176 replies to this topic

[Sprouticus]

Elkarlo, on 17 December 2012 - 05:30 AM, said:

I said overdoing it,.. personally i think Upping the Cbills for Damage and Spotting and
putting the base C-Bill down to 75% would be the best solution...

But i fear we will get only 25% of the Base C-Bill and only twice of the earnings...

And that will call a Shitstorm never heard before.

As it would putt down an Average Won Battle down to 25k Basics and earnings around 80k for the good players.. so they can Pay the Bills a Lost battle well fought will be 12,5k and earnings around 60k.
+ Prem Bonus


But very often you land very fast killed by the better players and then you can't afford playing Heavy's anymore.

This are my earnings when i land on the top places of my Team. Around 50k Bonus for fighting well + Prem on that. And there is the Problems... i get 100k Flat for a win and when i fight like hell i get 50k Bonus...

75k for a win and 50k for a loose and doubled C-Bill earnings would be okey for paying the Bills but reduced down to 25k and 12k and only Double C-Bill earnings or even the Same... then it will Rain.

This.

There was a reason they went to a more more flat payment model, it prevented extremes in C-Bill distribution. Previous to that, premades were farming a huge amount of CB compared to pugs, and pugs were complaining that they could not even field assaults without losing money.

I dont see how this has changed. If the base payment is lowered too much, you will see pugs on the boards complaining about this again.

I too think 75/50k would be a good number.

[Star Colonel Mustard Kerensky]

xRaeder, on 17 December 2012 - 06:13 AM, said:

Not really. If the game had been designed properly in the beginning with server browsers and immediate c-bill reward... I dunno like 90% of the other FPSes out there... it would be simple to add in an AFK kick timer and the player could be replaced by another.

It's a bit pointless to have a server browser when there is only one server

[Goose]

So let me see if I've got this right:

• New mode to suck up all the light 'Mechs (so the rest of use can get back to brawling?)
  
• A new assault 'Mech, which even the keds with premium can't afford, because
  
• nobody gets a payday anymore
  
• the first known attempt to fix NARC (having been dismissed out of hand when introduced)

Meanwhile:

• No Capcha per game to handle the farmers
  
• nothing on convergence
  
• silence on the simultaneous droppers issue
  
• ECM still rules
  
• Go Big or Go Home still applies, so get your premium, or go elsewhere
  
• Teh Netcode still pokes players in the eyes

… But I'm not bitter …

[Bguk]

xRaeder, on 17 December 2012 - 06:13 AM, said:

If the game had been designed properly in the beginning with server browsers and immediate c-bill reward... I dunno like 90% of the other FPSes out there...

Right, this game isn't like the other 90% of fps games out there. It's like WoT in its matchmaking design.

[Chunkylad]

FiveDigits, on 17 December 2012 - 05:02 AM, said:

Quite hard actually. The problem is to reliably identify which players are AFK. Even industry giants like World of Warcraft struggle with this task in the light of fake input generated by macros/scripts/bots.

Yesterday I witnessed a bot on my team that had a script to turn to the left by about 1 degrees every 5 seconds or so, it is getting more complex than just AFK's now.

[AlexEss]

Goose, on 17 December 2012 - 06:37 AM, said:

… But I'm not bitter …

Good... Because being bitter does not lead to anything.

As for the rest of the changes.. perhaps you should wait and actually test them first before you get your knickers in a twist.

[xRaeder]

Astroniomix, on 17 December 2012 - 06:23 AM, said:

It's a bit pointless to have a server browser when there is only one server

No it's not. By server browsers I mean like BF3, COD, etc. Any FPS these days has this as a basic feature EXCEPT WoT and MWO.

Server browsers do a number of things.

1. Remove AFKers while not penalizing the remaining team by allowing others to join.
2. Lessens the impact of Premades as the PUGs can leave and find other servers.
3. Lessens the impact of CTD, blackscreens, etc by allowing that player to disconnect and another to replace him.

Bguk, on 17 December 2012 - 06:42 AM, said:

Right, this game isn't like the other 90% of fps games out there. It's like WoT in its matchmaking design.

But it damn well shouldn't be. Battletech is not compatible with this crappy 8v8, 12v12 console kiddie bullcrap. Battletech is about MASSIVE battles over many kilometers of terrain. This game will never be like that until the community realizes this (which I think a lot more are calling crap on the game design these days).

Edited by xRaeder, 17 December 2012 - 06:51 AM.

[MaddMaxx]

Chunkylad, on 17 December 2012 - 06:45 AM, said:

Yesterday I witnessed a bot on my team that had a script to turn to the left by about 1 degrees every 5 seconds or so, it is getting more complex than just AFK's now.

And so now that Bot will generated SFA for C-Bills as the Bonus monies will be in the "doing things" and not "just being there" thing.

I assume it (the Bot) if on the winning Team did zero damage, had not Spot bonus, no component destruction bonus, no Cap bonus (if one was to be had) etc etc etc...

The best thing to do now, will be to wait for 15 seconds after Launch to see if you have a Bot, leg it and carry on. That way the Bot generates "ZERO" income but can be a point base defender. How the playa's like to waste precious time shooting at those halpless AFK/ CDT Mechs despite getting no funds for it. LOL

[Broceratops]

zverofaust, on 17 December 2012 - 06:16 AM, said:

So this is PGI's idea of redesigning the New Player Experience... to make them go through it twice as fast. Absolutely no thought or acknowledgement of how painful and idiotic an experience it is. It's not going to change much. New Players will still jump ship after a few games of crap.

