Removing f2p restrictions for warzones is unfair

[falcon_Xtreme]

why stop there? why not remove f2p restrictions for pve too because that is what will be next......if you head down that avenue. then bioware... tell me the what the hell will be the point of a subscription . I have maintained two subscriptions since launch (me and the ball and chain aka wife) and max rep well and truly with your gamble bag cartel scheme, the crappy 625 cartel coins you give me a month barely buys anything of real value. what's the incentive to pay to play anymore...

[falcon_Xtreme]

is the game population that low , that you need to cave in and give f2p more warzones.. at the expense of people who pay for the game? just so pvp becomes populated?.....I don't care if the outcome is positive for the game if it comes at the expense of money I earned and invested, you wont get another cent. sad but true. Edited August 15, 2013 by falcon_Xtreme

[Cretinus]

Go away.

[Razamatazz]

Yeah, I think they are trying to drum up support for Arena's, they need fresh blood flowing into PvP for it to be successful. This is something they learned from ranked, no new players causes a quick stagnation and the die off. I also think they know they will lose some people and I wouldn't be surprised to see a number of PvP guilds fall apart as a result of this change, so they need something to keep PvP going until it restabilizes. F2P players can be fresh meat for the grinder until people begin to get their PvP guilds back on track running groups for Arena's or new ones form. Another good to thing is it should drive up the price of Artifact grade equipment authorization on the GTN so F2P players can use the PvP gear they will need should they want to be effective in ranked.

 

In the end this is a push to get the Casual player more involved in PvP and push them towards ranked gameplay so that it becomes more popular. I won't say I'm a fan of how they're doing it, but at least they're now trying. As for your OP though, well, yes, your sub just became worth a little less.

[TheFXedits]

They could be talking about removing the restriction on FTP players from doing any Ranked matches but keep the weeklylimit. but we will see

[falcon_Xtreme]

Yeah, I think they are trying to drum up support for Arena's, they need fresh blood flowing into PvP for it to be successful. This is something they learned from ranked, no new players causes a quick stagnation and the die off. I also think they know they will lose some people and I wouldn't be surprised to see a number of PvP guilds fall apart as a result of this change, so they need something to keep PvP going until it restabilizes. F2P players can be fresh meat for the grinder until people begin to get their PvP guilds back on track running groups for Arena's or new ones form. Another good to thing is it should drive up the price of Artifact grade equipment authorization on the GTN so F2P players can use the PvP gear they will need should they want to be effective in ranked.

 

In the end this is a push to get the Casual player more involved in PvP and push them towards ranked gameplay so that it becomes more popular. I won't say I'm a fan of how they're doing it, but at least they're now trying. As for your OP though, well, yes, your sub just became worth a little less.

 

I agree with your observations, I just don't know why it has to come at the expense of our subscriptions, sometimes i feel like they purposefully drive subscribers away... perhaps they make more money from micro-transactions, so this could be a method to push people not to subscribe and just be assimilated into the micro-transaction f2p crowd?

[mulzii]

it would be interesting to see how they spin this for the subscribers. What, exactly, does my monthly subscription get me nowadays? Everything new goes on the cartel market, since i solely pvp new operations do not mean much to me personally. So i guess they duped me and when this model comes out, I can go f2p and not lose any of my pvp.

[falcon_Xtreme]

it would be interesting to see how they spin this for the subscribers. What, exactly, does my monthly subscription get me nowadays? Everything new goes on the cartel market, since i solely pvp new operations do not mean much to me personally. So i guess they duped me and when this model comes out, I can go f2p and not lose any of my pvp.

 

^ im in the same boat as you, and i think the boat is going to fill quickly.

Edited August 15, 2013 by falcon_Xtreme

[GalenMourne]

If you want to check the blog again it says this: Remove the ftp restriction for entering warzones. Again it says entering, but nothing about being completely unrestricted. Currently ftp players can run unlimited flash points, but have restricted rewards. The flash point pass works as a gearing pass.

 

My bet is they will still have the pass but put in a weekly cap on warzone and ranked coms. Thus turning the warzone pass into a gearing pass the same as the fp one. You can choose to grind out your gear very slowly and be far behind the curve, or you buy the pass and get it done as quickly as a sub.

 

Removing the restriction on participation has a lot of potential to bring in some fresh blood and old players who have left the game, especially with the addition of arena. Sub is not diminished in the least since you still get unrestricted access, along with all the other perks which are numerous compared to ftp.

Edited August 15, 2013 by GalenMourne

[Heal-To-Full]

I agree with your observations, I just don't know why it has to come at the expense of our subscriptions,

But how is it a problem for you?

You will either:

A. Keep subscribing. Good for you! Nothing changes.

B. Unsubscribe because you don't have to. Good for you! You saved some cash.

 

If they lose your sub money, it's their problem. Clearly they have thought of it and decided that they can spare the few subs that are only subscribed for unlimited WZ.

If you were on the fence over whether sub is worth the price and now feel that it's worth less... well, that's just psychological, isn't it? There are so many disadvantages to f2p that a serious player will still prefer to sub.

 

Warzones need more people. Restricting f2p's to as few as 5 a week is silly; though there is a WZ pass. I considered suggesting a "winning streak" mechanic: WZ that you win or hit a certain performance mark in don't count against the 5 allowed. But this is, of course, simpler and overall going to bring further shorter queue times.

 

 

why why not remove f2p restrictions for pve too because that is what will be next...

SWTOR has been widely criticized for its f2p system built around taking stuff out of the game and dangling it in front of you whispering "subscribe".

So indeed, I don't see why not, if it can make TOR a better game.

What they should work on is more perks for subs, all the while gradually cutting down on the f2p restrictions.

Edited August 15, 2013 by B-Dick

[GalenMourne]

But how is it a problem for you?

You will either:

A. Keep subscribing. Good for you! Nothing changes.

B. Unsubscribe because you don't have to. Good for you! You saved some cash.

 

If they lose your sub money, it's their problem. Clearly they have thought of it and decided that they can spare the few subs that are only subscribed for unlimited WZ.

If you were on the fence over whether sub is worth the price and now feel that it's worth less... well, that's just psychological, isn't it? There are so many disadvantages to f2p that a serious player will still prefer to sub.

 

Warzones need more people. Restricting f2p's to as few as 5 a week is silly; though there is a WZ pass. I considered suggesting a "winning streak" mechanic: WZ that you win or hit a certain performance mark in don't count against the 5 allowed. But this is, of course, simpler and overall going to bring further shorter queue times.

 

I agree that pvp needs more people, and allowing ftp to get more involved is a great way to do it. If you didn't read my post above check it out. I highly doubt the will make it completely unrestricted. I would be surprised if they don't do something similar to what i said.

[mattycutts]

great that they doing this in some ways, BUT as the OP said bout his sub, for me i only do pvp, i may do a raid once a year lol, so if i just pvp and have 4 chars i focus on and never have a massive load of credits, whats the point in me being a sub, i am paying for exactly what a f2p can do as me.

 

if this does go that way im happy for f2p players but i thinbk ill become a f2p person i wud be stupid to stay a subber if i only pvp lol

[GalenMourne]

great that they doing this in some ways, BUT as the OP said bout his sub, for me i only do pvp, i may do a raid once a year lol, so if i just pvp and have 4 chars i focus on and never have a massive load of credits, whats the point in me being a sub, i am paying for exactly what a f2p can do as me.

 

if this does go that way im happy for f2p players but i thinbk ill become a f2p person i wud be stupid to stay a subber if i only pvp lol

 

As i pointed out in my post they said no restrictions on entering war zones for ftp, not that there wouldn't be any restrictions. They will most likely restrict the rewards like they do with flash points. You will still have to pay, or you will have to grind out the credits to purchase the pass every week. And have fun transferring credits to your alts, becuase you can't. You will have to grind those credits on all 4 toons every week to gear them up, or buy each one a pass to gear. You might be able to save some money and go ftp, but will be required to do a bunch of dailies every week to pvp on 4 toons. The question is are you willing to grind it out so you can.

 

It's a cost vs time thing. Spend the money and just enjoy yourself, or spend time were you could be in a warzone doing daily quests on multiple toons to fund your enjoyment.

