With the credits inflation in the last years isn't it time to raise credit cap?

[JeKoCZ]

When I started playing as f2p I didn't know what the credit cap was. Then I heard someone talk about it in chat and they were arguing that 200k was too low (That was 2+ years ago). I looked at my inventory and thought to myself "How the hell am I even supposed to reach 200k? I just get 10-15 credits per mob IF they actually drop anything." while on Hutta with my very first character. Oh so little I knew. I reached the cap somewhere around Tatooine, Imperial side, for the first time. That's like the end of chapter 1 or close to it?

 

Anyway, the cap is there for a reason. I struggled to buy the things I wanted from the gtn, but still I managed to buy 1 item at 200k, then earn another 200k and buy a 2nd item, and then a 3rd item, a 4th, etc etc etc. And at the time a lot of stuff was very cheaper, for example the complete Eidolon set (That gold/black BH-looking one) went away for 200k more or less, now the chestplate alone is 800k, if you actually find one for sale anymore.

 

But point is, the relatively low credit cap was one of the reasons why I subscribed. Of course the main reasons were story-related, I wanted to see all the stories and have 8 lv60 character, 1 of each class. But the moment I subscribed and the escrow thing went away giving me back all the stolen credits, the gtn literally went from red to green and I could instantly afford basically anything I wanted.

 

tl;dr

 

f2p restrictions worked as intended on me. And on many others. There's no reason to change that.

As a bonus, gtn is a player-run thing, which means that if players are stupid and overprice stuff, there is nothing BW can do about it. It's their own fault if prices are high and things have inflated.

[Manathayria]

Slightly off topic.

While I could support that, I would actually suggest that non-paying players cannot play any toon over lvl 49.

 

You can try the game, level up to 49, enjoy all there is to see... but if you want to keep playing, pay.

 

If you WERE paying and now no longer pay, then any toon lvl 50 and over is "locked" until you pay again.

 

I have two paid accounts right now (one of which was pref till recently, and is the one I use as the example for the restrictions shifting), if they locked prior subs like that, I'd walk with my subscription back to DDO to be with friends who are no longer subs. I tend to RP a lot more than doing anything else and it would just be a shift in setting for us.

 

They're not going to 'lock' anything especially when they have paid character slots etc, especially when it was F2P that kept SWTOR alive.

 

I have come to hold the earnest opinion that I would far prefer that EA/BW eliminate F2P and Preferred accounts rather than ease the restrictions one iota.

 

That would be a bad idea as F2P is really what saved the game. As I said before, I am not suggesting easing more than the credit cap restriction - and even then, only for pref players to 700k. Not for F2P. I've bought most of my unlocks either with credits or cash and unlocked most of the game for if I drop sub while traveling. I don't expect/would not suggest a permanent unlock that removes the cap even though I would be all for a slight increase.

 

Some of those 'preferred' accounts are going to be like a guild leader I had in DDO.

 

He wouldn't pay a subscription, hated subscription models - but dammit he'd spend 50$ or so every two weeks for his consumables (xp potions, spell pots and other things) because that wasn't a requirement on him and he was spending what he wanted!

Edited February 4, 2016 by Manathayria

[Thoronmir]

Would EA/BW rather gamble on (a) getting $180 today and maybe more in the future or (b) a steady $15 per month for however long the game lasts? They'd also have to factor in how many current F2P or Preferred customers (i.e., currently paying $0 per month) would pay the $180 to remove the Credit Cap. Then there is the Credit Cap's role in inducing players to remain subbed. And, of course, we have to consider Dollars-to-Euros conversion rates. I've analyzed the data and run the numbers and the answer is: We have no friggin' idea, but EA/BW probably does. So, ashamedly, I have to agree with Bran: If the math worked out for EA/BW to profit, we'd see this feature already available.

