96 replies to this topic

[Cyberpath]

SamizdatCowboy, on 24 December 2012 - 06:48 PM, said:

This.

People keep getting hung up on 'OP' and 'pay2win.' I'll be the first to admit the hero mechs aren't necessarily superior to anything else, and the balance is very good. Again, it's not about pay2win.

If you're an f2p purist (like myself and some others), then the idea is you release the game, the whole game, for free. You make everything available via grind, but then allow players to pay real money to skip or accelerate the grind.

Maybe you think you can't make money by doing this (and many dinosaur game company executives would agree with you), but the trend of successful f2p games that have done this shows you're wrong.


Look, the reason I was so engaged in MWO was because I actually found the grind kind of fun. The idea that I could earn any mech in the game motivated me to play and grind out cbills. The fact that the grind took awhile made earning that next mech actually feel like an achievement.

At the same time I do value my time, and was willing to pay money for premium time, (standard variant) cbill booster mechs, and XP -> GXP conversion (and obviously mech bays). In other words, I was already a paying customer.

However now that I've realized you *can't* earn every mech in the game just by playing, I've lost some of that motivation to play. I was motivated by the idea that 'I can grind out any mech I'm interested in,' and obviously that's not true.

Also I hate cheap paywall gimmicks. I mean eff off, I'm already a paying customer and your shady strategy to force me to pay just makes me less likely to pay in the future.

Obviously a lot of people aren't like me, and good for you, but I firmly believe PGI didn't have to resort to this tactic. CBill booster mechs would have been profitable either way.



To everyone who is saying "they're just different hardpoint layouts"... um, last time I checked hardpoint layout was a pretty big deal in Mechwarrior.

This.

This fine gentleman said it all!

As someone who plays a lot of F2P games and is an enthusiast of this kind of business model, the first thing I check is whether or not there is gameplay content available to paying users only. It will be a real shame if this game ends up going that way...

I've also read somewhere here in the forums that there were plans to make hero mechs available through some kind of reputation you would earn with different factions, but I haven't seen confirmation anywhere... Does anybody know anything about this?

Edited by Cyberpath, 29 December 2012 - 11:32 AM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Here is the thing. What attracted me to buying the Flame was that it was a Dragon which I have enjoyed playing, that had a hard point configuration that was Energy Based which corrected the one thing I didn't like about the Dragon.

Basically I would never have spent money on a standard Dragon even if it had a C-bill boost. The attraction is the unique hardpoints.

However this isn't pay-to-win by any stretch. Both my Catapratchs are much more powerful and an enjoy them more. Also my flame doesn't outperform any of the standard Dragons I have run. In fact it might actually be a little worse. Lastly it really doesn't offer anything you couldn't get in a 1C variant as it has the exact same number and type of hardpoints. I guess technically you can mount an AC-20 in the Flame's torso but then you can't run an XL engine so all you have is a trade off, not some overpowering beast.

Anyway, the point being is that people buy unique, not run of the mill.

[Wintersdark]

Sorry, but I have to chip in here, and I know I'm going to step on toes.

This is silly, and childish. This game is not a charity. The devs need to make money - not just enough to keep the servers running, but enough to turn a reasonable profit.

They won't do that just selling shiny paint and a cbill bonus.

They are definitely avoiding Pay2Win, which we all agree on, and THAT is a real treat to the game.

However, the OP keeps saying players are forced to pay for mechs. Nobody is forced to do so. There is no substantial gain from it other than something different. My time spent getting Elite with my dragons has shown me that - I like my Flame, and I wouldn't have bought it without unique hardpoints, but it's certainly no better than other variants.

So, yes, if you really Must have every single mechanical, then sure, it's Pay2Play. *shrug*

Welcome to the real world. This purity of free to play you're looking for doesn't exist, and it can't. They simply wouldn't make enough money.

The devs walk a very thin line avoiding Pay To Win, which is far more than most "F2P" devs do. Golden ammo anyone?

Grow up, accept that that silly ideal is just that - a silly and impractical ideal. Because, and this is the cold, hard truth: If you're not paying something, your value to the game is minimal - just ensuring there are warm bodies in the matchmaking pool.

