105 replies to this topic

[Wired]

Rifter, on 17 December 2012 - 09:20 PM, said:

Except they had no hard data, they actually said they would post the data and then never did.

Im not saying pugstomps were common dont get me wrong all im saying is when you say you have data and will post it then never do it usualy because you dont really have the data.

Or maybe they realized that no one would care and still keep complaining. Either way, with the 8 man pug stomps gone people are still complaining about them and even going as far as claiming that every loss is against an 2 4 man teams which managed to sync drop.

Rifter, on 17 December 2012 - 09:25 PM, said:

I thought of this as well, just run a jenner run around tag everyone with a ML burst then who cares what you do you are racking up x 8 assist bonus, assuming you guys win and kill them all that is.

I was thinking the same thing, lol

[Rifter]

Wired, on 17 December 2012 - 09:26 PM, said:

Or maybe they realized that no one would care and still keep complaining. Either way, with the 8 man pug stomps gone people are still complaining about them and even going as far as claiming that every loss is against an 2 4 man teams which managed to sync drop.

sync dropping is a issue, as with pugstomping i dont thinks its as large of a issue as some people might think but it is definatly a issue that needs to be addressed.

[DirePhoenix]

Congratulations PGI, you've gone from attempting to not make this game about being an arms race to see who can stack the most weapons and armor into totally being about being able to stack the most weapons and armor.

You've completely removed any type of consequences for stacking as much of the most expensive tech available as you can cram onto a chassis. Having expensive gear meant that you needed to be skilled enough to use that gear without getting yourself obliterated and driving yourself broke. Not so skilled? Stick with the cheaper basic stuff until you can manage to get through matches intact. You want to take out the shiny stuff without the skill to back it up? You should pay the price. There's a reason a kid's first car shouldn't be the latest model from Bugatti.

And this has bigger implications in the long run too. What does this mean for Community Warfare? We're not being restricted as to what weapons/chassis are available, only the prices of those items are affected by planetary control. Our weapons and chassis don't get destroyed, we would have had to repair them. Community Warfare means that the prices would have affected the repair costs too. No more.

Planetary control will only affect the prices to acquire items. We don't lose them, they don't get destroyed, and now they don't even get damaged. And let's face it, without repair and reload costs, there's not going to be much else to spend C-Bills on so it's not like we won't be able to afford anything we want without much effort. And what will we buy with C-Bills once we already have the weapons and 'mechs we want? Nothing. So what point will there be for Community Warfare and planetary control?

Edited by DirePhoenix, 17 December 2012 - 09:53 PM.

[Wired]

DirePhoenix, on 17 December 2012 - 09:34 PM, said:

Congratulations PGI, you've gone from attempting to not make this game about being an arms race to see who can stack the most weapons and armor into totally being about being able to stack the most weapons and armor.

Yea, I pretty much agree with this. Between this and the fact that they won't talk about CW makes me think that they're reconsidering doing CW all together.

[Ascendent]

My concern is for Assault mode simply becoming TDM. No rewards for base capping or base defending. No difference in win loss tie payout. So why have the bases? Don't get me wrong, the base zerg rushes do get old, but this system is likely to remove the extra dimension of having a base from gameplay tactical consideration (not considering community warfare consequences since that seems far off). I'm sure if that happens rebalancing will be done. Just wanted to voice my concern. Lets see how it plays out first.

[Wired]

Ascendent, on 17 December 2012 - 09:57 PM, said:

My concern is for Assault mode simply becoming TDM. No rewards for base capping or base defending. No difference in win loss tie payout. So why have the bases? Don't get me wrong, the base zerg rushes do get old, but this system is likely to remove the extra dimension of having a base from gameplay tactical consideration (not considering community warfare consequences since that seems far off). I'm sure if that happens rebalancing will be done. Just wanted to voice my concern. Lets see how it plays out first.

Imagine dropship mutator. before repairs were out, you would have to consider what mechs you wanted to throw out there....

Now? Atlas atlas atlas atlas.
OR AC/20/gauss cat.

Edited by Wired, 17 December 2012 - 10:04 PM.

[JohnnyC]

I predict that in the future, PGI will think twice about telling us about changes the day before the patch because some of you can't help but freak out about it.

We keep saying we want more communication from the devs... and when they deliver a whole bunch of you just lose your noodles over it before we even have the chance to try it out for ourselves... just be a little patient and actually try it out before you start freaking out over it.

Personally... I've always felt that there shouldn't be rearm or repair costs. You should get your payout at the end of a round and that's that. Then you take your mech right back out and go mix it up in another match. Buy the mechs you like, equip them with whatever you find most enjoyable for you and your play style and do it some more...

This is supposed to be FUN, not SERIOUS BUSINESS... I think some of you may have lost sight of that.

So be patient... don't freak out... and have FUN.

And if you can't have fun without knowing that the player you just killed got a huge repair bill... try to be less malevolent. You already bested them on the battlefield, why do you want to kick them while they are down?

[Rifter]

Wired, on 17 December 2012 - 10:00 PM, said:

Imagine dropship mutator. before repairs were out, you would have to consider what mechs you wanted to throw out there....

Now? Atlas atlas atlas atlas.
OR AC/20/gauss cat.

Yeah except like CW they have stopped all talk about this game mode as well, makes me wonder if its going to get in game either.

[Secundus]

Wired, on 17 December 2012 - 10:00 PM, said:

Imagine dropship mutator. before repairs were out, you would have to consider what mechs you wanted to throw out there....

Now? Atlas atlas atlas atlas.
OR AC/20/gauss cat.

I'm hoping drop ship mode has tonnage limitations to curb that. I think the economy changes are needed.

[Fooooo]

Ascendent, on 17 December 2012 - 09:57 PM, said:

My concern is for Assault mode simply becoming TDM. No rewards for base capping or base defending. No difference in win loss tie payout. So why have the bases? Don't get me wrong, the base zerg rushes do get old, but this system is likely to remove the extra dimension of having a base from gameplay tactical consideration (not considering community warfare consequences since that seems far off). I'm sure if that happens rebalancing will be done. Just wanted to voice my concern. Lets see how it plays out first.

The bases would have to be left in no matter what you do to the assault gamemode, im guessing because of one of the reasons they were added in the first place.

To stop a mech either running or hiding to wait out the match timer / griefing etc.....and to provide another way to win but thats the secondary reason imo.

[Wired]

Secundus, on 17 December 2012 - 10:05 PM, said:

I'm hoping drop ship mode has tonnage limitations to curb that. I think the economy changes are needed.

Since now you have nothing to spend your money on once you get the mech you want, there is no economy.

[Rifter]

Secundus, on 17 December 2012 - 10:05 PM, said:

I'm hoping drop ship mode has tonnage limitations to curb that. I think the economy changes are needed.

Removing the economy from the game hardly counts as economy changes. Once you have the mech you want(and with 8 million free cbills that wont take long) there is no economy.

EDIT, beat by wired in this response by 60 seconds lol

Edited by Rifter, 17 December 2012 - 10:10 PM.

[steelblueskies]

DirePhoenix, on 17 December 2012 - 09:34 PM, said:

Congratulations PGI, you've gone from attempting to not make this game about being an arms race to see who can stack the most weapons and armor into totally being about being able to stack the most weapons and armor.

You've completely removed any type of consequences for stacking as much of the most expensive tech available as you can cram onto a chassis. Having expensive gear meant that you needed to be skilled enough to use that gear without getting yourself obliterated and driving yourself broke. Not so skilled? Stick with the cheaper basic stuff until you can manage to get through matches intact. You want to take out the shiny stuff without the skill to back it up? You should pay the price. There's a reason a kid's first car shouldn't be the latest model from Bugatti.

And this has bigger implications in the long run too. What does this mean for Community Warfare? We're not being restricted as to what weapons/chassis are available, only the prices of those items are affected by planetary control. Our weapons and chassis don't get destroyed, we would have had to repair them. Community Warfare means that the prices would have affected the repair costs too. No more.

Planetary control will only affect the prices to acquire items. We don't lose them, they don't get destroyed, and now they don't even get damaged. And let's face it, without repair and reload costs, there's not going to be much else to spend C-Bills on so it's not like we won't be able to afford anything we want without much effort. And what will we buy with C-Bills once we already have the weapons and 'mechs we want? Nothing. So what point will there be for Community Warfare and planetary control?

imagine dropping into a set of matches with frontloaded resource pools pulled from your gear, and mech stock. each match repair and rearm are 100% cost. stuff gets trashed for the duration. you survive the microcampaign through salvage to offset damage and rearm and if you run costly or perform poorly attrition will eat you. special sauce to the winner of the campaign. so buy what ye want for the default fluff. when it's srs bsns time it can all come in to play its' proper role.

mebbe you gotta pay bank to shlep your stuff to the location for the little planet control campaign i just mentioned, and so does the other team or teams. more stuff, more cost.

meanwhile in f2p farmland people can practice and derp it up for the lulz with impunity, and even casuals have a nice happy fluffy place.

i dunno. i could dream up worse scenarios.

