I compared EvE and Crossout because one is successful and the other is not and yeh Eve does sell expensive pack bundles to but then again EvE is a far bigger game with so many options available,
Where as the most exciting thing you can do on crossout is build a leviathan that can only be controlled in GW’s… and only 1 member of each team can use theirs…
And deploying them in invasion is almost worthless as your lucky if your leviathan even gets chosen for 1 match.
Although Eve has been around longer than Crossout, the Targem Developers have had plenty of time to sort the market and it’s had long enough to develop economically so dont give me that BS!
The Solution is very simple… add a coin reward system in matches with a limited cap whether its weekly or monthly…
I said the Tax should be massivly reduced while generating coin only comes from Real money purchases, not gotten rid of it all together so please stop the lectures on marketing
there is sending it off into invasions but… thats not exciting.
i want to do more with my leviathan, there is literally 0 reason to even make one because even if you send it out into battle for invasions your not guaranteed to get anything. you can go 24 hours and get nothing.
i mean im kind of glad they added it to clan wars to give them some meaning but it sure wasnt alot of meaning.
that doesnt get you any rewards though, its just for fun with no payout.
i dont know anyone who plays custom battles either, to alot of people they are just pointless and not worth it.
My concern is well founded if established players have a larger coin base to play with it and it results in higher market prices, that will make it harder for new players to start. This also means they would have to raise the amounts of coin given in packs or it degrades their value to players there as well. That’s a cyclical problem. No one wants to pay the same for less value.
I’m going to break the block quote down a bit more from here, I do get the point is that you want to earn more gold though:
And
Glad we agree on the portion it would have to be limited. That still doesn’t give coin overflow an exit point in the game other than tax and seriously 10% is not that bad. (When people sell stuff on amazon digital press they take 70% from each product sold as commission fees. Sucks a lot but it’s common for those fees to be high.) 10% I think for games is often standard as it just makes calculations really easy as it’s a decimal place move if you do the math in your head when thinking about it. Cutting that in half would require the extra div2 for 5%. It makes it harder for players to calculate in their heads also.
Few ideas for coin sinks:
Let players buy with gold temporary time limited upgrades for non-upgraded items. These would be the same figures as the God tier upgrades they offer in the upgrade events. Not every user will buy these but the more competitive players probably will and it would help with removing some of the P2W imbalances that everyone hates. It would be fair cheaper for a player that wants to just see what an upgrade does for a item too. At the same time it would remove some of the extra currency coming into the game if offered coin based rewards are in the game.
Car Wash Tokens - Earn your mudding while playing, costs a small amount of coins to wash it off. Pretty much just paying to get Ivy’s crew to wash your car. You can wash it yourself but it takes a time cycle. Simple mechanic just to pull extra coins of the market and keep nominal prices the same. Silly idea but would be just about as much fun as a hot wheels carwash they could probably even get a corporate sponsor from it if they inquired about it right. Could even be a garage-yard item.
Closer to Eve - Instead of just instantly driving out and around your garage spot blueprint, you have to produce the vehicle at a gold cost (outside of test drives). Once played you could repair or recycle it provided it’s not a total loss. This I think players would complain about this as they are use to cycling battle to battle really fast. Outside of rust and dust alt universe there isn’t this type of function in the game. I hope they collected good player data from that mode though.
These types of ideas should be spread out across play styles, so that not everyone has to use all of them and there are ways to save more gold via the missions rewards you want.
Our game was built around crowdfunding development for a continual beta game and it works just for that type of development. I would agree with you on that they should transition out of that type of model but it still leaves the issue of how they move out of that type of model with the important condition that it doesn’t make the situation worse.
I’m sorry but they have not spent their development time on the economics portion of the game. I agree it’s boring to do econ lessons. Look at the ever slightly more fun portion of ideas I gave for currency siphons and come up with some of your own or make some changes to the ones I gave. What type of missions do you think would be good for it? I want to hear about those just as much as other as both have to function to do a systematic change like that. There is no easy way out if we are to convince the dev to make the change over.
