Transfer is a p2w option, do you agree? — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Transfer is a p2w option, do you agree?

SkyShroud.2865SkyShroud.2865 Member ✭✭✭✭

It just suddenly crossed my mind.

I remember that in f2p games that focus on pvp, transfer scroll is something that not available all the time in item shop. Simply because it is very easy to break the power balance between fractions the moment it become available and there are quite a few mmo that die off right after a few months they added it, simply because majority went and stack on the strongest fraction thus eliminating any forms of meaningful competition.

P2w by my definition which shared by many other mmo players is as simple as "as long as you can obtain any forms of advantage over other players through monetary means, it is p2w".
through that defintion, gw2 indeed is p2w but due to its low gear cap, it is not a wealth vs wealth level p2w. however, can that be said for transfer since if a person want to, he can spend thousands just to move people.

Founder & Leader of Equinox Solstice [TIME], a Singapore-Based International PvX Guild
Henge of Denravi Server
www.gw2time.com

--

Explanations of WvW Structures & Populations Issues

<1345

Comments

  • Israel.7056Israel.7056 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 28, 2018

    You're gonna get disagreement with that definition but yes I agree with the definition and your characterization of transfers.

  • Strider Pj.2193Strider Pj.2193 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Though hard to say the server you transfer to won't have an exodus.

    But if you choose a server with the right coverage, then yes, it's paying to go to a winning server.

    Again, another reason to not have increased rewards for 'winning'

  • KryTiKaL.3125KryTiKaL.3125 Member ✭✭✭

    It will become irrelevant in the future anyway, with the Alliances system coming into play whenever it does servers will no longer be a thing in the game.

    Also keep in mind, this has been something that has been on the game pretty much since it released back in 2012, to imply that it is pay to win or has become pay to win simply because people "consolidated power" holds no bearing on their own individual performance in the game and isn't making them win. What personal advantage are they gaining by transferring servers exactly? I think you're stretching the definition rather thin in this circumstance. You can transfer 100 people onto a tier 1 server yet those 100 people could still get run over in 3 seconds in a fight or be next to useless in roaming circumstances.

    People like to really stretch the most commonly perceived definition of pay to win to almost anything, personally I see pay to win as the literal translation of that phrase because that is exactly where it is derived from; literally paying to win (several MMORPGs in the past had ingame markets where you could directly buy gear more powerful than any gear you could acquire through gameplay). However like most phrases and such it has become misused and abused by the general public as a generic excuse for why they lost. Does it hold some accuracy in certain situations even with recent MMORPGs? Sure, but not with every scenario that its used in, not by a mile.

  • Rysdude.3824Rysdude.3824 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 28, 2018

    I agree with this assessment.

  • DemonSeed.3528DemonSeed.3528 Member ✭✭✭✭

    That is unfortunately the mentality of winning some have though. It's like when people alt-f4 so you don't get the stomp. They think they are winning too. Many people have weird ways to make themselves feel like they are winning.

  • Israel.7056Israel.7056 Member ✭✭✭✭

    It's a psychic reward more than a material one but there are some distinct material advantages to being on a winning server particularly if they're k training a lot and running over most of the fights. It all adds up over time.

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:
    P2w by my definition which shared by many other mmo players is as simple as "as long as you can obtain any forms of advantage over other players through monetary means, it is p2w".
    through that defintion, gw2 indeed is p2w but due to its low gear cap, it is not a wealth vs wealth level p2w. however, can that be said for transfer since if a person want to, he can spend thousands just to move people.

    Then by that definition buying the game is already p2w and any subsequent aspects you consider p2w are a moot point, the condition have already been met. This is further proven by the fact that you cannot buy the game for anything but real cash, unlike transfers and everything on the TP that you can buy for gold converted to gems.

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭

    Disagree with your definition but would agree with your conclusion if there was anything to win . . .

  • derd.6413derd.6413 Member ✭✭✭✭

    what is there to win in doing it?

    also consider that transfering to a stronger server also means you'll be up against stronger servers.

    I Have No friends, so I Must pug

  • I have to say after being in tiers 3 and 4 the last several months, being linked now with a tier 2 server feels like a “win”. More people to help defend, kill,capture. The game is just a lot more fun again. So I can see why people pay to transfer to a higher pop server. The “rewards” are less frustration, more fun, less yelling/arguing/blaming between teammates. The game is just a lot more enjoyable. I didn’t have to pay to win but would consider it if we get linked next with another tier 3 or 4 server.

  • @SkyShroud.2865 said:
    .... since if a person want to, he can spend thousands just to move people.

    Op is about "spend thousands" to move many players away from one's competition and possibly to one's own server if it is open.

    How could this be done?

    By talking to Guild leaders and moving whole guilds away from some servers.

    This is probably what Op's winning strategy means by "spending thousands just to move people."

    Maybe ETOM could not be manipulated like this,

    But if ETOM is active, then Anet would lose "thousands" in transfer fees and other incentives that would be spent by willing players with large wallets.

    Players could use these opportunities to support Anet by being agreeable with any approach of offers to transfer.

    Through transferring, players are supporting Anet financially even if others are paying for it.

  • I agree with you up to an extent. However I think the only people who see xfering to a more populated server and going up in tier as winning these days are those who have yet to play long enough to realize that winning a matchup is empty and pointless except in that it plays a part in determining who you roll as opponents next week.

  • Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Nah. It's not pay to win. Even if it were, since you could buy a transfer with gold, you can play to get the gold to pay for the transfer, thus not paying real cash. Plenty of people farm gold efficiently to buy gems and never spend a cent on gems.

    That said, pay to win usually refers to power. That is to say your character itself is more powerful by something you buy in the cash shop. But I don't think this is any definition of pay to win I've ever heard.

    The tendency of this community to stretch the definition of pay to win further and further devalues the term and makes it less useful.

  • juno.1840juno.1840 Member ✭✭✭

    As an individual player you gain no advantage over any other individual player by transferring servers. In addition, the rewards are the same per unit of time invested -- in other words you don't get anything faster than players that didn't pay to transfer.

    In some ways, transferring to a "winning" server is a disadvantage because you have to fight queues to play and you're less likely to be on a "outnumbered" map.

    Is "pay to lose" a thing?

  • SoV.5139SoV.5139 Member ✭✭✭

    @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:
    P2w by my definition which shared by many other mmo players is as simple as "as long as you can obtain any forms of advantage over other players through monetary means, it is p2w".
    through that defintion, gw2 indeed is p2w but due to its low gear cap, it is not a wealth vs wealth level p2w. however, can that be said for transfer since if a person want to, he can spend thousands just to move people.

    Then by that definition buying the game is already p2w and any subsequent aspects you consider p2w are a moot point, the condition have already been met. This is further proven by the fact that you cannot buy the game for anything but real cash, unlike transfers and everything on the TP that you can buy for gold converted to gems.

    Elite specs included in expansions and only available to those who buy the xpac would be a mild form of p2w for sure. I disagree that any other p2w is moot however, as this topic can be discussed in terms of degree, and not whether it is or isnt.

  • Israel.7056Israel.7056 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 29, 2018

    Definitions are descriptive not prescriptive. The meanings of words can change over time as people use them in different ways. It may be that at one point p2w had a much more narrow usage but I tend to agree with the OP's more modern usage as it's the way I have come to personally use the term and the way I hear the people I play with use the term. Any competitive advantage of any form that can be purchased with real money in any way is what is more and more being called p2w. I think paid transfers certainly fall into that category.

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 29, 2018

    @SoV.5139 said:

    @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:
    P2w by my definition which shared by many other mmo players is as simple as "as long as you can obtain any forms of advantage over other players through monetary means, it is p2w".
    through that defintion, gw2 indeed is p2w but due to its low gear cap, it is not a wealth vs wealth level p2w. however, can that be said for transfer since if a person want to, he can spend thousands just to move people.

    Then by that definition buying the game is already p2w and any subsequent aspects you consider p2w are a moot point, the condition have already been met. This is further proven by the fact that you cannot buy the game for anything but real cash, unlike transfers and everything on the TP that you can buy for gold converted to gems.

    Elite specs included in expansions and only available to those who buy the xpac would be a mild form of p2w for sure. I disagree that any other p2w is moot however, as this topic can be discussed in terms of degree, and not whether it is or isnt.

    You need to either buy an xpac version including the base game or the base game and then xpacs. Either way you look at it you have to pay. Yes, they do give an advantage and by the definition in the OP, p2w starts there.

    Transfers is much tamer because you're not going to pay to win anything - you're just gonna pay. Servers are like lava lamps, going up is a sure way to go down. Mission accomplished on Anets part.

