Oh look an imperfect scrub, AFK some moar.

well your numbers are bit wrong,

19.99 gets you a 1 month active booster and enough aurum to buy a 1 month passive booster, after that you hsould have enough aurum left to buy more boosters when needed.

I think I stretch it for about a month and a half for 19.99

so if you look at it that way it should be around 12-15 dollars per month. of course you'd have to not spend your aurum on proto suits.

People could just not use boosters, but I guess some ppl just need an edge, so there will always be a market for it. I dont need to use them but probably will occasionally.

His argument isn't about the boosters... it's about passive SP.

He's basically saying that no matter how good newberries are, they'll never be able to compete with the 12 passive-trained alts that he has made back at Jan-Feb 2013 if they join at Jan-Feb 2014 or later. And quite honestly, he is right about that.

Show of hands, who buys the SP boosters and then stops at less sp than the boosterless cap?

Right now AUR boosters just give you an edge over free players, they don't actually reduce the grind. That is very counter-intuitive and unsatisfying. Furthermore, fully boosted is an incredible $28/month, which is ridiculously high (that's a new CoD every 2 months, or CoD plus a year of dlc 3x a year) for the the sparse content we have. Now I understand we are doing it as an investment for that magic day DUST 514 becomes "good", so it's not a perfect analogy; just bear with me please.

AFK boosters reveal a population that has faith in the game but don't want to grind. So they just sit there while doing things they actually enjoy. Instead of monetizing these players, they are eating server cost and making the match less enjoyable for those who do show up to play. This is a mistake. On the flip-side, you have to play a significant amount of time to "cap out" every week, whether you are boosted or not. While you don't HAVE to cap every week, leaving "SP on the table" is a discouraging experience that makes your efforts seem less meaningful compared to the proverbial "no lifers". EVEN THOUGH SP DOESN'T MAKE YOU MORE POWERFUL (after a certain, low threshold of level 5 in about 5-10 skills) IT IS STILL MORE FUN TO HAVE "ALL" (as in your personal maximum potential) SP by virtue of variety. Finally you have the alt situation. People have PSNs cooking with characters they never plan to play for at least a year, relying solely on passive SP. This creates a strong *unearned* veteran advantage.

So now that I've addressed my issues, let's proceed to an important discussion point - should paying give you MORE SP, FASTER SP, EASIER SP, or a combination of the above (it can't give you no advantage, you are spending money after all)? Right now the active and passive booster only gives you more SP. It is neither easier nor faster, with the caveat that "getting more" allows you to get the original amount faster, which is a type of easier. I feel promoting that logic is a poor customer experience as I described in the previous paragraph.

Ultimately, my purpose for starting this discussion is clearly going to have an agenda, so here is my response:

Firstly, it is important to realize the F2P model uses non paying accounts for 2 purposes. (1) is the potential customer. It would be a poor business that didn't try to deliver something that people would like to purchase and a F2P model lets the try large portions of the game on an indefinite timeline, freeing them from the burden of urgency in the transaction - a very customer friendly approach. (2) is content for the paying customer. Every additional human player creates a new variable that changes constantly, giving a very organic experience. It is for this reason that I think active SP should stay for the free player. SP is an ideal reward for logging on in a way that cannot be taken away (like ISK, assets, metagame). Tying that to upholding both free roles is acceptable.

I would go even further and say they should not get passive SP. This would neatly remove the issue of free alts progressing on the merit of join date. Eventually, those alts will "mature" and allow one player to take on a dozen roles with all level 5 in the necessary attributes. This removes opportunities for new players to contribute, which is a very real problem for a game that aspires to last a decade. This is not EVE where every new player can do something, it is DUST where every player in the match is taking up a finite number of slots. Vets being able to cover every role is not something they should be granted for free; I see it as the greatest danger to the long term health of the game.

Personally, I believe it would be fairest (which in my opinion is the best way to entice potential customers into actual customers, especially when they are expected to transition between the two fluidly) if money never granted you MORE SP. I think the game will survive with any decision, but I believe boosters have more value, not less, when the difference is time or effort. Adding the wrinkle of more sniffs of pay-to-win, although with the nature of DUST skill progression, it does not cross that threshold, merely flirts with it. The reasons why I would remove passive SP from free accounts apply to this point as well, but for different reasons. It makes a "free" player less competitive for that finite slot by merit of being someone who has not paid cash yet. Because DUST deals with persistence over a large geography and time-span, I petition CCP to reconsider. It is not game-breaking like passive SP, but it does hurt the new player experience, which hurts the whole community by discouraging new members.

Well I covered what I would remove, but have nearly run out of space. I will continue with what I would modify and in a second post.

