The Resource Revamp: Is it Pay2Win?

Discussion in 'Test Server: Discussion' started by Cyridius, Jul 9, 2014.

  1. Cyridius

    We know that with the Resource Revamp that Acquisition Timers are being removed, and that resources are being replaced with a single resource called "Nanites". The exact method of this Nanite Acquisition is not clear, but it is presumably tied to territory capture.

    We've also been told that the average player will be much more Resource starved and that taking bases for resources will be a very real objective.

    We've also been told that we can no longer stack up on certain items; Like Grenades and C4.

    So, that begs the question...

    Where does that leave Resource Boosters and Membership? With Acquisition Timers no longer being the common restriction(Even paying players had to cert it out), will this revamp give those with Boosters and *even larger* advantage than already exists?

    It's not like free2play players can compensate for this by stock piling infantry stuff, that's been removed.

    And now that there's no more timers, paying players will be able to pull more vehicles more often than anyone else. At least now with the Resource Boosters they don't matter that much; Resources are often in an abundance, and they still have the Timers.

    So, Resource Revamp; Another step down the slippery slope of Pay2Win that SOE has promised they're trying to reverse?
    • Up x 1
  2. Elrobochanco


    Especially in this phase, it's the same as before, except everyone will always have a baseline of maximum income to start. It will likely allow free players to get a lot more than previously, and paid players to be more careless.
    • Up x 7
  3. lokisrun

    I think it proves that there a lot of people out there who still don't know what Pay to Win is.
    • Up x 11
  4. Cyridius

    I disagree. Without the acquisition timers, there is no balance between the Free and Paid players. Now, the only variable here in whether one can pull a vehicle is resources. If I can get more resources, I can get more vehicles. If I can get more vehicles because I paid real money for it, that sounds pretty Pay2Win.

    In the first iteration of this revamp, there doesn't sound like there will be a problem. Something like 10 minutes to go from 0 to full. But this is the first phase. Later on it is a different animal.

    There are many who would argue that Resource Boosters should not be in this game, period.
    • Up x 4
  5. FateJH

    Resource boosts do not make the game Pay2Win under the current implementation and having both resource cost and Acquisition Timer certifcation line does not stop it from being Pay2Win.

    Pay2Win would be having to spend SC or a membership just to pull an MBT in the first place. Everyone else has to pull an AMC Gremlin.
    • Up x 2
  6. Cyridius

    And what is the difference? I can pull 5 Vanguards because I paid for it, you can pull 2. This is just for vehicles; What about C4? Grenades? MAX suits? Are you trying to argue that having more resources than everyone else yields no significant advantage?
    • Up x 3
  7. lokisrun

    Or if that tank that you bought did more damage, had more health and was faster that a Tank bought without real money.

    To the people screaming Pay 2 Win constantly, there are plenty of other legitimate problems with this game that need analysis, instead of incorrectly tagging Pay 2 Win onto literally every change the devs make.
    • Up x 3
  8. Mekeji

    At 60 resources per minute and MBT cost being brought down to 300 it just means that everyone can pull tanks every 5 minutes if they want.

    The only thing being a member will get you is allow you to be more reckless.

    The system really could have been pay to win if members were able to constantly pull tanks every minute while normal players had to wait 10-15 minutes. However as it is being implemented it is quite well done and will just force people to specialize or have to keep resource management in mind to do many roles.
    • Up x 1
  9. Chipay

    That's not Pay2Win, i can still win from someone with a superior loadout. P2W would be when you could spawn an invincible tank only with SC.

    Clearly you have no idea what pay to win means either, you're describing Pay 2 Advantage, that's already in the game.
  10. Mekeji

    Pay2win has been clearly defined over the years as anything in a game you can pay for that just gives you a noticeable advantage over non-paying individuals. Like golden ammo that boosts damage or more ammo for paying players. In this instance it is more resources to subs.

    However as it is being described it seems as though it will not be in that pay2win category as most people who tank seriously, can survive the 5 minutes in one tank that it takes to get resources to get another. The only thing the sub helps with are people who suicide their vehicles and they aren't really doing much anyways.

    What you are describing is Pay2cheat. I think you are the one who doesn't understand what Pay2Win is.
    • Up x 3
  11. Chipay

    Dude, look at the word.

