• Announcements

    • HEAVY265

      Attention Soldiers Operation Fury Needs you!   02/20/2020

      Attention All Soldiers, Operation Fury needs you.  You need to choose a side and sign up.  
      For more intel on Operation Fury Please click HERE Please go to Special Event Forum (here), And sign up for allied or axis.
      This will be a CRS Lead event on both sides.  Xoom will be heading up the axis side and Heavy265 will be heading up the Allied side. This will be for bragging rights.
      Why are we asking players to sign up you ask. We are trying for a role play experience.   We want this to be a true realistic event.  
      So get up and sign up and let's make this the best event ever!!!!!!!!!!
      Give me your war cry, grrrrrrrrrrrrr
      Heavy265 **out**
greywhizz

Expanding Free Player option

115 posts in this topic

First of all, please don't kill me for suggesting this blasphemous idea but I really wish we can have more choices as a free player. I discovered this game about 2 years ago after watching a random video on Youtube where a bunch of people paradrop into a town and mayhem ensued. Ever since then, I've played this game on and off but never really stuck around for long because playing as a rifleman (as much as I enjoy it) kinda gets boring after a while.

Now some may be like "Well, why don't you just cough up 15$ or so and enjoy the whole thing?". Well the problem is at this point in time, I'm still in college right now and money is not quite as abundant as I would like. In addition, I'm also stuck in a country with pretty mediocre to sometimes outright terrible economy. Just to give you some perspective, while in theory it may cost 180$ for a year's worth of awesomeness, I would have to pay around $704 (in local currency) to be able to afford that. Needless to say, I'm just making enough to get by so the 180$ price tag is infinitely beyond my reach. I know some would probably then say "What about the starter pack? That should be affordable right?". Sadly it still falls pretty far outside the realm of possibility with the price tag being somewhere around 375$. 

But I feel like if the free players gets slightly more options, then perhaps the playerbase will experience a significant increase as players like myself who love the game are able to enjoy it more. I'm not saying ditch the subscription and make it completely free to play. That's ludicrous with the bills for the devs and servers. But I do want to have a bit more chance against paid players who instantly mow me down with a SMG or worse, be in a tank and make me feel absolutely worthless.  This raises the point that despite claims otherwise, this game does have pay to win qualities. I know I can kill a player with my rifle just as he can kill me with his SMG. But in close quarters, his chance of spraying a whole room and instantly nailing me dead before I even see him is absurdly high. Add to this the fact that free players never get access to tanks much less a way to defend themselves against tanks and it makes it painfully obvious that those who have money will always have the advantage against those who don't.

I'm not asking for an instant unlock for all the classes and all the vehicles, I'm just pushing for some way to slowly reach a point where I can be useful to my team. Maybe the devs can add a system where as you rise through the ranks, you can unlock a class for every rank you reach. I must honestly admit that right now ranks are a bit pointless. You progress through them but they hardly add anything to the game. You don't unlock any new thing as you rank up nor is there any noticeable stats change (which I think is fair since this is not an RPG). 

To briefly sum it up, I'm hoping the devs give the common free players (the cannon fodder that we are right now) some better way to help our team. I understand the reason for locking 90% of the game's content behind a paywall to encourage more subscription (and like I said it's fair and I understand you have rents to pay) but there must be some form of expansion of options to the average joe playing this game. It doesn't have to be anything drastic like giving away tanks and planes. It simply need to expand the free players options so that they can help their team better. If the devs can implement this, I swear this game will see a massive surge in popularity.

Thanks for listening :D


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I don't agree. I have been paying off and on since the beginning and it would be a slap in the face of us payers.

The other side of the coin so to speak. We (payers) have footed the bill and upgrades and you have not. Many have started the game on day one and haven't left in 17+ years. And I find the noobs are dumber than a rock in most cases. Coming out of a FMS and smoking it and shooting. Do you know that sometimes the driver of the truck went way out of the way to sneak the FMS to that point and one noob blows that advantage in a matter of seconds. Then there is the noob who will not follow the orders. Well, I could go on for pages.

So no. I do not support this idea.

I think they should get less instead of more.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, imded said:

So no. I do not support this idea.

I think they should get less instead of more.

Because that's working so well for server population. :rolleyes:

 

OP has a point. Free players need to be given more than what they have. This sub model is keeping game population to a minimum, it's quite clear.

 

All that hype and all that work in the past for the Steam release for this?

