• Announcements

    • HEAVY265

      New Forum Lead!   11/17/2019

      It's with great pleasure to announce B2K as the new Forum Lead.   I am very confident he will be good for the forums, he has great ideas and direction for the future of the forums.
      Good luck sir and GOD speed.
nugx

Rank overhaul - point based system

64 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, vanapo said:

The up to date plane is by definition the best plane available up to date. When I fly a 1939 plane against a 1942 plane, because 1942 planes are available - I don't care what the point system says about the year we are fighting in - because I hae to fly a plane that is outdated for 3 years against the up to date plane. What you are suggesting as a way to give everyting the same chance is exactly the opposite: It's making people grind for the better chances by spending time with outdated equipment against the better one. You really think this will motivate people to play?

 

As a 1942 plane you would be fighting vs a 1942 plane. (for free)  - timeline

If someone would score some points and bought a 1945 plane, yes you would be vs a 1945 plane - but he earned it by playing and saving up points. - point system

Edited by nugx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, nugx said:

And the 'timeline', take cares that no one will ever truly remain 'at the top clubbing everyone else'

That's just wrong. People are better at the game will club the people who are worse. They will earn points easier, and the will be rewarded for that by getting the better equipment, putting the not so good player into even more of a disadvantage. He is missing the experience with his new toy, he will loose it soon. He will then have to grind back to it with the worse equipment. That's the most frustrating way I could think of it. Edit: How do other games cope with this? By offering the short route of pay2win. So you either proposing pay2win or the most frustrating game experience.

What you are describing as "top clubbing everyone else" is basically the vets "clubbing" the green tags for their first hours of the game - temporarily. Which will allways be the case for every game. And which by no means is a problem. If it would be, it would be a way better solution to just delete the rank unlocks completely. But I guess you would make a lot of people angry then when a green tag with no tanking experience whatsoever will use up all the tigers in an ongoing attack because he grinded to them or can spawn him on his very first mission right away.

Edited by vanapo

Share this post


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

As a 1942 plane you would be fighting vs a 1942 plane. (for free)  - timeline

If someone would score some points and bought a 1945 plane, yes you would be vs a 1945 plane - but he earned it by playing and saving up points. - point system

When SOMEONE fights in a 1945 plane, the 1942 fighter IS NOT the up to date fighter anymore, because it is outdated in regard of the planes it is put up against. This is how a timeline works. You can't just call it a timeline, when everybody can spawn units from any year at any point.

Edited by vanapo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, vanapo said:

When SOMEONE fights in a 1945 plane, the 1942 IS NOT the up to date fighter anymore, because it is outdated in regard of the planes it is put up against. This is how a timeline works. You can't just call it a timeline, when everybody can spawn units from any year at any point.

 

The 1942 still is 'up to date' fighter, because the 1945 pilot, used 'his points' to purchase it, while you get the 1942 fighter for free.

 

 

 

 

Vanapo look at 1940 - this is up to date time, everyone can fly those planes for free, and then you get points.

Now for those points you can purchase some uses of a 1943 plane for example.

1940 still is up to date because it's -free for everyone-,  you spend points to get the 1943 plane - you earned it.

 

rH0McIy.png

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, nugx said:

Vanapo look at 1940 - this is up to date time, everyone can fly those planes for free, and then you get points.

Now for those points you can purchase some uses of a 1943 plane for example.

1940 still is up to date because it's -free for everyone-,  you spend points to get the 1943 plane - you earned it.

Let me put it this way and you might understand it.

1. If there are planes from 1939-1945, than the most modern planes available are from 1945.

2. If there are planes from 1942 that have to fight planes from 1945 than there are players that have to fight with fighters that are outdated for 3 years against the most modern planes available. That is not realistic at all. And it is frustrating for the player that has to fly the outdated fighter.

3. If we start the German attack on France in 1939 and you have planes from 1945 flying around after a few days - That is not realistic at all.

4. If you can unlock a 1945 plane by skill in 1939, a player with a bit less skill will not only have a disadvantage in skill but also in equipment - and this disadvantage will stack over time. Which will drive a lot of people away from the game. Again: How do the games you named cope with this? By offering pay2win for the less skilled players. I hope nobody wants this in game.

And I said all of this multiple times and you just open new threads on the same topic over and over again.

