345 replies to this topic

[Mackman]

Hotthedd, on 17 May 2013 - 08:31 PM, said:

Pay to make more money per match maybe, but not pay-to-win. having smaller repair bills does not affect the outcome of a battle.

Except for when your premium time / hero mech allows you to bring a fully tricked out mech every match, unlike the poor saps who have to grind every other match with a crappy "economy" mech just to break even.

[Keifomofutu]

Mackman, on 17 May 2013 - 10:17 PM, said:

Except for when your premium time / hero mech allows you to bring a fully tricked out mech every match, unlike the poor saps who have to grind every other match with a crappy "economy" mech just to break even.

Yup it is pay to win only half the time because the freemium might be able to afford the exact same mech only every other match instead of every match.

Edited by Keifomofutu, 17 May 2013 - 10:32 PM.

[blinkin]

Keifomofutu, on 17 May 2013 - 10:32 PM, said:

Yup it is pay to win only half the time because the freemium might be able to afford the exact same mech only every other match instead of every match.

as opposed to the current system where new players get properly boned 100% of the time.

[Hotthedd]

Mackman, on 17 May 2013 - 10:17 PM, said:

Except for when your premium time / hero mech allows you to bring a fully tricked out mech every match, unlike the poor saps who have to grind every other match with a crappy "economy" mech just to break even.

Honestly, how many times did you LOSE money on the old R&R? I never did. Didn't use Ferro, didn't use Artemis.

[blinkin]

Hotthedd, on 18 May 2013 - 05:38 AM, said:

Honestly, how many times did you LOSE money on the old R&R? I never did. Didn't use Ferro, didn't use Artemis.

i did with my catapult build but it uses an xl315 engine, 6 tons of ammo for the SRM, and endosteel. i did the math once and the raw component cost for the build is more than 11,000,000 cbills. so if i played a crap game win or lose i ran the risk of losing money.

repair bills were somewhere between 75,000 - 150,000 cbills any time i died to a torso hit or took any torso damage. but i liked it that way. in those days i could be almost certain that if i saw another build like mine the pilot was damned good and the fight would be amazing. and those repair costs forced me to become a better pilot.

Edited by blinkin, 18 May 2013 - 10:23 AM.

[Hotthedd]

blinkin, on 18 May 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

i did with my catapult build but it uses an xl315 engine, 6 tons of ammo for the SRM, and endosteel. i did the math once and the raw component cost for the build is more than 11,000,000 cbills. so if i played a crap game win or lose i ran the risk of losing money.

repair bills were somewhere between 75,000 - 150,000 cbills any time i died to a torso hit or took any torso damage. but i liked it that way. in those days i could be almost certain that if i saw another build like mine the pilot was damned good and the fight would be amazing. and those repair costs forced me to become a better pilot.

Great points, but honestly how many times was the net total a loss? And, as you pointed out, as you became a better pilot (because of the R&R incentive), what percentage of your matches caused you to lose C-bills on a match? AFKers used to not have to worry about R&R, now they would.

[Lord of All]

There should be a retreat option if there is going to be R&R.

[Mackman]

Hotthedd, on 18 May 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

Great points, but honestly how many times was the net total a loss? And, as you pointed out, as you became a better pilot (because of the R&R incentive), what percentage of your matches caused you to lose C-bills on a match? AFKers used to not have to worry about R&R, now they would.

Isn't that what proponents of RnR want, though? People want it to "balance" high-end equipment, meaning they want the cost to keep people from running it all the time... meaning they want it to lose people money.

[Keifomofutu]

blinkin, on 17 May 2013 - 10:50 PM, said:

as opposed to the current system where new players get properly boned 100% of the time.

Until they can properly outfit a mech with DHS and Endo steel maybe. But once that happens they can run that mech 100% of the time without worrying about running out of money.

[LordBraxton]

At the end of the day repairs = more grind

I've yet to see a good reason to include it?

Can someone give me one?

Repair\rearm (any economy related factors) CAN NEVER serve as balancing mechanics. Period. That's why it was removed

So what purpose does it serve?

[Hotthedd]

Mackman, on 18 May 2013 - 04:04 PM, said:

Isn't that what proponents of RnR want, though? People want it to "balance" high-end equipment, meaning they want the cost to keep people from running it all the time... meaning they want it to lose people money.

No, meaning it would generally be MORE profitable to run medium mechs over assaults. Either way, you still make SOME C-bills.

LordBraxton, on 18 May 2013 - 04:53 PM, said:

At the end of the day repairs = more grind

I've yet to see a good reason to include it?

Can someone give me one?

Repair\rearm (any economy related factors) CAN NEVER serve as balancing mechanics. Period. That's why it was removed

So what purpose does it serve?

It serves the same purpose as 1st person view. Immersion.

[Tlmitf]

Remember when you played MW 3 or 4 and if you had a weapon system blown off/destroyed, you had to buy it again?

For free players such as myself, using cost as a balancing tool is bad - because that heads you towards pay-to-win, with premium accounts covering the costs of ammo (and then some)

I would like there to be a auto-resupply option for the coolant flush however - even if that does make you loose money at times...

[blinkin]

Keifomofutu, on 18 May 2013 - 04:35 PM, said:

Until they can properly outfit a mech with DHS and Endo steel maybe. But once that happens they can run that mech 100% of the time without worrying about running out of money.

so they just get a really crappy first impression. which is great for games.

[Hotthedd]

Lord of All, on 18 May 2013 - 03:20 PM, said:

There should be a retreat option if there is going to be R&R.