[Irreverence]

Ah, never mind. I think making up mechs is a dumb idea anyway.

Edited by Irreverence, 29 December 2012 - 03:23 PM.

[Cyberpath]

Wintersdark, on 29 December 2012 - 02:52 PM, said:

They won't do that just selling shiny paint and a cbill bonus.

And this is where you're wrong. Many F2P games have proved that. League of Legends and Planetside 2 (the latter already mentioned in this thread) are two prime examples.

And we're not childish just because we want real F2P. That doesn't mean we're not going to pay anything. I just don't want to feel like the devs are twisting my arm into paying. When I pay in games like the ones I mentioned above I pay for the convenience of getting things faster or items to make me look cooler, I don't ever feel like I'm being forced into anything and I gladly contribute. I imagine you're not very familiar with F2P games. There are many shady ways that devs can use to just try and squeeze the maximum amount of money out of us (planned obscelence for example) and it would just be a shame if this game went that way... Besides, they clearly stated that all items in the game would be available through in-game currency but it seems we've been lied too. Sounds like a shady way to handle things as well and we're just in beta...

[PiemasterXL]

Where did you read all items would be available to purchase with in-game currency?

At the moment hero-mechs are either hit or miss. If you just gotta get that cbill boost buy premium time.

[TopDawg]

Wintersdark, on 29 December 2012 - 02:52 PM, said:

Sorry, but I have to chip in here, and I know I'm going to step on toes.

This is silly, and childish. This game is not a charity. The devs need to make money - not just enough to keep the servers running, but enough to turn a reasonable profit.

They won't do that just selling shiny paint and a cbill bonus.

They are definitely avoiding Pay2Win, which we all agree on, and THAT is a real treat to the game.

However, the OP keeps saying players are forced to pay for mechs. Nobody is forced to do so. There is no substantial gain from it other than something different. My time spent getting Elite with my dragons has shown me that - I like my Flame, and I wouldn't have bought it without unique hardpoints, but it's certainly no better than other variants.

So, yes, if you really Must have every single mechanical, then sure, it's Pay2Play. *shrug*

Welcome to the real world. This purity of free to play you're looking for doesn't exist, and it can't. They simply wouldn't make enough money.

The devs walk a very thin line avoiding Pay To Win, which is far more than most "F2P" devs do. Golden ammo anyone?

Grow up, accept that that silly ideal is just that - a silly and impractical ideal. Because, and this is the cold, hard truth: If you're not paying something, your value to the game is minimal - just ensuring there are warm bodies in the matchmaking pool.

I know it's hard to miss, being big and orange and labeled 'Elite Founder' right under my avatar every time I post, but, that seems an awful lot like putting money into the game (and that's assuming I haven't purchased additional MC)?

Shall we keep going? Why, let's!

Where do I once, let alone 'keep saying', that anyone is forced to pay for Mechs? Here, let me help you out with that. (To save everyone a really lengthy post, I'll put this part in a spoiler tag)

Spoiler

From page 1:

First post

TopDawg, on 24 December 2012 - 04:47 AM, said:

PGI, I strongly urge you to consider making it so that Hero Mechs do not have unique hardpoint layouts. I suggest you offer a C-Bill variant that has the same hardpoint layout as the Hero Mechs, but does not have the unique skin or 30% C-Bill bonus (or name I suppose, too).

As someone who has the Ilya, Fang, and Flame (Dragons for life!), I think PGI has already crossed the threshold of 'pay for advantage' with the Ilya and the Flame; perhaps even the Yen-Lo. The Yen-Lo and Fang do not offer any overt advantage over their counterparts (although the Yen-Lo is the only Centurion able to mount an AC/20 in its arm). However the Ilya and Flame not only offer very unique possibilities and flexibility, but very strong possibilities that its other chassis just can't do.

I'm not advocating changing the hardpoints unless they offer a refund of MC, as changing the product after it is purchased is just a bad way to go about it all the way around. But as I said above, I am advocating that the hardpoints not be unique only to Hero Mechs.

In response to 'May I ask which ones?'

