Ask The Devs 30 - Answers!
#441
Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:59 AM
The stats I am most concerned about are my own personal stats.
Again I must say that it would be nice if personal stats were not recorded, so stat whores like myself wouldn't have to worry about them.
#442
Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:19 PM
Edited by darkangel32989, 06 February 2013 - 10:20 PM.
#443
Posted 06 February 2013 - 10:39 PM
darkangel32989, on 06 February 2013 - 10:19 PM, said:
You should have been refunded the purchase price of everything. This includes the MC cost and C-Bill cost for purchases of Colors and Camo specs. They also made the per-mech (one use) camo spec price much lower than the original price. The only thing I can see being an issue is the cost of the colors. The upside to those is that they're unlocked globally (for all 'Mechs) and can be used as many times as you want. The camo spec is available as a per-variant cost (once) or a Chassis unlock (costs quite a bit) but the unlock allows you to do whatever you want with that Chassis type and that Camo spec. Overall the price should be less.
EDIT: 2013 Febuary Developer Update
InnerSphereNews, on 04 February 2013 - 02:30 PM, said:
On February 5th, players will have the ability to permanently unlock patterns for MC, and permanently unlock colours for C-Bills or MC! This planned update offers more value and additional options for players, especially those collectors out there. We will be processing a refund of all MC purchased on Colours and Patterns since Camo Spec came online in November! Enjoy! All player BattleMechs will also be reset to the default pattern and basic green colour.
As I've stated the only cost is the initial MC cost for colors which is more but is globally unlocked. In the long run it is cheaper. The Camo spec for one variant of a chassis should be significantly cheaper.
Even some of the colors and Dazzle (per mech type) are half off right now.
Edited by CompproB237, 06 February 2013 - 11:07 PM.
#444
Posted 07 February 2013 - 03:58 AM
I would like to ask if there are any plans to change how LRMS behave regarding to 180m minimum distance. Atm new people which dont know that LRMS dont do any damage even when locked under 180m, which might be solved with info in mechlab. But wouldnt be more interesting if they would just fly that 1st 180 straight up something like TOW fired from M2 Bradley or anykind of other missilies for long range?
#445
Posted 07 February 2013 - 04:35 AM
got something to ask to devs . Can you check and make something at least for the founder hunchback , so we will be able to play it / them ... It's nice to have founder mech in the hangar , but it will be really more funny if we can play them with decent fit .
o/
#446
Posted 09 February 2013 - 04:13 PM
I remember being excited about mechwarrior making a return in gaming history but now I see it wasn't meant to be. Sorry devs but I dont personally appreciate your work. I haven't played the game for quite a long time I might play a match once a month now and even that was a frustrating experience and it's not because my computer sucks I have a nearly top of the line pc, and yet this game looks like utter garbage too me and it is. Sorry but you compare this to any other game like gears of war, or hell even chrome hounds even though it didn't last long had a lot more to offer they proved it was possible you could have made yours the better one but playing this just makes me wish chrome hounds 2 was made and I have been a fan of the mech series since I was in 6th grade I'm 25 now.
Sorry I had to be one of the posters that make you feel so super sad even though you are still getting a pay check. Deal with it the reason so many people are turning away is because you guys have failed to impress and realise the games potential. You guys are not cut out for the job, you either lack the numbers to make this game the best one out, or are not talented enough to do the job right and get it done on time. I know people who could have done this was a medium sized group and for free in half the time it's taking you guys, look how mechwarrior 4 mercenaries turned out with free help? Yeah **** you guys can suck my balls you act all outraged over our comments when you guys do a pathetic job.
Well now gonna uninstall this and not come back I'm am sick of this game even if I haven't played it a fraction compared to most on here. I'll stick with the earlier much more satisfying games.
#447
Posted 09 February 2013 - 04:20 PM
When I saw the trailer with the what looked like a loki or something vs an atlas in a city and had actual voice actors thats what I invisioned, I invisioned an outstanding single player mechwarrior game like the others with a massive boost in graphics and effects, only to get this piece of crap beta with few content and the few things I paid for was a huge waste of my money and cant see it doing the game any good in the long term or short term. Was basically here have some money go buy some tacos with it and do a lousy job.
This isn't what I was hoping for this is a disgrace and hope you guys go out of business and some real talent takes your place and dazzles us. Bye.
#448
Posted 09 February 2013 - 05:22 PM
It is painfully obvious that you don't bother to read the forums just post inflamatory remarks. What is really sad is that alot of other people do the same damn thing. They just go shooting off their mouths with at least tring to get informed. Although most of the people I encounter doing that are on TS or in the game chat. They at least admit to not useing the forums at all. So what is you sad excuse?
Read this:
http://mwomercs.com/...-blog-0-reboot/
You will find that the Dev wanted a single player game but couldn't find backers for one. They did find backers for a muitiplayer one. It is the trend of most but, not all of, the games made today. Also on a side note you don't know you mechs very well, which is funny since the paper doll on the HUD tells you the name of the mech. The trailer you saw has a reseen Warhammer killing a Jenner and getting killed by an Atlas. A Loki is a Clan mech and you wouldn't see one in 3015 the time period that the trailer was set.