One of my characters in Eve Online was started in 2009 - they'll never have as many Skill Points as someone who started in 2003. Unbalanced? Sure. Unfair? Not really.

Just be smart about what you specialize in. If you don't specialize in something stupid (like piloting, lmao) you'll have just as much of an advantage on the field as anyone else.

He might have 25,000,000 SP but it only takes about 7-10,000,000 to have Level 5 everything in a particular specialization.

Yeah, thats kinda it isnt it? It will make them more versatile, but you cannot make use of all your sp in every role. So I dont understand why people think we will have vets running around and wielding a forge gun and a sniper rifle and driving a tank and flying all at the same time, ridiculous.

So, effectively, someone like me that's a full-time student not currently working would just be ******. I think a better solution would be an adjustment to pricing rather than shafting anyone who can't be online every day.

For instance, what if the cost of the 7-Day Passive Booster was applied to a new 30-Day one, and the cost of the lesser time periods was reduced in conjunction? That alone would serve to significantly reduce the cost of "monthly subscription", which I also heartily support, as well.

The monthly subscription option given by SOE for Planetside 2, for example, has gotten them quite a bit of revenue, and is very popular with the community, as it even boosts offline Cert gain so that those who have less time to play aren't left behind as much.

Correct. This game gears toward specialization like EVE does, and there's only so far you can go in each before you've hit the theoretical max, and anyone who reaches it with you will still be on the same level as you, even if they started far later than you did.

TL;DR

Combine the current Active and Passive SP gains into one monthly cap that is earned passively. Active gain allows you to earn this cap faster by playing. Once the cap is reached for the month(through active play) the passive gain stops until next monthly reset. A soft cap still remains in effect for the remainder of the month after hard cap to allow for grinding as it is now.


A subscription of $15/mo(see underline for my rationale though i make room it could be cheaper and really sell at $10) allows for that passive SP cap to be raised by 50%(this would mean the rate at which passive SP is earned is also increase by %50 since it needs to hit a larger number in the same fixed time of 1 month(which i define as every 28 days so its normalized given monthly differences) Additionally the subscription gives you a %50 bump in active SP gain and increase in the soft cap as it is currently).


Before i get ppl freaking out on me this is not P2W. In fact all i have done is elminated the weekly grind, elminated AFKing, created a way to reward players who want to actively play without punishing casual players, by simply combining what you earn passivel and actively over the course of a month and making it all passive and shifting active so all it does is allows you to hit that cap faster after which you can earn a soft cap. Which is not much different from how it is now.

Who knows maybe eventually shift the cap to every 365 days. That will really encourage ppl to power grind and play if they can grind and play for a years worth of SP in a few months and then soft cap for the rest of the year.

---

While i understand your point about free accounts needing to play to justify their free slots. Earning passive SP isn't the issue as it is earning 1s=1sp in match that creates the issue.

Personally i think the model is better served by taking the current passive and active gain earned during the week and put it together and make it full passive and cap the gain month to month with reset being the first wednesday of each month. This however will create longer cycles and shorter cycles given 28, 29, 30 and 31 day months so perhaps normalize reset to every 28th day.



so heres how the system would work.


24K(passive) x7 x 4 + (190,400 x 4)=1,433,600 SP for the month unboosted. 2,150,400 with a booster.


Now what you do is make the system fully passive such that the rate of gain is standardized so that the SP is gained every x number of seconds so that after 28 days you would hit either of those above 2 numbers without having to play.


Well what about active gain, Hanz suggested full passive and that was boo. Well im glad you asked.

Make active gain such that it doesnt add to this number but allows you to earn this cap faster month to month. Set the gain at lets say arbitrarily as 1WP=2-3SP. (No 1s=5WP nonsense) So while you are playing you are passively still earning the SP at the rate required to hit the monthly cap like it runs in the background now. And the active gain simply accelerates the total SP youve earned to date for the month.

As soon as you hit the monthly cap ALL SP GAINS SHUT DOWN INCLUDING PASSIVE. The only thing that can be earned post hardcap is soft cap of lets say 1 WP=1SP.


The booster should be a subscription of $15/mo that gives you boost 50% increase on cap and 50% increase on gain just like it does now. Why $15? Because for $19.99 i can buy a merc pack that gives me a 30day active and enough AUR to purchase 30 day passive, have 12K AUR leftover and all the merc pack goodies.

So you creat a tier subscription. $15 gets just the boosters and $20 gets you the booster 12K AUR and all the goodies every month(guess which option ppl will buy)



So to give you an example of how this works. Lets say im a free player then i earn 1,433,600 SP every month without logging on similar but not quite the same as how it is now(currently you earn 672,000 SP/mo without logging on and "playing") .

