Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
ClockworkOrange

Tomes P2W Model

Recommended Posts

P2W elements are convenient to those who are willing to pay.  Gamers have been conditioned to convenience, they think these p2w elements help their play experience but in the bigger picture they erode the integrity of a game and the game eventually dies.  There are of course exceptions, CF won't be one of them.

These same people that want games to be watered down and made easy for them are the same people that often wonder why there are no good lasting games that can keep their attention for years.


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, ClockworkOrange said:

Money shouldn't create power. 

#socialism

 

My logic process looks like this: Feeder accounts give horizontal progression just like VIP.  I am ok with how VIP works, and so I am ok with feeder accounts.  That said, a lot does hinge on that first statement being true, and I think limiting tomes to the skill page they're built on, along with diminishing returns and the fact that high reward skills are deep into trees, comes close to guaranteeing that.  If ACE implements a per branch cap on skill development matching full time skill training I think that would be great.

 

Anyhow, the reason I think feeder accounts are so limited on vertical progression- in order to create tomes the feeder account must fall behind the main's progression through trees.  For example, Main and Feeder are both training Race basics.  Main gets to 60% (or whatever the graduating % is) and moves on to Sylvan and Monster because they've got VIP.  Feeder has some choices- make Tomes for Basics, make Tomes for a main spec, or make Tomes for Man.  Pumping the main with Tomes of Man is a crippled version of VIP and is also horizontal progression; I don't care.

Tomes of Race Basics give a 60% (and more) diminishing return on skills that have a relatively small impact compared to the skills in Sylvan and Monster.  Once Race Basics is filled on the Main, that entire branch for the feeder account is now limited to playing fill for Sylvan while the main has moved on to Fae due to the 1:1 time return on training.  Once Sylvan is filled, the feeder account is now worthless for vertical progression.  Pumping the main's progression in a high tree tapers out much more quickly than playing fill for lower trees.

I'm not arguing against caps, I just think they're way less of a big deal than people are making them out to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Kith said:

Hilariously easy stop on feeder accounts:  You can only produce Tomes in a tree you have trained to 100%

With the above, a second diminishing returns could be applied across the board.  If you're trained to 10% on a skill, you get 10% of the credit for that time when making a tome, forcing you to put 10X the amount of time to get a tome.  So to get 100% credit what you suggested would apply. 

Then you have two angles on the diminishing returns. When it is created, and when it is consumed.

Additionally, as I suggested previously, limit tome creation by a single account. With a limit of one tome every 3 days, a feeder account could never hope to feed all the training. Non-vip would only feed 1/3/3 or 10% roughly 10% of its training production. Even VIP would not allow you to output more than a single 72 hour tome of the 6 72 hours blocks earned along all the training lines.

We have also heard from ACE that if it turns out to be a P2W problem, they will put restrictions in place, and many have been suggested that mitigate the potential problem.

Besides, every ratchet tighter on the tomes there is, just makes that ALT account seem that much more valuable as a dedicated crafting account, which we will never get away from. Diminishing returns already makes ATL's better for some jobs than skill pumping.

 

Ironically, passive training and selling tomes is far more socialistic than the alternative (ALTS), with passive training being a type of basic income everyone in the system is paid regardless.

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

With the above, a second diminishing returns could be applied across the board.  If you're trained to 10% on a skill, you get 10% of the credit for that time when making a tome, forcing you to put 10X the amount of time to get a tome.  So to get 100% credit what you suggested would apply. 

Then you have two angles on the diminishing returns. When it is created, and when it is consumed.

Additionally, as I suggested previously, limit tome creation by a single account. With a limit of one tome every 3 days, a feeder account could never hope to feed all the training. Non-vip would only feed 1/3/3 or 10% roughly 10% of its training production. Even VIP would not allow you to output more than a single 72 hour tome of the 6 72 hours blocks earned along all the training lines.

We have also heard from ACE that if it turns out to be a P2W problem, they will put restrictions in place, and many have been suggested that mitigate the potential problem.

Besides, every ratchet tighter on the tomes there is, just makes that ALT account seem that much more valuable as a dedicated crafting account, which we will never get away from. Diminishing returns already makes ATL's better for some jobs than skill pumping.

 

Ironically, passive training and selling tomes is far more socialistic than the alternative (ALTS), with passive training being a type of basic income everyone in the system is paid regardless.

