F2P and augs

P2W could sneak into EQ in a somewhat digestible form. They could make players chase a 40 damage 1H aug or 60 damage 2H aug in a loot box.

Luckily, EQ devs have condemned P2W and most of us are happy to pay for subscriptions to prevent it.

EQ1's F2P model is extremely generous.

If people are struggling as solo F2P sub level 110, they can augment power by adding more F2P boxes (Alt-Tab).

Upon reaching higher levels, they can sub one or two accounts (at least a pet class or tank) to contend with current content.

How are the augs and P2W connected.

I fail to see why someone who is already wearing an augment they won fair and square shold lose it due to sub status. Low level augs aren't hurning anyone or anything, except returning players when they're "Prestige", yet won fairly.

Noone here whining that a F2P can autogrant, then stop paying sub again and get the AAs.

OP is correct, F2P augs need a look. Having catch up systems in game to get returning players back on the curve is and says the opposite of C blocking them over a DoN era aug.

HELP them level, don't trip them up.

It will sell more subs and expansions if they can be relevant in current game.

115 levels of inferiority should be enough incentive to sub up.

I think you are confusing who I am responding to (Jumbur on P2W in general and Joules on sub=/=profitability).

As for the rest of your points, F2P is already generous and the devs have likely decided that the status quo is fine (subscription model is balanced). I would also be concerned about the people currently complaining about older prestige augs to later move the goalposts towards even more benefits for F2P.

Although I was not responding to the OP's more narrow point but broader criticism of subscriptions, I do prefer a subscription revenue model over RMT (loot boxes) and ads.

more people reaching end game and actually WANTING a new expansion is a thing. make that easier. Certainly don't derail that over level 70 augs, or even level 85 augs. The cap is 115. HELP players get there.

It doesn't matter whether EQ's F2P is generous, it matters whether it is effective in its goal. I'm assuming that goal is bringing in new players or bringing back old players, but it could simply be to expand their ability to bring in revenue in general. Either way, the restrictions on F2P should be used to encourage a player to either sub or spend money, while avoiding P2W.

Stop thinking of it as "they get this for free, while I get this for paying." Start thinking of it as "F2P should be a road to more revenue from the players who aren't engaged enough to sub all of the time."

The problem is if you poll 100 players, you'll get 100 different responses on subscriptions (F2P and sub features) and revenue models. (You shouldn't ask a classroom of kids what brand and flavor of ice cream they want).

WoW and FF14 are clear cut on their F2P model at level 20 and level 60 cap, respectively.

EQ's current F2P model is stable and predictable. It already allows people to play in current content simply by buying the latest expansion.

I'm actually worried if they do tinker or tweak EQ F2P as they could also institute new restrictions (i.e. not being able to play F2P in current content). Just because you can sue, doesn't mean the other party can't countersue.

/em looks for anything relevant to OP here.

You say this as if they are the only options.

Marketplace non P2W items, like appearances, mounts, placeables and so on, access to long gone Legends of Norrath items and so on are not either of those. They are $ from players with and without subs.

If I log back into a character on a lapsed account, I am faaar more likely to just go start playing if 80% of my gear sin't suddenly trash and unwearable. This won;t make me immediately want to sub, it just makes me log off angrily because I won the gear fair and square.
F2P should get up to 3 expansion behind current game. and whatever the level cap was last before curent content. Level 110 vs 115 is plenty hindrance, but why on Norraht would we want to actively prevent a returning player from.. catching up? Not prestige BS on trivial things they already own. That's just mean and patently unfair.

Did you recently return to the game? Do you main on another MMORPG?

It is not difficult to gear up on EQ1 these days. The issue is probably more of messaging (tutorial) than the actual subscription model.

Edit: Before today, your last post was on the TLP forums in 2017. Welcome back!

I don't get all this with wanting MORE for FREE... EQ is very generous with how much you can do and how many hours you can enjoy the game...

You can't do 10ish bucks a month for many many hours of entertainment?

Well I couldn't survive in RoS with EoK gear on a paid account, so I might quibble a little with your "simply by buying the latest expansion" statement, but yes you can access it and go there if you have a strong enough group to take up your F2P slack. Any changes they might make to F2P could ruin that, but I don't think they would want to do anything to discourage people buying expansions. If giving away everything older than 4 expansions didn't seem too risky to sales, then their F2P restrictions aren't likely to get more restrictive in that way.

As far as what people want, I mean you never ask what flavor the kids want, you ask if they want ice cream, and then after they say yes, you say "ok but you have to do this first." You've successfully marketed the ice cream at that point, so the rest is on the suckers working the counter. My son works at a froyo place so I'm qualified to make this determination.

And let's be honest, WoW's F2P is what would be considered a demo in the times before MMORPGs. They know their game is like crack for the common folk, "the first hit is free" is how they can market that. Not every game can rely on that quality.

Dumping the prestige thing would probably get more people playing. It would probably also lose them some subs initially. The rub is where things go from there. If they lose a few and gain a lot, or lose a few and the Marketplace goes crazy, then it might be worth it. Somebody mentioned the DBC not being usable by F2P, that's a big problem if true. It should be something like subs > expansions > $15 F-150. Sorry I'm just bitter since Epic bought Psyonix and raised the price on everything in Rocket League. Woah tangent, simmer down now.

