[Theorycrafting] Revamped All Access and F2P Model.

—All Access characters start all spells and abilities at Master but can upgrade to all the way to Celestial. F2P starts at Apprentice and cannot exceed Expert. (If an account reverts to F2P, spells will default to Apprentice unless upgraded which will downgrade to Expert. You will regain spell rank upon resubscribing).

—All Access has the ability to go to bonus infusion layer (to a predefined threshold). (Infusers could be prestige and/or limited to All Access crafters with prestige recipes).

—All Access receives highest tier mercenary battalion buff.

—All Access receives premium features in Overseer. (Premium quests with premium rewards).

—There will be an increase in prestige items (all items and adornments from sig line and higher are now prestige).

—Creation of a tier of prestige gear for mounts and mercenaries. (This could entail a major nerf to current mount and merc gear. This gear could be limited to All Access crafters with prestige recipes).

—All Access now has access to Beastlord, Channeler, Aerykan, and Freebold. (If an account reverts to F2P, the character is locked until the appropriate feature is purchased or resubscribed).

—F2P no longer has access to familiars. Familiars are reserved for All Access.


The goal is to find the right mix where players cross the threshold where they deem necessary and beneficial to subscribe without undermining the current F2P Model. With an increase in subscription revenue, EQ2 can wean itself off of its reliance on microtransactions (cash shop P2W/Pay to Shortcut or higher expansion tiers).

I have not seen a comparable post in months or years.

This is a refined iteration; less controversial and much more workable.

You keep bleating on about changing the F2P model. You've made some threads yourself, and tried to shoehorn this idea into various other threads.
It's never going to happen. EQ2 is a footnote. It's a cash cow to help keep EQ1 afloat. There will be no radical changes to this game except when it goes from being live, to not being live. Which will probably be in about 2-3 years time.

That's your opinion and you're 100% entitled to it.

I'd like to keep this thread civil and open to constructive dialogue.

Feel free to comment on the many non-constructive complaint threads, open your own thread, send me private message, or put me on ignore. (This goes for anyone - especially folks who may intend to let this thread devolve).

Thank you.

This suggestion cannot possibly be serious. The revenue gained from having more subscribers would be hugely outweighed by the loss of free players (who help support the game with store purchases as well as keeping enough characters active to make it more worth playing for everyone) as well as the loss of store purchases from subscribers.

I speak as an All Access player that would personally only benefit from this - if destroying the game wasn't a factor.

I understand the hesitancy to adopt these changes. I wrote this post with feedback from the my last thread. The main criticisms were locking F2P out of major features (level caps, expansions, Overseer, mounts). I sought to incorporate feedback from that thread as well as longstanding criticism of cash shop, current spell upgrades, itemization, infusion, and other aspects.

The suggested plan ticks off a lot of concerns:

• Addresses the increasing reliance and criticism of cash shop (P2W/Pay to Shortcut) by shifting more of the revenue stream to subscription. Thereby granting All Access baseline features that were previously reserved to grinding (spell upgrades, mount upgrades) or cash shop (P2W/Pay to Shortcut).
• Keeps the current F2P model largely intact. No level cap or expansion restrictions. (Compare this to WoW's level 20 cap).
• Provides major incentives to go to All Access.

EQ1 has found the right All Access/F2P mix and stays self-sufficient and relevant with a largely cosmetic-only cash shop. EQ2 needs to find the right medium.

The population halves with each xpac, it's a consistent pattern. If they're going to keep this game alive for much longer, they're going to have to bleed the whales dry, to the point of it being morally questionable. The last thing they want to do is just harpoon all the F2P whales.

Is there really such a thing as a F2P Whale?

If you are a raider or play in heroics, you are likely to be All Access because of Prestige-restricted gear. If you are F2P, you probably won't invest a lot in the game because you don't need to min-max.

What Daybreak/Darkpaw should do is to "encourage" people on the tipping point (between Solos and Heroics) to subscribe to gain the edge to complete additional content. Solos should be the de facto endpoint for F2P (which is still quite a generous model).

One can argue that, with restrictions on Familiars and Mount gears, those facets would be the modicum to push players more easily over the Resolve/Potency requirements for Heroics and higher gameplay. In other words, with restrictions on F2P, devs can make higher Resolve & Potency gear for actual paying customers.

If free to play players are buying anything at all, it's better than forcing them out of the game. Some people are just completely opposed to paying subscriptions, but will buy little bits and bobs here and there.

The population is in a terrible terrible state, regardless of the nonsense they say on the podcast. It's fairly easy to see. Even on Thurgadin, which is probably the busiest server, we're running pickup raids with <24 players, or dual boxes. This is heading steadily in one direction only, and the last thing any of us want is to accelerate that process. The game doesn't need more money, it need ownership that actually cares about it and has a plan.