Why make an overly complicated solution of diminishing returns when the easy fix is a skill cap that requires no brain power or understanding of the game when pitched to a customer?

Tomes in my opinion isn't a great social option. If we want more of a social option develop a mentoring system. I believe it was Tinnis or someone who proposed something like this recently. I am OK with a mentoring system being used as a catch up mechanic, as long as their is a skill cap and mentoring doesn't lead to increased power.

1 hour ago, Kith said:

#socialism

I am far from a socialist and play video games partially as an escape from the poorly made socksty politics of the world I live in. Please don't bring it in here.

1 hour ago, Kith said:

I'm not arguing against caps, I just think they're way less of a big deal than people are making them out to be.

But if they benefit the game by preventing P2W advantage why spend any time or effort writing about why they aren't necessary?

I don't get the "ACE will fix it if tomes become a problem". Why not just fix it now with a simple skill cap?

....Still failing to see why adding a skill cap is a bad idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding is that implementing caps requires an arduous amount of time writing code.  No matter what, to cap or not to cap is a "Future Todd" problem, because Tomes won't be available at release because they're intended as a catchup mechanic.

 

Also; socialism can be boiled down to the idea that money shouldn't buy power, which is what you're arguing for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, ClockworkOrange said:

Why make an overly complicated solution of diminishing returns when the easy fix is a skill cap that requires no brain power or understanding of the game when pitched to a customer?

Tomes in my opinion isn't a great social option. If we want more of a social option develop a mentoring system. I believe it was Tinnis or someone who proposed something like this recently. I am OK with a mentoring system being used as a catch up mechanic, as long as their is a skill cap and mentoring doesn't lead to increased power.

I am far from a socialist and play video games partially as an escape from the poorly made socksty politics of the world I live in. Please don't bring it in here.

But if they benefit the game by preventing P2W advantage why spend any time or effort writing about why they aren't necessary?

I don't get the "ACE will fix it if tomes become a problem". Why not just fix it now with a simple skill cap?

....Still failing to see why adding a skill cap is a bad idea.

Because in 3+ years, that cap is going to be effectively meaningless.  If the issue is P2W and aggressive tome use, a moving cap will eventually no longer provide any protection against that. In 5 years or so, there will be nothing to stop nearly the same thing that happened in EvE with that guy buying full training for 28k. Eve has been around long enough, that had they put that same mechanic in place, the result would not have changed in any meaningful way.

I personally prefer mechanics that don't reduce in potency as time goes on, or are based on the age of the game.

The diminishing returns on making a tome is no more complicated to explain than diminishing returns on using them.

Quote

 

When making or using a tome, it will cost more time based on how much training has been done in the tree. When making a tome, the more training the better, when using a tome, it is the reverse.

 

I also don't see how it's hard to explain, "You make make one tome every 3 days".  Seems pretty easy to understand to me. I was detailing how the math worked, but explaining it minus the math is really easy.

I think I understand your biggest concern is people "getting ahead", but personally I don't think that is a big deal. The game needs to be able to work with people from all training levels working together.  Complaining that someone else got their first is just feeding into the idea that when it comes to competitive play, passive skills are more important than player skills, or participation.  

I really wish they had just gone with a points to spend model every time you enter a campaign world.  This whole EvE style passive training is to me a square peg in a round hole.

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ClockworkOrange said:

I honestly just find this funny. You are playing idiots and you must be a class that naturally is better than the other 2. There is very little skill involved in Crowfall. If you think you are outplaying them like a genius you are full of yourself and wrong.

Many of us have no freaking clue about the classes or anything.  Like me.  No armor, no nothing.  Just poking around.  I was going to put more effort in but I guess I should wait till 5.3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of complaining on this forum about supposed P2W aspects, you'd all make better use of your time by writing an Op-Ed for the NY Times convincing the people of the world that paying a monthly subscription to a MMORPG is the required business model and that everyone should feel happy to pay a subscription fee. /S

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

In 5 years or so, there will be nothing to stop nearly the same thing that happened in EvE with that guy buying full training for 28k. Eve has been around long enough, that had they put that same mechanic in place, the result would not have changed in any meaningful way.

 

I doubt $28k was spent of RL money, rather the $28k figure is the estimated worth of EVE in-game assets if one made a direct conversion to PLEX in order to acquire them. I'm pretty sure the skill boosters were bought with in-game ISK funds, of which most of the longtime players have figurative mountains of gold they sit on after a decade of playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this system is perfect for players who only have time to dip their toe in on the weekends.  It helps them feel like they aren't rapidly falling behind everyone else, and also gives them a reason to keep playing the game.