I wouldn’t mind more ways to play with them too or at least watch how they do via a visual representation of battle log. Like have you ever put yourself into the spectator mode and let the bots fight and just watch a fully simulated battle from the 3d flyby mode they have?
It’s so disappointing that they never went anywhere with this aspect of the game. I guess they added them to CW, but that’s not something I’m interested in.
I think it would be great if every once in a while each team got a single player controlled leviathan.
How do we do this?
I am very curious what their player data showed about that experiment. I loved playing it, but most on the forum seemed to hate it for reasons I struggled to understand.
I would have liked it more if they expanded it to include the whole Crossout universe of factions, but I definitely enjoyed the mad max vibes.
I know I am disappointed too, I have two of mine out in the garage for target practice but other than stopping around in the yard with them there is hardly anything to do with them. I most just use them to kill the garage visitors if I want to act like Mecha-Hamster (kind of like Mecha-Godzilla) Fun to piolit but have little practical usage plus the controls are horrible. I would much rather be able to label on the Levi which guns are AI commanded and which ones are manual.
I put it in a subtopic look at link added it as a subtopic for how it use to work. I have to file a bug report on it though. Looks like they broke it. I’ll deal with that tomorrow.
I would make it easier to explain stuff if they were more transparent but I do get that comes with risks for buisnesses too.
I think that could because unless your at the top of a match much of the time, a player that wants to stay in their current build is just trying to get to the next match for their next chance to maybe get there at the top. After so many years of playing it’s kind of like hit that next battle button too.
So anything between that and the next battle, seems off even if it probably shouldn’t though. Normally when I stop it’s just to look at current challenges to see how fast I can finish them this time around meaning daily or weeklies.
Some of this could be poor explanations from their communications department. I’m not involved with their project outside of general playing and asking for help when needed. Just the communication aspect can have a major impacts though, I know they have to translate for us. I might have been more willing to take part in that experiment if they said with a technical mind: Hello players we would like to test some functionality again and are going to run a test that gets us from this spot to another using this method. We had originally planned on using like this (what ever it was). I would have thought about it more and with how often they give up ideas I just didn’t want to waste my time.
Testing like this is a place where I think gold rewards are appropriate with less restrictions If we are going to keep using it as a premium currency and I do think they should do more live testing like that but it has to be clearer stated with the Devs objectives so the Devs can speculate if playing player participates or not against the later polling results. It probably got better player participation than the test server normally does regardless just from the crate offerings. As a stratagem this would allow players to earn gold via the beta testing in a fairway that people could appreciate later. It needs to be labeled as a test though and not be presented as an event. If they did in-game testing rewards like this clearly marked xbox and playstation could take part rather than just being random commentors on the test survey questions too. It’s like participation in a focus marketing group then.
give them a raid that we can bring them in, just… something! its one of the most pointless things in the entire game. build a giant leviathan just to have it limited more then the developers budget for this game. its depressing.
give them a raid, a mode of their own that we can bring them into to earn resources or something. heck let us send them out on wasteland missions for resources or something. literally anything to give them something to do.
Ok now your just claiming that a coin reward from matches system would increase prices again!!
you’ve already repeated this 3 times now and you can’t prove that at all…
stop chatting BS about a theory of yours which can’t be proven
stop your bs lectures about Amazon digital…
Personally I think your making excuses because you enjoy your position of power in the game and you dont want too many competitors,
Newbies getting coin for matches and gaining power more quickly is probably a dislike for you.
that would expand the playerbase far more if crossout hasen’t completely riuned its preputation already and new players would have better chance…
It really seems like you’re not quite getting what they’re trying to say, possibly because they’re giving a fairly technical explanation.
Here’s my take: prices in the game market for anything is based on scarcity. You know, supply and demand. Same as in the real world.
Increase the supply of coins too much, and they become less scarce, and also less valuable. Inflation would be what we call it in real life.