As for some of the things you want in the game read this:
http://mwomercs.com/...evs-31-answers/
Desructable objects are comming but they want to fix the net code frist.
Anyway if you are truly gone, goodbye. As the game gets better over the next year, I wont be surprised to see you on the battlefield. As I slag off your armor, pop the containment on your engine, and walk over the pile of wreckage you used to call your mech.
#449
Posted 10 February 2013 - 04:28 AM
At least i m pretty happy to see people like you living , but the point is can i have your stuff pls ? send me in private your info . I will ask to the dev to move the creditz to my main account .
You will be missed by everyone ! i already saw people making one minute of silence in game because you was leaving . Maybe Times magazine will make you an interview and keep trolling , cry more , feed me , feed the monster .
I already saw people write the game is bad etc etc and playing at crappy game as wot . This game is a good product , and i thx the dev and all people who helped to get this possible . Including myself and all those fan who buy items to get finally "another" fps genre . A game where , even you are skilled , you will need time and practice to understand all the way . I m sometimes totaly disappointed by the choice , but i keep to trust in this product . Remember what s happend with the lrm .
So people is always the same , whatever you do or not , they will always have some of them who will not agree , etc etc etc .
And for the end , i just want say to dev to try to stick as much as possible near the battletech background .
Edited by klownnection, 11 February 2013 - 02:53 AM.
#450
Posted 10 February 2013 - 04:28 PM
#451
Posted 12 February 2013 - 12:48 PM
#452
Posted 16 February 2013 - 04:26 AM
One problem is people forget it is still a beta game and we the players along side the Devs are helpping to mold it into something mega fantastic!
To those people that complain, if you dont like it LEAVE and take your ATTITUDE with you!
Once again, many thanks for your hard work you guys are putting into this game, without you we will still be driving cars.
Edited by Spooky01, 16 February 2013 - 04:27 AM.
#453
Posted 16 February 2013 - 09:34 PM
so to my actual questions...
Can you give us a peek on what the upcoming weapons are? we know roughly when certain mechs will show up...i was wondering if you can kind of tell us if any of the aerospace fighters may possibly implemented...Artillery strike and how it may look like..even concept art would be cool!
I also wonder about the vaibility of the Command console and if we can have the option ( if not killed by head shots) to jump out and run around til we can find a) an ally to help out..even if all we can do is minimize heat and give better orders b ) neurohack ...( i prefer we don't do this) c) pretend we are infantry and see if we can get our hands on some toys to throw at them big mechs..... d) find hidden ammo depots and reload our allies!..or something..or set that thing a blazeif an enemy come snear...
Edited by Lord Psycho, 16 February 2013 - 09:36 PM.
#454
Posted 17 February 2013 - 02:29 AM
Lord Psycho, on 16 February 2013 - 09:34 PM, said:
so to my actual questions...
Can you give us a peek on what the upcoming weapons are? we know roughly when certain mechs will show up...i was wondering if you can kind of tell us if any of the aerospace fighters may possibly implemented...Artillery strike and how it may look like..even concept art would be cool!
I also wonder about the vaibility of the Command console and if we can have the option ( if not killed by head shots) to jump out and run around til we can find a) an ally to help out..even if all we can do is minimize heat and give better orders b ) neurohack ...( i prefer we don't do this) c) pretend we are infantry and see if we can get our hands on some toys to throw at them big mechs..... d) find hidden ammo depots and reload our allies!..or something..or set that thing a blazeif an enemy come snear...
Umm you do know you posted your question on an answers thread right? They may not be read and I highly doubt they will be answered. You need to post your questions when the new Ask the Devs thread is started about a week and a half from now. Ask the Devs #32 the questions just closed so you'll have to wait for #33.
Edited by Mao of DC, 17 February 2013 - 02:30 AM.
#455
Posted 17 February 2013 - 05:52 PM
IMHO I agree with there being a thank you guys thread and also, With the fact that there isn't even community warfare setup for the MWO beta right now why declare the year timeline as being in 3050? If it is clan invasion time and there are not house on house or merc on merc battles and clans are even further out what is the point of saying what year it is? If it is going to take so long to get to CW we could have started during a lull in the wars back even before the clans were known and then do time leaps when community warfare became avaliable. Also as a clanner I think it's a little biased that the entire game seems so IS based, I understand the necessity of it as the timeline of BTstarts with the great houses, then the Merc Corps, then the clan's breaking away, but that was a long time ago. And now we have the clans supposedly invading. So why is everything lance based? I guess my ultimate question is this... Will we end up having CLAN based gaming anytime soon? where instead of a "Join Lance" it will be "Join Star" and instead of 4 8 or 12 mans it will be 5 10 or 15 mans? As a clannar I'm sure I'll catch some flak for having an oppinion and I truly appreciate all the hard work you guys have done. But could the clans get a tad bit more loving pretty please?
Respectfully
Star Captain Loremaster Galen "Vulk" Torc
Unit Garm
#457
Posted 20 February 2013 - 07:58 PM
[color=#959595]A: We plan to wipe stats when achievements come online."[/color]
I really hope you're not referring to pilot skills... Don't know if i could go through that atlas grind again.
10 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 10 guests, 0 anonymous users