Astarica Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 They haven't said anything about restricting gear, but the number of warzones they can play is restricted. It takes long enough to get full WH gear with unlimited access as it is. Wouldn't make a difference in 10-49 because people do the WZ there to win. Of course you're not going to get WH due to lack of playing time assuming the WZ per week limit is something fairly crippling, but if I was F2P in the 10-49 bracket my goal would simply be to win as many WZ as possible, and whether I'm alllowed 5 or 50 WZ a week doesn't make a difference since the best gear for WZ will probably be crafted at that level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UGLYMRJ Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I didn't notice any restriction on what gear they can wear for F2P so there really shouldn't be any difference between F2P and people on sub but then the list says it's not complete yet. As far as PVP the concern is since they're limited to how many WZ's they can play it will take them even longer to bring gear. While it took me 3-4 days to get full BM it may take a F2P weeks. Putting even more low geared pugs in the WZ's. That's the main concern. However I would imagine,Ike I said earlier... The F2P affects pvp more than pve. Anyone that wants to pvp will either pay up or get out considering they will be the bottom of the barell for queues and on top of that they will be limited to how many WZ's they're allowed to play in a certain amount of time. I doubt anyone who enjoys PvP will be content with playing say... 10 WZ's a week and having to wait an hour for each one. They'll pay or they'll leave... I think it's pretty well thought out. Hopefully... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skolops Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I assume it's going to have a standard 'can't wear this quality of gear' restriction but I didn't see it just looking at a quick glance. If there's no gear restriction technically you'd be fine as F2P but then why would you even pay a sub if there was no gear restriction for F2P? So I figure I probably missed it but I haven't seen anyone post what the restriction is yet and I didn't see it myself. F2P players are restricted by only being able to play a certain number of warzones per week. They also have a credit cap, restrictions on what gear they can wear (though nobody really knows exactly what kind of restrictions), on how many characters they can have, on what species they can play, on how many FPs they can do, they are not permitted to do Operations, they are limited in how many items they can carry and keep in their banks, etc. etc. etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UGLYMRJ Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I assume it's going to have a standard 'can't wear this quality of gear' restriction but I didn't see it just looking at a quick glance. If there's no gear restriction technically you'd be fine as F2P but then why would you even pay a sub if there was no gear restriction for F2P? So I figure I probably missed it but I haven't seen anyone post what the restriction is yet and I didn't see it myself. The gear will be limited to the way the f2p option is made. Can you imagine how long it would take to get full WH playing 10 WZ's or 20 WZ's a week? I play that in a day. Still not FULL WH. Like I said, once they hit 50 they'll pay up or get out... And sub 50... Who cares? There's so many bads down there don't we all enjoy it just to wreck a bunch of scrubs anyways? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UGLYMRJ Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 F2P players are restricted by only being able to play a certain number of warzones per week. They also have a credit cap, restrictions on what gear they can wear (though nobody really knows exactly what kind of restrictions), on how many characters they can have, on what species they can play, on how many FPs they can do, they are not permitted to do Operations, they are limited in how many items they can carry and keep in their banks, etc. etc. etc. Oh wow... There is a gear restriction. The way it's designed I'm surprised. Seems like over kill for the same reason I just posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astarica Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 As far as PVP the concern is since they're limited to how many WZ's they can play it will take them even longer to bring gear. While it took me 3-4 days to get full BM it may take a F2P weeks. Putting even more low geared pugs in the WZ's. That's the main concern. However I would imagine,Ike I said earlier... The F2P affects pvp more than pve. Anyone that wants to pvp will either pay up or get out considering they will be the bottom of the barell for queues and on top of that they will be limited to how many WZ's they're allowed to play in a certain amount of time. I doubt anyone who enjoys PvP will be content with playing say... 10 WZ's a week and having to wait an hour for each one. They'll pay or they'll leave... I think it's pretty well thought out. Hopefully... If you're at all familiar with how F2P schemes work it should be obvious that trying to compete against level 50 WH is a lost cause (if not why would anyone pay?) I assume most people will figure this out rather quickly and instead just twink characters for 10-49 if there's no gear restriction. Even a 100K credit cap is more than enough to run crew missions for the materials you need to make the best 10-49 gear since world drop rate for purple gear is simply way too low, and arguably not any better than crafted purples at that range to begin with. If I was doing F2P I'd get some character to level 50 for credits and then just make purple gear for my alts. Whether I can use that gear 5 or 50 times a week is not really a big deal. Therefore I strongly suspect you'll have a usual 'can't wear anything better than green' restriction on F2P that is prevalent in F2Ps, because otherwise you can actually get a pretty good deal for the 10-49 PvP game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UGLYMRJ Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 If you're at all familiar with how F2P schemes work it should be obvious that trying to compete against level 50 WH is a lost cause (if not why would anyone pay?) I assume most people will figure this out rather quickly and instead just twink characters for 10-49 if there's no gear restriction. Even a 100K credit cap is more than enough to run crew missions for the materials you need to make the best 10-49 gear since world drop rate for purple gear is simply way too low, and arguably not any better than crafted purples at that range to begin with. If I was doing F2P I'd get some character to level 50 for credits and then just make purple gear for my alts. Whether I can use that gear 5 or 50 times a week is not really a big deal. Therefore I strongly suspect you'll have a usual 'can't wear anything better than green' restriction on F2P that is prevalent in F2Ps, because otherwise you can actually get a pretty good deal for the 10-49 PvP game. I don't see the fun in that but I enjoy a good grind in my gaming. I see your point though. But if that's true as well all we'll really see from what you're suggesting is a more competitive sub 50 population. That actually sounds pretty good to me. Lol. Sub 50 is easy mode right now on Bastion except for the few twinkers that already exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astarica Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I don't see the fun in that but I enjoy a good grind in my gaming. I see your point though. But if that's true as well all we'll really see from what you're suggesting is a more competitive sub 50 population. That actually sounds pretty good to me. Lol. Sub 50 is easy mode right now on Bastion except for the few twinkers that already exist. Sure you may enjoy grinding and that's fine but obviously with the F2P as structured you don't even get to grind assuming the # of WZ you can play is fairly crippling so you got to settle for the next best thing. If you can only play 10 WZ a week and you know you're nowhere close to finishing a set of WH gear, you might as well play the 10 games where you actually have a chance to win, and that's most likely for the 10-49 bracket assuming no gear restriction exists. Even with gear restriction, your chance of winning is probably far better in the 10-49 bracket compared in terms of how much impact you can make with limited gear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UGLYMRJ Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Sure you may enjoy grinding and that's fine but obviously with the F2P as structured you don't even get to grind assuming the # of WZ you can play is fairly crippling so you got to settle for the next best thing. If you can only play 10 WZ a week and you know you're nowhere close to finishing a set of WH gear, you might as well play the 10 games where you actually have a chance to win, and that's most likely for the 10-49 bracket assuming no gear restriction exists. Even with gear restriction, your chance of winning is probably far better in the 10-49 bracket compared in terms of how much impact you can make with limited gear. While I can't argue that logic... I'm hoping they go the other route and just sub up! I'm sure it will give us a little of both. personally I can't see the appeal of twinking a 49 but I know a lot of people enjoy it. It just seems like a weak way of getting a gear advantage with less work. Twinks KNOW that most of the sub 50 players are not doing this... so it gives them a huge gear advantage over the rest of the sub 50 players. It's like going full WH vs someone in BM without aug's potentially. IDK, that's a completely different rant but if people would rather win with gear instead of skill, with half of the work... more power to em I guess. /endrant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astarica Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 While I can't argue that logic... I'm hoping they go the other route and just sub up! I'm sure it will give us a little of both. personally I can't see the appeal of twinking a 49 but I know a lot of people enjoy it. It just seems like a weak way of getting a gear advantage with less work. Twinks KNOW that most of the sub 50 players are not doing this... so it gives them a huge gear advantage over the rest of the sub 50 players. It's like going full WH vs someone in BM without aug's potentially. IDK, that's a completely different rant but if people would rather win with gear instead of skill, with half of the work... more power to em I guess. /endrant It's not really about twinking gear to feel powerful. Let's say you can only do 10 WZ a week, at the level 50 bracket not only are you guranteed to have your face smashed every game, you're also not leaving this state anytime soon because even if you miraculously get 120 comms a game while getting smashed badly, it'd take you probably around 2 months to get full BM which is still not on par with the full WH guy. Losing 100 games over 10 weeks is not the same as losing 100 games over say a week. In the former case you'll feel like you're wasting your time, while the latter is a perfectly valid way to play the game. You can simply go in with green gear at level 50 right now, lose 100 games in a short interval, and then get some BM gear and now you can start competing. It's not hard for people to cope with this concentrated period where you're utterly owned as a necessary sacrifice. Let's say you lose 14 games a day at 60 comms, that's 880 + 100 for daily each day, probably enough to buy a piece of BM on average per day, so even in this period of concentrated ownage you can see that your gear is improving daily and you can see the end in sight. Now switch to a 10 game/week schedule. You still lose the same games as before. You wouldn't even be able to