choad

Expand F2P weapons, force to underpop side.

28 posts in this topic

I believe we are near the point where we can say that tge current F2P approach simply is not working. I say "not working" in the sense that it has not grown the population in any meaningful way.

I really think that the F2P model should be .... expand the weapons that they can use. Not sure exactly how much to expand TBH. Maybe greatly. Then in exchange for that ... we do not permit them to select which side they play for. They only have the option to spawn underpop side.

Maybe even give them full access to all infantry units.

1) It is a great way for them to get their feet wet and feel like they have a fighting chance. Do not feel as if they are at a disadvantage by nature of the account type.

2) Hopefully by keeping them engaged, having fun, getting kills, etc, they will keep coming back. If they do ... eventually they will make friends in game, want to join squad, or prefer a side. At that point they seem primed to subscribe.

3) The current side balance system doesnt work all that great. But i promise you, this will! 

4) F2P players will actually be much more useful in the sense they can help blow fbs, guard cps effectively, etc. A great way to learn.

5) Get rid of the stupid "Reserve" infantry class. CRS has it backwards. The Reserve equipment should be for paying subscribers!

6) This model should not impact your current subscriber base all that much. Most "vets" enjoy doing what they wanna do ... whether that is picking a side or playing in a squad, etc.

7) Also. F2P shouldnt get to drive tanks, fly planes IMO. They have suvs or DLC for that.

Best part about this solution is it works to solve 2 issues! Overall population, and balance.

Maybe this idea is out-dated due to DLC ... wish this would've been the model from the start because i think it would work much better.

Edited by choad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's out of date as soon as the game gets any more than 400 population. You really should be locked to a side every campaign.
An add every life? Sure if F2P gets the equipment for it like they use to have.

Edited by knucks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some commentary

  1. I understand the thought process and desire of wanting to give away more stuff. Fact is, it reduced our conversion rate to a paid anything and did not contribute to a massive increase in players being online.
  2. We will not be giving away all infantryman for free.
  3. We do have a plan for new products (subscriptions) that we'll be sharing with you soon. Watch closely for it.
  4. Reserve access was very much intended to ensure free players got to use automatic weapons without it being siphoned by subscribers. 
    1. The reason for this was those players had highly requested access to an automatic, and it would likely improve their experience and conversion.
    2. If they didn't convert, at least they kept playing and enjoying themselves enough to populate the server.
  5. This whole forcing free players to the underpopulated side was mentioned by Lipton several times and is not a new concept.
  6. I think integrated voice communications and promoting squad incentives will do wonders to help with new player retention and improving existing customer experiences.
  7. I know we need to do more work here and I am not content with how things are currently - there is work going on behind the scenes.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok cool. I would just say ... don't bother forcing current f2p's to the underpop side b/c i gotta be honest ... a bunch of rifles to balance things out will make no difference in terms of a balanced fight. It may check a box or a spreadsheet nicely, but that is about it. What is the word im looking for ? Fodder i think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem at all with f2p players having targeted ads in the mission screens. There are many open source projects on github that can provide ideas on html5 designs. Will the updated UI support this?

Share this post


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

Some commentary

  1. I understand the thought process and desire of wanting to give away more stuff. Fact is, it reduced our conversion rate to a paid anything and did not contribute to a massive increase in players being online.
  2. We will not be giving away all infantryman for free.
  3. We do have a plan for new products (subscriptions) that we'll be sharing with you soon. Watch closely for it.
  4. Reserve access was very much intended to ensure free players got to use automatic weapons without it being siphoned by subscribers. 
    1. The reason for this was those players had highly requested access to an automatic, and it would likely improve their experience and conversion.
    2. If they didn't convert, at least they kept playing and enjoying themselves enough to populate the server.
  5. This whole forcing free players to the underpopulated side was mentioned by Lipton several times and is not a new concept.
  6. I think integrated voice communications and promoting squad incentives will do wonders to help with new player retention and improving existing customer experiences.
  7. I know we need to do more work here and I am not content with how things are currently - there is work going on behind the scenes.