I play and earn 2000WP in a match. I just earned 6000SP(1WP=3SP, hypothetical number) which is added to my cumulative count for the month. Once i reach 1,433,600 SP. My passive gain stops and the only way to earn more SP for the month is to play at a soft cap of 1WP=1SP.

A booster increases this cap to 2,150,400 and naturally the passive gain increases by 50% to reach it at the end of the month if i never logon. But my active gain is also increased by 50% and so if my soft cap. Therefore now 1WP=4.5SP before reaching hard cap and 1WP=1.5SP at soft cap. Once i have reached the hard cap ALL PASSIVE GAIN STOPS and all im left with is soft cap.

Please read my second post. I think the proposed system would actually be more fair to you without being unfair to those who can't afford to pay.

I understand what you're proposing, and I read your second post, but that would still leave most of the SP gain for someone like me reliant on having more time than I actually do to play the game.

Like I said, I'm with you on pricing, not arguing the point that it's too high.

Only one char can have passive SP at a time though, right? Did they change that? If not I dont see how alts give an advantage.

They just made it annoying, not hard. You only get one passive slot per PSN. If they moved passive to a booster, you could have 3 characters passively training on the same account, or just one, or have a mix, whatever you feel like. Currently they shouldn't even LET you plug in augmentations on your alts since it is a waste of money.

I see, I dont envy CCP, their job seems like an impossible task at times.

Perhaps I was unclear? The "Delta Wave" augmentation would give you all your SP without playing at all.

Full Time-Student + No Job = Flat Broke. Why do you think I play as many Free-to-Play's as I do? I used to put money into F2Ps occasionally while I was working to go back to school, but I don't have the time or money for that now. I play Dust when I have free time, and the Passive SP allows me to bump along at an acceptable level with the frequency I play.

I'm sorry you have both no money and no time. I don't think there is a way for you to be fully competitive by any metric. Did you see the suggested additional augmentations? I envision low grade augmentations could be cheap and easy to aquire, which helps you out if you are regularly active but limited. Also note, a full 25% of the SP is given away for the first 7 matches per week. That is a very low bar to get over, and if you can't perhaps you shouldn't expect to be progressing with any noticeable speed, especially for free?

I've always wanted boosters to be a catch-up thing (whether that's hit cap faster, or unlock ability to reach some global cap, ie a perpetual cap that nobody can surpass that increases each day from last reset), rather than a get-ahead thing.

With boosters working as they are, CCP is monetizing necessary items (SP), instead of focusing on creating appealing optional items.

Reading through the thread now because lots of people posted since I first looked.

Edit: I'm totally in favor of things like boosters that turn your active SP into passive gain to eliminate the grind, though.

Perhaps I was unclear? The "Delta Wave" augmentation would give you all your SP without playing at all.

Dev post from the DCUO forums

Feel free to tell me why you think you should have everything everyone else has to keep the game fair?

Here are my thoughts:

People that spend more time and have access to more features in the game will tend to have better skills and more powerful stuff. Welcome to MMOs.

The new changes to PvP regarding map rotation, seasonal gear and the ranked matchmaking are all steps that will improve the experience for all players. They will work together to place people against matched opponents. People that have better and larger amount of stuff that causes them to win all the time will face others who employ the same tactics. So, as the game matures with these systems in place the people at the top can go nuts and debuff each other to death and it will be an even playing field.

Furthermore, this is a business, not a charity; it is also entertainment, not the Olympics. So the idea of equality for all players to keep the power gap between certain groups - regardless of financial hardship or life commitments that impact game play time - isn't something that drives my day to day thinking. Player choice of activity drives this more than anything. In most cases, statements like: "I don't want to," I don't have time to" or "I don't have money to" are not going to make us alter entire systems in the game or how our business model works. There would be no game if we did.

I've always wanted boosters to be a catch-up thing (whether that's hit cap faster, or unlock ability to reach some global cap, ie a perpetual cap that nobody can surpass that increases each day from last reset), rather than a get-ahead thing.

With boosters working as they are, CCP is monetizing necessary items (SP), instead of focusing on creating appealing optional items.

Reading through the thread now because lots of people posted since I first looked.

Edit: I'm totally in favor of things like boosters that turn your active SP into passive gain to eliminate the grind, though.

Perhaps thats the best middle situation. What i describe is a model where everyone goes on passive with active gain allowing you to grind out the passive cap faster so you can play for soft cap to augment and earn more over time. And a subscription plan that boosts the cap amount you can earn by 50% and the soft cap amount as well.


But perhaps its simpler to keep the current system. And create a booster that turns all SP active and passive for the x days(1,3,7 28) into passive gain.

And all you can earn is soft cap through active play so long as that booster is in effect. That would probably a lot simpler. Additionally you can purchase an active booster that increase the soft cap much like it does now or perhaps include that in the cost of that previous mentioned booster and make that a added feature of that booster.

And it still gives free accounts the current model.

Of course they need to get rid of the 1s=5SP mechanic to entice player to purchase that booster or they will simply AFK that portion for free anyway.

Here it is folks the only 3 plans you need.

F2P= Current model where you have active gain and passive gain on a weekly/daily basis respectively

$10(AUR equivalent perhaps costs more if there is one?) Booster augment turns all active SP gain to passive gain for 30 days. All active play is soft capped at 1WP=2-4 SP(it has to be worthwhile, 2-3 is probably best tho)


$15 Same as above plus some of the merc pack goodies on a rotation(so different stuff every month based on sale items in the market)


$20 Same as above plus x AUR(im thinking 15K)


Simple effective creates an incentive to log on and grind but also allows ppl who just want to set and forget to do the same.



Remember one thing tho if this is a booster purchased with AUR and not a subscription then eventually these items will be available for trade on the 2* player market for ISK.

Full passive breaks down because it doesn't require the free player to get invested in the game. They don't get rewarded properly for being more active and providing content for the paying customers. Furthermore, it is entirely unrealistic to LIMIT free alts, which means a year or two from now, fresh players will have no opportunities in competitive play because ALL niches will be filled by a handful of players. At the very least they should be paying the server upkeep and development costs for such large advantages.

I thought about it and though you may be right part of the beauty of Dust is you can walk away take a break and still have earned some SP.

Not everyone is going to want to pay to be able to take a break nor should they.

What i did was offer up a simpler suggestion in the form of a booster. The reason why i think it works as a booster is then its subject to trade on the secondary market. Now if someone doesnt want to pay with real money they can do so with play money.

But to earn play money you have to play and earn therefore you overcome the hurdle of them not providing content.

yeah i find this very hard to belive

Please elaborate on how this addresses the core concerns I brought up in the OP so I can create a more meaningful response.

AFK boosters reveal a population that has faith in the game but don't want to grind

I don't see anything wrong with the current system.

If you don't have a job or are busy being a student... too bad. Life isn't fair and CCP is not a charity.

yeah i find this very hard to belive

They wouldn't AFK if they didn't believe there was future value in the SP, and they would play the game if they thought it was enjoyable (aka not a grind). What part of that statement do you have issue with?

dude that is lamest excuse i have ever heard of , stop trying to defend afkers

The man has a point there.

I also regard both Cap-increasing boosters and passive boosters mandatory for any serious players.
That's not quite the 'convenience' or 'catching up' advertised.

1. You are not buying anything as an investment. You are buying AUR, to use on whatever it can be used for right now. If it can be used for other things in the future then that is a bonus. Don't fork over money thinking CCP now owes you heaven and earth. They could decide that this whole "console" thing really was just a fad and then turn off the dust servers tomorrow. They would not owe anyone a refund.

2. All AUR lets you do is use things today that otherwise would have required you wait until tomorrow. Boosters help you get SP faster, AUR gear has lower skill requirements. Long term there is no benefit at all.

You can only utilise so many of your invested skill points at any one time. Having skills invested in AV grenades is not making your flux grenades work any better. If you have dumped 5 mill SP into tank skills but today your running around with a shotgun, you may as well be a first day player. Old accounts do not keep on progressing infinitely, newer players can easily catch up to old players in effectiveness at a certain role within a couple of months.

3. No matter how many accounts a bitter vet has been baking for however long, they can still only bring one of those characters to the battle. The other 15 slots(For PC) need to be filled by other players, old or new.

4. If you are unhappy about buying the SP boosters because you stop playing at less sp than the boosterless cap, then STOP DOING IT!!!! Don't blame CCP for your poor purchasing decisions.

Here are your options:

A - If you have loads of spare time then you can play this cool game for free as much as you want and you will get a fixed maximum of SP per week.

B - If you don't have much spare time because you, for example, have a job. You can use some of that nice money stuff that you earn at said job to buy boosters so that you can still reach at least the same amount of SP per week as the unemployed bum living in their parents basement.

C - You have spare time to play the game, but you happen to really enjoy it and want to get the most out of it. So you decide to PAY THE DEVELOPERS FOR MAKING THIS AWESOME ******* GAME! I know, it sounds crazy. CRAZY LIKE A FOX! In return for paying the developers for all their hard work, you get to use items today that otherwise would have required that you wait until tomorrow.

