Plenty from World of Tanks, going as far as match fixing to keep people in the “ideal for monetization” range of winrate. Shots literally going away from tanks you were aiming for. Spotting working differently. The patents for matchmaking they had to specifically foster that environment.
It isn’t a very wild guess it’s been empirically proven. Hopping on a low winrate account just makes you a god with impenetrable armour and perfect accuracy. There have been people going through statistics on this. People who say “nah it doesn’t exist” are either low winrate, or haven’t played the game much.
But that’s nothing to do with pay to win, that is a form of balancing. If you’re bad at the game the game gives you advantages so you can play with the big boys. Hopefully the game gradually turns off those advantages when you start getting good and high skill matches have no one with those advantages on.
That being said I’ve never played the game, or watched anything about it, so I might be missinterpreting what you’re saying, but to me it sounds like a good balancing system to keep noobs from being frustrated and experts from destroying everyone who’s not at their level of skill. It’s like if CS gave you more damage or auto-aim if your account was low K/D ratio, they’re trying to make everyone be on a leveled play field. Obviously competitive matches need to have that turned off, but for people playing just for fun that’s the difference between every time I spawn I die and I can kill someone every once in a while.
do you have any examples of this game being pay-to-win?
Plenty from World of Tanks, going as far as match fixing to keep people in the “ideal for monetization” range of winrate. Shots literally going away from tanks you were aiming for. Spotting working differently. The patents for matchmaking they had to specifically foster that environment.
The question was about Warships, not Tanks.
But your statements about the unfair advantage of paying players is just a very wild guess, that has nothing to do with reality.
It isn’t a very wild guess it’s been empirically proven. Hopping on a low winrate account just makes you a god with impenetrable armour and perfect accuracy. There have been people going through statistics on this. People who say “nah it doesn’t exist” are either low winrate, or haven’t played the game much.
could you please point me towards the statistics?
But that’s nothing to do with pay to win, that is a form of balancing. If you’re bad at the game the game gives you advantages so you can play with the big boys. Hopefully the game gradually turns off those advantages when you start getting good and high skill matches have no one with those advantages on.
That being said I’ve never played the game, or watched anything about it, so I might be missinterpreting what you’re saying, but to me it sounds like a good balancing system to keep noobs from being frustrated and experts from destroying everyone who’s not at their level of skill. It’s like if CS gave you more damage or auto-aim if your account was low K/D ratio, they’re trying to make everyone be on a leveled play field. Obviously competitive matches need to have that turned off, but for people playing just for fun that’s the difference between every time I spawn I die and I can kill someone every once in a while.
I’d say it’s pay to advance/skip the grind
If you suck at the game, no amount of money will fix that.just speeds up getting the ships and stuff.
Still need skill
I’m not sure paying for time is paying to win.
Yes, it is.
but no amount of money would give you the skill, right?
You wouldn’t need skill to win. That’s the point.
Paying doesn’t make your maneuvering or aiming better. A noob buying better ships will still die because they are a noob.
In most games, I fully agree though.
what exactly is the point? how come you don’t need the skill to win? sorry for stupid questions, I’m not very deeply familiar with Warships.