Without diving into the detail, I don't like the idea of people paying less unless it's justifiable that the expense of running a server for those clients is demonstrably cheaper. I don't know what proportion of Intrepid's expenses will be in San Diego and what proportion will be in another location with significantly cheaper overheads. The only items that I can envisage being significantly cheaper is the wages of support staff / GMs in some worldwide locations, but then the cheapest locations might not be the best place for a server. Some locations may need more staff to support several local languages.
It's complex and ultimately I don't need to know what contractual arrangements Intrepid make with other players.
The only items that I can envisage being significantly cheaper is the wages of support staff / GMs in some worldwide locations, but then the cheapest locations might not be the best place for a server. Some locations made need more staff to support several local languages.
I posted a list of power prices in various regions earlier in this thread/in the other thread.
The highlights of this are that power in parts of the EU were around US$0.33 Kw/h, while power in one country in the MENA region was US$0.01 Kw/h.
Internet access is along a similar general line to this.
These are not things that most people would think about, but they are things that Intrepid would think about.
This is a friendly reminder for people who have any new suggestion for Ashes of Creation game in general which would require Intrepid team to reconsider their decisions, plans or vision don't hesitate to post it on the forums to have a decent discussion about its pros&cons and totally ignore anyone who would accuse you of being disrespectful, feel free buddy!
This is a friendly reminder for people who have any new suggestion for Ashes of Creation game in general which would require Intrepid team to reconsider their decisions, plans or vision don't hesitate to post it on the forums to have a decent discussion about its pros&cons and totally ignore anyone who would accuse you of being disrespectful, feel free buddy!
Until Intrepid reiterate that they have no plans on changing what they have in mind - or in this case, reiterate it twice.
I mean, it's not like we haven't picked holes all through both versions of the one suggestion that has been made, and pointed out why Intrepid wouldn't even consider it.
If someone came up with an actual workable solution, there could be some discussion around it - but so far we don't have anything that can be worked with at all - we just have three people (or is it only two people?) that refuse to accept this.
This is a friendly reminder for people who have any new suggestion for Ashes of Creation game in general which would require Intrepid team to reconsider their decisions, plans or vision don't hesitate to post it on the forums to have a decent discussion about its pros&cons and totally ignore anyone who would accuse you of being disrespectful, feel free buddy!
Another reminder for this friendly reminder in case you haven't noticed it folks!
This is a friendly reminder for people who have any new suggestion for Ashes of Creation game in general which would require Intrepid team to reconsider their decisions, plans or vision don't hesitate to post it on the forums to have a decent discussion about its pros&cons and totally ignore anyone who would accuse you of being disrespectful, feel free buddy!
Another reminder for this friendly reminder in case you haven't noticed it folks!
No matter how much you complain on the forum, it won't happen. It's not financially viable by a long shot. And resorting to acting childish won't change it.
This is a friendly reminder for people who have any new suggestion for Ashes of Creation game in general which would require Intrepid team to reconsider their decisions, plans or vision don't hesitate to post it on the forums to have a decent discussion about its pros&cons and totally ignore anyone who would accuse you of being disrespectful, feel free buddy!
Another reminder for this friendly reminder in case you haven't noticed it folks!
I'm starting to wonder if this kind of post counts as impersonating a moderator.
@Noaani ,
Thanks for the additional info. I approach the issue only from Intrepid's business perspective because that seems to be the only version of "fair" that works for me. I understand that wages in some countries may exclude some players from playing Ashes. I can accept that. The same demographic that can't afford $15/month probably also can't afford a low end PC at $300-$500, even having had several years to save up.
Now that I've read a few more posts I can see the topic is pretty much covered, I don't feel the need to add more.
I approach the issue only from Intrepid's business perspective because that seems to be the only version of "fair" that works for me.
Same.
Even if fair wasn't the goal, if it isn't going to work financially for Intrepid, it isn't going to work.
What I will say is that I do make the assumption that people in these regions can afford a computer that is capable of playing Ashes. It is fairly common for manufacturers like Intel to offload surplus stock to such regions at drastically lower prices than what they sell for in the west (90% of the cost of a high end CPU is pure profit for Intel). They also do runs of older chips at times - if it will prevent them from needing to temporarily shut down an older fabrication plant. This will often be of chips that are no longer listed as being produced, and they usually get sent to distributers in these areas.