TopDawg, on 24 December 2012 - 04:55 AM, said:

I specifically had in mind the triple UAC/5s in the Ilya and the four Large Lasers in the Flame (two in each arm, which could also be [ER]PPCs when the heat fixes come). I'm not sure the AC/20 is a huge advantage on a Dragon, although it does offer the rather large flexibility I mentioned.

I didn't post on page 2.

From page 3:

In response to 'I agree. Hero skins & heroize your mech and having current hero mechs buyable with cbills but not giving the 30% income bonus should be added.'

TopDawg, on 24 December 2012 - 01:35 PM, said:

I'm not advocating that though.

I was simply saying that the Ilya and Flame, while not pay to win, do seem like a 'pay for advantage' due to hardpoint layouts (and again, I own the Ilya, Fang, and Flame); which could be entirely avoided/negated if they simply did not have unique hardpoints.

Although part of the reason for the Muromets is simply due to how strong the UAC/5 currently is (shameless plug for my feedback thread to perhaps better balance it). The Flame is just a really strong variant due to it's hardpoints and locations, but again, isn't necessarily pay to win. Most people seem to think they are fine though, which is great I guess. I'm just concerned that PGI is, and has to, carefully and continually toe the line here.

As for the Dragon arguments (my favorite chassis!), whenever a drop limit is introduced and when ECM is more refined, I think that's when the true meta game will emerge due to things being more closely balanced (and then being better able to balance it from that point).

In response to sgt scout's post

TopDawg, on 24 December 2012 - 02:32 PM, said:

I question whether you actually read the OP (original post). I never said they were OP (overpowered), nor that they were game breaking. I said that I already own three of the four Hero Mechs (the Ilya, Fang, and Flame, which were purchased the day they each came out, and in that order).



What I did say, and to quote myself, "As someone who has the Ilya, Fang, and Flame (Dragons for life!), I think PGI has already crossed the threshold of 'pay for advantage' with the Ilya and the Flame; perhaps even the Yen-Lo. The Yen-Lo and Fang do not offer any overt advantage over their counterparts (although the Yen-Lo is the only Centurion able to mount an AC/20 in its arm). However the Ilya and Flame not only offer very unique possibilities and flexibility, but very strong possibilities that its other chassis just can't do."

I go on to say in another post, from this thread, "Although part of the reason for the Muromets is simply due to how strong the UAC/5 currently is (shameless plug for my feedback thread to perhaps better balance it). The Flame is just a really strong variant due to it's hardpoints and locations, but again, isn't necessarily pay to win. Most people seem to think they are fine though, which is great I guess. I'm just concerned that PGI is, and has to, carefully and continually toe the line here."

I dunno how else to say it lol, but you probably aren't going to take the time to read this anyway.

From page 4:

TopDawg, on 25 December 2012 - 02:00 AM, said:

Yeah I mean I dunno, out of all the Hero Mechs the only one that worries me when I see it on the field is the Ilya, but that's mostly because of how strong UAC/5s are right now.

Perhaps Hero Mechs are supposed to be more flexible, so long as that doesn't translate into advantages on the field over other Mechs (that is to say, that despite having great hardpoints and/or locations, you can't make use of them all at the same time). I guess time will tell since we're due Hero Mechs about once a month, and had three this month.

In response to SpiralRazor's post

TopDawg, on 27 December 2012 - 05:00 PM, said:

When would you like to duel then?

Also I'm going to assume you didn't read my other posts (as then you wouldn't have made yours), so let me help you out. I say, "I was simply saying that the Ilya and Flame, while not pay to win, do seem like a 'pay for advantage' due to hardpoint layouts (and again, I own the Ilya, Fang, and Flame); which could be entirely avoided/negated if they simply did not have unique hardpoints.

Although part of the reason for the Muromets is simply due to how strong the UAC/5 currently is (shameless plug for my feedback thread to perhaps better balance it). The Flame is just a really strong variant due to it's hardpoints and locations, but again, isn't necessarily pay to win. Most people seem to think they are fine though, which is great I guess. I'm just concerned that PGI is, and has to, carefully and continually toe the line here."

