Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'p2w'.
Currently, the skill points are generated in background with the queue, which leads people to having alt accounts trained to specialize in one thing in background, which is not optimal and ends up being P2W, as this clearly gives them advantage over players with only one account, specially players starting out. The proposal here is to complement the current system with skill-specific points, which are earned by doing these activities - being active in the game. This could apply to all skills or, at least, the most basic ones, such as Mining and Piloting. Firstly, let's do some math. I'll take as reference the skill "Advanced Mining". In terms of skill points, each level costs, respectively: 2400, 12000, 60000, 300000 and 1500000 points, giving a total of 1874400 points to complete all 5 levels. With a full queue, we currently get 90 skill points per minute, which means it would take around 20827 minutes to complete the queue, which translates to 347 hours or 14.5 days. All of this is passive, so one owning multiple accounts would be able to queue many large skill trees to specialize in these same 15 days, which for a normal account could take 15, 30, 45 or even 60 days to complete. Not really fair, right? Now, with the proposal, let's say for every 25L of ore extracted, one would get 1 skill point. With a scoop size of 250L, one would get 10 skill points per scoop while actively mining. With an average time of 10 seconds to get 4 scoops (1000L, or 40 skill points), one would get an equivalent rate of 240 skill points per minute by actively mining, which would take the queue time from 14.5 days to around 5.4 days of actively mining, not considering the points still being generated in background, which would bump this to 330 points per minute and lower the queue time to just under 4 days, but the catch is: the player would need to be actively mining to achieve that. The same could be applied for Piloting skills, with some adjustments to consider whether we're flying atmo or space. Currently, the maximum speeds are around 1000km/h in atmo and 30000km/h (150su/h) in space, so let's say we want to match the same 240 points rate of mining, then one would need to fly either 16.5km in atmo or 500km (2.5su) in space, at full speed, to match these rates. Anything slower would still be accounted for, but since your speed is slower and the points are earned per distance, you would make less points flying slower, the only thing not being accounted for is warps, as that would be way too easy In the end, if this works, the passive rate could even be lowered, as anyone being actually active would still be earning their points and the passive generation would be more towards when the player is offline (like doing IRL stuff such as sleeping) instead of being a complete benefit to players with many accounts farming points in background Hope this helps somehow!
There has been some discussion recently over systems like DAC and PLEX being "Pay 2 Win" (p2w). There are obvious negative connotations of a game being p2w as the players with the larger wallets will always "win" against those that do not. This is especially demoralizing when an opponent feels they were beaten not by skilled opponents but bludgeoned into submission by their wallets. So it got me thinking: What does p2w actually mean? My own definition has always been: To me there is a clear distinction between "paying to win" and "paying to progress faster". But was I wrong? Has the definition of p2w changed while I wasn't looking? It appears for some it means just one thing: So paying to progress faster in a game *IS* paying to win even if anyone, given enough time, can gain that same advantage, or gain it through other means. Like most things in life, it's not quite that simple. There is definitely a grey area between these two definitions. For example, how is it p2w to buy boosters to gain skills faster but buying in game currency is not p2w? This bothered me. More digging was required. After doing some research, using either of these definitions is only half of the story. It completely ignores what it means to "win". The way to "win" in a game depends very much on the game itself. In a sandbox game, like Dual Universe, this becomes very difficult to nail down. When has a player won? Most would cry out "When my enemies are slain!". Sure, it is conceivable that players could spend money to buy bigger and better fleets with better weapons but the same fleets and weapons can be gained through savvy diplomacy. DU is an MMO after all. But, again, PvP is only a part of many equal parts of DU: mining, building, governments, economy, etc. My conclusion is that there are as many different definitions of p2w as there are opinions on the matter. But that is just my opinion. Take a look around and decide for yourself. Give people the benefit of the doubt. Let's not worry overly much about differing opinions but instead build a community everyone can be proud of. Further articles and discussions asking the same thing, all with varying opinions: mmobomb: https://www.mmobomb.com/what-really-constitutes-pay-to-win mmobomb: https://www.mmobomb.com/nearly-every-mmorpg-pay-win-heres/ games reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/3q8lh2/is_the_definition_of_pay_2_win_mechanics_expanding/ truegaming reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/truegaming/comments/2hx5or/what_does_p2w_pay_to_win_mean_to_you/ newstateman: http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2015/02/should-videogames-let-you-pay-win toucharcade: http://toucharcade.com/2016/02/25/why-pay-to-win-is-a-flawed-concept-the-carter-crater/