This means it takes more coins to buy anything, because they are now worth less. This only benefits veteran players, because they are more likely to already have a lot of coins, and also more likely to have items that are worth a lot of coins.
If you want to improve things for new players, you want the price of items to be low. Best way to do that is to increase the supply of scarce and valuable items. They typically do this through mini passes and pack sales. But if prices get too low, players also get pissed off because they lose coin selling stuff they got when prices are high. So the devs can also make an item more valuable by using it as an ingredient for crafting.
Every single recourse you get can be traded for coins. Your points fails right here.
While I’ve been here for almost 10 or so years I earned what I have you haven’t. Your point fails right here.
Look up in the comment section I said I don’t mind the coin missions but their has to be support for removing such coin on the market. Your point fails here too.
Real life sucks sometimes I was just giving you an example of the 10% not being so bad. Again your point fails.
Every time I’ve tried to engage you in a constructive manner you have responded like I killed your puppy or something Outside of free stuff what do you want? Most of us that got any where in the game ground for via effort or paid a little in. What makes you so special that you can degrade everyone’s else’s own efforts? Nothing work for it just like the rest of us did or go try make up sicarios where we can remove portions of the coins that so desperately want so fast.
If we gave everything out for free who is going to pay for development, server costs, data storage, staff and everything else that the game depends on to function. I can barley (great typo) afford each BP let alone squirl a little for the garage I want. You aren’t are you?
Are you that functionally clueless that you do not understand even the most basic econ stuff, or are you just so selfcentered that you would destroy what is left of the game so you can have your own way for free? On the backs of people that actually paid to try to get the game to function? Do you have any idea what you sound like?
Now if you want to talk about how we could try to put missions in for coins and actually get it to work well in the system go ahead and answer and it better not be just give me gold because I showed up to play.
I have to go back to work sanding the rest of the drywall hope you have a nice evening.
I don’t think I completely understood all the parts of your logic, but agree with the bigger picture.
To me, Crossout’s biggest problem is that it’s free to play, which locks it into a business model that is inherently annoying for players. Within that model, I think they’ve done OK, but it’s still a bad model that will prevent the game from ever living up to its full potential.
My hope for the game is that Rust and Dust was a test run for a buy-it-once spin-off version. I don’t think there’s any realistic way of getting the main Crossout game out of the F2P swamp, but I would gladly play $50 for a version that worked like R&D and that never got new content (ideally use the entire structural and movement part library of Crossout though). I think you could even put the legendary and relic items into a game like that, provided that they cost a ton of in-game coin and that had a weekly season reset so that veterans couldn’t build up an advantage over time.
I’d be interested in a paid-for standalone version, that offers multiplayer support (one person’s machine would act as a server) like alot of 90’s games did. They could even offer periodic updates/expansions that you could download (for some set fee). Adding a mission editor would be great, so you can keep things fresh for you and your fellow players.
Then 20 years from now, you could still play, even if the online version is long since defunct.
I don’t think getting too technical is required for a fairly simple failing game and
I don’t think it’s very clever to talk real life issues with marketing when we’re talking about a game with a very simple marketing system…
Lecturing someone about real life technicalities doesn’t make you right about a simple game…
I love how you claim what will happen to the market yet my very idea is applied to most mmo’s with a market and they work just fine…
You make it sound like applying a coin based reward system would would be the final nail in the games coffin…
I Promise you the Targem Developers are already working on that…
You’re putting a lot of words in my mouth, that don’t represent what I’m actually saying.
Any game with a p2p market is going to be impacted by the same issues. It’s not that you can’t add new coin into the system, but that it has to be done carefully to avoid devaluing coin so much that it creates other problems. All games are going to use various techniques to try to keep their economy stable, whether you are aware of it or not. Some techniques are going to be more subtle, but they’re still there.
Anyway, you’ve got things backwards. Coin isn’t what you want, it’s the items themselves that you want. The more ways you have to acquire items, the lower their prices will become, and then you could buy more stuff with the coin you currently have.
