• 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

12 minutes ago, Pittpete said:

I agree that populating the game is important, but at what cost?

It should be priority number one. The game needs to offer action as consistently as possible. In its current state, there are certain time zones where this game isn't even worth logging into due to low population. Being able to deliver action as close to 24/7 as possible is key. Think casino terms: don't let them out the door & keep them playing as long as possible.

12 minutes ago, Pittpete said:

If you allow f2p players access to most infantry weapons, what keeps strictly inf players from unsubbing and choosing f2p?

Thats the flaw with packs like those. And the way those work is often heavily involved with a fast-paced dev rate, something this game doesn't quite provide at the time. 

Share this post


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

Think casino terms: don't let them out the door & keep them playing as long as possible.

In the casino, you pay 2 play, many times over

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, merlin51 said:

In the casino, you pay 2 play, many times over

Just a generalization not to be taken literally like a casino... though many games have gone that shameful route

 

Share this post


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

Thats the flaw with packs like those. And the way those work is often heavily involved with a fast-paced dev rate, something this game doesn't quite provide at the time. 

all you need to do is create a difference, however small, and use that as incentive. incentive to either lay the foundation for 'how you the developer want the player to play' or incentive to players who aren't paying as much to either pay more or play the game perfectly, the way you the developer want it to be played.

 

Example:

I spawn a LMG, i rambo into a CP and do what I do. doesn't matter if i clear the room and cap or instantly die ... i did what I did. now, the developer could then do this.

LMG = 10 'points'

LMG kills on infantry = .5 points

LMG caps = 0 points

LMG RTBs = 10 points. 

 

Right? If that is the underlying table for what a LMG costs and how the player can earn points when using a LMG, it's fairly clear to the player that his BIGGEST opportunity to earn, is to RTB. The player is FREE to do w/e the palyer wants but the developer rewards certain types of play, in this case from LMG players. 

 

Now all you need to do is create a difference. My recommendation for that, use real world acceptance criteria to create a 10% performance divide between the low rank players (-5%) and high rank players (+5%). To borrow from you, consider the economy that we don't currently have and a reward system that we also dont have as "the rake". What I mean is, the rake draws from the economy and he rake always keeps you reaching into your pocket to play how you want (at max +5% performance) all while keeping the gear, otherwise identical.

 

meaning, you dont ened to constantly put stuff out. all you need is the rake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, merlin51 said:

In the casino, you pay 2 play, many times over

you're too quick to dismiss ... WHY! for [censored] sake WHY do people do this at casinos?

 

technically, they're after the endorphine rush from a successful 'play'. this feedback loop is what we need to design!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

This is at the core of WoW's deisgn. They have PHDs on staff specifically working on this underlying game theory. We've NEVER, ever, had this feedback loop. Our entire ranking system is total BS once you 'graduate'. We have no feedback loop at all, this accounts for players leaving after X amount of time btw. You do lose people to boredom. If you lack positive feedback loops in your game, it doesn't get played like .. WoW. 

Edited by madrebel
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think f2p has a place, but i like the notion of it being more than a demo than anything else.

More importantly, get fewer f2p players! 

I think this could be achieved with a more flexible subscription package.

$17.99 - Premium account, unchanged. Full access to alll units.

$5.99 - Infantry package, access to all infantry and trucks.

$5.99 - Air package, access to all planes.

$5.99 - Tanker/Atg package - Access to all tanks, AA, ATG

$2.99 - Access to all ships. (Or maybe that is a throwin or something)?

Note: when i say "Access to all units", i think you should still have to rank up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good ideas...we need ideas to incentivise players to sub to the game BUT the cost involved is too high, especially in this economic environment. Different subs as suggested would likely work..perhaps with a chance for a free month for outstanding teamwork aars etc. This would again INCENTIVISE teamwork.

I really dont think the devs have a feel on WHY people dont sub or leave in general.

Edited by dropbear
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d estimate that an improved F2P to premium conversion correlates directly to the amount of logged sorties / days logged in.

We are certainly seeing squaddies who start as F2P “switch over” if they are still with us 7+ days after joining. The industry that I’ve worked in since leaving the forces (let’s just say it’s “years”, lol) is subscription-based, and to improve yield, one must improve the experience. 

Days 1-14 of Mr Greentag are critical, of which I have no doubt CRS are aware. It’s tapping into what “clicks” for the diverse range of player that is the key. This is of course extremely complex, and seemingly the biggest challenge. It’s obvious that projects have been attempted before (training, host squad) to varied levels of success.