Yeah, make more powerful beastlord and chaneller! Аfter all they will bring more money. And delete all other classes from these archetypes. And return to subscribe paying system

The plan proposed in this thread does not unduly alter the current F2P model. F2P is not restricted with level or expansion caps. It is still very generous.

Both the podcasts and videos (Fading) describe high population (and the devs know the internal data) so it makes this proposal feasible.

We are flattening the cash shop (P2W/Pay to Shortcut) in exchange for a more equitable distribution of game resources (raiders should not subsidize the game for everyone else) and higher subscription revenue.

I technically am free to play (buy kronos with plat) and have stats on par with top 5 raid guilds (just shy of 185k standing)

Could qualify that as a free to play whale /shrug

High population? Let's forget about the data we're not given access to and look at it this way. How much traffic is there on the official forums? It's tiny isn't it? That in itself is pretty shocking.

I know guys who have been keeping an eye on the population using easily obtainable data, such as searching for number of each class at the highest level each expac, numbers of characters completing the signature line etc, and seeing which way the numbers are heading. Yes some people hide their profiles, but that is most likely a steady proportion of the population, so we can discount that. We can have a rough guess at how many alts each account is likely to have on average and come to the conclusion that the population appears to halve every expac. It's not perfect data, but you don't need it. The only way this method is inaccurate, is if a much greater number of players hide their profiles each expac, which is highly unlikely.

Now look around your server. Think back to the names you regularly grouped with when grinding experts last summer. How many of them do you never see now? I can think of loads.

Like I said above, the game doesn't need money. It's like trying to cure someone of cancer by paying their mortgage. It needs new ownership, and it won't get it because it's too old and knackered. Just try to enjoy the game until it dies, without marginalising a whole tranche of the player base, ie ftp. They're not the problem.

First I would like to say... You about gave me a heart attack with the way your title is worded... It made me think it was something that was being done... I kinda feel like you did deliberately so people would read it... Not reading forums with out more coffee in me that's for sure... I would like to know is this something that is being put out by daybreak? I see you in a lot of threads in regards to memberships and free to play implying changes that should be made... If this isn't coming from daybreak, why are you investing so much time into this? I am just curious... You seem very adamant about the subject, thats why I was assuming you were doing this for daybreak... But then when I dug through the forums I realized that was not the case...

If you are looking for feedback on this... I will tell you that you seem extremely biased against the F2P players... It reminds me of back when the forums and servers where seperated... eq2x and eq2... When they first merged us all together, it was a nightmare... It also got very ugly... What you are suggesting, would put it right back to that... F2P would not be accepted into groups for lack of what they could not use... That's not forcing them into a membership... That's getting them to walk away...
Someone the other day in chat on MD had a very good point to be made... Do you buy things with plat to better your character? Food, steel crates, familiar cages, masters, loot rights, etc? if so what is the difference? One may be with cash and one may be with plat... But ultimately it is still a currency and you are bettering yourself through paying... Everything I have seen on the market that will better you is a gamble... So is the 2 crates you get for free every 7 days... Or the familiar from the quest you get or drop... So is the overseer... You can get some nice gear if you are lvled high enough potions, and barding slots... If you use any of that... You are just as guilty as P2W... whether you wanna see it from that point of view or not...
I guess what I see you doing is putting us back to the beginning of F2P... Some guilds wouldn't even touch F2P players... You said F2P is still very generous... How is that hurting you or anyone else? Also P2W is a choice...
Your last paragraph implies this is something that daybreak needs to do... why? why do you feel their finances are truly anybodies business but their own... They haven't ever once said that they need income...

What you have drawn up is a greedy horrible idea tearing up the population that has already been hit... You just need to present your idea to daybreak... get a yes or no answer... But I don't think even daybreak would be that selfish and rude to F2P players... What if you lost your job barely made it by and was f2p on eq1 and had no access to eq2 at all.... would you still want it? I'm sorry but if you say yes... I don't believe you... no offense... Until you walk in their shoes, don't try to change them. Have you noticed, the things you talk about changing, are things that are a choice... If you take away choice and demand certain ways... Does that not make the company like a dictator? My way or the highway?

I am not saying your layout is bad... I am saying its bad for things that already are in affect... If it was a brand new game maybe... But you can't take away whats already been given... That's not nice... Anyways just my thoughts... I hope you get the answers you are looking for....

Also even if eq1 found the perfect balance... This is NOT eq1... never has been, never will be... I remember being logged in on eq1 the day eq2 dropped... 2 completely differrent games.. Alot of my friends bailed eq1 for eq2 becuz of housing being introduced.... lol

I'd rather not be resigned to the fatalist perspective of "enjoying the.game until it dies." I'd like to find workable solutions.

