Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

I finally understand the Pay to Win argument

1235710

Comments

  • DanitaKusorDanitaKusor Member UncommonPosts: 556
    Originally posted by Adalwulff

    Whats really funny is how they ignore the need for supply, whenever I bring it up, they simply ignore it and stick to thier claim that buying gold will ruin GW2.

    They just dont get it do they?

    Supply has never been an issue.  We have 2 secure supply camps in the Eternal Battlegrounds and a network of towers protecting them so we have caravans keeping us supported constantly and most people by now are carrying around supply.

    The Enlightened take things Lightly

  • RyowulfRyowulf Member UncommonPosts: 664

    How long would WvW be P2W? A day? I don't doubt that there will be a few hardcore guilds who spend money and corr supply really well.

    How many people are ever likely to fight them those first few days? Won't those guilds just end up fighting each other until people level and it balances out?

    This was said before but there are many MMOs where you can spend money to buy gold. At least in this case the damage seems mininal.

    Finally keep in mind it is those spending spree types that help keep GW2 sub free. If it bothers anyone so much make a guild where everyone spends $15 a month and you can buy tons of gems (and you won't be spending any more money than you would for SWToR or SW or Rifts or etc.)

  • FreyasFreyas Member Posts: 32

    Has noone noticed that you can buy blueprints with Badges of Honor (the tokens you get as loot for killing players) now?  I've been buying blueprints left and right this BWE without spending a single silver.  Most of the cheap blueprints are only 2 or 3 badges, which means you can pay for a blueprint by killing a couple of players, no money required.  Most siege weapons pay for themselves, plus all the other loot that you get from the loot bags.

    With the change this BWE to have your loot appear at your feet instead of where you killed the enemies, it's been really easy to afford everything- I haven't spent a lot of time repeatedly suiciding into superior forces and getting all my armor broken repeatedly, though- that might end up costing you some money in repairs.

  • mastersomratmastersomrat Member UncommonPosts: 373

    Haven't played this game but it sounds like people will at some point stop playing these pvp bouts untill max lvl.

  • PurutzilPurutzil Member UncommonPosts: 3,048

    It is P2W to some degree. Even at 80 your going to be earning about the same doign Straight WvW, and if your not your no way going to be able to fund a whole seige on your own without stocking up and saving a lot for it.

     

    The big issue comes is theres less to actually play to get stronger with that money becomes that much more important and having it that much more influencial on victory.

  • Gaia_HunterGaia_Hunter Member UncommonPosts: 3,065
    Originally posted by Adalwulff

    Whats really funny is how they ignore the need for supply, whenever I bring it up, they simply ignore it and stick to thier claim that buying gold will ruin GW2.

    They just dont get it do they?

    It is called theorycrafting.

    What money allows is for players that choose to ignore PvE to get some money straight away - it clearly is a convinience thing.

    It is easy to understand that supply is limited - it regenerates at a constant rate - and that limit will prevent a massive army of trebuchets from spawning. But admiting this removes the P2W argument.

    If you own the entire map, sure, then can you create 150 golems like team legacy did (you still need 150 players to use them), But if you own the map you already won.

     

    Currently playing: GW2
    Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders

  • Gaia_HunterGaia_Hunter Member UncommonPosts: 3,065
    Originally posted by Purutzil

    It is P2W to some degree. Even at 80 your going to be earning about the same doign Straight WvW, and if your not your no way going to be able to fund a whole seige on your own without stocking up and saving a lot for it.

     

    The big issue comes is theres less to actually play to get stronger with that money becomes that much more important and having it that much more influencial on victory.

    In a 2 weeks match. A massive battle where you have 3+ million points, no individual alone will be influencial.

    I don't understand the lvl 80 part - rewards scale as you level. A real level 80 will earn more money that a level 2 in WvW. Additionally gold and players circulate freely between PvE and WvW.

    Again, theorycraft.

