Jump to content

Should Endosteel, Ferrofibrous Etc. Be Unlockable Rather Than Pay Each Time You Switch?


45 replies to this topic

Poll: Should EndoSteel, FerroFibrous etc. be unlockable rather than pay each time you switch? (151 member(s) have cast votes)

Should Endosteel, DHS, Ferro Fib armor be unlockable options on a per mech basis rather than having to buy them every time you switch your configuration

  1. Yes - They cost millions to unlock and I like try new configurations (131 votes [85.06%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 85.06%

  2. Voted No - You should have to pay millions if you take them off then put them back on again, even on the same mech. (23 votes [14.94%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 14.94%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21 verybad

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,229 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 10:27 AM

There is no economy. It's onesided. There's no feedback to player decisions.

If every single player bought Endo it would cost the same, and if no player buys endo it costs the same.

Now maybe if in the future, player decisions both in the battlefield (ok we conquered Xplanet that makes 1.4 heatsinks, now 1.4 heatsinks are 25% cheaper for our faction)

and in the Mechbay(ok, 80% of people are buying 1.4 heatsinks, so now they're 25% more expensive due to supply and demand.) On the other hand maybe only 25% of people are using Endo, so it gets 25% cheaper both to buy and repair, the industry is desperate to sell so they're flooding the market.

Thsi could be dynamically locked to player decisions, Piranha has all our info in their computers, shouldn't be very hard to link it to the market.

Then it's an economy, and then it's also got interesting strategic decisions like trying to get a monopoly on particular things so other factions can't use them AT ALL. (or they're 2 times the cost to buy or repair)(probably be a very hard thing to get a monopoly, but also very worth the effort)

But right now it's NOT an economy, it's a price sheet.

Edited by verybad, 07 December 2012 - 10:29 AM.


#22 GatorG

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 88 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 10:28 AM

I would be happy if I could just own 2 or more of the same chassis, particularly since they won't let me save different load outs. Actually that makes some since for PGI as well as it will lead to me buying more mech bays.

#23 Koreanese

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 518 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 10:28 AM

Ah.. it feels like im being hit by a lightning!
But anyways i got everything i need so i dont even need the c bills anymore haha. So its completely biased opinion

#24 Joseph Mallan

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 35,216 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationMallanhold, Furillo

Posted 07 December 2012 - 10:30 AM

Guess I'm in the minority who likes a bit of realism in my fantasy.

#25 Tolkien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 1,118 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 10:33 AM

View PostJoseph Mallan, on 07 December 2012 - 10:30 AM, said:

Guess I'm in the minority who likes a bit of realism in my fantasy.



Yes you are.. I like my unicorns to have D cup ******* and to wield thor's hammer as they mow down space marines from the planet Zog.

#26 verybad

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,229 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 10:35 AM

View PostJoseph Mallan, on 07 December 2012 - 10:30 AM, said:

Guess I'm in the minority who likes a bit of realism in my fantasy.

Then replaicing your weeapons each time should also cost full amounts. Replacing engines in a Mech that's been cored should cost full amounts.

Repairs for a destroyed mech in most situations should be be at least a few million cbills.

It's not "reality" it's a Cbill draining system so Piranha can influence more people to buy MCs. You can call it what you want, but it has NOTHING to do with reality in an economics sytem.

Edited by verybad, 07 December 2012 - 10:35 AM.


#27 Firion Corodix

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 37 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 10:37 AM

I think it should be an unlock rather than pay each time you change it, currently realism has gone a bit to far there, detracting from the game instead of adding to it.

#28 Joseph Mallan

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 35,216 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationMallanhold, Furillo

Posted 07 December 2012 - 10:41 AM

There are rules in TT for fixing "damaged" or "Destroyed" weapons, engines and other equipment. This should in fact be implemented. And you are right... repairing a Mech should be impossible for a Lone Wolf player. The Tank Crew does not pay for repairs/replacing of their Abrams deeper pockets do.

Sorry Verybad, but I don't feel your pain or agree with the preferred answer.

#29 Aldon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 108 posts
  • LocationShaVegas

Posted 07 December 2012 - 10:46 AM

It should only cost Cbills again if you use the mech. If I change it around 6 times while I'm playing with configurations it should only be paid once.

#30 Joseph Mallan

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 35,216 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationMallanhold, Furillo

Posted 07 December 2012 - 10:51 AM

It shouldn't cost at all while we are deciding on what we want to have done. But only after we finally decide, "Yeah. This!" Should cost be paid. After that if you decide to change it again you have to pay to have it removed/replaced again.

#31 Clay Pigeon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • 1,121 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 10:55 AM

Haha! Checkboxes!

I voted for both!

#32 WardenWolf

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,684 posts
  • LocationTerra

Posted 07 December 2012 - 11:04 AM

I think it should be an expensive buy-in the first time (on a specific mech chassis / variant) - like you are buying the frame / armor itself. After that, though, the cost to change back to normal or to upgrade again should be fairly small... not non-existent, but definitely lower. Maybe 100-200k c-bills?