    Pay = paying money
    to = what are you paying money for?
    Win = you're paying money to win

    Somebody who pays money but is ******** is still going to lose with golden ammo. Golden ammo is just paying for an advantage. Like having 50% more resource income.
  12. FateJH

    You could argue that even what I suggested - having to pay SC just to acquire the MBT in-game - is not a pure Pay2Win scenario because non-paying members still have access to AV equipment for destroying MBTs.

    Here's an article that creates a stark contrast I think underscores the point.
    We're not talking about Nanoweave 5, we're talking about a hypothetical Nanoweave 103 that only exists because you bought 102 increasingly expensive improvements on the cert line and offers such a benefit that any non-paying member should only feel lucky if theirs is the one-billionth bullet that kills the b astard.
  13. axiom537

    I have an idea...Buy a membership and support the game!

    And no this is not P2W. Free players will still be able to pull vehicles, maxes etc. etc. but at a slightly reduced rate from those players that actually support the game, if you want to pull vehicles and maxes more often, then buy a membership and support the game...
    The free players will not be restricted from gunning and there are a multiple freely accessible weapons that F2P players will be able to use to kill vehicles and maxes, so they will not be at a disadvantage...
    • Up x 2
  14. Goretzu

    What people class as "P2W" is a massive scale:

    From if you pay more no one who has paid less can possibly kill you
    To if you pay more you avoid a small grind

    And everything in between (by some definations being able to buy a $1 reload in game would NOT be "P2W", by others it would be MASSIVELY so).

    However "what is the defination of P2W" arguements are completely irrelevent, only what people believe to be P2W remotely matters (and no amount of semanticing over "the" defination can change that persons belief or their reaction to it).
  15. Mekeji

    You are taking the very literal look at that opposed to the actual meaning the term Pay2Win has gained over the years of f2p games.

    You are arguing semantics which is just annoying.

    Pay2Win has gained a connotation as a system in a f2p game in which a player can directly purchase something to gain an advantage that other players who don't pay real money can't obtain.

    By the definition of Pay2Win formed over the years of the f2p culture the resource boosts are pay2win.

    Now when it comes to how bad of a Pay2Win model it is, isn't noticeable in the current resource system due to cool down timers. However with the new system there are no timers only resources. As long as free players have more than enough resources in the new system it won't be a problem.

    However if members are able to just spam maxes while free players have to wait long periods of time for them, then it will be an issue. As it is being planned it seems fine and the boost is basically just allowing members to diversify.
    • Up x 4
  16. Chipay

  17. Mekeji

    No source is needed. I have played free to play games for more than a second and have a basic understanding of the meaning of pay2win when it comes to the term used in the f2p ecosystem.

    If you have ever even talked to any kind of community on the concept of pay2win in video games then you would understand it.

    The fact that you are arguing semantics of it shows you have no actual retort and are just trying to be an annoying little bugger.
  18. FateJH

    There's a fun game. Come, let us add MLA documenting to everything of supposed substance and put a bibliography at the end.
    • Up x 3
  19. Tommyp2006

    You guys really should give up in this, "is this slightly p2w" argument, because in an f2p, a subscriber will ALWAYS have some kind of advantage over a non paying member. That's the entire point of a subscription in a free to play game. Hell, I could argue that the member priority queue is p2w. It's something that you have to accept will exist in a f2p game, the argument will be to what degree is acceptable. I think a resource an X boost is an acceptable advantage for a paying member over a free member. It's not like paying members are being given double damage or double health, which would be much worse.
    • Up x 1
  20. lokisrun

    Certainly, this thread has reminded me why I rarely post on internet forums. I've assumed (incorrectly it seems) that there have been enough Pay 2 Win games in the last 10- 15 years or so for every reasoned person to realise why the term was coined. It is obviously not as one poster on here seems to think a system whereby you pay the devs some money and you instantly win, that is a truly insane literal interpretation of the term and anyone who thinks that probably has deeper issues they need to address.

    The fact is that there is no true definition, hence the rise of terms like Pay 4 Convenience, but I like to think there is a pretty clear logical conclusion that most people will come to. On the topic of resources boosts, I think I've made it clear that I don't believe they provide a distinct advantage to people that use them in fact it could be argued that if you need to pull 5 vehicles in 5 minutes by using one of these boosts you are probably causing your team a disadvantage.
    • Up x 2