PDA

View Full Version : Pay to win?



Huxley_S
06-07-2007, 06:00 PM
OK. I've been thinking about ways to make online play more 'interesting', shall we say. My first thought in a drunken exchange since deleted yesterday was to make it political.

However, and hear me out my fellow pilots, an alternative would be a pay to win scenario.

Obviously no one is interested in pay to play, i.e. you have to pay simply for the privilege of playing, but consider paying for the chance of winning.

Imagine a server where kills and completed objectives are translated into cold hard cash.

Now obviously, this is for the future and SoW+. Imagine the hue and cry over kill stealing if actual cash was involved! It could get nasty http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif . So obviously, the scoring has to be improved for this to be viable.

But imagine, you pay 5 bucks on your credit card to enter the server, and credit is added to your card for the kills you get (or objectives completed). Every hour another five bucks is deducted from your card, i.e. if in an hour you got five kills or more you're in the black if not you're in the red.

AKA_TAGERT
06-07-2007, 06:06 PM
Originally posted by Huxley_S:
Obviously no one is interested in pay to play, i.e. you have to pay simply for the privilege of playing
Depends.. Before IL2 came out the best WWII flight sims were pay to play.. So if you wanted the best, you had to pay for it. As for the rest, option II.

Huxley_S
06-07-2007, 06:14 PM
If it were simply a question of paying for playing, I'd forget it. I'd need some kind of "value added" even to consider that as an option.

If skills and teamwork could somehow be rewarded, whilst at the same time earning revenue for the hosts of the server then I'd be interested.

That's kind of what I'm getting at.

P.S. Also I am quite aware that this is not something that novices would or should be interested in. This is more for your flyers who are confident in their skills who want to go up against similarly skilled flyers with a bit of a wager to make it interesting. Maybe even $5 is too much. It doesn't really matter what the amount is, as long as the transaction fees still make it worthwhile.

AKA_TAGERT
06-07-2007, 06:17 PM
Originally posted by Huxley_S:
If it were simply a question of paying for playing, I'd forget it. I'd need some kind of "value added" even to consider that as an option.
As I pointed out before IL2 the 'best' WWII flight sims were pay to play.. If that is not enough for you than also consider the fact that they were also the only sims that had over 100 flyable planes representing the ETO and PTO and Russian front aircraft.. Several different severs dedicated to specific fronts and due to the constant revinew they were kept current with patchs and new planes every so often.

That is the way it was prior to Oleg

The only way to get that kind of support was from a pay to play sim.. All other sims prior to IL2 were lucky to see a patch let alone two or more.. That and addons were not likly in that the sim makers were into the quick buck. Get in, get out, in that the 2nd sale (read addons) hardly ever matched the inital sales. The only sims that came close were SWOTL and Falcon 3.0 in that they both had about 3 addons.

Oleg basically took a box shelf sim and gave it the support that only pay to play sims were use to getting. He has set the bar so high that I don't see any other sim makers getting close to it without having some kind of pay to play. I think we will be refering to IL2 10 to 20 years from now about how they set the standard and how no one else has ever come close. On that note I don't think even Oleg can repeat it! The cost of doing business is just too high without some kind of revanew comming in.


Originally posted by Huxley_S:
If skills and teamwork could somehow be rewarded, whilst at the same time earning revenue for the hosts of the server then I'd be interested.

That's kind of what I'm getting at.
Well, don't hold your breath.

heywooood
06-07-2007, 06:22 PM
hmmm - if you think the crying over cheating is bad now? over points?...and now you want to suggest playing for cash....wow.

can you imagine the screaming? I can.

dude - great idea!

I love nothing more than to come here and read the bellyaching over cheating and 'kill stealing' Laugh OUT F'Ing Loud hillarious.

Huxley_S
06-07-2007, 06:27 PM
Originally posted by heywooood:
hmmm - if you think the crying over cheating is bad now? over points?...and now you want to suggest playing for cash....wow.

can you imagine the screaming? I can.

dude - great idea!

I love nothing more than to come here and read the bellyaching over cheating and 'kill stealing' Laugh OUT F'Ing Loud hillarious.

I think this would be the biggest drawback.... Player X cost me a dollar etc etc

Totally. So like I say, the scoring has to be improved to make this even remotely viable. Perhaps entirely team based, so that kill stealing becomes redundant... but then bad pilots become a liability!

I'm not saying it's simple, but perhaps do-able?

Huxley_S
06-07-2007, 06:39 PM
Oleg basically took a box shelf sim and gave it the support that only pay to play sims were use to getting. He has set the bar so high that I don't see any other sim makers getting close to it without having some kind of pay to play. I think we will be refering to IL2 10 to 20 years from now about how they set the standard and how no one else has ever come close. On that note I don't think even Oleg can repeat it! The cost of doing business is just too high without some kind of revanew comming in.