As such, I do see the desire for people in these areas to want to play the game at an affordable price as being valid - though expecting to be offered it cheaper would be somewhat entitled.
That is why I think Intrepids plan is great. It makes use of the local economy of these areas in order to offer the game to people in these areas at a price that suits that economy. Since the servers run locally would use the local pricing for power, internet, potentially hardware and any wages that need to be paid. As these all need to be paid according to the local economy, it is fair enough that people accessing this service also pay according to the local economy.
And hey, Intrepid running a server there is injecting a portion of the subscription fee back in to that economy, which is another great thing - rather than that money goes to The Netherlands or where ever if these people were playing on EU servers.
But you have been on these forums long enough to know that I am happy being the bad guy to these people.
3
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
@Noaani ,
he same demographic that can't afford $15/month probably also can't afford a low end PC at $300-$500, even having had several years to save up.
Now that I've read a few more posts I can see the topic is pretty much covered, I don't feel the need to add more.
PCs probably won't be costing them $300-500 in their countries, though.
Didn't get the answer they were begging for, so had to start another thread just to waste everyone's time hoping for different comments.
Begging/hoping for different comments? really?
The only thing I was hoping while I was posting this new suggestion is that it to be implemented, besides that I wanted to know the opinion of each one who engaged in the last thread on my new suggestion.
Best course of action is to just stop responding to certain posts. If you feel a post / posts make no sense part from upsetting and going in circles, just let it be.
Now we even have Toast saying " we've shared our plans for how some regions may have harmonized pricing in the future " so let´s hope for the best in what that can lead too. The game will not be out for quite some time, so don´t burn your candle in both ends and exhaust yourself. Many agree, many don´t. It´s not worth arguing, neither on the topic or with the people.
Yes, you are definitely right. Need also the capability to snatch an alpha key to contribute in the current phase and next phases.
Didn't get the answer they were begging for, so had to start another thread just to waste everyone's time hoping for different comments.
Begging/hoping for different comments? really?
The only thing I was hoping while I was posting this new suggestion is that it to be implemented, besides that I wanted to know the opinion of each one who engaged in the last thread on my new suggestion.
Best course of action is to just stop responding to certain posts. If you feel a post / posts make no sense part from upsetting and going in circles, just let it be.
Now we even have Toast saying " we've shared our plans for how some regions may have harmonized pricing in the future " so let´s hope for the best in what that can lead too. The game will not be out for quite some time, so don´t burn your candle in both ends and exhaust yourself. Many agree, many don´t. It´s not worth arguing, neither on the topic or with the people.
Yes, you are definitely right. Need also the capability to snatch an alpha key to contribute in the current phase and next phases.
I find it interesting that the notion of ignoring the person giving you correct and accurate information is something people would agree with.
As I have said a few times, you may not like what it is I am saying, what what I am saying is what Intrepid have said. Feel free to ignore what Intrepid have said if you like, just don't expect anything to come from threads like this if you do.
If you want to come up with a different scheme that works for you, I'm happy to get in to a discussion on any ideas you have that are workable.
However, an idea that straight up isn't workable isn't worth getting in to a discussion on, and the singular idea you have had so far (with a slight variation) is not workable at all. The first thing you need to account for if you want to pay less, is you need to come up with a way for Intrepid to need to pay less to maintain your account and game access - this is why local servers work for them, the cost of running them in such areas is a fraction of the cost of running them in EU or NA (or Australia).
Come up with a way to do that, and you have something worth discussing.
Didn't get the answer they were begging for, so had to start another thread just to waste everyone's time hoping for different comments.
Begging/hoping for different comments? really?
The only thing I was hoping while I was posting this new suggestion is that it to be implemented, besides that I wanted to know the opinion of each one who engaged in the last thread on my new suggestion.
Best course of action is to just stop responding to certain posts. If you feel a post / posts make no sense part from upsetting and going in circles, just let it be.