Edited by vanapo

Share this post


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

@chaoswzkd Sorry but I have not entered into personal issues or provocative comments. It is more the OP that has dropped that the subscribers are something stupid. And I think it's disrespectful to pretend to have everything for free knowing there are people paying. I reiterate that I have not entered into anything personal so I do not have to apologize for anything. I try to be positive and in fact i am positive, the negative one is the OP, not me.  What's more, I think the OP should apologize he is again and again with the same statements: Kill the suscriptors player base. He only quotes the phrase that interests him and he does not care about the rest.....

Ah, misread some stuff on my end. Thought you were calling him stupid.

 

11 minutes ago, nugx said:

Could you clarify more? I don't realy get what you are saying.

To quote one of the pictures you've posted a couple times:

"Armaments from 'the future' can be purchased with the point system"

The game is based on WW2's European theater, starting some time in 1940 I believe. It attempts to simulate the war for its duration. This includes the asymmetrical warfare in which there were big equipment disparities between nations.

Getting rid of that by explicitly allowing players to ruin the realism by having Tiger tanks in the 1940 conflict in France is antithetical to the game. It would literally be a different game as soon as that happens, and directly counter to what CRS wants to develop and what it I marketing. You can argue that CRS should want and market something different, but I'm pretty sure you're not going to persuade them otherwise.

Suggestions to change the game in such a fundamental matter simply won't be received well because you're suggesting a different game.

20 minutes ago, nugx said:

The incentive is that the system treats all players fairly - no hidden payments, no 'carrots on a stick' etc.

You pay for the game - everyone has the same chances - the game is fair.

Those who play 24/7 will ofcourse have a chance of a better tank or plane - but that is like this in every game, in WoW if you play 24/7 you will have a better gear than a player who plays few times a week.

 

no no, the 'spawn' is bought for points which you earn for playing.

Oh, so this is actually just an avocation for a single-purchase system. Pay - idk - $50 USD and have the game forever and no additional charges?

No. The game is not and will never be popular enough to be profitable from one-time purchases. The only possible way that could work would be with supplemental income from purchasables, and if we're avoiding Pay2Win, that means cosmetics.

There are only so many historically-accurate cosmetics you can make before you run out, and CRS couldn't churn them out fast enough to remain profitable.

 

Additionally, there are no hidden charges. You want full access? Subscribe. You want some supplemental access? Buy DLC. It's clear and straight-forward.

 

24 minutes ago, nugx said:

It's a double edged sword, because the higher tier, will have less uses of plane/tank.

And the 'timeline', take cares that no one will ever truly remain 'at the top clubbing everyone else'

Yes, so with their limited spawns they can seal club so hard they earn the points they need to buy more limited spawns.

Regarding the timeline, once it hits max and everyone is on the last tier, what's the point of the system anymore? How does it remain interesting?

 

29 minutes ago, nugx said:

I think the points should remain for infantry when you play as inf, as a tanker for tanks, plane for planes etc.

While that sounds nice conceptually, as @vanapo pointed out, and as I mentioned in my post, higher tier armor and aircraft simply win in the vast majority of cases against lower tier stuff. Players at lower tier will be less able to kill things, and basically have to stop playing anywhere anyone rolls out something higher tier.

 

Your argument against that thus far has been "but limited spawns and timeline will fix it", but again, higher tier can simply earn the points needed to purchase more higher tier with their higher tier equipment, staying on top forever. Additionally, as soon as the timeline hits max, your system is no different from the current one: uninteresting, with the added caveat that complete newbies and trolls can step in and waste precious equipment.

Part of the reason we have rank requirements is so that people adequately learn the game before they can spawn in and potentially waste critical resources, like heavy tanks, engineers, sappers, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

1. If there are planes from 1939-1945, than the most modern planes available are from 1945.

Only a small number, because the cost would be high, and before someone would buy it, he would had to make a lot of sorties.

 

Quote

2. If there are planes from 1942 that have to fight planes from 1945 than there are players that have to fight with fighters that are outdated for 3 years against the most modern planes available. That is not realistic at all. And it is frustrating for the player that has to fly the outdated fighter.

Realistic doesn't mean always fun - that's why there is no friendly fire.

Quote

3. If we start the German attack on France in 1939 and you have planes from 1945 flying around after a few days - That is not realistic at all.

How much time it took you to max out the rank? it surely didn't few days

Quote

4. If you can unlock a 1945 plane by skill in 1939, a player with a bit less skill will not only have a disadvantage in skill but also in equipment - and this disadvantage will stack over time. Which will drive a lot of people away from the game. Again: How do the games you named cope with this? By offering pay2win for the less skilled players. I hope nobody wants this in game.