What I also see is some experienced players on F2P as they simply do not have the cash right now to commit but wish to remain in game and part of the team. There’s nothing wrong with that. I do take exception to the former subscriber who uses his F2P account to simply flame CRS and the players via this forum and not login, that’s just idiotic.

The price is what it is: wwiionline is not (and never has been) mainstream. It is a boutique experience that targets a very specific end-user. I can’t see us ever being able to compete with the big guys, and frankly why should we? Continuing to improve the game is critical, as is (obviously) increasing the number of recurring subscribers. They go hand-in-hand.

Subscriber acquisition (marketing) and the subscriber journey (engagement) are the critical factors to ensuring we kick-on. My personal view is that focusing significant time on pricing strategies is the wrong direction to take.

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, poker said:

I do take exception to the former subscriber who uses his F2P account to simply flame CRS and the players via this forum and not login, that’s just idiotic.

The fourms would be dead without us. :P

 

As one of those guys, I'm invested in the game enough to check in every week but not enough to pay.

There are serious issues from bugs to the game simply being unplayable that discouraged me from premium.

The criticism directed to CRS is warranted... It resulted in a better 09, better FB's, reasonable RPATS supply, and many other long needed changes.

 

We suggested changing F2P to demo or trial before steam and gave feedback of the FMS'S effect on AO's. the feedback was ignored and as a result steam players were spawncamped to hell.

It's up to CRS to decide if the feedback we leave has substance, i personally reported on the FMS to deaf ears. The problem was obvious and the proof was simple, yet it went on for a year and devistated the population.

 

As to flaming players... The surviving subs have turned discussions into a echo chamber. Heck i provided real data backing a weapons performance, but the echo chamber refuted it with data that clearly and plainly stated it was estimated data. Again criticism is healthy but flatly denying obvious issues (even bugs) is not healthy at all, these people need to get called out on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, major0noob said:

The fourms would be dead without us. :P

 

As one of those guys, I'm invested in the game enough to check in every week but not enough to pay.

There are serious issues from bugs to the game simply being unplayable that discouraged me from premium.

The criticism directed to CRS is warranted... It resulted in a better 09, better FB's, reasonable RPATS supply, and many other long needed changes.

 

We suggested changing F2P to demo or trial before steam and gave feedback of the FMS'S effect on AO's. the feedback was ignored and as a result steam players were spawncamped to hell.

It's up to CRS to decide if the feedback we leave has substance, i personally reported on the FMS to deaf ears. The problem was obvious and the proof was simple, yet it went on for a year and devistated the population.

 

As to flaming players... The surviving subs have turned discussions into a echo chamber. Heck i provided real data backing a weapons performance, but the echo chamber refuted it with data that clearly and plainly stated it was estimated data. Again criticism is healthy but flatly denying obvious issues (even bugs) is not healthy at all, these people need to get called out on it.

!

The problem is when the criticisms are constant, then they start to look like trolls and when the criticisms also come from F2P accounts that were previously a paid account, the issue seems more and more a revenge and is not taken seriously as your case.  S!

Edited by kase250
spelling
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

would be nice to have some in-game credit or something that is rewarded to f2Ps who do choirs like defending CPs, Covering tanks, Making MSPs, Guarding FBs.... not even much .. 

for example, 1 credit per each 5 min of defending CP or FB to an AO ... then for each 100 credit you get access to full equipment for 1 day ... something so you can never replace full playing customers, but still a token of appreciation for adding value to game or team. or for every 50 point you could get access to some anti-tank unit ATG .. not quite micro transaction , but micro rewards that are addictive...

And then double the rewards gained when playing for underpop to help side balancing as well.. 

nevertheless it is awesome that we have F2P in first place, great initiative but some tweaking would be nice.

S!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, kase250 said:

!

The problem is when the criticisms are constant, then they start to look like trolls and when the criticisms also come from F2P accounts that were previously a paid account, the issue seems more and more a revenge and is not taken seriously as your case. If the game is full bugs or whatever, take the door and close when leave the room. S!

That's the kind of attitude that brought the game to the brink.

There are serious problems with simple fixes. The echo chamber blows the fixes out of proportion and undermines the problems.

 

By all speculation the current 30s FMS should be far worse than only 1-2 per hour.