Now we even have Toast saying " we've shared our plans for how some regions may have harmonized pricing in the future " so let´s hope for the best in what that can lead too. The game will not be out for quite some time, so don´t burn your candle in both ends and exhaust yourself. Many agree, many don´t. It´s not worth arguing, neither on the topic or with the people.
Yes, you are definitely right. Need also the capability to snatch an alpha key to contribute in the current phase and next phases.
Yupp me too supporting you bud and wishing us best of luck
Have to say thanks to @Noaani here for doing all the work. That was a wild read.
1
Options
KarthosMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I'm going to whole heartedly disagree and destroy one of your points right out of hand.
Botters WILL blow $40 right out the gate to scam, because even if their account is active for a day, they will make that back in all likelihood. It's a numbers game for them. If they make 100 accounts, and 90 of them get banned, they just spent $4000, but they managed to make $20,000 with the 10 accounts that didn't get grabbed.
Given these are totally made up numbers, but it's how scammers operate, and since scammers and botters still exist, it's safe to say their business model works and we haven't starved them out of business yet. So this point you made is just not valid because that's not how it works. In fact, you're entire argument is proof that a sub based system is more a hardship for botters than an upfront cost, because YOU yourself state this payment model is more of a hardship than just paying upfront.
I don't disagree fundamentally with your entire premise, but you aren't going to win support with this very flawed, very wrong sentiment as one of your MAIN points to drive your point home.
I don't disagree fundamentally with your entire premise, but you aren't going to win support with this very flawed, very wrong sentiment as one of your MAIN points to drive your point home.
Assuming his premise is wanting Ashes to be affordable in his region, I completely agree.
I also agree with your thoughts on the suggestion not stopping botters, hackers or general RMT accounts at all. While this isnt the first point I am pushing in regards to an alternate subscription scheme, it is probably the second most important point imo (though I can see many people considering it the most important).
The other thing I've not seen is any real reason why Intrepids existing plan wouldn't work. There is no real point in coming up with a new plan unless there is a reason the one they have wont work - and so far all that has been said is "we play on EU servers in other games". This is not a reason, as in those games, everything costs the same for you regardless of where you are from.
Didn't get the answer they were begging for, so had to start another thread just to waste everyone's time hoping for different comments.
Begging/hoping for different comments? really?
The only thing I was hoping while I was posting this new suggestion is that it to be implemented, besides that I wanted to know the opinion of each one who engaged in the last thread on my new suggestion.
Best course of action is to just stop responding to certain posts. If you feel a post / posts make no sense part from upsetting and going in circles, just let it be.
Now we even have Toast saying " we've shared our plans for how some regions may have harmonized pricing in the future " so let´s hope for the best in what that can lead too. The game will not be out for quite some time, so don´t burn your candle in both ends and exhaust yourself. Many agree, many don´t. It´s not worth arguing, neither on the topic or with the people.
Yes, you are definitely right. Need also the capability to snatch an alpha key to contribute in the current phase and next phases.
I suffer from serious insomnia, sleep depravation and heat allergy, so these month´s a year is not very constructive for me. I hope i will be able to participate in testing ahead post the heat...but it depends on me getting my workshop up in full. Crafting is gonna commence soon, so by then i hope to get some extra cash to perhaps set on a test pack.
As for testing, i am really looking forward to it. Been a long time since done anything of the sorts, but i fully enjoy doing my part. Also, when the NDA´s drop, i hope we can get a better look as well into systems and be able to analyze footage and help even without having keys for the tests as well.
0
Options
KarthosMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
The other thing I've not seen is any real reason why Intrepids existing plan wouldn't work. There is no real point in coming up with a new plan unless there is a reason the one they have wont work - and so far all that has been said is "we play on EU servers in other games". This is not a reason, as in those games, everything costs the same for you regardless of where you are from.
This is really key here.
I know it's common to see people come in during development of a game, and make suggestions, state things they want to see. This however is not that, this is just a suggestion for something that doesn't need improved upon, because frankly. it isn't broken, nor has it been shown to not work.
His original premise is making Ashes affordable despite your region, but he's shown us nothing in the way that it's not already other than "people can't afford $15 a month where I'm from". They can't? Because they seem to get into other games just fine.
