Jump to content


Sliphantom on WoT P2W?(Pay for Advantage)


  • Please log in to reply
708 replies to this topic

Strike_Witch_Tomoko #1 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 14:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 15574 battles
  • 12,518
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

yeah...this video is gonna be posted by alot of people today. as its a popular argument and i like his answer.

 

oh but first....DEATH TO TEEMO. (you'll understand in the video)

 


Edited by Strike_Witch_Tomoko, Oct 10 2016 - 19:25.


BreakerX #2 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 14:31

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 20337 battles
  • 83
  • [-RDX-] -RDX-
  • Member since:
    11-23-2013
A premium account is a must have, so I guess in that sense, yes it is P2W. I've never spent a penny on this game, but now that WG stripped us of quality tournaments, my time playing this game will diminish with my gold stash.

soslo #3 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 14:35

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 40116 battles
  • 847
  • Member since:
    04-23-2012

If the only thing WoT had to offer for sale was camo, I wouldnt spend a dollar on this game. Slip is missing the one biggest point about his argument and suggestion; The Average WoT Player. The targeted, average WoT player is not some tween to early twenty something kid playing in moms basement or the dorm, its people like me, people who are older 25+, who appreciate a little slower paced game, who doesnt have a ton of time due to RL commitments, but has a few bucks to throw at a video game. WoT has masterfully nailed a very niche market of older players, players who wont spend ONE RED CENT on some digital skin, but will drop $10 on some gold and premium time to grind over the weekend or after work in the evenings. WoT would not survive if they went to a model like Slip is suggesting, because that is not what the players they have targeted would buy.

 

So, with that context, is WoT P2W? I dont believe so. You do not gain any advantage in game, but it is definitely Pay-2-Progress, and the company readily admits that, because that's what its player base wants, and is willing to pay for. 


Edited by soslo, Oct 07 2016 - 14:38.


ratpak #4 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 14:36

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 25998 battles
  • 2,346
  • [DHO-X] DHO-X
  • Member since:
    11-24-2010
non-premium accounts can accomplish everything a premium account can.  It just takes much, much  longer.  So it's not pay to win, it's pay to win faster.

Weapon_of_Proliferation #5 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 14:36

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 25388 battles
  • 502
  • Member since:
    12-25-2011

View PostBreakerX, on Oct 07 2016 - 13:31, said:

A premium account is a must have, so I guess in that sense, yes it is P2W. I've never spent a penny on this game, but now that WG stripped us of quality tournaments, my time playing this game will diminish with my gold stash.

 

Bye Bye. Was happy to cover your entertainment costs with my financial support to WG.

 

Perhaps find another socialist construct to avail yourself of.



Redshirt4Life #6 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 14:38

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 5886 battles
  • 1,347
  • Member since:
    07-17-2015
They even offer premium time and premium tanks as rewards frequently. Really, there is nothing pay to win about the game, but like all free-to-play games, the temptation to put money into the game grows as your interest does. Not because it gives you some unfair advantage, but because of shortcuts and the freedom of choice.

NARWL_Legend_Soviet #7 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 14:42

    Captain

  • Players
  • 26378 battles
  • 1,151
  • [MAHOU] MAHOU
  • Member since:
    03-22-2012

View Postratpak, on Oct 07 2016 - 13:36, said:

non-premium accounts can accomplish everything a premium account can.  It just takes much, much  longer.  So it's not pay to win, it's pay to win faster.

 

Its pay to grind less. Full stop. Nothing more. 

 

 

There are so many sub 50% players who have all the premium tanks, and premium time and buy war chests regularly and fire all gold.  Why aren't these players better? Its because at the end of the day having a premium account, tanks and ammunition wont make a player good or bad. 

Good players win because they are able to carry games when it counts. There are plenty of players in tops clans without premium time etc who are still good. Taugrim is a good example as he made his whole unicum guide series without firing any gold ammo and still was able to get results. 

 

Honestly I think this video and the esports video just show slips bias or lack of understanding who WoT is being marketed to. Comparing WoT to DOTA, LoL, or CSGO is a horrible comparison right off the bat as the market for those three esports games is kids who can only afford 20-30$ yearly on some cases or cosmetics. WoT is positioned to older players with deeper pockets who won't feel bad or need to ask mom and dad for money to skip a tank line, or buy the latest premium 

 

At least thats my 2 cents. 



