Pay-to-win 2.0

[Dawdler.8521]

Where is this stronger gear purchased?

Asking for a friend.

[Sugar Min.5834]

Hey, yesterday i got a ascended weapon box. I finally got my dagger. Yay!

[Cyninja.2954]

@Frye.4608 said:Why bother selling people stronger gear if you can let them skip that bit and pay straight into a 2.0+ K/D ratio which allows them to sustain the illusion of deserving it? Loot boxes or straight up advantages are one thing but very obvious. This is way smarter psychologically.

Yup, and forfeit the vast majority of WvW rewards which go along with the game mode. How long exactly do you think people will transfer when every single time they do so it takes two resets until they can get pips again?

The servers which were crowded this week will move up within 1-2 resets.

What, people transfer again after that? Sure, and again get none of the pip rewards for 2 resets (8-14 days every time). The system balances its self.

This week saw a lot of transfers because entire communities are reshuffling and moving. What used to be linked communities of 2 servers in the past mostly decide on 1 server and have a lot of people move there. Things will settle down again.

[ChillyKoti.1928]

Wait... How do you buy gear with real life money in this game? I don't understand...

[iKeostuKen.2738]

@Edge.8724 said:Wait... How do you buy gear with real life money in this game? I don't understand...

Probably buy a server transfer into a higher tier server that has better chances to get more pips and bags to be converted into gear later on or more ingame gold. ? just a guess

[DeadlySynz.3471]

Am i missing something here? What do we get or win if we get up to a 2.0 KDR?

[L A T I O N.8923]

@Strider Pj.2193 said:

@biofrog.1568 said:He's referring to NA and the broken Activity in various tiers. Eg, this is the current standings of K+D, an indicator of 'which servers are busiest':Rank Server Activity

1. Dragonbrand - Tier 3 NA 60711
2. Borlis Pass - Tier 4 NA 60616
3. Maguuma - Tier 4 NA 60430
4. Ferguson's Crossing - Tier 2 NA 59022
5. Crystal Desert - Tier 3 NA 56291
6. Blackgate - Tier 1 NA 53869
7. Sorrow's Furnace - Tier 4 NA 47800
8. Fort Aspenwood - Tier 1 NA 46186
9. Sea of Sorrows - Tier 1 NA 41361
10. Yak's Bend - Tier 2 NA 39582
11. Tarnished Coast - Tier 2 NA 37346
12. Northern Shiverpeaks - Tier 3 NA 36232

This indicates a trend for players to transfer out of T1 to stack on a lower server for better fights. There's substantially better numbers and 'Activity' in a T4 or T3 server than there is in T1. Meanwhile, run a blob for an hour and you'll roll over any T1 server without barely a scratch.. making terribly boring, unenthusiastic and downright terrible game play for anyone left in that server, on any side.

Thus people pay to move.

So then why is T2 activity lower than T1?

And you happened to pick the first week after links changed.... Those active servers from T3 and 4 will bounce up...

'Its Just tc and ybThey barely ticked over 120 ppt this week, thus low moral

[DemonSeed.3528]

@L A T I O N.8923 said:thus low moralA lot of matchups can also happen like this with the low morale thing, it is a snowball effect. Servers most likely have the population for it, but only magically appear when their server is doing well. Although if the server they are playing against is really stacked, it can magnify the situation. It is probably a lot of reasons why people didn't show up for this matchup, but low morale is a high one on that list. Only the small dedicated leftovers are left atm and those finishing this weeks skirmish chest.

[Hesacon.8735]

How dare Arenanet as for $30 every 2 years for new features that take hundreds of hours to develop on a subscription-less service. It's unconscionable that they would demand something to offset hardware costs for the servers, electricity, bandwidth, and some jerk's salary to make sure it doesn't melt into the floor.

Putting mounts behind an expansion that includes hundreds of hours of other content, I can't believe we the players let them get away with such a reasonable price.

[PervMonk.4891]

imagine calling cosmetic loot boxes p2w or that expacs are p2w feelsweirdman

[sephiroth.4217]

@PervMonk.4891 said:imagine calling cosmetic loot boxes p2w or that expacs are p2w feelsweirdman

Expansions are pay to win for this game.

If the new specs weren't called Elite (which by definition is better than the rest) and didnt out perform its predecessors by a large margin and only content was added, then it wouldnt be pay to win.