Your 4X build also has as many UAC/5s as you can fit. That's weird; or is that interesting? Either way, when do we duel?

And finally, from this page, and in response to MrPenguin's post (which pretty much applies to you, too)

TopDawg, on 28 December 2012 - 06:40 PM, said:

Such as? I have three of the four Hero Mechs. I have a 3x UAC/5 build.

I'm not sure either of you are actually reading these posts without just wanting to excrete nerd rage 'Her0 Mechz r not OP, u r dum', despite my posts I've already quoted ~3 times now.

Assuming PGI gets CW right, I hope to see you guys around.

So please, next time you step from your high horse to your pedestal, you might actually wanna be right, you know?

As per the topic of my original post, as was written, I'll quote myself yet again as I am still unconvinced that Hero Mechs should have unique hardpoints. But I digress, here you are:

"Most people seem to think they are fine though [in reference to Hero Mechs], which is great I guess. I'm just concerned that PGI is, and has to, carefully and continually toe the line here."

[KuruptU4Fun]

Yet the concept you guys seem to be missing about hero mechs is that someone noteworthy (and odds are rich) were piloting them. The Commander in Chief is no different than you or I, but there are entire departments dedicated to his safety that have a lot of people and funds resourced to do just that.

The B-2 Stealth bomber is arguably the best in the world for what it does. But there are only 20 of them in the Air Force at this time.

If someone is noteworthy you're going to give them the best advantage possible. Should that equate to having to pay real money to buy the YLW/ the IL or Fang and Flame, I believe so.

Edited by KuruptU4Fun, 29 December 2012 - 04:29 PM.

[Bluescuba]

This whole argument is BS.

Someones nose is out of joint because not everying can be bought with c-bills??? Get over yourself.

F2P games are barely in their infancy, and there are a number of different models. Being F2P does not mean everying is free; the argument that you can get a flame with c-bills is a slippery slop to "why cant I get all the paints for c-bills"... the upshot of this shortsighted view is that the economy would become fubar in short order with rapid c-bill inflation. Remember this; without people who are willing to pay for what is essentially fluff PGI will have to find other revenue streams.

So long as the hero mechs are not P2W this is a non issue, so please do not qq more and make it an issue.

[Wintersdark]

TopDawg, on 29 December 2012 - 04:17 PM, said:

I know it's hard to miss, being big and orange and labeled 'Elite Founder' right under my avatar every time I post, but, that seems an awful lot like putting money into the game (and that's assuming I haven't purchased additional MC)?

Shall we keep going? Why, let's!

Where do I once, let alone 'keep saying', that anyone is forced to pay for Mechs? Here, let me help you out with that. (To save everyone a really lengthy post, I'll put this part in a spoiler tag)

First, I'm sincerely sorry. For some reason, I thought SamizdatCowboy was the OP here. My mistake, and it was to his posts I was referring with the "keep saying" comment. That comment, however, was the only one directed at anybody specifically.

Also, I didn't specify anyone in particular - including SamizdatCowboy, who I'm aware is also a founder - as having not contributed to the game. Rather, I was saying that if one doesn't pay, one can't expect anything.

Quote

So please, next time you step from your high horse to your pedestal, you might actually wanna be right, you know?

And you may well color me chastised. I was reading on my phone, at work, and not paying close enough attention - not that that's an excuse for unfairly pointing that at you, but there you have it.

Quote

As per the topic of my original post, as was written, I'll quote myself yet again as I am still unconvinced that Hero Mechs should have unique hardpoints. But I digress, here you are:

"Most people seem to think they are fine though [in reference to Hero Mechs], which is great I guess. I'm just concerned that PGI is, and has to, carefully and continually toe the line here."

This I agree with entirely. I feel it's important for the Hero mechs to be unique in play as well as appearance, because otherwise PGI is going to have a hard time selling enough, but they absolutely have to be very careful to avoid degenerating into a pay-to-win scenario wherein players must purchase Hero mechs to be competitive.

That is absolutely not the case now. So long as they keep it that way, it's all good.