40 
playing 9 min ago
45 
24-hour peak
448 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

F2P is a commercial error, it should be presented as a demo version. the wwiiol concept cannot be a real f2p. It’s too expensive and we are far from being ready to address FPS players. Read the steam evaluations and see how many of the 600k players are actually playing...

However there should be more paying options, like pay-to-kill (x$ allows you to kill a total of x players).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Zebbeee said:

F2P is a commercial error, it should be presented as a demo version. the wwiiol concept cannot be a real f2p. It’s too expensive and we are far from being ready to address FPS players. Read the steam evaluations and see how many of the 600k players are actually playing...

However there should be more paying options, like pay-to-kill (x$ allows you to kill a total of x players).

Those reviews are there because the sub model is dated and priced way too high for the current game market, as well as the fact that the current points/rank grind is intense and upon leaving the initial free to play period players were restricted to a handful of units - thus roles - to exercise in the battlefield unless they paid said overpriced subscription.

Pay to kill players? Seriously?

No need to re-invent the wheel here. There's no reason this game couldn't do well on a paid booster status, spanning anything from daily to yearly, which would increase a player's points rewards/speed up rank gain by at least double. With a small rework of current points/rank structure and access to units, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only way I could see it is that the F2P players get limited access to tier 0 stuff once all the tiers are in game. 

And by tier 0 stuff I mean equipment. 

 

You can contribute but still need to play very smart cause all the higher tier stuff can end your life fast. But you could be of great use supress a CP or a Efms , or actually help with Enemy Tanks using the ATG . But all on a strictly limited basis almost like a first come 1st serve basis. You can get lucky and get ur hands onto it or not. There needs to be enough of a carrot so to speak that you get to try out stuff but enough carrot that you get a taste and go I want more , that one needs to figure a way out how to come up with the monthly sub. 

 

Edited by dre21

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is the starter option at 7.99 a month which also rotates units available per campaign with more options

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 What about adding a new infantryman to the TOE, it would be locked so only f2p could use it, kinda like the limited SMG.

ATR- half the ammo no smoke

Enginear- half the HE charges, keeps the tools

tier-0 AT gun half the ammo

 You see where I’m going with this...

 It would be simple to do, give them a token  capability and you could set the numbers on the low side in the pools 

More F2P is better for you and me

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The F2P model I joined the game in back around 2011 was that F2P had access to Rank 2 equipment (all), but could not cap, could not set FRU, could not make missions, etc.

Like the OP, I was a college student who could not afford the subscription but did end up loving the game.

This was a pretty fair F2P model in my opinion, as I only really got access to stuff subscribers basically never used, or did use but there was so much of I could never realistically put a dent in it.

F2P at the time gave a much more well-rounded feel of combined arms to the game. It wasn't just top-equipment vs. top-equipment, and the full spectrum of available supply was used.

Then CRS at the time (old-CRS now iirc) changed it to only rifles, but gave them capping. This upset me so much because the things I really enjoyed were running out low-tier armor as scouts/infantry support/armor support, or running trucks for ammo/tow, spawning 20mm FlaK to shoot at planes, etc.

Despite loving the game and the squad, it robbed me of what fun I had playing the game and pissed me off enough that I quit. It wasn't until in the past couple years that I took a second look to see what was up with the game and decided to drop some money on a subscription now that I had any amount of money to my name. That was around 2016 I think, and I've been around since.

 

A good F2P system will hook players, get them interested in the game, and compel them to support it. A bad F2P system won't. I personally feel that the current F2P system is a bad one, but I appear to have the minority opinion.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, chaoswzkd said:

A good F2P system will hook players, get them interested in the game, and compel them to support it. A bad F2P system won't. I personally feel that the current F2P system is a bad one, but I appear to have the minority opinion.

I agree.

However, maybe it's just the minority opinion of the already notable minority of those interested in the game who take to these forums. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, gt3076r said:

I agree.

However, maybe it's just the minority opinion of the already notable minority of those interested in the game who take to these forums. 

This is a good point, and admittedly sometimes I forget that, the people who use the forms are a small percentage of the game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, chaoswzkd said:

The F2P model I joined the game in back around 2011 was that F2P had access to Rank 2 equipment (all), but could not cap, could not set FRU, could not make missions, etc.

Like the OP, I was a college student who could not afford the subscription but did end up loving the game.

This was a pretty fair F2P model in my opinion, as I only really got access to stuff subscribers basically never used, or did use but there was so much of I could never realistically put a dent in it.

