BioWare, GTN prices are insane, its time to do something

[BRKMSN]

The most important piece of that is a permanent crew skill unlock. Without it, F2P can only use 2 crew skills.

F2P only had 1 crew skill. Preferred had 2. A majority of F2P users used that perk before they became preferred which kept them at 2 crew skills upon becoming preferred. This was also just a one-time package. You don't receive the "goodies bag" the second time you use a referral.

 

Anyway, that might have been the most important piece to you. Others might feel the unify colors is much more important since it directly affects their character look. Some might even think titles are the best thing ever. Reagrdless, Bioware stated they'd look at trying to get that other stuff back out in some fashion (it sounds like a RAF 2.0 program might be rolled out in the future if they can figure out how to make it do what it was supposed to do).

[xordevoreaux]

F2P only had 1 crew skill. Preferred had 2. A majority of F2P users used that perk before they became preferred which kept them at 2 crew skills upon becoming preferred. This was also just a one-time package. You don't receive the "goodies bag" the second time you use a referral.

 

Anyway, that might have been the most important piece to you. Others might feel the unify colors is much more important since it directly affects their character look. Some might even think titles are the best thing ever. Reagrdless, Bioware stated they'd look at trying to get that other stuff back out in some fashion (it sounds like a RAF 2.0 program might be rolled out in the future if they can figure out how to make it do what it was supposed to do).

 

No, definitely hide head gear in my book.

[Ardrossan]

F2P only had 1 crew skill. Preferred had 2. A majority of F2P users used that perk before they became preferred which kept them at 2 crew skills upon becoming preferred. This was also just a one-time package. You don't receive the "goodies bag" the second time you use a referral.

 

Anyway, that might have been the most important piece to you. Others might feel the unify colors is much more important since it directly affects their character look. Some might even think titles are the best thing ever. Reagrdless, Bioware stated they'd look at trying to get that other stuff back out in some fashion (it sounds like a RAF 2.0 program might be rolled out in the future if they can figure out how to make it do what it was supposed to do).

 

Once you get the package once, it gets mailed to you on every character you make. You would know that if you'd ever used it, which you obviously haven't, meaning you're arguing out of ignorance, as usual.

 

There is a major difference between having 3 crew skills versus having only 1 or 2, and a major affect on your ability to make credits. Again, this is OBVIOUS if you've ever needed it. I am not interested in your hypothetical "you only get to pick the most important piece", the package came with a BUNCH of stuff that suited many playstyles so there was no need to pick "the most important piece."

 

Why do you care? Why do you argue about this? It makes no difference to you either way. It makes a little difference to me because I don't have to buy a crew skill account unlock that would otherwise cost hundreds of millions of credits. It makes A LOT of difference to F2Pers who were unaware of this or arrived after they stopped the program. How about having a little empathy and understanding other perspectives than your own, i.e whiteknighting for the devs on even the most minor points and vigorously upholding the status quo at all costs?

Edited September 8, 2021 by Ardrossan

[Sir-steve]

Getting rid of the ref program was one of the factors of the huge increase in inflation on the gtn. Even with the cc's from the GS seasons I don't think there are as many free cc's floating around as there was with the ref links. Even without pimping my link out in game (just having it as my signature) I got thousands of cc's, with GS I got (or will have) close to 20k , but that was over months, people were getting that in a month.

 

Everything that you NEED to play the game is either given, or can be crafted. Everything else is fluff. Sure some armour is cool, but you can make cool outfits from dropped loot, etc. None of my pref accounts have CM stuff, unless it's specific for a char, most are dropped mixes, with dyes.

 

BW hasn't responded to inflation, and probably never will, because while stuff is selling high, people will pay real money to get it and sell it. And people who don't want to buy from the gtn, will probably spend real money, to get cc's. Rampant inflation is a win/win for BW.

 

The point is, with everyone having access to a decent amount of free CC (instead of a few referral whales) they can a) buy what they want from CM direct without needing to pay those inflated prices or b) buy CM and sell for credits on GTN if they want to play in that space.

 

Sure there may be less CC floating around for now and the perception of scarcity, but BW has put the means for redistribution of 'wealth' into everyone's hands and ended what's almost been a monopoly on 'free' CC.

 

Giving everyone the means to bypass or participate in the GTN CM resale game is a brilliant way of addressing inflation in my opinion.

