Pay To Win

[DeletedUser2225]

League of Legends is a bad comparison.
The average league player spends one poor little $ in his lifetime on the game.
An average browsergame player spends around 20$ per month.

A good comparison would be the (discontinued) There you had artifacts you could buy, or you could find them (pretty easily in lategame).
You also had a fixed limitation through "mana", which restores every hour.

Using money without limitation is simply unfair.
Someone could chip in a few k bucks and simply push a few k points and troops. And trust me, there are more than enough users who spend a few k per month for browser games.

But honestly I don't expect them to change that. A company who starts milking players in beta state.. what do you people expect?

 

[DeletedUser2335]

Yeah, I really dislike how pay-to-win this game has become.
The way it is now, you can literally spend an unlimited amount of cash to get unlimitedly far ahead. They should call it CreditCard Wars. I made a thread suggesting "Premium worlds" here: http://forum.beta.tribalwars2.com/f...d-suggestions/24435-suggestion-premium-worlds - Basically worlds where you pay a monthly fee to play, and no pay2win. I'm basically just going to play this world until I die then never come back. I'll find a new game and bring as many players as I can with me. I would never contribute a penny towards any pay2win product under any circumstances. Not because I can't afford it (trust me I can afford to spend £60 a month if I want), but because I'm sick of seeing this model in the gaming industry and refuse to support such rubbish.

BUT - Now that I actually think about it, for me there's 2 things that are a massive turn-off.
Instant build. Sorry but that's just ridiculous.
Purchasing units - as bad, if not worse than instant build.

In fact thinking about it, if there was no instant build and no purchasing troops I wouldn't of even made all these posts asking for "monthly fee no pay2win worlds". Hell, I might even be tempted to spend some money (~£20 a month) and continue playing longterm if there was no instant build, and no purchasing units. These two things are a real game-killer for me. Having spoke to people in my tribe, everyone is trying TW2 for the first time too and has the same opinion. And after they die they're going to stop playing because of pay2win.

It's all because of instant build and buying troops.
Those "features" turn a great game in to CreditCard Wars.

I'd definitely play this for years to come if they:
a) added worlds where you needed a subscription to play (with no pay2win options), or
b) removed instant build and the ability to buy troops.

One of those two solutions will result in far more longterm players.

 

[DeletedUser924]

You have a good point, but think about this, you spend weeks building your armies to kill an enemy near you with a good amount of skill, you attack he dodges you wipe his armies out and send your noble nuke, then this guy pays real money to recruit an army instantly. How would you feel if this happens to you, i would feel less angry if it was support from one of his allies, but seriously what idiot thought instant recruiting a good idea. Then there is pay to instant build so tjhis means any people who play near me in the start of the game can pay and get nobles quicker.

They are focusing too much on simplifying the game for the masses and taking away everything that made the game great.

Let me follow this you attack he dodges. poof his troops are dead? i don't get that part.
but anyway lets say poof he does die. now he spends real money to get a full army?
you mean the 50 crowns for 92 swordsmen I can buy?

lets do some math. you buy the best deal possible because you are a bi spender and what the best deal
you pay 89.99 for 7000 crowns

89.99/7000 = .012 dollars per crown

times 50 = .64 dollars equals 92 troops

20000/92 do that 217 ore times for a full army. (sure this won't be exact but it will be a ball park number)

congratulations you just spent 139 dollars to have a full army in one village.



Second point
where do you people get off saying that TW has become P2W. it has always been pay to win. tell me how you could manage a 20 mill account in a major war in TW1 without premium? the number of hours you would have to spend online to rebuild some 1000 villages troops and buildings without PA would be far more than 24 a day. thus if you paid to play you could save more of your account and not by skill simply the ability to max you wall reconstruction from one page, mass recruit troops, ect. if you didn't pay you were forced to chose what to do with your time which meant you lost more of your account and the attackers who paid could rebuild their losses far faster. That was not paying for a convenience that was paying for the ability to play late game. maybe mid game and early game you didn't need PP. Luck yes PP no. but you could not achieve success in a major war without PP and anyone who says otherwise is lying to you. those who won without PP were backline players who were riding on the success of others who did pay. the one thing about the PA system was that you didn't spend 1000 dollars a month or week for super quick advances. But that doesn't not mean that without extreme luck you could ever win without paying something. If you want to play a game where luck decides the victory go play high card poker.

 

[DeletedUser1587]

Well I never invested a coin in the game and on both my worlds I am really highly ranked:3rd and 11th (where nr1 had 300K points when I joined)... so it is possible to be highly competitive in this game even without investing, and you would think that I don't mind those pay 2 win features... of course I do, I will just end the worlds I play on and will never log in again, not to talk about paying for these p2w features.
Anyway, how do the beta worlds currently look... either inactive or really, really small.. I guess that says enough about the game quality (even with the enormous amount of advertising)... enough said..

One more thing, is there any satisfaction in being highly ranked on an 300 player or on an inactive world? Little...

Doobie93...you got a point there bro...