108 replies to this topic

[MustrumRidcully]

Bluescuba, on 24 December 2012 - 05:52 AM, said:

Now without R&R I make say on average 125k in c-bills per match... in a 2 month's time what am i going to do with the 100s of millions c-bills i accumulate???? I can easily make 5 million c-bills a night 5 x 60 days = 300 million c-bills. How do I earn so much? Because I can run a min max build as there is no risk/reward anymore, no large repair and rearm costs = xl engines artemis missle systems ff armour/endo structure etc etc. Back in the days of R&R their was a risk to running all the exotic equipment now effectively a 6 er ppc stalker costs the same and a commando running 3 x sl and srm6...

That is just crazy.

It just points out that this game doesn't have any decent money sinks. Repair & Rearm will never be sufficient for this alone.


Good Money Sinks I could see

1) Refits:
Why don't we have to pay for refitting our mechs? This is something actually rarely done in the Battletech lore, and it is time intensive and expensive!
This is a money sink that will never go away, unless you believe players will ever be satisfied with their build.

2) Visual Customization:
have this already with the paint system - unfortunately this will not work well currently, simply because the only pains that cost money are a small subset of paints that don't look particularly good. MCs for unlocking camos and paint and C-Bills for applying them would work probably better for this.

3) Drop Ship Fees:
This is something for Community Warfare, but moving your mechs across the galaxy to take contracts will cost drop ship fees.

4) Training Cost:
Training your skills could not just cost XP, but also C-Bills.

5) Boosts:
With the way Premium works, this could be a pay-to-win thingy, but "boosts", say in form of temporary modules or temporarily increased module power could also work as a money sink. Battletech is not the game for healing potions and buffs, but I could easily imagine that a satellite image of the area or an artillery strike could have C-Bill cost attached to it.

6) Holdings:
Mercenary Groups or possibly even individual mercenaries may want to acquire their own holdings, with their own mech lab, drop ship launch pad, defenses, banners and decorations.

[ARCTICF0X]

The changes to R&R are welcome.

1 week after the patch and I love this game more than when I started in closed beta.

The amount of suiciders has plummeted, thank god.
Being punished for having weapons that take missiles or ballistics has gone.
Being rewarded for playing the game effectively, has increased.
Buying an XL engine is no longer completely stupid.
Base capping for cbills is over, yay.
People that enter battle without R&R to get more cbills, wiped out.

Thank you PGI, just thank you.

[Joseph Mallan]

Bluescuba, on 24 December 2012 - 06:06 AM, said:

I really hate this pug arguement... playing as a pug is a player's choice, same as playing in a premade. If player X chooses to play pug and player Y chooses to play premade should have no bearing on R&R costs. I am sick of this excuse... im sick of people wanting everying right now and not working for it... WTF even in CoD you have to play for a long time to get the top tier weapons, but here everyone wants to be in the best mech from day one.

Playing in a non founders Atlas-D-DC Let my Premium time lapse. Made close to 4 Mil in two days... As a PUG you are playing as a Lone Wolf and there are next to no Lone Wolves in The BattleTech/MechWarrior Universe. Even the famed Bounty Hunter has a Lance of Skilled warriors backing him up. This is most likely the House Warrior Economy and as it should be the warrior gets less money per mission but pays no R&R. HOWEVER, when the actual game hits a house warrior should be limited to Mechs that are available to his house alone. Mercs would have a more diverse yet limited selection and a Lone Wolf would be looking at the leftovers.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 24 December 2012 - 06:18 AM.

[Adridos]

Bluescuba, on 24 December 2012 - 06:06 AM, said:

I really hate this pug arguement... playing as a pug is a player's choice, same as playing in a premade. If player X chooses to play pug and player Y chooses to play premade should have no bearing on R&R costs. I am sick of this excuse... im sick of people wanting everying right now and not working for it... WTF even in CoD you have to play for a long time to get the top tier weapons, but here everyone wants to be in the best mech from day one.

You're looking at the argument from the wrong side pal.

Stomping pugs is teh tool, but the thing I was talking about is the fact it allows premade teams to completely negate R&R. Like really, unless you are a horrid player, you already got millions from pugstomping, level 2 tech on everything and never actually ran out of money for rearm or reapairs, thus noone in a group ever actually played with R&R set on and you are the one that shoulodn't notice a difference...

[WolvesX]

To remove the R&R cost was the best move ever that solved various isseus with one little change.

- Income balance between lights and *****.
- Worry about ammo -> Buff for Balls and Rockets

For the, the game is much more fun now and I earn about 70000 CB more per match (counting loses and wins in).