[squirrelballz]

Would EA/BW rather gamble on (a) getting $180 today and maybe more in the future or (b) a steady $15 per month for however long the game lasts? They'd also have to factor in how many current F2P or Preferred customers (i.e., currently paying $0 per month) would pay the $180 to remove the Credit Cap. Then there is the Credit Cap's role in inducing players to remain subbed. And, of course, we have to consider Dollars-to-Euros conversion rates. I've analyzed the data and run the numbers and the answer is: We have no friggin' idea, but EA/BW probably does. So, ashamedly, I have to agree with Bran: If the math worked out for EA/BW to profit, we'd see this feature already available.

 

I readily admit I have no clue about the numbers, however, I personally think that if someone is willing to pay 3 times the normal cost of a regular game to remove one restriction it's more than an adequate amount, heck GW2 is a one time $40 payment for the game. EA/BW can get people to resub even the ones who would leave if they got a credit unlock if the new content and incentives they put out there is to their liking. Ultimately I would think companies like EA like to bank on the now and get whatever they can while leaving the gambling to their customers i.e cartel market packs.

Edited February 4, 2016 by squirrelballz

[Ratajack]

I readily admit I have no clue about the numbers, however, I personally think that if someone is willing to pay 3 times the normal cost of a regular game to remove one restriction it's more than an adequate amount, heck GW2 is a one time $40 payment for the game. EA/BW can get people to resub even the ones who would leave if they got a credit unlock if the new content and incentives they put out their is to their liking. Ultimately I would think companies like EA like to bank on the now and get whatever they can while leaving the gambling to their customers i.e cartel market packs.

 

There have been planety of posters in this thread alone, who have made it clear that if they could remove the credit cap, they would do so and NO LONGER SUBSCRIBE.

 

Yet, it seems that you want us to believe that if BW were to allow the credit cap to be removed, it would have no real affect and might result in MORE subscribers.

 

How does that make ANY sense?

[squirrelballz]

There have been planety of posters in this thread alone, who have made it clear that if they could remove the credit cap, they would do so and NO LONGER SUBSCRIBE.

 

Yet, it seems that you want us to believe that if BW were to allow the credit cap to be removed, it would have no real affect and might result in MORE subscribers.

 

How does that make ANY sense?

 

Honestly I'm not asking you to believe anything nor did I say it wouldn't have an effect on the income of the game. You are also taking crap that I haven't said like it "might result in more subs" and implying that's what I said, honestly I find it to be pretty stupid. The only thing I have said is it a path of revenue BW can take if they want to and that at the end of the day it will bring some money in and it wouldn't be the end of the world.

 

I also agree that there are people who have said they wouldn't sub if the credit cap was gone, however, I also would like to ask those very same people if the content they like was made and alot of other restrictions remained whether or not they would resub? I'm willing to bet a good sum of people will always sub if they really like the game and if the content they like is being put into the game.

[Ratajack]

Honestly I'm not asking you to believe anything nor did I say it wouldn't have an effect on the income of the game. You are also taking crap that I haven't said like it "might result in more subs" and implying that's what I said, honestly I find it to be pretty stupid. The only thing I have said is it a path of revenue BW can take if they want to and that at the end of the day it will bring some money in and it wouldn't be the end of the world.

 

I also agree that there are people who have said they wouldn't sub if the credit cap was gone, however, I also would like to ask those very same people if the content they like was made and alot of other restrictions remained whether or not they would resub? I'm willing to bet a good sum of people will always sub if they really like the game and if the content they like is being put into the game.

 

Why spend money if you can play the game for FREE, especially if you can play for FREE without the "pesky credit cap"?

 

THAT is the point that many are making. That is also the point which you seem to be ignoring in your desire to see the credit cap removed so that people can play for FREE without that "pesky credit cap".

[LordArtemis]

As I said earlier, removing the cap completely is not a wise idea IMO. The only thing that should do that is a sub.

 

I do, however, think higher caps and other perks for two MORE tiers would be good for the game, as long as they were expensive, say 700 and 2000 for each successive tier. I also think 5 dollars is far too LOW for preferred status. It should be more like 50 IMO.

 

End game content should still require passes regardless of access level IMO, except for subs of course.

[branmakmuffin]

Why spend money if you can play the game for FREE, especially if you can play for FREE without the "pesky credit cap"?