CRS was adamant about not touching the FMS for a entire year, there was lots of feedback and simply looking at the game for a hour made the problem obvious. Yet the echo chamber and CRS's parionia made the fix sound far worse than the problem, eve though the problem was catastrophic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

F2p model in this game is awful, and it's a shame because I think CRS could make more money with a better designed F2p model

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sydspain said:

F2p model in this game is awful, and it's a shame because I think CRS could make more money with a better designed F2p model

How exactly do you make money from free to play?  F2P people play because its free amd dont want to spend money.

Now if you mean a "cash shop" within the F2P model.......thats a different story but not possible at this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bmw said:

How exactly do you make money from free to play?  F2P people play because its free amd dont want to spend money.

Now if you mean a "cash shop" within the F2P model.......thats a different story but not possible at this time.

Yes, I mean a cash shop, why is not possible?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, sydspain said:

Yes, I mean a cash shop, why is not possible?

I remember reading it was not possible with the current setup that CRS has now.  Dont remember the specifics of why but maybe a RAT or someone who remembers can chime in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're talking about 7-8 bucks a month for people to play this game.  People spend more than that on coffee in a day.  Support the game. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if anybody addressed it , but the way it stands we are a supply based game.

In actuality we are a 1st come 1st serve based game, I think that's why making sub based subscription problematic.

By 1st come 1st serve I mean you have a premium sub but that does not guarantee you that you will get your hands on prime equipment,  all depending how long an AO has been up , if or if not Brigades have been moved in or out if any HC is on or if it's possible due to no link. 

So now imagine someone paying for a certain sub base account like ATG/ AAA but they are all gone already then what??? Don't you think that player will be here and [censored]ing? That he pays for a certain unit account but none are to be had.

I think one of the 1st thing CRS needs to do is figure out how they can make it clear that we are supply based 1st come 1st serve  game . That any unit lost / destroyed has a ripple effect down the road / hours from now . That these Units can make or break of keeping a Town or loosing it. 

Best bet is probably calling it a Demo account with the chance of achieving better access to better units , but again the 1st come 1st served needs to be addressed. 

CRS can not afford nor add all of a sudden more units to each side it would throw everything off balance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, chyrenz said:

We're talking about 7-8 bucks a month for people to play this game.  People spend more than that on coffee in a day.  Support the game. 

Steam price is 16,49€ month, Playnet price is between 14€~17€ depending on exchange rate...is a very expensive game  no matter how many coffees you can buy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, sydspain said:

Steam price is 16,49€ month, Playnet price is between 14€~17€ depending on exchange rate...is a very expensive game  no matter how many coffees you can buy

$7.99 is the starter sub.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bmw said:

$7.99 is the starter sub.

Are you aware of which items unlocks this subscription?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone mentioned having free players only able to function under command of a paying officer, Its brilliant! It would be an excellent way to get squads formed and long term goals achieved

 

alternatively, Give us free players the jobs people hate, every cap, fb taken down, fms set around an AO, AI rebuilt/destroyed gives points towards covering the sub cost. If you dont get your points for the month you lose access and go back to rifleman only. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main problem with different subscriptions (f2p, starter, premium) is to keep just the right balance between attracitveness (fun) and affordability. You want people to pay as much as they can afford and give them enough fun to justify and continue their subscription. That's true for every type of subscriptions and CRS tried out different things over the year here. Affordability is not the same for everyone, same is true for fun with different equipment/roles. It is usefull to offer different subscriptions to different people so they better correspond to what they are willing and able to afford. I think that's clear. But of course you have to keep in mind that you still need them to pay as much as they can afford. A lot of premium players stay away from a lot of branches most of the times. A lot of them stick to one branch most of the time. If you give them cheap (5$) branch subscriptions I am pretty sure the gross income for CRS would plummet. Why?

As many people pointed out, 15 $ have been a high price for this kind of game especially in recent years where nothing got fixed or added. There are a lot of folks especially outside the US that will have to ponder about paying that sum. I guess for a lot of people (like myself) it's paying ww2online for another year or buying 3-6 new standalone wargames (Paradox) or simulators (Il2) which will keep them occupied and entertained for the same period or even longer. Those people, including myself, will seek ways to pay less for the game because they don't think they gonna play this game every week in every month for the whole upcoming year which would be the only sturdy reason to pay that much if you got other fun games at your hand.

15$ is no cheap fee and the main problem is that it's the only subscription worth paying and playing at all. As others pointed out the f2p account limits you to a very minor infantry role with not much to do in game that other games (f2p or not) won't do much better. The starter account is a joke to me. You get basically the same as a f2p player + very few and random equipment. If you like to fly but hate infantry warfare that's a very expensive lottery ticket with a very little prize. I don't have the numbers but I would be suprised if we have a lot of starter accounts.