So.

THANK YOU PGI FOR

BALANCING YOUR STUFF
AND REMOVING R&R

[SaberCut Moffat]

PANZERBUNNY, on 23 December 2012 - 11:30 PM, said:

I don't care about getting damaged anymore.

Rationalize it for the economy etc, and people rally to its defense, but i has simply made people less cautious than before.

This change has altered the pace of how people play instead of simply changing their income.

There is nothing so dangerous as a foe without self-preservation. I can't remember who said it originally, but this is an accepted military axiom throughout the world, and history.

[Adridos]

SaberCut Moffat, on 24 December 2012 - 06:22 AM, said:

There is nothing so dangerous as a foe without self-preservation. I can't remember who said it originally, but this is an accepted military axiom throughout the world, and history.

Agreed, just look at Vikings and Spartans.

[WolvesX]

ARCTICF0X, on 24 December 2012 - 06:09 AM, said:

The changes to R&R are welcome.

1 week after the patch and I love this game more than when I started in closed beta.

The amount of suiciders has plummeted, thank god.
Being punished for having weapons that take missiles or ballistics has gone.
Being rewarded for playing the game effectively, has increased.
Buying an XL engine is no longer completely stupid.
Base capping for cbills is over, yay.
People that enter battle without R&R to get more cbills, wiped out.

Thank you PGI, just thank you.

THIS!

[Ivanzypher]

I'd like to see R&R return. Now there's no downside to cramming your mech full of every expensive upgrade you can find. Also my Atlas now makes by far the most money out of all my mechs. It has more weapons, so does more damage, which means more money. Less armed mechs (ie. lights and meds) will make much less than big mechs now, which will only exacerbate the 5 Atlas per team problem we sometimes have. Especially when the netcode is fixed and most of the light mech "pros" realise they suck and it was only their lagshield letting them pull off the ridiculous stuff they do.

When we had R&R, it worked like WoT(a VERY succesful game I might add) where unless you were really good(or had premium), you would have to use some cheaper mechs to support your big assaults. This works in WoT because it means there is always some people driving the "basic" tanks, PzIVs Shermans T-34s etc, to support their King Tigers and IS-2s. In MWO this would mean mediums were the most played mech, which is how it's supposed to be. Mediums are supposed to be the work horse mechs, but as it is they are by far the least popular category. This would also net PGI some extra cash from people who don't want to step out of their Killatron5000 Uber mech, and so buy premium to make ends meet.

Also, there is no lasting downside to getting blown to pieces now. It used to be that you would try to do as much damage as possible, while minimizing damage recieved. Now, who cares if you lose half your mech, it magically reappears next match anyway. Might aswell charge in SRMs blazing.

[Bluescuba]

Ivanzypher, on 24 December 2012 - 06:47 AM, said:

I'd like to see R&R return. Now there's no downside to cramming your mech full of every expensive upgrade you can find. Also my Atlas now makes by far the most money out of all my mechs. It has more weapons, so does more damage, which means more money. Less armed mechs (ie. lights and meds) will make much less than big mechs now, which will only exacerbate the 5 Atlas per team problem we sometimes have. Especially when the netcode is fixed and most of the light mech "pros" realise they suck and it was only their lagshield letting them pull off the ridiculous stuff they do.

When we had R&R, it worked like WoT(a VERY succesful game I might add) where unless you were really good(or had premium), you would have to use some cheaper mechs to support your big assaults. This works in WoT because it means there is always some people driving the "basic" tanks, PzIVs Shermans T-34s etc, to support their King Tigers and IS-2s. In MWO this would mean mediums were the most played mech, which is how it's supposed to be. Mediums are supposed to be the work horse mechs, but as it is they are by far the least popular category. This would also net PGI some extra cash from people who don't want to step out of their Killatron5000 Uber mech, and so buy premium to make ends meet.

Also, there is no lasting downside to getting blown to pieces now. It used to be that you would try to do as much damage as possible, while minimizing damage recieved. Now, who cares if you lose half your mech, it magically reappears next match anyway. Might aswell charge in SRMs blazing.

THIS

[Adridos]

Ivanzypher, on 24 December 2012 - 06:47 AM, said:

I'd like to see R&R return. Now there's no downside to cramming your mech full of every expensive upgrade you can find.

Mediums are supposed to be the work horse mechs, but as it is they are by far the least popular category.

Might aswell charge in SRMs blazing.

First of all, why should there be a downside to it? The stuff already has many cons that balance it out, no need to add another and make fighting Clans impossible.