F2P at the time gave a much more well-rounded feel of combined arms to the game. It wasn't just top-equipment vs. top-equipment, and the full spectrum of available supply was used.

Then CRS at the time (old-CRS now iirc) changed it to only rifles, but gave them capping. This upset me so much because the things I really enjoyed were running out low-tier armor as scouts/infantry support/armor support, or running trucks for ammo/tow, spawning 20mm FlaK to shoot at planes, etc.

Despite loving the game and the squad, it robbed me of what fun I had playing the game and pissed me off enough that I quit. It wasn't until in the past couple years that I took a second look to see what was up with the game and decided to drop some money on a subscription now that I had any amount of money to my name. That was around 2016 I think, and I've been around since.

 

A good F2P system will hook players, get them interested in the game, and compel them to support it. A bad F2P system won't. I personally feel that the current F2P system is a bad one, but I appear to have the minority opinion.

Today a good f2p is someone who take a subscription after a month.

Pity there is no option to let them do micro transactions, or an ingame add system. 

Everyone must contribute. Except if you would agree to play under orders of premium players? I do want a pet  ingame.

you will be allowed to shoot only when standing close to me. Okay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are staying away from micro transactions as this game is based on team oriented skills and micro transactions would jeopardize that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BLKHWK8 said:

We are staying away from micro transactions as this game is based on team oriented skills and micro transactions would jeopardize that

I don't think anyone in here is advocating microtransactions seriously. At least in terms of paying for units/skins or something like that. It just wouldn't work with this game for a multitude of reasons, but we know that. 

However there's no reason the free to play feature couldn't offer more for the free players to do. The insanely limited roles for free to play combined with removing the option completely from steam has effectively neutered being on steam in the first place. Everyone in here wants those 3-400+ peak times back if not higher, and its dependent on reworking your free to play system. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Xoom has previously said that every time they give the free accounts more equipment it costs them money.  They've tried different variations over the years and it just isn't viable.  Unfortunately, the more people get for free the less likely they become to pay for the rest.

 

I agree the FreePlay accounts need to be renamed.  Perhaps call them Sample Accounts.  Give new players the idea they are meant to allow them to try the game before subscribing.  Now, I do NOT agree the subscription fee is too high for this game.  I paid $14.99(US)/mo fourteen years ago, for a below-standard, bugged MMO.  I also paid that same amount for over eight years, for City of Heroes (which ended several years ago).  If anything, the fact this game only costs what games cost fifteen years ago should be seen as a current players getting a break.

 

 

 

-Irish

 

 

Edited by odonovan1
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, odonovan1 said:

 

Xoom has previously said that every time they give the free accounts more equipment it costs them money.  They've tried different variations over the years and it just isn't viable.  Unfortunately, the more people get for free the less likely they become to pay for the rest.

 

I agree the FreePlay accounts need to be renamed.  Perhaps call them Sample Accounts.  Give new players the idea they are meant to allow them to try the game before subscribing.  Now, I do NOT agree the subscription fee is too high for this game.  I paid $14.99(US)/mo fourteen years ago, for a below-standard, bugged MMO.  I also paid that same amount for over eight years, for City of Heroes (which ended several years ago).  If anything, the fact this game only costs what games cost fifteen years ago should be seen as a current players getting a break.

 

 

 

-Irish

 

 

Call them DEMO accounts. What you see is a demo of the game with limited play.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, imded said:

Call them DEMO accounts. What you see is a demo of the game with limited play.

 

This is a demo account and should indeed no longer be speaken as a f2p. this is misleading. 

When speaking of micro transaction I was speaking of small fixed pre-pay package allowing X deaths.

So it can answer the need of another part of the population who is not online every day. And there is an extra fear of death

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, odonovan1 said:

Now, I do NOT agree the subscription fee is too high for this game.  I paid $14.99(US)/mo fourteen years ago, for a below-standard, bugged MMO.  I also paid that same amount for over eight years, for City of Heroes (which ended several years ago).  If anything, the fact this game only costs what games cost fifteen years ago should be seen as a current players getting a break.