    Currently playing: GW2
    Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders

  • AdalwulffAdalwulff Member Posts: 1,152
    Originally posted by miscrpgdude
    Originally posted by Adalwulff

    Whats really funny is how they ignore the need for supply, whenever I bring it up, they simply ignore it and stick to thier claim that buying gold will ruin GW2.

    They just dont get it do they?

    Nobody is ignoring it, its simply quite obvious that YOU don't get it.

     

    Normally the ability to gain the advantage provided by Siege Weapons is limited by 2 factors, 1) gold, and 2) supply. When you remove one of these limitations - regardless of how small that limitation may or may not turn out to be - you are effectively altering the balance. This is and always has been described as a P2W effect.

    There is no argument to be made that it is not. Some people it doesn't bother, others it does but there is no doubt that WvW is P2W.

    Personally I don't care, I don't plan on taking part so no real skin off my nose.

    Although I do wish they simply had a monthly subscription server where there was no gem-gold interaction.

     

    Wait, what part didnt I get? You mean that seige does not need supply? Those walls and gates are not rebuilt with supply?

    I dont get what your saying.... I have never seen anything repaired with gold

    image
  • AdalwulffAdalwulff Member Posts: 1,152
    Originally posted by DanitaKusor
    Originally posted by Adalwulff

    Whats really funny is how they ignore the need for supply, whenever I bring it up, they simply ignore it and stick to thier claim that buying gold will ruin GW2.

    They just dont get it do they?

    Supply has never been an issue.  We have 2 secure supply camps in the Eternal Battlegrounds and a network of towers protecting them so we have caravans keeping us supported constantly and most people by now are carrying around supply.

     

    Never an issue until the enemy takes your supply camps, thats what you meant right?

    image
  • miscrpgdudemiscrpgdude Member UncommonPosts: 28
    Originally posted by Adalwulff
    Originally posted by miscrpgdude
    Originally posted by Adalwulff

    Whats really funny is how they ignore the need for supply, whenever I bring it up, they simply ignore it and stick to thier claim that buying gold will ruin GW2.

    They just dont get it do they?

    Nobody is ignoring it, its simply quite obvious that YOU don't get it.

     

    Normally the ability to gain the advantage provided by Siege Weapons is limited by 2 factors, 1) gold, and 2) supply. When you remove one of these limitations - regardless of how small that limitation may or may not turn out to be - you are effectively altering the balance. This is and always has been described as a P2W effect.

    There is no argument to be made that it is not. Some people it doesn't bother, others it does but there is no doubt that WvW is P2W.

    Personally I don't care, I don't plan on taking part so no real skin off my nose.

    Although I do wish they simply had a monthly subscription server where there was no gem-gold interaction.

     

    Wait, what part didnt I get? You mean that seige does not need supply? Those walls and gates are not rebuilt with supply?

    I dont get what your saying.... I have never seen anything repaired with gold

    What your clearly not getting is that the need for supply is utterly irrelevent to the change in balance caused by gold availablity.

    It changes the degree of effect that buying gold causes but it does not change either the principle or the functional reality that spending money gives you a measurable advanatage in WvW.

  • Gaia_HunterGaia_Hunter Member UncommonPosts: 3,065

    Gold is used in WvW as a sink to keep the PvE economy going.

    It requires no skill associated with WvW to acquire gold.

    That is why gold doesn't buy you a siege weapon - it just buys you a blue print that does nothing by itself, requiring supply and a player to operate it.

    Anyway lets look at the siege weapons:

    Arrow cart - 4 silver, 30 supply.

    Ballista - 6 silver, 20 supply.

    Catapult - 8 silver, 50 supply.

    Flame ram - 4 silver, 40 supply.

    Siege golem - 1 gold, 100 supply.

    Trebuchet - 16 silver, 100 supply.

    Really, really expensive stuff...

    By playing the market you can make 100 gold or more in 1 weekend...

     

    Currently playing: GW2
    Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders

  • Gaia_HunterGaia_Hunter Member UncommonPosts: 3,065
    Originally posted by miscrpgdude

    What your clearly not getting is that the need for supply is utterly irrelevent to the change in balance caused by gold availablity.

    It changes the degree of effect that buying gold causes but it does not change either the principle or the functional reality that spending money gives you a measurable advanatage in WvW.

    Measurable?

    Can you quantify the advantage it gives?

    If I spend $10 and buy 800 gems how many points and wins will I get?

     

    Again, gold acquisition isn't a WvW related activity - you will acquire (at least as of now at lower levels) more coin playing PvE than WvW.

    Currently playing: GW2
    Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders

  • 3-4thElf3-4thElf Member Posts: 489
    Originally posted by miscrpgdude
    Originally posted by Adalwulff

    Whats really funny is how they ignore the need for supply, whenever I bring it up, they simply ignore it and stick to thier claim that buying gold will ruin GW2.

    They just dont get it do they?

    Nobody is ignoring it, its simply quite obvious that YOU don't get it.

     

    Normally the ability to gain the advantage provided by Siege Weapons is limited by 2 factors, 1) gold, and 2) supply. When you remove one of these limitations - regardless of how small that limitation may or may not turn out to be - you are effectively altering the balance. This is and always has been described as a P2W effect.

    There is no argument to be made that it is not. Some people it doesn't bother, others it does but there is no doubt that WvW is P2W.

    Personally I don't care, I don't plan on taking part so no real skin off my nose.

    Although I do wish they simply had a monthly subscription server where there was no gem-gold interaction.

    Go look at my previous post, there is doubt it's P2W.

    a yo ho ho

  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441
    Originally posted by 3-4thElf

    Go look at my previous post, there is doubt it's P2W.

    Only really for guilds that just PvP.

    A few PvE players can easily fund a large guilds PvP so it is more like "pay to avoid PvE" which isn´t as catchy.

    Still, this is a balancing thing, once they get the droprate in PvP right it ain´t a problem anymore.

  • KingJigglyKingJiggly Member Posts: 777
    They need to keep the cash shop closed until the majority of players are above level 80. They also need to make it much easier for new players to get gold in wvwvw, becuase it is extremely hard from personal experience to kill anything in wvw as a noob. I love the game, I had fun, it stands for the hype I have given it, however, for the sake of the game, they need to do this or lose many possible players in the first month due to wvwvw being unfair. Or they of course could make wvwvw all about supply, which can't be bought with gold. Nothing, blueprints and all that included. Then you can trade supply for gold at a trader, but not the other way around ( you can give supply and get gold, but you can't use gold to get supply). Either of those two things will work, I personally like the latter myself.
  • Stx11Stx11 Member Posts: 415
    Originally posted by KingJiggly
    They need to keep the cash shop closed until the majority of players are above level 80. They also need to make it much easier for new players to get gold in wvwvw, becuase it is extremely hard from personal experience to kill anything in wvw as a noob. I love the game, I had fun, it stands for the hype I have given it, however, for the sake of the game, they need to do this or lose many possible players in the first month due to wvwvw being unfair. Or they of course could make wvwvw all about supply, which can't be bought with gold. Nothing, blueprints and all that included. Then you can trade supply for gold at a trader, but not the other way around ( you can give supply and get gold, but you can't use gold to get supply). Either of those two things will work, I personally like the latter myself.

    So let me make sure I have your suggestion right...

    ANet should shut down the Cash Shop for some indeterminate period of time so that people who only play WvW don't have to deal with other people having more gold than them...

    Did I get that right?

  • Gaia_HunterGaia_Hunter Member UncommonPosts: 3,065
    Originally posted by KingJiggly
    They need to keep the cash shop closed until the majority of players are above level 80. They also need to make it much easier for new players to get gold in wvwvw, becuase it is extremely hard from personal experience to kill anything in wvw as a noob. I love the game, I had fun, it stands for the hype I have given it, however, for the sake of the game, they need to do this or lose many possible players in the first month due to wvwvw being unfair. Or they of course could make wvwvw all about supply, which can't be bought with gold. Nothing, blueprints and all that included. Then you can trade supply for gold at a trader, but not the other way around ( you can give supply and get gold, but you can't use gold to get supply). Either of those two things will work, I personally like the latter myself.