6 Months later, three different players join a match and happen to all be using the same equipment. Even though each of these three players choose a different approach to their gaming time, all three players do the same damage, have the same HP, reload their at the same speed, in fact, their capabilities are identical. The only difference is that one has a sweet logibro dropsuit fit that they are not using and the third one has a REALLY sweet logibro dropsuit fit that they are not using.

OMG!! IT'S JUST SO UNFAIR!!!

Then all three of them get totally owned by some dude who only ever uses militia gear, cos that's how he rolls.

So in conclusion, you have no idea what the hell you're talking about. If it's doesn't seam to you like paying for boosters is a worthwhile use for your money, THEN DON"T BUY THEM!!

Serious players SHOULD BE PAYING FOR THE GAME!!!!

If you don't think the game is worth spending a bit of money on, then you can't really be that serious can you?

I will give you a detailed point-by-point response soon, but I have to ask why you are assuming so much about my motivations? Nowhere did I list how often I buy boosters or how much SP I personally have. It seems like you have more personal investment in this issue than I do ... food for thought until I can respond in full.

Show of hands, who buys the SP boosters and then stops at less sp than the boosterless cap?

The current system is going to let me, who registered dozens of alt PSNs just because I could, have prototype EVERYTHING in about 1-3 years. Sure I have to switch between accounts to switch roles, but when making a battle roster that's not a realistic limitation.

Nowhere in my post did I imply anything about your personal booster habits. I was just responding to points in your post.

1. You are not buying the future of dust. Your paying for what is already there.
2. The only advantage of AUR is time.
3. After enough time that advantage disappears completely.


Though i must say your opening line:



Sure sounds like a judgement call on a value proposition to me.

Who cares? Not many people are mental enough to waste that amount of time for so little gain. If you get proto gear over three years more power to you.

Why do you absolutely have to use boosters 24/7? It won't kill you to not use them, you know.

[quote=Khamelaya]
I will just say that your CAP LOCKED statements certainly came across to me as aggressive, judgmental, and directed at myself. I have a peculiar style though, so it could merely be a miscommunication. Ultimately, right now boosters are buying you more than time. They are buying you more SP. That may not be a second by second advantage, but it is allowing you deeper access to the content if you use it for variety, instead of more power in your niche. Unfortunately, in practice, I have seen every reset people race to fill out their "role" and not since E3 has anyone truly been able to branch out without sacrificing their primary role (and that is mostly due to many skill trees being broken i.e. nonfunctional). So while anecdotes cannot prove my point, they do suggest it is not as simply as you make it out to be. 3) especially is troublesome, because in an FPS where you can switch roles instantly and there are a fixed number of people in a given match, variety IS a major advantage. A player with a prototype assault and tank is going to be selected before the player with just the tank, because they can adapt more easily to changing circumstances.

SP is time.

So by your reasoning, there will only be two teams of 16 players competing in all of PC, they will have the 32 highest amounts of SP of anyone in the game. This will provide maximum utility and flexibility. It would be absolute lunacy to invite the guy with the 33rd highest number of skill points, because you will severely handicap your team. There is no reason for any other teams to compete, because they don't have the SP and therefore flexibility so they would just loose anyway.

I know that is taking your logic to the extreme, but that's my point. There is a middle ground. You don't need to have the best gear or the most skills points to win, you only need "enough". New players can can catch up to old players in a way that their contribution will be meaningful in a relatively short amount of time. Hell, I run around in all militia gear most of the time, it doesn't stop me from capping points, reviving teammates or taking on opponents who's gear cost 100 times more than mine and still coming out on top. CCP have done a really great job of providing a system that does not provide a pay to win advantage, while still offering a free to play game that motivates enough players to buy conveniences, thus paying for development to continue.

Game design is a fine balance, but then so is bartering any trade worth making. Make no doubt that CCP is thinking very hard about just how to balance in regard to both. So far they are doing an excellent job.

I know you are going to disprove of another anecdote, but your stretch is actually quite close to the truth. I've been through and won a tourney already, and unfortunately the only reason we rotated players was because we wanted to maximize who got the rewards. Come finals, we had no variation at all. So your extreme isn't that extreme.

If you want to play your best game then you bring your best players, you take every advantage you can get. But the fact is not everyone has access to the best players. Even the ones you have access to won't be there all the time. That doesn't mean that you can't win, or even that you are at a disadvantage. Heavy dropsuits have many advantages over Scout dropsuits, more damage, more armour, more shields, yet scouts can still kill heavies.

A players own personal skill; critical thinking, communication, cooperation, reflexes, dexterity and experience all count for a lot more than how much SP their character has. When you take all that into account, a players with 10 million SP or 50 million sp, if they have each only put 4 million into their role as a recon scout, then they are both going to have equal potential. The flexibility gain is no more significant that a piece of straw on a tone of bricks.




