On Premium Ships and "Pay to Win"

[montyrattus]

The yacht is a premium ship we all got for preordering the game.

How other prem ships are going to be obtained..? buying them for RL money most likely.

 

I like the idea of capped ships loosing a special feature. Its a good way to reward economy players. Pirating ships should only be a secondary way to obtain ships. I mean: one player worked really hard for his vessel and now some progamer is going to wreck him and steal his ship.

Its a very good way to motivate economy instead of "pirating" enemy ships.

You still can go cheap and capture enemy ships. But if you want to have the edge over your opponent.. Build your own ship or buy if off some traders.

 

This is what I am concerned about, pay to win. I hope the devs learn from other games and keep "premium" ships low tier or mostly cosmetic, many of us have already payed money for this game and have no wish to pay more just to keep competative (a subscription fee would be cool though if updates are regular).

[Jeremiah O'Brien]

(a subscription fee would be cool though if updates are regular).

No thank you. I paid for the game already, I shouldn't have to continue paying to be allowed to play. Premium ships are fine, but please, no subscription fees.

[Oliver H. Perry]

This is what I am concerned about, pay to win. I hope the devs learn from other games and keep "premium" ships low tier or mostly cosmetic, many of us have already payed money for this game and have no wish to pay more just to keep competative (a subscription fee would be cool though if updates are regular).

 

How is the ability to gain access to a ship that is obtainable through real money, but has stats that are average with other ships of their size, pay to win?  It's "pay to bypass the grind", certainly, but you don't have any sort of extra "win" ability just because you've purchased a premium ship.  People bandy about the term "pay to win" a lot, but I'm not sure most people truly understand the difference.

[Arvenski]

(a subscription fee would be cool though if updates are regular).

Oh hell no. Are you even serious? 

[Jack Freedom]

(a subscription fee would be cool though if updates are regular).

 

[Joe]

How is the ability to gain access to a ship that is obtainable through real money, but has stats that are average with other ships of their size, pay to win?  It's "pay to bypass the grind", certainly, but you don't have any sort of extra "win" ability just because you've purchased a premium ship.  People bandy about the term "pay to win" a lot, but I'm not sure most people truly understand the difference.

Welfare Warriors seldom understand the difference, all they know is they want a free game, they want it to always be free, they want free updates, and free content. The reality that the game won't exist without a consistent flow of cash isn't big on their radar because FTP gamers are locusts who feed and then fly away to the next new hot game.

An FTP player has an abundance of time to game so he thinks his 14 hours of un funded game hours a day are worth more than my 2 hours a day of cash supported gaming. The cold hard truth is my 2 hours of funded gaming is paying for 10 welfare warriors yet they cry about the paying customers having a ship with a special flag or name. The players who will stay with this game long term are those who are invested in it.

As bad as Wardunder is I have to point out that their creation of premium planes is genius, it keeps the cash flowin. Wardunders allowance to use RL cash to train up crews and upgrade planes is genius as well. In the end my plane is no better than anyone else's (hell in some case's they are worse) but the ability to use real cash to make up for my game time deficit is genius.

The closest thing to pay to win I've seen in gaming is WOT's gold ammo and that's not even that huge a bonus and yet they have plenty of people ready to play the game.

Gamers who step up and support the game with RL cash should get a thank you card from the welfare warriors who won't give a cent to support the game yet will make the most noise when I have to buy a 3rd rate because I have a life but somehow those 16 hours they played for free today make them more noble than we dirty RL money spenders.

When I see someone use the term "pay to win" Im actually reading how dare someone exchange stored labor in the form of RL money to stay even with my 14 hour gaming days. The honest truth is RL money as dirty as it is will run this game, it will decide if it sinks or swims.

How about we put limits on how many hours non paying players can be in game? After all we shouldn't want anyone to get an advantage right? We can't have welfare warriors "grinding to win"...that's just not fair.