A player in 1939 most likely would not be able to unlock a 1945 plane because the cost would be too high.

Edited by nugx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting rid of that by explicitly allowing players to ruin the realism by having Tiger tanks in the 1940 conflict in France is antithetical to the game. It would literally be a different game as soon as that happens, and directly counter to what CRS wants to develop and what it I marketing. You can argue that CRS should want and market something different, but I'm pretty sure you're not going to persuade them otherwise.

Maybe this is what is needed to bring back the game alive?  Do something new?  Isn't 12 years showing that sticking to the same thing is not producting results ?

 

Oh, so this is actually just an avocation for a single-purchase system. Pay - idk - $50 USD and have the game forever and no additional charges?

It can be a subscription or single-purchase, if there is a good product, people will pay for it.

 

No. The game is not and will never be popular enough to be profitable from one-time purchases. The only possible way that could work would be with supplemental income from purchasables, and if we're avoiding Pay2Win, that means cosmetics.

That suggestion is also a good one and one that already I've been suggesting also,  60$ 1 time fee, 15$ dlcs and cash shop with cosmetics.

 

There are only so many historically-accurate cosmetics you can make before you run out, and CRS couldn't churn them out fast enough to remain profitable.

I think the big part that is limiting this game, is the word 'realistic'.

 

es, so with their limited spawns they can seal club so hard they earn the points they need to buy more limited spawns.

and with current rank people do that, and don't even worry they will loose their ride - with this atleast people would lose the ride.

 

Regarding the timeline, once it hits max and everyone is on the last tier, what's the point of the system anymore? How does it remain interesting?

It gets a reset.  Maybe a draw in war, for example the war runs for 2 months,  2 weeks in real life is 1 year ingame.

 

Players at lower tier will be less able to kill things, and basically have to stop playing anywhere anyone rolls out something higher tier.

Which is exactly what is happening now.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AFAIK, CRS remains as committed as always to not going Pay to Win.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, nugx said:

Realistic doesn't mean always fun - that's why there is no friendly fire.

 

 

That's a logical fallacy and a false equivalence. You're saying "Spawning a 1945 fighter in 1939 isn't realistic but thats fine because we don't allow friendly fire."

Friendly fire being disabled is meant to address something that's also not historically accurate: soldiers randomly killing their buddies for giggles. You're still able to kill yourself, but that's the only person you can harm.

Seal clubbing in a 1945 fighter against 1939 fighters and bombers is only fun for the seal clubber. It's the kind of thing that makes people quit the game.

 

33 minutes ago, nugx said:

Maybe this is what is needed to bring back the game alive?  Do something new?  Isn't 12 years showing that sticking to the same thing is not producting results ?

17 years, and no, it's really not. Even if it was, it's not the game CRS wants to make, even if it's more profitable. If you want high profitability, go play something easily accessible. WWIIOL exists because nothing else on the market is like it, and the only way for it to remain on the market is to remain that way.

 

33 minutes ago, nugx said:

It can be a subscription or single-purchase, if there is a good product, people will pay for it.

Yeah, but you're saying no subscriptions, so you're advocating for single-purchase.

Look at literally any MMO game that's single-purchase. Where is it? It's either dead, living by microtransactions, or so massively and wildly popular that it's still alive - for now.

Every online game that isn't peer-to-peer and doesn't have microtransactions is moving to a Service-Based monetization model, which is basically a subscription. Players are kicking and screaming, but it's happening. They are returning to subscriptions because it's the only way to guarantee keeping the lights on for the game when they don't want to release the source code for fans to host their own servers.

 

33 minutes ago, nugx said:

That suggestion is also a good one and one that already I've been suggesting also,  60$ 1 time fee, 15$ dlcs and cash shop with cosmetics.

No, it's not a good suggestion, because it's not sustainable. WWIIOL goes 1-time purchase, it dies in 3 years or less, and that's optimistic. It will never draw the amount of players necessary to buy enough time to create enough cosmetics to be sustainable, and the cosmetics are a limited resource without going to ridiculous stuff like in WarThunder.

33 minutes ago, nugx said:

I think the big part that is limiting this game, is the word 'realistic'.

It honestly sounds like this isn't a game you should be interested in, then. It's like going to Bohemia Interactive and saying "ARMA IV should be about cowboys fighting aliens. Not a mod, the actual game itself". That's not what they want to make, and it's not what you're going to get, no matter how much you might want it for some reason.