Your anecdotal counterpoint is actually not a point at all - while $15 monthly as a value is probably more often than not seen as nominal by most gamers who are at least young adults, $15 monthly for this product is considerably overpriced on today's market. We have significant feedback on this. It is a fact. (In fact, you could probably counter-argue your point of the price being the same over the years in that the game's value in the market has continually declined, but that's a whole different story and off topic)

Now, a player's experience in this game is largely dependent on the population of the server. Action could be incredibly boring, driving players to do things such as, I don't know, build 1,000m walls of PPO bunkers (:rolleyes:) or it could be so heart-pumping fast-paced that one can hardly click that 'enter world' button fast enough. Clearly, we all want the latter of these scenarios, and there's good news - it's already been done! And it was done with free to play, which is something this game seriously needs to get right if there's any intention of having a healthy, populated server for the majority of a day.

Essentially, Steam free to play needs to be re-activated along with a rework of the free to play system which will not only offer more for players to do in-game but also incentivize them to subscribe and thus bring revenue in. Myself and others have discussed several different ways of doing this, me particularly favoring some sort of free to play with premium anti-grind status such as War Thunder, but there's other options, too. That's what we're discussing, let's get back to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For 129.99$ one-pay through the official website you get 12 months premium. That's only 10$/month.

Why not offer this through steam as well ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Zebbeee said:

For 129.99$ one-pay through the official website you get 12 months premium. That's only 10$/month.

Why not offer this through steam as well ?

Likely just as unattractive if not more so. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We really need paying customers- the game is going nowhere without them.

If the dollar price of the game is too high for you, then i would argue that the opportunity cost of playing  the game is even worse for you. This game can eat up huge chunks of your time- if you are in school, concentrate on that and don't get distracted by this game.  When you have the income to afford it, then subscribe.  Keep your priorities straight.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎27‎/‎2018 at 10:14 AM, gt3076r said:

I agree.

However, maybe it's just the minority opinion of the already notable minority of those interested in the game who take to these forums. 

And how long have you been playing? When do you plan on joining?

Under the present situation, the F2P are NOT joining the ranks of paying players. So this needs to be rectified.

F2P needs to renamed for one. Trial period or Sample or .......

This game take awhile to learn. It is NOT a 1st person shooter. It is a simulation, which requires planning and thinking.

It has a huge map that other games do not have. You can go anywhere on the map at any time.

Unfortunately the younger crowd prefers awesome graphics over team game play.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something as simple and rational as renaming "f2p" to "demo account" has been suggested several times now, even directly to the rats.

 

There's no downside to it, heck "f2p" is a toxic tag in the gaming world these days.

 

Rats...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, imded said:

And how long have you been playing? When do you plan on joining?

Under the present situation, the F2P are NOT joining the ranks of paying players. So this needs to be rectified.

F2P needs to renamed for one. Trial period or Sample or .......

This game take awhile to learn. It is NOT a 1st person shooter. It is a simulation, which requires planning and thinking.

It has a huge map that other games do not have. You can go anywhere on the map at any time.

Unfortunately the younger crowd prefers awesome graphics over team game play.

I agree with almost everything, except that this IS a 1st person shooter. It is a 1st person shooter that does it's best to be historically accurate, but it is not a pure simulation. If it were, there would be a great number of differences from what we have, especially those elements that are changed for "game balance"

This game will always be a  compromise between a simulation and a 1st person shooter game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/31/2018 at 3:06 PM, imded said:

And how long have you been playing? When do you plan on joining?

Under the present situation, the F2P are NOT joining the ranks of paying players. So this needs to be rectified.

F2P needs to renamed for one. Trial period or Sample or .......

This game take awhile to learn. It is NOT a 1st person shooter. It is a simulation, which requires planning and thinking.

It has a huge map that other games do not have. You can go anywhere on the map at any time.

Unfortunately the younger crowd prefers awesome graphics over team game play.

Ok, let's take a step back and look at some facts. 

Fact: Once the initial account full-content trial period is over, free players are faced with a choice to either pay a subscription or continue playing the game with access to 5-10% of its content and a rank cap.

Fact: The current subscription price (for full content access) is overpriced in the current game market. 

Combine these two facts together and you have a base reason why few free players are joining the ranks as you put it and subscribing. Thinking that by re-naming what the free to play account status is called will change something is foolish. It won't. What needs to change to drive these new players to join and subscribe is how the whole thing is structured, starting with what free players have access to and ending with the cost it would take to have the potential to access the full game. 

Sitting there and making excuses that this game is a sim, etc. and new players don't play those games anymore is also a foolish assumption as there are a number of games on the market/soon to be on the market which prove otherwise. On top of that, we have significant feedback from players who have tried this game and moved on and a large number of them cite the expensive (overpriced) subscription as the reason and not general gameplay.

Edited by gt3076r

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.