...but what if it's the straw that broke the proverbial camels back? Well, thats the whole point of the game. If we could figure out who wins just buy adding up the skill points that are being taken advantage of by a teams deployment, we wouldn't need to have a tournament at all. Just do the math. How dull...with fewer explosions.

So expanding on that, if the player is what is important, and he has easy access to every niche through free passive SP... then you have no reason to invite more players to participate unless they are replacing said player in every role.

If you already have said player, then why would you want to swap them? Even for another player with equal SP?

The core of this argument is wrong.

Passive Booster = faster SP.

All it does is increase the rate at which passive SP accumulates. That's the definition of "faster". It doesn't hand you SP without any time spent to accumulate. You still have to wait a week for your week's worth of boosted SP.

Active Booster = easier SP.

You still have to enter matches. It doesn't give you SP based on games you already played. It doesn't just hand a pile of SP that ignores the cap. You still have to be playing (or AFKing, but that's another issue) to get the SP bonus from the Booster. But for the effort it would normally take to get 1000 SP, you're rewarded with 1500. More SP for same effort = easier. Again, fits the definition of the word quite nicely.

More SP = nope.

There is no option that says "pay X moneys, get Y SP" None. It doesn't exist. There is nothing that just directly gives you more SP. And there shouldn't be.

Both options - Passive and Active Boosters - let you build up a larger amount of SP than would be the case without them, but the time/effort still needs to be spent to make the most out of them.If you buy a 30 day Passive Booster, then look back on your account in a week, you won't have the full 30 days worth of bonus SP yet. If you buy a 7-day Active Booster, activate it then come back after a week without playing, you don't get a stack of SP for buying the Booster.

Then why have SP at all?

AAhahahahaha, seriously? Thats like asking why have more than one weapon.

Progression, motivation, rewards, treats. It's the carrot on the stick! It makes you feel like you have achieved something, it makes you feel like you have something to strive for. It's gameplay benefits are choice.
The actual SP training system servers a couple of purposes, one its gates the content. It stops players from access the entire game at once. Without the training time, it would be like getting Bioshock Infinite, turning on god mode, disabling player collision detection and letting the player choose what order they'd like to play the levels in. It also means the player gets exposed to new items and gear at a slower rate giving them time to learn what everything does.




But seriously though. You didn't answer my question. Why would you want to swap that player out?

Thats the point of the OP. IF you are paying for something it should be convenience. Eliminitating the grind is a convenience by this will allow players who wish to to pay for SP that they can earn without playing the game and thus taking up space in a game mode where ppl want to play(hence AFK).

People think that spending time in a game is in itself mandatory to provide content, i saw paying is providing content because paying means you are helping to fund future content. Those who wish to grind are free to do so and still earn just as much SP as the ppl who pay for the convenience of not having to play.

In eve its even more extreme you pay and you grow you character over time no matter how much you play. In fact you can just set skills and never login until those skills are completed as long as you maintain the account. I know because as i type this my eve toon is progressing.

Basically take a piece of that model into Dust by giving the option to pay and not have to play and earn the same SP a person earns while playing. Thus they can avoid the grind and not take up room in the game and still earn the same benefits as someone who plays to earn the same effect. IT isnt P2W because you arent getting ahead of anyone.

The only way you get ahead is because you are earning a booster rated soft cap. But again you have to "play" to earn that extra SP. See why its works without breaking the fundamental fear of F2P becoming P2W.

The carrot and the stick makes sense in a game that has nothing else to offer. This game does or do you concede that really after you are done grinding in this game there isnt much else but play a third rate lobby shooter that holds no meaning beyond isolated matches where ppl pretend it really all means something more? (cause you might be on to something there)

Sorry this game isnt rocket science. Maybe the point holds true in EVE but this is DUST it really isnt that complicated if you really feel it is that diffiicult and requires a lot of time to learn this game i suggest you buy Zitro's book (now in a kindle edition)

True, the carrot on the stick is an added benefit, but without it, then dust is just the latest quake with a new coat of paint. Having a persistent character that grows over time in line with your play style preferences is central to what makes dust different.

No it's not very hard. For me, or for you. But what if this was the first FPS you had ever played? What if you don't instinctively know the difference between a rifle and a sub-machine gun? There are a lot of items in the game now, you could spend a good deal of time just browsing through them and figuring out what each does. Now double that number, then double it again, then again. When CCP has finished fleshing out racial variants and subtypes of militia, basic, advance, prototype and officer gear...well...let's just say that it's a big number. If you picked up dust for the first time and were told to go fit a drop suit, most people would just give up straight away because there are far too many options and they'd have nothing to base their decisions on. Choice paralysis is bad.

Locked in syndrome is worse. While it may make for variety in some peoples mind, again this isnt EVE where the shard is only limited for large events. OW fleet comps can reach extremely high numbers. New players can be taught to specialize into a very specific role for use because well hey fleet comps are nearly limitless in size you can take a new player in a hyperspecialized role and make them useful.

This is a instanced lobby shooter with fixed player count. There are so many uses for a DS pilot. Guess what happens ppl wont use dedicated DS pilots when having someone who can be specialized in Assault or Logi can just use a militia DS for the quick transport job and let the thing blow up after its served its purpose. Thats the point these specialty roles are limited value utility currently and for a very long time. This makes them less useful in competitive matches and thus limits their ability to play the game.

But what about when the game get 24 v 24 32v32 256v256.

Not happening for a VERY VERY LONG time if ever why?

Because its not stable enough. We do CB's all the time stuff disconnects like crazy. By jenza's own admission they got Internal errors during the first game of the tourney final. The cloesd beta tourney was 16 v 16, you know why CBs are only 8v8 and not 16 v16 now when they were able to host it months ago. ITs not stable enough.

This game has a long way to go before it is stable enough to host large mathces. Even then player counts arent high enough and CCP said they wanted small FPS oriented groups to be able to compete in PC (hence 16v16); (more proof CCP wants us and is trying to cater to us but keep mucking stuff up)..

Point is when you are trying to play the game competitively and be of utility you aren't going to choose a role that limits your ability to play and thus you will see less variety not more. MMO players that try to go for the hyperspecialzed role wil failcascade into nothingness. Don't believe me ask some of these players who used to run dedicated DS pilot, tank, heavy, lav, lazer, stealth scout etc what they will play. The ones who say they will stick to their role or pick a speciality role other than assualt or logi ask them how many CB's they have played.

You will see a correlation i promise you will.

The core of this argument is wrong.

Passive Booster = faster SP.

All it does is increase the rate at which passive SP accumulates. That's the definition of "faster". It doesn't hand you SP without any time spent to accumulate. You still have to wait a week for your week's worth of boosted SP.

Active Booster = easier SP.

You still have to enter matches. It doesn't give you SP based on games you already played. It doesn't just hand a pile of SP that ignores the cap. You still have to be playing (or AFKing, but that's another issue) to get the SP bonus from the Booster. But for the effort it would normally take to get 1000 SP, you're rewarded with 1500. More SP for same effort = easier. Again, fits the definition of the word quite nicely.

More SP = nope.

There is no option that says "pay X moneys, get Y SP" None. It doesn't exist. There is nothing that just directly gives you more SP. And there shouldn't be.

Both options - Passive and Active Boosters - let you build up a larger amount of SP than would be the case without them, but the time/effort still needs to be spent to make the most out of them.If you buy a 30 day Passive Booster, then look back on your account in a week, you won't have the full 30 days worth of bonus SP yet. If you buy a 7-day Active Booster, activate it then come back after a week without playing, you don't get a stack of SP for buying the Booster.

I tried to support that stance explicitly. Boosters should be for saving time, not a threshold to being competitive.

Boosters currently only raise the cap. They don't really save me time. I spent about 10 hours yesterday to hit that cap. If a booster was working like a booster it should have taken me 5 hours.

My ultimate point distilled into a simple example. You are buying an SP advantage, it still feels like a job to collect it. That is a poor customer experience for both the haves and have-nots.

I have a solution to you $28 a month problem.

$20 Mercenary Pack.
1 ENTIRE MONTHS WORTH OF ACTIVE BOOSTER
40,000 Aurum - 28,000 for the MONTH PASSIVE BOOSTER = 12,000 Aurum to spare.

Problem solved.

Hell, if you don't spend it you can even get a freebie three months later.

Oh look an imperfect scrub, AFK some moar.

Sorry, I've stopped reading when you said "CoD" and made it sound like it was something you rather buy then the boosters.

Llan Heindell.

People hating on a good idea just cause he's an Imp

There is similar discussions on things inside the CPM we're just waiting on uprising to deploy before we can game play topic focus on those as the whole 'subscription' and aur thing is next on the queue list after most of uprising is dealt with the government thing still looming in discussion.

People could just not use boosters, but I guess some ppl just need an edge, so there will always be a market for it. I dont need to use them but probably will occasionally.

It shouldn't be inside the CSM, it should be led by the CSM but involve us all, because it affects us all.

Sorry, I've stopped reading when you said "CoD" and made it sound like it was something you rather buy then the boosters.

Llan Heindell.

