Supply - in-game currency

I'm with Inverse on this. I'm all for microtransactions, but if you have to pay money in order to keep using your items (whether you got them for free or purchased them) I won't spend a single cent.

im with masked monkey guy and napalm on this

what if supply is only needed for items dropped from warspoils and items bought in the steam store wont need to be repaired. thatll make sense because giving away stuff ppl usually would have to pay for might have reduced relics revenue ( i got 4 out of 6 WFA commanders from warspoils, some 2x or 3x)
why has noone thought of that? oh, wait, probably because one couldnt bash relic or their buisness model then.

why has noone thought of that? oh, wait, probably because one couldnt bash relic or their buisness model then.

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.

You should really read the thread before you respond. A lot of possible alternatives have been discussed. The problem is there really isn't a way to implement item degredation without it ultimately affecting the consumer in a negative way, unless they make the durability reduction so insignificant that it might as well not exist.

Hopefully they prove me wrong. I just don't see how they can create a system around durability that both makes them money and lets people who don't want to pay money still access all gameplay-related content, and their previous venture into the field with CoHO was less than encouraging.

The problem is there really isn't a way to implement item degredation without it ultimately affecting the consumer in a negative way, unless they make the durability reduction so insignificant that it might as well not exist.

How about degredation applies only to dropped commanders, not bought ones. You drop a commander(-item) it degredates. You buy it, it doesn't. Isn't that a possible way to not make a fool out of the customerz? Whould also fit into F2P.

That exact scenario has been addressed multiple times if you actually read the thread.

im with masked monkey guy and napalm on this

what if supply is only needed for items dropped from warspoils and items bought in the steam store wont need to be repaired. thatll make sense because giving away stuff ppl usually would have to pay for might have reduced relics revenue ( i got 4 out of 6 WFA commanders from warspoils, some 2x or 3x)
why has noone thought of that? oh, wait, probably because one couldnt bash relic or their buisness model then.

In a transaction-based f2p model only a minority of players spend any money (2.2% for mobile games), but they spend enough for it to be very profitable.

The majority of players just play for free and attract other players, which makes the player base bigger. When the player base gets bigger this minority that spends money gets bigger as well, so the company makes more money.

However, for this system to work you have to retain the majority of "free players", or your player base won't increase and you won't get more people ready to spend money on your game. And this is where this "durability" concept fails: people who don't want to spend money on a free game won't keep playing if you force them to pay (even slightly). Because guess what: most people don't want to spend money on a free video game, and bashing them won't change anything.


PS: I regularly spend money on LoL and CSGO (I don't want to know how much...), but I've only spent like 10 euros on CoH2 commanders because I needed them for tournaments, and I haven't spent anything on the old CoHO model.

EDIT: Another good read.

That exact scenario has been addressed multiple times if you actually read the thread.

The only way that scenario was addressed was by saying that it would become a demo for the store. (Which you apparently claim to be a bad thing)

The way I see it, it's more stuff that you can pay for, or you can play and get it for free. I fail to see how getting free stuff (even for a limited time) can possibly be a bad thing.

It frankly screams of entitlement and lack of respect for the basis of economics (making a profit).

It's a bad thing when that content actually affects gameplay in a multiplayer game. If they keep durability away from commanders then it'll be a lot better, unless you happen to be a person who really likes skins. But when you release paid DLC that affects gameplay without giving players a way to reliably obtain that content over time without paying, then you're forcing players into a situation where they need to pay extra money in order to have access to the same gameplay options available to other players. It should be obvious why that is a terrible situation for a multiplayer game based around competition.

You should really read the thread before you respond. A lot of possible alternatives have been discussed. The problem is there really isn't a way to implement item degredation without it ultimately affecting the consumer in a negative way, unless they make the durability reduction so insignificant that it might as well not exist.

Hopefully they prove me wrong. I just don't see how they can create a system around durability that both makes them money and lets people who don't want to pay money still access all gameplay-related content, and their previous venture into the field with CoHO was less than encouraging.

hmm. sorry for that.
but after reading the first dozen posts full of the usual "im entitled to get all this shit for free, fuck relic, fuck economics" i wasnt feeling like reading the rest
my bad

It's a bad thing when that content actually affects gameplay in a multiplayer game. If they keep durability away from commanders then it'll be a lot better, unless you happen to be a person who really likes skins. But when you release paid DLC that affects gameplay without giving players a way to reliably obtain that content over time without paying, then you're forcing players into a situation where they need to pay extra money in order to have access to the same gameplay options available to other players. It should be obvious why that is a terrible situation for a multiplayer game based around competition.