    The coin costs involved in the WvW are too good a gold sink to be removed.

    They need to tweak the rewards though, especially for low level players and add some more small side events to keep the money going.

    3 hours sieging a castle to get a few silver isn't that great.

    Currently playing: GW2
    Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders

  • KingJigglyKingJiggly Member Posts: 777
    Originally posted by Stx11

    Originally posted by KingJiggly
    They need to keep the cash shop closed until the majority of players are above level 80. They also need to make it much easier for new players to get gold in wvwvw, becuase it is extremely hard from personal experience to kill anything in wvw as a noob. I love the game, I had fun, it stands for the hype I have given it, however, for the sake of the game, they need to do this or lose many possible players in the first month due to wvwvw being unfair. Or they of course could make wvwvw all about supply, which can't be bought with gold. Nothing, blueprints and all that included. Then you can trade supply for gold at a trader, but not the other way around ( you can give supply and get gold, but you can't use gold to get supply). Either of those two things will work, I personally like the latter myself.

    So let me make sure I have your suggestion right...

    ANet should shut down the Cash Shop for some indeterminate period of time so that people who only play WvW don't have to deal with other people having more gold than them...

    Did I get that right?

     

    There was a forum post on here that had a voting thingy on what you would do when you get to guildwars... Guess what was on top? Wvwvw... So yes. Yes they should.
  • KingJigglyKingJiggly Member Posts: 777
    Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

    Originally posted by KingJiggly
    They need to keep the cash shop closed until the majority of players are above level 80. They also need to make it much easier for new players to get gold in wvwvw, becuase it is extremely hard from personal experience to kill anything in wvw as a noob. I love the game, I had fun, it stands for the hype I have given it, however, for the sake of the game, they need to do this or lose many possible players in the first month due to wvwvw being unfair. Or they of course could make wvwvw all about supply, which can't be bought with gold. Nothing, blueprints and all that included. Then you can trade supply for gold at a trader, but not the other way around ( you can give supply and get gold, but you can't use gold to get supply). Either of those two things will work, I personally like the latter myself.

    The coin costs involved in the WvW are too good a gold sink to be removed.

    They need to tweak the rewards though, especially for low level players and add some more small side events to keep the money going.

    3 hours sieging a castle to get a few silver isn't that great.

     

    They need to make it easier also. I can barely level up solo in wvwvw, I like to do the little events and all that. However since I was new I didn't have anything unlocked, and it was extremely hard to kill one single bird, impossible if I aggroed 2 .
  • 3-4thElf3-4thElf Member Posts: 489
    Originally posted by Loke666
    Originally posted by 3-4thElf

    Go look at my previous post, there is doubt it's P2W.

    Only really for guilds that just PvP.

    A few PvE players can easily fund a large guilds PvP so it is more like "pay to avoid PvE" which isn´t as catchy.

    Still, this is a balancing thing, once they get the droprate in PvP right it ain´t a problem anymore.

    I mean more money earned to cover repairs from pvp isn't a bad thing.

    I just don't see an advantage; save for betas or the first 2 days of the game. Surely people will understand their limits of what they can afford in both economies and react accordingly.

    If all that's being gained is a speed advantage that isn't a very good argument for P2W. Never has been.

    The OP isn't even clear that his Mr. Moneybags won in the end. It sounded like he delayed things. Sounded like the player had a lot of fun doing this for people. I don't see any "instant win". 

    Like I did see in other games that were P2W. I was once gifted a 1000 use full heal potion for pvp use in a Korean grindy pvp game I played some time ago. I was a good tank, communicated well, and the battled needed me to not die and spawn back. But to basically be one point on the map a dozen or so people hit over and over and over while the team finished objectives. The potion, only bought with cash, did what it needed to do and I stood there for an hour taking hits and keeping players drawn to me.

    That's P2W. Nothing described by the OP is even close to that.