I say go back to your old F2P that you didn't try. I was still mad I wasn't subscribed (until I was for a year), but I felt okay while playing. It's irritating to know how bad the F2P experience is, so many players passing up this game all because the first impression is bad.

 

 




 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ads are a bad impression, have you have ever played a cheap mobile game on your phone? It's the same thing ads everywhere, ads in your face after every screen that you have to contantly click away, how tiresome. Not even all big websites sell ads because they're so ugly. An actual PC game that has repeated ads build into the code? I would rather die.

Underpop situation is a tricky one. My question is, why not add a side dedication feature, where the side you choose at the beginning of the war is the side you fight for? Is pop so low that the imbalance is not 50/50? You should merge the ally nation to one, because 3v1 looks odd when you're new and choosing your side, just make it allies/axis and surprise people when they see british, french, and americans down the line.

We already know the subscription you're planning, subscriptions for branches. It's not price, it's the subscription itself. BUT if you really wan't to support the game like a whale would you should buy this subscription. Right? So it's not all bad. You could be going backwards which you aren't.

Just waiting for you to get back to decent F2P, it's only like 4 actual units in game while you go and give a whole tree away like a troop of air junkies high off compressed air,
Don't even do the tank. Do the AT/AA guns. Bump up the DLC for these two to 1 (ONE) medium gun (per side)
I do believe you will extent the playerbase noticeably within a month, and then you can decide.

Share this post


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

I say go back to your old F2P that you didn't try.

Wait... what?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen. Current f2p is no way to introduce a guy to this game. That is all i am saying. It is a fail. Let's regroup and move on.

Share this post


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

Listen. Current f2p is no way to introduce a guy to this game. That is all i am saying. It is a fail. Let's regroup and move on.

Like I said, I am not comfortable with it either. But we have a plan to try some new product offerings. We gotta keep trying until we get it to work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as the leader of FHREE TO PLAY I will added my 2 cents.

The basic rifle is best weapon in game. Top Killer as ftp has proven this.

The current HE round can kill light tanks. With New TOE there is many more DAC and Panny targets.

You can help attack FB as Rifleman.

Opel is now an option.

FTP auto exists.

Two things I feel could help FTP -

More run stamina with basic rifle,

Rifle should be fasts shouldered weapon

2nd HE satchel to assist fb attacks.

Maybe some better info to F2P players on how to play - not text - video or pictures.

So the only beef ftp can have is I cant kill a campin Matty..how bad do you want to kill him?

S! 

LIES

ps IF balance sides is your deal.. get 10 guys who don't care about axis/allied blah blah and have them play as low pop. No coding needed

I love a target rich environment!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've done this a lot so I kind of know how it works. I can tell you don't get around to many games so your opinion is pretty shallow and that's backed up by your inability to make a solid argument for Pay2Win. When properly done F2P makes more money and has more players than P2W games. That's on CRS though to do it faithfully and with integrity, without having the money get to their heads, which will be hard. Either way the game as it stands is ranked somewhere in the top 10 of worst P2W games on Steam, behind WoT and H&G. Pretty heckin disappointing that you don't see how that could be possible.

Edited by knucks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, knucks said:

I've done this a lot so I kind of know how it works. I can tell you don't get around to many games so your opinion is pretty shallow and that's backed up by your inability to make a solid argument for Pay2Win. When properly done F2P makes more money and has more players than P2W games. That's on CRS though to do it faithfully and with integrity, without having the money get to their heads, which will be hard. Either way the game as it stands is ranked somewhere in the top 10 of worst P2W games on Steam, behind WoT and H&G. Pretty heckin disappointing that you don't see how that could be possible.

F2P + revenue stream requires a significant investment in building out a new layer from which the game runs a top.

 

Meaning, we don't have an 'economy' model where boosters of any type will have any impact. Some of the underpinnings that could enable that do kind of exist but would need significant amounts of code to enable/enhance/etc. Things like skins and what not essentially dependent on loadouts - a feature that is needed for subscription players as well.

