7-Perhaps that fanboism is preventing you from seeing things clearly, and the definition of p2w varies from person to person, but on this case most if not all agree that CoE is going heavy on the p2w.
Thats 100% True. I am a fanboy but also an achiever, so beeing able to buy noble titles made me erase CoE from my list for half a year.
The reason why it is on my list now is this: -You dont have to be a noble. Nobles have certain disadvantages that make them useless to play as adventurers. -The Land you can buy is not as OP as it seems, since there is simply far too much. -you may be able to buy items, but you can also farm them. With SCRIPTS. 24/7.
Is the game pay2win?
If you want to play a noble, then YES, it is pay2win. Wait for new continents(1 to 2 years after release) and aim to become a noble there.(after those 1 to 2 years, the game will be fair for all nobles)
If you want to play an adventurer or crafter, then my answer is between NO and YES. You can get a house for free from your parents after they die.(they have to like you though) You can also become a child of a blacksmith or any other profession(to get access to all important stuff). There ARE advantages of paying Money, but we dont know what EXACTLY you can buy (we know about professionkits, parcels, horses, commercial builings and sieging weapons).
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
My thoughts are that it is CLEARLY P2W for the following reasons:
Buy yourself up to a kingship (or multiple kingships in at least 1 case of a guy who spent 40k)
Buy yourself a 3 month no wipe head start in a PvP territory control game with looting
Use real money to buy IP
Use IP to buy items such as:
land
buildings
resources (both common and uncommon)
mounts
siege weapons
Feel free to have a different opinion but to me this is clearly one of the most over the top P2W games I have seen.
1. kingship takes massive community building, your clearly thinking of short term success if you actually think you can just drop 10k not have a community behind you and be king. Your going to lose that 10k so good luck. I HOPE, you buy king so you can lose it.
2. It's not a headstart. 80% of the infrastructure is built during this time.....what does that mean? players starting AFTER expo will have better jobs, houses, gear, mats and weapons than you did when you started. Your technically playing catch up in expo.
2a. It's not even close to a PvP territory control so just stop already....
3. IP is used to decide pick order when nobles choose land....they then balance this by giving everyone equal oppourtunity to expand or shrink their domain via KoE.
4. Items that will decay if not taken care of, get stolen, get destroyed. You can buy 8 siege weapons but when someone torches them because you bought too many then RIP.
My thoughts are that it is CLEARLY P2W for the following reasons:
Buy yourself up to a kingship (or multiple kingships in at least 1 case of a guy who spent 40k)
Buy yourself a 3 month no wipe head start in a PvP territory control game with looting
Use real money to buy IP
Use IP to buy items such as:
land
buildings
resources (both common and uncommon)
mounts
siege weapons
Feel free to have a different opinion but to me this is clearly one of the most over the top P2W games I have seen.
1. kingship takes massive community building, your clearly thinking of short term success if you actually think you can just drop 10k not have a community behind you and be king. Your going to lose that 10k so good luck. I HOPE, you buy king so you can lose it.
2. It's not a headstart. 80% of the infrastructure is built during this time.....what does that mean? players starting AFTER expo will have better jobs, houses, gear, mats and weapons than you did when you started. Your technically playing catch up in expo.
2a. It's not even close to a PvP territory control so just stop already....
3. IP is used to decide pick order when nobles choose land....they then balance this by giving everyone equal oppourtunity to expand or shrink their domain via KoE.
4. Items that will decay if not taken care of, get stolen, get destroyed. You can buy 8 siege weapons but when someone torches them because you bought too many then RIP.
Your uninformed propaganda is strong.
Pretty sure I'm much more informed than you are. I mean... you are actually arguing that a 3 month no wipe headstart is not an advantage in a PvP game with territory control.
My points stand. Ill let the readers decide who really is uninformed.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
And I'd say it's NOT P2W for the following reasons:
1. You can lose anything you buy to another player, even an NPC potentially, with nothing left to show for your money.
2. The backing options are ONLY available PRE-launch to help players to define kingdoms, towns and more, and make the world better prepared for new players. This isn't a "keep throwing money in to stay ahead game".
3. Starting out with extra furniture does not make you "win a game"
4. Many MMOs sell aesthetic goods for $, which don't offer game advantages, so we should steer clear of false definitions of "IP for $" equating to pay to win.
