Lets talk about the ressource system. Right now, its borderline Pay to Win - Page 2

VaderDSL · 2013-06-21, 12:43 PM

I don't have any numbers, but it'd be cool to have supply lines.

So a vehicle/aircraft will cost say 100 resources base (just one example, number not important).

At the warpgate it will be 75% reduced cost, so 25 resources.

At each step out of the lattice the cost reduction decreases, until at some point it is at 0% say 5 points out on the lattice (maybe make it so that the first big base in the lattice from the warpgate is at 0% resource modifier.

After this, any further steps out into the lattice you go the cost increases, until basically when you are pulling vehicles/aircraft from near the enemies WG you are at say 200% or more increase to costs due to distance from your warpgate.

This way you can revert the costs, but make it so that people being pushed back have vastly reduced costs while the attackers have to pay more, it would be balanced as the more territory = more resources but greater costs compared to less territory = less resources but reduced costs.

The stick a few controllable resource nodes around the place which would allow you to disrupt resource flow/links and would give more options for continent defenders, if you could hack a few control points to disrupt resource gain it would starve the attackers, they would have to re-secure in order to continue to gain resources up lattice of that control node.

This way attackers and defenders are balanced vehicle/aircraft wise, maybe apply it to infantry resources as well?

Shogun · 2013-06-21, 12:47 PM

Originally Posted by Chaff

People may either be too frugal with their money, flat-out cheap, or truly can't afford to pay an extra $10-to-$20 per month.

Those that PAY ..... "EARN" SOMETHING FOR THIER MONEY. Not only is it the way the World works. It's the way this game survives. They're willing to pay for some perks or benefits. If you're NOT .... you have no right to cry.

if the game was really fun and had good design and layout, i would gladly pay. but i don´t see anything worth a subscription. the f2p model literally killed the art style, the balance and the depth of planetside.
but i am not going to pay for a game when i never had a single gamesession that was real fun. i keep coming back to try again or check if the game has developed enough, but for every good change i see at least 2 negative changes.
i even bought a high end gaming rig, only for ps2 and backed the developement by buying sc before launch. but now i regret all of this.

Dragonskin · 2013-06-21, 12:53 PM

Meh, I don't think Planetside 2 is true Pay 2 Win and I still don't. That said, I didn't buy premium for resources gains. It was a means to get queue priority now that queues matter. It was a nice bonus that I get 48 certs a day just for logging in when I don't alwayd have time to play long due to real life and all that.

So yea, as a premium member I would be ok with losing resource gain completely if it made more players happy and feel less screwed by P2W.

I would still get my certs, queue priority and membership sales on fluff items. That is really all that we need in my opinion to make membership worth the investment.

VaderDSL · 2013-06-21, 01:06 PM

Ditto, if people really feel aggrieved that premium members are getting a game breaking advantage over F2P players, I'd happily give up resource bonus as well, it wouldn't bother me. If I pull a tank and it gets insta gibbed then hey ho, I'll just wait for a bit, probably go AV and kill some enemy tanks myself.

Assist · 2013-06-21, 01:08 PM

Originally Posted by basti

B. we get rid of ressource boosts, means everyone, regardless of how much money he spends, gets the same amount of ressources.

That would be a good temporary fix. The problem is the resource system sucks and has needed to be overhauled since they got rid of Auraxium.

Chaff · 2013-06-21, 01:11 PM

Originally Posted by Crator

I had something typed up in the other P2W thread but decided to not post it. Mainly because, premium subs can affect the over-all "win" condition for an empire. So I don't think it's ludicrous to think that it can't affect it. Just depends on how many players are paying and how many aren't, per empire. There's probably a healthy mix of both though. And I agree with everything else you said.

The definition of pay-to-win is something that free players cannot obtain in the game that would help them "win". Most here are using the thing that free players cannot obtain to mean: The speed at which you can obtain resources to pull vehicles and obtain consumables. Does that "speed to obtain" equal pay-to-win? Perhaps..... Is it fair for SOE to charge for that? I think so. Are the resource cost values in-line with cost for a sub or single-boosters? Perhaps....

Thank you for your civility. I hear y' on the debate over what mindset is "ludicrous"......

I have my Account - which is Premium Auraxis (until it runs out). I help my wife with hers. Currently, she is 100% F2P mode. I play her Characters quite often to help her Cert-Up her character(s).

I miss the front-of-the-line priority of My Auraxium Sub.

