Non P2W Worlds?

[DeletedUser1260]

Nearly every single aspect of this game is P2W.

200 Crowns is $7.

1. Pay to increase beginner protection, 100 crowns ($3.5) for 3 days, can that be extended forever?
2. Add another building queue slot, 70 crowns ($2.45), i assume that needs to be done per village? Is that only temporary?
3. Pay to hide more resources in "hiding place", 30 crowns ($1.05), this only lasts 7 days, and i assume is per village?
4. Pay to research upgrades, 125 crowns ($4.38), i assume upgrades need to be researched per village? - Theres also FAR more things to research than tw1, each building has a lot of features
5. Pay to finish building, 6 crowns, ($0.21), maybe gets more depending on how long is left?,
6. Boost resources by 20% for 7 days, 50 crowns ($1.75), each resource needs to be done separately, and it looks like each village needs to be separate too.
7. Boost barbarian villages resources by 25%, and its warehouse by 50%, for 3 days, 35 crowns ($1.23), each res needs to be done separately, and i assume each village needs to be separate.
8. Theres also the "build buildings 20% cheaper" feature, but i cant see how much crowns it costs. I also assume thats one time thing.
9. "Increase loot capacity by 50%, increases attack speed to Light Cavalry, and 10% chance to upgrade a barbs villages resources", 12 crowns ($0.42), i assume this is per attack, and cannot be reused?
10. "Increase offensive combat strength by 10%", 14 crowns ($0.49), i assume this is per attack too?
11. "Reduces offensive casualties by 10%", 14 crowns ($0.49), i assume this is per attack too?
12. "Slows down army to nobleman speed", 18 crowns ($0.63), i assume this is per attack too? Do i need to by 4 to make a fake train?
13. "Raises walking speed to LC speed of supporting army", 12 crowns ($0.42), i assume this is per attack too?
14. "If an army would of lost a battle, they instead do not enter battle", 24 crowns ($0.84), i assume this is per attack too?
15. Buy paladin weapons, 50 crowns ($1.75)
16. It looks like it MIGHT be possible to pay IRL money to insta recruit paladins too, but i dont see the button. however, i got an item for it.
17. Instantly convert resources, 50 crowns ($1.75)


Also this game does not have the basic premium features, like viewing recruitment time from the village overview. It could be that this hasnt been implemented yet as its still in beta. Or it could be because they are planning for premium in this game aswell as micro transactions.

The other criminal thing, is one of the first things the tutorial makes you do is press one of the micro transactions buttons... Yeah thanks guys, straight to the point.

Have i missed anything?

Ive only had a quick look

 

[DeletedUser653]

If you don't mind me asking, how would you like Inno to make money from the game if not with 'pay to win' features? The old system didn't work so well IMO.

 

[DeletedUser1151]

If you don't mind me asking, how would you like Inno to make money from the game if not with 'pay to win' features? The old system didn't work so well IMO.

How so the old system didn't work that well? In the old days when premium accounts had a limited functionallity they still made a lot of money cause how did they otherwise expand so fast? Like every company with a fast expansion they seem to not care about their fanbase anymore and just about making more profit and this is sad. I mean you can make more profit but for reasonable stuff then and not this kind of things. Do it like valve make hats and sell them you'll make more money and its not even P2W

I would never play this game and i would never play for this either i just like to bug test a lot. This game is all about money the fact that you may not even ask for free crowns says enough (http://forum.beta.tribalwars2.com/fo...s/11730-crowns). I mean we are here testing the game for free so it would be great if we got crows or something to test out the premium stuff but i guess you are not supposted to bug test the features and the game is broken so why even pay for a beta. In fact i was also thinking of asking for crowns purely for testing or they could hand them out to people who post bugs. Also pretty lame that the premium functions are per village and not per account. Anyway enough rant i'll just play this for bug testing purposes but i'd never become a customer nor do i support their greed.

 

[DeletedUser1260]

if tribalwars was not ecomomically viable it would of been shut down many years ago, with maybe innogames going bankrupt. i do not mind giving innogames money to play tw, i have always payed for premium in tw1... happily. i am not here to say what business model innogames should use, but i strongly appose this one.