Guild Wars went with the model that not only added new content but gave significant power creep to those who purchased said expansion.

Other games like Stellaris, Battlefield, STEEP, Railway Empire and some more only release content with expansions, they dont add a steroid injected character to go with it. Just content. For those games, saying that buying an expansion is p2w is laughable but this isn't the catagory that GW2 fits in.

Gw2 has been P2W since HoT and even more so now that PoF users have a huge combat advantage in WvW over those who dont via mounts. 3 extra dodges, immunity to CC, faster travel times and list goes on just based off that 1 example.

[Cyninja.2954]

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@PervMonk.4891 said:imagine calling cosmetic loot boxes p2w or that expacs are p2w feelsweirdman

Expansions are pay to win for this game.

If the new specs weren't called Elite (which by definition is better than the rest) and didnt out perform its predecessors by a large margin and only content was added, then it wouldnt be pay to win.

Guild Wars went with the model that not only added new content but gave significant power creep to those who purchased said expansion.

Other games like Stellaris, Battlefield, STEEP, Railway Empire and some more only release content with expansions, they dont add a steroid injected character to go with it. Just content. For those games, saying that buying an expansion is p2w is laughable but this isn't the catagory that GW2 fits in.

Gw2 has been P2W since HoT and even more so now that PoF users have a huge combat advantage in WvW over those who dont via mounts. 3 extra dodges, immunity to CC, faster travel times and list goes on just based off that 1 example.

So if Arenanet made expansions a necessity and disallowed access to endgame content and game modes to people who did not buy them, would that not fix the issue? It would definitly not be pay to win any more right?

Also all of those games you mentioned are neither MMOs nor in some cases even multiplayer. A bit apples to oranges or?

[Sovereign.1093]

well ppl need to still pay the bills. =p

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

Expansions are pay to win for this game.It's a rhetorical mistake to use that phrasing. "Pay to Win" has a very specific meaning to a lot of people and it completely distracts the conversation from whatever is the OP wants to discuss (which is already convoluted) into unending arguments about the definition of the term.

If the new specs weren't called Elite (which by definition is better than the rest)"Elite" in English might nearly-always be used as "better," but in game, by definition, it just means an extra trait line that is locked behind an expansion. It's a jargon term that does not require the spec to perform better or be easier to play. If it has often turned out like that (and FYI: it hasn't always), that's due to balance issues, not because the "elite" means better in this game.

So instead of hanging your argument on the terminology, try to focus on what you really think the issue is.

---

If I understand correctly the OP's stated concern has nothing to do with specs and everything to do with bandwagoning. Their argument is that people don't need to buy gear to "win," they can buy transfers and leech off those who have better gear.

That's an even more convoluted use of the terminology and ignores the fact that people do not have to pay RL cash to transfer. (Evidence suggests that more people convert gold to gems, because historically, we've seen the exchange rate spike with new links that result in mass transfers.)

And even if people were spending cash, it's still not "pay to win;" it's pay to be on a winning team, which is different. (I don't think bandwagoning has been good for the game; it's just an entirely different issue than described by the OP.)

[sephiroth.4217]

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@PervMonk.4891 said:imagine calling cosmetic loot boxes p2w or that expacs are p2w feelsweirdman

Expansions are pay to win for this game.

If the new specs weren't called Elite (which by definition is better than the rest) and didnt out perform its predecessors by a large margin and only content was added, then it wouldnt be pay to win.

Guild Wars went with the model that not only added new content but gave significant power creep to those who purchased said expansion.

Other games like Stellaris, Battlefield, STEEP, Railway Empire and some more only release content with expansions, they dont add a steroid injected character to go with it. Just content. For those games, saying that buying an expansion is p2w is laughable but this isn't the catagory that GW2 fits in.

Gw2 has been P2W since HoT and even more so now that PoF users have a huge combat advantage in WvW over those who dont via mounts. 3 extra dodges, immunity to CC, faster travel times and list goes on just based off that 1 example.

So if Arenanet made expansions a necessity and disallowed access to endgame content and game modes to people who did not buy them, would that not fix the issue? It would definitly not be pay to win any more right?

Also all of those games you mentioned are neither MMOs nor in some cases even multiplayer. A bit apples to oranges or?

Its simple it shouldn't need to be explained. It applies to all expansions for any game.