Mediums are supposed to be workhorses, yes, but R&R doesn't help them in any way, shape, or form. Light mechs earn more and cost less. Only thing that could make them a viable workhorse is BV, but that has nothing to do with R&R.

... and get minimal income in return. Unless your enemy is really incopetent, you go down in milliseconds, literally doing 200 damage, 500 if they suck. That is 12.500 C-Bills. Your team looses for sure and the chances they finish off the mechs you've fired at is pretty slim. Now, if you play competenly, even 2 scratches on mechs that actually will go down earns you more + your own damage.

[Loonix]

Ivanzypher, on 24 December 2012 - 06:47 AM, said:

When we had R&R, it worked like WoT(a VERY succesful game I might add) where unless you were really good(or had premium), you would have to use some cheaper mechs to support your big assaults. This works in WoT because it means there is always some people driving the "basic" tanks, PzIVs Shermans T-34s etc, to support their King Tigers and IS-2s. In MWO this would mean mediums were the most played mech, which is how it's supposed to be. Mediums are supposed to be the work horse mechs, but as it is they are by far the least popular category. This would also net PGI some extra cash from people who don't want to step out of their Killatron5000 Uber mech, and so buy premium to make ends meet.

WoT may be successful but I wouldn't want to try and emulate its economy. And the difference is that the 'basic tanks' are canon fodder to higher tiers. MW has a more level playing field. An assault doesn't have an advantage over a light or medium, unlike the way a ferdinand owns a pzrIV.

I'm simply not a fan of forcing people to play a Mech they don't like, when there is no advantage in heavier Mechs. Long term something will need to be changed, no doubt. But it will require a deft touch, and I would prefer it be executed with careful consideration of the balance of the combat, rather than a simple desire to make the game more of a grind.

Besides, as it stands with the old economy I always found lights were the real money grinders. And we wouldn't want entire teams of lights. Five Atlas' on a team is a bit silly no doubt, but the only definitive way to limit it would be in the matchmaker, and that might not be the smartest idea. We don't have a huge variety of Mechs at the moment. Not to mention I enjoy the fact that you sometimes get crazy match ups, it adds variety.

Edited by HouseCat, 24 December 2012 - 08:05 AM.

[Ivanzypher]

Adridos, on 24 December 2012 - 06:55 AM, said:

First of all, why should there be a downside to it? ...

The downsides are usually pretty irrelevant though. Have you ever ran a mech without endo-steel? I find the Atlas is the only mech where the slots taken up are a problem. How about XL engines, there is really no reason not to use one on light mechs. Having a bigger repair bill would actually make it a decision between increased performance or greater income.
Also, ECM could be given a big repair bill, making it less of a no brainer.Note that I don't think ECM is overpowered, but there is no reason not to take in on compatible mechs.

R&R easily could make mediums relevant. Just give them reduced repair costs. Done. Also, lights will be alot less popular when the lagshield is removed anyway. As time goes on I'm seeing more and more Assaults/Lights everywhere. And hardly any mediums. Even heavies, only the Ilya and certain OP Cat builds seem popular. I'm getting fed up of every match having 3 Atlases and a pair of Stalkers.

Oh, and I didn't mean that I personally would run at the enemy guns-a-blazing, but an awful lot of other players do seem to. Plus tagging each enemy once(dem assists) and dying would probably make quite a good profit I imagine.

I admit the old R&R wasn't particularly well balanced/thought out, but improving it would have been preferable to just axing it I think. It just seems like unnecessary dumbing down of the game. Why not remove ammo while we are at it? I believe there should be consequences to getting assploded every match, but right now there really isn't(aslong as you blam a few baddies before said assploding) It's also an established part of BattleTech (apparently) so it's a shame to see it go.

HouseCat, on 24 December 2012 - 08:03 AM, said:

WoT may be successful ...

The problem I forsee without any R&R is that eventually the game will end up 8madcats/daishis vs.8madcats. Or 5madcats vs. 8atlases. Depends on how the clans work. It's bad enough in WoT where you can expect 2/3rds of your team to be in heavies, and heavies actually have downsides in WoT. Here, bigger is usually better.(aside from lagshielded lights ofc.) An atlas will always beat a Centurion, or a Cataphract. Assuming both pilots are equally skilled. The firepower/armour difference is simply huge. I don't think I've ever lost a 1v1 in my Atlas(except other Atlases), nor do I see it happening to others often.

I don't think people should be forced to drive meds, losing money in assaults used to suck, but there should atleast be an incentive to drive one. I think greater earning potential would be a good incentive.

[Darwins Dog]

I don't really understand the argument OP. It really comes down to this:

Why should people play cautiously?

(emphasis added to get attention, I'm not yelling)
What good does it serve? Why shouldn't people use the best build they can?

The old system encouraged people to run slow laser boats with less armor, or abuse the 75% welfare ammo. There was incentive to be cautious, but not to bring an optimized build. If a player wanted to run all of the most expensive upgrades and weapons, they would usually need to have premium time in order to make a profit. That wasn't fully P2W, but it was inching the game closer. Paid players and non-paid players could get the same stuff, but paid players could run it no matter what ant not have to farm trials or similar to keep the shiny mech.

Now the system encourages players to bring the best mech possible, and to "take one for the team" when necessary. Sometimes a person needs to spearhead the charge (and probably get shot to pieces) so the rest of the team can advance and engage.

I guess I don't understand why playing cautiously was a good thing for the game.

[Darwins Dog]

Ivanzypher, on 24 December 2012 - 09:11 AM, said:

The downsides are usually pretty irrelevant though. Have you ever ran a mech without endo-steel? I find the Atlas is the only mech where the slots taken up are a problem. How about XL engines, there is really no reason not to use one on light mechs. Having a bigger repair bill would actually make it a decision between increased performance or greater income.
Also, ECM could be given a big repair bill, making it less of a no brainer.Note that I don't think ECM is overpowered, but there is no reason not to take in on compatible mechs.

The choice for XL on lights is survivability. I usually die to losing a side torso, not the center. With a standard engine I could survive longer, do more damage, possibly get kills or more assists. That aside, XL engines were always a no-brainer for lights IMO with or without repairs.

Ivanzypher, on 24 December 2012 - 09:11 AM, said:

R&R easily could make mediums relevant. Just give them reduced repair costs. Done. Also, lights will be alot less popular when the lagshield is removed anyway. As time goes on I'm seeing more and more Assaults/Lights everywhere. And hardly any mediums. Even heavies, only the Ilya and certain OP Cat builds seem popular. I'm getting fed up of every match having 3 Atlases and a pair of Stalkers.

If a mech isn't effective, then reducing repair costs won't help much. Many people would still take the broken/cheesy/effective mech and be more likely to get a win (thus more money and xp) than play a less effective mech just because it's cheaper. The reward and repair system should encourage people to play the best mech they can (which is a medium for a lot of people, I still see plenty of them). You're right about lights I think; they will be less popular as netcode gets better), and staklers are just the shiny new toy right now.

[KuruptU4Fun]

What point I've yet to see made in here is that PGI has removed R&R for a reason. Currently we don't know exactly what that is, but it can be speculated easily. The removal has to do with it being a testbed on how differences are going to be between House MW's; Merc Corps; and Lone wolves.

Standing armies supply their soldiers with both income and resources. So what's currently going on is a test bed for how that will be handled. Houses will repair and re-arm you, your performance earns you income and additional LP above a baseline.

Merc. Corps require large payments made from contracts they bid for to R&R their mechs. So odds are, when we get CW implemented, R&R for MC's will return. The big transition for them is to find the balance between being the lowest bidder and making a profit. But this can at least be countered in one way that I can think of, which is the amount of players in your M Corps playing at one time. The more pilots you can field every day the more profitable they will be. Currently the test bed for this is the "Team play" awards like spotting and Kill assists. Being reliant on one person to carry you thru the game is going to result in a lot of losses.

Haven't really seen how Lone Wolves will prosper in the balance of the economy currently.

Ivanzypher, on 24 December 2012 - 09:11 AM, said:

The problem I forsee without any R&R is that eventually the game will end up 8madcats/daishis vs.8madcats. Or 5madcats vs. 8atlases. Depends on how the clans work. It's bad enough in WoT where you can expect 2/3rds of your team to be in heavies, and heavies actually have downsides in WoT. Here, bigger is usually better.(aside from lagshielded lights ofc.) An atlas will always beat a Centurion, or a Cataphract. Assuming both pilots are equally skilled. The firepower/armour difference is simply huge. I don't think I've ever lost a 1v1 in my Atlas(except other Atlases), nor do I see it happening to others often.

I don't think people should be forced to drive meds, losing money in assaults used to suck, but there should atleast be an incentive to drive one. I think greater earning potential would be a good incentive.

Ok, my first question here is why are you discussing Clan invasion mechs when there's no information about the clans yet other than the date they're most likely to arrive. IS and Clans field mechs differently, lances have more mechs than stars do. So if the Dev's do stick with that canon then IS will be fielding 12 mechs while Clans can only field 10 in any match. 2: there were a lot of lighter mechs in the Clan arsenal than MatCats and Vultures and other huge heavies.