[BRKMSN]

Once you get the package once, it gets mailed to you on every character you make. You would know that if you'd ever used it, which you obviously haven't, meaning you're arguing out of ignorance, as usual.

 

There is a major difference between having 3 crew skills versus having only 1 or 2, and a major affect on your ability to make credits. Again, this is OBVIOUS if you've ever needed it. I am not interested in your hypothetical "you only get to pick the most important piece", the package came with a BUNCH of stuff that suited many playstyles so there was no need to pick "the most important piece."

 

Why do you care? Why do you argue about this? It makes no difference to you either way. It makes a little difference to me because I don't have to buy a crew skill account unlock that would otherwise cost hundreds of millions of credits. It makes A LOT of difference to F2Pers who were unaware of this or arrived after they stopped the program. How about having a little empathy and understanding other perspectives than your own, i.e whiteknighting for the devs on even the most minor points and vigorously upholding the status quo at all costs?

 

Holy crap, dude. Just put me on ignore.

 

For the record, I'm interested in this topic which is why I've been participating. While I still believe the credit cap is the #1 reason to continually sub, I see, due to your testimony, that there are other strong incentives to continually sub as well. That only strengthens my opinion that the F2P model is working.

 

It appears obvious to me (because of how often you post on the forums) that you have a main account that probably is continually subscribed for the most part and at least one F2P account (likely several), which explains why you seem to be taking my interest personally. It would also seem that your F2P account(s) is/are preferred status meaning you spent some money on the game (nothing wrong with that).

 

Hopefully, you'll get those other things back in some fashion. As I stated before you went postal, the devs alluded to wanting to get those other items out as well in some manner, but they didn't specify exactly how. It's my belief that they are trying to figure out a new RAF program that won't get so twisted like the original (people only wanted subs to click their link). However, I remain adamantly opposed to Bioware implementing GTN price control measures just to cater to F2P players. Also, the F2P credit cap should never exceed whatever the credit cost is involved with buying a max level gear item from a game vendor (currently 1 million credits).

[Ardrossan]

Holy crap, dude. Just put me on ignore.

It appears obvious to me (because of how often you post on the forums) that you have a main account that probably is continually subscribed for the most part and at least one F2P account (likely several), which explains why you seem to be taking my interest personally. It would also seem that your F2P account(s) is/are preferred status meaning you spent some money on the game (nothing wrong with that).

 

No, I don't. I sub once or twice a year for 60 days through the Origin offer. I used to be able to post more often because of the weekly referral. I have one account that I have been using continuously since 2013, though my interest has waned recently and i've been playing more SP games. I am not opposed to spending money on the game, or for F2P to sub. What I want is for F2P to have similar ACCESS that I did when I joined: that is, ability to buy account unlocks that dramatically change the ability to play the game, rather than being hoarded by the type of sub you describe.

 

I lurked for several years before subbing and being able to post, and I noticed, and continue to notice, that most subs don't understand what F2P want or actually get, or confuse their desires / fears of losing their sub privileges, with F2P, like the OP. Most subs have an extremely negative view of F2P, which is little more than petty prejudice, like your comment about devs "catering" to F2P. My own perspective of F2P is dated, but at least it's evenhanded. I don't see them as freeloaders or a despised economic class horning in on MY perks the way many players here do.

 

As for my posting frequency, the forum, aside from niche subforums like story and lore, is mainly for complainers to snipe each other and the devs, and I fit that characterization. I rarely put people on ignore unless I think they will report me, and even then it just limits what I see.

Edited September 9, 2021 by Ardrossan

[Evelyn_Phoenix]

I've made billions in-game, almost all of it without spending real $$. (caveat: I was subscribed that whole time). And I agree the economy is broken and unfair.

 

1) The economy is inflating. Fast. A year ago, prices were 1/2 to 1/3 of what they are now. In a month or two, hypercrates (which were once 250m) will be 1 billion apiece. The GTN does cap out at 1 billion, but people are already advertising rare armor sets for 2 or 3 or more billion in general chat because the GTN won't accommodate those costs.

 

2) Subscribers have a MASSIVE advantage in making credits than f2p. F2p basically aren't allowed to have credits, can't even get legacy unlocks due to credit cap - it's really unfair. Yes, f2p can make credits, but you will never be able to compete with what a subscriber can do. A sub can buy and resell items for profit, they have way more gtn slots to sell with, they can send more companions out at once, they have more character slots to use, they can queue for crafting (otherwise crafting is awful). It's an unending list of advantages.

[BRKMSN]

I've made billions in-game, almost all of it without spending real $$. (caveat: I was subscribed that whole time). And I agree the economy is broken and unfair.

 

1) The economy is inflating. Fast. A year ago, prices were 1/2 to 1/3 of what they are now. In a month or two, hypercrates (which were once 250m) will be 1 billion apiece. The GTN does cap out at 1 billion, but people are already advertising rare armor sets for 2 or 3 or more billion in general chat because the GTN won't accommodate those costs.

 

2) Subscribers have a MASSIVE advantage in making credits than f2p. F2p basically aren't allowed to have credits, can't even get legacy unlocks due to credit cap - it's really unfair. Yes, f2p can make credits, but you will never be able to compete with what a subscriber can do. A sub can buy and resell items for profit, they have way more gtn slots to sell with, they can send more companions out at once, they have more character slots to use, they can queue for crafting (otherwise crafting is awful). It's an unending list of advantages.

Which just happens to be the point of subscribing.

 

Those unlocks that F2P players "need" were designed to be purchased with CCs, not credits.

[TrixxieTriss]

While I agree that F2P shouldn’t have all the bells and whistles because otherwise what’s the incentive to subscribe.

But I do think it’s time Bioware reassessed the credit limits that F2P / Preferred players get because inflation has out paced the limits.

 

And with GTN capped at 1 billion credits, soon many CM items will be listed at 1 billion credits as standard. That in turn is pushing lower priced crafted items much higher than they’ve historically been. Items that used to be bellow the 1 million thresh hold are now often higher than it and they sell. Which obviously puts all those items out of reach of F2P players.

 

For instance, I sell crafted dyes and some decorations and other niche crafted items. 3 years ago my prices for many of these items were between 50k to 200k. Then 2 years go they were 100k to 500k and 1 year ago they were 200k to 1 million.

Then BioWare got rid of the referral program and now my base rate is a million+ (I don’t list anything under 1 million now) and I’m selling just as many as I was 2-3 years ago. Some items sell regularly for 50 million and those prices are still rising.

By the end of the year I expect my base rate will be 5 million and I’ll be regularly selling items 100+ million plus.

 

Inflation was always high, but it’s now out of control since BioWare removed the referral system from the game. The people who used to get 1000s of free CCs a month used to keep the prices on the GTN down.

And while I think it was a great idea to offer CCs as rewards in GS, the people getting those are mostly using them on themselves and not buying stuff to list on the GTN.

That is why inflation has sky rocketed since they got rid of the referral system. Sadly I predicted this would happen because supply would drop and demand would still be there.

 

BioWare should have either kept the referral program as it was or modified it if they thought it was too much. They should not have nuked it like they did because it’s a major trigger for the runaway inflation.

BioWare could have just as easily reduced the amount received from referrals by 25% to start with and reviewed it after 6 months. Then reduced it more if they felt it was needed. Instead they have nuked it totally and only a small residual amount still flows from those who’ve stayed subbed.

 

The inflation and economy problem isn’t as simple as some are suggesting here. And the restrictions for F2P players is now having an affect on subscribers too because that part of the player base now can’t afford to even buy your crafted items. And with the GTN listing limit at 1 billion, soon ™️ (probably by end of year) all CM items will be listed as 1 billion. That in turn means a black market outside of the GTN will take hold to buy and sell the more prestigious items. Which in turn means the games credits will devalue more and inflation will be worse. Not only that, but BioWare will lose control of their best credit sink in game because players will by pass it.

 

The only way out of this that won’t piss off the larger player base or the whales BioWare rely on to make real money and who we rely on to supply CM items to the GTN is to reform the system.

 

Some suggestions for economy reforms :

 

1. Reinstate the referral system with reforms that keeps a cap on how much can be earned from it (BioWare can tweak this as needed).

2. Put a sliding tax scale starting at 10% (up from 8%) on the GTN that gradually increases for CM items over 5 million but is capped at 20% tax for items over 500 million

3. Have a flat GTN tax of 10% for all crafted items (up from 8%)

4. Have a flat GTN tax of 10% for all crafting materials, but cap the price of crafting materials on the GTN (cap to be discussed). That way you keep cost prices for crafted items down.

5. Increase the F2P credit limit to 50 million and preferred 150 million.

6. Get rid of the current CM credit escrow system and replace it with a CM item that opens up F2P and preferred to 1 billion credits. But put a price cap this can be sold for on the GTN of 500 million.

7. At the same time, BioWare also adds an in game option to open up credit increases with in game credits. Starting price at 50 million and scaling up to 500 million which caps them out at 500 million.

8. Reduce and then Limit how many credits you can privately transfer directly to another player to make it more cumbersome to trade outside of the GTN (guilds would be unaffected).

 

Each suggestion I have listed contributes as part of the overall solution and I believe cherry picking them would unbalance the other suggestions that will ultimately cause the changes to be unbalanced and fail. That doesn’t mean some of the ideas can’t be tweaked, especially the numbers which could be modelled from internal data.

 

Of course it’s not 100% perfect and not everyone would be happy. But it would slow inflation without reducing BioWares income and it would still incentivise people to sub.

Edited September 9, 2021 by TrixxieTriss

[RikuvonDrake]

many great suggestions if the objective was to reduce the number of subscribers as most players would simply go f2p as the remaining restrictions wouldn't matter. At some point, most of you people gotta come to the realization that the purely cosmetic items from the cartel market will have a cost that is dependant on its supply which in turn relies on real people spending IRL money on buying them to resell for other players

 

I agree that things should be done to reduce the inflation of credit value, but expecting the prices of CM items to go back to what they were before is unreasonable, with the abuse and exploitive behaviour around referral links now removed CM items will be priced at a far more logical level. Sure that will exclude f2p players due to their credit cap, but that's most likely also intentional to promote them spending money on cartel coins, and if they don't it's just cosmetic items they miss out on, nothing of value

 

increased gtn tax, increased repair cost, significantly reduce the credit reward from quests, loot and selling dropped items as well as introduce more credit sinks on endgame gear, perhaps some form of pvp/gsf/space mission gear in line with the prices we have now would all be helpful towards combating the inflation without removing the incentives to actually maintain a subscription to the game

 

I am sure there are a few credit sellers cheering for the suggestions posted prior, but I doubt the wider community would appreciate more of that kind of stuff, nor would it help the game. f2p and pref are largely irrelevant for the economy and that is fine as they don't need to have access to it and the risk of abuse is similar or higher than what it was with referrals

Edited September 9, 2021 by RikuvonDrake

[TrixxieTriss]

many great suggestions if the objective was to reduce the number of subscribers as most players would simply go f2p as the remaining restrictions wouldn't matter. At some point, most of you people gotta come to the realization that the purely cosmetic items from the cartel market will have a cost that is dependant on its supply which in turn relies on real people spending IRL money on buying them to resell for other players

 

I agree that things should be done to reduce the inflation of credit value, but expecting the prices of CM items to go back to what they were before is unreasonable, with the abuse and exploitive behaviour around referral links now removed CM items will be priced at a far more logical level. Sure that will exclude f2p players due to their credit cap, but that's most likely also intentional to promote them spending money on cartel coins, and if they don't it's just cosmetic items they miss out on, nothing of value

 

increased gtn tax, increased repair cost, significantly reduce the credit reward from quests, loot and selling dropped items as well as introduce more credit sinks on endgame gear, perhaps some form of pvp/gsf/space mission gear in line with the prices we have now would all be helpful towards combating the inflation without removing the incentives to actually maintain a subscription to the game

 

I am sure there are a few credit sellers cheering for the suggestions posted prior, but I doubt the wider community would appreciate more of that kind of stuff, nor would it help the game. f2p and pref are largely irrelevant for the economy and that is fine as they don't need to have access to it and the risk of abuse is similar or higher than what it was with referrals

 

You are assuming the only reason people subscribe is because of the credit cap. Which really should be the lowest point on the totem pole to subscribe. If we’ve really reached that point then the game has more problems than inflation.

[Ardrossan]

You are assuming the only reason people subscribe is because of the credit cap. Which really should be the lowest point on the totem pole to subscribe. If we’ve really reached that point then the game has more problems than inflation.

 

Before GS and its sub track of rewards, It was the only reason I subscribed. There is some slight value in access to ops and uprisings for achievements, and it makes it much easier to gain renown levels, and who doesn't love forum pvp? But beyond that...if the devs implemented your suggestion to raise the credit cap to 150M for preferred, I would absolutely sub less.

[xordevoreaux]

many great suggestions if the objective was to reduce the number of subscribers as most players would simply go f2p as the remaining restrictions wouldn't matter.

28 minutes after I started playing in 2013, I subscribed when someone told me in gen chat how horrible the restrictions are on crafting for non-subscribers. Now I'm glad -- for a ton of other reasons repeated enough as to why -- I'm still a subscriber.

[Tsillah]

You are assuming the only reason people subscribe is because of the credit cap. Which really should be the lowest point on the totem pole to subscribe. If we’ve really reached that point then the game has more problems than inflation.

 

It does. Is this really news to you?

[TrixxieTriss]

It does. Is this really news to you?

 

We know it’s got problems, but Rik was suggesting people only subscribe to bypass the credit limits on F2P and preferred and I find that absurd. Which is why I was being sarcastic about the game having worse problems if people only subscribe for that.

[DreadtechSavant]

We know it’s got problems, but Rik was suggesting people only subscribe to bypass the credit limits on F2P and preferred and I find that absurd. Which is why I was being sarcastic about the game having worse problems if people only subscribe for that.

 

It's not the only reason, it is however a reason along with the rest. Considering how much F2P do get these days, there not a lot else for many of us, once we have had the latest story update. To continue to sub, there is less and less reason to.

[TrixxieTriss]

It's not the only reason, it is however a reason along with the rest. Considering how much F2P do get these days, there not a lot else for many of us, once we have had the latest story update. To continue to sub, there is less and less reason to.

 

So if they raised the credit limit on F2P accounts, do you think everyone would unsub as Rik is suggesting or is his thinking a bit extreme.

[BRKMSN]

So if they raised the credit limit on F2P accounts, do you think everyone would unsub as Rik is suggesting or is his thinking a bit extreme.

 

GMs would stay subbed for their guilds, but most players probably wouldn't see a point in continual subbing. If they raised the F2P credit cap to 1 billion like you previously suggested... Knowing that you can store 100 Billion in your legacy bank and just take out a billion credits whenever you need it, subbing seems pointless except when you want access to new released content or to collect your GS rewards. I figure I would be subbed for 1/3 of the time (compared to continually (been subbed since game launch)). So not only would subs with my mindset spend less money on the game, one of the largest incentives for F2P characters to sub would be gone.

 

I don't think that sounds promising for the game's future.

[TrixxieTriss]

GMs would stay subbed for their guilds, but most players probably wouldn't see a point in continual subbing. If they raised the F2P credit cap to 1 billion like you previously suggested... Knowing that you can store 100 Billion in your legacy bank and just take out a billion credits whenever you need it, subbing seems pointless except when you want access to new released content or to collect your GS rewards. I figure I would be subbed for 1/3 of the time (compared to continually (been subbed since game launch)). So not only would subs with my mindset spend less money on the game, one of the largest incentives for F2P characters to sub would be gone.

 

I don't think that sounds promising for the game's future.

 

Wouldnt you rather BioWare increase the credit limit and find other worthwhile incentives to keep people subbed. You know, like actually releasing sub only content instead of only cartel market outfits? Then they could also offer season or weekly passes on said content like they use to and make up any short fall.

 

If you truly believe only 1/3 of current subscribers would stay subbed if they raised the credit cap, then we’re all smucks for paying $15 a month for only that privilege. That really is the worst reason to stay subbed in this game.

 

If people were actually doing as you and Rik suggest, then there is something intrinsically wrong with this game and us players supporting such a terrible payment model.

 

Thankfully I don’t believe that people only sub for that reason. It might contribute part of the reason, but it’s not the whole reason a person stays subbed. Which means I don’t think increasing the credit limit would cause such a mass exodus of subscribers. We may lose a few, but they would have unsubbed anyway due to one reason or another.

 

Raising the credit cap helps subscribers and free to play alike. If you can’t see that or understand my explanations, then nothing I say will help you see the bigger picture.

 

Hopefully someone from BioWare is tracking this thread and will pass on player feedback back and the devs can use internal data and modelling to check the feasibility of ideas.

[RikuvonDrake]

You are assuming the only reason people subscribe is because of the credit cap. Which really should be the lowest point on the totem pole to subscribe. If we’ve really reached that point then the game has more problems than inflation.

 

We know it’s got problems, but Rik was suggesting people only subscribe to bypass the credit limits on F2P and preferred and I find that absurd. Which is why I was being sarcastic about the game having worse problems if people only subscribe for that.

 

No, what I am assuming is that a player who has been a subscriber in the past, has full gear and unlocks etc. will definitely consider going f2p instead of maintaining their subscription if the credit restrictions are removed, there is a huge amount of players who don't do ops and would lose a major incentive to maintain their sub if the credit restrictions was essentially taken away.

 

28 minutes after I started playing in 2013, I subscribed when someone told me in gen chat how horrible the restrictions are on crafting for non-subscribers. Now I'm glad -- for a ton of other reasons repeated enough as to why -- I'm still a subscriber.

 

I totally agree, personally I never felt that the cost of maintaining a subscription was a big thing and since I mostly run ops its basically a requirement, but for the vast amount of players that doesn't do operations they can, assuming Trixxies suggestions would be a reality, simply buy the crew skill unlocks and drop their sub without any major quality of life change

 

The key point is that yes the inflation is bad, but the credit cap on f2p and pref is irrelevant to that discussion, tiny increase to their credit cap isn't a terrible idea, up to 5m maybe, but in the grand scheme of things the core issue is the lack of credit sinks and the fact that players gain to much credits from everyday activities without needing to spend them on anything

[BRKMSN]

Wouldnt you rather BioWare increase the credit limit and find other worthwhile incentives to keep people subbed. You know, like actually releasing sub only content instead of only cartel market outfits? Then they could also offer season or weekly passes on said content like they use to and make up any short fall.

 

If you truly believe only 1/3 of current subscribers would stay subbed if they raised the credit cap, then we’re all smucks for paying $15 a month for only that privilege. That really is the worst reason to stay subbed in this game.

 

If people were actually doing as you and Rik suggest, then there is something intrinsically wrong with this game and us players supporting such a terrible payment model.

 

Thankfully I don’t believe that people only sub for that reason. It might contribute part of the reason, but it’s not the whole reason a person stays subbed. Which means I don’t think increasing the credit limit would cause such a mass exodus of subscribers. We may lose a few, but they would have unsubbed anyway due to one reason or another.

 

Raising the credit cap helps subscribers and free to play alike. If you can’t see that or understand my explanations, then nothing I say will help you see the bigger picture.

 

Hopefully someone from BioWare is tracking this thread and will pass on player feedback back and the devs can use internal data and modelling to check the feasibility of ideas.

 

It's pretty simple. They are currently making the amount of revenue they currently make with the system as is. Major updates are now every other year. New content rolls out slowly in between. You really think that potentially decreasing the revenue they currently make by incentivizing F2P will somehow get them to pump out more reasons to subscribe? I'll tell you right now... That just won't happen. You know this to be true.

 

So... if they incentivize F2P by significantly raising the credit cap and you want to create reasons to sub, the only solution will be to take other things away from F2P. They won't mess with WZ restrictions because they need them to keep queues popping. So about all that's left is to prevent leveling beyond a certain level even after a subscription lapses, prevent max level gearing progression, or prevent story progression on newer content (again, I want to specify these would affect people that started the progression while subbed and now are not subbed). So what exactly do you want to strip from current un-subbed F2P players to encourage re-subbing since we know they aren't increasing the Dev staff to pump out extra content?

[Ardrossan]

So if they raised the credit limit on F2P accounts, do you think everyone would unsub as Rik is suggesting or is his thinking a bit extreme.

 

Assuming that the thinking on this forum reflects the opinion of many subs [unlikely, but hypothetically], if your plan went forward, many of you would continue to sub, not for rational reasons like an actual difference in gameplay, but more out of values [i.e prejudices] such as disdain for people who get something for nothing, as well as a cultural inertia against changing routines or trying something new. I think most would continue on as before, and perhaps even pay more through the Cartel Market so they could brag about being a vital source of income to the devs. imo this thinking is more fantastic than evil space wizards, but no less an accurate description of the forum mentality.

 

If you truly believe only 1/3 of current subscribers would stay subbed if they raised the credit cap, then we’re all smucks for paying $15 a month for only that privilege. That really is the worst reason to stay subbed in this game.