Did the purchase of an expansion provide you with better equipment, tools and or characters to use that involves Player vs Player? If you answer yes, its pay to win.

Did the purchase of an expansion provide you with more content and nothing else that provides an advantage to a Player in a Player v Player environment? Not pay to win.

Its really simple to understand that it doesn't require any nit picking.

Now our expansions came with Elite specs, look up the definition of Elite and its basically something better than the rest. We didnt get 1 steroid injected toon, we got 9 and content. BY ENGLISH DEFINITION: its pay to win.

Thats by English definition though.

[derd.6413]

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@PervMonk.4891 said:imagine calling cosmetic loot boxes p2w or that expacs are p2w feelsweirdman

Expansions are pay to win for this game.

If the new specs weren't called Elite (which by definition is better than the rest) and didnt out perform its predecessors by a large margin and only content was added, then it wouldnt be pay to win.

Guild Wars went with the model that not only added new content but gave significant power creep to those who purchased said expansion.

Other games like Stellaris, Battlefield, STEEP, Railway Empire and some more only release content with expansions, they dont add a steroid injected character to go with it. Just content. For those games, saying that buying an expansion is p2w is laughable but this isn't the catagory that GW2 fits in.

Gw2 has been P2W since HoT and even more so now that PoF users have a huge combat advantage in WvW over those who dont via mounts. 3 extra dodges, immunity to CC, faster travel times and list goes on just based off that 1 example.

So if Arenanet made expansions a necessity and disallowed access to endgame content and game modes to people who did not buy them, would that not fix the issue? It would definitly not be pay to win any more right?

Also all of those games you mentioned are neither MMOs nor in some cases even multiplayer. A bit apples to oranges or?

Its simple it shouldn't need to be explained. It applies to all expansions for any game.

Did the purchase of an expansion provide you with better equipment, tools and or characters to use that involves Player vs Player? If you answer yes, its pay to win.

Did the purchase of an expansion provide you with more content and nothing else that provides an advantage to a Player in a Player v Player environment? Not pay to win.

Its really simple to understand that it doesn't require any nit picking.

Now our expansions came with Elite specs, look up the definition of Elite and its basically something better than the rest. We didnt get 1 steroid injected toon, we got 9 and content. BY ENGLISH DEFINITION: its pay to win.

Thats by English definition though.

isn't anet currently in the process of nerfing especs to be more in line with core specs? it's like especs weren't supposed to be direct upgrades

[PervMonk.4891]

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@PervMonk.4891 said:imagine calling cosmetic loot boxes p2w or that expacs are p2w feelsweirdman

Expansions are pay to win for this game.

If the new specs weren't called Elite (which by definition is better than the rest) and didnt out perform its predecessors by a large margin and only content was added, then it wouldnt be pay to win.

Guild Wars went with the model that not only added new content but gave significant power creep to those who purchased said expansion.

Other games like Stellaris, Battlefield, STEEP, Railway Empire and some more only release content with expansions, they dont add a steroid injected character to go with it. Just content. For those games, saying that buying an expansion is p2w is laughable but this isn't the catagory that GW2 fits in.

Gw2 has been P2W since HoT and even more so now that PoF users have a huge combat advantage in WvW over those who dont via mounts. 3 extra dodges, immunity to CC, faster travel times and list goes on just based off that 1 example.

So if Arenanet made expansions a necessity and disallowed access to endgame content and game modes to people who did not buy them, would that not fix the issue? It would definitly not be pay to win any more right?

Also all of those games you mentioned are neither MMOs nor in some cases even multiplayer. A bit apples to oranges or?

Its simple it shouldn't need to be explained. It applies to all expansions for any game.

Did the purchase of an expansion provide you with better equipment, tools and or characters to use that involves Player vs Player? If you answer yes, its pay to win.

Did the purchase of an expansion provide you with more content and nothing else that provides an advantage to a Player in a Player v Player environment? Not pay to win.

Its really simple to understand that it doesn't require any nit picking.

Now our expansions came with Elite specs, look up the definition of Elite and its basically something better than the rest. We didnt get 1 steroid injected toon, we got 9 and content. BY ENGLISH DEFINITION: its pay to win.