I like the idea of Passive Cert Gain. However, I have to Log In EVERY DAY to get them. I take a two week business trip and I LOSE ALL MY PASSIVE CERTS cuz I'm not logging in from the road ? BS. I PAY FOR THEM. I should not have to log in daily to get them. It's enough for me to decide not to renew my Sub when it runs out.

I have Zero issues with my wifes F2P account. I get what I want when I want it. I NEVER had to wait for anything. She has little or nothing invested in shortening her ability to respawn any of her vehicles. .... was always able to grab a Flash .... get to Point-B quickly ..... and HAVE ALL HER OTHER VEHICLES AVAILABLE.

Now ? I'll have to see how much it affects my game play on her account.

I prefer Infantry anyway. If I am noticebly hindered by lack of vehicles ... it means more of us F2P guys will now simply help FILL MBTs, GALS, and SUNDYs ..... and IMHO .... that is a BONUS for the Metagame.
.

Lucidius · 2013-06-21, 01:15 PM

"Squad Resource Boost"

Looks like the F2Pers are screwed

AThreatToYou · 2013-06-21, 01:47 PM

Originally Posted by Lucidius

"Squad Resource Boost"

Looks like the F2Pers are screwed

It's not even that. I drop money on this game but I don't subscribe.

CrimsonTemplar · 2013-06-21, 01:52 PM

Originally Posted by basti

Crimson, did you read the post? :o

Subs get another 6 months XP boost for free.

The problem is, and i propably didnt make that clear: The upcoming ressource overhaul will not work as long as there is a difference in up to 100% between what a paying player and a free player gets for ressources, even if they do exactly the same stuff.

You just cant create a proper ressource system under those circumstances. So we need to get rid of the ressource boosts.

Yeah sorry, I didn't realise that was what you meant. I should've been clearer myself.

Mongoose · 2013-06-21, 02:01 PM

I LOL at all this Pay2Win crap. Pay 2 win.....what exactly? A hexagon that turns purple/blue/red 20 minutes later? A continent that means absolutely nothing?

There needs to be a winning condition before any winning can occur. Right now it is Pay 2 inflate your e-penis. Fine by me. Spend all the money you want.

Chaff · 2013-06-21, 02:50 PM

^
....tend to agree. Mongoose has hit the nail right on the head. Please read, digest, and absord his succint wisdom. The Reality is SUBs pay to make it "free" for those who choose NOT to pay.

I'm fine with eliminating Resource gains if the F2P folks seem to think it's P2W. Part of me thinks this (Paid Subs) is simply the reality of the World. And there really is no "winning" anything in this game. It's a frickin' GAME. Cry babies should NOT be pandered to.

I'd prefer they increase TTK about 20%. See how that helps gamelay.

I think F2P folks need to lighten up. Sony needs to generate income to keep this game running. The Catch-22 reality of this fact is unavoidable.

I have no issues playing my wifes F2P account. I play both ends of the Account spectrum. The P2W debate is much ado about nothing.
.

Dreamcast · 2013-06-21, 03:08 PM

Originally Posted by Chaff

^
....tend to agree. Mongoose has hit the nail right on the head. Please read, digest, and absord his succint wisdom. The Reality is SUBs pay to make it "free" for those who choose NOT to pay.

I'm fine with eliminating Resource gains if the F2P folks seem to think it's P2W. Part of me thinks this is simply the reality of the World. And there is no "winning" anthing in this game. It's a frickin' GAME. And, cry babies should NOT be pandered to.

I'd prefer they increase TTK about 20%. See how that helps gamelay.

I think F2P folks need to lighten up. Sony needs to generate income to keep this game running. The Catch-22 reality of this fact is unavoidable.

I have no issues playing my wifes F2P account. I play both ends of the Account spectrum. The P2W debate is much ado about nothing.
.

"reality of the world"

Using the mentality lets give people who pay enough money better tanks/Guns lol....since after all in the real world you get better things if you pay money.

This is a video game....which is meant to be "fair" inside the game.

Sorry but "winning" is getting kills,completing objectives, and overall having success.

If Resources didn't matter much as you say when why is that is only 10% discount when somebody wins a continent?

Why isn't 50% discount?...Is quite obvious...50% discount resources will benifit an Empire way too much because their is absolutely zero downside to have a lot of resources.

It will be unfair to the other 2 empires who will spend more resources to buy the same thing.

You keep mentioning your wives account.