I don't think the pay to play model works long term. Not in this genre anyway. There will always be too many geeks interested in aviation doing it for the love of it to make pay to play viable. I.e. they will find a way.

But at the same time, it's not free to run a server like WarClouds or BigTop or ZekesVs.... etc

These dudes are running these servers out of their own pockets and donations.

But what if they were able, through the software, to make money from people gambling on their piloting skills?

The only real drawbacks I can see, is the numbers of players (obviously no one is going to pay to play on an empty server) and the scoring (no one is going to want to see their dollars stolen by other players).

Huxley_S
06-07-2007, 07:08 PM
So...

1. All kills are attributed to the team, therefore eliminating kill stealing. Rather, the quicker the kill, the quicker the bucks. So the kill stealer is elevated to good egg in a stroke.

2. When you join the server and pick a team / are automatically allocated a team based on keeping the sides equal, you are unable to change teams or rejoin the server within 1 hour. Extra incentive for to you to make your team the winning side.

3. Points are awarded based on the number of players in the server. i.e. if there are just two players on the server a kill is worth a dollar (for example) but if four players are on the server, a kill is worth 50c (divided among the players of that team) etc etc. If the number of players is uneven, the side with the fewest players earns more per kill.

4. Vulching or team kills earn money for the opposing side.

5. Five deaths (or a fixed number of deaths) kicks the bad pilot from the server for 1 hour, thereby giving his team a chance to catch up.

etc etc

AKA_TAGERT
06-07-2007, 07:09 PM
Originally posted by Huxley_S:
I don't think the pay to play model works long term. Not in this genre anyway.
That is 'neat' that you 'think' that.. but the FACTS do not support that 'thought'.

In that the likes of Warbirds has been around since 1992 (orginally called confirmed kill). And before that and before the internet there was Airwarrior at $12/hr on the Genie network. Airwarrior stopped putting money back into the sim and rested on the fact that for the longest time they were the only game in town. Than the likes of Warbirds and Aces High put them out of business.


Originally posted by Huxley_S:
There will always be too many geeks interested in aviation doing it for the love of it to make pay to play viable. I.e. they will find a way.
Again, history does not support that theory. Except for Oleg most sim makers get into flight sims to make money. There may be alot of geeks who love it.. but too geekie to find a company to make it work. I think Oleg is one of a kind that is geekie enough to love it enough but still has some business since to make it work. That is a hard combination to find. Last one to come close to that was Daymon Sly the maker of RBI, AOTP, and AOE.


Originally posted by Huxley_S:
But at the same time, it's not free to run a server like WarClouds or BigTop or ZekesVs.... etc These dudes are running these servers out of their own pockets and donations.
Enh, most servers are not dedicated servers, alot are just based off an existing IP account on some PC in thier home. But the good ones are the dedicated ones that rent the server hardware to do it right. With that said there are only a hand full of them in the HL lobbie.. You can allways find a hand full of just about anything in this world.. i.e. exceptions to the rule.


Originally posted by Huxley_S:
But what if they were able, through the software, to make money from people gambling on their piloting skills?
Sounds like more trouble than it is worth. I think most folks would be happy to pay a monthly fee just to have some well organised web sight that kept stats and ranking. Alot of want to be aces would pay for them kinds of braging rights.


Originally posted by Huxley_S:
The only real drawbacks I can see, is the numbers of players (obviously no one is going to pay to play on an empty server) and the scoring (no one is going to want to see their dollars stolen by other players).
Too name a few.. it is one thing to have a flight sim running in real time.. it is another to have some software running along side that keeping stats and ranking and determining who gets the kill money. Doable? Sure, but think of the strange bunch of Quakie left feild high scoring wack jobs that would attracked! Would you really want to fly with bunch of merc mindset nubs like that? There would be NO TEAM WORK to speak of and nothing but a bunch of LONE WOLFS out to steal your kills 24/7

XyZspineZyX
06-07-2007, 07:17 PM
1) This is not "pay to win". This is "pay FOR win"

2) were's this magical money coming from?

3) I will not buy the sim if it uses this system. Luckily, I can't possibly imagine it happening

Troll2k
06-07-2007, 07:21 PM
Pay to win has been done(giving of prizes).It just promotes team killing, kill stealing, shooting over your shoulder and other anti social behavior.

Huxley_S
06-07-2007, 07:22 PM
Originally posted by BBB462cid:
1) This is not "pay to win". This is "pay FOR win"

2) were's this magical money coming from?

