A case for a more robust preferred status

[Ratajack]

OK, I'll bite

 

Wz unlock 7500

FP unlock 7500

OP unlock 7500

Space unlock 2900

Heroic space 2000

Medical unlocks 1500

credit unlock 3500

 

Together with the QoL unlocks already available that would probably work out at around $370 and that doesn't include character unlocks over 6. It also allows EA to charge 1200CC for every new FP/WZ/Op released. Effectively you would have to sub for 21/2 years or so for it to be cheaper in pure monetary terms - of course subscribers still have all those free cartel coins to spend on top of that.

 

Just my suggestion.

 

These are your proposed prices for PERMANENT unlocks?

 

Here's a likely scenario:

 

Wz unlock 7500

I don't do WZ's so I can save those 7500 CC's.

 

FP unlock 7500

FP's 7500 CC's a bargain, especially since you make no distinction between story mode and har mode FP's.

 

OP unlock 7500

OP's 7500 CC's cheap enough

 

Space unlock 2900

Heroic space 2000

I don't do enough space missions or heroic space missions in a week to make it worth paying the extra cost, so I can save those 5900 CC's

 

Medical unlocks 1500

I'll pass for now, if needed I'll pick it up later, another 1500 CC's saved

 

credit unlock 3500

A bargain, I'll take it.

 

Let's see, that's:

7500 Fp's

7500 Ops

3500 credit cap unlock

 

18500 total

 

At 5500 CC per $40, I can spend $200 and have 27500 CC's, enough to cover my unlocks and still leave me with 9000 CC's left over, far more than the 6000 a subscriber would get in one year. So for the cost of a ONE year's subscription plus $20, not the 2 1/2 year's you would have us believe, I can have access to all of the features of the game that I use, and 3000 more CC's than a subscriber would get in that year, a total of 9000 CC's that I can use to pay for the next 7 content updates at the rate of 1200 CC's per update, almost another year at the rate of one update every 6 weeks. I might not even buy every update, so I might even be able to make that $200 spent last even longer. So I would have spent $200 for almost 2 years of gaming, compared to the subscriber who spent almost $360. Which is the better deal?

 

I think if they offer unlocks a la carte this way, that you will find most people will only unlock those features that they use the most, meaning less money spent on unlocks. That is one of the reasons the price for each individual unlock should be much higher. A higher unlock cost will add incentive for the player who wants multiple unlocks to subscribe--the more unlocks, the better deal a subscription becomes.

Edited January 15, 2013 by Ratajack

[Ratajack]

The account wide unlock to use Artifact quality items costs 2700 CC. Artifact quality items directly impacts how good your character stats can be and thus how effective you are with your class. I'd say it's perfectly reasonable to have an unlock that has no direct bearing on your in game performance, and thus group performance, not cost more than an unlock that directly impacts your character's combat abilities.

 

If they charge 2700 CC for credit cap restriction removal and 2700 CC for commendation cap restriction removal that would cost them more than 40 USD for those two items alone. However, it is quite probable that people would gladly pay that much for those two unlocks. The devs would make a killing selling these items.

 

As for medical probes: have the probes as a weekly allotment functioning exactly like the FP/WZ weekly allotment. Sell a weekly pass that gives unlimited medical probes at the same price for other weekly unlocks (240 CC/week or 940 CC/month/unlock). In order to reap the same sub benefits of unlimited FP/WZ/Space/Med Probes for an entire month it would cost about 3820 CC or over 20 USD per month.

 

Unless I am mistaken, the account wide unlock to equip artifact items only includes most artifact items. I do not know which artifact items it does not include, but I'm guessing the higher end ones would not be included. So, you would be limited in what you could equip in the future and would affect future character improvement.

 

As far as a credit cap unlock not having a direct bearing on your in game performance, either solo or in groups, I think you are missing an important factor. Let's take level 27 item modifications as an example. They give a substantial increase in character performance. They are currently going for well over 1 million credits on the GTN on my server. If you are capped at 350k credits, you will not be able to purchase any of those mods on the GTN, and I think you would have little luck finding anyone willing to sell you one for 350k. If this credit capped were removed by unlocks, that would give you access to those item modifications, thereby providing a direct bearing on your performance.

 

So, tell me again how removing the credit cap has no direct bearing on your performance in game, and why it should be as cheap as you suggest.

Edited January 15, 2013 by Ratajack

[Vlacke]

Most of the restrictions are fine, if you want full access to all content feel free to subscribe.

[Edzew]

These are your proposed prices for PERMANENT unlocks?

 

Here's a likely scenario:

 

Wz unlock 7500

I don't do WZ's so I can save those 7500 CC's.

 

FP unlock 7500

FP's 7500 CC's a bargain, especially since you make no distinction between story mode and har mode FP's.

 

OP unlock 7500

OP's 7500 CC's cheap enough

 

Space unlock 2900

Heroic space 2000

I don't do enough space missions or heroic space missions in a week to make it worth paying the extra cost, so I can save those 5900 CC's

 

Medical unlocks 1500

I'll pass for now, if needed I'll pick it up later, another 1500 CC's saved

 

credit unlock 3500

A bargain, I'll take it.

 

Let's see, that's:

7500 Fp's

7500 Ops

3500 credit cap unlock

 

18500 total

 

At 5500 CC per $40, I can spend $200 and have 27500 CC's, enough to cover my unlocks and still leave me with 9000 CC's left over, far more than the 6000 a subscriber would get in one year. So for the cost of a ONE year's subscription plus $20, not the 2 1/2 year's you would have us believe, I can have access to all of the features of the game that I use, and 3000 more CC's than a subscriber would get in that year, a total of 9000 CC's that I can use to pay for the next 7 content updates at the rate of 1200 CC's per update, almost another year at the rate of one update every 6 weeks. I might not even buy every update, so I might even be able to make that $200 spent last even longer. So I would have spent $200 for almost 2 years of gaming, compared to the subscriber who spent almost $360. Which is the better deal?

 

I think if they offer unlocks a la carte this way, that you will find most people will only unlock those features that they use the most, meaning less money spent on unlocks. That is one of the reasons the price for each individual unlock should be much higher. A higher unlock cost will add incentive for the player who wants multiple unlocks to subscribe--the more unlocks, the better deal a subscription becomes.

 

but thats just you! there are a LOT of people out there that would pay for every single one of those.... well sept for space B^P so i would say his point is quite valid and any ways he is talking about unlocking everything to be like a subscriber so again his point would be valid. and all that just listed is a small part of the complete picture you add in all the other unlocks then the unlocker is paying way more than a subber and the subber is still getting extra coins to spend on lotto boxes and armor and holiday items

 

i still say there should be no limitations on the space part of this game.

 

Most of the restrictions are fine, if you want full access to all content feel free to subscribe.

 

but what if i don't think this game is worth paying $15 a month?? i just quit?? what if everyone that feels like me just quits?? the servers would start to dry up!! no extra money being brought in then game dies.... a lot quicker!!

Edited January 15, 2013 by Edzew

[leojreimroc]

At 5500 CC per $40, I can spend $200 and have 27500 CC's, enough to cover my unlocks and still leave me with 9000 CC's left over, far more than the 6000 a subscriber would get in one year. So for the cost of a ONE year's subscription plus $20, not the 2 1/2 year's you would have us believe, I can have access to all of the features of the game that I use, and 3000 more CC's than a subscriber would get in that year, a total of 9000 CC's that I can use to pay for the next 7 content updates at the rate of 1200 CC's per update, almost another year at the rate of one update every 6 weeks. I might not even buy every update, so I might even be able to make that $200 spent last even longer. So I would have spent $200 for almost 2 years of gaming, compared to the subscriber who spent almost $360. Which is the better deal?

 

I think if they offer unlocks a la carte this way, that you will find most people will only unlock those features that they use the most, meaning less money spent on unlocks. That is one of the reasons the price for each individual unlock should be much higher. A higher unlock cost will add incentive for the player who wants multiple unlocks to subscribe--the more unlocks, the better deal a subscription becomes.

 

So you said that if you buy not even half of the unlocks, you'd pay less than paying a full sub? Well, geez....duh. Most people will eventually unlock everything though, and this will make bioware more money.

 

Now, if you choose to unsubscribe, and only buy a few things, well you are correct, you will save money for now. That is until the next content update when you will have to open your wallet again, and again, and again. Subscribers won't have to do this now will they?