Here's my stab at an economic model - feel free to add to it from the perspective of better leveraging F2P.

 

Share this post


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

F2P + revenue stream requires a significant investment in building out a new layer from which the game runs a top.

You already had it, basic equipment for Reserve accounts, basic AA, basic AT, basic tank, basic plane.
But I forgot, F2P is evil and just want everything for free, it's not because this game has a mid day population of 50 people.
It couldn't possibly be any of the other way around and that you're over-valuing this equipment and that people aren't interested because of it.
It's not hard to not be stingy, when CRS decides to put something into F2P maybe they'll finally get something out of it, wouldn't you agree?

Edited by knucks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, knucks said:

You already had it, basic equipment for Reserve accounts, basic AA, basic AT, basic tank, basic plane.
But I forgot, F2P is evil and just want everything for free, it's not because this game has a mid day population of 50 people.
It couldn't possibly be any of the other way around and that you're over-valuing this equipment and that people aren't interested in you because of it.
It's not hard to not be stingy, when CRS decides to put something into F2P maybe they'll finally get something out of it, wouldn't you agree?

No.  I wouldn't.

Because again you are blowing off the whole issue of people that sub NOW would go F2P if all their stuff is available for free.

 

I would go with basic tank AA and plane, don't see a problem there.

AT work, ATGs and sappes, hell no.

 

Now then, the real gorilla in the room is not any of this.

It's the trucks.  THOSE are the content blockers, as more FMS attack and defense would allow for more spawn points to switch to in case of a camp and more entree to battle.

But, how many second accounts go bye bye if they are free?

And, how many people are lost due to lack of FMS precisely because you are dependent on a subbed account to forego their 'premium P2W experience' (snork) and drive an FMS to a fairly certain frustrating death?

Edited by Kilemall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no-one is saying it's evil. there does need to be revenue potential though. currently, there is no revenue potential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The basic equipment wins!

SKILLLLLLZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

add an AD each time ftp dies!

S!

LIES

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, nily said:

ps IF balance sides is your deal.. get 10 guys who don't care about axis/allied blah blah and have them play as low pop. No coding needed

I love a target rich environment!

 

 

Lots of targets over here Nilly. The only thing missing is you. I know you have played a ton of Allied, just not lately. Don't be a stranger ... that's all i'm saying. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they don't cover expenses this game will die very fast.  FTP give nothing to that end.

If you can't afford $12-17 per month then you really should be working overtime a bit more and not waste your time here.  It takes me about 2 hours of work every year to pay for an entire year of this game.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing to also consider is survivorship bias. You only hear about the F2P games that succeeded because they succeeded. Because you built it doesn't mean that they will come.

I haven't seen any reliable stats showing what % of F2P games go belly up after a couple years.

These are all important things that require careful consideration before spending resources on new monetization schemes. That said I personally believe that it could work and there is demand for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think effort toward FTP is a death spiral for CRS. Resources will go into development of monetization functionality instead of toward gameplay content, the only proven attractor of customers.

There's no evidence that there are any customers out there that will financially support this game instead of one of the mass market shooters. Certainly the Steam community didn't find this kind of gameplay to their liking.

There's no evidence that FTP is a stepping stone to subscribing.

There's a ton of evidence that present subscribers will go FTP if it's cheaper for them.

What evidence is there that aggregate revenue won't *decrease* after all that expensive development is done?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, we have existing DLC's
buy one time, it is yours for keeps.

but here come the words Stingy and Greedy again.
When payday comes, do you decide oh hell, i'm not taking that, i don't want to be greedy?
I doubt it
Explain that to the electric company when they would like paid for their service you used.

You throw the words around as if you see John Romero driving out of the CRS office in a different color Ferrari every day or something.
This is the really real world here, COLO space costs money, electric costs money, bandwidth costs money, servers which we own cost money, switches
redundant power solutions misc hardware costs money, licensed technology costs money, equipment costs money, etc etc etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, nily said:

The basic rifle is best weapon in game. Top Killer as ftp has proven this.

It's proving a lot of things, but not what you say it does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.