5. Land can be lost. Buildings can be lost. Resources are finite. Mounts can be lost. Siege weapons can be lost. There is no permanent advantage.
6. Elyria is a world filled with inequality. This isn't a "normal" MMO. In your bog standard MMO, there IS no King. All players are equal. In Elyria, ANY player can potentially rise through the ranks and depose another. A King is NOT equal to a peasant, but reaching King is NOT winning.
7. Perhaps while you're blasting CoE about being P2W, you should define what your idea of "winning" is. If your ideal of winning is owning a mount, then perhaps for you it is P2W.. it just wouldn't fit most people's definition.
For me it comes back to security. My impression from the KS to now is buying a high level position is incredibly secure. If it isn't then the P2 is less of a problem, bus as is it sounds pretty secure. I say sounds because that it my own interpretation. I have yet to see it cleared up on SS's end. It might be something they can't really define until further into development. /shrug
Agreed. That has been my impression as well. They have to please two camps. The players that don't like P2W games, and the Kings who spent $10,000.00 to be on top and don't want to lose their money in an instant. I don't see how they can possibly appease both...
And from what my impression is so far, for a KS King to lose their throne, they will either have to royally screw up somehow (like go out adventuring without an heir and be coup'd de grased 4ish times (outside of the 2hr respawn safety window), or a combined effort of many players, roughly the equivalent of $10k of time/in-game resources, will have to be mustered to try and overthrow the king.
I think when this game comes out I'm going to organize a "barbarian horde" with the sole purpose of devastating the realm.
Hey, goals are good, right?
So despite all your trash talking about the game you're going to play it after all. There's a world for that. Hyp.. hypo.. hypocri... something like that. I can't seem to remember it.
Not sure I've "trash talked" this game, I've pointed out obvious flaws in either the designs, payment models or people's willful ignorance of the facts. Blind faith is always a great target as well.
But I am an EVE player and always wondered what playing as a Goon would be like. If this game launches I'd like to join a group that wants to see the world burn.
Also I slam games I play as well, CCP gets my wrath at times, equal opportunity for all is my motto.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I think when this game comes out I'm going to organize a "barbarian horde" with the sole purpose of devastating the realm.
Hey, goals are good, right?
So despite all your trash talking about the game you're going to play it after all. There's a world for that. Hyp.. hypo.. hypocri... something like that. I can't seem to remember it.
Not sure I've "trash talked" this game, I've pointed out obvious flaws in either the designs, payment models or people's willful ignorance of the facts. Blind faith is always a great target as well.
But I am an EVE player and always wondered what playing as a Goon would be like. If this game launches I'd like to join a group that wants to see the world burn.
Also I slam games I play as well, CCP gets my wrath at times, equal opportunity for all is my motto.
Hmm, you're not easily provoked today I see.
I'll let you in on a little secret. Everyone who plays EVE is a goon to the rest of us, you maelstrom of mayhem.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
The thing with saying that allowing RMT is pay to win is that it's no worse than allowing a PLEX like system. You pay money, you get an in-game items, you sell it for in-game currency, you use it to accomplish in-game objectives.
How is a system in which you swap money directly for in-game currency with other players substantially different from this is any way?
Yet people aren't calling EVE or any of the games that have copied it's system (Which is most of them now) "Pay to Win." It's just proof how illogical and driven by their emotions people are. One person calls out "Pay to Win!" and everyone gets to squawking because everyone else is squawking even if there is nothing to freak out about.
The thing with saying that allowing RMT is pay to win is that it's no worse than allowing a PLEX like system. You pay money, you get an in-game items, you sell it for in-game currency, you use it to accomplish in-game objectives.
How is a system in which you swap money directly for in-game currency with other players substantially different from this is any way?
Yet people aren't calling EVE or any of the games that have copied it's system (Which is most of them now) "Pay to Win." It's just proof how illogical and driven by their emotions people are. One person calls out "Pay to Win!" and everyone gets to squawking because everyone else is squawking even if there is nothing to freak out about.
It's not really the same. In game currency swapping hands for an item that does not impact other players experience in any way is not the same as providing a direct advantange to the player from the developer for money. In the example you're using, both players benefit, and they could easily come to an agreement to trade in game currency for sub time without the developer facilitating that. The actual item being sold by the developer has no value in an ingame capacity, in that sense it's no different than a player buying a cosmetic item from the cash shop and selling it for in game cash. It's the same thing in practice, would you also consider that p2w?