ACE is building a game where the main content in the game is people.  If nobody is playing, then there is NO GAME.  They know this, and so they are trying to find ways to keep players interested.  If they don't have systems like this, they are going to get a ton of people who pop in for a few hours, realize it's going to take them months to get anywhere, become a complete time sink for them, and then they are going to log out and uninstall the game.  Games that rely on players tend to release with a concurrent player base of like 60K and then 2 weeks later there is maybe a thousand people still playing.  It happens all the time.  Crowfall is one of these games, so try to keep that in mind and see it from ACE's perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Kith said:

Also; socialism can be boiled down to the idea that money shouldn't buy power, which is what you're arguing for.

As a socialist, I endorse this idea- if you don't believe money should buy power, you are a socialist & should join me.

However, as a socialist I understand that people are forced to engage in contradictions in order to survive in the corrosive system of capitalism, so as much as I'd love the employees of artcraft to be able to eat and live under a roof just because people love & play this game, and people could pay this game for free, that is not the economic system we labor under.  Additionally, as someone who's got $15 to spend on MMOs each month, I'd love if hustling could be separated from game mechanics, but that is not the capitalist market landscape we labor under either.  Artcraft will have to incorporate money hustle into the game mechanics for the same currently-intractable reasons that they have to hustle for money at all: capitalism doesn't care about your moral framework.  So instead of screaming into the void of an uncaring system, please try to come up with solutions that are compatible with real life.  Or, you know, advocate for socialism so we can eliminate cash from the game entirely, I'm down with that.

Edited by canvox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, DocHollidaze said:

Instead of complaining on this forum about supposed P2W aspects, you'd all make better use of your time by writing an Op-Ed for the NY Times convincing the people of the world that paying a monthly subscription to a MMORPG is the required business model and that everyone should feel happy to pay a subscription fee. /S

 

The people of the world are the problem.  I have become more and more convinced that the issue with MMORPGs is they have become too accessible (and I don't strictly mean convenient or casual--I mean abandoning their core to appeal to other genres and therefore harvest the cash of disparate player types).  Passion in development has been nearly wholly replaced by game decisions designed to generate revenue, even the cash grab, distorting RPGs via coveted mass appeal.  

EDIT:  I think ACE is developing CF with passion, which is why I am here.  However, they can't single handily repair the genre with one game.  They can, however, lead people back in the direction of quality--precisely by being relatively exclusive.  

Edited by Regulus

The Artist Formerly Known as Regulus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Regulus said:

The people of the world are the problem.  I have become more and more convinced that the issue with MMORPGs is they have become too accessible (and I don't strictly mean convenient or casual--I mean abandoning their core to appeal to other genres and therefore harvest the cash of disparate player types).  Passion in development has been nearly wholly replaced by game decisions designed to generate revenue, even the cash grab, distorting RPGs via coveted mass appeal.  

EDIT:  I think ACE is developing CF with passion, which is why I am here.  However, they can't single handily repair the genre with one game.  They can, however, lead people back in the direction of quality--precisely by being relatively exclusive.  

Or ACE just jumps in with the rest.  I am not sure which it is at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

I think I understand your biggest concern is people "getting ahead", but personally I don't think that is a big deal. The game needs to be able to work with people from all training levels working together.  Complaining that someone else got their first is just feeding into the idea that when it comes to competitive play, passive skills are more important than player skills, or participation.  

I really wish they had just gone with a points to spend model every time you enter a campaign world.  This whole EvE style passive training is to me a square peg in a round hole.

This is my concern, but it is getting ahead by P2W type means. Crowfall was advertised as an MMORPG that took out the grind and allowed players to focus on PVP. We were told we would have passive training and there would be no balance affecting mechanics between VIP and non-VIP. I took this to mean we would be on an even playing field and we got to focus on skill and tactics.

What I see now is a game where paying more money gives an obvious advantage. Added systems that cause the type of EVE 28K skill injector scenario. People often quit PVP games when they realize they aren't on an even playing field. Every competitive PVP game is designed to be on an even playing field (LoL, CS, PUBG, Overwatch).