  • Swamurabi.7890Swamurabi.7890 Member ✭✭✭

    Anybody remember tournament season 1?

  • Kylden Ar.3724Kylden Ar.3724 Member ✭✭✭

    Yes.

    More words for minimum post size requirements.

    Leader of PvE/WvW Havoc Guild - Tyrian Adventure Corporation [TACO] - Kaineng since the start, and till KN is no more.

    Do not fear simplification of the game, there is elegance in simplicity that allows more time for playing and less time building.

  • Justine.6351Justine.6351 Member ✭✭✭✭

    When you can just use a moderate amount of ingame gold to transfer I'm not sure it qualifies as p2w.

    The only thing you gain is a few extra WvW ranks. Rank chests, lord loot and heavy bags gained are a wash as you are spending gems to transfer. Afaik most everything else is tied to the participation system which doesn't care if you are winning or losing so long as you do something every few minutes.

    Anet buff me :-(
    Make me good at game!

  • XenesisII.1540XenesisII.1540 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Monetary means as in real currency, not gems which can also be earned in game with gold which everyone has access to.
    About the only p2w you could consider in gw2 is buying the expansions for the new overpowered specs in pvp, over others who don't get it but they all still have to play in the same player pools.

    Another derailing post. ^^
    EBG North Keep: One of the village residents will now flee if their home is destroyed!
    Maguuma: Free ppt, come and get it!

  • Ansau.7326Ansau.7326 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 29, 2018

    p2w is a term used for when players are allowed to drop real money to either be able to stay competitive or bypass content that would take a long time to do it.

    p2p (pay to play) is differentiated from p2w as it's either 1 time pay or a periodical subscription to have access to 100% to the content available. Items that can be obtained through the same procedures of p2w but that lack the winning aspect by not providing necessary advantage is also considered p2p. Examples can be account keys, expansions, DLCs (when they aren't specific boosted items), cosmetic items (when cosmetic isn't rewarded)...

    A transfer to a server that allows you to play the same content and that can be payed by normal gold income cannot be considered p2w. HoT and PoF are p2p and not p2w. Boosters, however, are an example of p2w in gw2 , but at the same time they can be considered as soft-p2w, their benefits are mild at best.

    When will people stop gambling with the meaning of the words trying to find answers that justify their nonsense... It's the same situation with the other guy desperately catering downstate as a handicapping mechanic, when the implementation of downstate already negates very basic definition of itself.

  • ArchonWing.9480ArchonWing.9480 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 29, 2018

    Yes, in the current state of the game, this is absolutely true. It kind of sucks because there are certainly many other reasons to transfer, maybe you just can't work with the people or just hate their guts but without a doubt at the end of the day people like to win regardless of how stupid or petty it is. To those of you who wonder why people chase you 10:1 across the map, this is why. They "won"; it doesn't matter that nobody cares how good you are in 10v1. But in any case, making it that easy has not helped.... though I would guess people would exploit any number of loopholes that show up.... and they have.

    Though as pointed out earlier in this thread, it's for the sake of some extra chests and the scoreboard which few look at it. It could be considered Pay to Fail in these cases, considering the investment, at least from my viewpoint.

    In an ideal world, situations would be balanced enough so that people would just transfer out of preference as opposed to advantage. This probably doesn't exist in reality though.

  • SkyShroud.2865SkyShroud.2865 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 29, 2018

    @KryTiKaL.3125 said:
    It will become irrelevant in the future anyway, with the Alliances system coming into play whenever it does servers will no longer be a thing in the game.

    I know some people will put this up but regardless, is for discussion sake.

    @KryTiKaL.3125 said:
    Also keep in mind, this has been something that has been on the game pretty much since it released back in 2012, to imply that it is pay to win or has become pay to win simply because people "consolidated power" holds no bearing on their own individual performance in the game and isn't making them win. What personal advantage are they gaining by transferring servers exactly? I think you're stretching the definition rather thin in this circumstance. You can transfer 100 people onto a tier 1 server yet those 100 people could still get run over in 3 seconds in a fight or be next to useless in roaming circumstances.

    Honestly speaking, back then, there were always rumors of people using cash to sponsor people or even guilds to other servers. At that point, I did not pay any mind of it, perhaps because I came from f2p era, I mean there were mostly f2p mmorpg back then so all of these things are just so common that I subconsciously filter them out. However, recently there were someone talking about how he/she hate p2w thus gw2 is the best on map chat and then move on to transfer topic which mentioned he/she transferred, I was like isn't that p2w?