 

Indeed.

 

If people were actually doing as you and Rik suggest, then there is something intrinsically wrong with this game and us players supporting such a terrible payment model.

 

Yes. Mainly the latter. Since firing all the staff that built the 1 - 50 game, BW has generally acted with ruthless self-interest throughout this game's lifespan.

 

They won't mess with WZ restrictions because they need them to keep queues popping.

 

Actually, they don't. I don't remember where/when they said this but at some point in the last couple years they considered giving F2P unlimited WZs. They decided against it because their metrics showed that F2P did not represent a statistically significant share of WZ pvpers. They said that before they made changes to WZs for wins only/deserter lockout, and since that time i've only pvped for GS objectives or to raise alignment points.

 

Supposedly, there's a limit on FPs, but it's not marked and i've never noticed a difference. There's no limit on GSF matches.

Edited September 10, 2021 by Ardrossan

[TrixxieTriss]

It's pretty simple. They are currently making the amount of revenue they currently make with the system as is. Major updates are now every other year. New content rolls out slowly in between. You really think that potentially decreasing the revenue they currently make by incentivizing F2P will somehow get them to pump out more reasons to subscribe? I'll tell you right now... That just won't happen. You know this to be true.

 

So... if they incentivize F2P by significantly raising the credit cap and you want to create reasons to sub, the only solution will be to take other things away from F2P. They won't mess with WZ restrictions because they need them to keep queues popping. So about all that's left is to prevent leveling beyond a certain level even after a subscription lapses, prevent max level gearing progression, or prevent story progression on newer content (again, I want to specify these would affect people that started the progression while subbed and now are not subbed). So what exactly do you want to strip from current un-subbed F2P players to encourage re-subbing since we know they aren't increasing the Dev staff to pump out extra content?

 

You’re completely missing the point of the increase. I’ll direct you to the title of the thread “BioWare, GTN prices are insane, its time to do something”.

 

The purpose of my suggestions isn’t to make life easier for F2P, it’s to address the inflation and GTN prices. With the current restrictions and cost of basic GTN items now at or above the one million threshold, it is creating a massive gap in the economy. This gap also affects subscribers when you have such rampant hyper inflation because a large part of the player base can no longer buy your goods.

 

So I’m not for devaluing the subscriber experience, I’m for addressing the GTN inflation through existing and new mechanisms. That is where you are confusing my suggestions. They aren’t to make it easier on F2P, it’s to make it easier for Subscribers.

Edited September 10, 2021 by TrixxieTriss

[DakhathKilrathi]

You’re completely missing the point of the increase. I’ll direct you to the title of the thread “BioWare, GTN prices are insane, its time to do something”.

 

The purpose of my suggestions isn’t to make life easier for F2P, it’s to address the inflation and GTN prices. With the current restrictions and cost of basic GTN items now at or above the one million threshold, it is creating a massive gap in the economy. This gap also affects subscribers when you have such rampant hyper inflation because a large part of the player base can no longer buy your goods.

 

So I’m not for devaluing the subscriber experience, I’m for addressing the GTN inflation through existing and new mechanisms. That is where you are confusing my suggestions. They aren’t to make it easier on F2P, it’s to make it easier for Subscribers.

 

 

Without touching the rest of this thread: you do understand that dumping everyone's escrow and/or banked credits into the economy will make the inflation problem worse, right?

 

It's at the point where they do need to start looking at ways to address it, but that's not going to help. It would do the exact opposite. More credits available/more buyers = price increases/more inflation.

Edited September 10, 2021 by DakhathKilrathi

[RikuvonDrake]

So I’m not for devaluing the subscriber experience.

 

if this is the case you should probably take a second look at your proposed suggestions, cause the way they were phrased is not corresponding to your stated intention

 

it's true that some of them would probably have a small impact on inflation and economy, but in the grand scheme of things your proposed suggestions completely miss the point of the thread and would simply just result in a similar inflation level but a big reduction of subscribers

 

i understand that you want to significantly improve the f2p and pref credit cap, you stated that you wanted to increase their credit cap to up to 1 billion several times before, however that has nothing to do with the purpose of this thread and the cash injection from the f2p/pref escrow would simply increase the inflation and the core problem, not help combat it