[Ratajack]

but thats just you! there are a LOT of people out there that would pay for every single one of those.... well sept for space B^P so i would say his point is quite valid and any ways he is talking about unlocking everything to be like a subscriber so again his point would be valid. and all that just listed is a small part of the complete picture you add in all the other unlocks then the unlocker is paying way more than a subber and the subber is still getting extra coins to spend on lotto boxes and armor and holiday items

 

i still say there should be no limitations on the space part of this game.

 

 

 

but what if i don't think this game is worth paying $15 a month?? i just quit?? what if everyone that feels like me just quits?? the servers would start to dry up!! no extra money being brought in then game dies.... a lot quicker!!

 

I seriously doubt that he or the OP are really talking about buying EVERYTHING. If he is talking about unlocking EVERYTHING to have ALL the perks that a subscriber would have, then the far better deal is to subscribe. It makes no sense to pay for EVERYTHING individually, even if it's a one time payment, if you can get everything cheaper by subbing.

 

I think it much more likely that most will only pay to unlock those features they use the most.

[Ratajack]

At 5500 CC per $40, I can spend $200 and have 27500 CC's, enough to cover my unlocks and still leave me with 9000 CC's left over, far more than the 6000 a subscriber would get in one year. So for the cost of a ONE year's subscription plus $20, not the 2 1/2 year's you would have us believe, I can have access to all of the features of the game that I use, and 3000 more CC's than a subscriber would get in that year, a total of 9000 CC's that I can use to pay for the next 7 content updates at the rate of 1200 CC's per update, almost another year at the rate of one update every 6 weeks. I might not even buy every update, so I might even be able to make that $200 spent last even longer. So I would have spent $200 for almost 2 years of gaming, compared to the subscriber who spent almost $360. Which is the better deal?

 

I think if they offer unlocks a la carte this way, that you will find most people will only unlock those features that they use the most, meaning less money spent on unlocks. That is one of the reasons the price for each individual unlock should be much higher. A higher unlock cost will add incentive for the player who wants multiple unlocks to subscribe--the more unlocks, the better deal a subscription becomes.

 

 

 

 

So you said that if you buy not even half of the unlocks, you'd pay less than paying a full sub? Well, geez....duh. Most people will eventually unlock everything though, and this will make bioware more money.

 

Now, if you choose to unsubscribe, and only buy a few things, well you are correct, you will save money for now. That is until the next content update when you will have to open your wallet again, and again, and again. Subscribers won't have to do this now will they?

 

Why would you think that most people will unlock everything? Do you actually believe that those people who prefer PVE will ever unlock the WZ's, or those that PVP would unlock the FP's or OP's? How many people actually do the space missions? Why would someone pay to unlock something they rarely if ever use?

 

You keep talking about having to pay for future content. I've already showed you how a lot of people will be able to pay a one time payment to unlock what I suspect will be the most unlocked items and still have enough CC's to pay for almost a full year at the price someone suggested for future content packs, assuming that a person unlocks every one of them. I'm not sure they would. How many people would have paid to unlock section x without HK-51? It's just another daily area, after all.

[Edzew]

I seriously doubt that he or the OP are really talking about buying EVERYTHING. If he is talking about unlocking EVERYTHING to have ALL the perks that a subscriber would have, then the far better deal is to subscribe. It makes no sense to pay for EVERYTHING individually, even if it's a one time payment, if you can get everything cheaper by subbing.

 

I think it much more likely that most will only pay to unlock those features they use the most.

 

but that is the point i think you are missing. in order for free 2 play people to get everything the subbers get it would cost a LOT and continuously cost them as more new stuff comes out. Let us pay for what we want in game. let the subers sub and get everything plus the extra coins every month. for me im not happy with the game the way it is and don't think the game is worth the sub fee. also i don't play much anyways so it makes it even more of a waist. so let us choose what we do and don't get by being F2P. you as a subber still get more than us and pay less.

