Kevall, pokey, et all...

"Saying it is so over and over again simply does not make it so." Please note that this ascertation could equally be applied to your (Kevall's) definition of P2W and areas of commentary.

Honestly I'm all for a healthy monetization of Dust. Healthy is a somewhat defined by where you sit in the process and most of the concern is being genereated by those in the customer side of the equation. As Pokey noted a component of this is transparency...just a bit of plain up front communication.

I'm personally at the point where I think would simply prefer a subscription similar to what I pay for with my EVE accounts as far as monetization models. The shaping and alignment of the game to the current monetization model is quite indicative of many of the things that drove me away from quite a few other games. I'm fairly confident with positive interaction (in both directions) there can be an optimal solution arrived at for some model.

I'm re-evaluating my level of support to Dust 514 - no this isn't a "fix mah stuffz or I'll quit!" type comment. I have no more information than the average player that pays attention to goings on and that's the sum of data / information that I can base decisions on as a customer. I don't have the inside baseball of the CPM and the Dust Dev team as good as they are in communicating about granular in-game matters rarely communicate about the game in longer term matters. To Rattati's credit, I honestly believe he would be a quite transparent and forthright if he were allowed to do so.

I'm simply stating that I'm personally not prepared to put real money down, particularly in the current monetization structure, based on the overall information environment. This is juxtaposed by my desire to actually support the game that I do sincerely wish gets off the ground as we all wanted it to.

I had a conversation with a friend about this last night, and one of his initial reactions was based upon the premise of generating one warbarge component per minute of gameplay.

It sounded crazy at first, that someone who played for five hours worth of matches straight could get 300 components, but then after a bit of thought he went "Well, not everyone plays that much... and those that do are actually very invested in the game". It would feel much like the current SP system where your character growth is largely determined by your actions as a player.

Even if it was two thirds of that (one component for every 1m30s in match) to prevent 'grinding' it would still feel relevant and meaningful to your growth as a player for actually PLAYING the game.

I had a conversation with a friend about this last night, and one of his initial reactions was based upon the premise of generating one warbarge component per minute of gameplay.

I had a conversation with a friend about this last night, and one of his initial reactions was based upon the premise of generating one warbarge component per minute of gameplay.

It sounded crazy at first, that someone who played for five hours worth of matches straight could get 300 components, but then after a bit of thought he went "Well, not everyone plays that much... and those that do are actually very invested in the game". It would feel much like the current SP system where your character growth is largely determined by your actions as a player.

Even if it was two thirds of that (one component for every 1m30s in match) to prevent 'grinding' it would still feel relevant and meaningful to your growth as a player for actually PLAYING the game.

However, in this instance I think some small tweaks could have saved everyone a lot of heartache. First, a WC booster which increases component generation by 50% would be step one. The booster mechanics in dust where spot as far as im concerned, they gave you a boost but limited that boost over time so it doesn't feel like pay to win.

Honestly that might be a very solid idea.

Remove Ability to buy Components with AUR
Add Components as EoM rewards (Frequently drops in salvage)
Sell Component Production Booster for AUR to increase passive production

+1

Agreed, as long as "frequently drops in salvage" is pretty much 100% drop chance for at least the winning team, quantities can be varied, but the droprate should be consistent.

Playing the game should feel rewarding, and watching a timer tick away does not feel rewarding. Ideally, players should be getting components in nearly all if not every match they play.

Winners get warbarge components? Would reduce the incentive to AFK a bit.

It's an established and successful business model that virtually every other free to play game now employs. What is it that means that Dust 514 should be exempt from such notions as CCP earning some money? Nothing from what I can see.

Eve Online's plex system, which allows some players to play for free, some to pay a subscription, and some to use real money to gain isk by subsidizing the free players; is pretty much PERFECTION. Eve's market, economy and industrial system; the best in any game I've ever played. Failing to capitalize upon CCP's strengths, like the plex system, and imitating more "normal" games is a decision I don't understand.

Kevall,

Well thought out post and you touch on some solid concerns about the tone of the community. I believe the point was made previously that it certainly feels that without some fairly high level of outrage the needle doesn't move with CCP much, however, this could very well be perception gap with the community.

That said, I want to address the above excerpt directly. You are correct, the monetization strategy is now very clear. There is a reason that I don't play "Clash of Clans" and similar mobile games...you pay to win. Pay to win can be defined as having to pay for a distinct advantage in game that you normally couldn't get else where or couldn't be obtained in a reasonable amount of time though in-game effort. For all but the most casual player, this game is clearly drifting into that area. When you offer AUR only accelerations that directly Impact in-match advantages and larger scale reasources generated quickly become necessary items for competitive play...we've hit the pay to win zone.

Additionally, Dust514 is NOT a popular mobile free to play game nor should it seek to simply replicate the model in this format. I honestly excepted better as a customer. I have no problem with a working and healthy monetization system...but not the road we seem to be on now. I suppose we could have seen this coming a bit given CCP Rouge's background.

As for rumor comment about the lifespan of Dust and future systems it maybe on being foreshadowed by the implied progression / monetization structure I will tell you the same thing i have told, Cross, IWS, SirManBoy, and Soraya...comments like that at this point MUST come from CCP or all they do is sow confusion. Do not get me wrong, I was very interested in your fairly strong implication but until it is said publicly by CCP that's throwing a squirrel to chase in the room. I want CCP to address this if it is in fact part of their current behind the scenes vision and direction to provide clarity to the player (customer) base.

Again, I appreciate your commentary but took direct issue with the points above.

*Edited for atrocious ipad typos.

You know if you think about it, the current Mobile Factory and Warbarge remind me a lot of the old EVE Learing skills, the skills that would increase passive SP generation rate? You pretty much would sign up for EVE, set the skill queue up to train those skills, and then come back a month+ later at level 5, because training anything before optimizing your SP/day rate was basically a waste of time.

There is a reason they removed those skills

This is why passive component generation should be the lesser of total generation, with the majority being active. If most of my components come from active gameplay, I have far fewer issues with leveling up the passive factory, because its production rate is not a massive portion (if not all) of my production. I fear that CCP may be trying to cater a bit too much to those who can't play often. I get that people have lives, myself included, and cant play as much as they would like. I think *some* passive benefit and a cap on active benefit are great for people who can't play as much...but staking 100% of it into passive completely devalues the effort of those who can play often. This is why Hybrid systems work best.

If they gave you 50 WBCs for a win it would be the best thing that ever happened to pubs.