Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

Free Trial Program Ending

Ravenlute
Paddy Fitzpatrick
Also, it won't get better with a higher pop, it will only get worse. Sure having no free trial period will mitigate it by weeding out people who would just spam trial accounts, but then you will get groups who will just buy more accounts and then the influence system becomes P2W.

Let's say you get a 100 man group, each one gets three toons to stuff their company with and they now have an influence cap based on 300 toons. All these people gotta do is buy one more account each and $30 a month isn't exactly expensive. So now you got a 600 toon cap. Up it to $45 a month and you get 900 toons.

The inherently flaws in this entire system will still be there and the main difference is people just have to pay a bit more to take advantage of it. You're definitely gonna find groups who are willing to also shell out much larger sums to get an even bigger leg up, which is the essence of P2W since there will probably be more groups whose members won't shell out hundreds of dollars a month to stuff their companies with toons than there will be ones that do.

The raise of the Influence cap declines the more people you have so putting even 300 characters in a single Company would be a huge waste.
Myl - Herald of Stone Bear Clan (Tavernhold)
"You can walk into Tavernhold but a horse will have to carry you out."
Bringslite
Why should there be caps at all? Instead of banking influence for setting things up, maybe it should be SPENT. If the basis for influence is 1. To make new players valuable to veterans and 2. To encourage players TO DO THINGS in game, well then the "gain slider" could stay the same. The "costs" for "doing" things with influence could be adjusted.

Yes there will be an advantage for groups that play regularly.
Yes if done right, a blob might run out of Feud Money after a stretch.
Yes there might be howling from groups that want to have a kingdom that they can manage with minimal or absentee playtime in a competitive territory sandbox with a real time clock.

So?
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Duffy Swiftshadow
Bringslite
Why should there be caps at all? Instead of banking influence for setting things up, maybe it should be SPENT. If the basis for influence is 1. To make new players valuable to veterans and 2. To encourage players TO DO THINGS in game, well then the "gain slider" could stay the same. The "costs" for "doing" things with influence could be adjusted.

Yes there will be an advantage for groups that play regularly.
Yes if done right, a blob might run out of Feud Money after a stretch.
Yes there might be howling from groups that want to have a kingdom that they can manage with minimal or absentee playtime in a competitive territory sandbox with a real time clock.

So?

Better that what I cam up with, only downside is that it would help create even larger stockpiles of bulk resources. Depending on how that is viewed it may modify opinions a bit, but maybe if they really wanted a temporary band-aid and planned to redo the whole influence/holding stuff anyways…it might help alleviate concerns for the immediate and short term.

Kills the major hostile recruiting incentive too, so that's nice.
Bringslite
Mostly I am positive on closing the free trial program because I am not seeing it increase the new subscriber base and this is a hell of a bad time to be trying to show people the game to entice them to subscribe. The issue with trial stuffed companies is out of control and that is another good reason.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Midnight
I don't see a need for an influence cap, either.

Smaller companies could earn influence at a faster rate if we need to incentivize against the game becoming a red vs. blue blob duel.

Newbies could generate influence at a faster rate, but frankly I never saw newbies unvalued in this game. Just the issues of numerical advantage in both PVP and PvE combat and the issue of PvP window coverage guaranteed that every newbie was in demand.
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Duffy Swiftshadow
Bringslite
Mostly I am positive on closing the free trial program because I am not seeing it increase the new subscriber base and this is a hell of a bad time to be trying to show people the game to entice them to subscribe. The issue with trial stuffed companies is out of control and that is another good reason.

We got 1 last week (a 2nd never came back), so it still does something. But I can see potential problems under a couple scenarios without changes in game, but I also see/get the potential out of game ones too.

Ditto on valuing noobs, they always serve a purpose. Getting rid of 'get them so if they quit at least they quit in my company' will help a lot with decreasing negative recruitment tactics and avoid impacting settlement infrastructure. They'll still be there cause people can be pricks, but it should let folks that don't want to recruit that way the ability to not have to and stay competitive.
Bringslite
Duffy Swiftshadow
Bringslite
Mostly I am positive on closing the free trial program because I am not seeing it increase the new subscriber base and this is a hell of a bad time to be trying to show people the game to entice them to subscribe. The issue with trial stuffed companies is out of control and that is another good reason.

We got 1 last week (a 2nd never came back), so it still does something. But I can see potential problems under a couple scenarios without changes in game, but I also see/get the potential out of game ones too.

Ditto on valuing noobs, they always serve a purpose. Getting rid of 'get them so if they quit at least they quit in my company' will help a lot with decreasing negative recruitment tactics and avoid impacting settlement infrastructure. They'll still be there cause people can be pricks, but it should let folks that don't want to recruit that way the ability to not have to and stay competitive.
You mention negative recruitment tactics often. Would you elaborate on what you see as negative?

Edit: Not trying to start a negative discussion. I am curious though. I will play nice if you share. smile
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Hobson Fiffledown
q1 - I have one active player in my company. Me. smile

q2 - Most characters and accounts were actively used for more than a year. I now only continue paying for one subscription. So, now a huge majority of characters in my company are throwaway toons. I have thousands of ghost-Influence just out there floating around with dead accounts and companies that I've surrendered to the void.

Again, I'd love to see something good replace the Influence system. While we're at it, new combat, a better engine, a robust holding and bulk system, etc. But we only have Bob right now (no offense Bob, you're doing great). I can't see an influence system retooling happening anytime in the next twelve months right now.

GW cancelled trial accounts in part because they create imbalances. I think they'll have to figure out a way to address the imbalances which remain due to current trial accounts. If it created a big enough of an issue that they had to stop it, I don't think they'd knowingly let certain players (who happened to use a tactic before it was removed) have an advantage for an indeterminate amount of time.

I don't think of Influence caps lowered in this situation (trial accounts) as any type of punishment. Some companies would just be lowered to where they should be as the mechanic stands now. It's just a matter of game balance.

Now, maybe my idea of extending that to unsubbed accounts seems harsh. But I'm OK with that, I still don't see it as being punitive. If influence comes from in-game actions and achievements, I think you should at least have to show up to get credit. smile

EDIT: Now, we get a NewCorp statement soon and a crazy mission statement from them and maybe influence retooling is on the table. Who knows?
This space for rent.
Edam
Ravenlute
The raise of the Influence cap declines the more people you have so putting even 300 characters in a single Company would be a huge waste.
Indeed. But that has just resulted in the creation of a lot of "fake" influenced based companies.

Instead of a new recruit being told "join the Keystone Cops as they are all in your timezone and are a great bunch of guys you will fit in well with" you effectively get new recruits being told "you are being placed in our newly created holding company number 246x as we are thinking of trying to lock up another monster hex and they are a handy one to have their influence cap pumped".
Bringslite
What number, in man hours(play time), is a fair amount of hours chasing Influence to enable a company to place a holding +0 and two outposts +0?

What is a fair amount to do the same to have enough to run a feud?

Why should I have to pay anything to be able to start a feud? You only should if I have to pay something to place a holding that you can take away.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post