 

THAT is the point that many are making. That is also the point which you seem to be ignoring in your desire to see the credit cap removed so that people can play for FREE without that "pesky credit cap".

I posted a ways back about my LotRO experience. Even when I play, I do not subscribe because I can "buy off' most of the Premium (same as Preferred) limitations, including the currency cap. If TOR had a similar scheme, I'd play here as Preferred, too. I don't have a problem subscribing because I like the game that much and I am willing to pay $15/month to avoid the limitations.

[squirrelballz]

Why spend money if you can play the game for FREE, especially if you can play for FREE without the "pesky credit cap"?

 

THAT is the point that many are making. That is also the point which you seem to be ignoring in your desire to see the credit cap removed so that people can play for FREE without that "pesky credit cap".

 

I'm sorry but I think that you are not properly comprehending anything I said and suggest you actually go back and READ. I DIDN'T say to hand out credit caps FOR FREE I said they should cost either $180 or whatever EA/BW THINKS IS JUSTIFIED FOR IT. HOPE THAT CLEARS IT UP FOR YOU.

[squirrelballz]

I posted a ways back about my LotRO experience. Even when I play, I do not subscribe because I can "buy off' most of the Premium (same as Preferred) limitations, including the currency cap. If TOR had a similar scheme, I'd play here as Preferred, too. I don't have a problem subscribing because I like the game that much and I am willing to pay $15/month to avoid the limitations.

 

You know what I disagree with branmakmuffin on alot of things, however, I agree with him in this post. I also think if SWTOR was like LotRO perhaps alot of people would be preferred and not subs. Honestly I have no way to determine that and lastly my point is what branmakmuffin says in his last sentence, I think that people like me and him will still Sub because we like the game and are willing to spend $15. I personally didn't sub because of restrictions my friends and love for star wars did and I pay because I love the game and think it does alot of things right.

[Ratajack]

I'm sorry but I think that you are not properly comprehending anything I said and suggest you actually go back and READ. I DIDN'T say to hand out credit caps FOR FREE I said they should cost either $180 or whatever EA/BW THINKS IS JUSTIFIED FOR IT. HOPE THAT CLEARS IT UP FOR YOU.

 

Maybe you should try to ACTUALLY READ what I wrote.

 

Here it is again, for the reading challenged:

 

Why spend money if you can play the game for FREE, especially if you can play for FREE without the "pesky credit cap"?

 

THAT is the point that many are making. That is also the point which you seem to be ignoring in your desire to see the credit cap removed so that people can play for FREE without that "pesky credit cap".

 

Notice that NOWHERE in that post did I say the removal of the credit cap was FREE, or that you were asking for the removal of the credit cap to be FREE.

 

However, once a person pays whatever price might be set to remove the credit cap, they can continue to pay from that point onward for FREE without that pesky credit cap.

 

THAT is the point which you continue to ignore as you continue to argue that people should be able remove that pesky credit cap and then continue to play for FREE without that pesky credit cap.

[Ratajack]

I posted a ways back about my LotRO experience. Even when I play, I do not subscribe because I can "buy off' most of the Premium (same as Preferred) limitations, including the currency cap. If TOR had a similar scheme, I'd play here as Preferred, too. I don't have a problem subscribing because I like the game that much and I am willing to pay $15/month to avoid the limitations.

 

 

 

You know what I disagree with branmakmuffin on alot of things, however, I agree with him in this post. I also think if SWTOR was like LotRO perhaps alot of people would be preferred and not subs. Honestly I have no way to determine that and lastly my point is what branmakmuffin says in his last sentence, I think that people like me and him will still Sub because we like the game and are willing to spend $15. I personally didn't sub because of restrictions my friends and love for star wars did and I pay because I love the game and think it does alot of things right.

 

Maybe reading comprehension is not your thing, because it certainly seems to me that you missed his point ENTIRELY. Maybe you simply see what you want to see.

