345 replies to this topic

[Warge]

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

So what purpose does it serve?

Game depth, no? You are fighting for the money, you get payed for victory, so repairs - vital part of BT universe.

[DeaconW]

Interesting that votes with "Yes" outnumber the "No" votes by a significant margin...but PGI won't bring it back. I don't know why we even do polls...look what it did for 3rd person view...

[blinkin]

DeaconW, on 19 May 2013 - 09:48 PM, said:

Interesting that votes with "Yes" outnumber the "No" votes by a significant margin...but PGI won't bring it back. I don't know why we even do polls...look what it did for 3rd person view...

polls are only part of it. we need to show that people support it (polls), and we also need to make a strong case for why it is a good idea (in most cases this is the more important part).

the problem with just using poll data is EVERYONE gets to vote, and the majority of people are incredibly ignorant (ON BOTH SIDES). also this is a highly divisive topic where many have chosen their side and refuse to think about it anymore, because changing your opinion means at some point you have to admit that you may have been wrong.

[Keifomofutu]

blinkin, on 19 May 2013 - 10:50 PM, said:

polls are only part of it. we need to show that people support it (polls), and we also need to make a strong case for why it is a good idea (in most cases this is the more important part).

the problem with just using poll data is EVERYONE gets to vote, and the majority of people are incredibly ignorant (ON BOTH SIDES). also this is a highly divisive topic where many have chosen their side and refuse to think about it anymore, because changing your opinion means at some point you have to admit that you may have been wrong.

Because we need more hugely divisive things in this game?

[blinkin]

Keifomofutu, on 20 May 2013 - 01:23 AM, said:

Because we need more hugely divisive things in this game?

the ideas themselves aren't inherently divisive. the long drawn out arguments full of hyperbole and powered by a steady stream of insults mixed with general mud slinging are what make anything divisive.

discussions start out with people debating the merits of an idea. naturally people disagree, because people don't think (or not think in some cases) the same way. then someone gets insulted in some manner (direct or implied). then opinions stop being based on any form of logic and are based purely on honor, because "i could never agree with such morons". as offenses increase each side becomes entrenched, until any information or logic that does not directly support your side is not even thought about. now you have decided that your side is right and you spend all of your time supporting anything at all that even resemble agreement and diminishing any argument or person that disagrees. you stop trying to find out what IS right and start looking for ways to MAKE yourself right.

ideas are not divisive, people are.

[Keifomofutu]

blinkin, on 20 May 2013 - 01:40 AM, said:

the ideas themselves aren't inherently divisive. the long drawn out arguments full of hyperbole and powered by a steady stream of insults mixed with general mud slinging are what make anything divisive.

discussions start out with people debating the merits of an idea. naturally people disagree, because people don't think (or not think in some cases) the same way. then someone gets insulted in some manner (direct or implied). then opinions stop being based on any form of logic and are based purely on honor, because "i could never agree with such morons". as offenses increase each side becomes entrenched, until any information or logic that does not directly support your side is not even thought about. now you have decided that your side is right and you spend all of your time supporting anything at all that even resemble agreement and diminishing any argument or person that disagrees. you stop trying to find out what IS right and start looking for ways to MAKE yourself right.

ideas are not divisive, people are.

Sneaky buddy. You avoided saying R&R once during that whole spiel. Maybe because you know that R&R is hugely divisive at its core. The people against R&R have heard all the arguments for it. But none of them are particularly true. Trying to say it brings balance is a huge red herring. It forces the freemiums to use cheap mechs but leaves those who pay stronger. You will never shake that part of it.

More importantly anyone from closed beta actually experienced R&R. It added nothing positive to the game, caused nothing but problems with player behavior, and likely drove away many people. Nobody wants it back but people who either don't know better or people who should have learned the lesson the first time.