[Ratajack]

but that is the point i think you are missing. in order for free 2 play people to get everything the subbers get it would cost a LOT and continuously cost them as more new stuff comes out. Let us pay for what we want in game. let the subers sub and get everything plus the extra coins every month. for me im not happy with the game the way it is and don't think the game is worth the sub fee. also i don't play much anyways so it makes it even more of a waist. so let us choose what we do and don't get by being F2P. you as a subber still get more than us and pay less.

 

That is EXACTLY the point. You don't want to pay a sub fee, but you want to eliminate the restrictions you dislike. Why should you, or anyone, be able to play without the restrictions you dislike without paying a sub fee when so many people pay that sub fee to play without restrictions. Most of the subscribers probably do not use every feature of the game, yet they still pay the sub fee to play without restrictions. To offer the option to pick and choose which restrictions you would remove would be unfair to the subscribers.

[annabethchase]

Pay for the game already

[Edzew]

That is EXACTLY the point. You don't want to pay a sub fee, but you want to eliminate the restrictions you dislike. Why should you, or anyone, be able to play without the restrictions you dislike without paying a sub fee when so many people pay that sub fee to play without restrictions. Most of the subscribers probably do not use every feature of the game, yet they still pay the sub fee to play without restrictions. To offer the option to pick and choose which restrictions you would remove would be unfair to the subscribers.

 

how?? subrers get a discount on expantions by 50% and free coins every month, also free content like the battlegrounds and dungeons... sorry i have no freakin clue what tor calls them so i use the wow terms here. subbers could go on for ever never buying cartel coins and still get everything on the cartel market ... i.e armor sets, pets, speeders and what have you.

 

if you let F2Pers pick and choose you will make more money in the long run. but if they do what they are doing F2Pers will come in see how restricted it is and either A) sub B) grin and bear it and keep playing nerfed or C) quit and never come back... i have a feeling more people are choosing C

 

more players we have the more money EA/BW gets

[Edzew]

Pay for the game already

 

i payed for the game when it came out so there!!!! B^P

 

now give me a game worth playing and paying a monthly subscription to!!!!!

[Tumedus]

I have said this before, but one of the flaws in thinking from a lot of "subscription should always be better" advocates is that they aren't looking at this from a revenue standpoint and/or aren't considering the length of time people play.

 

Over the course of the first year, some creative number shuffles from EA aside, the average player stayed with the game less than 6 months. Even at the monthly rate of $15 that means you get an average of $90 in sub costs from players. So no matter how you eke that money out of players, F2P unocks, sub fees, carel packs, costumes, etc. If you are averaging over $90 per player you are ahead of what you were before.

 

And, on top of that, from a sustainability standpoint, a player who has permanently unlocked features is more likely to stick around and thus more likely to spend more in the market. They also server to keep populations higher so that which benefits the game for everyone, sub and F2P alike. More people also means a better in game market, making those cartel items that much more enticing. A player who subs and then quits, has near zero probability of spending money on the market.

 

The continued perspective that a F2P player who pays and unlocks everything is lost revenue in sub fees is a simply a fallacy.

 

You can keep trying to say that we need subbers to keep the money flowing, but it is just not true. And even a cursory look at the rest of the MMO market will show just how wrong that perspective is.

Edited January 15, 2013 by Tumedus

[Ratajack]

i payed for the game when it came out so there!!!! B^P

 

now give me a game worth playing and paying a monthly subscription to!!!!!

 

Paying for the game a year ago does not entitle you to access to all features now. If you wish to continue to play without restrictions, you still can. All you have to do is subscribe. If you don't feel it's worth subscribing, you don't have to subscribe. You can continue to play, albeit with restrictions.

[Ratajack]

I have said this before, but one of the flaws in thinking from a lot of "subscription should always be better" advocates is that they aren't looking at this from a revenue standpoint and/or aren't considering the length of time people play.

 

Over the course of the first year, some creative number shuffles from EA aside, the average player stayed with the game less than 6 months. Even at the monthly rate of $15 that means you get an average of $90 in sub costs from players. So no matter how you eke that money out of players, F2P unocks, sub fees, carel packs, costumes, etc. If you are averaging over $90 per player you are ahead of what you were before.

 

And, on top of that, from a sustainability standpoint, a player who has permanently unlocked features is more likely to stick around and thus more likely to spend more in the market. They also server to keep populations higher so that which benefits the game for everyone, sub and F2P alike. More people also means a better in game market, making those cartel items that much more enticing. A player who subs and then quits, has near zero probability of spending money on the market.