Thats by English definition though.

lol u even dont know what's p2wgo do ur research kidif you want to see real p2w look at bdo or archeage. this games doesnt even come close to having p2wjust keep whining cuz u want every thing free

[Timelord.8190]

I dislike the way they made HoT and PoF mandatory by adding mounts and gliding for a game mode they otherwise don't put work into. I see players who are gliding and on mounts out of sync all the time. It doesn't even work.

[Dawdler.8521]

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@PervMonk.4891 said:imagine calling cosmetic loot boxes p2w or that expacs are p2w feelsweirdman

Expansions are pay to win for this game.

If the new specs weren't called Elite (which by definition is better than the rest) and didnt out perform its predecessors by a large margin and only content was added, then it wouldnt be pay to win.

Guild Wars went with the model that not only added new content but gave significant power creep to those who purchased said expansion.

Other games like Stellaris, Battlefield, STEEP, Railway Empire and some more only release content with expansions, they dont add a steroid injected character to go with it. Just content. For those games, saying that buying an expansion is p2w is laughable but this isn't the catagory that GW2 fits in.

Gw2 has been P2W since HoT and even more so now that PoF users have a huge combat advantage in WvW over those who dont via mounts. 3 extra dodges, immunity to CC, faster travel times and list goes on just based off that 1 example.

So if Arenanet made expansions a necessity and disallowed access to endgame content and game modes to people who did not buy them, would that not fix the issue? It would definitly not be pay to win any more right?

Also all of those games you mentioned are neither MMOs nor in some cases even multiplayer. A bit apples to oranges or?

Its simple it shouldn't need to be explained. It applies to all expansions for any game.

Did the purchase of an expansion provide you with better equipment, tools and or characters to use that involves Player vs Player? If you answer yes, its pay to win.

Did the purchase of an expansion provide you with more content and nothing else that provides an advantage to a Player in a Player v Player environment? Not pay to win.

Its really simple to understand that it doesn't require any nit picking.

Now our expansions came with Elite specs, look up the definition of Elite and its basically something better than the rest. We didnt get 1 steroid injected toon, we got 9 and content. BY ENGLISH DEFINITION: its pay to win.

Thats by English definition though.So whats the line here if it applies to expansions 2-3 years apart that basicly replace the base game?

What about games themselves that release this often?

Is every CoD game P2W for the retail cost release version?

Because by your definition, it must be.

[Vayne.8563]

@"Dhemize.8649" said:I mean... we already have P2W mounts so I don't see a valid argument from previous mount defenders to be against P2W loot boxes. They're both paying for additional buffs.

"Mounts are P2W buffs.""You can just buy PoF too."Well..."You can just buy P2W loot boxes.""I don't like paying for loot boxes."Hurrrrr!

Not sure why people have so much trouble distinguishing between expansions, which were NEVER considered pay to win, and cash shop purchases, which are quite different. An expansion in virtually every MMORPG but this one raises the level cap, adding power. But people don't call WOW expansions pay to win, because expansions are an expected expense when playing an MMO. It's pretty much buying the game.

If you want to change that definition then every single MMO I can think of is P2W as well, and once that happens the term loses all value.

[derd.6413]

@Vayne.8563 said:

@"Dhemize.8649" said:I mean... we already have P2W mounts so I don't see a valid argument from previous mount defenders to be against P2W loot boxes. They're both paying for additional buffs.

"Mounts are P2W buffs.""You can just buy PoF too."Well..."You can just buy P2W loot boxes.""I don't like paying for loot boxes."Hurrrrr!

Not sure why people have so much trouble distinguishing between expansions, which were NEVER considered pay to win, and cash shop purchases, which are quite different. An expansion in virtually every MMORPG but this one raises the level cap, adding power. But people don't call WOW expansions pay to win, because expansions are an expected expense when playing an MMO. It's pretty much buying the game.

If you want to change that definition then every single MMO I can think of is P2W as well, and once that happens the term loses all value.

inb4but lootboxes are also an expected expansehurrrrrrrrrrrr

[Ultramex.1506]

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@"PervMonk.4891" said:imagine calling cosmetic loot boxes p2w or that expacs are p2w feelsweirdman

Expansions are pay to win for this game.

If the new specs weren't called Elite (which by definition is better than the rest) and didnt out perform its predecessors by a large margin and only content was added, then it wouldnt be pay to win.

Guild Wars went with the model that not only added new content but gave significant power creep to those who purchased said expansion.

