Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 41
08-08-2011, 06:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilawpilath View Post
It's not about Paying to Win for me. It's about the hard earned money I spent to aquire some of the ships I found to be cool. Regardless to their effects in PVP. I didn't just buy Federation garbage, I also bought Klingon Garbage. And I wouldn't want some of the Novelity ships that I purchased, and spent a good amount of money on, destroyed and forced to spend MORE money just to keep using it. I mine as well have taken my money and thrown it into my toilet. That is how I feel about it. So your little "you admit to paying to win" molarcy is unwarrented. Heck, to be honest, If this game were like EVE, I doubt I'd be playing it. Mostly because I don't want to spend Months playing a game just to have that Months work destroyed in a few hours of game play and have to spend another series of months doing it all over again.
That's a false choise, with what I suggested you could just not use it in PvP and never lose it. However, you want to buy an advantage and use it PvP play w/o any risk at all. This is wrong on multiple levels as it gives those who pay above and beyond an advantage in a subscription game, and it encourages time and $ resources by Cryptic to focus in that area. My conclusion that you admit to paying to win wasn't "molarcy" or malarkey even, but observing of your quote res ipsa loquitur.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 42
08-09-2011, 06:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamid
I'd say Cryptic so casually makes this game, the least they could do is go all in on the C-Store and make more $$ on the items by making them destructable in some cases. At least people who don't bother supporting the significant R&D time/$ spent on micro transaction items (as opposed to KDF and PvP development) could have a sense of satisfaction when defeating an opponent w/built in advantages.

Also, I still do play EVE from time to time. I'm not looking to turn this game into EVE, I'm looking to either avoid Pay to Win in PvP, or make it painful to Pay to Win in PvP.


If you don't like the way things are, you are a human and I assume an adult. If you don't like it, don't play it life is way too short. You choose to come here and play the game and you choose to make asinine suggestions.

You are trying to ruin people off from pvp. You are not trying to help it out. The majority of high lvl ships can be acquired in game. Some people donít have the time to spend grinding for emblems to receive the ships they want so they spend cash. You are just upset because you are not satisfied with this approach and you want to make an in game method to punish people for doing what you are not willing to do and that is shortcutting the grind to get the ships.

I am through feeding I am sure you will never be full.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 43
08-09-2011, 07:56 AM
So we should quit if there is something we don't like, rather than offering feedback to correct a problem. And we shouldn't have to play the game to win the game. Should I really have to work to get paid?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 44
08-09-2011, 02:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doogie
If you don't like the way things are, you are a human and I assume an adult. If you don't like it, don't play it life is way too short. You choose to come here and play the game and you choose to make asinine suggestions.

You are trying to ruin people off from pvp. You are not trying to help it out. The majority of high lvl ships can be acquired in game. Some people donít have the time to spend grinding for emblems to receive the ships they want so they spend cash. You are just upset because you are not satisfied with this approach and you want to make an in game method to punish people for doing what you are not willing to do and that is shortcutting the grind to get the ships.

I am through feeding I am sure you will never be full.
When a responsible adult sees a problem, he or she will determine its root cause then find a solution and implement it. A child runs away from problems.

I've clearly stated on more than one occasion in this post my issue is with C-Store items which can NOT be obtained in game. If you wish to avoid a grind, then what I suggested wouldn't apply as there's a ginding means in game to obtain said item. FYI, I was willing to pay for a life time sub which included C-Store points and I have used them. You shouldn't assume I'm not refering to my own items as I have even included my Borg Captains previously.

Futher, with the exception of not being able to use C-Store unique items in PvP I have yet to read any proposed solution to the problem. I will further elaborate on the problem for you.