To be clear, this is not directed at you, TopDawg:

Where I was going with this was that people not paying are absolutely not entitled to anything. PGI has said they're going to avoid "Pay2Win" scenarios, but to my knowledge has never said that they will ensure that players can buy everything with c-bills - a very different proposition entirely.

Cyberpath, on 29 December 2012 - 03:40 PM, said:

And this is where you're wrong. Many F2P games have proved that. League of Legends and Planetside 2 (the latter already mentioned in this thread) are two prime examples.

League of Legends is a terrible comparison. They can afford to be more finicky in what they sell for a number of reasons. Due to the nature of the game (simpler essentially 2D game, graphics aside), the per-user server load is substantially lower, keeping their costs (again, per user) much lower. Mechwarrior Online, however, is never going to have the userbase LoL does. Not that it's not as good a game, but rather because it's a niche game. It's complex, simulator-esque, and inherently (deliberately, to a degree) unbalanced: not really very e-sportish.

Quote

And we're not childish just because we want real F2P. That doesn't mean we're not going to pay anything. I just don't want to feel like the devs are twisting my arm into paying. When I pay in games like the ones I mentioned above I pay for the convenience of getting things faster or items to make me look cooler, I don't ever feel like I'm being forced into anything and I gladly contribute. I imagine you're not very familiar with F2P games. There are many shady ways that devs can use to just try and squeeze the maximum amount of money out of us (planned obscelence for example) and it would just be a shame if this game went that way... Besides, they clearly stated that all items in the game would be available through in-game currency but it seems we've been lied too. Sounds like a shady way to handle things as well and we're just in beta...

Again, there's no arm twisting. They aren't forcing you to pay for anything. You don't need Hero mechs - they're not particularly better than existing ones. And, as I said above, the devs have certainly not said that everything in the game would be available through ingame currency - or at least, they haven't said so publicly. I wasn't in closed beta, so I'm not privvy to what they said there.

Incidentally, planned obsolescence is part of Battletech. Technology advances, older tech (and mechs, for that matter) are replaced by newer, better ones. It's almost certain to happen come the Clan Invasion, unless the dev's decide to break with TT entirely, and throw the whole "stick to canon" thing out the window.

[SamizdatCowboy]

Wintersdark, on 29 December 2012 - 02:52 PM, said:

Sorry, but I have to chip in here, and I know I'm going to step on toes.

This is silly, and childish. This game is not a charity. The devs need to make money - not just enough to keep the servers running, but enough to turn a reasonable profit.

They won't do that just selling shiny paint and a cbill bonus.

They are definitely avoiding Pay2Win, which we all agree on, and THAT is a real treat to the game.

However, the OP keeps saying players are forced to pay for mechs. Nobody is forced to do so. There is no substantial gain from it other than something different. My time spent getting Elite with my dragons has shown me that - I like my Flame, and I wouldn't have bought it without unique hardpoints, but it's certainly no better than other variants.

So, yes, if you really Must have every single mechanical, then sure, it's Pay2Play. *shrug*

Welcome to the real world. This purity of free to play you're looking for doesn't exist, and it can't. They simply wouldn't make enough money.

The devs walk a very thin line avoiding Pay To Win, which is far more than most "F2P" devs do. Golden ammo anyone?

Grow up, accept that that silly ideal is just that - a silly and impractical ideal. Because, and this is the cold, hard truth: If you're not paying something, your value to the game is minimal - just ensuring there are warm bodies in the matchmaking pool.

Bluescuba, on 29 December 2012 - 06:51 PM, said:

This whole argument is BS.

Someones nose is out of joint because not everying can be bought with c-bills??? Get over yourself.

F2P games are barely in their infancy, and there are a number of different models. Being F2P does not mean everying is free; the argument that you can get a flame with c-bills is a slippery slop to "why cant I get all the paints for c-bills"... the upshot of this shortsighted view is that the economy would become fubar in short order with rapid c-bill inflation. Remember this; without people who are willing to pay for what is essentially fluff PGI will have to find other revenue streams.

So long as the hero mechs are not P2W this is a non issue, so please do not qq more and make it an issue.