As a result you come back now and then when you know you are willing and got time to play the game and you pay the fee for 1 or three more months. After that period you might resub or in most cases gonna take a break and play something different. You probably gonna forget this game or at least you won't notice any new stuff that might get you hooked on again because you know that f2p is no fun at all. As a result you pay like 50-100$ in 3 years. Which is significantly less than what you would have paid for a minor subscription (starter account) if you would have kept it the whole time because it was balanced out for your gaming profile.

To sum it up I think CRS has to be more flexible in what they offer.

We got a lot of folks loving this game so much that they crowdfund, got multiple (hero-)accounts and so on. Give them the ability to do so. I think CRS did a good job on this side. You could ad some more cosmetical things (like decals, in game mentions....) to buy for them which won't hurt gameplay and imersion at all. Of course you have to be carefull not to implement a pay to win factor because it would kill the fun for many players like myself. Pay to win is the sheer contrast to what ww2online is about and unique in: cooperate to win. We should not have to pay to win but pay to play . You want  to play the way you like - you have to pay for that. You can't pay? You get restricted in how you can play. You are a grunt now. You have to grab a rifle, fly an outdated bomber or man a minor flak gun. I am okay with that. But nobody should be able to buy 20 rounds of better ammo so his personal tank performs 10% better. I quit a lot of games because of such ptw bs.

We got lots of people that might pay a little less for a month but constantly for the whole year if it would just be more attractive. Like a starter account that at least let you choose a branche of equipment and offers stuff that might put you in some disadvantage but let you compete. Like giving you the 109G6 in axis Tier 3 but not the 190, or the StuG but not the PzIV.  BTW: I think some more discount campaigns would help too. WBS brought me back into premium f. e. - you should offer starters (or even f2p) a limited premium account ("premium weekend - only 2,99$") or access to certain equipment that is more than just one additional rifle or tank ("this month you can rent a drivers licence for all pzIII! - only 2,99$"). This would be the only kind of "micro transactions" that wouldn't ruin the game and could get people to pay some money that never would subscribe a full premium account. At the same time it wouldn't pull anybody out of premium that constantly pays and plays right now.

F2p at it's current state is not helpfull - I think most people would agree on that. It won't get people invested in the game enough to actually pay for it. I think a main reason for that is that f2p players don't have a lot usefull things to do other than spawn in rifles and play battlefield 1942 with other players grabbing all the good stuff. Let's face the facts here: You will have a lot of players that never going to pay for this game under the current subs but they might play a better f2p. You have to decide if you want to kick 'em out of the game because they won't pay or leave 'em here to raise the fun for the rest of paying subscribers. I would emphasize the latter. So give them something to do that keep them invested while at the same time keep them making the game more fun for everybody else. Guarding stuff is boring and the f2p equipment sucks at it. But guarding is the only usefull support work we got right now. Change that. Emphasize them to earn points by supplying or repairing stuff in the field (like tanks!) or doing transport missions (f.e. by plane to drop "equipment" over a contested town or driving a supply truck into such a town or a damaged FB to repair it) - in short by doing support stuff that could matter, increases cooperation and is somewhat interesting enough while giving premium players more things to shoot at. You can make them grind for a glimpse of premium this way. Fly 10 successfully RTBed transport plane missions and you can grab 1 fighter until you loose it. Resuply 250 rounds to other tanks (not in depot range) and you get a nice StuG yourself. Drive 20 trucks to damaged FBs and earn yourself an ATG. That might get players hooked into playing which might make them try out a paid subscription. And it could make it a more interesting game for all of us because green tags are encouraged to cooperate and communicate. And that's the most fun part pf ww2online.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, unpaidsub said:

Someone mentioned having free players only able to function under command of a paying officer, Its brilliant! It would be an excellent way to get squads formed and long term goals achieved

 

alternatively, Give us free players the jobs people hate, every cap, fb taken down, fms set around an AO, AI rebuilt/destroyed gives points towards covering the sub cost. If you dont get your points for the month you lose access and go back to rifleman only. 

Yeah I want my pet! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allowing F2P to stay F2P forever is crazy. Especially the Vets that have switched to F2P just to come in here and flame for free and don't even play the game any more. But allowing someone to play the game for free forever? That's just bad business.  

Perhaps, give F2P a time limit. After 90 days, they have to start paying a minimum price to continue playing the game... AND flaming in the forums. 

It could be as low as $2.99/mo and they get a slight bump up in equipment. VERY slight. 

Edited by lipton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.