    As for advantage? I think that is obvious if you compare a highly populated ones with a not so populated ones. Btw, advantage can be more than personal, it can also be group advantage. One way or another, it will still benefit related individuals but there are many forms of advantage.

    @KryTiKaL.3125 said:
    People like to really stretch the most commonly perceived definition of pay to win to almost anything, personally I see pay to win as the literal translation of that phrase because that is exactly where it is derived from; literally paying to win (several MMORPGs in the past had ingame markets where you could directly buy gear more powerful than any gear you could acquire through gameplay). However like most phrases and such it has become misused and abused by the general public as a generic excuse for why they lost. Does it hold some accuracy in certain situations even with recent MMORPGs? Sure, but not with every scenario that its used in, not by a mile.

    Coming from f2p era, I think you are totally mistaken what is p2w. Buying gear directly...I don't think many games do that, it is just the minority fail f2p games that do that. The most successful p2w games, successful in a way they milk the most money is through boosters items such exp, upgrades etc. In this generation, some people will even argue them as "pay for convenience" but it still doesn't change the nature of it.

    @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:
    P2w by my definition which shared by many other mmo players is as simple as "as long as you can obtain any forms of advantage over other players through monetary means, it is p2w".
    through that defintion, gw2 indeed is p2w but due to its low gear cap, it is not a wealth vs wealth level p2w. however, can that be said for transfer since if a person want to, he can spend thousands just to move people.

    Then by that definition buying the game is already p2w and any subsequent aspects you consider p2w are a moot point, the condition have already been met. This is further proven by the fact that you cannot buy the game for anything but real cash, unlike transfers and everything on the TP that you can buy for gold converted to gems.

    This is arguable because it is a buy to play model. If we exclude the f2p model which was introduced later on and revert to initial state of the game, then all of us actually b2p which means all of us still equal at that point.

    @Vayne.8563 said:
    Nah. It's not pay to win. Even if it were, since you could buy a transfer with gold, you can play to get the gold to pay for the transfer, thus not paying real cash. Plenty of people farm gold efficiently to buy gems and never spend a cent on gems.

    That said, pay to win usually refers to power. That is to say your character itself is more powerful by something you buy in the cash shop. But I don't think this is any definition of pay to win I've ever heard.

    The tendency of this community to stretch the definition of pay to win further and further devalues the term and makes it less useful.

    This is how f2p games also want you think, you see. They add items to item shops that can be bought by monetary means. They also add the same items that can be obtain through grind. However, have it ever cross your mind that p2w players too can grind therefore what a non-p2w players can do, they will be doing plus more. Such is why you can never chase up to p2w players. This is something you will understand if you ever play p2w games in-depth.

    In this case, they can transfer more often then you who don't p2w.

    Founder & Leader of Equinox Solstice [TIME], a Singapore-Based International PvX Guild
    Henge of Denravi Server
    www.gw2time.com

    --

    Explanations of WvW Structures & Populations Issues

  • If the need to 'win' at wvw causes people to give money to Anet - GOOD. I want the company to stay in business.

    Thanks to you 'must win wvw' folks.

  • KryTiKaL.3125KryTiKaL.3125 Member ✭✭✭

    @SkyShroud.2865 No, many MMORPGs even from the "F2P era" have not done actual "buy gear in cash shop". Pay to win came from much earlier than that, where a number of MMORPGs actually had gear or other things available in the cash shop that you could buy that was better than any gear you could acquire through normal means of gameplay. Honestly the name of one in particular that directly did that is escaping me, but a larger number of earlier MMORPGs than you might expect, especially more browser based ones, had pay to win systems. Even more recent ones like Archeage fall into that category.

    You have to look at the context in which this is being applied; what constitutes an advantage in this particular game? For instance, I wouldn't see "pay for convenience" things like boosters for exp as pay to win. In the context of GW2 an experience booster only helps so far when leveling and I'd say just hitting level 80 faster is far from giving someone an advantage over someone else. To be honest, people who have been at least playing sPvP or WvW for a while have stacks upon stacks of Tomes so they can just instantly get level 80 on another character if they wish. I have made at least 2 full stacks of Tomes from doing WvW and sPvP with no boosters that I've ever bought, only ones I've used are really only the Birthday ones.