In the thread in the C-Store section of the forums regarding RI it was revealed by a dev there is a plan to releas a suite of KDF ships similar to the RI (ie C-Store only if at least for a minimum time and these would be the most powerful of their Tier release), also there's an audio link to an interview with a Dev who addressed the complaint about how the RI was essentially a 2.5 Tier ship by saying something to the effect they've already knowing and purposefully release ships in the C-Store which were more powerful then their peer ships. Without a timely in game means of acquiring the C-Store ships it is by definition a Pay to Win scenario.

Also, the time and $ spent by a dev on C-Store gear could be spent on finishing KDF faction development and PvP development which were unfinished at release and have barely if ever been touched.

I've come up with a solution which doesn't effect PvE nor does it effect C-Store items which are currently available by an in game means. My solution also doesn't offer a hard restriction on the ability to use the equipment C-Store customers have payed for. All it does is add risk to those have payed an additional cost to get an item which is more powerful than what's available by in game means.

How would you address these issues? Or do you plan on taking your ball and going home as you suggested?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 45
08-10-2011, 12:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamid
Since it's becoming more and more prevelant C-Store items aren't balanced, for the C-Store items sold which aren't obtainable in game let's make them have a chance of being destroyed should someone use them in a PvP match. Imo, if you want to pay for an advantage you should risk something for using it.
I can comfortably predict that this proposal will never happen, simply because it negatively impacts C-Store sales and therefore hurts Cryptic's profit margins. Without the stable bonus income earned by the C-Store to fund the development team which keeps STO content coming, this game will suffer the same fate as so many other static-content titles.

Money talks loud and clear
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 46
08-10-2011, 03:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shar487
I can comfortably predict that this proposal will never happen, simply because it negatively impacts C-Store sales and therefore hurts Cryptic's profit margins. Without the stable bonus income earned by the C-Store to fund the development team which keeps STO content coming, this game will suffer the same fate as so many other static-content titles.

Money talks loud and clear
Why would this negatively impact sales? It wouldn't effect PvEers at all. It wouldn't effect PvPers who only use items which are available by in game means. At worse it would effect PvPers who use items which aren't available by in game means and unwilling to adjust. The ability to destoy C-Store Unique items may actually draw PvPers to the game and increase both subs and C-Store transactions. I'd be willing to bet the amount they draw would vastly outway PvPers who would quit over not being guaranteed safety for their C-Store Unique items (ie Pay to Win). I base this on a personnal observation that there were more PvPers prior to the end of last year w/the influx of C-Store gear much of which was Unique for a long time as well as a more generally balanced item/skill set.

I agree it would be slim to none of happening, but that's more a result of a kneejerk response to anything resembling a "hardcore" PvP environment. I still haven't seen anything logical/reasonable stating why this would actually be bad for the game.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 47
08-10-2011, 04:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamid
Why would this negatively impact sales? It wouldn't effect PvEers at all. It wouldn't effect PvPers who only use items which are available by in game means. At worse it would effect PvPers who use items which aren't available by in game means and unwilling to adjust. The ability to destoy C-Store Unique items may actually draw PvPers to the game and increase both subs and C-Store transactions. I'd be willing to bet the amount they draw would vastly outway PvPers who would quit over not being guaranteed safety for their C-Store Unique items (ie Pay to Win). I base this on a personnal observation that there were more PvPers prior to the end of last year w/the influx of C-Store gear much of which was Unique for a long time as well as a more generally balanced item/skill set.
Why would anyone want to purchase inferior grade C-Store items that can fail and break, especially when the game was never originally designed for it? Which would YOU, as a paying customer, prefer to buy, a reliable item that will always be there, or one that can disappear? As a paying customer, I would never settle for anything less than the best possible option.

Yes, reducing C-Store item quality WILL negatively impact C-Store virtual item sales and volume. Anyone arguing otherwise is being unrealistic if not deceptive.

Quote:
I agree it would be slim to none of happening, but that's more a result of a kneejerk response to anything resembling a "hardcore" PvP environment. I still haven't seen anything logical/reasonable stating why this would actually be bad for the game.
It's safe to say that the vast majority of STO players enjoy the online game experience but hate unnecessary time sinks. Combat related repairs and maintenance definitely qualify as such. Yes, this activity does add more realism, but then no one would PVP if ship combat upkeep costs and efforts start exceeding the player's available time, resources, and interest factor.

