84 replies to this topic

[nitra]

Creovex, on 02 December 2014 - 08:36 PM, said:

Perks of Premium: You get less grind by running on it.... (more xp and cbills per match)

So let's do some math here with some general estimations to make it quick and clean to show how the current system is getting you what you keep asking for, just in a different format.

Subscription model (as is right now)

Lets take the $15 a month MC approach....
-Buy 3000MC for $15
-Use 2500MC for 30 days of premium time
-Bank 500MC a month (12 months, bank 6000MC)

Lets take the Bulk Sum MC discount (yearly) approach....
-Buy 24000MC for $100
-Use 24000MC for 360 days of premium time
-Cost of ~$8.34 a month for the perk ($80 less annually then a monthly payment)
-Use that banked ~$80 and buy a 12,000MC for $50, use the other $30 you saved to buy your wife chocolates on Valentines Day (And get laid and keep your personal life alive)

People want....
-I should get 1000MC a month -> Solution: Buy the Bulk Sum MC approach
-A month $15 sub approach -> Solution: Buy the $15 a month MC approach (and yes, you can now activate later you banked time with the mwomercs/profile link they added)
-People want perks for xp and cbills -> Solution: Buy any premium time option
-Early access to other things.... -> We already have that all over the place, its not like all DLC doesn't eventually become free, and in a rather fast timeframe if I do say so myself. Hell I just saw that the Masakari is up for Cbills.... not more then a few months after I bought my pack.

Why do we need a sub model again?

You make some good points.

but i think a sub would be more to some people liking .

to some its a budget thing, they setup the 15 dollar sub or whatever price Then. thats it, they have budgeted their game play for that year . they no longer need to spend any more money on the game .

where as with mc bulk purchases once its gone there maybe a nagging need to go back and buy more mc thus they end up spending more on the game than they really wanted to .

it is really a psychological thing and im sure its all been researched out and thus why f2p gaming is so lucrative .


but there is those who are not total suckers and would prefer a more traditional model ala the standard sub you get x for x , fair trade.

i guess its a matter of conditioning really , but there is still one subset that your ideology does not address.

and thats people like me who dont care for premium time.

all we want is mechs and cammos and paint and feel the mc price is just way to high to acquire those things .

we do feel a sub for a 15 a month in return for a mc stipend and some colors cammos and other goodies would be a good deal.

premium time is just gravy.


but then we get into the whole mess that sub players just want another form of entitlement ..

I disagree i just think its a fair option to offer players to give them a choice on how they want to spend their money .

giving your customer base more options to spend their money is not a bad thing .

While, maybe in the end it is just a psychological thing. Subs just make people feel better . micro transaction still feel dirty

and there is no reason not to have both models .


but your reasoning may actually convert some sub supporters to rethink their position, good post.

Edited by nitra, 03 December 2014 - 12:03 AM.

[Kirkland Langue]

R Razor, on 01 December 2014 - 07:23 PM, said:

I'd prefer to see it set up as a pay to play as opposed to free to play........would eliminate a LOT of the issues seen in the game as well as in the forums. I'd happily pay $19.95 a month to get rid of some of the dead weight.

Edited to clarify: I do not believe free to play players are deadweight, the deadweight I was referring to are easily identifiable by their attitudes and posting styles. Apparently one such individual thought I was referring to free to play players and decided to "champion" their cause.

I find this post interesting. This is probably because I'm of the opinion that the vast majority of posters on these forums have put $100's of dollars into this game. If I had seen this prior to your edit, I would likely have thought you meant the F2P players but if you aren't talking about the F2P players... then I wonder who you are talking about.

BTW - if the game were to go P2P, would you have PGI refund all of the money spent by players up to this point? Would those players have all money they spent converted into the monthly packages for future playtime? How would that work?

[Jack Corban]

NO SUBSCRIPTION! END OF STORY /Thread

[Metus regem]

If I could get a couple of well written and well done campaigns, then yes, I'd pony up a sub.

The sub/preferred/f2p model has been working for SWTOR, so with some tweaking it could work here too, but we would need more content.

[Saobh]

tbh I really think that CW should be only on a subscription type access availability only. I'm not saying this in order to block players whatever type of player think should have access to this "serious business" part of the game, but rather because to get the work and content which will be necessary to have enough depth to it ---> # of maps , different types of scenarios before a planet is taken (rather then just blow up this thing behind a wall played x times in a row) , implementation of multi level resource management (planets which bring c-bills, factories which boost the quirks of its specialized chassis .. )

Right now PGI makes money on selling hero mechs, pattern and colors etc meaning they need to concentrate on having new stuff for players to drool on to buy it. That is effort not being placed on making CW a living galaxy wide war which we'll feel we are taken part in.

If this game is to live on it needs more content and more depth, the shiny colors and Mechs are just the icing on it and must not be its sole way of surviving.