We don't really know what the supply system will be for and how the commander system will work in the future. I wouldn't be that much surprised if Relic fuck it up in the way you describe it, but sincerely let's wait & see, there is no need to play Cassandra in that topic with so few hints.

hmm. sorry for that.
but after reading the first dozen posts full of the usual "im entitled to get all this shit for free, fuck relic, fuck economics" i wasnt feeling like reading the rest
my bad

well... to be honest... i AM entitled to "all this shit" since i paid money for the game. i paid full price. yet i do not have access to all content in the game, which would cost multiple times what i paid for the game itself. now a system gets implemented that wants to entice me into spending even more money (regardless of whether its for things i aquired "for free" by playing the game or not). and not just that, they seemingly want to generate a steady stream of money from me to them just to keep the stuff i have (and most likely have already paid for, possibly multiple times). even with all the uncertainty about how exactly the system will work, trying to defend it by saying "we do not know how it will be implemented" is not exactly wise.

a fairly recent example of that would for example be the ruleset from garena for a competitive female only league. in the ruleset it was stated that no team would be able to have more than one "lesbian, gay, transgendered woman" on the roster, or the entire roster would be banned from playing for a year. nobody knew whether they would actually enforce that rule, yet the community backlash was swift and sharp (rightfully so), and a day or two later the rule was removed.

discussions like this can have a DIRECT impact on how stuff like this actually gets implemented. if nobody shows the potential bad sides of a system like that, in all likelyhood all that "bad stuff" will get implemented, because the company feels like it can "get away with it".

given the track record of relic, especially with CoHO, this "speculation" is not at all unfounded. and remember, CoHO was going to be a F2P game, unlike CoH2.

on that note: i'd also be extremely disappointed if the game became F2P without giving the people that actually did purchase the game and possibly spent hundreds of dollars worth of money on it get nothing over the F2P users, yet this exact thing could also spell the death of "competitive" CoH2, because this could also turn the game more into a pay to win game than it already is.

This can either be great or terrible, I really hope Relic knows exactly what they're doing with this.

This smells like P2W... Sorry

well... to be honest... i AM entitled to "all this shit" since i paid money for the game. i paid full price. yet i do not have access to all content in the game, which would cost multiple times what i paid for the game itself. now a system gets implemented that wants to entice me into spending even more money (regardless of whether its for things i aquired "for free" by playing the game or not). and not just that, they seemingly want to generate a steady stream of money from me to them just to keep the stuff i have (and most likely have already paid for, possibly multiple times). even with all the uncertainty about how exactly the system will work, trying to defend it by saying "we do not know how it will be implemented" is not exactly wise.

a fairly recent example of that would for example be the ruleset from garena for a competitive female only league. in the ruleset it was stated that no team would be able to have more than one "lesbian, gay, transgendered woman" on the roster, or the entire roster would be banned from playing for a year. nobody knew whether they would actually enforce that rule, yet the community backlash was swift and sharp (rightfully so), and a day or two later the rule was removed.

discussions like this can have a DIRECT impact on how stuff like this actually gets implemented. if nobody shows the potential bad sides of a system like that, in all likelyhood all that "bad stuff" will get implemented, because the company feels like it can "get away with it".

given the track record of relic, especially with CoHO, this "speculation" is not at all unfounded. and remember, CoHO was going to be a F2P game, unlike CoH2.

on that note: i'd also be extremely disappointed if the game became F2P without giving the people that actually did purchase the game and possibly spent hundreds of dollars worth of money on it get nothing over the F2P users, yet this exact thing could also spell the death of "competitive" CoH2, because this could also turn the game more into a pay to win game than it already is.

1. you got what you paid for. but free content till kingdom come? hell, that would be the worst buisness model in the history of bad buisness models (yes even worse than me trying to sell swords [a.k.a tree branches] in kindergarden)

2. of course discussions about this should take place here, but this seems like one of those pitchforky kind of threads to me

discussions like this can have a DIRECT impact on how stuff like this actually gets implemented.

Would be nice but in fact Relic has a plan and i got the feeling that they aren't even reading this forum. Maybe, just maybe, the will think about your feedback if you approach one of the guys personal via mail or steam.

Does it realy matter what they add to the game ?

There will always be some guys that write about how bad the idea is, how bad the balance is, how many bugs there are, how much pay to win it is, etc...

Inflating the bad things in a game seems to be very important for some people. So important, they actualy spent hours writing dozens or even hundreds of threads and posts about it.

Relic released a patch that fixed many annoying bugs, which is a good thing.
Then someone finds a few lines in the gamefiles and thats so important that instantly the speculations begin about how bad the idea is, how bad the balance is, how many bugs there are, how much pay to win it is, etc...