With everything having been covered, it's best to lay this bad topic to rest.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 48
08-10-2011, 05:00 PM
I don't do a lot of PvP, but this seems like a bad idea to me. Items that cost real-world money being destructible in a casual MMO? Good luck with that ever happening.

That suggestion only makes sense if you actually believe a C-store item gives a player an insurmountable advantage (which is debatable, I don't believe the RI console is a pay-to-win gamechanger) and if you don't mind the PvP queues being even more deserted than they currently are already.

Oh, Iamid, you have seen plenty of reason why this would be bad for the game. You just refuse to accept them as valid because they don't support your position.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 49
08-10-2011, 06:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shar487
Why would anyone want to purchase inferior grade C-Store items that can fail and break, especially when the game was never originally designed for it? Which would YOU, as a paying customer, prefer to buy, a reliable item that will always be there, or one that can disappear? As a paying customer, I would never settle for anything less than the best possible option.

Yes, reducing C-Store item quality WILL negatively impact C-Store virtual item sales and volume. Anyone arguing otherwise is being unrealistic if not deceptive.



It's safe to say that the vast majority of STO players enjoy the online game experience but hate unnecessary time sinks. Combat related repairs and maintenance definitely qualify as such. Yes, this activity does add more realism, but then no one would PVP if ship combat upkeep costs and efforts start exceeding the player's available time, resources, and interest factor.

With everything having been covered, it's best to lay this bad topic to rest.
I never said a thing about maintenance nor repairs. I never said to anything about inferior grades either. I didn't say they'd fail. I said they'd have a chance at being destroyed, and only under slight conditions (ie PvP battles for only Unique C-Store items again this doesn't effect those avoiding grinds). If as reported most players PvE only it follows to most players the items would be the same and they would be purchased accordingly. PvP players who use the C-Store to avoid a grind wouldn't be effected either. This would draw more PvPers as either the playing field would be more even as people leave their unique C-Store gear in the hanger or they bring in bullseye targets to the fight. More PvP players equals more subs and more subs equals more C-Store purchases.

Now for other PvP players, there are those who abuse exploits et al and this type would be predisposed to wanting to pay to win as they don't mind cheating or uneven playing fields (I assume you're in this category w/a few others who instead of arguing against my position w/sound reason or logic like to claim complete falsehoods about my position in order to keep their Pay to Win items coming. Btw have you noticed the Ship itself is slated to have extra Boff slots for its tier, or there's slated to be a line of similar KDF ships coming down the pike?).

Also, here's a list of B.S. from your post, none of which I've suggested:

1. Combat related repairs and maintenance
2. inferior grade C-Store items that can fail and break
3. Yes, this activity does add more realism, but then no one would PVP if ship combat upkeep costs and efforts start exceeding the player's available time, resources, and interest factor.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 50
08-10-2011, 06:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by boglejam View Post
I don't do a lot of PvP, but this seems like a bad idea to me. Items that cost real-world money being destructible in a casual MMO? Good luck with that ever happening.

That suggestion only makes sense if you actually believe a C-store item gives a player an insurmountable advantage (which is debatable, I don't believe the RI console is a pay-to-win gamechanger) and if you don't mind the PvP queues being even more deserted than they currently are already.

Oh, Iamid, you have seen plenty of reason why this would be bad for the game. You just refuse to accept them as valid because they don't support your position.
Go ahead name them for me please, and let's not make claims based on a proposal I didn't make. Also, please don't make a claim with out backing it up in some manner. Don't write things like "it'd be bad for PvP" but instead "it'd be bad for PvP because of x, y, and z" or "the C-Store would have a net loss in sales because of x, y, and z"
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:40 PM.