Didn't get the answer they were begging for, so had to start another thread just to waste everyone's time hoping for different comments.
Begging/hoping for different comments? really?
The only thing I was hoping while I was posting this new suggestion is that it to be implemented, besides that I wanted to know the opinion of each one who engaged in the last thread on my new suggestion.
Best course of action is to just stop responding to certain posts. If you feel a post / posts make no sense part from upsetting and going in circles, just let it be.
Now we even have Toast saying " we've shared our plans for how some regions may have harmonized pricing in the future " so let´s hope for the best in what that can lead too. The game will not be out for quite some time, so don´t burn your candle in both ends and exhaust yourself. Many agree, many don´t. It´s not worth arguing, neither on the topic or with the people.
Yes, you are definitely right. Need also the capability to snatch an alpha key to contribute in the current phase and next phases.
I suffer from serious insomnia, sleep depravation and heat allergy, so these month´s a year is not very constructive for me. I hope i will be able to participate in testing ahead post the heat...but it depends on me getting my workshop up in full. Crafting is gonna commence soon, so by then i hope to get some extra cash to perhaps set on a test pack.
As for testing, i am really looking forward to it. Been a long time since done anything of the sorts, but i fully enjoy doing my part. Also, when the NDA´s drop, i hope we can get a better look as well into systems and be able to analyze footage and help even without having keys for the tests as well.
Hope you get better as soon as possible.
Actually for me it hasn't been so long for such a thing, but the last game I was testing wasn't that promising and got me disappointed after all and wasn't even my favorite genre. That's why I'm so excited for testing AoC
Correct me if I'm wrong -- I'm under an impression that some folks seem to be thinking that Intrepid pays a fixed cost for the EU server, and therefore letting additional players from other regions in at a reduced cost "shouldn't hurt", since the resources have already been paid for.
So I'd just like to point out that AWS charges by usage (cpu/mem/storage/bandwidth), not fixed cost. Every additional player will consume additional server resource and incur additional AWS charge on Intrepid. There's a bottom line that subscription fee per player must at least cover the increased cost incurred by the server resources consumed by the player. After all Intrepid runs Ashes as a business, not a charity.
But I don't know what's Ashes' estimated average cpu/mem/disk/bandwidth consumption per player, so I don't know how much infrastructure cost per player that translates into. If you think when you pay a reduced subscription it can still cover Intrepid's increased cost in the EU region, then sure by all means continue the conversation. Otherwise I'd say the argument's likely pointless.
Correct me if I'm wrong -- I'm under an impression that some folks seem to be thinking that Intrepid pays a fixed cost for the EU server, and therefore letting additional players from other regions in at a reduced cost "shouldn't hurt", since the resources have already been paid for.
So I'd just like to point out that AWS charges by usage (cpu/mem/storage/bandwidth), not fixed cost. Every additional player will consume additional server resource and incur additional AWS charge on Intrepid. There's a bottom line that subscription fee per player must at least cover the increased cost incurred by the server resources consumed by the player. After all Intrepid runs Ashes as a business, not a charity.
But I don't know what's Ashes' estimated average cpu/mem/disk/bandwidth consumption per player, so I don't know how much infrastructure cost per player that translates into. If you think when you pay a reduced subscription it can still cover Intrepid's increased cost in the EU region, then sure by all means continue the conversation. Otherwise I'd say the argument's likely pointless.
This is the point I have been making the whole thread.
We dont know Intrepids cost structure, but they do.
In knowing that, they have said they will look at setting up regional servers to help players in less well off regions play the game, as that seems to be what makes the most sense to them.
Before any other system is considered, there needs to be a valid reason (a technical reason,most likely) why this plan that Intrepid have wont work. Such a valid reason is absent in this case, with the only reason given being "we always play on EU servers".
It's been a bit of an odd thread. Several of us have been pointing out to the OP what they should do to ensure their best chance of access to this game at a price they can afford, all of us with the same suggestion (convince Intrepid to host a MENA server). That suggestion is Intrepids suggestion, not ours - we are simply passing it along. It has been met with disdain, and a seeming expectation that Ashes must have a cost structure exactly matching a pay-to-win game, which means people in that region should expect access to EU servers at less-than-cost.
It's been a strange mix of entitlement, disrespect, arrogance and assumption. Not surprisingly, the OP's singular suggestion has gained no traction.
Comments
It's complex and ultimately I don't need to know what contractual arrangements Intrepid make with other players.
I posted a list of power prices in various regions earlier in this thread/in the other thread.
The highlights of this are that power in parts of the EU were around US$0.33 Kw/h, while power in one country in the MENA region was US$0.01 Kw/h.
Internet access is along a similar general line to this.
These are not things that most people would think about, but they are things that Intrepid would think about.
This is a friendly reminder for people who have any new suggestion for Ashes of Creation game in general which would require Intrepid team to reconsider their decisions, plans or vision don't hesitate to post it on the forums to have a decent discussion about its pros&cons and totally ignore anyone who would accuse you of being disrespectful, feel free buddy!
Until Intrepid reiterate that they have no plans on changing what they have in mind - or in this case, reiterate it twice.
I mean, it's not like we haven't picked holes all through both versions of the one suggestion that has been made, and pointed out why Intrepid wouldn't even consider it.
If someone came up with an actual workable solution, there could be some discussion around it - but so far we don't have anything that can be worked with at all - we just have three people (or is it only two people?) that refuse to accept this.
Another reminder for this friendly reminder in case you haven't noticed it folks!
No matter how much you complain on the forum, it won't happen. It's not financially viable by a long shot. And resorting to acting childish won't change it.
I'm starting to wonder if this kind of post counts as impersonating a moderator.
You don't get to "remind" us how to post.
Thanks for the additional info. I approach the issue only from Intrepid's business perspective because that seems to be the only version of "fair" that works for me. I understand that wages in some countries may exclude some players from playing Ashes. I can accept that. The same demographic that can't afford $15/month probably also can't afford a low end PC at $300-$500, even having had several years to save up.
Now that I've read a few more posts I can see the topic is pretty much covered, I don't feel the need to add more.
Even if fair wasn't the goal, if it isn't going to work financially for Intrepid, it isn't going to work.
What I will say is that I do make the assumption that people in these regions can afford a computer that is capable of playing Ashes. It is fairly common for manufacturers like Intel to offload surplus stock to such regions at drastically lower prices than what they sell for in the west (90% of the cost of a high end CPU is pure profit for Intel). They also do runs of older chips at times - if it will prevent them from needing to temporarily shut down an older fabrication plant. This will often be of chips that are no longer listed as being produced, and they usually get sent to distributers in these areas.
As such, I do see the desire for people in these areas to want to play the game at an affordable price as being valid - though expecting to be offered it cheaper would be somewhat entitled.
That is why I think Intrepids plan is great. It makes use of the local economy of these areas in order to offer the game to people in these areas at a price that suits that economy. Since the servers run locally would use the local pricing for power, internet, potentially hardware and any wages that need to be paid. As these all need to be paid according to the local economy, it is fair enough that people accessing this service also pay according to the local economy.
And hey, Intrepid running a server there is injecting a portion of the subscription fee back in to that economy, which is another great thing - rather than that money goes to The Netherlands or where ever if these people were playing on EU servers.
But you have been on these forums long enough to know that I am happy being the bad guy to these people.
Yes, you are definitely right. Need also the capability to snatch an alpha key to contribute in the current phase and next phases.
I find it interesting that the notion of ignoring the person giving you correct and accurate information is something people would agree with.
As I have said a few times, you may not like what it is I am saying, what what I am saying is what Intrepid have said. Feel free to ignore what Intrepid have said if you like, just don't expect anything to come from threads like this if you do.
If you want to come up with a different scheme that works for you, I'm happy to get in to a discussion on any ideas you have that are workable.
However, an idea that straight up isn't workable isn't worth getting in to a discussion on, and the singular idea you have had so far (with a slight variation) is not workable at all. The first thing you need to account for if you want to pay less, is you need to come up with a way for Intrepid to need to pay less to maintain your account and game access - this is why local servers work for them, the cost of running them in such areas is a fraction of the cost of running them in EU or NA (or Australia).
Come up with a way to do that, and you have something worth discussing.