[Vassago Rain]

Keifomofutu, on 20 May 2013 - 02:24 AM, said:

Sneaky buddy. You avoided saying R&R once during that whole spiel. Maybe because you know that R&R is hugely divisive at its core. The people against R&R have heard all the arguments for it. But none of them are particularly true. Trying to say it brings balance is a huge red herring. It forces the freemiums to use cheap mechs but leaves those who pay stronger. You will never shake that part of it.

More importantly anyone from closed beta actually experienced R&R. It added nothing positive to the game, caused nothing but problems with player behavior, and likely drove away many people. Nobody wants it back but people who either don't know better or people who should have learned the lesson the first time.

This.

DeaconW, on 19 May 2013 - 08:34 AM, said:

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...

Trialmechs are OUT when we get the UI upgrade. There's 0 CoD kiddies in this game.
CoD kiddies only play CoD.

You're too old to even score a single kill against them in their simple game, by the way.

[DeaconW]

Keifomofutu, on 20 May 2013 - 02:24 AM, said:

"It added nothing positive to the game", "Nobody wants it back"

Hyperbole much lately? I've been here since CB. I believe it was a huge positive and I want it back. Your argument, as stated, is therefore invalid.

[DeaconW]

Vassago Rain, on 20 May 2013 - 02:42 AM, said:

This.

All that means is that you probably shouldn't waste so many LRM's. As I said previously, the cost amounts can be debated but R&R is, and always has been, a core part of BT/MW....until now.

Quote

Trialmechs are OUT when we get the UI upgrade.

So? Still doesn't invalidate my point because if that is true then the initial builds a newbie gets should be *better*.

Quote

There's 0 CoD kiddies in this game.
CoD kiddies only play CoD.

No, they are here. Despite your feigned literalism, you and I both know the type of player we are talking about.

Quote

You're too old to even score a single kill against them in their simple game, by the way.

And the amount I care about that is, O yeah...zero.

[hammerreborn]

R&R does nothing at this stage in the game but restrict new players. The guy sitting on 100 million cbills doesn't give a damn about a 100k loss. It doesn't change anything in the current meta but screwing those we are trying to get into the game.

The reason it was effective before was it was present after everythign was wiped and everyone was starting from scratch trying to make money, and there was no cadet bonus to really get into a decent mech, and trial mechs gave you nothing.

[Hotthedd]

hammerreborn, on 20 May 2013 - 05:01 AM, said:

R&R does nothing at this stage in the game but restrict new players. The guy sitting on 100 million cbills doesn't give a damn about a 100k loss. It doesn't change anything in the current meta but screwing those we are trying to get into the game.

The reason it was effective before was it was present after everythign was wiped and everyone was starting from scratch trying to make money, and there was no cadet bonus to really get into a decent mech, and trial mechs gave you nothing.

100K loss? I never saw anything close to that. Regardless, people wanting R&R back in the game concede that the OLD R&R was flawed. That is not what they are advocating. You even list some of the changes since R&R was removed, like the Cadet bonus. What if there were no R&R during the Cadet bonus phase? New players get extra money, and no repair cost, getting them into a customizable mech that much faster.

[hammerreborn]

Hotthedd, on 20 May 2013 - 05:11 AM, said:

100K loss? I never saw anything close to that. Regardless, people wanting R&R back in the game concede that the OLD R&R was flawed. That is not what they are advocating. You even list some of the changes since R&R was removed, like the Cadet bonus. What if there were no R&R during the Cadet bonus phase? New players get extra money, and no repair cost, getting them into a customizable mech that much faster.

What? Have you looked at the poll options? Every single one but "i like it as it is" is to return it to old R&R and actually make it more detrimental to new players by removing the 75% free rearm or automatically repairing.

Also note that without a complete overhaul of the rewards system, cappers become even more of the ultimate troll that they are already because HAHA 25k win for the entire team but if you lost a single component from a ppc snipe or hurled a bunch of LRMs you will have lost way, way more than that.

Edited by hammerreborn, 20 May 2013 - 05:17 AM.