 

The continued perspective that a F2P player who pays and unlocks everything is lost revenue in sub fees is a simply a fallacy.

 

You can keep trying to say that we need subbers to keep the money flowing, but it is just not true. And even a cursory look at the rest of the MMO market will show just how wrong that perspective is.

 

So, what benefit is there to subscribing if someone not paying a monthly sub has the same benefits as a subscriber, but without the monthly cost?

 

You can say that you are willing to pay a one time fee to unlock the restrictions you wish to unlock, but you want them priced so cheap as to make the cost to unlock them laughable. A subscriber's gaming experience should always be far enough ahead to make subscribers feel they are getting enough bang for their buck. There need to be some things other than a few cartel coins that are limited to subscribers.

 

The same goes for the F2P. Their gaming experience should reflect what they pay. If a F2P feels an unlock is worth purchasing, then they can purchase it, and improve their gaming experience. Not all features of the game need to be available to be unlocked by means other than subscription.

[Gavin_Kelvar]

Unless I am mistaken, the account wide unlock to equip artifact items only includes most artifact items. I do not know which artifact items it does not include, but I'm guessing the higher end ones would not be included. So, you would be limited in what you could equip in the future and would affect future character improvement.

 

I've not heard what it does or does not include. I would imagine it is fairly encompassing or else they'll have a LOT of unhappy customers who bought that unlock and the expansion and find that the new gear in the expansion isn't usable by non-subs.

 

As far as a credit cap unlock not having a direct bearing on your in game performance, either solo or in groups, I think you are missing an important factor. Let's take level 27 item modifications as an example. They give a substantial increase in character performance. They are currently going for well over 1 million credits on the GTN on my server. If you are capped at 350k credits, you will not be able to purchase any of those mods on the GTN, and I think you would have little luck finding anyone willing to sell you one for 350k. If this credit capped were removed by unlocks, that would give you access to those item modifications, thereby providing a direct bearing on your performance.

 

So, tell me again how removing the credit cap has no direct bearing on your performance in game, and why it should be as cheap as you suggest.

 

Well that assumes the player has to buy said item and cannot craft said item. Assuming you bought all the crew skill assignment slots you require it could become a moot point. With the implementation of purchasable character slots it is in theory possible to have alts that can craft any item you require. Thus credit wallet size could be seen as a quality of life item similar to the hide headslot or unify colors unlocks. At any rate the fact that it can have any impact on in game performance doesn't justify either 1) having it cost more than the unlock for Artifact quality items or 2) not have the unlock at all.

 

Assuming that credit wallet size can have as much impact on in game performance as the Artifact Quality unlock then it gives even greater reason to have a credit cap unlock because otherwise it leaves a restriction in place that is intentionally designed to gimp a specific set of players.

 

As others have said the way to make subbing appealing is not to penalize non-subs with restrictions they can never remove. The solution is to sweeten the deal for subbing through things like the 500 CC monthly stipend (for example give subs an additional 15-20% off of any CM item, create a "currency exchange bank" where subs can exchange credits for CC and other such things).

[Ratajack]

I've not heard what it does or does not include. I would imagine it is fairly encompassing or else they'll have a LOT of unhappy customers who bought that unlock and the expansion and find that the new gear in the expansion isn't usable by non-subs.

 

 

 

Well that assumes the player has to buy said item and cannot craft said item. Assuming you bought all the crew skill assignment slots you require it could become a moot point. With the implementation of purchasable character slots it is in theory possible to have alts that can craft any item you require. Thus credit wallet size could be seen as a quality of life item similar to the hide headslot or unify colors unlocks. At any rate the fact that it can have any impact on in game performance doesn't justify either 1) having it cost more than the unlock for Artifact quality items or 2) not have the unlock at all.

 

Assuming that credit wallet size can have as much impact on in game performance as the Artifact Quality unlock then it gives even greater reason to have a credit cap unlock because otherwise it leaves a restriction in place that is intentionally designed to gimp a specific set of players.