Yupp me too supporting you bud and wishing us best of luck
Botters WILL blow $40 right out the gate to scam, because even if their account is active for a day, they will make that back in all likelihood. It's a numbers game for them. If they make 100 accounts, and 90 of them get banned, they just spent $4000, but they managed to make $20,000 with the 10 accounts that didn't get grabbed.
Given these are totally made up numbers, but it's how scammers operate, and since scammers and botters still exist, it's safe to say their business model works and we haven't starved them out of business yet. So this point you made is just not valid because that's not how it works. In fact, you're entire argument is proof that a sub based system is more a hardship for botters than an upfront cost, because YOU yourself state this payment model is more of a hardship than just paying upfront.
I don't disagree fundamentally with your entire premise, but you aren't going to win support with this very flawed, very wrong sentiment as one of your MAIN points to drive your point home.
Assuming his premise is wanting Ashes to be affordable in his region, I completely agree.
I also agree with your thoughts on the suggestion not stopping botters, hackers or general RMT accounts at all. While this isnt the first point I am pushing in regards to an alternate subscription scheme, it is probably the second most important point imo (though I can see many people considering it the most important).
The other thing I've not seen is any real reason why Intrepids existing plan wouldn't work. There is no real point in coming up with a new plan unless there is a reason the one they have wont work - and so far all that has been said is "we play on EU servers in other games". This is not a reason, as in those games, everything costs the same for you regardless of where you are from.
I suffer from serious insomnia, sleep depravation and heat allergy, so these month´s a year is not very constructive for me. I hope i will be able to participate in testing ahead post the heat...but it depends on me getting my workshop up in full. Crafting is gonna commence soon, so by then i hope to get some extra cash to perhaps set on a test pack.
As for testing, i am really looking forward to it. Been a long time since done anything of the sorts, but i fully enjoy doing my part. Also, when the NDA´s drop, i hope we can get a better look as well into systems and be able to analyze footage and help even without having keys for the tests as well.
This is really key here.
I know it's common to see people come in during development of a game, and make suggestions, state things they want to see. This however is not that, this is just a suggestion for something that doesn't need improved upon, because frankly. it isn't broken, nor has it been shown to not work.
His original premise is making Ashes affordable despite your region, but he's shown us nothing in the way that it's not already other than "people can't afford $15 a month where I'm from". They can't? Because they seem to get into other games just fine.
Hope you get better as soon as possible.
Actually for me it hasn't been so long for such a thing, but the last game I was testing wasn't that promising and got me disappointed after all and wasn't even my favorite genre. That's why I'm so excited for testing AoC
So I'd just like to point out that AWS charges by usage (cpu/mem/storage/bandwidth), not fixed cost. Every additional player will consume additional server resource and incur additional AWS charge on Intrepid. There's a bottom line that subscription fee per player must at least cover the increased cost incurred by the server resources consumed by the player. After all Intrepid runs Ashes as a business, not a charity.
But I don't know what's Ashes' estimated average cpu/mem/disk/bandwidth consumption per player, so I don't know how much infrastructure cost per player that translates into. If you think when you pay a reduced subscription it can still cover Intrepid's increased cost in the EU region, then sure by all means continue the conversation. Otherwise I'd say the argument's likely pointless.
We dont know Intrepids cost structure, but they do.
In knowing that, they have said they will look at setting up regional servers to help players in less well off regions play the game, as that seems to be what makes the most sense to them.
Before any other system is considered, there needs to be a valid reason (a technical reason,most likely) why this plan that Intrepid have wont work. Such a valid reason is absent in this case, with the only reason given being "we always play on EU servers".
It's been a bit of an odd thread. Several of us have been pointing out to the OP what they should do to ensure their best chance of access to this game at a price they can afford, all of us with the same suggestion (convince Intrepid to host a MENA server). That suggestion is Intrepids suggestion, not ours - we are simply passing it along. It has been met with disdain, and a seeming expectation that Ashes must have a cost structure exactly matching a pay-to-win game, which means people in that region should expect access to EU servers at less-than-cost.
It's been a strange mix of entitlement, disrespect, arrogance and assumption. Not surprisingly, the OP's singular suggestion has gained no traction.