#33 Tolkien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 1,118 posts

Posted 09 December 2012 - 09:30 AM

View PostWardenWolf, on 07 December 2012 - 11:04 AM, said:

I think it should be an expensive buy-in the first time (on a specific mech chassis / variant) - like you are buying the frame / armor itself. After that, though, the cost to change back to normal or to upgrade again should be fairly small... not non-existent, but definitely lower. Maybe 100-200k c-bills?



Right now switching from ferrofibrous on a catapult back to normal armor costs ~230,000 Cbills. That doesn't bother me too much since it is just two matches. But not getting any money back when selling the upgrade, and having to pay full price AGAIN if I want to switch back is just not nice.

I like playing around with mech designs and this tax on trying new things is a pain.

As previously discussed there is no 'economy' to protect, so PGI should trim off some of these unnecessary Cbill sinks.

#34 Tennex

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 6,619 posts

Posted 09 December 2012 - 09:40 AM

PGI likes to do this ting where you have to pay again for things you've already paid for. Like camo for example.

Really goes against the tinkering and trying new things spirit of mechwarrior games

and is just cheap money. bad business

#35 Tolkien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 1,118 posts

Posted 09 December 2012 - 09:44 AM

View PostTennex, on 09 December 2012 - 09:40 AM, said:

PGI likes to do this ting where you have to pay again for things you've already paid for. Like camo for example.

Really goes against the tinkering and trying new things spirit of mechwarrior games

and is just cheap money. bad business



Are you telling me Camo schemes aren't unlocked on different chassis? Like if I buy a camo spec, then a 2nd for the same mech they will make me pay again to go back to the first?

#36 Warrax the Chaos Warrior

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 925 posts
  • LocationMyrror

Posted 09 December 2012 - 09:48 AM

View PostTolkien, on 09 December 2012 - 09:44 AM, said:



Are you telling me Camo schemes aren't unlocked on different chassis? Like if I buy a camo spec, then a 2nd for the same mech they will make me pay again to go back to the first?

Yes. If you change your paint, what you paid before is gone forever.

There have been a lot of threads griping about the system, here's a good one to bump:

http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1

Edited by Warrax the Chaos Warrior, 09 December 2012 - 09:51 AM.


#37 Tolkien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 1,118 posts

Posted 09 December 2012 - 10:10 AM

View PostWarrax the Chaos Warrior, on 09 December 2012 - 09:48 AM, said:

Yes. If you change your paint, what you paid before is gone forever.

There have been a lot of threads griping about the system, here's a good one to bump:

http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1


This nickel and dime crap is getting on my plums. I've already got two friends to join as founders, but I promise that if this isn't fixed I`m going to start making the opposite recommendation - to stay away.

At this point I don't know if this is malice or just a bad implementation, but I am going to keep an eye on it.

#38 Sybreed

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,199 posts
  • LocationQuebec

Posted 09 December 2012 - 10:16 AM

The current system seems a bit out of place.

I wouldn't mind paying the first 500K C-Bills for Endo-steel. But, if I ever had to remove it, put it back again, I expect to pay 250K top for worker fees, etc.

#39 Darth JarJar

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 263 posts
  • LocationGulf Coast, U.S.A.

Posted 09 December 2012 - 10:19 AM

How about a compromise? Pay the initial amount in the millions to buy and install it initially. Then, pay a reduced amount for 'labor' to swap it out with other components that you have in your inventory. Just like a real-life mechanic shop. Fair?

#40 Shalune

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 647 posts
  • LocationCombination Pizza Hut and Taco Bell

Posted 09 December 2012 - 10:20 AM

View Postverybad, on 07 December 2012 - 10:35 AM, said:

Then replaicing your weeapons each time should also cost full amounts. Replacing engines in a Mech that's been cored should cost full amounts.

Repairs for a destroyed mech in most situations should be be at least a few million cbills.

It's not "reality" it's a Cbill draining system so Piranha can influence more people to buy MCs. You can call it what you want, but it has NOTHING to do with reality in an economics sytem.

I was going to post this point but you've already made it. Creating a simulation does not necessarily mean fun, and if the goal is to make a simulation there's a mountain of other things that should cost you cbills as well.

Additionally I think they might make more money off MC purchases by having these systems unlocked. If your progress in obtaining new parts and upgrades is permanent then it is possible to 'finish' a variant completely. The next step is to get another mech, which quickly leads to an important choice: Do you buy more mech bay slots?

- If yes, you spend money on MC.

- If no, you sell off an existing mech. If you want to play it again you now have to choose between two variants you've gotten attached to. Over time the temptation to buy mech bay slots will grow, or you will at least spend a lot of money on mechs, which itself can be mitigated by MC.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users