Edited August 15, 2013 by GalenMourne

[Xanas]

As a PvP only player this would be great news to me. No need to pay a sub if this happens...

 

If more people join PvP because of this change all the better as I have more stuff to "kill"

 

So I don't need to pay and more stuff to "kill"... Looks good to me man. I still have premade if I feel like avoiding those who (let's use a nice term) are not that good at this game.... Then ranked TEAM arena with matchmaking is going to put us with equal skills/geared/water players so I REALLY don't see a bad side to this.

[mattycutts]

As i pointed out in my post they said no restrictions on entering war zones for ftp, not that there wouldn't be any restrictions. They will most likely restrict the rewards like they do with flash points. You will still have to pay, or you will have to grind out the credits to purchase the pass every week. And have fun transferring credits to your alts, becuase you can't. You will have to grind those credits on all 4 toons every week to gear them up, or buy each one a pass to gear. You might be able to save some money and go ftp, but will be required to do a bunch of dailies every week to pvp on 4 toons. The question is are you willing to grind it out so you can.

 

It's a cost vs time thing. Spend the money and just enjoy yourself, or spend time were you could be in a warzone doing daily quests on multiple toons to fund your enjoyment.

 

sat in my inv is f2p access stuff from quickbars to artifact equipment access etc on each of my chars, have majority of my legacy stugg unlocked, all my chars have decent crafting to make their own credits, and yep got the access things for max crew skills for each char, did this in event i needed to ever drop to f2p quickly, and if they remove the limit of warzones u can do, wheres the downside to dropping sub? lower comms dont mean alot to me since i love pvp, and got decent gear so dont mind grinding any new set of gear. i wud be stupid to stay a subber, and im sure others in same boat as me lol

[GalenMourne]

sat in my inv is f2p access stuff from quickbars to artifact equipment access etc on each of my chars, have majority of my legacy stugg unlocked, all my chars have decent crafting to make their own credits, and yep got the access things for max crew skills for each char, did this in event i needed to ever drop to f2p quickly, and if they remove the limit of warzones u can do, wheres the downside to dropping sub? lower comms dont mean alot to me since i love pvp, and got decent gear so dont mind grinding any new set of gear. i wud be stupid to stay a subber, and im sure others in same boat as me lol

 

I'm not saying you couldn't save money, you could. I guess the question becomes how much of a grind do they make it? My guess is pretty big. If you had a weekly com cap of say 300 warzone and 150 ranked how easy would it be to gear then? And how hard would it be to stay competetive? If they did this you can also bet you will see pvp gear updates more often, say every 4 months. They are gonna look at things like that if they do it so they can balance thing out on the money side of things.

 

If they make this change they will try to make sure there is a big incentive every time they do a gear update for people to buy the pass. They are in the business of making money.

 

Main thing is this: Yes you can save money, do a little grinding and trading, and buy some cc to make it a bit easier. If all you do is pvp it isn't a bad idea. And that is the big reason for the ftp system. Pay as much or as little as you want to. Its better to have a customer who only spends $40 bucks a year than to not have that customer at all.

Edited August 15, 2013 by GalenMourne

[cycao]

I am 100% sure you will need a sub to do solo and grouped ranked arenas. As it currently stands with a warzone weekly pass it does not unlock ranked just regular. So while this is a good move overall there is still a good reason to sub.

[Master-Nala]

If after this change, you no longer feel having a sub is worth it to you, then go preferred. What folks have to realize is in a F2P game, not having a sub is a valid way to play the game. All this hand-wringing is silly. This change doesn't hurt subs.

[Heal-To-Full]

I am 100% sure you will need a sub to do solo and grouped ranked arenas. As it currently stands with a warzone weekly pass it does not unlock ranked just regular. So while this is a good move overall there is still a good reason to sub.

I would actually hope that they keep the PvP weekly pass, but instead of gating WZ access, it affects WZ rewards - sets Valor and comms gain rate to the same as for subs - and most importantly gives access to Ranked.

 

A pref or ex-sub who paid for the expansion to get to 55, and now pays for WZ passes just so he can play the same thing, but rated, is in all likelihood at least as serious about PvP as a casual sub who clicked the "Ranked" button because he saw it there.

