• Announcements

    • HEAVY265

      Crs Wants You!   01/18/2019

      CRS is looking for some volunteer live support chat staff.  Are you up for the assignment?  If so,  please send an email with your interest to,  Jobs@corneredrats.com
knucks

F2P should be defined by Pre-War equipment

13 posts in this topic

There's not enough people to properly attack/defend. Most of the time FMS are set up stealthy and no one is available to stay back, build the FOB and defend the spawn. No one pulls light AA or AT from the MS until last second when it's too late. Subscribers are not doing this job so it needs to be picked up by F2P with Pre-War and tier 0 equipment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmmm....interwar weapons and equipment.  Sounds very interesting.  Don’t know how much CRS wants to spend doing older stuff, when everyone wants the late war stuff.  As popular as tier 0 is, I wonder how tier -1 would do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, rendus said:

Hmmmm....interwar weapons and equipment.  Sounds very interesting.  Don’t know how much CRS wants to spend doing older stuff, when everyone wants the late war stuff.  As popular as tier 0 is, I wonder how tier -1 would do.

Well we already have some interwar equipment, it's meant to give F2P just enough and prewar-first year of the war is a good defining area for F2P.
Right now F2P literally cannot compete in combined arms, they're useless in that regard, and like you say everyone wants mid-late war stuff, so it wouldn't be any loss to give access to the obsolete stuff that hardly anyone uses. If it brings players in then I see it as a plus, money on the table if you will. People tend to flock to a game that already has players, more population, more potential customers. If someone gets hooked on pre-war equipment you bet your [censored] they will want that late tier stuff. I honestly don't see any negative to it, the equipment goes mostly unused into the war anyway.

Edited by knucks

Share this post


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

Well we already have some interwar equipment, it's meant to give F2P just enough and prewar-first year of the war is a good defining area for F2P.
Right now F2P literally cannot compete in combined arms, they're useless in that regard, and like you say everyone wants mid-late war stuff, so it wouldn't be any loss to give access to the obsolete stuff that hardly anyone uses. If it brings players in then I see it as a plus, money on the table if you will. People tend to flock to a game that already has players, more population, more potential customers. If someone gets hooked on pre-war equipment you bet your [censored] they will want that late tier stuff. I honestly don't see any negative to it, the equipment goes mostly unused into the war anyway.

That's what the dlc currently offer for a one time purchase.

Share this post


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

That's what the dlc currently offer for a one time purchase.

But has it worked? Same 20 or so average players on steam since April.

Edited by knucks

Share this post


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

But has it worked? Same 20 or so average players on steam since April.

Steam is a small percentage of the game population. We are trying to capture and monetize that as well. We can not just have steam be f2p for all, with our limitations of billing, overhead in maintaining the servers and development, its not feasible. Our organic population has grown as well. This is not a First Person Shooter that the "steam community" is use to. This is a FPSMMO which is run by our servers not  shared resources like COD, and others. We look with in the resources and limitations we have to try to bring in new players however this game will never be a One Stop Shop for everyone no game will be. For every argument you give for F2P a subscriber can make the opposite point. Our in game population has grown in the last three months and that includes Steam and organic. We make adjustments  to the feedback receive yours included, sometimes they are passed on but they are discussed. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

Steam is a small percentage of the game population. We are trying to capture and monetize that as well. We can not just have steam be f2p for all, with our limitations of billing, overhead in maintaining the servers and development, its not feasible. Our organic population has grown as well. This is not a First Person Shooter that the "steam community" is use to. This is a FPSMMO which is run by our servers not  shared resources like COD, and others. We look with in the resources and limitations we have to try to bring in new players however this game will never be a One Stop Shop for everyone no game will be. For every argument you give for F2P a subscriber can make the opposite point. Our in game population has grown in the last three months and that includes Steam and organic. We make adjustments  to the feedback receive yours included, sometimes they are passed on but they are discussed. 

Steam has grown by 9 people since the DLC was released for a whopping 20 players average. And I’ll take the organic growth with a grain of salt since you don’t quantify it.

Share this post


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

Steam has grown by 9 people since the DLC was released for a whopping 20 players average. And I’ll take the organic growth with a grain of salt since you don’t quantify it.

This. @blackhawk There is zero point to try to tout better ‘organic’ numbers when there’s no concrete public evidence to back it up. Especially when webmap still displays the usual population trends. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at your stat kills look at the number of new names in game, look at the webmap on Friday Saturday and Sunday where it showed population as good, which has not happened in over a year.

Or don't take those as facts as well. 

How about the fact this game with the resources gathered this year has had a steady patch stream of content and fixes for the first time since 2012.

Or just keep speweying your personal agenda to try and make this game something it is not by giving all equipment to free to play, and hope some magical bailout will come each month when the bills come in.

 

Yes I would love to paly all equipment for free and have population servers at all time highs. But here are the facts it cost actual money to pay for the servers that host the game, actual money to keep the connection to the internet, and the hard work of it's players base stepping up to donate their free time to develop the game further, or even those players who donate to our crowd funding campaigns or those who have builder accounts or subscriptions, which by the way help pay for these very forums you come here and hyjack thread after thread about how out of touch we are with steam community, and "your gaming experience".