If you actually stand back and observe matches now, the game is very Medium mech heavy. The only other big thing is the Stalker, but it's the new toy on the block.

Darwins Dog, on 24 December 2012 - 09:15 AM, said:

I don't really understand the argument OP. It really comes down to this:

Why should people play cautiously?

(emphasis added to get attention, I'm not yelling)
What good does it serve? Why shouldn't people use the best build they can?

The old system encouraged people to run slow laser boats with less armor, or abuse the 75% welfare ammo. There was incentive to be cautious, but not to bring an optimized build. If a player wanted to run all of the most expensive upgrades and weapons, they would usually need to have premium time in order to make a profit. That wasn't fully P2W, but it was inching the game closer. Paid players and non-paid players could get the same stuff, but paid players could run it no matter what ant not have to farm trials or similar to keep the shiny mech.

Now the system encourages players to bring the best mech possible, and to "take one for the team" when necessary. Sometimes a person needs to spearhead the charge (and probably get shot to pieces) so the rest of the team can advance and engage.

I guess I don't understand why playing cautiously was a good thing for the game.

Teams play cautiously, because teams tend to be co-ordinated and understand that giving someone a thousand cuts is going to hurt more than a bullet to the brain in a face to face confrontation.

[Ivanzypher]

I find on the rare occasion I use a light mech, I most often die from losing a leg. At which point I'm dead regardless of what gear I have. Then again like I said, I normally use Assaults(Awesome being my favourite) so I'll take your word on lights. Take artemis then. Why would you ever not use it on an LRM based mech? Previously it cost a fortune to run. Now however, all it takes is four tons(easily spared on most LRMboats) for a pretty significant upgrade.

The reason I brought up Clans was to illustrate that aslong as there is no downside to using big expensive stuff, people will gravitate towards it. It will only get worse in time as more big goodies are added. Why do you think there are 3/4 times as many Atlases in play now R&R is gone? Used to see 1/2 Assaults a match, now they make up half the team nearly every game.

Point in case, my last match. On my team was me(Awesome 8R) an Atlas, a Stalker, 2 Ilyas, couple ECM lights and a single trial Centurion. This is what a typical match looks like for me nowadays. Sometimes you get a few more lights(premades dropping as 4 lights I'm guessing) but rarely do I see more than a single med. As stated by both BattleTech and the devs(iirc) mediums are the workhorses. Well right now they just aren't. And that's a shame. I love my Centurion, I don't want to see the chassis die out.

Now, KuruptU4fun, if your guess about mercs/houses etc. having different mechanics in regards to R&R is correct, then I would be happy with that. However, whilst a house would indeed pay for repairs etc. they also wouldn't equip 50% of their soldiers with Assault mechs. Aside from Steiner maybe So even that would need some limitation in regards to mech usage.

Now when the netcode is fixed, we can assume most light pilots will leave to use the next big thing. I'm guessing they will end up in Assaults personally(unless some new OP build is discovered) and the situation will get even worse. Now as much as I love Assaults(they are my personal fav.) I don't want to see the game become Assaultwarrior Online. And that is what it's gradually becoming.

[Darwins Dog]

KuruptU4Fun, on 24 December 2012 - 09:36 AM, said:

Teams play cautiously, because teams tend to be co-ordinated and understand that giving someone a thousand cuts is going to hurt more than a bullet to the brain in a face to face confrontation.

But why do I want to hurt them? A bullet to the brain leaves more salvage. I'm not suggesting that everyone go Leeroy Jenkins into battle. A team will be cautious because it's a good strategy, and will help win. The reward system now encourages that. You win and kill everything, you get more money. Why should caution be enforced by the economy through R&R? You don't need the economy to further reinforce a good strategy, it will do that by itself.

Some people will never play with any strategy (remember all the Rambos when R&R was active). Most will start to learn the best way to win/make money/enjoy the game, and that may be to be reckless at times. Mass charging can still work, so why punish it?

[Ursh]

The almost complete cessation of afk and suicide farming more or less nullifies any argument in favor of the old R&R system.

For the first time since I've been playing, we're actually seeing a lot of 8vs8 in the pug matches, rather than 8vs6, 7vs5, etc.

[Snuglninja]

The game needs something in place to balance mech classes on the battlefield. Either some sort of cbill repair cost or in game drop limit. Right now I have no idea what pgi is doing. I am hoping that when cw comes out it will all make sense.