You can survive in the latest expansion by boxing. You have to account for the force multiplier with F2P boxes. It it not difficult to gear up in modern EQ1.

The devs (specifically Ngreth) has designed it where F2P has access to T1 group gear in the latest expansion.

Again, F2P already get access to the latest expansion's T1 group gear. You now want them to access T2/T3 group gear and T1/T2 raid gear?

As I said to Shurman, the issue at hand may not be the subscription model but rather the messaging for new and returning players (tutorial).

So I didn't notice this earlier.

But most of the people in this thread looking for more F2P power are new or returning players.

You can survive as F2P in modern day EQ1.

Here are some tips:
1. Create boxes (1-2 more chars). Preferably 1 pet class for pet tanking if you are new.
2. Look for T1 group gear in the expansion you will play in. (Ask for help to get a leg up or purchase old armor templates in Bazaar).
3. Sub at least one account for a T5 healer merc.

I was two boxing myself, with mercs, but my second character wasn't caught up yet in levels. I didn't actually try to take that duo to RoS though, it was hard enough in EoK with my 105 Monk and 92 Shaman, and both accounts were subbed. My main was in crafted EoK gear, but not a tank, which is probably the issue. I did go to RoS with some guildies and it was rough. But that isn't really my point, I was mostly agreeing with you on F2P accessing the latest expansion. My point is that selling expansions is very important to DPG and they likely wouldn't make any F2P changes that would risk loss of an expansion sale.

That's not actually what I'm arguing. My point is that F2P as it exists now probably needs to be reviewed, and if that happens, their focus should be a model that encourages more revenue, either by leading to subs or marketplace purchases. If that means the prestige thing goes away, that's fine with me. If you earned it while you were paying I don't see why you shouldn't be able to use it, unless it's legitimately discouraging you from subbing or spending more money in the future.

Yeah, 105 monk/92 shaman duo is not ready for EoK.

Why would you say they would lose money (e.g. expansion sale) because F2P is not any more generous? The expansion sells itself: more content.

I think the problem is messaging (tutorial, guidance) rather than the revenue model itself.

If F2P gets reviewed, EG7 is probably going to the other way (restrict F2P from current content) and they'll cite WoW and FF14 for their decision. That's why I'd rather not touch F2P at all; there could be some trade-off (more access to old content, locked out of current content).

People sub in large part because of the prestige gear restriction. (Obviously, we can go back-and-forth on data or lack thereof). But the fact that this thread even exists and is an issue shows that the prestige distinction is a important determinant for subscriptions.

We are currently in a happy medium where F2P get access to T1 non-prestige group gear in the latest expansion. T1 CoV group gear is actually an upgrade over T2 ToV group gear. I honestly don't see the problem.

And please don't take my argument personally.

I like the subscription model as it currently stands.

I do not want some trade-off or unintended consequences through revenue engineering: F2P gets more access to old content but locked out of the current expansion, or the introduction of more loot boxes (beyond cosmetic crates) or in-game ads.

Be careful what you wish for.

100% of the reason I sub several accounts is for prestige gear. Complaining of prestige augs when FTP gear is at it's very best point in history seems pretty petty. FTP gear is now ~7700hp. Why do you even need an aug at that point? Want augs? Subscribe or use TBM augs.

I'd say it's a fair bet most people on here have paid and FTP accounts going together. Why shred the main reason people sub (prestige/nonprestige) so people that don't pay for the game can have more free stuff at the expense of keeping the game alive? If I want top tier augs on my 7th box, I'll pay for it, but I don't.

I was responding to your concern that they would change F2P in a way that would ruin a person's ability to buy the expansion and then utilize it while F2P. You detailed that more below, so I'll address that there, but my position is they wouldn't change F2P in a way that would risk sales of the expansion.

I guess this comes down to who gets to make the decisions, or who gets to make the arguments in the meetings or whatever. If DPG could afford to skip a year of making an expansion, I think 2020 would have been the year given the worldwide situation. Since they didn't, I'm going to assume they have to release one to stay afloat. Any conversation around the impact F2P has on revenue is likely to touch on that topic.

Is EG7 that hands on in the first place? I don't know. Assuming they would come in with a suggestion that specific seems misguided. Even if they did, I'm sure that it could be argued that a low level demo in EQ wouldn't have the same effect as it does for WoW, I can't say how it effects FF14.

In the end, not touching things leads to stagnation. Sometimes we don't like change, but the industry has changed, and not recognizing that can be a problem. I could probably write a book about how the entire downfall of EQ was due to the Luclin models, but it would be a bad book and nobody should read it. I still think they suck, but imagine trying to convince people to play EQ now with the original models. Progress comes with a cost, but it is mostly absorbed by adjusting and accepting the change.

Do you really think these for-profit companies live in a land of unicorns and rainbows where they will drop certain money-making features and not put in a trade-off or cost (other monetization schemes)?

Do you really want to see loot boxes and ads in our game simply because a small segment of the population (free riders) wanted access to BiS gear?

If we see loot boxes, ads, or any other mobile game money-mechanic, this game will be a shiz show.