 

As others have said the way to make subbing appealing is not to penalize non-subs with restrictions they can never remove. The solution is to sweeten the deal for subbing through things like the 500 CC monthly stipend (for example give subs an additional 15-20% off of any CM item, create a "currency exchange bank" where subs can exchange credits for CC and other such things).

 

We shall see what the future holds with regards to the expansion and future artifact items. The unlock specifically says MOST artifact items, meaning it does not include all artifact items. Maybe you should have read a little more closely, as I did. Don't worry, though. I'm sure you will have the option to unlock the new expansion artifact gear if it is not included in the current unlock, although it might cost you.

 

If a player has bought all the class skills, and can make all the highest mods, or gear, then more power to them. Not all players have all crew skills, and the credit cap provides a strong motive for them to subscribe.

 

If you want to claim that you are gimped because you choose not to pay the monthly sub fee, I cannot stop you. The credit cap is not intentionally designed to gimp a specific group of players, but rather to provide an impetus for people to subscribe. Any impact the credit cap has on a player's performance is a side effect, not the design. Claiming that it gimps a specific group of players is akin to the cries of class nerfs gimping specific groups of players, namely those players which play the nerfed class. Neither claim has any real validity.

 

Giving everything away to F2P or preferred status players for a pittance is not the way to make subscribing an appealing option. There are not a lot of restrictions that a F2P or a preferred player cannot unlock. The ones that exist should continue to do so.

[PlasmaJohn]

We shall see what the future holds with regards to the expansion and future artifact items. The unlock specifically says MOST artifact items, meaning it does not include all artifact items.

I thought I saw a clarification somewhere stating that it's all artifact quality items except those gained via events like the Rakghoul Plague. There's a separate unlock for that ( and what a fine investment -that- turned out to be ).

[Edzew]

Paying for the game a year ago does not entitle you to access to all features now. If you wish to continue to play without restrictions, you still can. All you have to do is subscribe. If you don't feel it's worth subscribing, you don't have to subscribe. You can continue to play, albeit with restrictions.

 

well if you can have an attitude of im better than others kuz i sub why cant i have an attitude of im better than the people that didn't buy the actual game?? why shouldn't i get more for actually buying the game??

 

kinda a dumb argument aint it??

 

So, what benefit is there to subscribing if someone not paying a monthly sub has the same benefits as a subscriber, but without the monthly cost? .

the non subber isnt getting the same benefits as a subscriber they are getting less, that is what you need to understand. a subber gets discounts on new expansions, a subber gets free coins every month, a subber gets free content. a nonsubber has to pay extra for expansions, no free coins, and has to pay for access to your free content.

 

As others have said the way to make subbing appealing is not to penalize non-subs with restrictions they can never remove. The solution is to sweeten the deal for subbing through things like the 500 CC monthly stipend (for example give subs an additional 15-20% off of any CM item, create a "currency exchange bank" where subs can exchange credits for CC and other such things).

 

this^^^ i agree with this^^^

[leojreimroc]

I thought I saw a clarification somewhere stating that it's all artifact quality items except those gained via events like the Rakghoul Plague. There's a separate unlock for that ( and what a fine investment -that- turned out to be ).

 

This is correct. The only artifact level items that can't be equipped are the ones that specifically need to be bought by another unlock, so the event artifact items.

[Gavin_Kelvar]

We shall see what the future holds with regards to the expansion and future artifact items. The unlock specifically says MOST artifact items, meaning it does not include all artifact items. Maybe you should have read a little more closely, as I did. Don't worry, though. I'm sure you will have the option to unlock the new expansion artifact gear if it is not included in the current unlock, although it might cost you.

 

I don't know where this hostility is coming from and it's totally uncalled for. I have been a sub and except for a few cases when I had to cancel my sub because work prevented me from having enough time to play I have maintained and intend to maintain my sub. But at the same time I see no reason why Preferred status people should have arbitrary restrictions placed on them which they cannot remove. If they idea is to make Preferred appealing for those who just want to buy access to features they use and sub is for those that want access to everything for a single monthly fee then why not make unlocks for the credit/commendation cap?