[Warrax the Chaos Warrior]

My prediction is that everyone that hopped in to a streak raven as a FOTM build will buy a stalker (which everyone will be able to afford with the c-bill boost thing). There will be far more missiles on the field at the same time there is less ECM. Dust off you AMSs, try to remember where all the cover was

[Wired]

JohnnyC, on 17 December 2012 - 10:04 PM, said:

snipped for space

My issue is that they've removed part of the game which made sense with CW. Now that it isn't there, CW doesn't make much sense. That is my problem. I'm not "crying" over every change, I'm being concerned over a major change to the game. It almost feels like we've lost progress and now we're back to last august. We can always see how it goes, but it feels like we've been here before.

Warrax the Chaos Warrior, on 17 December 2012 - 10:11 PM, said:

My prediction is that everyone that hopped in to a streak raven as a FOTM build will buy a stalker (which everyone will be able to afford with the c-bill boost thing). There will be far more missiles on the field at the same time there is less ECM. Dust off you AMSs, try to remember where all the cover was

Why do you think ECM will be dropped?

[DirePhoenix]

Wired, on 17 December 2012 - 09:40 PM, said:

Yea, I pretty much agree with this. Between this and the fact that they won't talk about CW makes me think that they're reconsidering doing CW all together.

Right. No repair costs, no significant meaning for Planetary Control. Might as well remove it. No significant value for C-Bills since everyone just stacks it up with no consistent sinks and everyone can afford to get anything they want, might as well remove those too, and just let everyone put whatever they want on their 'mechs since they would be able to afford it anyway.

No planetary control, no community warfare, no C-Bills, what do we have? A MechWarrior game that is pretty indistinguishable from every other multiplayer MechWarrior experience, without the single player campaign. Thanks for the not-so-unique game. Might as well toss in some third-person action on there too, just to ice that cake.

[o0Marduk0o]

Ritter Cuda, on 17 December 2012 - 07:23 PM, said:

This is not about what’s good or bad just what I bet the changes to the game will be. Your welcome to ad your own.

• Aggressive or reckless game play IE player not caring if they blow their mech just running into the fight no thought of team play or tactics

If you don't care, then you won't earn money. Staying alive longer while doing something useful -> more money.

[Warrax the Chaos Warrior]

Wired, on 17 December 2012 - 10:13 PM, said:

Why do you think ECM will be dropped?

There are a lot of people driving ECM mechs because it was the newest thing. Now there will be a new newest thing, happens this way every single patch.

[Wired]

Warrax the Chaos Warrior, on 17 December 2012 - 10:15 PM, said:

There are a lot of people driving ECM mechs because it was the newest thing. Now there will be a new newest thing, happens this way every single patch.

I disagree with you. A more accurate view would be that people mostly drop in Atlas D-DCs with ECM and all the latest gadgets they can stick on there.

[Adeptus Odren]

DirePhoenix, on 17 December 2012 - 09:34 PM, said:

Congratulations PGI, you've gone from attempting to not make this game about being an arms race to see who can stack the most weapons and armor into totally being about being able to stack the most weapons and armor.

You've completely removed any type of consequences for stacking as much of the most expensive tech available as you can cram onto a chassis. Having expensive gear meant that you needed to be skilled enough to use that gear without getting yourself obliterated and driving yourself broke. Not so skilled? Stick with the cheaper basic stuff until you can manage to get through matches intact. You want to take out the shiny stuff without the skill to back it up? You should pay the price. There's a reason a kid's first car shouldn't be the latest model from Bugatti.

And this has bigger implications in the long run too. What does this mean for Community Warfare? We're not being restricted as to what weapons/chassis are available, only the prices of those items are affected by planetary control. Our weapons and chassis don't get destroyed, we would have had to repair them. Community Warfare means that the prices would have affected the repair costs too. No more.

Planetary control will only affect the prices to acquire items. We don't lose them, they don't get destroyed, and now they don't even get damaged. And let's face it, without repair and reload costs, there's not going to be much else to spend C-Bills on so it's not like we won't be able to afford anything we want without much effort. And what will we buy with C-Bills once we already have the weapons and 'mechs we want? Nothing. So what point will there be for Community Warfare and planetary control?

Troopers don't pay for the ammo they use, or for the vehicles they drive. Only mercs do. So repair and rearm costs should not be a consideration for Community Warfare, unless it's a merc unit.