In game currency can change hands for many non gameplay reasons without prompting from developers. I give it to friends/family all the time, I give it away when I quit a game, etc. The actual transactions that provide the benefit to one party are still ultimately occuring between 2 players, so I dont see it in a P2W sense. It's still 2 players exchanging or giving their time spent, that's a shit ton different than OP items being popped into existence out of thin air because someone busted out their credit card.
The thing with saying that allowing RMT is pay to win is that it's no worse than allowing a PLEX like system. You pay money, you get an in-game items, you sell it for in-game currency, you use it to accomplish in-game objectives.
How is a system in which you swap money directly for in-game currency with other players substantially different from this is any way?
Yet people aren't calling EVE or any of the games that have copied it's system (Which is most of them now) "Pay to Win." It's just proof how illogical and driven by their emotions people are. One person calls out "Pay to Win!" and everyone gets to squawking because everyone else is squawking even if there is nothing to freak out about.
I'm fairly certain almost everyone who decries "P2W" about paying cash for in game advantages believes PLEX like systems fall under this moniker.
I've spent considerable time on these forums (or wasted my breath) explaining how and why PLEX trading has almost zero impact on other players game experience due to EVEs design.
I can't say this would be true for every game and I can think of several titles where spending thousands to improve your gear bonuses can put players in a much higher power plane which non payers are likely never to reach.
MMORPG I'm currently playing has no RMT that I'm able to discern, but for most modern games I've accepted most will have P2A (a more accurate term in most cases) in them.
What matters to me is their impact on my personal game play and I look for titles where I feel it will be negligible.
I'm not sure about COE yet. Yes, people are buying Kingdoms but I'm not sure I really care as I likely would never aspire to such a role
EVE taught me running a large corp, or worse alliance or coalition even was a huge investment of time and meta gaming.
I never envied the leaders their role and was grateful someone was willing to do all that work on such a thankless job.
I don't think I really care if someone paid cash for the job, likely in COE leaders will pay even more in terms of time spent.
Heck, you would have to pay me to be king, so let those willing have the job.
Any kings out there reading this looking for a loyal subject? (pretty low maintenance too)
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
The issue with the RMT is that it comes in top of the Buy2King P2W scheme.
There is a reason that the whale who spent tens of thousands of dollars and bought not one but 2 of the 6 kingdoms on his server publicly posted his concern that it was getting over the top in the P2W category even for him. He felt his advantages were becoming insurmountable.
Here you can buy yourself any position up to king (or I suppose Emperor if you buy 2 kingdoms) then buy additional advantages like Legendary Castles, war machines, technology, resources, etc... Now to top it off RMT is allowed. It's just the icing on the cake as now the same folks can use their real world resources to buy whatever they need once the game launches. So nothing in game was ever earned by in game actions. Heck they could now just use real money to hire people to fight for them.
(Please excuse any obvious typos as I'm on my phone)
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
The thing with saying that allowing RMT is pay to win is that it's no worse than allowing a PLEX like system. You pay money, you get an in-game items, you sell it for in-game currency, you use it to accomplish in-game objectives.
How is a system in which you swap money directly for in-game currency with other players substantially different from this is any way?
Yet people aren't calling EVE or any of the games that have copied it's system (Which is most of them now) "Pay to Win." It's just proof how illogical and driven by their emotions people are. One person calls out "Pay to Win!" and everyone gets to squawking because everyone else is squawking even if there is nothing to freak out about.
It's not really the same. In game currency swapping hands for an item that does not impact other players experience in any way is not the same as providing a direct advantange to the player from the developer for money. In the example you're using, both players benefit, and they could easily come to an agreement to trade in game currency for sub time without the developer facilitating that. The actual item being sold by the developer has no value in an ingame capacity, in that sense it's no different than a player buying a cosmetic item from the cash shop and selling it for in game cash. It's the same thing in practice, would you also consider that p2w?
In game currency can change hands for many non gameplay reasons without prompting from developers. I give it to friends/family all the time, I give it away when I quit a game, etc. The actual transactions that provide the benefit to one party are still ultimately occuring between 2 players, so I dont see it in a P2W sense. It's still 2 players exchanging or giving their time spent, that's a shit ton different than OP items being popped into existence out of thin air because someone busted out their credit card.
Well that's an entirely separate subject from the one I am discussing. My point is that RMT is not greater than PLEX on the pay to win scale.