     

    a yo ho ho

  • AdalwulffAdalwulff Member Posts: 1,152
    Originally posted by KingJiggly
    Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter
    Originally posted by KingJiggly
    They need to keep the cash shop closed until the majority of players are above level 80. They also need to make it much easier for new players to get gold in wvwvw, becuase it is extremely hard from personal experience to kill anything in wvw as a noob. I love the game, I had fun, it stands for the hype I have given it, however, for the sake of the game, they need to do this or lose many possible players in the first month due to wvwvw being unfair. Or they of course could make wvwvw all about supply, which can't be bought with gold. Nothing, blueprints and all that included. Then you can trade supply for gold at a trader, but not the other way around ( you can give supply and get gold, but you can't use gold to get supply). Either of those two things will work, I personally like the latter myself.

    The coin costs involved in the WvW are too good a gold sink to be removed.

    They need to tweak the rewards though, especially for low level players and add some more small side events to keep the money going.

    3 hours sieging a castle to get a few silver isn't that great.

     

    They need to make it easier also. I can barely level up solo in wvwvw, I like to do the little events and all that. However since I was new I didn't have anything unlocked, and it was extremely hard to kill one single bird, impossible if I aggroed 2 .

     

    Seriously? Your trying to solo the WvW!  LOL!!

    Ok well, good luck with that.

    image
  • KingJigglyKingJiggly Member Posts: 777
    Originally posted by Adalwulff

    Originally posted by KingJiggly
    Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter
    Originally posted by KingJiggly
    They need to keep the cash shop closed until the majority of players are above level 80. They also need to make it much easier for new players to get gold in wvwvw, becuase it is extremely hard from personal experience to kill anything in wvw as a noob. I love the game, I had fun, it stands for the hype I have given it, however, for the sake of the game, they need to do this or lose many possible players in the first month due to wvwvw being unfair. Or they of course could make wvwvw all about supply, which can't be bought with gold. Nothing, blueprints and all that included. Then you can trade supply for gold at a trader, but not the other way around ( you can give supply and get gold, but you can't use gold to get supply). Either of those two things will work, I personally like the latter myself.

    The coin costs involved in the WvW are too good a gold sink to be removed.

    They need to tweak the rewards though, especially for low level players and add some more small side events to keep the money going.

    3 hours sieging a castle to get a few silver isn't that great.

     

    They need to make it easier also. I can barely level up solo in wvwvw, I like to do the little events and all that. However since I was new I didn't have anything unlocked, and it was extremely hard to kill one single bird, impossible if I aggroed 2 .

     

    Seriously? Your trying to solo the WvW!  LOL!!

    Ok well, good luck with that.

     

    that's how I ended up naked. But yes, I am, becuase Anet have stated they are trying to make it solo friendly by adding control points with a single defending npc. So yes I am and will continue doing so.
  • AdalwulffAdalwulff Member Posts: 1,152
    Originally posted by miscrpgdude
    Originally posted by Adalwulff
    Originally posted by miscrpgdude
    Originally posted by Adalwulff

    Whats really funny is how they ignore the need for supply, whenever I bring it up, they simply ignore it and stick to thier claim that buying gold will ruin GW2.

    They just dont get it do they?

    Nobody is ignoring it, its simply quite obvious that YOU don't get it.

     

    Normally the ability to gain the advantage provided by Siege Weapons is limited by 2 factors, 1) gold, and 2) supply. When you remove one of these limitations - regardless of how small that limitation may or may not turn out to be - you are effectively altering the balance. This is and always has been described as a P2W effect.

    There is no argument to be made that it is not. Some people it doesn't bother, others it does but there is no doubt that WvW is P2W.

    Personally I don't care, I don't plan on taking part so no real skin off my nose.

    Although I do wish they simply had a monthly subscription server where there was no gem-gold interaction.

     

    Wait, what part didnt I get? You mean that seige does not need supply? Those walls and gates are not rebuilt with supply?

    I dont get what your saying.... I have never seen anything repaired with gold

    What your clearly not getting is that the need for supply is utterly irrelevent to the change in balance caused by gold availablity.