[Jeremiah O'Brien]

How about we put limits on how many hours non paying players can be in game? After all we shouldn't want anyone to get an advantage right? We can't have welfare warriors "grinding to win"...that's just not fair.

Are you serious??

We all payed for this game. Many of us supported this game from the start, and many of would continue to support by buying premium ships and donations, but seriously? Everything you suggested in your post was at the least, presumptuous, and at times downright insulting.

Every member of the sea trials has paid for this game. We paid to test the game, and most of all, to support it. We did NOT pay for this game, just to be told that We would have to pay more for the right to play it. You cannot suggest transforming Naval Action into a subscription/pay to win game simply because you have the ability to spend amount of money that to some are exorbitant. Not everyone can continually pay for the privilege of paying, or the ability to win.

It would be wrong to tell those who already bought the game that If they want to continue playing, they need to pay. And I absolutely disagree with using RL money to get ahead of those who need to grind just to get even. I'm sorry, but that would be totally unacceptable to the current playerbase and the future players as well.

[SueMyChin]

Welfare Warriors seldom understand......

 

 

You must understand why that is though...?

 

Players see skipping parts of the game, almost as a cheat. In fact, it almost defines cheating in some instances - "act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage."

Gold ammo in WoT (before you could buy it for in-game credits) was effectively a cheat you paid for. It took away the level playing field and any player wanting to play from an unfair advantage is always going to be despised. It's pretty unfair when you're fighting against a kid who can't afford gold ammo and is at a disadvantage.

 

In WoT, what exactly is the aim of the game, to unlock vehicles and upgrade tanks and crew? ...if that's what you play for (and some do) then seeing someone skip that whole process right to the end game sounds very much like a cheat. It bypasses all the bits players who can't afford to pay real money must endure. It's obviously not so bad in an arena based game where ultimately all you do is duel with similar levelled players but in a game like this it has to be done properly otherwise players with money to burn could gain a serious advantage.

 

There is no argument that buying a ship so you can fight immediately without having to play the parts of the game others must endure gives you an advantage. Especially in a game where getting back into the fight asap could be the difference between taking a port or not.

 

You must understand that concern?

 

I'm fully aware the game must make money, there are however many way of doing this, premium ships are just one of them. So long as the players using them gain no 'unfair' advantage then there won't be any issues. I think the fear is that they won't be very popular unless they do though because that's why most players buy them...

 

Before anyone starts, I'm not saying NA shouldn't have premium ships here, I'm just pointing out the argument from the other side.

Edited April 5, 2015 by SueMyChin

[Grim DeGrim]

Except that the same is made available, by game design, to everyone.

I get that not everyone can afford the same level of gaming support. In the same vein, not everyone can put in the same number of hours to "get it for free".

I loved Joe's post.

[Grim DeGrim]

I bought 50 Mechs in mechwarrior online... I'll be buying ships in NA too.

Anything to kill the grind, so I can enjoy my limited game time.

I bought gold ammo. And money tanks in WoT.

I bought crew up grades for warthunder, and a Mustang... And tanks...

In Potbs, I subbed. Bought those bonds (whatever they were called, with the Sony points).

[Magnum]

I want the developers to have a way to get fresh money so they will be able to stay on the job (of developing / maintaining NA) - just that simple. If they can't charge real money taxes for some of the government services in game, then they need to be able to perhaps make money with "spiffs" to some of the ships they "sell", making them premium is just one way.

 

I for one think we should think in terms of "solutions" not in terms of "problems". Think of an elegant way for the Dev's to create a cash flow so they can continue to work for us.

 

[Joe]

Are you serious??

We all payed for this game. Many of us supported this game from the start, and many of would continue to support by buying premium ships and donations, but seriously? Everything you suggested in your post was at the least, presumptuous, and at times downright insulting.

Every member of the sea trials has paid for this game. We paid to test the game, and most of all, to support it. We did NOT pay for this game, just to be told that We would have to pay more for the right to play it. You cannot suggest transforming Naval Action into a subscription/pay to win game simply because you have the ability to spend amount of money that to some are exorbitant. Not everyone can continually pay for the privilege of paying, or the ability to win.