Edited August 15, 2013 by B-Dick

[EzioMessi]

why stop there? why not remove f2p restrictions for pve too because that is what will be next......if you head down that avenue. then bioware... tell me the what the hell will be the point of a subscription . I have maintained two subscriptions since launch (me and the ball and chain aka wife) and max rep well and truly with your gamble bag cartel scheme, the crappy 625 cartel coins you give me a month barely buys anything of real value. what's the incentive to pay to play anymore...

 

The main restrictions for F2P in PvE are limited loot rolls on flashpoints (not that big a restriction, they can still play flashpoints all they want), and no access to Ops.

 

You can consider Regs to be the PvP flashpoints, and Rateds to be PvP Ops, then it's only logical that the former is available for free to all players, and the latter has to be paid for (that is, assuming they maintain the Ranked restrictions as it is now).

[cycao]

The main restrictions for F2P in PvE are limited loot rolls on flashpoints (not that big a restriction, they can still play flashpoints all they want), and no access to Ops.

 

You can consider Regs to be the PvP flashpoints, and Rateds to be PvP Ops, then it's only logical that the former is available for free to all players, and the latter has to be paid for (that is, assuming they maintain the Ranked restrictions as it is now).

 

I cannot see them removing any reason as to why you would need a sub if there are 0 restrictions on f2p on anything PvP. Ranked will still require a sub which is a good thing and its also a good thing that a f2p player can now enjoy endless reg matches while leveling to get a feel for PvP and a taste of arenas.

[Heal-To-Full]

Ranked will still require a sub which is a good thing

Right now it's not. The big problem with Ranked 8v8 was that on most servers there just isn't anyone doing it, so it's 99% waiting and 1% playing. I don't know how much did locking f2p's with passes out of RWZ contributed to this problem, but it certainly did, especially pre-2.0.

 

There's being exclusive and there's being a ghost town. You don't want ghost towns in your game, to the point that it's better to drop some of the exclusivity, and if you fail to do that, they sink further to the point where it's better to demolish the town altogether.

 

Now, 4v4 only Ranked (RankedPUG will probably be considered a joke) may solve this problem. Or it may not. Either way, when all other content in the game is available to pref players - even NiM ops if they want to - it makes little sense for Ranked Arenas to be the only thing that isn't.

Edited August 15, 2013 by B-Dick

[cycao]

Right now it's not. The big problem with Ranked 8v8 was that on most servers there just isn't anyone doing it, so it's 99% waiting and 1% playing. I don't know how much did locking f2p's with passes out of RWZ contributed to this problem, but it certainly did, especially pre-2.0.

 

There's being exclusive and there's being a ghost town. You don't want ghost towns in your game, to the point that it's better to drop some of the exclusivity, and if you fail to do that, they sink further to the point where it's better to demolish them altogether.

 

Now, 4v4 only Ranked (RankedPUG will probably be considered a joke) may solve this problem. Or it may not. Either way, when all other content in the game is available to pref players - even NiM ops if they want to - it makes little sense for Ranked Arenas to be the only thing that isn't.

 

If f2p or preferred players were allowed access to ranked then every single player who only PvPs would drop their sub. I don't think Bioware is that dumb to let that happen.

[Heal-To-Full]

If f2p or preferred players were allowed access to ranked then every single player who only PvPs would drop their sub. I don't think Bioware is that dumb to let that happen.

Who only PvPs and does it ranked.

Judging by the current state of RWZ PvP, that's a diminishingly small fraction of the population.

Edited August 15, 2013 by B-Dick

[cycao]

Who only PvPs and does it ranked.

Judging by the current state of RWZ PvP, that's a diminishingly small fraction of the population.

 

As of now, not a ton. This is one of their reasons as to why they are removing 8v8 and replacing it with a solo or group only arenas. I think there will be enough people who only want to do arenas. And hopefully all the moaners on 'premades only want to pugstomp' and 'blah blah blah separate the queues' will now finally have a solo only option with a matchmaking system in place, all they need to do is keep their sub to partake.

 

I see it working out well.