That sounds fair.

[blinkin]

LordBraxton, on 18 May 2013 - 04:53 PM, said:

At the end of the day repairs = more grind

depends. for cheap mechs it means less grind, at least under the old model. rewards would need to be increased to account for the repair cost of standard balanced mechs. so extremely cheap mechs earn more money and expensive mechs earn less.

I've yet to see a good reason to include it?

so new players don't get screwed quite so hard. currently everyone runs the most powerful build they can find all the time. what do new players run? unless they dump money into the game (which i doubt very many players would BEFORE they have decided whether they like it or not) they run trial mechs and if they manage to tough that out then they get a new mech and have to spend very large amounts of money turning into something that isn't the stock build. how many trial mechs stand a chance against any mech from an established player? i know i would be ashamed of myself if i ever lost in a one on one vs. a trial mech.

we need some method to balance the field a bit so new players will occasionally come back. if there is something on the field besides assault mechs and xl engine light mechs then just maybe a new player won't immediately decide the game is unfair and sucks.

but it's all ok because you got yours.

Can someone give me one?

Repair\rearm (any economy related factors) CAN NEVER serve as balancing mechanics. Period. That's why it was removed

any particular reason why it can't? care to back up your declaration with ANY sort of reason?

can you give me one?

in fact in the days of closed beta, even with all of the balance issues, the field stayed fairly diverse. every class of mech was well represented on the field. now the only things you see are assaults, light mechs, and any builds from the other classes that are generally seen as over powered.

So what purpose does it serve?

generally a statement like that is made AFTER you have proven... something. it doesn't work very well if it just follows a series of baseless declarations.

Edited by blinkin, 18 May 2013 - 11:56 PM.

[Accursed Richards]

Hotthedd, on 18 May 2013 - 05:42 PM, said:

It serves the same purpose as 1st person view. Immersion.

Playing a mercenary who wasn't able to get R&R covered by their employer breaks my immersion, as it happens. I would know that gives them no reason not to send me on the most dangerous missions as disposable cannon fodder instead of risking their own troops.

[MustrumRidcully]

Tlmitf, on 18 May 2013 - 06:11 PM, said:

Remember when you played MW 3 or 4 and if you had a weapon system blown off/destroyed, you had to buy it again?

For free players such as myself, using cost as a balancing tool is bad - because that heads you towards pay-to-win, with premium accounts covering the costs of ammo (and then some)

I would like there to be a auto-resupply option for the coolant flush however - even if that does make you loose money at times...

Remember in Mechwarrior 3 and 4, when you could, after a poor game, just reload a previous savegame?

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 19 May 2013 - 01:19 AM.

[Vassago Rain]

No.

Tlmitf, on 18 May 2013 - 06:11 PM, said:

Remember when you played MW 3 or 4 and if you had a weapon system blown off/destroyed, you had to buy it again?

For free players such as myself, using cost as a balancing tool is bad - because that heads you towards pay-to-win, with premium accounts covering the costs of ammo (and then some)

I would like there to be a auto-resupply option for the coolant flush however - even if that does make you loose money at times...

Hotthedd, on 18 May 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

Great points, but honestly how many times was the net total a loss? And, as you pointed out, as you became a better pilot (because of the R&R incentive), what percentage of your matches caused you to lose C-bills on a match? AFKers used to not have to worry about R&R, now they would.

Do you want my huge folder of inflated repair bills for every single type of mech in the game?

[Hotthedd]

Accursed Richards, on 19 May 2013 - 12:13 AM, said:

Playing a mercenary who wasn't able to get R&R covered by their employer breaks my immersion, as it happens. I would know that gives them no reason not to send me on the most dangerous missions as disposable cannon fodder instead of risking their own troops.

It depends on the employer and difficulty of the mission. But the reward system SHOULD be large enough to cover R&R, even if your mech is destroyed.

Vassago Rain, on 19 May 2013 - 02:03 AM, said:

No.




Do you want my huge folder of inflated repair bills for every single type of mech in the game?

You keep a folder of your repair bills from months ago? I do not think you can legitimately deduct C-bill expenses from your taxes, can you?

[DeaconW]

The problem is that MWO has been released as FTP, therefore the intellectual challenge part of the game has to be removed/reduced to satisfy the COD kiddies who will whine about anything that makes them have to calculate or think. R&R adds a delicious complexity to the game that thoughtful gamers appreciate. Questions like: "Should i get an XL to mount more weapons or avoid the risk?" "Should I boat SRM's and count on my skills to win the day or maybe a more balanced build to mitigate the risk?". These don't exist in the current dumbed down model necessitated to appeal to the masses. What I wish we had debated was the right *level* of R&R. You should only have lost C-bills on a match if you were carrying significant bling or a LOT of ammo. There should never have been a "free" 75% loadout. That just complicated the problem and led to people not R&Ring at all.

By removing R&R it removed, what to me is a *critical* part of the game that would actually solve a lot of the boating problems, constant min-maxing, and "bling"(XL engine, FF, ES, etc) prevalence. It would make people have to think before making that Cadillac build. Overall this would make a *better* new user experience as they wouldn't be facing the hordes of people min-maxing with no cost and trashing them in their trial mechs. The trial mechs would actually become more competitive naturally.

But I know none of this will convince the COD FTP kiddies. This is one reason why I will NEVER crowd fund a FTP game again. I wish that PGI had done a subscription model instead. Would make the player base more selective...

Edited by DeaconW, 19 May 2013 - 08:36 AM.