I do apologize for the wall of text affect. I am considering cleaning it up and making a Mk2 version soon.

It shouldn't be inside the CSM, it should be GUIDED by the CSM but involve us all, because it affects us all.

People could just not use boosters, but I guess some ppl just need an edge, so there will always be a market for it. I dont need to use them but probably will occasionally.

As he has explained in IRC, not using Boosters is not an option.

If you play without Boosters, you are falling behind.

Oh please enough with the strawmen.

What part of my statement was not what you said?

Personally, I'm in favor of the new SP system they've been talking about allowing Boosters to reduce the grind, as you called it.

But please don't start arguing for Boosters to be reduced in price just because some people want to keep buying them constantly.

The price is not the problem, the value is. I explicitly said I don't have the knowledge to set them, I was just eyeballing based on major competitors ($10-$15/month for a "full" sub).

You know, it actually saddens me that we used to get along pretty well back in the day. I think we all channeled our disappointment in DUST 514 development in different ways. If only there was a way to roll it all back...

Yes, but both Nothin and the EP are gone, with no replacements yet. Also that was several months ago and not a single thing has changed. So while it was good to know at least certain devs understood the problem, there is little evidence any lasting action has been taken yet.

CCP Nothin was working in Reykjavik. What makes you think he's gone?

They're fine to me- actually, I think Dust has by far the best microtransaction system I've seen in any game.

You're grinding less for the same effect as non-aurum users.

"Show of hands, who buys the SP boosters and then stops at less sp than the boosterless cap?"

If you do this, that is on you! Don't waste your money! That would be like going and buying a large Meat Lover Pizza, then throwing 3/4 of it away. No one is forcing you to buy boosters. If you aren't going to maximize your gain using them, why buy them in the first place?


"Right now AUR boosters just give you an edge over free players, they don't actually reduce the grind."

AUR is only supposed to give you a slight advantage, not make it pay to win. How does it not reduce the grind? A new player using boosters will gain SP much faster than a new player not using boosters. This will allow the boosted player to reach a point of having all core skills maxed faster than the non-boosted player, thus reducing the grind.

If one doesn't want to pay $28 a month for boosters, don't! It's as simple as that. I've been playing since mid March. I have only used one 7 day active and one 30 day passive booster.

Ultimately it is the player's choice whether or not to use boosters.

Your entire model is structured to where one would necessarily be forced to buy boosters in order to ever have hopes of being competitive.

The Froob
So do you would have to play every day for a week to get 100k SP? No

How do you figure up to 300k for 4 SP per WP? You are aware most new players only get about 500 WP in a match? This is way beyond the grind we have now. This would equate to 75 1000 WP matches per week. Thats just over 10 1000 WP matches per day for 7 days to get 300k in a week. how many new players do you seriously think can achieve this? The current method is simple and everyone has nearly the same opportunity for SP gain no matter how many WP they get in a match, much more noob friendly!

AFKing is a separate issue.

The Casual
This pushes pay to win in a big way, and goes even further to benefit vets who can earn 2 - 3 thousand WP in a match. You think they should get 30k SP from a booster while a new player might be able to earn 5k SP from the same booster? That is ludicrous!

The Instant
So instead of fixing the problem of AFKers, just let them buy their SP? Seriously?
??????

Removing passive SP gain is a terrible idea! This would only widen the rift between the casual players and the die hard no lifers.

There is nothing wrong with the current SP system. If it isn't broken, don't fix it!

If you would like to kill DUST 514 once and for all, this would be the way to do it.

You failed thinking at the first hurdle. In your argument boosters simultaneously are and are not selling SP. There is nothing to say to someone who is ignorant of their own cognitive dissonance.

Show of hands, who buys the SP boosters and then stops at less sp than the boosterless cap?

stuff

In your argument boosters simultaneously are

and are not selling SP

There is nothing to say to someone who is ignorant of their own cognitive dissonance.

herpaderp *troll face*

How is this my argument?

Your suggestion is altogether selling SP

Your F2P model says to the player "Hey look at all this SP you have to grind, I bet you wish there was an easier way", while more than doubling the grind from what we have now.

Your first booster suggestion offers the player an option to buy more than 2x the amount of earned SP. This sends the message of "This is a pretty sweet deal. It would make that ridiculous grind actually worth it

Your next "booster" is outright selling SP. This tells the player "Hey no need to actually play the game, just pony up the cash, and you can stay on the same level as your competitors."


Attempting to insult me because I disagree and make perfectly valid points as to why your idea is garbage is immature and only makes you look like an insecure little basement troll and a terrible one at that. You probably think cognitive dissonance has something to do with reading comprehension.

You failed thinking at the first hurdle, sir.