 

Maybe you simply saw the :

 

"I don't have a problem subscribing because I like the game that much"

 

and either "missed" or chose to ignore the:

 

"and I am willing to pay $15/month to avoid the limitations."

 

Maybe I am wrong (hopefully Branmakmuffin will clarify what his point actually was), but it seems to me that his point was:

 

If TOR had a similar scheme, I'd play here as Preferred, too.

 

It seems to me that he is not saying that he would continue to sub even if there were a way to remove the credit cap, but rather that if there were a way to remove the credit cap, he would NO LONGER SUBSCRIBE, but would continue to play for FREE as preferred.

[Nkya]

As a bonus, gtn is a player-run thing, which means that if players are stupid and overprice stuff, there is nothing BW can do about it. It's their own fault if prices are high and things have inflated.

 

Prices raise because there is more and more credit in game. Printing more money leads to inflation. Bioware is the first responsible for this, even if they have very few options to reverse it.

[squirrelballz]

Maybe you should try to ACTUALLY READ what I wrote.

 

Here it is again, for the reading challenged:

 

 

 

Notice that NOWHERE in that post did I say the removal of the credit cap was FREE, or that you were asking for the removal of the credit cap to be FREE.

 

However, once a person pays whatever price might be set to remove the credit cap, they can continue to pay from that point onward for FREE without that pesky credit cap.

 

THAT is the point which you continue to ignore as you continue to argue that people should be able remove that pesky credit cap and then continue to play for FREE without that pesky credit cap.

 

LOL I've clearly read what you wrote, however, the difference is I don't Imply things that haven't been said unless they ACTUALLY SAY IT. YES I AM AWARE LIKE EVERYONE ELSE THAT ONCE THE CAP IS GONE THEY GET TO PLAY FOR FREE. GUESS WHAT THEY WOULD HAVE PAID FOR SOMETHING IN ORDER TO GET TO THE POINT OF THAT RESTRICTION BEING FREE. IT STILL WOULDN'T STOP PEOPLE FROM SUBBING IF THEY REALLY LOVE THE GAME AND IF THE GAME IS THAT GOOD THEY WILL ALWAYS COME BACK FOR NEW EXPANSION AND CONTENT AND SHOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR IT. I think I've made my point in cohesive manner and I'd like to hear peoples opinion on whether they would come back and SUB for new content and expansions they like even if they had the credit cap unlock.

[ekwalizer]

Wow! Heartless... Honestly I think a lot of us forget how it was being a kid. My parent's sure as heck would never give me the money for an MMO nor would they have allowed me to have one of these pre-paid debit cards, which are a waste of money if you ask me, but then of course I'm one of those people who thinks that if you pay for something you should get what you want out of it but at the same time I'm not a heartless person who thinks that we shouldn't think about those less fortunate then ourselves.

 

MMOs are not, nor should be, the realm of children's entertainment.

 

MMOs are all, each and every one, profit driven ventures.

[Ratajack]

LOL I've clearly read what you wrote, however, the difference is I don't Imply things that haven't been said unless they ACTUALLY SAY IT. YES I AM AWARE LIKE EVERYONE ELSE THAT ONCE THE CAP IS GONE THEY GET TO PLAY FOR FREE. GUESS WHAT THEY WOULD HAVE PAID FOR SOMETHING IN ORDER TO GET TO THE POINT OF THAT RESTRICTION BEING FREE. IT STILL WOULDN'T STOP PEOPLE FROM SUBBING IF THEY REALLY LOVE THE GAME AND IF THE GAME IS THAT GOOD THEY WILL ALWAYS COME BACK FOR NEW EXPANSION AND CONTENT AND SHOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR IT. I think I've made my point in cohesive manner and I'd like to hear peoples opinion on whether they would come back and SUB for new content and expansions they like even if they had the credit cap unlock.

 

All you need to do is go back and read this thread to get that answer. Without a credit cap, BW would lose MANY subscriptions, as the credit cap is the biggest single incentive to sub.

 

You can also do a forum search for threads regarding this topic to see similar results in those threads.

 

Also, there are plenty of threads in which people freely admit that they unsubbed and will come back after all the KOTFE chapters have been released, sub for ONE MONTH ONLY to unlock all the rest of the chapters. How much much impact will your "some people might even sub for new content" have if those subs will only be for one month.

[Soul_of_Flames]

The cap is too low. Been saying that since it came out. It needs to be raised. Although not by much because of things like credit farmers.

 

I think there should be in-game ways to increase your cap, but it should require a good deal of effort and dedication.

 

For example, every time you complete a class story (all 3 chapters) you should get like an additional 20k added to your credit cap. (Or 18,750. Because that multiplied by 8 and added to the current cap of 350k, would bring the cap to 500k.)

 

And, for the record, I'm subbed. I have been subbed since the game came out and I don't see myself unsubbing any time soon. I'm saying this because I like to sell and trade items in game. And far too many people have too few credits to keep me busy.

[pbraden]

I think I've only seen 1 person with their credits capped out completely.

[TX_Angel]

Slightly off topic.

 

I have two paid accounts right now (one of which was pref till recently, and is the one I use as the example for the restrictions shifting), if they locked prior subs like that, I'd walk with my subscription back to DDO to be with friends who are no longer subs. I tend to RP a lot more than doing anything else and it would just be a shift in setting for us.

 

Just curious... honest question here... But if you're a sub, you're not losing anything, and if you're not a sub, then you're not "walking with my subscription", now are you?

 

From what BW has reported in the past, the vast majority of CM sales are to subs. Something like 80%, if memory serves.

 

I'm not convinced that F2P adds as much to the game as you'd think, but maybe it does. Neither of us has access to the figures to really know.

 

I would have been interested in seeing what would happen if the CM had been added, but F2P had been limited to lvl 25 from the start. Go ahead and put the cash shop in for those who can and want to spend more, give F2P up to lvl 25, sub after that.

 

My gut tells me that the numbers in terms of total revenue wouldn't actually be much different than today. Might even be more. I know a number of former subs who bought all the unlocks from the GTN and unsubbed, and just play for free.

 

Free is not a good number when you're running a business.

 

Oh sure, they subbed for 30 days to unlock KotFE, and they'll sub another 30 days when chapter 16 comes out, but that's it.

[IslanderRebel]

The title just says all.

 

 

 

Sure, go ahead and raise the cap level to 15 million.

What the heck.

let them have some more fun, the F2Pers and preferred players.

heck, go ahead and allow them to run 4 ops and 20 wzs per week.

This is America.

Home of THE Donald and Mc Donald's!!!!

 

GET SOME!!!!

 

wait for it..... wait for it..........

 

 

Next please.

Edited February 4, 2016 by IslanderRebel

[branmakmuffin]

The cap is too low. Been saying that since it came out. It needs to be raised.

Why? Why do you think it is necessary to make the game easier to play for people who don't pay for it?

[MeNaCe-NZ]

One solution is of course to make all unlocks BoP so they can't be put on the GTN and only purchased with CC.

 

Thus your larger cap doesn't allow you to play for free because you can't buy the unlocks.

 

See the CC pricing based around what a month of sub would be so maybe you only want to sub for PVP so a months PVP unlock would be $5 as opposed to $15 ...

 

A model like this could work as an alternative to a credit cap and subscribing I feel.

 

Also right now I could buy enough unlocks off the GTN to have me playing fully for free for ever if I wanted ( just couldn't do my GTN trading I enjoy doing ) and there were actually enough for sell on the GTN. The above solution would stop players who are currently doing exactly that to get around paying for the game.

[Ratajack]

One solution is of course to make all unlocks BoP so they can't be put on the GTN and only purchased with CC.

 

Thus your larger cap doesn't allow you to play for free because you can't buy the unlocks.

 

See the CC pricing based around what a month of sub would be so maybe you only want to sub for PVP so a months PVP unlock would be $5 as opposed to $15 ...

 

A model like this could work as an alternative to a credit cap and subscribing I feel.