    Context is the key here, and context can change the nature of really anything significantly. Context is the difference between a comedian making a "racially insensitive" joke, poking fun at the ridiculousness of racial stereotypes, vs an actual racist, white supremacist or otherwise, saying these things to other people because they believe these things to be true.

    So yes, context can very much change the nature of it.

    Trying to classify a server transfer as "pay to win" is really stretching what the definition of "pay to win" actually is. Say you transfer to Blackgate on NA servers. Boom, you're there with a t1 world in WvW. You're also there fighting against the other two t1 servers in WvW. Does transferring to Blackgate suddenly make you a better player? Do you just suddenly start winning 1v1s? Suddenly winning 1v2s? 1v3s? Is your guild that you maybe transferred with or helped get transferred suddenly able to fight 10v20+ and win? Did you acquire some sort of special title for Blackgate placing first that particular week or weeks? Special cosmetics? A KitKat bar? Probably not. In fact its very unlikely that happened because that is not how that works.

    What you are perceiving as some "pay to win" method is far away from being such and I think that is because, in your own words saying you've come from the "f2p era" of MMORPGs, you were exposed to the severe misuse of "pay to win" as a phrase or term.

  • Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:

    @KryTiKaL.3125 said:
    It will become irrelevant in the future anyway, with the Alliances system coming into play whenever it does servers will no longer be a thing in the game.

    I know some people will put this up but regardless, is for discussion sake.

    @KryTiKaL.3125 said:
    Also keep in mind, this has been something that has been on the game pretty much since it released back in 2012, to imply that it is pay to win or has become pay to win simply because people "consolidated power" holds no bearing on their own individual performance in the game and isn't making them win. What personal advantage are they gaining by transferring servers exactly? I think you're stretching the definition rather thin in this circumstance. You can transfer 100 people onto a tier 1 server yet those 100 people could still get run over in 3 seconds in a fight or be next to useless in roaming circumstances.

    Honestly speaking, back then, there were always rumors of people using cash to sponsor people or even guilds to other servers. At that point, I did not pay any mind of it, perhaps because I came from f2p era, I mean there were mostly f2p mmorpg back then so all of these things are just so common that I subconsciously filter them out. However, recently there were someone talking about how he/she hate p2w thus gw2 is the best on map chat and then move on to transfer topic which mentioned he/she transferred, I was like isn't that p2w?

    As for advantage? I think that is obvious if you compare a highly populated ones with a not so populated ones. Btw, advantage can be more than personal, it can also be group advantage. One way or another, it will still benefit related individuals but there are many forms of advantage.

    @KryTiKaL.3125 said:
    People like to really stretch the most commonly perceived definition of pay to win to almost anything, personally I see pay to win as the literal translation of that phrase because that is exactly where it is derived from; literally paying to win (several MMORPGs in the past had ingame markets where you could directly buy gear more powerful than any gear you could acquire through gameplay). However like most phrases and such it has become misused and abused by the general public as a generic excuse for why they lost. Does it hold some accuracy in certain situations even with recent MMORPGs? Sure, but not with every scenario that its used in, not by a mile.

    Coming from f2p era, I think you are totally mistaken what is p2w. Buying gear directly...I don't think many games do that, it is just the minority fail f2p games that do that. The most successful p2w games, successful in a way they milk the most money is through boosters items such exp, upgrades etc. In this generation, some people will even argue them as "pay for convenience" but it still doesn't change the nature of it.

    @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:
    P2w by my definition which shared by many other mmo players is as simple as "as long as you can obtain any forms of advantage over other players through monetary means, it is p2w".
    through that defintion, gw2 indeed is p2w but due to its low gear cap, it is not a wealth vs wealth level p2w. however, can that be said for transfer since if a person want to, he can spend thousands just to move people.

    Then by that definition buying the game is already p2w and any subsequent aspects you consider p2w are a moot point, the condition have already been met. This is further proven by the fact that you cannot buy the game for anything but real cash, unlike transfers and everything on the TP that you can buy for gold converted to gems.

    This is arguable because it is a buy to play model. If we exclude the f2p model which was introduced later on and revert to initial state of the game, then all of us actually b2p which means all of us still equal at that point.

    @Vayne.8563 said:
    Nah. It's not pay to win. Even if it were, since you could buy a transfer with gold, you can play to get the gold to pay for the transfer, thus not paying real cash. Plenty of people farm gold efficiently to buy gems and never spend a cent on gems.