It would be wrong to tell those who already bought the game that If they want to continue playing, they need to pay. And I absolutely disagree with using RL money to get ahead of those who need to grind just to get even. I'm sorry, but that would be totally unacceptable to the current playerbase and the future players as well.

I was trying to be sarcastic my friend, of course I don't think that. But just as my RL money is just stored labor I was pointing out how making it unfair is just like saying a hardcore players hours spent are unfair. Their time or my money are both equal but my money keeps the servers on their time keeps the servers alive, this is a symbiotic relationship.

[Jeremiah O'Brien]

I was trying to be sarcastic my friend, of course I don't think that.

Glad to hear that. With the internet, you never know.

I don't mind having aspects of the game paid for with RL money, but I don't want an unfair advantage from it either. Premium ships are fine. But things like better ships, better crew, etc., should be bought only with in game money.

[Quineloe]

Having watched some of these "welfare warriors" up close, thanks to twitch streaming inviting us into their lifes now, I find myself more and more agreeing with the pay2advance model. It was one thing to see players always in the best ships available, with seemingly unlimited durability or rebuy money, no matter how often they died, it's quite another to actually see the process (and even more important the warrior) behind it streamed to you. 

[Jeremiah O'Brien]

Having watched some of these "welfare warriors" up close, thanks to twitch streaming inviting us into their lifes now, I find myself more and more agreeing with the pay2advance model. It was one thing to see players always in the best ships available, with seemingly unlimited durability or rebuy money, no matter how often they died, it's quite another to actually see the process (and even more important the warrior) behind it streamed to you.

Do you agree with telling everyone who already purchased the game that if they want to continue enjoying it, they will have to pay their way through?

[Henry d'Esterre Darby]

I've split this conversation out into a new topic.  Let's please be respectful of each other and make logical arguments that do not call people of different beliefs derogatory names.

[Austrum]

Welfare Warriors seldom understand the difference, all they know is they want a free game, they want it to always be free, they want free updates, and free content. The reality that the game won't exist without a consistent flow of cash isn't big on their radar because FTP gamers are locusts who feed and then fly away to the next new hot game.

An FTP player has an abundance of time to game so he thinks his 14 hours of un funded game hours a day are worth more than my 2 hours a day of cash supported gaming. The cold hard truth is my 2 hours of funded gaming is paying for 10 welfare warriors yet they cry about the paying customers having a ship with a special flag or name. The players who will stay with this game long term are those who are invested in it.

As bad as Wardunder is I have to point out that their creation of premium planes is genius, it keeps the cash flowin. Wardunders allowance to use RL cash to train up crews and upgrade planes is genius as well. In the end my plane is no better than anyone else's (hell in some case's they are worse) but the ability to use real cash to make up for my game time deficit is genius.

The closest thing to pay to win I've seen in gaming is WOT's gold ammo and that's not even that huge a bonus and yet they have plenty of people ready to play the game.

Gamers who step up and support the game with RL cash should get a thank you card from the welfare warriors who won't give a cent to support the game yet will make the most noise when I have to buy a 3rd rate because I have a life but somehow those 16 hours they played for free today make them more noble than we dirty RL money spenders.

When I see someone use the term "pay to win" Im actually reading how dare someone exchange stored labor in the form of RL money to stay even with my 14 hour gaming days. The honest truth is RL money as dirty as it is will run this game, it will decide if it sinks or swims.

How about we put limits on how many hours non paying players can be in game? After all we shouldn't want anyone to get an advantage right? We can't have welfare warriors "grinding to win"...that's just not fair.

 

I tend to agree.   Free to Play has been by far one of the biggest negatives of the MMO market.  Without money, the Devs cannot keep the servers running, let alone improve the game yet the minute anyone mentions anything that might provide the developer a stead flow of cash to keep the game running and improve upon it, the cries of "PAY TO WIN!!!" start overflowing from all those people unwilling to spend a dime on making the game a better environment for all.