Wintersdark, on 29 December 2012 - 07:29 PM, said:

First, I'm sincerely sorry. For some reason, I thought SamizdatCowboy was the OP here. My mistake, and it was to his posts I was referring with the "keep saying" comment. That comment, however, was the only one directed at anybody specifically.

Also, I didn't specify anyone in particular - including SamizdatCowboy, who I'm aware is also a founder - as having not contributed to the game. Rather, I was saying that if one doesn't pay, one can't expect anything.

And you may well color me chastised. I was reading on my phone, at work, and not paying close enough attention - not that that's an excuse for unfairly pointing that at you, but there you have it.


This I agree with entirely. I feel it's important for the Hero mechs to be unique in play as well as appearance, because otherwise PGI is going to have a hard time selling enough, but they absolutely have to be very careful to avoid degenerating into a pay-to-win scenario wherein players must purchase Hero mechs to be competitive.

That is absolutely not the case now. So long as they keep it that way, it's all good.

To be clear, this is not directed at you, TopDawg:

Where I was going with this was that people not paying are absolutely not entitled to anything. PGI has said they're going to avoid "Pay2Win" scenarios, but to my knowledge has never said that they will ensure that players can buy everything with c-bills - a very different proposition entirely.


League of Legends is a terrible comparison. They can afford to be more finicky in what they sell for a number of reasons. Due to the nature of the game (simpler essentially 2D game, graphics aside), the per-user server load is substantially lower, keeping their costs (again, per user) much lower. Mechwarrior Online, however, is never going to have the userbase LoL does. Not that it's not as good a game, but rather because it's a niche game. It's complex, simulator-esque, and inherently (deliberately, to a degree) unbalanced: not really very e-sportish.

Again, there's no arm twisting. They aren't forcing you to pay for anything. You don't need Hero mechs - they're not particularly better than existing ones. And, as I said above, the devs have certainly not said that everything in the game would be available through ingame currency - or at least, they haven't said so publicly. I wasn't in closed beta, so I'm not privvy to what they said there.

Incidentally, planned obsolescence is part of Battletech. Technology advances, older tech (and mechs, for that matter) are replaced by newer, better ones. It's almost certain to happen come the Clan Invasion, unless the dev's decide to break with TT entirely, and throw the whole "stick to canon" thing out the window.

So the gist of these posts is:

1. Nobody is forcing you to buy the hero mechs, and they're not better than other mechs, so it's not Pay2Win it's Pay2Play
2. You can't make money without some Pay2Play
3. As long as it's not Pay2Win it doesn't matter stop your qq

I've already replied to these in previous posts, but since nobody actually reads the thread, let me reply again (I'm starting to understand how TopDawg must feel).

Nobody is forcing you to buy the hero mechs so it's not Pay2Win it's Pay2Play

You're right, the hero mechs are not pay2win. Different hardpoint variations simply accomodate different styles of play. What that means though, is that if a Hero mech comes out with hardpoints/tonnage/etc perfect for my style of play I have to buy it if I want to use it. I can't earn it in game. So the hero mech ploy really only shafts the players who would most benefit from a particular hero mech's configuration. This kind of paywall tactic annoys the hell out of me.


You can't make money without some Pay2Play

This one really gets my goat. You base this on what exactly? Clearly not research. (Google is your friend, you should use it).

First watch this penny arcade vid: http://www.penny-arc...crotransactions

Then read this penny arcade comic: http://www.penny-arc...omic/2011/6/10/

Then ponder the fact that Planetside 2 is raking in the dough and everything playable can be earned in game. I personally am probably going to shell out for the 1 year membership ($120 - same price as Legendary Founders), which gives you 1 year of premium time 50% boosts and $5 worth of in game cash per month.

Guess what, (again you would only know this if you, like, researched before you replied) it turns out boosts, cosmetic items, and allowing certain in game items to be either earned or puchased outright is enough to be profitable. You don't need the pay wall pay2play gimmicks.

So please, stop using the argument 'if they didn't have some pay2play they couldn't make money,' it's baloney.