I agree this is bad design. But it's quick and easy and as we've seen with the matchmaking quick and easy rules the day with PGI.

It better be a huge bonus. Like 50%. So after 20 games of getting curbstomped in a trial, you have 4 million. Because I don't see most people playing trials past 20 games or so.

Edited by Broceratops, 17 December 2012 - 06:58 AM.

[MaddMaxx]

xRaeder, on 17 December 2012 - 06:51 AM, said:

But it damn well shouldn't be. Battletech is not compatible with this crappy 8v8, 12v12 console kiddie bullcrap. Battletech is about MASSIVE battles over many kilometers of terrain. This game will never be like that until the community realizes this (which I think a lot more are calling crap on the game design these days).

Massive kilometer long maps when many Mechs run flat out at 46kph? Hmmm. Doesn't sound all that fun really. BattleTech was in a fictional world where such things could be overcome when the players used abstract thought to overcome what surely was the absurd. We play in real-time and that does not allow that to be the case.

Running to an objective, for 30 minutes, in an Atlas, would be about as FUN as putting broken glass into ones posterior.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 17 December 2012 - 07:02 AM.

[Redshift2k5]

zverofaust, on 17 December 2012 - 06:16 AM, said:

So this is PGI's idea of redesigning the New Player Experience... to make them go through it twice as fast. Absolutely no thought or acknowledgement of how painful and idiotic an experience it is. It's not going to change much. New Players will still jump ship after a few games of crap.

Of course given how they've completely ignored how **** their original game mode was and all they're doing is releasing yet another **** game mode without acknowledging or confronting how broken the original is, this is pretty much PGI in a nutshell.

This is the new user experience version .05

It is not even version 1.0, this is a stopgap step before full implentation of whatever version 1.0 is. Version 1.0 is slated for sometime in the early new year.

Edited by Redshift2k5, 17 December 2012 - 07:03 AM.

[zverofaust]

Redshift2k5, on 17 December 2012 - 07:01 AM, said:

This is the new user experience version .05

It is not even version 1.0, this is a stopgap step before full implentation of whatever version 1.0 is.

I bet you $10 this becomes version 1.0. I guess you haven't noticed, but PGI has this tradition of passing off new features as "interim solutions" and then quietly making them permanent with little to no alteration.

[Bguk]

zverofaust, on 17 December 2012 - 07:03 AM, said:

I bet you $10 this becomes version 1.0. I guess you haven't noticed, but PGI has this tradition of passing off new features as "interim solutions" and then quietly making them permanent with little to no alteration.

Right like the matchmaker was correct? Not going to put my head in the sand and say they haven't done it with other items but it's not 100% one way or the other.

[AlexEss]

Faust... Apart from living up to your screenname i sometimes wonder why you are still here as this game seems to only cause you frustration and anger... And that is not wholly healthy in a long term perspective.

But just to humor me... What features have been introduced as "new features as "interim solutions" and then quietly making them permanent with little to no alteration."

Just being curious..

[Krazyjim]

zverofaust, on 17 December 2012 - 06:16 AM, said:

So this is PGI's idea of redesigning the New Player Experience... to make them go through it twice as fast. Absolutely no thought or acknowledgement of how painful and idiotic an experience it is. It's not going to change much. New Players will still jump ship after a few games of crap.

Of course given how they've completely ignored how **** their original game mode was and all they're doing is releasing yet another **** game mode without acknowledging or confronting how broken the original is, this is pretty much PGI in a nutshell.

You mad bro?

[Asakara]

I hope that they allow the base Stalker 3F to become a 3Fb.

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Stalker

[John Horrigan]

Redshift2k5, on 17 December 2012 - 04:54 AM, said:

[...]

This is an educational thread written to provide one-stop-shopping for upcoming updates. Let's stay on topic and leave complaints about individual items to their respective threads and/or the patch feedback section.

[...]

funny how this line seems to have been largely ignored .. maybe u should have highlighted it or something ...

wait u did ...

anyway great thread (again) should be stickied and locked imho

[xRaeder]

MaddMaxx, on 17 December 2012 - 07:00 AM, said:

Massive kilometer long maps when many Mechs run flat out at 46kph? Hmmm. Doesn't sound all that fun really. BattleTech was in a fictional world where such things could be overcome when the players used abstract thought to overcome what surely was the absurd. We play in real-time and that does not allow that to be the case.

Running to an objective, for 30 minutes, in an Atlas, would be about as FUN as putting broken glass into ones posterior.

Oh so Assaults might actually have to sit and defend instead of zerg rushing? Maybe defend rewards per minute? That doesn't sound like team play at all...

Edited by xRaeder, 17 December 2012 - 07:53 AM.

[storm0545]

woot an objective based game mode where I can snipe all the light mech cappers with my gausscat XD

[dF0X]

I'm gonna have to just poke a little fun at those here using terms like stopgap or placeholder.

For the record, PGI, has never implemented such a feature. All features are meant to be the "real deal" or at least the foundation of the finished feature.

For instance :

Mechlab is not a placeholder
Cw, if it comes at all, will be an iteration of what we have.
New user experience is here to stay.
Collisions only left because it failed.
Netcode is likely here to stay as well, unless they can completely rebuild it.

Anyway, have fun, but there are no secrets behind the curtain, what you get is the best they can deliver.