 

[DeletedUser653]

Tribalwars 1 had a decreasing number of players, so their profits from TW would have been shrinking if they only get the same amount of cash per person. This time if you pay, its not just making things more convenient, they've made that free to everyone, it gives you an advantage, so as you pay for premium happily, why not pay for the advantages you'll get here happily? Either way they had to try something different, its possible this way they will make more money from less players, meaning even if it were to shrink, they would still have income from loyal players buying things, not just everyone subscribing.

 

[DeletedUser1151]

Tribalwars 1 had a decreasing number of players, so their profits from TW would have been shrinking if they only get the same amount of cash per person. This time if you pay, its not just making things more convenient, they've made that free to everyone, it gives you an advantage, so as you pay for premium happily, why not pay for the advantages you'll get here happily? Either way they had to try something different, its possible this way they will make more money from less players, meaning even if it were to shrink, they would still have income from loyal players buying things, not just everyone subscribing.

You also seem to forget that this is not their only game + alot of players left cause of the P2W methods they made into the games including me and several others i know. We all loved TW1 before the P2W stuff but they ruined it and they don't seem to understand that this kind of methods to make money will never work just like it never worked for EA games etc... and the single purpose of gaming is ruined you don't have to be the best you only need to have money.

 

[DeletedUser894]

My two pennyworth.

I feel that as this is a game in progress mistakes will be made. It will be come apparent by the way we play, and choose or not choose to buy crowns if the current system is viable. So far i have 88 crowns which i got via freeplay and i have not used them, i haven't been in a situation where i would want to but its early days yet. There seems to be ways of getting the benefits through applied game play with out costing money but its still to early for me to judge how effective that will be.

The one major gripe so far that i can see from the forums is building slots and the fact that it applies per village and not to the account in general. This may well prove to be in error, if so i am sure it will be changed at some point. Things need to be shown not to work before they are changed.

 

[DeletedUser1151]

Anyway it doesn't matter for me what they do or how they do it i said how i think about it and thats all there is. What they do with the feedback is their choice but i think it will never be as popular because of the P2W feautures it will be popular at start cause it will be the second tribalwars and everyone will be curious but if it stays like this i think it will go rapidly down in popularity.

 

[DeletedUser886]

The payment features at the moment are not from this planet. In example 5) pay to finish building. The costs are proportional to the building-time and if you want to you can raise up an village very quickly if you spend some hundrets of dollar or euro... in combination with extra boost for ressources and cost-reduction this is very disproportional.

 

[DeletedUser1171]

I agree with the anti-p2w commentators. The original Tribal Wars was a great game before it introduced the p2w features. What made TW great was it's simplicity, you could learn to play the game very quickly but it took a long time to master (if that's even possible). In some respects it's similar to chess in this way, I could teach a child the rules of chess in a day, however, it would take them many years to become a master.

I think there are 2 reasons for Tribal Wars' decline in popularity; lack of advertising and it's steep learning curve (in terms of strategy not game mechanics) for new players. I think they made good steps in addressing the latter issue by introducing the quest system, then later adding casual worlds. Sadly by this time TW was already drawing in sub-25k players per world and without proper advertising nobody will know the game/product exists, word of mouth can only do so much.

I think I'm correct in saying that the original makers of this game created Tribal Wars to have fun with friends playing a real-time strategy game. I would be interested to know if they think back to when they started out, is Tribal Wars 2 a game they would play themselves? I personally think they wouldn't. Sadly I think the accountants have taken over Innogames and it's the gameplay that has suffered.

Hopefully after the launch of TW2 they might make TW1 non-p2w again as a gesture of goodwill to the players that helped them get to where they are now. I'm not holding my breath though.

 

[DeletedUser1269]

Sad but true, INO transform everything for money... nice graphic but a lot of "buy crowns"...

 

[DeletedUser1171]

Perhaps if they offered a more competitive bundle package (referring to the "sales" section in Shop/Inventory) it could help balance it out by giving "good" players a chance to outplay less experienced opponents who are mass using p2w features inefficiently. However it won't solve the problem of 2 "good" players in the same area, where one is mass using p2w features and the other can't afford to, it can help narrow the gap to some extent though (all this depends on how decent the bundle package is ofc). Even with that in place I have my doubts because the reduce build costs feature is such a monstrous advantage for the guy who's willing to spend the most $$$.