complete the daily more than once assuming the # of games limit is fairly crippling (I assume it has to be). So you lose your 10 games, buy a piece of BM, and feel a bit better about yourself but now you can't even lose more games if you wanted to! Why would you stick around? Since a F2P obviously cannot make meaningful gains against the level 50 WH characters (if they can this F2P is way too generous), the next best thing they can do is try to actually win some games and that's most possible in the 10-49 bracket just because you're not worried about fighting guys who are on average at least full purple (BM) compared to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DroidDreamer Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 F2P has been successful for a number of other games. I hope it will be a good model for SWTOR. And if it's good for SWTOR, then it's good for those who, like me, love this game. As for the rest of it, it's obviously too early to tell how it will all play out. The F2P details are not yet set in stone. So we shall see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astarica Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 F2P has been successful for a number of other games. I hope it will be a good model for SWTOR. And if it's good for SWTOR, then it's good for those who, like me, love this game. As for the rest of it, it's obviously too early to tell how it will all play out. The F2P details are not yet set in stone. So we shall see. Successful compared to shutting down, perhaps. Successful compared to the traditional sub model, not really. There's a reason why you always get these totally nebulous metrics when dealing with F2P like '325 billion Klingon-hours have been logged in this game since the last lunar eclipse', while a game like WoW usually releases numbers in human understandable terms like: "We made $1 billion this year". Yes Blizzard can lie about the profit too but at least they didn't invent new terms when they're lying. We all know what $1 billion means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morrolan Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 I am curious to why you, and others are seeing this as a bad thing. The way I see it, is more noobs to crush in Warzones. Shoot, all you'll need is a couple buddy's in a group and you'd own most of the Warzones. Sounds like fun to me. This is pretty much my reaction as well. More comms for me, good stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DroidDreamer Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 (edited) This is pretty much my reaction as well. More comms for me, good stuff. I'll suck when they're on your team, probably. But that just means more WZ pops. Edited August 1, 2012 by DroidDreamer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CKNairb Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 just when you thought you'd seen enough baddies in your teams... just when you thought you had your fill of jerks in Ops chat insulting people left and right while sitting on a node all game... now, we get to add F2Pers into the mix. Hooray:rolleyes: dont forget Banning and Reporting will mean nothing Banned, Pfft, gmail.com for a new email address and a phone book for a physical address if needed, boom back in game. its a Hackers / Cheaters Free For All Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDRedmage Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Yes, because if a person is not paying for a subscription, they are automatically a terrible player. If they fork over $14.95 they instantly turn into good players! Titans of intellect on these forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yinata Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Yes, because if a person is not paying for a subscription, they are automatically a terrible player. If they fork over $14.95 they instantly turn into good players! Titans of intellect on these forums. You obviously didn't read what the F2P system entails, it will limit the amount of warzones these players can do each week, meaning they will be at a significant gear disadvantage unless they do go to the sub model. In other words they will be at a disadvantage in this gear centric game. PvP will be less competitive than it's now, there will be so many baddies not doing objectives that warzones will be a giant pain in the backside. Ranked warzones rofl most of the top ranked teams are going to GW2, those left will jump ship shortly after as the level of competition just after that release is going to dip so much. Once November hits there will be so few skilled players left this game is going to be a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leiralei Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 You obviously didn't read what the F2P system entails, it will limit the amount of warzones these players can do each week, meaning they will be at a significant gear disadvantage unless they do go to the sub model. In other words they will be at a disadvantage in this gear centric game. PvP will be less competitive than it's now, there will be so many baddies not doing objectives that warzones will be a giant pain in the backside. Ranked warzones rofl most of the top ranked teams are going to GW2, those left will jump ship shortly after as the level of competition just after that release is going to dip so much. Once November hits there will be so few skilled players left this game is going to be a joke. Good I'll be able to enjoy playing my commando without getting leaped by 5 maras and a guardian for every second of the match I'm not dead already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
islander Posted August 1, 2012 Author Share Posted August 1, 2012 Yes, because if a person is not paying for a subscription, they are automatically a terrible player. If they fork over $14.95 they instantly turn into good players! Titans of intellect on these forums. Oh, the irony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts