Gearing Standards

Allybeboba said:
Now I thought trials were all about " fair and balanced " games.
Tsk tsk tsk.
Click to expand...

Well look, that's really a matter of perspective. You can look at it as Veterans are trying to make the games more fair and balanced against 29s, or you can look at it as Veterans are trying to make the game less fair and balanced against Starters. Which way you believe depends on your own point of view, and also whether or not you trust the stated intent of those who have said they are going to play Veteran. I have heard a lot of people say they plan to go Veteran for the former reason, and I have never heard anyone say they were going to go Veteran for the latter reason, yet one or two people still want to keep pinning the stigma of the latter reason on every Veteran. i think that that is unfair, and I think it speaks to the amount of faith and trust those few individuals have or don't have in their fellow community members.

I feel like everyone is free to make their own decision on what is right and what is best for themselves, but that nobody has the right to project their own moral decisions onto others.
 
Kincaide said:
Well look, that's really a matter of perspective. You can look at it as Veterans are trying to make the games more fair and balanced against 29s, or you can look at it as Veterans are trying to make the game less fair and balanced against Starters. Which way you believe depends on your own point of view, and also whether or not you trust the stated intent of those who have said they are going to play Veteran. I have heard a lot of people say they plan to go Veteran for the former reason, and I have never heard anyone say they were going to go Veteran for the latter reason, yet one or two people still want to keep pinning the stigma of the latter reason on every Veteran. i think that that is unfair, and I think it speaks to the amount of faith and trust those few individuals have or don't have in their fellow community members.

I feel like everyone is free to make their own decision on what is right and what is best for themselves, but that nobody has the right to project their own moral decisions onto others.
Click to expand...

No one can find a moral high ground by saying they are going Veteran to farm Starter Editions.

It's not good logic to say that because they say, so it must be. They could very well be lying, or ignoring the obvious fact that farming Starter Editions is an eventuality of becoming a P2P Veteran Account.

And regardless of what they say or think to themselves, they will be utilizing an advantage over Starter Edition accounts that cannot pay to get the heirlooms.

By no means is this an argument that no one should become a Veteran account. In fact, it isn't even an argument that declares the use of P2P heirlooms as wrong.

My point is that you cannot find the moral high ground by becoming a Veteran Account and utilizing all of the advantages therein. You are morally bankrupt in terms of relations with F2Ps, at that point.

You are of the same shade of color as P2P Subbed 29's.

Now, go out and make the decision for yourselves. Don't let anyone on a forum tell you how to play - but make no mistake, you're abusing Starter Editions by doing so.

Don't piss on our backs and tell us it's rain.
 
Kincaide said:
Well look, that's really a matter of perspective. You can look at it as Veterans are trying to make the games more fair and balanced against 29s, or you can look at it as Veterans are trying to make the game less fair and balanced against Starters. Which way you believe depends on your own point of view, and also whether or not you trust the stated intent of those who have said they are going to play Veteran. I have heard a lot of people say they plan to go Veteran for the former reason, and I have never heard anyone say they were going to go Veteran for the latter reason, yet one or two people still want to keep pinning the stigma of the latter reason on every Veteran. i think that that is unfair, and I think it speaks to the amount of faith and trust those few individuals have or don't have in their fellow community members.

I feel like everyone is free to make their own decision on what is right and what is best for themselves, but that nobody has the right to project their own moral decisions onto others.
Click to expand...

I just find in rather farcical that the AP community is so "accepting" of these changes. Why, just a few months ago there was a HUGE argument over whether it was against the " f2p rules" to group with a subscriber.
And even myself practically got banned from participating in any of APs reindeer games games. Not because of my gear, not because of enchants but because by alchemy was a whopping 105.
And now those people are Hipocrits. I am not suggesting they do anything other than have fun in their own way. After all, that is what the game is intended.
Just don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining.

/cheers
Sweetsidney
 
Bop said:
You are of the same shade of color as P2P Subbed 29's.
Click to expand...

I don't know about that... one could argue the cost of entry for a Veteran should make it openly available to everyone, really. It's 5 dollars... if you are on a good realm you should be able to get everything you want within that time.

Vets also aren't 9 levels above someone.

It would be nice to be able to play an aff lock, or maybe bump a frost mage a bit to be on par... Getting globaled by 29 Ferals doesn't mean anything... it doesn't show any kind of skill level. It would be nice to get closer to a level playing field. I'm hoping the new vets allow for some different class/specs to be played.

I wish everyone was buying into the vet thing, I don't understand why there's so much push back for something so cheap that helps close the gap so much...


I will say F2Ps have no trouble mopping up 29s still. Many visited the GY last night...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bop said:
No one can find a moral high ground by saying they are going Veteran to farm Starter Editions.

It's not good logic to say that because they say, so it must be. They could very well be lying, or ignoring the obvious fact that farming Starter Editions is an eventuality of becoming a P2P Veteran Account.

And regardless of what they say or think to themselves, they will be utilizing an advantage over Starter Edition accounts that cannot pay to get the heirlooms.

By no means is this an argument that no one should become a Veteran account. In fact, it isn't even an argument that declares the use of P2P heirlooms as wrong.

My point is that you cannot find the moral high ground by becoming a Veteran Account and utilizing all of the advantages therein. You are morally bankrupt in terms of relations with F2Ps, at that point.

You are of the same shade of color as P2P Subbed 29's.

Now, go out and make the decision for yourselves. Don't let anyone on a forum tell you how to play - but make no mistake, you're abusing Starter Editions by doing so.

Don't piss on our backs and tell us it's rain.
Click to expand...

Bop. with all due respect, when I read this and distill it down, what I basically hear you saying is "If you do this, then you're a bad person. But don't let anyone tell you what you should do. But if you do, you're bad."

Heh, well, at least you're not telling anyone what do do, right?
 
Allybeboba said:
And even myself practically got banned from participating in any of APs reindeer games games. Not because of my gear, not because of enchants but because by alchemy was a whopping 105.
Click to expand...

Hmm, I don't know that story, tell me about it. How was your Alchemy 105?
 
Kincaide said:
Bop. with all due respect, when I read this and distill it down, what I basically hear you saying is "If you do this, then you're a bad person. But don't let anyone tell you what you should do. But if you do, you're bad."

Heh, well, at least you're not telling anyone what do do, right?
Click to expand...

The weight of my assessment should only be as strong as an individual's opinion of my assessment.

With any luck, people will read it and decide not to do it because I am not doing it.

But I also recognize the very human desire to acquire more power. I only wish to let those players know that they are taking advantage of others.

If that dissuades them, it is merely a side effect of my intention to remove any sense of Moral-Justice from the act of paying money for an advantage.
 
Bop said:
The weight of my assessment should only be as strong as an individual's opinion of my assessment.

With any luck, people will read it and decide not to do it because I am not doing it.

But I also recognize the very human desire to acquire more power. I only wish to let those players know that they are taking advantage of others.

If that dissuades them, it is merely a side effect of my intention to remove any sense of Moral-Justice from the act of paying money for an advantage.
Click to expand...

I'd like to talk more about your perspective so that I understand it and so that you don't think I'm dismissing it out of hand. Why is it that you feel that five dollars is a prohibitive cost of entry for people who own a computer and pay for a computer, electricity, and an internet connnection? Forgive me if this is asking you to repeat points you've made before; it's been and continues to be a very long week for me.
 
Kincaide said:
I'd like to talk more about your perspective so that I understand it and so that you don't think I'm dismissing it out of hand. Why is it that you feel that five dollars is a prohibitive cost of entry for people who own a computer and pay for a computer, electricity, and an internet connnection? Forgive me if this is asking you to repeat points you've made before; it's been and continues to be a very long week for me.
Click to expand...

It is repetitive, but that's fair.

I accept that this is the one part of my argument that requires you to put aside a holistic (or statistic) analysis, which I am normally in favor of.

It stands to reason that there are going to be members of the F2P community who cannot upgrade an account. We accept them, because this is a community that seeks to access as much of WoW as possible without paying money to the company.

Please note that this is a very different goal than not-subscribing. It would make far less sense for this community to continue if we were against subscription rather than payment in general. The subscription is fairly cheap and accessible for anyone who, as you've stated, can afford internet and a computer.

What this community stands by is the refusal to pay money to the company. This has innately manifested itself in the form of not subscribing, but it stands to merit that many among us are simply not able to pay any money, let alone a subscription.

By that same logic, there will be members of the community who are able to pay a 1-time payment and access Veteran account features.

And one can logically and soundly acknowledge that Veterans will be on the same footing as each other, and Veterans will be closer to 29's than Starter Edition accounts are. Those are both true statements.

However, Veteran Accounts are also at an advantage derived from money over Starter Edition Accounts. That is inherent in this debate and a factual statement.

What you are attempting to address is how low the relative cost of the 1-time payment is relative to a subscription, but to do that you have to make the blanket Goldilocks statement that :

A. 15 dollars a month is too high.

B. a 1-time payment of 5 dollars is just right.

That seems like the extremely relative, subjective statement to me. It could be that for some, 15 dollars a month is too much - 5 dollars 1-time is too much - 1 dime 1-time is too much. They don't want to give Blizzard another damned cent.

That seems like a better conclusion to come to than trying to determine exactly how much tribute you are willing to give Blizzard.

And to re-iterate, I am not arguing that there are no Pros of becoming a Veteran account.

I'm just trying to argue that there are Cons.

As of now your argument has been that there are only Pros that are worthwhile to mention, and I find that to be inherently false.
 
Bop said:
It is repetitive, but that's fair.

I accept that this is the one part of my argument that requires you to put aside a holistic (or statistic) analysis, which I am normally in favor of.

It stands to reason that there are going to be members of the F2P community who cannot upgrade an account. We accept them, because this is a community that seeks to access as much of WoW as possible without paying money to the company.

Please note that this is a very different goal than not-subscribing. It would make far less sense for this community to continue if we were against subscription rather than payment in general. The subscription is fairly cheap and accessible for anyone who, as you've stated, can afford internet and a computer.

What this community stands by is the refusal to pay money to the company. This has innately manifested itself in the form of not subscribing, but it stands to merit that many among us are simply not able to pay any money, let alone a subscription.

By that same logic, there will be members of the community who are able to pay a 1-time payment and access Veteran account features.

And one can logically and soundly acknowledge that Veterans will be on the same footing as each other, and Veterans will be closer to 29's than Starter Edition accounts are. Those are both true statements.

However, Veteran Accounts are also at an advantage derived from money over Starter Edition Accounts. That is inherent in this debate and a factual statement.

What you are attempting to address is how low the relative cost of the 1-time payment is relative to a subscription, but to do that you have to make the blanket Goldilocks statement that :

A. 15 dollars a month is too high.

B. a 1-time payment of 5 dollars is just right.

That seems like the extremely relative, subjective statement to me. It could be that for some, 15 dollars a month is too much - 5 dollars 1-time is too much - 1 dime 1-time is too much. They don't want to give Blizzard another damned cent.

That seems like a better conclusion to come to than trying to determine exactly how much tribute you are willing to give Blizzard.

And to re-iterate, I am not arguing that there are no Pros of becoming a Veteran account.

I'm just trying to argue that there are Cons.

As of now your argument has been that there are only Pros that are worthwhile to mention, and I find that to be inherently false.
Click to expand...

Okay, yes, sorry I do remember now you making this argument before.

I disagree with it in two places. The first is the statement that "This community was built on the standard of not giving one cent to Blizzard". I think that isn't the case. This community was built on the standard of not paying Blizzard a monthly subscription. Other options weren't open to us at the time, so it isn't accurate to say that we had built this community on the standard of not giving Blizzard a five-dollar one-time payment, when that option never existed before for us to even consider.

The other place I disagree with you is that you appear in your choice of language to be making the claim that most people in the community agree with your stance on not giving Blizzard even one red cent. I get that you feel most people agree with you, and I feel that most people don't agree with you. But without solid empirical evidence to back up either position, I think it's best that we all only speak in terms of "I feel" rather than "we as a community feel". That's only fair. And what we as a community feel will be borne out by what we as a community do, in the days and weeks and months that follow.

I'm all for you trying to sway people to your point of view if you feel that is what's important to you in your service to the community. I wouldn't want anyone to stand in the way of that. I would ask you though to just be careful to avoid presenting your side in such a way that would make it appear to the average consumer to be anything greater than just your personal opinion. I know, many of us have been guilty of this in the past, but we should all guard against it in the interests of being fair to others.
 
Bop said:
It is repetitive, but that's fair.

It stands to reason that there are going to be members of the F2P community who cannot upgrade an account. We accept them, because this is a community that seeks to access as much of WoW as possible without paying money to the company.

Please note that this is a very different goal than not-subscribing. It would make far less sense for this community to continue if we were against subscription rather than payment in general. The subscription is fairly cheap and accessible for anyone who, as you've stated, can afford internet and a computer.

What this community stands by is the refusal to pay money to the company. This has innately manifested itself in the form of not subscribing, but it stands to merit that many among us are simply not able to pay any money, let alone a subscription.

.
Click to expand...

I believe that's subjective. While some members o the community do in fact have a stance against paying a monthly subscription and money in general, I don't think it's right too say that the whole community stands against it. Some members of the community just choose not to pay money, and some members do.

But Bop, would it be better in your mind to wait for free time like the 7 day trial? Would not paying for game time while still reaping the rewards of vet accounts make it better? Or do you believe that even that would be getting a competitive advantage over our fellow f2ps even if they were capable of doing the same thing but choosing not too?
 
Klinda said:
But Bop, would it be better in your mind to wait for free time like the 7 day trial?
Click to expand...

I don't believe starter accounts get access to free time. The page looks different then on my paid account that's inactive. On the paid I have a small picture with 3 buttons that say like upgrade now, something, and try a 10 day trial (which is currently grayed out and comes back every few months). I don't have that on my starter. If starters get 10 day trials this argument is null and void lol everyone should get all the gear.

[MENTION=18826]Bop[/MENTION] What about if you scam a GM to give you some free time, still not paying Blizz? i wouldn't just curious how that stacks up with the "I'm not paying a company philosophy"
 
I tried to get this thread steered away from "morals" of f2p and more toward increasing the amount of competitive and balanced games our bracket will have with an influx of veterans by getting the most ppl using the same gear restrictions but balanced with allowing to play more formidably against 29s. I've played f2p restricted p2p for ~ 2 1/2, 3 years now and came into this bracket as a 24 twink. I know the urge to play at the highest gear / stats possible, especially when ur good friends are offline and u are solo-queing and to get that same advantage as those players who think they are good but are clearly crutching on gear to even match u. But just by playing trial twinking u have already given up that possibility. And now its easier than ever to get p2p chants for cheap ( 5$ one-time payment ). However using money to gain that significant of an advantage over the still majority of players in the bracket is no different than 29s, i assume thats what bop means. In the past many, many, many f2ps use the term pay to win or so on and whether it is 15$ a month or 5$ u are paying for an advantage, u would be hypocritical if u now use veteran accounts to get those same chants and so on. Veteran or linked i believe u should be using at MAX the full boa tab and thats it
 
The question I'm asking myself and scanning all the recent threads to find ideas and answer for is, "where do we go from here?"

I have so many options now...sticking with F2P, upgrading one-time, resubbing and making veteran twinks, but what I really want to know is, what direction will the community go, where will the fun games be played and in what fashion, etc. Thats what I'm excited to see. Its been months since F2p bracket has seemed viable so this is an exciting time for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top