 

33 minutes ago, nugx said:

and with current rank people do that, and don't even worry they will loose their ride - with this atleast people would lose the ride.

No, they don't. With current rank, they play against a ton of other players that can fight them. Newer players that don't have the rank to fight them spawn lower tier equipment to run support missions, like bombing bridges and making FMSes and suppressing infantry. This adds to the combined arms feeling of the game, so not everyone is rolling around in Matildas or Tigers or etc. at whatever tier.

What you're suggesting does away with that because it's no longer about running support missions to win a battle but about earning points so you keep your high tier spawns.

 

33 minutes ago, nugx said:

It gets a reset.  Maybe a draw in war, for example the war runs for 2 months,  2 weeks in real life is 1 year ingame.

Yeah that's not happening. There are currently some concerns with late tier supply imbalances, but if that were fixed pretty much no one would want a campaign to have a time limit by design.

33 minutes ago, nugx said:

Which is exactly what is happening now.....

As I said previously, they can earn rank points and do things and have fun without having to worry about unlocking limited spawns to remain competitive. Yes, they die in a crappy little infantry support tank vs a bigger tank, but their goal was infantry support to suppress the enemy so they can take the town and win. It wasn't to earn rank points so they can buy higher tier equipment. The focus shift is critical here.

Edited by chaoswzkd
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jwilly said:

AFAIK, CRS remains as committed as always to not going Pay to Win.

This is correct. If you’re a subscriber you’ll get maximum value. If you go down the Free —> DLC route, we’ll give you a sub-section of access. WWII Online has received the label of a “pay to win” game purely based on the lack of micro-transactions or path to gain every component of our game for free. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

That's a logical fallacy and a false equivalence. You're saying "Spawning a 1945 fighter in 1939 isn't realistic but thats fine because we don't allow friendly fire."

I'm saying  'spawning a 1945 plane in 1939 might be potentialy fun because it gives unpredictability to the game'.

 

Quote

Seal clubbing in a 1945 fighter against 1939 fighters and bombers is only fun for the seal clubber. It's the kind of thing that makes people quit the game.

Before a player could roll a 1945 plane, he would have to make a hell lot of a good sorties in 1939 plane - consider it max rank, you don't get in in few days.

 

WWIIOL exists because nothing else on the market is like it, and the only way for it to remain on the market is to remain that way.

WWIIol is like any other game now, what you are talking of was in 2000-2004

 

Newer players that don't have the rank to fight them spawn lower tier equipment to run support missions, like bombing bridges and making FMSes and surprising infantry

Nope, new players log off and don't play, that's why in a month from steam release game dropped from 448 to 110 people on steam and later even lower.

Edited by nugx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, nugx said:

I'm saying  'spawning a 1945 plane in 1939 might be potentialy fun because it gives unpredictability to the game'.

Only for the person doing it and the person who shoots them down out of vindictive glee, not for any other casualties in the meantime.

 

27 minutes ago, nugx said:

Before a player could roll a 1945 plane, he would have to make a hell lot of a good sorties in 1939 plane - consider it max rank, you don't get in in few days.

Doesn't matter. It's possible and that's a problem in and of itself.

 

28 minutes ago, nugx said:

WWIIol is like any other game now, what you are talking of was in 2000-2004

Categorically false. Largest persistent game world (that doesn't cheat because it's set in space), not instanced, no loading transitions, WW2-themed, entirely player-driven conquest, combined arms, focused on realism.

The only game out there that comes remotely close is Planetside 2, and it's an arcade shooter set in the future.

If you go for realism and WW2 then you're looking more at Red Orchestra. Red Orchestra + Planetside 2 doesn't exist. There's just WWIIOL.

 

32 minutes ago, nugx said:

Nope, new players log off and don't play, that's why in a month from steam release game dropped from 448 to 110 people on steam and later even lower.

Steam players left for a lot of reasons: tutorials weren't fixed yet, controls were not modern at all, graphics are very dated, ideological opposition to subscriptions, confusion over "F2P" really meaning "F2P with limited access if you don't want to subscribe because it's actually Pay 2 Play", unwillingness to use 3rd party voice comms, and yes, a feeling of getting clubbed by vets.

It's just one piece in the puzzle, though.

 

And newer players do do those things, because there are a good number of people still around from Steam, and that's how all the vets got started as new players.

Share this post


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

Doesn't matter. It's possible and that's a problem in and of itself.

That's what differs us, you see it as problem, I see it as benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.