Defending that War Thunder has the exact same system almost to a T and it isn’t a problem there?
It could be dialed back for sure but we have evidence of how it looks on practice.
Discord???
They still use that thing?
should they use teamspeak instead?
like, what is your point?
If you want to join, here is the invitation link
Really at the end of the day I think the existing logistics and progression system isn’t compatible with that type of monetization.
As everyone else was saying, it turns it into a lootbox system.
I think everyone here understands that developers need to make money to keep a game running because of course they need to pay people for a lot of jobs. But there seems to be a lot of debate on what the developers want versus what the players want. Here are some of my suggestions.
What I would like to suggest is that the developers throw any idea out of the window that involves any kind of weapon/item giving the player a (significant) advantage in combat over players that have not bought said item/weapon. Giving players that pay for such items/weapons a (significant) advantage will make others frustrated and abandon the game sooner. I’ve allready seen this in the current version of the game where people got frustrated because the premium squads are much more powerfull than your regular squads. The premium squads have very good soldiers right from the start (this includes AI behaviour) with unique perks that give, in my experience, a great advantage over others.They also have submachineguns that have allready been upgraded and thus become very powerfull. This becomes especially apparent in the current version of the game where submachineguns are generally the most powerfull due to fights mainly taking place at short ranges.
I’ve seen a lot of people here come up with great ideas especially regarding cosmetics, which I believe is one of the best ways to monetise a game. Cosmetics should not give advantages to players but make them unique. For example: Guns have massive cosmetic potential with stocks, barrels and camouflages being the main ones. Uniforms are also a great way to monetize with cosmetics. You can for example let players equip a variety of helmets and camouflaged clothing that would make them unique (try to stay away from camouflages that blend into the environments too well). These cosmetics don’t have to be very expensive but as long as you can provide a large amount of them they should remain profitable. You could potentially introduce another menu specifically made for customisation. Here the player could choose whatever combination of helmets, boots and uniforms they wanted.
/see screenshot for a suggestions/
These cosmetics don’t have to be implemented all at once, the best option is to introduce a set of cosmetics each update or after a set amount of time (when they will be introduced is something that we can discuss). This will make people exited for new cosmetics. These sets could even be a historical set, for example a “Battle of Tunisia German Uniform set”.
There are of course many more ways to monetise this game but I again ask to not go the “Pay to win” route, this will make you a lot of money at first but it will ruin the experience of the game and drive people away from it. I’ve enjoyed the game for what it is and I would hate to see it go down like that.
Thank you for reading this I hope this has given you some ideas for how to monetise this game in a way that is in my opinion the best.
Here is how i would imagine the customisation system would look like: 
5 Likes
for now this looks like mobile game. free to play but to speed up process use “insert premium currency” and with leveling and combining * for soldiers 
6 Likes
And just like in the mobile game you are required to spend money to be competitive or be meat for those who did.
It blows my mind how anyone could think that this is a good approach… only thing this achieves is waking more anger in gaming community.
6 Likes
I don’t think it’s a good approach, but I think the community is overreacting to it.
This same system exists in War Thunder but it doesn’t create those problems because it’s so expensive to max out a crew or vehicle with microtransactions alone that nobody wants to bother.
In War Thunder, you are not gambling for faster progress as far as I know.
Also, Enlisted works a little bit differently than WT (that btw also allows you to buy slots to play comfortably for non premium currency, additional slots that are however not needed and are just convenience requires you to pay up).
All in all, premium currency can be in the game as long as monetization is not forcing players to pay for optimal game experience (which Moscow pretty much does to new players)
You can iirc but War Thunder’s lootboxes are pretty inconsequential and more of a bonus mechanic than a core mechanic.
From what I’ve seen the proposed monetization system lets you buy campaign and squad levels outright, like you can buy vehicles and modules outright in War Thunder.
I see that as the bigger threat than someone buying logistics orders.
War Thunder players have no real alternative to play
Not really relevant. I’m saying in War Thunder you don’t see anyone even mention maxed out ubercrewmates being a problem.
Please keep weapon monetisation to aesthetics. I’d happily pay for a really cool looking gun, perhaps ‘factory new’ with clean wood and shiny metal, but skipping a long grind to better guns puts me off the game.
If you REALLY insist on going ahead with this, at least restrict weapon upgrades until the appropriate level is reached, or the weapon is already received in a drop. I’d only accept that if someone higher-up mandated that things must be this way.
I love this game, and I’d hate it to go the way of H&G where the game is dominated by people spending real money. It gives short term revenue, but new players won’t stick around. I’ll take a well-populated game over personal advantage any day.
1 Like
You don´t? It is pretty important factor in high tier and makes big difference. Maybe we are just playing around different people but I hear complaints of “premium g-tolerance” etc. far too often.
Also, “no alternative” argument actually is relevant, because it more forces people into tollerating this. Can we say the same about Enlisted?
1 Like
There are bigger problems ^^’ (but ppl are complaining about that too)
10$ for monthly subscription, on the top of that premium P2W squads for 30$ each and possibly monetised every other aspect of the game is shocking when you compare to other online shooters.
With WT you have nothing else to compare. Its very unique, so take it ore leave it.
I’ve been selected to the monetization test, is this where I give feedback???
couldn’t have been said better than that.
although, i don’t think that giving the ability to players to decide torso and legs would be a good idea, because some people will most likely wear the most weird cosmtics that they can put on the character just to " meme around ". so i would insthead; use:
so that you can’t miss match colors and put others odd/weird combinations.
( and not ruin the " immersion " )
1 Like
I used to forum warrior there as hard as I do here and I never once saw it get brought up from what I remember, apart from maybe by me saying that gunners become almost halfway competent if you max out their aiming stats.
Really I wouldn’t be opposed to an “early sample” approach where you can buy a functionally-identical gun at a lower level.
For example, and I already know the M3 is minimum level, the M3 and M3A1 could have identical stats but you could do a one-time purchase of a pack of 7 M3A1s before you unlock the M3.
Similar to what Dust 514 did for monetization.
1 Like