 

Note that as it stands to just buy a month's worth of access to Space, WZ, Ops, and FPs it would cost 3840 CC or more than 30 USD a month. That's not counting the additional money that would have to be spent for the account wide unlocks like the Artifact Quality unlock. So even if credit/commendation cap unlocks are sold a sub would still cost less if you do all four of the mission activities. Preferred would only be economically appealing if you have no need for weekly passes or rarely buy them. Adding credit/commendation cap unlocks would only harm the sub aspect if the idea is to make subs feel better than everyone else rather than present a payment option that offers a package deal that is cheaper than individually buying access to everything.

 

For record I did read what the unlock says and was quite aware that it says most without explicitly saying what isn't included. Thus I was speculating that it would be fairly encompassing or else they'd have a big PR disaster when it comes out "oh yeah you remember how we vaguely only said it unlocks most Artifact quality items but implied not all without specifying what we meant? Well this item, for no reason apparent to the consumer, falls into our unspecified category of what isn't covered by the unlock."

 

Any impact the credit cap has on a player's performance is a side effect, not the design.

 

Yet you have argued that the credit cap does have a direct impact on a player's in game performance by preventing them from buying BiS gear on the GTN. You argued that removing the credit cap would allow players to buy BiS items on the GTN and further emphasized this by noting that not all players have alts to craft everything which forces them to buy off the GTN if they want the BiS items they cannot craft. By the logic of your own argument then the credit cap is by design intended to impact a player's in game performance by limiting what items a player can acquire/equip which makes it exactly the same as the Artifact Quality equipment restriction.

 

If you can buy an unlock to allow use of Artifact quality items because it has a direct impact on in game performance why are only subs allowed to "unlock" the credit cap that allows them to buy BiS items on the GTN, which again by your own argument, is an option that has just as much impact on a player's in game performance?

 

This is correct. The only artifact level items that can't be equipped are the ones that specifically need to be bought by another unlock, so the event artifact items.

 

And this is the first I've ever heard what that "most" qualification didn't encompass. thanks for clarifying!

[Gavin_Kelvar]

So something I think the OP should add: commendations that exceed the cap should be placed in escrow (to my knowledge any commendations beyond the cap permanently disappear).

 

Why?

 

1) like the credit escrow it can tempt non-subs to subscribe to get access to commendations they have that went beyond the cap. If a credit/commendation cap unlock was made they'd alternately be tempted to buy that unlock to gain access to what is in escrow

 

2) and perhaps most important: it would seem if a subscriber lets their sub lapse ever they permanently loose any commendations they earned that exceeds that cap. Now not a problem if you intend to remain subbed every day for the life time of the game but this could be a big problem for anyone who lets their sub lapse because real life issues got in the way for a period of time. Simply put subscribers should NEVER permanently loose anything for letting their sub lapse, that wasn't how it was prior to F2P and it shouldn't be that way now. However, it would seem that the Preferred status restrictions on commendations means that subscribers will be punished for letting their sub lapse by permanently taking away any commendations they earned as a sub but exceed the cap permitted to Preferred status players. This needs to be changed with a commendation escrow option at the very least.

[witchys]

F2p or preferred players can unlock comm and credit cap all it takes is a monthly $$ cost

 

[Gavin_Kelvar]

F2p or preferred players can unlock comm and credit cap all it takes is a monthly $$ cost

 

 

except once you stop paying that monthly money it would appear you permanently loose any commendations you earned while subbed that exceed the preferred/F2P limit and do not get them back when you resub. Currently the limitation can hurt any sub who lets their sub lapse. It doesn't just restrict non-subs, it punishes subs who don't maintain their sub every day for the life of the game.

 

Not particularly cool to pay a subscription, earn comms, let subscription lapse for a month because real life got in the way, resub and find that the devs punished you for letting the sub lapse by permanently taking away any comms you earned that exceeded the Preferred status comm cap. In this case creating a comm escrow at minimum is needed to avoid punishing subs who briefly let their sub lapse.

Edited January 17, 2013 by Gavin_Kelvar

[SithKoriandr]

Yeah but people like the OP seem to think it's better and cheaper for them to unsub and buy things outright then has the audacity to ask for yet more stuff to sweeten their deal even more.

 

This indicates that staying subbed needs to offer more incentives (or unsubbing needs to offer less, that would likely be less preferable to the end of keeping the unsubbers around however).

 

Making the equipment 50% cheaper when you subscribe would be nice