Other games like Stellaris, Battlefield, STEEP, Railway Empire and some more only release content with expansions, they dont add a steroid injected character to go with it. Just content. For those games, saying that buying an expansion is p2w is laughable but this isn't the catagory that GW2 fits in.

Gw2 has been P2W since HoT and even more so now that PoF users have a huge combat advantage in WvW over those who dont via mounts. 3 extra dodges, immunity to CC, faster travel times and list goes on just based off that 1 example.

Yep, you will never see pug zerg or guild zerg run core only. Hell! The "Core" definition in WvW mean meta build require elite.

[Aeolus.3615]

Just don’t take gw2 pvp seriously, it’s was never ment to be a serious game, just for the sake of the mmo had to have pvp....

It’s a troll gimmick pvp just for jokes and lolz....

And rewards system in gw2 are another lolz failure from Anet

[TheGrimm.5624]

@Frye.4608 said:@TheGrimm.5624

Finally something worth responding to. It's my brother's account that came with five level 80 characters and a whole dead guild. It also came with a bunch of gold and enough materials in the bank to pay for at least one transfer of choice, possibly even more than one. Even if I wanted to transfer, it wouldn't cost me anything. I am literally not affected at all by this. I won't be playing long anyhow unless some magic click happens when I learn my second character which I happen to have started earlier today.So my pressure to transfer is next to zero. My motivation lies elsewhere.

If you 'pay straight into a 2.0+ K/D ratio' then that is short for 'transfer to a different server with the intention of having easier fights'. Just more condensed. Even mentioning loot boxes after all that has been discussed about it in social media should have been enough although out of context (the context being pay-to-win) I can see why some would read it as drops. I should have taken the audience into account apparently.

On topic : something doesn't have to be a new phenomenon to be a negative business practice. Just because the EA / BLIZZARD-STYLE LOOTBOXES (!!!!) or selling straight upgrades to gain an advantage have come under public and even political scrutiny doesn't mean that other incentives are all good. Personally I find paying for a skin to be perfectly acceptable. Lootbox gambling is not, paying for direct upgrades is not and paying for easier match-ups is certainly not okay. It is more subtle than bragging rights. It appeals to elitism and feeling a better player than you actually are. That is not okay, even if they are legally safe.

Lots of people have indicated on these very forums that they feel forced into paying money to transfer so they can play with their friends. Just one tiny indication that I at least have a nugget of truth here.

Finally, why do I even bother? Because I find many online communities show cannibalistic behavior, be it the toxicity in Overwatch which is gladly less prevalent in GW2 or buying into whatever incentive companies give players to spend money to solve problems that are artificially held in place. For example filling people's bags with junk as an incentive to buy more slots. Sound familiar?

That's more of a full picture. I have transferred servers in the past to join others, but so far only once. I can't talk to the feeling of being forced to transfer because never have. That was even riding a server from T1 down to T8 when we had 8 tiers. But I have also seen the other side of it where people will bandwagon. The point of having it have a cost is to counter people that might be just stacking a server to steam roll people. The reason I say that is less pay to win is since it is an expense for people to move. Without that price there might be more. We might end up with more stacking to win with Alliances and if someone is really good at organising we might end with a few mega servers and then the rest of us in massive pug servers. Time will tell. The other side of the stacking to win is there really is no advantage expect self pride to win. If they were to add bonus loot or some other bonus to winning the week than that would be more of a problem. But today have had weeks where my server lost but I still felt it was a win since weigh that in actions and in how much fun the week was. Long story short, don't feel forced to transfer especially while we still have server relinks each 8 weeks and we have alliances some time in the future that will allow you to effectively transfer based on the guild you join for free. Good hunting!

[L A T I O N.8923]

@DemonSeed.3528 said:

@L A T I O N.8923 said:thus low moralA lot of matchups can also happen like this with the low morale thing, it is a snowball effect. Servers most likely have the population for it, but only magically appear when their server is doing well. Although if the server they are playing against is really stacked, it can magnify the situation. It is probably a lot of reasons why people didn't show up for this matchup, but low morale is a high one on that list. Only the small dedicated leftovers are left atm and those finishing this weeks skirmish chest.

'Its a snowball effect indeed. These 2 servers have a high amountt of fairweather players because they mostly run pugs and not dedicated guilds, for pugs moral factor is much larger