 

I started playing back in the day when MMOs were all subscription.  You had to pay for the box which was $40 at the time.  Then you had to pay $15 a month for a subscription and then about ever 6 months to a year, pay another $40 for the expansion and so on.  My "EXPECTATIONS" due to being part of the early days is to spend roughly at least $220 a year on a MMO and now 15 years later I spend that and more on just about every F2P game I am actually active with and I don't whine about it.

 

What F2P players don't get, is while they get to play off my dime, I am actually spending my hard earned money to give them a game to play.  Of course I should get privileges they don't have.  If they want the same privileges, they should quit complaining and pony up the same cash I do.  I mean it is a "Free" world, they can "Freely" chose to play for "Free" or pay up and "freely" gain everything I have earned...yes earned....though working in a real life job and using the funds I earned to pay for enhanced entertainment value.

 

Now I am not talking about buying "I Win" stuff, but a premium ship that I will always have and only have to pay reduced rates for repair if I get sunk, well I don't see the problem since the free players, get to continue to play the game and reap the benefits of improvement and new content as a result of me buying that ship.  If fact free players should be thanking each and every one of those willing to spend money on the cash shop for their contributions the game rather than call us wallet warriors or complain because we were able to purchase convenience in the game.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Austrum

[Galileus]

I'm sorry, is this still topic about payment models (or was it ever), or is it "these dirty people! let's call them names!" topic now?

 

Because I see a lot of "these dirty free/wallet warriors say stuff like Y and complain for Z, how dare they!?" yet all I see is people complaining about abuse I'm yet to see. Isn't that just abuse by another name, pretending to be a victim of the other side and putting words in their mouths they didn't have yet a chance to say? Isn't antagonizing someone just as much an abuse as the stuff you all complain about?

 

How do you intend to have a discussion with someone, if you start off with calling him a part of a group and then complaining how bad that whole group is? Is it fair to disregard someone's proper and well argumented fear, because someone else, some time ago, on forums far far away with more or less similar agenda behaved improperly?

 

Seriously, knock it down few notches, guys. Most of you complaining about such-a-such warriors are just as guilty as they are, doing the very same thing they are, just hiding behind a victim shield.

[Johny Reb]

I think its just jealousy when people complain about those who spend money to get to the end game quicker. If they had a lot of throw away cash then the bulk of them would do it as well. I guess a few hard core people wouldn't but imo they would be rare. And I'm saying all this from somebody that limits myself to about 20 dollars a month for the game I play which isn't much at all.

 

The thing is, everyone has their own sense of why they play and who is everybody else to judge? In Potbs I played for a couple of months to grind to level 50 and reach end game. After that I played for nearly three more years! So what value did that first couple of months of grinding missions mean. Almost zilch. I play these games for the end game pvp not for the sake of grinding through another "kill that 10 times in a row" missions.

 

So, why complain unless you are simply jealous. Who cares, when games don't usually really start till you reach the end game. Of course we don't know how the devs will design this game but most likely there will still be an end game. Cheating? How is it cheating to get yourself to the game you really want to play?

 

Now I will say this. If I meet you on the water and I'm still a lieutenant and your an admiral because of the money you spent, don't be bragging about your rank. I'm not gonna have the same respect for someone who bought their rank as opposed to earned it. Brag only when you've earned it.

 

So to sum up. You play your game and let them play theirs. The only issue with a pay model is if it gives them an advantage in a fight. Like gold rounds, or speed buffs or whatever. Then 'Houston', we'd have a problem.

[Jack Freedom]

I bought 50 Mechs in mechwarrior online... I'll be buying ships in NA too.

Anything to kill the grind, so I can enjoy my limited game time.

I bought gold ammo. And money tanks in WoT.

I bought crew up grades for warthunder, and a Mustang... And tanks...

In Potbs, I subbed. Bought those bonds (whatever they were called, with the Sony points).