[Vassago Rain]

DeaconW, on 20 May 2013 - 04:29 AM, said:

Hyperbole much lately? I've been here since CB. I believe it was a huge positive and I want it back. Your argument, as stated, is therefore invalid.

What good did it add?

[Vassago Rain]

DeaconW, on 20 May 2013 - 04:36 AM, said:

All that means is that you probably shouldn't waste so many LRM's. As I said previously, the cost amounts can be debated but R&R is, and always has been, a core part of BT/MW....until now.



So? Still doesn't invalidate my point because if that is true then the initial builds a newbie gets should be *better*.



No, they are here. Despite your feigned literalism, you and I both know the type of player we are talking about.



And the amount I care about that is, O yeah...zero.

RnR has never been part of mechwarrior, or CBT. You can run stupid campaigns, where you also take into account the mental health of your mechwarriors, set budgets, and generally pretend you're playing EVE. It's never been part of the core game.

Core CBT is, you take 4-8 mechs up to a certain value, and I do the same, then we roll a bunch of dice to decide who nukes each other first.

Mechwarrior games? In singleplayer. Where you can savescum if you don't salvage that madcat. Multiplayer mechwarrior has never had silly RnR, because it's not something you'd want in a deathmatch shooter, which is what every single one has been.

[Hotthedd]

hammerreborn, on 20 May 2013 - 05:13 AM, said:

What? Have you looked at the poll options? Every single one but "i like it as it is" is to return it to old R&R and actually make it more detrimental to new players by removing the 75% free rearm or automatically repairing.

Read the actual posts. (I understand 14 pages--not happening) 25% have voted for the old R&R, but the rest (who voted yes) have voted that they want something to return, but tweaked from the old system.

the free 75% re-arm was one of the most broken aspects of the old system, IMO, as it was so exploitable.

You cannot argue that my compromise in the last post would be detrimental to new players, right?

We could work together to solve the issue, or be rigid ideologues whose only answer id "Yes" or "no" without adding anything useful.

[DeaconW]

Vassago Rain, on 20 May 2013 - 05:14 AM, said:

What good did it add?

I believe I and many others have already covered that in previous posts.

[DeaconW]

Vassago Rain, on 20 May 2013 - 05:19 AM, said:

You can run stupid campaigns.....

Not sure if you've missed all the advertising but that is where this is going.

[Shae Starfyre]

It will be part of the hardcore mode.

[DeaconW]

Vassago Rain, on 20 May 2013 - 05:19 AM, said:

RnR has never been part of mechwarrior, or CBT.

Um...MW4? That one game invalidates your argument.

[hammerreborn]

Hotthedd, on 20 May 2013 - 05:20 AM, said:

Read the actual posts. (I understand 14 pages--not happening) 25% have voted for the old R&R, but the rest (who voted yes) have voted that they want something to return, but tweaked from the old system.

the free 75% re-arm was one of the most broken aspects of the old system, IMO, as it was so exploitable.

You cannot argue that my compromise in the last post would be detrimental to new players, right?

We could work together to solve the issue, or be rigid ideologues whose only answer id "Yes" or "no" without adding anything useful.

There is nothing that wouldn't be detrimental to new players while having no effect on current players without redoing a complete cbill/mc wipe, and that will NEVER happen. As long as veteran players will have been able to amass giant swaths of loot and money, they will forever hold a leg up on new players that will be constantly killed trying to buy their first or second mech.

Even if you removed it for the cadet bonus, that helps you for your first mech only. Who hasn't bought a ****** mech on the first go around? Oh, sorry you didn't read the forums timmy and learned that dragons are the worst heavies ever, shoulda picked that poptarting highlander! Have fun playing 100 losing matches getting cored instantly to afford a Jenner.

Oh, sure, I lose 100k a match because I just buy consumables for the hell of it and spend it at the start of the match, timmy, and one day you too will be able to purchase 6 million c-bill modules and UAVs, but right now you can't CAUSE IM RICH *****!