Maxx_Rage #8 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 14:48

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 25313 battles
  • 363
  • [Y0L0] Y0L0
  • Member since:
    09-17-2013

View PostSovietMemeBear, on Oct 07 2016 - 13:42, said:

 

Its pay to grind less. Full stop. Nothing more.

 

 

There are so many sub 50% players who have all the premium tanks, and premium time and buy war chests regularly and fire all gold.  Why aren't these players better? Its because at the end of the day having a premium account, tanks and ammunition wont make a player good or bad. 

Good players win because they are able to carry games when it counts. There are plenty of players in tops clans without premium time etc who are still good. Taugrim is a good example as he made his whole unicum guide series without firing any gold ammo and still was able to get results.

 

Honestly I think this video and the esports video just show slips bias or lack of understanding who WoT is being marketed to. Comparing WoT to DOTA, LoL, or CSGO is a horrible comparison right off the bat as the market for those three esports games is kids who can only afford 20-30$ yearly on some cases or cosmetics. WoT is positioned to older players with deeper pockets who won't feel bad or need to ask mom and dad for money to skip a tank line, or buy the latest premium

 

At least thats my 2 cents.

 

+ 1k

SparkyGT #9 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 15:01

    Major

  • Players
  • 49432 battles
  • 4,393
  • [-NHL-] -NHL-
  • Member since:
    02-05-2012
well im a guy with alot of premiums, so am a heavy spender. do the occasional tourney, but for fun not gold. way easier to work a few hours on a saturday and just buy a years premium, best bang for the buck i figure. the rates for smaller amounts is where they make lots more i would say.  go look at buying smaller amounts of gold. or those packages

SluggerJackson #10 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 15:06

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 29847 battles
  • 408
  • Member since:
    10-20-2013
I used to buy premium time, but I an simulate it with Personal reserves so I no longer need it.  Now I just buy the premium tanks I like, and some gold every once in a while.  Nothing about this game is pay to win.

frumpylumps #11 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 15:30

    Captain

  • Players
  • 33592 battles
  • 1,004
  • Member since:
    01-04-2014

View PostSovietMemeBear, on Oct 07 2016 - 14:42, said:

 

Its pay to grind less. Full stop. Nothing more. 

 

 

Astonishing how anyone can come to this conclusion with the existence of Pz2J, Cromwell B, Skorpion G, KV-5, JT88, T-44-100, and dozens more premium tanks which are better than simliar performing tech tree. vehicles.   But I guess since at one point in history you could earn the T-44-100 in a marathon if you gave up 100 hours of your life, this disqualifies it from being p2w in your mind, right? :rolleyes:

 

the shameless pay2win deniers obvious didn't even watch the video game and just want to spew their nonsense into the face of all the facts.

 

The fact that these p2w deniers refuse to understand is that some of the most successful F2p games operate on cosmetic items alone and the wallet warrior p2w kids are totally necessary and unwanted.  If you look at all the new gaming coming out they are all trying to copy wargaming p2w model because of how much money they are making.  To the people who don't want to feel compelled to get competitive with your wallet in a videogame created by greedy developeres, these wallet warriors are the cancer of video games.

 

The CEO of Wargaming is one of three members in the games industry bilionares club next to gabe newell and the creator of minecraft.  What does that tell you?

 

Anyone who pretends like they are giving Wargaming to "support the game" is lying or fooling themselves, they are paying for in-game advantages and paying to win.

 

Slipphantom was spot on and anyone claiming otherwise is delusional or lying..

 

 

 

 


Edited by frumpylumps, Oct 07 2016 - 15:35.


Ogopogo #12 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 15:30

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 25353 battles
  • 6,994
  • Member since:
    07-15-2010

I agree with the points made in the video almost entirely. Wot monitization does really fall flat compared to other games, but it exsists as pretty much the only option on the market.

 

That aside, yes, I do believe WOT has some pay to win elements which could be toned back as a whole a bit. And before anyone jumps down my throat saying anything bought doesn't guarantee a win, you are thinking too literally. Like in the video, nothing is a game is ever perfectly balanced or unbalanced but rather somewhere in between. Similarly, any non-cosmetic premium in game service in any game is going to fall somewhere on a spectrum of pay-to-win or not. And like balance, minor pay-to-win features can exist in the game without the game relying on this. 

 

Let's list off the pay services for the game.

Premium Accounts

Premium Vehicles

Free experience conversion

Crew Training

Equipment Dismounting 

Gold rounds (and yes, I will come back to this).

