55 replies to this topic

[QuantumButler]

cdlord, on 15 February 2013 - 12:24 PM, said:

Advanced tech should cost more. There should also be a munitions cost as well.... Just IMO.

And it does cost more to purchase, once you've bought 9it though making people pay more to run the stuff they worked hard to earn is stupid and serves no purpose.

Cost is a terrible balancing mechanic, if you only balance things by cost then only the space rich will be able to run the good stuff, and they will use the fancy toys only they can afford to run to stomp the people who cannot afford to run it.

If people can't see how this is toxic to good game design they are a fool.

Edited by QuantumButler, 15 February 2013 - 12:30 PM.

[DocBach]

QuantumButler, on 10 February 2013 - 12:26 AM, said:

Mechwarrior 1 - don't know, didn't play, but IIRC I don't think it has RnR.

Very repair and rearm oriented. In fact, buying damaged 'Mechs for low costs on poor planets, getting them repaired on better off planets and selling them for more on rich planets was a great way to make supplemental income in MechWarrior 1.

[Jonathan Paine]

There were aspects of RnR that I felt added to the game, but the costs of RnR were completely blown out of proportion. A quick and dirty RnR implementation might have been reducing costs to 1/10 of previous costs and adding 10% bonus to c-bill earnings per match. Most people would not notice too much of a difference, and those obnoxious c-bill farming afk bots would lose most of their attraction.

However, I prefer the system as it is right now to the RnR system we had.

[QuantumButler]

Jonathan Paine, on 15 February 2013 - 12:31 PM, said:

There were aspects of RnR that I felt added to the game, but the costs of RnR were completely blown out of proportion. A quick and dirty RnR implementation might have been reducing costs to 1/10 of previous costs and adding 10% bonus to c-bill earnings per match. Most people would not notice too much of a difference, and those obnoxious c-bill farming afk bots would lose most of their attraction.

However, I prefer the system as it is right now to the RnR system we had.

Of course then the RnR costs would be pretty much redundant and it would beg the question of why even bother with them.

[LordRush]

All good in talk and theory,but again...The Devs have specifically stated this will not return.
Which makes me wonder about how an economy base will be implemented in CW. If you dont have an economy, how will it operate?

[Kraven Kor]

I'm hoping we will see some aspect of RnR in Community Warfare, without it "being a tax."

Something where RnR just adjusts how much money you get, but doesn't cause you to lose money. And something where premium accounts have it no better than non-premium.

[ferranis]

RnR was aweful and you should feel bad for even thinking to want it back.

[Beo Vulf]

Op4blushift, on 10 February 2013 - 12:31 AM, said:

Maybe some of the upcoming quirks might make mediums shine a little better, who knows. Even so, 5 out of the 7 mechs I own are mediums (the other 2 or heavies) and while it definitely is quite punishing if you screw up its very rewarding when you do well. But no I don't think reintroducing just repair is the way to go about things.

I still pilot my HBK's and I am never the lowest man on the totem pole, so maybe the other guys can tell us what is so wrong with mediums. I often do more damage than the Heavies and quite often more than the Assaults. It's all about the pilot getting the most out of his mech.

[Oppresor]

Repair definitely, but in the traditional way, see http://mwomercs.com/...n-field-repair/

[Kraven Kor]

ferranis, on 15 February 2013 - 02:32 PM, said:

RnR was aweful and you should feel bad for even thinking to want it back.

That's just, like, your opinion. Man.

I like the "economic metagame" of the old Mechwarrior RPG and would like to see some representation of it here, though again, only for Community Warfare. I would like to see managing the costs of your Merc corp and maximizing contract profit and all that as some aspect of the game. Just not one that "punishes" players for getting blown up or whatever.

[Karl Streiger]

Ok, what do i see when i read this topic. I see people that are afraid of loosing the working BattleMechs because they have to spend all there income for rearm.

However it is a part of BattleTech its a part of Warfare to consider logistics.

every step on the path to make this game idiotic simpleness, turn it from a real BattleTech experience to a generic Arcade Mecha FPS.

First I have donated/sold. Last thing i wouldn't even consider to waste even a second of my time.

I knew it is a hard way to find a balance between die hard BattleTech fans and just FPS Arcade playern - last must be the majority first those that will pay money.

[Vassago Rain]

Karl Streiger, on 16 February 2013 - 11:43 PM, said:

Ok, what do i see when i read this topic. I see people that are afraid of loosing the working BattleMechs because they have to spend all there income for rearm.

However it is a part of BattleTech its a part of Warfare to consider logistics.

every step on the path to make this game idiotic simpleness, turn it from a real BattleTech experience to a generic Arcade Mecha FPS.

First I have donated/sold. Last thing i wouldn't even consider to waste even a second of my time.

I knew it is a hard way to find a balance between die hard BattleTech fans and just FPS Arcade playern - last must be the majority first those that will pay money.

That's nice, but PGI have said 'no.'

[lsp]

They should have never removed it to begin with, and rearms should stay in.Otherwise there is no penalty to taking 3 lrm-15s with artemis, or 6 srm6's.

[QuantumButler]

lsp, on 16 February 2013 - 11:49 PM, said:

They should have never removed it to begin with, and rearms should stay in.Otherwise there is no penalty to taking 3 lrm-15s with artemis, or 6 srm6's.

Haha look at how wrong you are.

Stop having wrong opinions that are wrong, wrongo.

[lsp]

QuantumButler, on 17 February 2013 - 06:57 AM, said:

Haha look at how wrong you are.

Stop having wrong opinions that are wrong, wrongo.

Prove me wrong then, if my opinion is wrong. Where's your argument.

[Kraven Kor]

lsp, on 17 February 2013 - 07:00 AM, said:

Prove me wrong then, if my opinion is wrong. Where's your argument.

Eh, this entire argument is subjective. There is no right or wrong, there is only your opinion, and theirs. Your preference, and theirs.

I like having to worry about money in games like this and would like to see an "economic metagame" to Community Warfare. Not everyone agrees.