Your ideas on how to increase server population are not realistic under the reality it takes to run this game and what separates us from the games we are compared to.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BLKHWK8 said:

Steam is a small percentage of the game population. We are trying to capture and monetize that as well. We can not just have steam be f2p for all, with our limitations of billing, overhead in maintaining the servers and development, its not feasible. Our organic population has grown as well. This is not a First Person Shooter that the "steam community" is use to. This is a FPSMMO which is run by our servers not  shared resources like COD, and others. We look with in the resources and limitations we have to try to bring in new players however this game will never be a One Stop Shop for everyone no game will be. For every argument you give for F2P a subscriber can make the opposite point. Our in game population has grown in the last three months and that includes Steam and organic. We make adjustments  to the feedback receive yours included, sometimes they are passed on but they are discussed. 

You think you're the only MMOFPS on steam? You need to play Planetside 2, You'd be shocked how much they offer for free while not being pay2win and still making profit to continue development.
It's not what you do it's how you do it. Also population has grown on steam? That's a straight up lie. https://steamcharts.com/app/251950
You must think we're dumb. "This isn't cod, servers cost money"
Come on man. Play other games, you're not a special case.
Please make an argument on the point and not the same 
argument that dug the hole for you in the first place.

 

Edited by knucks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think CRS need to prioritize working on their bill system

or at least make dlc more attractive & allow organic players to buy them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, heilmittel said:

I think CRS need to prioritize working on their bill system

or at least make dlc more attractive & allow organic players to buy them

True, why you would think charging 12 bucks for a pre-war tank as microtransaction as a good idea is beyond me.
I can buy like 5 cosmetic items in Planetside for that price that I keep forever and have no effect on gameplay.
Better yet I bought another game that's just like this one for 15 bucks on sale, one server, wars that last for weeks, massive combined arm battles, NO p2w whatsoever.

I seriously wonder why the developer thinks they're above the competiiton when they're losing out on almost every aspect?
It's one thing to say "hey, this is a hobby we aren't real devs we don't care about profits or playercount"
But to market yourself as if you want these things, then go and do almost everything wrong and have the nerve to blame everyone but themselves, 
I do not understand it one bit.

The DLC is 120 something bucks and you only get maybe up to tier 2 stuff. So if the whole game was one time buy it would cost like 500 bucks per person. That's insane. Not to mention p2w.

Edited by knucks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

knucks, you siimply don't get it...

Let me cut to the chase. EVERY SINGLE F2P GAME OUT THERE has a way to monetize those free players be it ad impressions, skins, or p2win items like super XP, super speed, super armor, super ammo, etc. It's simply a law of economics. Nothing is really for free, and if there is not a way to monetize those f2p users, f2p would cease to exist.

WE do not have a simple way to monetize our current f2p base, be it lack of power-ups and "fluff" content or the resources needed to generate it and/or the billing system integration for such commodities.

1) We do not have ANY artificial buffs that would allow one player, paying or f2p, to have an advantage over another player with the same class vehicle. Even if we wanted to go that route, at present, there just isn't anyone "extra" to develop that type of content and still make progress with moving the actual "playing" parts of the game forward.

2) We don't have the resources to generate tons of purchasable cosmetics, nor the extra bandwidth available in the communication packets to share the extra bits required regarding "who's wearing what" across the bit stream so that anyone else but you could see it. Who knows how much dev time required for such implementations, that also increases overall packet size and bandwith required to move it.

3) We don't devote 10% or more of your screen to banner ads the entire time you play, although, in the short term, this would probably be the easiest way to monetize you (as all the others are doing whether you choose to believe it or not) to make f2p more neconomically worthwhile for us in light of no other easily available f2p monetizing options.

That's the bottom line. Most of us here hate #1, true p2w (rather than p2play such as our current subscription and DLC models) and would rather not waste the dev resources we do have on #2 churning out useless things that only appeal to vanity and offer no other benefit to gameplay such as global game improvements and new vehicles while at the same time increasing the bandwidth necessary for it all.

As for #3, most of us here hate the thought of banner ads constantly flashing around somewhere on your screen, on every spawn screen and every pop-up available to ad real estate while you play. Talk about an immersion killer... But I gotta tell you, If that would allow f2p users access to the rest of the equipment so that they could no longer complain or otherwise constantly attack us in reviews or elsewhere in regards to our need to support the ongoing operation/maintenance of the game by "real world means" with a subscription for access, or some kind of payments for the equipment that they use, I'm honestly warming to the idea. It might be the easiest route forward for us to make f2p an asset rather than the current strain on public relations, and the constant drain on revenue and morale that it is at this time. That would give you what you really want, and hopefully equal or exceed what we need to monetize f2p enough to support it's continuance and possible expansion. It's certainly the easiest way to begin the monetization of the f2p demographic, they can't complain about having to pay for anything if they're not, and it could prove to be lucrative enough to support itself. Maybe we both can win.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.