 

No disrespect but not everyone values their money that way.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Jack Freedom

[Magnum]

One of the "M"s in MMO is for Multi - right? So we will have multi different considerations about the right way to "support" the game - sure.

 

Some will have little time to "invest" - some will have more.

 

Some will have little money to "invest" - some will have more (or at least want to spend more).

 

---- time is money ----

 

Perhaps, each player pays a micro fee each time they "shorten" their sailing time by teleporting. EXAMPLE: each time you (or I or Henry) teleports one nickel is deducted from our "transport" account.

 

Our transport account can be funded by real money, or possibly by helping the Dev's in some way. But the transport fund can't really help you "win" a fight - it only helps you shorten the time BETWEEN fights.

 

Not P2W but "P2be less bored"

 

$.02

Edited April 5, 2015 by ampaholic

[Jeremiah O'Brien]

So to sum up. You play your game and let them play theirs. The only issue with a pay model is if it gives them an advantage in a fight. Like gold rounds, or speed buffs or whatever. Then 'Houston', we'd have a problem.

This I can agree with. If someone wants to pour money into a game, that's fine. It's their money. If someone wants to grind their way through a game, that's fine too. You don't have to spend money.

(Not in response to johnnyreb's post)-

The only thing I have a problem with is when it becomes necessary to pay just to play. So, not a "pay to win" scenario, but a "pay to play" scenario. That should not happen here. If it had been stated from the beginning, that would be fine. But you can't Just tell the playerbase, "Oh, you purchased the game? Well, from now on, you need to pay if you want to play it."

P.S.- enough of this "welfare warrior" crap some people are slinging around. A lot of people can't afford to continue lavishing their hard-earned money on a video game, they have more important things to pay for. So please stop with the name calling (which, quite frankly, is insulting).

Edited April 5, 2015 by Jeremiah O'Brien

[milkyway12]

I wouldn't mind a subscription. I cant stand Free to play models. They always turn to crap.

 

Like Hero's and Generals .. they want to force you to buy equipment because the grind takes forever just to get basic equipment. You spend more money in the short term, but save a few bucks a year or two down the road. I cant stand that massive grinds. However, even if you sub, their grind is outrageous still.

 

So, they could go with a free to play model with a sub model. You can play for free, have a massive grind, you can sub, have a lot less grind, or you can buy a ship, and have a lot less grind, or sub and buy the ship and have hardly no grind.

 

----------

 

Give the player a choice about what they want to do.

Edited April 5, 2015 by milkyway12

[Jeremiah O'Brien]

I wouldn't mind a subscription. I cant stand Free to play models. They always turn to crap.

Has everyone forgotten that this game is NOT free to play, and never will be? We already payed for it. And the devs have said repeatedly that the price will only INCREASE with future release. This is going to be an expensive game, everyone. Nothing about it is free to play. Once the massive influx of players due to the Steam release occurs, the devs won't need subscriptions to keep the game going. Everyone is leaving a lot of this out in their arguments. Edited April 5, 2015 by Jeremiah O'Brien

[Magnum]

I wouldn't mind a subscription. I cant stand Free to play models. They always turn to crap.

 

Like Hero's and Generals .. they want to force you to buy equipment because the grind takes forever just to get basic equipment. You spend more money in the short term, but save a few bucks a year or two down the road. I cant stand that massive grinds. However, even if you sub, their grind is outrageous still.

 

So, they could go with a free to play model with a sub model. You can play for free, have a massive grind, you can sub, have a lot less grind, or you can buy a ship, and have a lot less grind, or sub and buy the ship and have hardly no grind.

 

----------

 

Give the player a choice about what they want to do.

 

Their are two problems with a subscription model:

 

1) You are dampening the allure of the game for those who can't or don't want to pay to play.

 

2) You are putting a "tax" on exactly the one thing that you want people to do more > join the game. It is a well known fact that things you tax - you get less of....

 

A fee or "tax" should be on something that if people do "less" of it - it is OK. So a tax on teleporting might dampen the teleporting a bit - but who cares?