The problem is, player skills currently are not a huge factor in the outcome of a battle. The skill ceiling has been created extremely low in Crowfall (another complaint of mine). This low skill ceiling pushes more emphasis on passive skills as I have very little potential to outplay you. This means the group that has paid for additional passive combat skills will almost always win in an even match up (think 5 v 5 of same classes. Only 1 group has VIP (double profession training) or has bought tomes to advance their skills past the other group). The P2W advantage will be the greatest factor in the outcome of this fight. In my opinion, that is unacceptable and against what I thought Crowfall was advertised as.

The low-skill ceiling, lack of REAL friendly fire (third huge complaint of mine) and P2W mechanics = Largest ZERG with the fattest wallet is king of the castle.

Totally OK with your points spent each time you enter a campaign world. It creates an even playing field in a PVP game which outcomes of fights should be mostly determined on player skill and tactics.

4 hours ago, Talizar said:

Many of us have no freaking clue about the classes or anything.  Like me.  No armor, no nothing.  Just poking around.  I was going to put more effort in but I guess I should wait till 5.3.

If you felt insulted by my comment, it was not my intent. I was trying to make a point to Kith that him easily 2v1ing people is somewhat of a joke and not a representation of what should be happening. I would recommend waiting till 5.3 as much will change, population should increase and skills will be wiped putting you on a more even playing field.

 

I still haven't seen any argument why allowing two mechanics that offer P2W potential is good for anyone aside from ACE (and I argue it is bad for them). Some claim it helps them keep the game open longer, but any P2W potential keeps many people from ever touching the game. I have a group of 5 friends who all ask me about the status of this game. If I were to tell them these P2W mechanics were introduced they would lose all interest immediately. If they truly make a good game, they will have no problem of funding. Overwatch has no monthly sub and has actively continued developing. ACE can add all the cosmetic crap in the world if they need money. Take advantage of the nerds obsession and vanity to make money, don't ruin your gameplay.

It might not seem like it, but I badly want this game to succeed. I honestly feel ANY P2W passive skill training potential in this game = dead game in a few months.

I will be paying for VIP and I see the problem of me having more power than a non-VIP (dual profession training).

Edited by ClockworkOrange

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ClockworkOrange said:

This is my concern, but it is getting ahead by P2W type means. Crowfall was advertised as an MMORPG that took out the grind and allowed players to focus on PVP. We were told we would have passive training and there would be no balance affecting mechanics between VIP and non-VIP. I took this to mean we would be on an even playing field and we got to focus on skill and tactics.

What I see now is a game where paying more money gives an obvious advantage. Added systems that cause the type of EVE 28K skill injector scenario. People often quit PVP games when they realize they aren't on an even playing field. Every competitive PVP game is designed to be on an even playing field (LoL, CS, PUBG, Overwatch).

The problem is, player skills currently are not a huge factor in the outcome of a battle. The skill ceiling has been created extremely low in Crowfall (another complaint of mine). This low skill ceiling pushes more emphasis on passive skills as I have very little potential to outplay you. This means the group that has paid for additional passive combat skills will almost always win in an even match up (think 5 v 5 of same classes. Only 1 group has VIP (double profession training) or has bought tomes to advance their skills past the other group). The P2W advantage will be the greatest determent in the outcome of this fight. In my opinion, that is unacceptable and against what I was promised Crowfall would be.

The low-skill ceiling, lack of REAL friendly fire (third huge complaint of mine) and P2W mechanics = Largest ZERG with the fattest wallet is king of the castle.

Totally OK with your points spent each time you enter a campaign world. It creates an even playing field in a PVP game which outcomes of fights should be mostly determined on player skill and tactics.

If you felt insulted by my comment, it was not my intent. I was trying to make a point to Kith that him easily 2v1ing people is somewhat of a joke and not a representation of what should be happening. I would recommend waiting till 5.3 as much will change, population should increase and skills will be wiped putting you on a more even playing field.

 

I still haven't seen any argument why allowing two mechanics that offer P2W potential is good for anyone aside from ACE (and I argue it is bad for them). Some claim it helps them keep the game open longer, but any P2W potential keeps many people from ever touching the game. I have a group of 5 friends who all ask me about the status of this game. If I were to tell them these P2W mechanics were introduced they would lose all interest immediately. If they truly make a good game, they will have no problem of funding. Overwatch has no monthly sub and has actively continued developing. ACE can add all the cosmetic crap in the world if they need money. Take advantage of the nerds obsession and vanity to make money, don't ruin your gameplay.