Relic isn´t going to design the game around forumguys and keyboardwarriors.

1. you got what you paid for. but free content till kingdom come? hell, that would be the worst buisness model in the history of bad buisness models (yes even worse than me trying to sell swords [a.k.a tree branches] in kindergarden)

thing is: if i pay money for a game, especially when it's on release or as was the case with coh2 even before release, i expect to get all the content that is available at day 0. and i didnt. so i didn't really get what i paid for. as for free content after: i don't think anybody really expects free content, especially not forever. what exactly is this free content you're talking about anyway? if you're talking about bulletins, then i'm really sorry, but that is a part of the game, and definitely NOT something that you have to pay for. and if you have to, then i'm sorry, but that is the very definition of pay to win.

paying for new factions (as in WFA), paying for new skins, new faceplates, you name it... all legit.

2. of course discussions about this should take place here, but this seems like one of those pitchforky kind of threads to me

i don't think it is pitchforky. concerns are being brought up, as they should be. i didn't see anybody pick up pitchforks, telling others to boycott relic or write protest emails or anything of the sorts. apart from people argueing that "the soup is never eaten as hot as it's cooked" in a way to could be considered slightly offensive, this thread seems rather calm in comparison to some others.

also: how would you feel if you had to pay for extra maps too? that was a plan that relic initially had, that luckily got scrapped. and saying that the world builder or the mod tools got released and are free content... i don't know if you're old enough to know this, but 15 years ago this was common practice. warcraft 2, starcraft broodwar and even coh all had these things to begin with, that is to say ON RELEASE. it didn't have to be delivered after the fact. even then, for CoH stuff like corsix mod studio was written by the community, also for free.

again: these kinds of conversations are, imho, what convinces developers to finally go through (or not, depending on backlash) with their plans.

Would be nice but in fact Relic has a plan and i got the feeling that they aren't even reading this forum. Maybe, just maybe, the will think about your feedback if you approach one of the guys personal via mail or steam.

yeah, relic might have a bad track record when it comes to listening to community feedback regarding game mechanics and the sorts, but i always like giving people the benefit of the doubt, as in they might change their plans (even if only slightly) if the community reaction is overly negative.

Honeystly I'm not turned off by any big changes to the game at this point. I bearly play anymore because the game feel so stale.

On a personal level I feel like Relic taking a risk and doing wide sweeping changes is a good thing. Sure there is risk involved but I feel either its kept stale or something changes.

bearly

Sayings like this make me want to be part of TAB...But I don't think I have all the koalafications!

thing is: if i pay money for a game, especially when it's on release or as was the case with coh2 even before release, i expect to get all the content that is available at day 0. and i didnt. so i didn't really get what i paid for. as for free content after: i don't think anybody really expects free content, especially not forever. what exactly is this free content you're talking about anyway? if you're talking about bulletins, then i'm really sorry, but that is a part of the game, and definitely NOT something that you have to pay for. and if you have to, then i'm sorry, but that is the very definition of pay to win.

paying for new factions (as in WFA), paying for new skins, new faceplates, you name it... all legit.



i don't think it is pitchforky. concerns are being brought up, as they should be. i didn't see anybody pick up pitchforks, telling others to boycott relic or write protest emails or anything of the sorts. apart from people argueing that "the soup is never eaten as hot as it's cooked" in a way to could be considered slightly offensive, this thread seems rather calm in comparison to some others.

also: how would you feel if you had to pay for extra maps too? that was a plan that relic initially had, that luckily got scrapped. and saying that the world builder or the mod tools got released and are free content... i don't know if you're old enough to know this, but 15 years ago this was common practice. warcraft 2, starcraft broodwar and even coh all had these things to begin with, that is to say ON RELEASE. it didn't have to be delivered after the fact. even then, for CoH stuff like corsix mod studio was written by the community, also for free.

again: these kinds of conversations are, imho, what convinces developers to finally go through (or not, depending on backlash) with their plans.



yeah, relic might have a bad track record when it comes to listening to community feedback regarding game mechanics and the sorts, but i always like giving people the benefit of the doubt, as in they might change their plans (even if only slightly) if the community reaction is overly negative.

what? why are you asking me? i do not expect anything for free at all after i purchased the game... updates and bugfixes, yes. but no content whatsoever. (still, i cried tears of joy when faster than light released its advanced edition for free )
and the effect of bulletins on the game is marginal, nay, negligible. so even if they sold them it would not be p2w. commanders on the other hand could be (im looking at you tiger ace and sov industry), but if properly balanced they should pose no threat to a p2w-free f2p (i do hate these acronyms)

i still think its pitchforky, because people in here seem to assume that relic will fuck this up intentionally