Camo

 

Premium accounts is individually one of the services in game that only be seen as pay to win due to other elements of the game. Premium accounts allow for greater net income, allowing players to use more costly and better loadouts, and allow players to progress through the stock stage of any tank faster. The whole stock stage of a tank is overall rather inoffensive, but it is a slight difference over the lifetime performance of a player. If there was no premium ammunition and no stock stage of a tank, there would be no element of P2W whatsoever.

 

Premium vehicles... So outside some possibly dubious vehicles (Cromwell B or Skorpion), and quite obvious ones (Pz IIJ), there is nothing wrong here. Again, higher net income results in better loadouts, but that's it.

 

Free experience conversion. A player who converts free experience to skip stock modules of a tank will have better performance over the lifetime of the tank than someone who doesn't.

 

Crew Training. This is something which really needs to change. If you started from tier 1, and used gold to retrain each tank, the difference between that crew, and one which only does 80% by the end of the line is huge.

 

Equipment dismounting. While you recoup some of the losses in selling equipment attached to the tank, a player who doesn't spend gold dismounting equipment will be at a fair deficit by the end of a line compared to someone who does.

 

Gold rounds. If I am being honest, a lot of the problems with the game being P2W in any degree are centered around the use of gold rounds. While yes, they can be obviously bought for gold, it's the silver use which contributes to so many other paid for services offering some degree of P2W. With ammunition that is, in countless cases, a straight upgrade over standard ammunition. With their high cost it means players who have invested in other services are the ones who can make more use of them. And no, I'm not saying that gold rounds make a bad player a good one, but in so many cases, it will make any player better than they would be otherwise.

 

Camo. This is something really quite minor, and even if it could only be bought with gold I doubt people would really care.

 

 


Edited by Ogopogo, Oct 07 2016 - 15:34.


Mainerd #13 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 15:34

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 16285 battles
  • 294
  • [DRB] DRB
  • Member since:
    09-04-2014

Wow how old is he? Most experience based F2P games have the increased exp and earnings model for premium players. 

 

One of the last things I think most players want to see is gaudy paint jobs I think. Just look at the World of Warship threads on the ARP anime ships. 



KatzeWolf #14 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 15:37

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 30 battles
  • 731
  • Member since:
    09-10-2012

View PostMainerd, on Oct 08 2016 - 00:34, said:

Wow how old is he? Most experience based F2P games have the increased exp and earnings model for premium players. 

 

One of the last things I think most players want to see is gaudy paint jobs I think. Just look at the World of Warship threads on the ARP anime ships. 

 

Increased exp and earning alone is fine, it just speeds up the grind. But when you can use that extra income to buy 'better' equipment, premium rounds and crew training, it gets a little fuzzy.

Strike_Witch_Tomoko #15 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 15:40

    Major

  • Players
  • 15574 battles
  • 12,518
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

View PostMainerd, on Oct 07 2016 - 07:34, said:

Wow how old is he? Most experience based F2P games have the increased exp and earnings model for premium players. 

 

One of the last things I think most players want to see is gaudy paint jobs I think. Just look at the World of Warship threads on the ARP anime ships. 

 

you realize you can disable those skins in the options menu right?

WoWS Devs have literally be screaming this to people who don't like them for almost a year now.  if you still don't realize it. then you deserve to have your game ruined.

 

hell Blitz and Console both having fun with them

 

 

 

and

https://thearmoredpa...view-with-serb/

Serb:  We all remember the Japanese tank simulator Panzer Front. There was the fantasy tank E-79 with a crew of gnomes: a normal person wouldn’t fit in such a thing. But it looked interesting! We kinda wanted to buy a license and inplement the tank in the game.

 

e-79......

aka

Spoiler

 

 

oh w8....they sorta did put that in game...blitz

Spoiler

 

 

View PostKatze_, on Oct 07 2016 - 07:37, said:

 

Increased exp and earning alone is fine, it just speeds up the grind. But when you can use that extra income to buy 'better' equipment, premium rounds and crew training, it gets a little fuzzy.

 

^this

even if its buyable by credits, one person is working harder for it. while others are "using daddy'd money" to get them easier.

 

 

and the thing i really hate about gold rounds....is they are become a neccessity for some tanks.

its not a "pens easier" round for some tanks...its becoming a "need in order to realistically pen due to no pennable spots with normal round"


Edited by Strike_Witch_Tomoko, Oct 07 2016 - 15:42.


Mainerd #16 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 15:40

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 16285 battles
  • 294
  • [DRB] DRB
  • Member since:
    09-04-2014

 

View PostKatze_, on Oct 07 2016 - 08:37, said:

 

Increased exp and earning alone is fine, it just speeds up the grind. But when you can use that extra income to buy 'better' equipment, premium rounds and crew training, it gets a little fuzzy.

 

If the equipment cost gold then yes. 

SilentPOH #17 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 15:41

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 35273 battles
  • 290
  • Member since:
    09-12-2011

View Postsoslo, on Oct 07 2016 - 08:35, said:

If the only thing WoT had to offer for sale was camo, I wouldnt spend a dollar on this game. Slip is missing the one biggest point about his argument and suggestion; The Average WoT Player. The targeted, average WoT player is not some tween to early twenty something kid playing in moms basement or the dorm, its people like me, people who are older 25+, who appreciate a little slower paced game, who doesnt have a ton of time due to RL commitments, but has a few bucks to throw at a video game. WoT has masterfully nailed a very niche market of older players, players who wont spend ONE RED CENT on some digital skin, but will drop $10 on some gold and premium time to grind over the weekend or after work in the evenings. WoT would not survive if they went to a model like Slip is suggesting, because that is not what the players they have targeted would buy.

 

So, with that context, is WoT P2W? I dont believe so. You do not gain any advantage in game, but it is definitely Pay-2-Progress, and the company readily admits that, because that's what its player base wants, and is willing to pay for. 

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

^So much this^

 

Could not say it any better myself.  I don't mind paying a little for premium time to ease the grind, but buying "paint" just to look cool would net WG $0 from me.



Strike_Witch_Tomoko #18 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 15:43

    Major

  • Players
  • 15574 battles
  • 12,518
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

View PostSilentPOH, on Oct 07 2016 - 07:41, said:

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

^So much this^

 

Could not say it any better myself.  I don't mind paying a little for premium time to ease the grind, but buying "paint" just to look cool would net WG $0 from me.

 

pay to progress is one thing

but gold rounds is the bigger issue (as he says)



Mainerd #19 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 15:44

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 16285 battles
  • 294
  • [DRB] DRB
  • Member since:
    09-04-2014

View PostStrike_Witch_Tomoko, on Oct 07 2016 - 08:40, said:

 

you realize you can disable those skins in the options menu right?

WoWS Devs have literally be screaming this to people who don't like them for almost a year now.  if you still don't realize it. then you deserve to have your game ruined.

 

hell Blitz and Console both having fun with them

 

 

 

and

https://thearmoredpa...view-with-serb/

Serb:  We all remember the Japanese tank simulator Panzer Front. There was the fantasy tank E-79 with a crew of gnomes: a normal person wouldn’t fit in such a thing. But it looked interesting! We kinda wanted to buy a license and inplement the tank in the game.

 

e-79......

aka

Spoiler

 

 

oh w8....they sorta did put that in game...blitz

Spoiler

 

 

Look at the hate for the ARP ships from those that are not into it. They even hid them in their own port. 

 

I would think the gnome tanks would be a special event tank rather than a tech tree tank. Like the moonball tanks.



Random__Task #20 Posted Oct 07 2016 - 15:45

    Captain

  • Players
  • 18723 battles
  • 1,171
  • [-_-] -_-
  • Member since:
    07-19-2013

View PostSovietMemeBear, on Oct 07 2016 - 13:42, said:

 

Its pay to grind less. Full stop. Nothing more. 

 

 

There are so many sub 50% players who have all the premium tanks, and premium time and buy war chests regularly and fire all gold.  Why aren't these players better? Its because at the end of the day having a premium account, tanks and ammunition wont make a player good or bad. 

Good players win because they are able to carry games when it counts. There are plenty of players in tops clans without premium time etc who are still good. Taugrim is a good example as he made his whole unicum guide series without firing any gold ammo and still was able to get results. 

 

Honestly I think this video and the esports video just show slips bias or lack of understanding who WoT is being marketed to. Comparing WoT to DOTA, LoL, or CSGO is a horrible comparison right off the bat as the market for those three esports games is kids who can only afford 20-30$ yearly on some cases or cosmetics. WoT is positioned to older players with deeper pockets who won't feel bad or need to ask mom and dad for money to skip a tank line, or buy the latest premium 

 

At least thats my 2 cents. 

 

 

This to a T.  He completely ignored the games target demographic, which is not kids who his comparison titles are geared towards.  Having said that, the rest of his argument is moot.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users