Also, I mentioned this in a previous post, but it's so important I'm going to quote it again. This is Planetside 2's business model, and it's a biz model I wish all F2P (especially MWO) would follow:

Quote

Planetside 2 has three fundamental types of items.

Power adding items: [These are] items such as grenades, med kits, certain types of implants (like a run speed booster); these items fundamentally alter player power and are acquired exclusively with resources earned in game.

Playstyle items: These are sidegrades for vehicles and weapons, these switch up playstyle, and as much as possible are balanced against one another to not add absolute power. These are available for resources earned in game or Station Cash.

Non-gameplay affecting items: [These are] things like cosmetic skins, resource or XP boosts, etc. These don't have any impact on moment-to-moment gameplay, and therefore player power, and are available for Station Cash.

So as you can see, anything that gives any gameplay impact of any kind is always going to be available through gameplay. You wont be able to unlock a gameplay affecting item exclusively for Station Cash, there will be an in-game acquisition path as well, you're just bypassing (or short-cutting) it by using Station Cash.

Additionally, none of our item sidegrades really give a discrete power advantage, and those items which do (such as grenades, etc.) are available exclusively for in-game resources. So, while you can unlock different playstyle choices with Station Cash, you're not really buying an advantage overall, you're just unlocking different situational breadth.

(emphasis added)
Source

For the most part, MWO does follow this. Power adding items such as weapons or Skill unlocks can only be earned in game. Cosmetic items are only available for MC.

Where they diverge is 'Playstyle items/sidegrades,' which in MWO would be different mechs. MWO chose to make some 'sidegrades' money exclusive, and Planetside 2 chose to make all sidegrades available for money or in-game credits.


As long as it's not Pay2Win it doesn't matter stop your qq

You're right, it may not matter. MWO even with paywall mechs may still be wildly successful. I can only speak for myself, and I personally am turned off by this gimmick. So much so that if the trend continues I personally am likely to end up spending my money/time elsewhere.

And ultimately, that's what the forums are for, so individual players can give individual feedback. And PGI, looking at the sum of the whole, may very well decide that players like me are in the minority and see no need to change their paywall ploy.

[FrostPaw]

I see them being unique variants as more of a bonus than a requirement. If I felt I really must have a specific variant to enjoy it I would either not play that mech chassis or I would just buy that variant....probably the former since I haven't yet bought a hero mech.

The combination and placing of weapons hardpoints doesn't change the fact that tonnage/ammo and heat are still the limiting performance factors.

I think people are looking at it wrong, you're looking at ways to make it less attractive for money, when money is what they want you to spend. I think it's undervalued how fair and balanced the current hero mechs are compared to standard chassis. Right now hero mechs are perfect, just wait until they start putting in stat bonuses and traits for specific mech variants....that's gonna be a can of worms.

[TopDawg]

@Wintersdark: No worries, happens to all of us sometimes. People have been up in my junk a bit in this thread lol, so I probably responded harsher than was needed. These forums are just so full of doom and gloom in general it's pretty disheartening, but the potential for Hero Mechs to get out of hand does worry me, as I really want this game to succeed.

@the thread: I don't consider the Yen-Lo to be an advantage over other Centurion variants, but it does rub me the wrong way that it's the only Centurion to mount an AC/20 (and rubbed a lot of people the wrong way when they removed the AH as well). I do think the Ilya and Flame are a bit on the strong side, though. If UAC/5s are ever balanced, the Ilya likely less so; but it's hard to beat the Flame's hardpoints (and I've done my fair share of Dragon piloting).



I've heard people talk about the possibility of Mechs getting individual stats and bonuses like FrostPaw was referring to, I hope they eventually decide to go a different route.

All well. As always, time tells all.

[Cyberpath]

Wintersdark, on 29 December 2012 - 07:29 PM, said:

League of Legends is a terrible comparison. They can afford to be more finicky in what they sell for a number of reasons. Due to the nature of the game (simpler essentially 2D game, graphics aside), the per-user server load is substantially lower, keeping their costs (again, per user) much lower. Mechwarrior Online, however, is never going to have the userbase LoL does. Not that it's not as good a game, but rather because it's a niche game. It's complex, simulator-esque, and inherently (deliberately, to a degree) unbalanced: not really very e-sportish.

