is why it was listed as a baseline.

[Ancient Demise]

RedDragon, on 04 March 2013 - 07:00 PM, said:

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.

By supporting these 'nonsense' builds we deviate further from properly balanced configs. It also changes the game by having it "more" available to some people more than others

[Noobzorz]

urmamasllama, on 04 March 2013 - 07:06 PM, said:

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

Yes.

P2W is axiomatically bad.

[Dihm]

MoonUnitBeta, on 04 March 2013 - 07:10 PM, said:

I think they clarified to say it was 35% of total heat.

It's still extra coolant that you're carrying around, that is weightless.

[wolf74]

MC 35/1 does not equal Cbill 35/2 sorry

[stjobe]

Dihm, on 04 March 2013 - 07:08 PM, said:

Your math is off, they never said how much actual coolant is injected, only that it provides, at max, a 35% reduction in heat.

The 35% number is for 10 heatsinks. The actual number varies with the number of heatsinks (the logical thing would be for it to increase 3.5% per heatsink).

How engine double heatsinks, external double heat sinks, or internal double heatsinks factor into this is anyone's guess at this point.

[Helmer]

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

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.

I know you mean "you" as in IGP or moderators, and not me personally. And I agree with alot of what you said, however, there are also considerations of time (It would take an infinite number of moderator monkeys an infinite amount of time to go through deleting, notating,reporting and contacting members who's posts are deleted) And simply deleting posts without informing individuals of WHY they are deleted smacks more of control and censorship than lumping the numerous relative threads together.

Personally, I would have left the Poll threads alone (Polls are deleted when merged) and only merged like minded threads (as there were few different takes on the subjects at hand)

TL:DR - I do understand and agree with you.



Cheers.

Edited by Helmer, 04 March 2013 - 07:14 PM.

[MoonUnitBeta]

Dihm, on 04 March 2013 - 07:11 PM, said:

It's still extra coolant that you're carrying around, that is weightless.

Oh, I see what you mean.

Edited by MoonUnitBeta, 04 March 2013 - 07:15 PM.

[dachad]

You know tomorrow they are going to pull one of these:

[Kousagi]

stjobe, on 04 March 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

The 35% number is for 10 heatsinks. The actual number varies with the number of heatsinks (the logical thing would be for it to increase 3.5% per heatsink).

How engine double heatsinks, external double heat sinks, or internal double heatsinks factor into this is anyone's guess at this point.

My guess is that they are using the Total max heat as a base line.. So with a Base max heat of 30 on a mech, + 10 from the engine, your mech would have a heat thresh hold of 40 units of heat. So 35% of 40 would be 14 units. So you would vent 14 units for the flush. so if ya up'ed that number, to say doubles, 35% of 50 is 17.5.

Edited by Kousagi, 04 March 2013 - 07:19 PM.

[Bagheera]

Garth Erlam, on 06 December 2012 - 09:39 AM, said:

It's actually because it invalidates heat as an issue in a team vs. team environment.

[Norris J Packard]

Garth Erlam, on 06 December 2012 - 09:39 AM, said:

It's actually because it invalidates heat as an issue in a team vs. team environment.

[Noobzorz]

Helmer, on 04 March 2013 - 07:13 PM, said:

I know you mean "you" as in IGP or moderators, and not me personally. And I agree with alot of what you said, however, there are also considerations of time (It would take an infinite number of moderator monkeys an infinite amount of time to go through deleting, notating,reporting and contacting members who's posts are deleted) And simply deleting posts without informing individuals of WHY they are deleted smacks more of control and censorship than lumping the numerous relative threads together.

Personally, I would have left the Poll threads alone (Polls are deleted when merged) and only merged like minded threads (as there were few different takes on the subjects at hand)

TL:DR - I do understand and agree with you.



Cheers.

I am sorry. "You" was intended generally. When directed at a volunteer forum moderator in a capacity like that, it is unkind and uncalled for. Please consider this my apology.

As a justification for everything else I wrote, the logical and sensible thing to do, in my opinion, would've been to delete nothing and post an official response. I believe whoever did this took the most heavy handed (and hence ham handed) approach possible.

Edited by Noobzorz, 04 March 2013 - 07:30 PM.

[Omigir]