It might not seem like it, but I badly want this game to succeed. I honestly feel ANY P2W passive skill training potential in this game = dead game in a few months.

I will be paying for VIP and I see the problem of me having more power than a non-VIP (dual profession training).

Not offended.  I was trying to tell the other guy that while he can beat two people maybe those two people are poorly geared or just screwing around and don't really care or even understand much about the game.  My issue is that is keep changing hopefully for the good but the changes are extensive.  I have played lots of MMO's and I honestly feel very lost here.  Granted I have not reached out to join any groups and have had limited time to mess around but the scope of the game is daunting to me at this point.

I agree monetize the vanity items or other player conveniences but I have misgivings about what is proposed and If I have to pay for a ruby membership to get heard then this game is going to fail majorly if those are the only people they listen to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, RikForFun said:

Exactly.

I feel amusing how in this forum people point out Crowfall should be better with a subscription model and in the same time other people are complaining about so-called P2W becouse ACE put in the game tradeable advantages. :D 

Can you explain to me how purchasing VIP tickets with RL money and then selling them IG for IG currency isn't a P2W aspect?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ironarm said:

Can you explain to me how purchasing VIP tickets with RL money and then selling them IG for IG currency isn't a P2W aspect?

P2W means you are buying power that you cannot achieve by just playing the game.  By buying VIP tickets with real money, then trading them to someone for something they earned in game means you bought something that is earnable in game and the person who sold that to you got VIP without having to pay real money.  Both player have access to both in game and VIP stuff regardless of whether they paid money or just spent a ton of hours playing the game therefore no P2W.

Now if your definition of P2W is different, like buying something in game without having actually played to get it or something then that's a different matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the argument that you could use alt accounts to generate tomes over time yes you an do that, but having to wait to complete a skill tree before generating tomes for it means that you'll be waiting a long time before those extra accounts pay off, and any time you are pulling time away from those accounts to feed your main account, they are not progressing which means they won't be able to feed you points from a higher tree for an even longer time.

If you're going to dump that much money and time into alt accounts you might as well just buy tomes from other players to power level your trees, it will probably be faster and cheaper than having to manage 50 alt accounts for a year before they start paying off dividends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, jasta85 said:

P2W means you are buying power that you cannot achieve by just playing the game.  By buying VIP tickets with real money, then trading them to someone for something they earned in game means you bought something that is earnable in game and the person who sold that to you got VIP without having to pay real money.  Both player have access to both in game and VIP stuff regardless of whether they paid money or just spent a ton of hours playing the game therefore no P2W.

Now if your definition of P2W is different, like buying something in game without having actually played to get it or something then that's a different matter.

"that is earnable in game" <--- So if the ACE store sold IG currency for RL money that wouldn't be considered pay to win? Currency is something "that is earnable in game".

 

My definition of P2W is that you Pay RL money to Win (having advantages over others, including getting something faster). $15 VIP Ticket turns into 400 Gold (Just random currency amount). Best sword cost 1600 Gold, best armor 800 gold each. (We are going to assume that the price of VIP tickets will be more than what you can get in 1 day of normal gaming, otherwise the VIP tickets would be of no value and people wouldn't buy them. It would be much easier to just play IG to get that amount of money.)

Player 1 on Day 1: Buys 3 VIP Tickets, sells for 1600 Gold and purchases best sword.

Player 1 on Day 3: Buys 2 VIP tickets, sells for 800 gold, purchases 1st piece of best armor.

Player 1 on Day 5: Buys 2 VIP tickets, sells for 800 gold, purchases 2nd piece of best armor.

Player 1 on Day 7: Buys 2 VIP tickets, sells for 800 gold, purchases 3rd piece of best armor.

Player 2 Day 1: Makes 200 gold using only IG. 

Player 2 Day 8: Purchases best sword.

This is exactly what would happen in ArcheAge. This will happen, it happens in almost every MMO that has elements like this. If the above isn't P2W, I don't know what else to say. Player 1 being able to be almost fully geared in 7 days by buying and selling VIP tickets purchased with RL money compared to Player 2 who it took 8 days just to buy the sword.

 

The value of the VIP Tickets have to/will be enough to warranty people purchasing them for RL and then turning around and selling them, which usually happens. Having a system where this is a possible outcome is a track for more P2W elements in the game. The cash shop already have items to give buffs and the game isn't even out yet. 

Edited by ironarm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...