elstaar Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 the actual problem is that they try to get additional "monetization" from subscribers, too. i doubt is it fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommanderKeeva Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 (edited) I get really tired of these money grabbing comments. EA is a business and businesses exist to make profit. Of course they are going to charge you at some point. They already charged us when we paid our monthly subscription. They should allow subscribers to convert req with credits. Edited December 4, 2013 by CommanderKeeva Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vhaegrant Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 Subscribers already get a 40-60% boost on requisition earned over F-2-P (not worked it out but it's in that ball park, wouldn't surprise me if it's a flat 50% bonus ) that allows them to gear up their ship faster. I don't see an issue with an additional charge for those effectively wanting to bypass content. If you are enjoying GSF play it and you'll get maxed out in the end. If you need to rush to the 'winning' line to unlock boosts on a ship you're not playing then I feel it's perfectly fair to pay for it. Maybe you could use some of those complimentary CC that come with your subscription Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monterone Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 (edited) The conversion is totally pay-to-win and their choice to use this method is despicable. It is also not the only place where you can see blatant nickle and diming. The colors of the engine contrails and the blaster fire is intentionally mismatched. The only way to fix it, if you care about cosmetics, is to spend 120cc to change one of the colors to match the other. You can just see them sitting around the table brainstorming how to squeeze an extra dollar out of a customer. Mr. Burns Edited December 4, 2013 by Monterone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord_Ravenhurst Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 Remove the CC cost for Fleet Requisition conversion. . hahaha. Nope. It´s a tried and proven business model for F2P games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benovide Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 Welfare warrior go away. To the rest. How do you do currency conversion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMightyKnight Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 Even so, why can't they allow subscribers to do so with credits? I'm sick and tired of them forcing their Cartel Coins on us. Yeah, I agree, it's not gamebreaking, but it's annoying me very much on principle. The same that they're demanding Cartel Coins for using the Appearance Customization Vendor. They need to generate revenue, plain and simple, and subs are still their most important source for income. It was mentioned somewhere, players with subscription are spending more money on the CM than those who arent even willing to pay for a sub. Giving everything away for free for subs effictivley kills their "F2P" buisness model. It sucks and i dont like the balance between montly grant and CM prices either, but the conversion really is dirt cheap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benovide Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 It's not exactly winning, but getting better gear, which improves your chances of winning. Of course with the bracket system, the effect of gear is negligible. There is still an effect, though, however small. Because you can indirectly obtain that effect through the use of CC, it is in principle pay-to-win. It would be nice not to have such a system, but it's too profitable with effects too miniscule such that it's highly unlikely BW/EA will repeal it. It doesn't hurt to try, though, right? How absolutely stupid does one need to be to even remotely believe all ships are better as unlocks? Every ship is completely different from the rest. FFS learn to play. First day I have all three scouts and strikes. Not a single one is the same as the last. None of them even fly the same. Buying a new ship is completely relearning how to play. Only ships that overpower the others are the CC ships. Mainly because their plays tile is beyond perfect for a dogfight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cessna_X Posted December 4, 2013 Author Share Posted December 4, 2013 How absolutely stupid does one need to be to even remotely believe all ships are better as unlocks? Every ship is completely different from the rest. FFS learn to play. First day I have all three scouts and strikes. Not a single one is the same as the last. None of them even fly the same. Buying a new ship is completely relearning how to play. Only ships that overpower the others are the CC ships. Mainly because their plays tile is beyond perfect for a dogfight. I'm not comparing different ships. I'm comparing one ship with no gear vs. the same ship with maxed out gear. Can we agree that, however small the effect, HAVING GEAR is better than NOT HAVING GEAR? Since you can pay to have gear, you can pay to be better. In other words, you can pay to win. Yes, the effect is small. But the grievance is really more about the principle of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viperswhip Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 All you buy with fleet coms though are new companions and ships right? All the weapons and things that actually make you significantly better are ship coms and those are free conversion from fleet coms. Ya, when I unlocked the T6 I paid 160 CC for 4000 ship--> Fleet Coms but I didn't have to, I just prefer the T6. What great benefit does someone get for transferring to fleet coms? I admit I haven't fully explored the system, I was having too much fun in matches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin_Kelvar Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 All this considered if I have to choose between "P2W" that simply means person X can get upgrades faster to their preferred ship by grinding on the ship "alts" than me who plays my primary ship almost exclusively to learn all the subtle aspects of it I'm ok with that. It beats selling CC only Death Star laser cannons. Besides if match making works as well as intended won't it do a "gear check" to minimize guys with fully upgraded ships from being matched to a game with newbies/players who have only a few upgrades? If so I don't see how it's P2W since earning components faster just means you'll get matched into games with similarly equipped players faster. Doesn't seem very "P2W" if match making prevents stacking players who are fully equipped against players who aren't similarly equipped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rahuran Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 I'm split between opinions on this. On one hand, as an aspiring game designer, I totally understand the purpose behind the microtransaction system as a whole, in spite of not really approving of it. This is just one of the many devious ways those coins get drained, and seems underwhelming for the expenditure. That said, it serves as a decent, if cheap, coin sink if you're not in the market for random luck and don't like the cartel ship looks. It also serves as a way for people who don't have a lot of time on their hands to still feel competitive without having to devote countless hours to the game, which is a nice incentive for casual players. I feel like the conversion cost should either be removed, or the compensation increased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts