Supply - in-game currency

I hope you are aware that the most played game on steam (by a wide margin) is a F2P game, rife with microtransactions.

I don't have to keep paying money to be allowed to use my hero skins.

People need to take a look at this thread and then read this one. We are looking at one piece of the puzzle.

http://www.coh2.org/topic/30476/custom-commanders

Of course it's based on assumptions. Doesn't mean it can't still be discussed. The system described in the strings is very unambiguous, especially since it almost exactly mirrors the system they used in CoHO. There's a lot of discussion to be had on the merits, or lack thereof, of the system described.

Durability decay for units and commanders is not the best thing for sure, especially if you must constantly need to spend real money to play them. I won't play anymore if this is the case.

But if the in game currency permit to support all my units and there is still enough left to buy new stuff (even more slowly) then i will play.

It's the love for a game that make me spend cash on it, not the obligation to.

So if i don't have to spent real cash to stay competitive, i will spend real cash as i see fit to enjoy myself and to help them ( to pay my share). For me it's around 40-60 CA$ for a year.( Around the price a new game). But the game must be fun and addictive.

The line is fine, but still it can be a success.

yeah, more gameplay changing shit behind a pay wall. Now with limited uses which you can refresh by paying them even more money. You're point?

First of all, the system described is nearly identical to the system used in CoHO, so drawing comparisons between the two and discussing one in context of the other makes perfect sense. The fact that these strings are even in the game is proof that this is a concept at the very least under consideration at Relic, which in my opinion is enough to justify discussing its merits.

Secondly, I never said microtransactions are a bad business model. In fact, if you actually read through the thread, you would see that I'm actually very keen on microtransactions done right in games like CSGO and Dota 2. There is nothing wrong with microtransactions when done correctly. This implementation, however, is an extremely terrible way to do microtransactions, for all of the reasons I and others have stated in other posts in this thread, which I suggest you read.

Durability decay for units and commanders is not the best thing for sure, especially if you must constantly need to spend real money to play them. I won't play anymore if this is the case.

But if the in game currency permit to support all my units and there is still enough left to buy new stuff (even more slowly) then i will play.

It's the love for a game that make me spend cash on it, not the obligation to.

So if i don't have to spent real cash to stay competitive, i will spend real cash as i see fit to enjoy myself and to help them ( to pay my share). For me it's around 40-60 CA$ for a year.( Around the price a new game). But the game must be fun and addictive.

The line is fine, but still it can be a success.

The acceptable amount of money you should have to spend per year to stay competitive in a multiplayer game is $0. If you have to spend a cent more than that to play a multiplayer game properly, there's a serious problem.

as a consumer do you think that buying an item from the store that has charges to it that degrade every time you use it, which you top up by spending more money so you can continue to use that item is appealing to you?

Personally I don't find it appealing and I think it's a terrible idea. When you overtly try to wrangle as much money as possible from your player base you put people off.

As an internet-poster do you think that making virtually baseless claims about a companies future business model is applealing to you?

Personally, I don't find it appealing and I think it's a terrible idea. When you overtly try to use your extrapolated theories to shit on a company that is trying to make a profit by apparently claiming to be able to predict the future. You put people off.

maskedmonkey2 is right though, we need to take all of this info with a grain of sand. I think coh2 f2p could be a good thing for the community. We just have to give them time to figure out what they are going to do.


maskedmonkey2 cant u just give me money? XD

As an internet-poster do you think that making virtually baseless claims about a companies future business model is applealing to you?

Personally, I don't find it appealing and I think it's a terrible idea. When you overtly try to use your extrapolated theories to shit on a company that is trying to make a profit by apparently claiming to be able to predict the future. You put people off.

It's not baseless there is precedent for this in CoH: online. I don't really understand how anyone can think this would be a fantastic addition to the game when what is described in UCS file is identical to how it worked in CoH: online.

People need to take a look at this thread and then read this one. We are looking at one piece of the puzzle.

http://www.coh2.org/topic/30476/custom-commanders

Instead of giving hints, isnt it better and much easier if you just tell us?