    It changes the degree of effect that buying gold causes but it does not change either the principle or the functional reality that spending money gives you a measurable advanatage in WvW.

     

    Then clearly you havent PvPed against a tough enemy who constantly takes out your supply camps.

    Not to mention the amount of players it takes to supply and man all those siege weapons you got, seems you have a lot more to worry about than gold. I dont believe you have given this much thought.

    image
  • 3-4thElf3-4thElf Member Posts: 489
    Originally posted by KingJiggly
    Originally posted by Adalwulff
    Originally posted by KingJiggly
    Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter
    Originally posted by KingJiggly
    They need to keep the cash shop closed until the majority of players are above level 80. They also need to make it much easier for new players to get gold in wvwvw, becuase it is extremely hard from personal experience to kill anything in wvw as a noob. I love the game, I had fun, it stands for the hype I have given it, however, for the sake of the game, they need to do this or lose many possible players in the first month due to wvwvw being unfair. Or they of course could make wvwvw all about supply, which can't be bought with gold. Nothing, blueprints and all that included. Then you can trade supply for gold at a trader, but not the other way around ( you can give supply and get gold, but you can't use gold to get supply). Either of those two things will work, I personally like the latter myself.

    The coin costs involved in the WvW are too good a gold sink to be removed.

    They need to tweak the rewards though, especially for low level players and add some more small side events to keep the money going.

    3 hours sieging a castle to get a few silver isn't that great.

     

    They need to make it easier also. I can barely level up solo in wvwvw, I like to do the little events and all that. However since I was new I didn't have anything unlocked, and it was extremely hard to kill one single bird, impossible if I aggroed 2 .

     

    Seriously? Your trying to solo the WvW!  LOL!!

    Ok well, good luck with that.

     

    that's how I ended up naked. But yes, I am, becuase Anet have stated they are trying to make it solo friendly by adding control points with a single defending npc. So yes I am and will continue doing so.

    For irony's sake? Like a Steve Martin bit? Or for serious?

    a yo ho ho

  • KingJigglyKingJiggly Member Posts: 777
    Originally posted by Adalwulff

    Originally posted by miscrpgdude
    Originally posted by Adalwulff
    Originally posted by miscrpgdude
    Originally posted by Adalwulff
    Whats really funny is how they ignore the need for supply, whenever I bring it up, they simply ignore it and stick to thier claim that buying gold will ruin GW2. They just dont get it do they?

    Nobody is ignoring it, its simply quite obvious that YOU don't get it.

     

    Normally the ability to gain the advantage provided by Siege Weapons is limited by 2 factors, 1) gold, and 2) supply. When you remove one of these limitations - regardless of how small that limitation may or may not turn out to be - you are effectively altering the balance. This is and always has been described as a P2W effect.

    There is no argument to be made that it is not. Some people it doesn't bother, others it does but there is no doubt that WvW is P2W.

    Personally I don't care, I don't plan on taking part so no real skin off my nose.

    Although I do wish they simply had a monthly subscription server where there was no gem-gold interaction.

     

    Wait, what part didnt I get? You mean that seige does not need supply? Those walls and gates are not rebuilt with supply?

    I dont get what your saying.... I have never seen anything repaired with gold

    What your clearly not getting is that the need for supply is utterly irrelevent to the change in balance caused by gold availablity.

    It changes the degree of effect that buying gold causes but it does not change either the principle or the functional reality that spending money gives you a measurable advanatage in WvW.

     

    Then clearly you havent PvPed against a tough enemy who constantly takes out your supply camps.

    Not to mention the amount of players it takes to supply and man all those siege weapons you got, seems you have a lot more to worry about than gold. I dont believe you have given this much thought.

     

    Pf course I have. Avoid the Zerg, go guardian with lots of spirit weapons, works great. Guardian kind of op, so I may have to change. I am not an idiot, I just don't plan to face 1000 people head on like some people think they can... I much prefer to go around them.
Sign In or Register to comment.