Look dude I had 50% Xp boost(Xp boost helps u get resources) and 25% Xp/Resource boost with membership.....I had all my infantry resources full at 100%....I felt rich.

Now I can't even get it passed 30% full.....I have to make choices on what to spend my infantry resources on and I can't be as careless.

It does a huge difference.

Sorry is Pay 2 Win because it gives you an ingame advantage to get powerful items with no downside.

Their is 0 downside to being able to get tanks/planes/etc when ever you want and having all infantry resources at full....Zero downside.

Comapred to Certs which really are convenience...Certs give you sidegrade,slight upgrades, and options....but ingame you still have to make a decision on which sidegrade you want to use since their is downsides to each weapon mostly.

So yes resource boost = Pay 2 win.

Chaff · 2013-06-21, 05:11 PM

.
We do agree it's a game. It's an escape from the real world - but only to a certain degree. Maybe we all play games to escape from reality. We never escape. We can only hide from it. The P2W debate is moot - unless you wish to keep your head in the gaming sand.

Long ago I too acknowledged it is borderline P2W. Griefers grief. Criers cry.
I understand what they're doing. When I want to escape or temporarily ignore the reality of the World, I play games - not just this one.

They may very well come up with better ways to help keep the playing field level. However, they won't rock-the-boat in that pursuit at the risk of losing paying customers .... be it Subs, or people that only spend their $$$$ in the CA$H Shop.

Before your ideals get the better of you, remember Sony is in the business of making money.
.

basti · 2013-06-21, 06:17 PM

Originally Posted by Chaff

.
We do agree it's a game. It's an escape from the real world - but only to a certain degree. Maybe we all play games to escape from reality. We never escape. We can only hide from it. The P2W debate is moot - unless you wish to keep your head in the gaming sand.

Long ago I too acknowledged it is borderline P2W. Griefers grief. Criers cry.
I understand what they're doing. When I want to escape or temporarily ignore the reality of the World, I play games - not just this one.

They may very well come up with better ways to help keep the playing field level. However, they won't rock-the-boat in that pursuit at the risk of losing paying customers .... be it Subs, or people that only spend their $$$$ in the CA$H Shop.

Before your ideals get the better of you, remember Sony is in the business of making money.
.

And you are in the business of not understanding a thing.

Money isnt the problem here, not at all. Evening out the playing fields for the resource system isnt going to drive paying players away. In the long run, it allows a meaningful metagame to exist based on the overhauled resource system, and THAT will keep players playing and paying.

Also, you dont understand how Free to Play works as a business model.

You sell stuff. On the one hand, direct items that you jsut cant get without paying. If its stuff that doesnt affect gameplay (cosmetics), then everything is fine. They do that, and theres plenty of cash coming in that way.

You also sell time. Means boosts to get more XP, or allowing you to aquire some extra in game currency (borderline Pay 2 Win there).
Certs are PS2s in game currency. However, you cant trade them, cant loose them, you can only spend them for yourself on stuff you cant loose, thus its only time you buy with XP boosts (not P2W at all)

Resources are another in game currency. However, you can loose them. The stuff you buy with them can be destroyed or used up, means there is a constant input and output of resources for every individual player. Depending on how they play, they may exeed the input they get.
And THERES the problem: If you pay, you can boost your input by up to 100%, means your output is also boosted by 100%. You can get double the amount of Tanks, Aircraft, Maxes, C4, mines, Whatever than a Free player in the same time.

Okay, in PS2, with the pre GU11 resource system, that was no problem. Even as a free player, the resource input was usually much higher than your output.
With the current resource prices, the problem increased, but its still not that big of a deal. You hit the limit sooner, but you can still pull a few vehicles in fast sucession, even as a free player.

BUT: The resource system is getting a major overhaul in the future. There is NO way to give it a lasting, proper overhaul as long as there is a difference in up to 100% in input for players. The existance of the boosts FORCE the overhauled resource system to still depend on the basic rules of in game currency (input that can be affected by in game means and by boosts - a storage to save that input - Output). And if the overhauled resource system has to play by the rules to be able to recive boosts, then it will just be as pointless as before.

MrMak · 2013-06-21, 06:40 PM

I find it kind of ironic that for months people have been complaining that mechanised and airspace resources dont matter and now that they somewhat do, everyone suddenly realised someone might have an advantage if they have more of em and that there are resource boosts.

Granted that a simple price increase was a lazy "revamp" but come on guys...make up your frigin minds.