It just shows that in the future Relic seems to be planning on splitting up commanders into their individual abilities, so instead of commanders being items each commander ability will be its own item. Doesn't really have much to do with supply or durability, just shows that in the future there will likely be more individual items and commanders will likely be split into components.

It's not baseless there is precedent for this in CoH: online. I don't really understand how anyone can think this would be a fantastic addition to the game when what is described in UCS file is identical to how it worked in CoH: online.

For some reason, you think that because they both have the word "durability" that they are destined to be identical systems, and proceed to shit-talk Relic as much as you can.

For all we know they very well may be the same system, but please realize that they are just as likely to be very different.

Put your pitchforks away, now is not the time for them.

For some reason, you think that because they both have the word "durability" that they are destined to be identical systems, and proceed to shit-talk Relic as much as you can.

For all we know they very well may be the same system, but please realize that they are just as likely to be very different.

Put your pitchforks away, now is not the time for them.

Slippery slope. They are going to have durability ----- They had it before ------ it was bad before------it will be bad!

Lets just hope that they have learned. But we could just as easily go:

Relic didnt learn about x ---------- this is related to x-------Relic wont learn!

Supply in COHO was only used to resupply "Elite units" each of them limited at 1 or 2 per building.
And it was absolutly possible to play without them and so not using supplies.

Commander draft ability was also part of COHO, and drafts were limited in the Commander dedicated doctrine.
It brought a lot of fun, but also some unbalance since some abilities were to much powerful in combo with some stock units. (heyho flare + triple snipers)

As far as I remember COHO was shut down before a complet test of its monetization aspect so I'm not really sure about repeting the same errors, we don't know if it would have work or not.

In order to have a durability system, items must degrade unless repaired. And in order for such a system to be financially viable, there has to be an incentive at some point to purchase credit for repairs. That's more than enough to provoke a negative reaction in my opinion.

In order to have a durability system, items must degrade unless repaired. And in order for such a system to be financially viable, there has to be an incentive at some point to purchase credit for repairs. That's more than enough to provoke a negative reaction in my opinion.

Unless they take a model thusly:

Free items degrade. People like free items. They can buy versions that dont degrade. People buy non degrading items.

Its not like Relic has some huge staff as well all know (Read super high operating expenses).

Sure, that would be better, but it would still suck, because it would mean the only way to reliably keep items is by buying them. It turns the drop system into a demo for the store.

Sure, that would be better, but it would still suck, because it would mean the only way to reliably keep items is by buying them. It turns the drop system into a demo for the store.

Yep. And then you add supply to maintain your "Free" item. I dont think it would be terrible. As long as its not say a commander.

But I am willing to bet if they add custom commanders they would degrade. Wild speculation on my part of course.

Sure, that would be better, but it would still suck, because it would mean the only way to reliably keep items is by buying them. It turns the drop system into a demo for the store.

Who cares if the drop system becomes a demo for the store?

Ever heard the phrase "don't look a gift-horse in the mouth"?

How people can so consistently and aggressively complain about free stuff is beyond me.

I would love to live in a world where I could pay 60 dollars (or as low as 10 dollars like during Steam sales where I bought it for all my friends) and play a game for years for free. However, if I want more content, patches that are more than biannual events, and so on, I understand that the company has to make money beyond a fixed amount they received years ago.

If the system isn't completely terrible, then it has a good chance of funding continuing development and increasing the matchmaking player base.

How about people who were around when Relic promised not to lock game-affecting DLC behind paywalls? Because being unable to reliably access all commanders for free is exactly that.

It's no skin off my back personally. I lost interest in CoH2 the moment they sold their first DLC commander, because I'm not the kind of person to purchase DLC that affects gameplay in a multiplayer game, and without commanders CoH2's core factions are incredibly
bland.

I have nothing against microtransactions. I've spent more money on Dota 2 and CSGO skins than I have on new games in the past two years, but not one cent of that money I spent on DLC went toward gameplay benefits. I paid $60 for this game, and I shouldn't have to pay more to achieve gameplay parity with other players in multiplayer.