Now in terms of cash shop items. I've always held this opinion:
If you you can turn cash into in-game gold and in-game gold into cash (or cash shop currency) then it's still no different from PLEX. If I don't want to pay for a cash shop item with in-game currency I just buy cash shop currency with it and then buy what I need. Something I've done many times in ArchAge. Similarly just like if I don't want to earn something bought with game currency in-game I can sell a PLEX and buy it with the proceeds from that, I can buy the cash shop item with cash if I don't want to save up for it in-game.
The only meaningful difference between in-game currency and cash shop currency in a PLEX based game is their exchange rate. If your income source is the game cash shop items are cheaper when the ingame economy is good and more expensive when it's bad. If your income source is cash in-game currency items are cheaper when the economy is bad and expensive when it's good. That's the only difference.
With pre-purchase items such as kickstarter perks, yeah that can give a serious advantage to wallet warriors unavailable to people who earn their stuff ingame. CoE while on my radar list is one of the lower games on it so I haven't researched it very much. I guess we'll see how it pans out. Hopefully the stat gap in the game is low enough that neither pay-to-win more play-to-win players will have a major advantage, and if it isn't, then it's very unlikely I'll would choose this game over the other options on my radar list. So no biggie. We'll see what happens.
The thing with saying that allowing RMT is pay to win is that it's no worse than allowing a PLEX like system. You pay money, you get an in-game items, you sell it for in-game currency, you use it to accomplish in-game objectives.
How is a system in which you swap money directly for in-game currency with other players substantially different from this is any way?
Yet people aren't calling EVE or any of the games that have copied it's system (Which is most of them now) "Pay to Win." It's just proof how illogical and driven by their emotions people are. One person calls out "Pay to Win!" and everyone gets to squawking because everyone else is squawking even if there is nothing to freak out about.
That's actually one of the main reasons people call other games p2w; although I can't think of any mmo that allows players to also buy power on the massive scale on display here.
Well if people feel PLEX is pay to win, then yeah, Pay to Win is here to stay. It's kind of proven itself to be a winning business model and I think most players have gotten over it these days which is why you see it in so many games.
Well if people feel PLEX is pay to win, then yeah, Pay to Win is here to stay. It's kind of proven itself to be a winning business model and I think most players have gotten over it these days which is why you see it in so many games.
"Pay to Advance" is now so deeply entrenched in the age of "Free Gaming" that nothing will ever dislodge it.
The reality is that "Pay to Advance" effectively becomes "Pay to Win" when combined with today's short player commitments. Buy the maximum advantage at launch, and you can pwn everyone else until you quit the game 2 months later, by which time they're starting to catch-up...
Well if people feel PLEX is pay to win, then yeah, Pay to Win is here to stay. It's kind of proven itself to be a winning business model and I think most players have gotten over it these days which is why you see it in so many games.
"Pay to Advance" is now so deeply entrenched in the age of "Free Gaming" that nothing will ever dislodge it.
The reality is that "Pay to Advance" effectively becomes "Pay to Win" when combined with today's short player commitments. Buy the maximum advantage at launch, and you can pwn everyone else until you quit the game 2 months later, by which time they're starting to catch-up...
That's true for a game like ArcheAge. Takes A LOT of money to stay ahead in a game with gear loss on death.
Going to stay far, far away from this cash sink nightmare. Remember the concept of an equal playing field that used to exist in games? I guess the focus has just shifted from investing time to investing money. What's next, paying for guaranteed headshots in an online FPS? Hey, the other players have a chance to get a headshot, too. They just have to work at it. So that's cool. I spend enough money in RL trying to keep my head above water. Sure as hell not going to P2W in a video game.
Remember the concept of an equal playing field that used to exist in games?
Games? Sure. MMOs? No.
MMOs have always favored basement dwelling virgins over people with lives. To the point of fights in many MMOs being straight up unwinnable unless you have grinded for thousands upon thousands of hours.
If the power gap between Pay to Win and non-Pay to Win is smaller than the power gap between no-lifers and people with a useful function in society then I am totally ok dealing with that game.
If the main thing people are upset about is people starting with most of the land in a game about territory control it makes me wonder if they've ever played a game with territory control.
You can't control territory without a strong alliance to defend it, an strong alliances almost always fall to infighting and drama eventually. Generally sooner rather than later.