 

[DeletedUser123]

I don't know if there will be any changes in the payment system and in the way crowns work in general, but what I can tell you for sure is thata there will be competitions to win crowns.

 

[DeletedUser1238]

If anti-P2W comments: Maybe InnoGames should make the game without premium features and micro payments, but which need an internet connection, and sell it for 10 or 20$. All players will pay, but also the chances of all of them will be even. But if someone e.g. works at 7-21 and brings thousands of € home, and doesn't have time to play, why s/he couldn't pay for the game e.g. 100€/month to equal his/her chances with other players? I think this, which is now is good, except instant finish recruit job or building, which has to be changed to 33% or 50% decreasing time. Also 14. 'Ranger' is useless. 10. 'Grandmaster' & 11. 'Medic' are weak officers, which doesn't make them so good to use. Of course, devs can make it even better. And where's P2W option No.7?

 

[DeletedUser1171]

I agree that it is good to give players that work full-time the possibility to compete with more active players, but I think there are better ways to tackle this problem than damaging the integrity of the game itself. You can create worlds with settings such as: no hauls (not needing to farm reduces activity required to do well), auto-tagging of attacks/support incomings, slow world/troop speed settings, account sitting/coop system, night bonus and could probably think of some more interesting ways if the community put their heads together.

The problem with activity is undoubtedly the #1 flaw with Tribal Wars i.e. it is a 24/7 ongoing rts, if you don't use co-players or account sitters there will be times when you're account is not being watched and vulnerable to attack. There's ways you can reduce this problem but it will always be there. Perhaps creating a new feature that you can set-up ingame; where the game will automatically defend against an attack, in the event the account is offline say 5-10mins before the attack is about to hit.

Anyway that is the type of problems we should be looking to address, p2w features on the other hand is a cancer on the integrity of the game. I think you could also make a strong argument for the case that these features are immoral, because Innogames are enticing players to spend more by giving them the opportunity to "cut corners" via continuous spending. In other words they're manipulating players into spending more to be more successful ingame. Most intelligent persons will see through this, but there will be kids and young persons who will fall into this trap.

 

[DeletedUser1260]

"And where's P2W option No.7?"

Click on a barb village on the map, theres a button to boost its res, bottom left corner

 

[DeletedUser1206]

I will throw some light to two points of the list for other players and yourself:
4) The researchers need a certain building level, if you dont have that level and you want the research right away, THEN you have to pay the crows.
15) The weapons are get when attacking the enemy or looting resources, there's even a counter after you get the weapons for what do you need to level it up.
And thats all I want to say.

 

[DeletedUser894]

"And where's P2W option No.7?"

Click on a barb village on the map, theres a button to boost its res, bottom left corner

I noticed that today and thought, *Are there really players who are to lazy to farm properly and who will use this?*

I farm constantly and have found that in this game i actually have to much res coming in and i can't spend it quick enough and have had to cut down on my farm runs. So if people are stupid enough to pay and run the risk of others farming the villa before they can get to it, well then Inno have just got themselves a cash cow!

 

[DeletedUser926]

On my opinion, the P2W system as it is presently has really one big flaw: it allows to grow faster than it would be "normal", therefore, between 2 players starting at the same time, the one paying will eat the one that cannot do it, and has then a definite advantage. The eaten one will be rapidly disgusted, and disappear from the game.

Now, no-one can repraoch Inno to be able to have their people earning a living, just like any of us, paying severs, etc, etc.

But then I would by far prefer that the game becomes a paying on, say: 5 euros/month for every player after a 1 month trial free period, and suppress direct game advantages. Advantages for people paying in addition to the monthly fee could be in specific graphics, etc, not directly impacting the gameplay.

This would from my point of view have 2 advantages:
- limit the game to "serious" players;
- warrant Inno foreseable revenues.

And, yes, the 24/7 problem should be addressed as well. When you reach several thousands villages, it becomes much too time consuming. Sharing an account is on my opinion not a correct solution.

 

[DeletedUser1163]

I don't mind the option to buy crowns... But like in "" it should be limited on how much crowns you can spend in 24h...
This way you avoid people just spending money without knowing the game...
And after time a good player without funds (or with minimal funds) would be able to grow faster than a bad player with unlimited funds.