My plan barely touches the current F2P model. No one can articulate specific criticisms. If people take the time to read it, it is very sensible. There are no heavy-handed level or expansion cap restrictions like most other MMOs. F2P can do current expansion Solos (and most older adventure, tradeskill, and raid content) but they will be soft capped at current expansion Heroics and higher. (Some will honestly say this should have been the subscription model applied to EQ2 many years ago).

Based on feedback in previous All Access threads, most players feel like the only reasons to sub is for Bonus Coin/Speed, Broker, Fast Travel, and prestige gear. Does that really send people over the tipping point to sub? It is apparent by many F2P player reactions that it does not.

There has been too many criticisms about the cash shop (Pay-to-Win/Pay-to-Shortcut). I also feel like raiders and min-maxes should not subsidize the game for everyone else (who seek best cash shop familiars, mounts, infusers, or spell upgrades).

Most EQ1 players gladly pay for All Access. They even purchase subscriptions for multiple accounts to lift restrictions and gain power. There seems to be this false notion that All Access is prohibitively expensive on EQ2. (Yes, I've heard in my previous thread that - for some foreigners - $10-15/month is too high). $15 is actually fairly low after you account for inflation.

I want EQ2 is succeed and celebrate her 20th anniversary but that may entail some changes to the current subscription model.

If this is a game people love (and want to see succeed), $15 per month for a boost that also keeps cash shop cosmetic-only should not garner opposition.

$15 a month is a fraction of what min-maxers are paying right now.

How many ftp players do you think there actually are? And how many of them do you think would actually pay to play THIS GAME if they were strong-armed into it? Or do you think the majority would just call it the straw that broke the camel's back and go play something else? You do realise EQ2 isn't actually very good at the moment right? It's not like it's value for money when you consider the lack of quality and content in the latest xpac, and how the old content is a one-shot snorefest now. The game is a mess top to bottom, bugs, broken content, old bugs that they never bothered fixing, redundant stuff that's left in and just does nothing. That any of us agree to pay to play this in its current state is amazing enough, let alone more people.

The game is so heavily pay-to-win now, the last time I saw anything this bad was Perfect World. When a publisher is trying to bleed its customer base this heavily, it means the end is nigh. Sorry you don't like that, but it's true.

You jump from your "F2P whales" theory to accepting my premise of min-maxers. I am flattered.

That's the funny thing. My proposal would actually help the players who want to do away with P2W/Pay-to-Shortcut at the cost of minimal or slight modifications to F2P.

This is a more equitable distribution of the costs of running and innovating in this game.

Let's get straight to the point: you want a quality game for free or near nothing (expansion cost only). You don't want cash shop to fund the game but you also don't want slight modifications to F2P to encourage subs. I'm sorry but EQ2 can't just sell $15-20 skins like Fortnite to stay viable.

What is your revenue model to keep EQ2 viable? Fortnite season pass and skin model? Mobile game-type microtransactions? GoFundMe? Beg for investors like Pantheon and Star Citizen? If you are a fatalist with no constructive alternative, then you really aren't contributing anything to this discussion other than pontificating. It may be best that you move on from this thread (even though I appreciate the bumps).

I've never played EQ1 or 2 without subscription. I also stumped up for the premium edition this time. Now that we've had a few months of BoL though, I kinda wish I could get my money back. I'd say we were certainly mis-sold BoL. It's lucky for them that the customer is so poorly protected when it comes to buying in-game products. No, I don't expect anything for nothing, I didn't like it when they first went ftp, also was one of the first to be up in arms when the original cash shop appeared. We knew it'd only be cosmetic stuff for a time.

My revenue model? I've said it before, lots of engaging, fun, good quality content that keeps hold of players when they return, and gradually build the player base back up, open new servers etc. So yes, primarily, an ideal world where you have 100-200k subscribers, and not the miniscule amount we have now.

Problem with that is, it requires a leap of faith from the people holding the purse strings, because it involves investment with no guarantee of a return. It simply won't happen. They also don't have the numbers of staff to do the game justice now. And the code is so old and messy, they can't just hire more people. If they could re-hire all the good guys they sacked down the years, that'd be a start, but let's face it, that's fantasy.

The alternative? Well the ptw model is pushing players away, there's no doubt about that. The idea that wringing a few more subscriptions out of a small population of ftp players would be the solution though? That's got to be a joke. How many do you think there are? I asked before and you didn't answer. To replace all the pay-to-win revenue, you'd need a huge number of additional subscribers, and getting them would be too much hard work and investment, when they can just dangle something shiny, lock raid progression behind massive potency mitigation and dps checks, and wait for the raiders to bust out the credit cards.

I'm sorry you think the problem is fixable. It isn't. You can write me off as a fatalist by all means, and back before they started to go down the ptw route, it was easy to write off people as fatalist. But whatever way you look at it, there's very very little to be positive about when it comes to this game. It's all heading in one direction, and if you think ftp is in any way the cause of that, well, that's your problem.