Unless the defender's advantages in this game are off the chain I would guess that at least 75% of the keeps will have different owners by the end of the first year of this game.
That's a concern for people planning to play two months and leave. It's not a concern for people planning to play this game a few years. So I don't think this game's primary audience cares all that much.
Remember the concept of an equal playing field that used to exist in games?
Games? Sure. MMOs? No.
MMOs have always favored basement dwelling virgins over people with lives. To the point of fights in many MMOs being straight up unwinnable unless you have grinded for thousands upon thousands of hours.
If the power gap between Pay to Win and non-Pay to Win is smaller than the power gap between no-lifers and people with a useful function in society then I am totally ok dealing with that game.
Of course where this arguments fails is because it considers that people either have time or have money. That is obviously untrue. These whales have both time AND money. So guess what that does to the "power gap"? Eldurian said:
Remember the concept of an equal playing field that used to exist in games?
If the main thing people are upset about is people starting with most of the land in a game about territory control it makes me wonder if they've ever played a game with territory control.
You can't control territory without a strong alliance to defend it, an strong alliances almost always fall to infighting and drama eventually. Generally sooner rather than later.
Unless the defender's advantages in this game are off the chain I would guess that at least 75% of the keeps will have different owners by the end of the first year of this game.
That's a concern for people planning to play two months and leave. It's not a concern for people planning to play this game a few years. So I don't think this game's primary audience cares all that much.
I can assure you that I have quite a history of playing territory control games. To suggest that it's not a huge advantage to start with control is just silly. They aren't just buying land, but also siege weapons, defensive structures, technology, resources, skills... Then to top it off, they can use RMT to maintain that advantage. I also suggest you familiarize yourself with the complex process of actually deposing someone: https://chroniclesofelyria.com/forum/topic/15294/casus-belli-an-ab-guide
It's the guy that understands the game best and put in tens of thousands of dollars that called it an "insurmountable advantage". It's his quotes below:
The "it can be taken from you" argument gets invalidated by the amount of advantage it gives being so valuable that it is now required for a community to rally around that advantage and protect it so that the community benefits from said insurmountable advantage. "it can be taken from you" arguments only work when / if the advantage you are being given is reasonably surmountable.
and
Again, rant over, but these are legitimate concerns that can no longer be answered with a simple "But they can be taken from you." My answer to that is, if things stay this way, good luck trying to take any of the advantages away from a group like mine. I can confidently say that these advantages in the hands of my group will equate to a completely insurmountable Kingdom in literally any and every aspect that we choose to go with. If that is a problem with me, it should be a problem with you too.
I do believe that 75% of the keeps will have different owners after the first year though, but not for the reasons you post. IMHO it's because all those people will have long since become disillusioned with the game as it was delivered. They have been able to project their hopes and dreams on it. When it launches and reality hits, there will be quite the exodus.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
I am always curious what whales do for a living that they can have both money and time. I mean don't they have to work to make the money ...oh trust fund kid yes but how many of them play games over partying all night.
All I can say is I've never played a game with territorial control that the political map did not change dramatically every few months. New powers rise and old powers fall constantly. In any PvP guild there is always going to be some drama and the larger a guild gets the worse the drama gets.
I'm sure when the game comes out and has been out a few months, the political map will change, and I will claim it is confirmation of what I am saying now, and you will claim it is confirmation the game is crap and there as some huge exodus (AKA natural player turnover).
Comments
The reason why it is on my list now is this:
-You dont have to be a noble. Nobles have certain disadvantages that make them useless to play as adventurers.
-The Land you can buy is not as OP as it seems, since there is simply far too much.
-you may be able to buy items, but you can also farm them. With SCRIPTS. 24/7.
Is the game pay2win?
If you want to play a noble, then YES, it is pay2win. Wait for new continents(1 to 2 years after release) and aim to become a noble there.(after those 1 to 2 years, the game will be fair for all nobles)
If you want to play an adventurer or crafter, then my answer is between NO and YES. You can get a house for free from your parents after they die.(they have to like you though) You can also become a child of a blacksmith or any other profession(to get access to all important stuff). There ARE advantages of paying Money, but we dont know what EXACTLY you can buy (we know about professionkits, parcels, horses, commercial builings and sieging weapons).
Hey, goals are good, right?
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
I guess so.
If you are interested in making a MMO maybe visit my page to get a free open source engine.