    That said, pay to win usually refers to power. That is to say your character itself is more powerful by something you buy in the cash shop. But I don't think this is any definition of pay to win I've ever heard.

    The tendency of this community to stretch the definition of pay to win further and further devalues the term and makes it less useful.

    This is how f2p games also want you think, you see. They add items to item shops that can be bought by monetary means. They also add the same items that can be obtain through grind. However, have it ever cross your mind that p2w players too can grind therefore what a non-p2w players can do, they will be doing plus more. Such is why you can never chase up to p2w players. This is something you will understand if you ever play p2w games in-depth.

    In this case, they can transfer more often then you who don't p2w.

    Pay to win refers to things you can't get by playing the game. If you need say potions to stay alive and the person with more potions wins battles, that would be pay to win. Because you can get more potions if you grind. Or the most powerful weapons, which give you an in game combat advantage. That's pay to win.

    When this game started, transfers were free and do you know who complained about it the most? WvW players. Why? Because having free transfers allowed spies to come over more easily, and allowed people to bandwagon more easily. The WvW community wanted it to be harder to transfer. Not quite the definition of pay to win most people would use.

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭

    This thread is a ridiculous...

    1. The system is changing anyway so I don’t know why all the QQ about servers and stacking and transfers is going on...

    2. You win nothing of substance by transferring to a better server, except for maybe a better experience... Reward track stuff and skirmish tickets are time and participation gated, it’s not like you “win” anything just because your server, most with links, gets anything for being the mighty 1st place winner.

    Sad.

    "It's that sorta mentality that prevents progress from actually being made and the game from being fun for everyone and not the minority." -TexZero

    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/9804/idea-wvw-only-movement-skills

  • Ansau.7326Ansau.7326 Member ✭✭✭

    @SkyShroud.2865 said:
    Coming from f2p era, I think you are totally mistaken what is p2w. Buying gear directly...I don't think many games do that, it is just the minority fail f2p games that do that. The most successful p2w games, successful in a way they milk the most money is through boosters items such exp, upgrades etc. In this generation, some people will even argue them as "pay for convenience" but it still doesn't change the nature of it.
    This is how f2p games also want you think, you see. They add items to item shops that can be bought by monetary means. They also add the same items that can be obtain through grind. However, have it ever cross your mind that p2w players too can grind therefore what a non-p2w players can do, they will be doing plus more. Such is why you can never chase up to p2w players. This is something you will understand if you ever play p2w games in-depth.
    In this case, they can transfer more often then you who don't p2w.

    It's clear that you idea of p2w based on an outdated conception and experience makes any of your opinions irrelevant.
    Today we have clear, defined and well known examples of p2w mmos: Archeage, Black Desert Online, Age of Wushu... These games (all 3 examples were released in the past 5 years) have a common characteristic: Either you prepare your wallet to drop hunderds of €/$ or stop thinking having the remote chance to be able to compete in anything.

    And sir, that is the current meaning of p2w.

  • Israel.7056Israel.7056 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 30, 2018

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    This thread is a ridiculous...

    1. The system is changing anyway so I don’t know why all the QQ about servers and stacking and transfers is going on...

    2. You win nothing of substance by transferring to a better server, except for maybe a better experience... Reward track stuff and skirmish tickets are time and participation gated, it’s not like you “win” anything just because your server, most with links, gets anything for being the mighty 1st place winner.

    Sad.

    This is a sort of clever moving of the goalposts argument so points for that.

    It's wrong btw if you've ever been on a winning server, particularly one that's steamrolling as I have been, you know that everything is easier and you get more stuff with much less effort than you do otherwise.

  • ReaverKane.7598ReaverKane.7598 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 30, 2018

    Your assessment is flawed. It's only "p2w", not by design, but because the community made it so, by flocking to the winning servers instead of trying to improve their own server's win rate.
    The cost is a deterrent, a means to reduce the number of people that do so, it is not actively encouraged for players to join full servers, it's actually the opposite, they often mark servers as full even if they really aren't, simply based on the WvW pop.
    Finally even if you "win" WvW matches through your server, you don't really win anything personally. They have removed any benefits from those wins long ago. At best you'll have a boost of a couple pips per tick, you'd have more from playing on a smaller server from the outnumbered bonus.
    Also, this, already irrelevant question will be deemed more irrelevant once the future changes are implemented. Honestly if you think that they use WvW to make money you're fooling yourself.

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 30, 2018

    @Israel.7056 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    This thread is a ridiculous...

    1. The system is changing anyway so I don’t know why all the QQ about servers and stacking and transfers is going on...

    2. You win nothing of substance by transferring to a better server, except for maybe a better experience... Reward track stuff and skirmish tickets are time and participation gated, it’s not like you “win” anything just because your server, most with links, gets anything for being the mighty 1st place winner.

    Sad.

    This is a sort of clever moving of the goalposts argument so points for that.

    It's wrong btw if you've ever been on a winning server, particularly one that's steamrolling as I have been, you know that everything is easier and you get more stuff with much less effort than you do otherwise.

    “Moving goalposts” from the person who came up with a new application for a phrase to suit their flawed and shallow argument... right...

    And no, sorry, but if you are going to make up an argument that transfers are “pay to win” then it’s your responsibility to clearly state what you do “win”... You should spend less time trying to redefine “pay to win” and more time defining what you think you “win” by transferring and make a rational argument.

    “More stuff” lol you can’t even define “stuff”... like what? Greens and blues and badges of honor are winning something special? I get more valuable rewards on dead maps faster than your “stuff” junk bags on busy maps... Players don’t win anything by being the match winner either, unless you know about some super special winners rewards that none of us don’t?

    Is the next argument going to be that buying extra bag slots and permanent salvaging tools are also “pay to win” because you can stay on the battle field longer and collect and hold more “stuff”?

    "It's that sorta mentality that prevents progress from actually being made and the game from being fun for everyone and not the minority." -TexZero

    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/9804/idea-wvw-only-movement-skills

  • Israel.7056Israel.7056 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 30, 2018

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Israel.7056 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    This thread is a ridiculous...

    1. The system is changing anyway so I don’t know why all the QQ about servers and stacking and transfers is going on...

    2. You win nothing of substance by transferring to a better server, except for maybe a better experience... Reward track stuff and skirmish tickets are time and participation gated, it’s not like you “win” anything just because your server, most with links, gets anything for being the mighty 1st place winner.

    Sad.

    This is a sort of clever moving of the goalposts argument so points for that.

    It's wrong btw if you've ever been on a winning server, particularly one that's steamrolling as I have been, you know that everything is easier and you get more stuff with much less effort than you do otherwise.

    “Moving goalposts” from the person who came up with a new application for a phrase to suit their flawed and shallow argument... right...

    And no, sorry, but if you are going to make up an argument that transfers are “pay to win” then it’s your responsibility to clearly state what you do “win”... You should spend less time trying to redefine “pay to win” and more time defining what you think you “win” by transferring and make a rational argument.

    “More stuff” lol you can’t even define “stuff”... like what? Greens and blues and badges of honor are winning something special? I get more valuable rewards on dead maps faster than your “stuff” junk bags on busy maps... Players don’t win anything by being the match winner either, unless you know about some super special winners rewards that none of us don’t?

    Is the next argument going to be that buying extra bag slots and permanent salvaging tools are also “pay to win” because you can stay on the battle field longer and collect and hold more “stuff”?

    You moved the goalposts by tacitly conceding the argument and trying to change the focus to be about what is actually won by winning a matchup rather than whether or not one can pay to transfer to an easily won matchup in the first place and whether or not that counts as p2w.

    There are tangible and intangible benefits to being on a winning server but that's not what the thread is actually about.

    A slightly clever tactic but an obvious one. Nice try better luck next time bro.

  • CrimsonNeonite.1048CrimsonNeonite.1048 Member ✭✭
    edited October 30, 2018

    That's how it's always been though, even when transfer fees were quite high for T1 servers, people would always find a way. Besides the moments where anet gave players incentive to move/stack on servers, outside the WvW seasons and certain moments, like when SFR was somehow medium population during spring 2013.

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Israel.7056 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Israel.7056 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    This thread is a ridiculous...

    1. The system is changing anyway so I don’t know why all the QQ about servers and stacking and transfers is going on...

    2. You win nothing of substance by transferring to a better server, except for maybe a better experience... Reward track stuff and skirmish tickets are time and participation gated, it’s not like you “win” anything just because your server, most with links, gets anything for being the mighty 1st place winner.

    Sad.

    This is a sort of clever moving of the goalposts argument so points for that.

    It's wrong btw if you've ever been on a winning server, particularly one that's steamrolling as I have been, you know that everything is easier and you get more stuff with much less effort than you do otherwise.

    “Moving goalposts” from the person who came up with a new application for a phrase to suit their flawed and shallow argument... right...

    And no, sorry, but if you are going to make up an argument that transfers are “pay to win” then it’s your responsibility to clearly state what you do “win”... You should spend less time trying to redefine “pay to win” and more time defining what you think you “win” by transferring and make a rational argument.

    “More stuff” lol you can’t even define “stuff”... like what? Greens and blues and badges of honor are winning something special? I get more valuable rewards on dead maps faster than your “stuff” junk bags on busy maps... Players don’t win anything by being the match winner either, unless you know about some super special winners rewards that none of us don’t?

    Is the next argument going to be that buying extra bag slots and permanent salvaging tools are also “pay to win” because you can stay on the battle field longer and collect and hold more “stuff”?

    You moved the goalposts by tacitly conceding the argument and trying to change the focus to be about what is actually won by winning a matchup rather than whether or not one can pay to transfer to an easily won matchup in the first place and whether or not that counts as p2w.

    There are tangible and intangible benefits to being on a winning server but that's not what the thread is actually about.

    A slightly clever tactic but an obvious one. Nice try better luck next time bro.

    So you have no real argument... as expected.

    "It's that sorta mentality that prevents progress from actually being made and the game from being fun for everyone and not the minority." -TexZero

    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/9804/idea-wvw-only-movement-skills

  • Israel.7056Israel.7056 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    So you have no real argument... as expected.

    Actually it would seem that you don't have an argument that's relevant to the actual question at hand since you already effectively conceded the OP's point and then proceeded to try to distract everyone with a moving goalpost fallacy.

    The OP's argument can be stated as follows: players can pay money to transfer> transfers can be used to move to a more favorable matchup and/or an easily won matchup> paid transfers are a form of p2w.

    Your response could be stated as follows: yes players can pay to transfer > transfers can indeed be used to move to a favorable matchup and/or easily won matchup > paid transfers are probably a form of p2w> it doesn't matter if transfers are p2w because one doesn't win anything particularly valuable for winning a matchup.

    You see? It moves the goalposts by attempting to recenter the discussion around a subtly different question than the one that was actually asked.

    I do think there are enormous benefits both material and immaterial to being on a winning server particularly one that's steamrolling the opposition as I have been on two of them in the time I've played this game but that's not what this thread is actually about.

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Israel.7056 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    So you have no real argument... as expected.

    Actually it would seem that you don't have an argument that's relevant to the actual question at hand since you already effectively conceded the OP's point and then proceeded to try to distract everyone with a moving goalpost fallacy.

    The OP's argument can be stated as follows: players can pay money to transfer> transfers can be used to move to a more favorable matchup and/or an easily won matchup> paid transfers are a form of p2w.

    Your response could be stated as follows: yes players can pay to transfer > transfers can indeed be used to move to a favorable matchup and/or easily won matchup > paid transfers are probably a form of p2w> it doesn't matter if transfers are p2w because one doesn't win anything particularly valuable for winning a matchup.

    You see? It moves the goalposts by attempting to recenter the discussion around a subtly different question than the one that was actually asked.

    I do think there are enormous benefits both material and immaterial to being on a winning server particularly one that's steamrolling the opposition as I have been on two of them in the time I've played this game but that's not what this thread is actually about.

    I like how you deflect and can’t answer the hard questions...

    You’re free to keep trying so hard and grasping at straws to make up some augment, but you’re not looking good so far...

    "It's that sorta mentality that prevents progress from actually being made and the game from being fun for everyone and not the minority." -TexZero

    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/9804/idea-wvw-only-movement-skills

  • sephiroth.4217sephiroth.4217 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 30, 2018

    Guilds I'm in usually transfer servers because the fights died and just want to be in an active match up.
    People then flame about pay to win and all sorts of junk and make their own assumptions even when told why...
    "we're moving servers because the match up is dead" > "No YoUr NoT, yoUR pAy To WiN!!"...

    Not to brag, but I put together a puzzle in 4 days and the box said 2-4 years.
    CLICK HERE FOR A FREE SCREEN CLEANING SERVICE
    Please allow team queue with rewards again at our own discretion - Playing till last friend leaves.

<1345
©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.