 

Also right now I could buy enough unlocks off the GTN to have me playing fully for free for ever if I wanted ( just couldn't do my GTN trading I enjoy doing ) and there were actually enough for sell on the GTN. The above solution would stop players who are currently doing exactly that to get around paying for the game.

 

 

I think if they were to try to do this, they might need to create a different type of currency than CC's to purchase those unlocks.

 

The reason for creating a new type of currency other than CC's is that subscribers get a monthly stipend, and the referral program also creates a massive amount of CC's monthly from thin air. Neither of these two sources for CC's generate any additional revenue for BW.

 

I am not overly familiar with the referral program and the monthly CC rewards, so I do not know if a player has to be subscribed to receive the rewards. I know the CC rewards are based on the number of referred players who are subscribed, but I do not know if the person receiving those CC rewards needs to be subscribed.

 

If a preferred player still receives the CC rewards for referred "friends" who remain subscribed, then the CC then a preferred player could theoretically purchase those unlocks using nothing but referral generated CC's, even though he is not subscribed.

 

Even if the recipient of those referral reward CC's has to be subscribed to receive those rewards, all one would need to do is to use the referral CC's to stock up on unlocks before dropping to preferred.

 

If we are looking for a way to ensure that BW see additional revenue for those unlocks, then it would seem that a new type of currency that can only be purchased using RL money would be required.

[MeNaCe-NZ]

I think if they were to try to do this, they might need to create a different type of currency than CC's to purchase those unlocks.

 

The reason for creating a new type of currency other than CC's is that subscribers get a monthly stipend, and the referral program also creates a massive amount of CC's monthly from thin air. Neither of these two sources for CC's generate any additional revenue for BW.

 

True but you can only get referral CC when you're subbed I believe? At least you can only refer people so they could stop the actual referral payments if not subbed.

I guess then as I look at it is if you set it at around $5 per unlock ( 500CC let's say ) then you basically saying you referred 1 subscribing player to earn yourself one unlock of whatever type you wanted.

Likewise you can get one unlock of whatever type you wanted for each month you subbed providing of course you saved those CC whilst you were subbing and not spending them on the myriad of other items to spend them on.

 

Point is it's got to be better than allowing people to buy unlocks for credits now because that's an easy way around the payment structure. You can use the unlocks and still GTN to earn more credits ( millions at 7 pages per toon limit once all unlocked ) providing if you planned ahead you saved up items to sell ( I'm at around 2600 unbound CM items for example and probably not even close to being one of the largest hoarders ).

You can then resub for 1 month anytime you run short on unlocks or what not and rinse and repeat for much cheaper than paying every month.

 

I imagine the CC model would have people subbing much more often if they weren't going to buy actual CC's because the are nowhere ear as readily available as credits and for the most part do require an monetary payment made to BW to earn them.

 

I am not overly familiar with the referral program and the monthly CC rewards, so I do not know if a player has to be subscribed to receive the rewards. I know the CC rewards are based on the number of referred players who are subscribed, but I do not know if the person receiving those CC rewards needs to be subscribed.

 

Neither but that would be an easy change to make and Austin ideally wouldn't care if people cried too much over it because it implied they didn't want to pay to begin with ( or weren't ) - paying customers I imagine would happily support the decision as they aren't affected either way.

 

If a preferred player still receives the CC rewards for referred "friends" who remain subscribed, then the CC then a preferred player could theoretically purchase those unlocks using nothing but referral generated CC's, even though he is not subscribed.

 

They can do that now though ... my point is taking what we have now, set an equivalent price to subscriber status ( if it's not already, not at home to check pricing )and make it bound to remove it from the GTN.

 

Even if the recipient of those referral reward CC's has to be subscribed to receive those rewards, all one would need to do is to use the referral CC's to stock up on unlocks before dropping to preferred.

 

If we are looking for a way to ensure that BW see additional revenue for those unlocks, then it would seem that a new type of currency that can only be purchased using RL money would be required.

 

Again they can do that now ... it's about removing them from the GTN to allow a credit cap increase or removal even that wouldn't ideally affect subscribers in the sense of "can now play for free with unlocks".