1. kingship takes massive community building, your clearly thinking of short term success if you actually think you can just drop 10k not have a community behind you and be king. Your going to lose that 10k so good luck. I HOPE, you buy king so you can lose it.
2. It's not a headstart. 80% of the infrastructure is built during this time.....what does that mean? players starting AFTER expo will have better jobs, houses, gear, mats and weapons than you did when you started. Your technically playing catch up in expo.
2a. It's not even close to a PvP territory control so just stop already....
3. IP is used to decide pick order when nobles choose land....they then balance this by giving everyone equal oppourtunity to expand or shrink their domain via KoE.
4. Items that will decay if not taken care of, get stolen, get destroyed. You can buy 8 siege weapons but when someone torches them because you bought too many then RIP.
Your uninformed propaganda is strong.
Pretty sure I'm much more informed than you are. I mean... you are actually arguing that a 3 month no wipe headstart is not an advantage in a PvP game with territory control.
My points stand. Ill let the readers decide who really is uninformed.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Damn, CoE is so entertaining with all their cultists.
Agreed. That has been my impression as well. They have to please two camps. The players that don't like P2W games, and the Kings who spent $10,000.00 to be on top and don't want to lose their money in an instant. I don't see how they can possibly appease both...
And from what my impression is so far, for a KS King to lose their throne, they will either have to royally screw up somehow (like go out adventuring without an heir and be coup'd de grased 4ish times (outside of the 2hr respawn safety window), or a combined effort of many players, roughly the equivalent of $10k of time/in-game resources, will have to be mustered to try and overthrow the king.
Not sure I've "trash talked" this game, I've pointed out obvious flaws in either the designs, payment models or people's willful ignorance of the facts. Blind faith is always a great target as well.
But I am an EVE player and always wondered what playing as a Goon would be like. If this game launches I'd like to join a group that wants to see the world burn.
Also I slam games I play as well, CCP gets my wrath at times, equal opportunity for all is my motto.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Fair enough.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
How is a system in which you swap money directly for in-game currency with other players substantially different from this is any way?
Yet people aren't calling EVE or any of the games that have copied it's system (Which is most of them now) "Pay to Win." It's just proof how illogical and driven by their emotions people are. One person calls out "Pay to Win!" and everyone gets to squawking because everyone else is squawking even if there is nothing to freak out about.
In game currency can change hands for many non gameplay reasons without prompting from developers. I give it to friends/family all the time, I give it away when I quit a game, etc. The actual transactions that provide the benefit to one party are still ultimately occuring between 2 players, so I dont see it in a P2W sense. It's still 2 players exchanging or giving their time spent, that's a shit ton different than OP items being popped into existence out of thin air because someone busted out their credit card.
I've spent considerable time on these forums (or wasted my breath) explaining how and why PLEX trading has almost zero impact on other players game experience due to EVEs design.
I can't say this would be true for every game and I can think of several titles where spending thousands to improve your gear bonuses can put players in a much higher power plane which non payers are likely never to reach.
MMORPG I'm currently playing has no RMT that I'm able to discern, but for most modern games I've accepted most will have P2A (a more accurate term in most cases) in them.
What matters to me is their impact on my personal game play and I look for titles where I feel it will be negligible.
I'm not sure about COE yet. Yes, people are buying Kingdoms but I'm not sure I really care as I likely would never aspire to such a role
EVE taught me running a large corp, or worse alliance or coalition even was a huge investment of time and meta gaming.
I never envied the leaders their role and was grateful someone was willing to do all that work on such a thankless job.
I don't think I really care if someone paid cash for the job, likely in COE leaders will pay even more in terms of time spent.
Heck, you would have to pay me to be king, so let those willing have the job.
Any kings out there reading this looking for a loyal subject? (pretty low maintenance too)
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
There is a reason that the whale who spent tens of thousands of dollars and bought not one but 2 of the 6 kingdoms on his server publicly posted his concern that it was getting over the top in the P2W category even for him. He felt his advantages were becoming insurmountable.
Here you can buy yourself any position up to king (or I suppose Emperor if you buy 2 kingdoms) then buy additional advantages like Legendary Castles, war machines, technology, resources, etc... Now to top it off RMT is allowed. It's just the icing on the cake as now the same folks can use their real world resources to buy whatever they need once the game launches. So nothing in game was ever earned by in game actions. Heck they could now just use real money to hire people to fight for them.
(Please excuse any obvious typos as I'm on my phone)
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Now in terms of cash shop items. I've always held this opinion:
If you you can turn cash into in-game gold and in-game gold into cash (or cash shop currency) then it's still no different from PLEX. If I don't want to pay for a cash shop item with in-game currency I just buy cash shop currency with it and then buy what I need. Something I've done many times in ArchAge. Similarly just like if I don't want to earn something bought with game currency in-game I can sell a PLEX and buy it with the proceeds from that, I can buy the cash shop item with cash if I don't want to save up for it in-game.
The only meaningful difference between in-game currency and cash shop currency in a PLEX based game is their exchange rate. If your income source is the game cash shop items are cheaper when the ingame economy is good and more expensive when it's bad. If your income source is cash in-game currency items are cheaper when the economy is bad and expensive when it's good. That's the only difference.
With pre-purchase items such as kickstarter perks, yeah that can give a serious advantage to wallet warriors unavailable to people who earn their stuff ingame. CoE while on my radar list is one of the lower games on it so I haven't researched it very much. I guess we'll see how it pans out. Hopefully the stat gap in the game is low enough that neither pay-to-win more play-to-win players will have a major advantage, and if it isn't, then it's very unlikely I'll would choose this game over the other options on my radar list. So no biggie. We'll see what happens.
That's actually one of the main reasons people call other games p2w; although I can't think of any mmo that allows players to also buy power on the massive scale on display here.
The reality is that "Pay to Advance" effectively becomes "Pay to Win" when combined with today's short player commitments. Buy the maximum advantage at launch, and you can pwn everyone else until you quit the game 2 months later, by which time they're starting to catch-up...
MMOs have always favored basement dwelling virgins over people with lives. To the point of fights in many MMOs being straight up unwinnable unless you have grinded for thousands upon thousands of hours.
If the power gap between Pay to Win and non-Pay to Win is smaller than the power gap between no-lifers and people with a useful function in society then I am totally ok dealing with that game.
If the main thing people are upset about is people starting with most of the land in a game about territory control it makes me wonder if they've ever played a game with territory control.
You can't control territory without a strong alliance to defend it, an strong alliances almost always fall to infighting and drama eventually. Generally sooner rather than later.
Unless the defender's advantages in this game are off the chain I would guess that at least 75% of the keeps will have different owners by the end of the first year of this game.
That's a concern for people planning to play two months and leave. It's not a concern for people planning to play this game a few years. So I don't think this game's primary audience cares all that much.
Eldurian said: I can assure you that I have quite a history of playing territory control games. To suggest that it's not a huge advantage to start with control is just silly. They aren't just buying land, but also siege weapons, defensive structures, technology, resources, skills... Then to top it off, they can use RMT to maintain that advantage. I also suggest you familiarize yourself with the complex process of actually deposing someone: https://chroniclesofelyria.com/forum/topic/15294/casus-belli-an-ab-guide
It's the guy that understands the game best and put in tens of thousands of dollars that called it an "insurmountable advantage". It's his quotes below:
The "it can be taken from you" argument gets invalidated by the amount of advantage it gives being so valuable that it is now required for a community to rally around that advantage and protect it so that the community benefits from said insurmountable advantage. "it can be taken from you" arguments only work when / if the advantage you are being given is reasonably surmountable.
and
Again, rant over, but these are legitimate concerns that can no longer be answered with a simple "But they can be taken from you." My answer to that is, if things stay this way, good luck trying to take any of the advantages away from a group like mine. I can confidently say that these advantages in the hands of my group will equate to a completely insurmountable Kingdom in literally any and every aspect that we choose to go with. If that is a problem with me, it should be a problem with you too.
I do believe that 75% of the keeps will have different owners after the first year though, but not for the reasons you post. IMHO it's because all those people will have long since become disillusioned with the game as it was delivered. They have been able to project their hopes and dreams on it. When it launches and reality hits, there will be quite the exodus.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
All I can say is I've never played a game with territorial control that the political map did not change dramatically every few months. New powers rise and old powers fall constantly. In any PvP guild there is always going to be some drama and the larger a guild gets the worse the drama gets.
I'm sure when the game comes out and has been out a few months, the political map will change, and I will claim it is confirmation of what I am saying now, and you will claim it is confirmation the game is crap and there as some huge exodus (AKA natural player turnover).