That's a very valid point. And it's good to see you're a reasonable person, just because we may disagree we don't need to go calling each other names.

I really want this game to succeed, believe me. You're absolutely right that this is more of a niche game, but I think that's exacly why a more open f2p approach would benefit it. I might be wrong but that's my belief. And about the server load, one of the examples I mentioned was Planetside 2, which probably has as much server load as MWO and succeeds, although it's not probably a fair comparison because the game fits in a very popular genre. But know what? Tower defense was a niche game too once, now it's very popular. Guess how?

But about a more open f2p approach. Many people who might know some other not so good examples of f2p games and the people who never played any (probably the vast majority) will come to know this game and will be a little suspicious at first because it is f2p. Then they might even play for a while but then they find that a gameplay component of mechs is pay-only, they might think something like "oh so that's how they get you!", and having not played the game for long they might not understand why those mechs might even be balanced with the free mechs (there were some huge dissertations on this thread about why hero mechs aren't really an advantage, you don't expect newbies to know all that do you?).

My point is, even if hero mechs are perfectly balanced to not be an advantage, the PERCEPTION of part of the players might be different, and when it comes to f2p games it is REALLY important that the devs establish a relation of transparency and trust with the players so that the common fears with f2p games are removed.

And the truth is that hero mechs can never be perfectly balanced, nothing in a game ever really is, that ideal is always missed even if for the slightest. So a hero mech can become a minor advantage, and that's what the OP was talking about, it's a thin line...

I never said hero mechs should be removed, of course the devs need money. I just think that most of the people who buy them now would buy them still if the hardpoints were the same and all the mechs had was a different paint-job and a C-bill and exp boost. In short, the devs are putting themselves in a lot of potential trouble, for minimal gain.

[AlexEss]

Also i like to point out that this game is far from released yet and we do not have the full understanding of how all the reward systems will work. Maybe they will actually introduce a way to grind up your own heromech. We do not know but it is still a chance, however small.

Personally i take heromechs (as they are now) over paying a monthly sub any day... And when this game had it's financial model set PS2 was not released and how ever you turn it they did take a decent chance with their system. (although free realms and Clone Wars had worked as good testbeds) but to tie in to the hypothetical "if i found the perfect mech for me and it was a hero mech" i have to ask is it then to much to be asked that you put forth the money for that seeing as you get a ton of fun for free? I do not think it is and that is why i am perfectly fine with this.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

TopDawg, on 24 December 2012 - 04:55 AM, said:

(two in each arm, which could also be [ER]PPCs when the heat fixes come).

WHAT heat fixes? There are heat fixes the devs have talked about?

[TopDawg]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 30 December 2012 - 07:46 AM, said:

WHAT heat fixes? There are heat fixes the devs have talked about?

From the thread Weapon Balancing in Command Chair, particularly the last two posts:

Quote

Next on Deck:

• The PPC/ER-PPC/Large Laser/ER Large Lasers/Large Pulse Lasers will be investigated with possible heat nerfs..buffs.. (whichever you prefer in terms of LOWERING heat generated by these weapons).
  
• Possible damage buffs may be coming up as well for these weapons.

and

Quote

Update on the above:

After review, it seems that Large Lasers are working at a rate that is fairly well balanced. That being said, the Large PULSE Laser and ER-Large Lasers seem to be generating too much heat. I've found some new numbers that work fairly well and we'll be putting this into test after the holidays.

The PPC and ER-PPCs also seem to be generating a bit too much heat and like above, I've found new numbers that seem to work and have those going into test as well.

Because this is a very sensitive subject with you all, I am expecting these changes to appear early to mid January because I want to make sure that numerous Mech builds are thoroughly tested before releasing it to the Live servers.

I'll keep you updated as this progresses."

Some people are speculating that it's only a one heat decrease, but the devs haven't really said one way or another yet what exactly it's going to be. The one heat decrease to the AC/20 helped to make that a lot more competitive, though I'm not sure these weapons will enjoy the same thing if that were to be the change.

Guess we'll find out in a couple weeks though.