3) I will not buy the sim if it uses this system. Luckily, I can't possibly imagine it happening

1... yes it is pay to the winner(s). Like Las Vegas but with flying.

2... money comes from the players and their flexible friends.

3... If this was mandatory I'd agree with you. On the surface it sounds horrible. However, after playing this sim for several years, and noting that there are simmers who have been playing for much, much longer, this would be an 'option' for simmers who wanted to prove themselves against the best (or the foolish) and make some money for those who run the cool, totally free servers at the same time.

The overall idea would be to make using Teamspeak and flying as a team, in the real sense, invaluable.

Huxley_S
06-07-2007, 07:25 PM
Originally posted by Troll2k:
Pay to win has been done(giving of prizes).It just promotes team killing, kill stealing, shooting over your shoulder and other anti social behavior.

1. All kills are attributed to the team, therefore eliminating kill stealing. Rather, the quicker the kill, the quicker the bucks. So the kill stealer is elevated to good egg in a stroke.

Huxley_S
06-07-2007, 07:53 PM
There would be NO TEAM WORK to speak of and nothing but a bunch of LONE WOLFS out to steal your kills 24/7

See previous posts.

Blood_Splat
06-07-2007, 07:53 PM
Well sense we can't actually die it might make our virtual life more valuable.

Huxley_S
06-07-2007, 07:58 PM
Originally posted by Blood_Splat:
Well sense we can't actually die it might make our virtual life more valuable.

That is EXACTLY my point.

I used to run a poker club at school, for which I was nearly expelled, however... we used to have mountains of chips on the table but in reality they were only worth a couple of bucks. But even the small amount made the game worthwhile. Had the chips been worthless it would not have been worth playing.

On dogfight servers, I see all too often, and I am certainly guilty of it myself, reckless behaviour. Even if the life of your plane (and pilot) was worth just one cent in real money, you'd play differently. I guarantee it.

Korolov1986
06-07-2007, 08:08 PM
If my virtual life and plane were worth something, I wouldn't play.

LStarosta
06-07-2007, 08:11 PM
Jesus says that all gamblers go to Hell.

Huxley_S
06-07-2007, 08:14 PM
Originally posted by Korolov1986:
If my virtual life and plane were worth something, I wouldn't play.

I'm not saying all servers should be like this. It would be awful if they were. I like the servers the way they are, this would be in addition to...

Rather than what TAGERT said about Lone Wolves, I'm thinking more about squads practicing and using Teamspeak to win the bucks. The complete opposite to what he said in reality...

Huxley_S
06-07-2007, 08:14 PM
Originally posted by LStarosta:
Jesus says that all gamblers go to Hell.

Then I'll see you in Hell!

TC_Stele
06-07-2007, 08:17 PM
I could see squads breaking up with rules like that. Could definetly get dramatic.

Huxley_S
06-07-2007, 08:19 PM
Originally posted by TC_Stele:
I could see squads breaking up with rules like that. Could definetly get dramatic.

Well I suppose that would depend on the squad. A lot of squads will take anyone who applies, some squads will only take the best pilots.

The former might run into trouble but the latter would probably do pretty well.

LEXX_Luthor
06-07-2007, 08:43 PM
It will have to be Pay~To~Play for everybody, but the winning team gets some money back, with the server keeping a profit. Both teams lose money over the long term. Its gambling. Nothing new under the FB sun.

Maybe a little less "all or nothing" -- both winning and whining sides may accomplish some objectives and are compensated accordingly.

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d178/Lexx_Luthor/Smileys/thumbs.gif Or the Offline players pay in the money for the Online gambling, which has been the case in Oleg's sim from the start.

How this would go over with all the gf's and wives may be an issue. Huxley, please, think of the children.

Whirlin_merlin
06-08-2007, 02:34 AM
Of course a lot of people already pay to play, what's more they pay for everyone else to play too.

Servers don't appear by magic you know.

MEGILE
06-08-2007, 03:35 AM
no.

Huxley_S
06-08-2007, 06:49 PM
Originally posted by Whirlin_merlin:
Of course a lot of people already pay to play, what's more they pay for everyone else to play too.

Servers don't appear by magic you know.

If you read my following posts you will see that the entire point is to create revenue for servers... without going pay to play.

That's why I'm trying to develop the idea of a pay to play that isn't pay to play, i.e. it promotes all the good things about flying online, teamwork, skill, risk aversion, patience and tactics so that the best players (in that sense) have a chance of breaking even or even winning a few quid. And at the same time earning a commission in actual money for the server.

The idea of this post was to solicit ideas that might make that a viable proposition, but so far the contribution from other forum members has been dismal.

Even if it isn't something you'd go for yourselves, you have to admit that there is something in what I'm saying that is pretty much untried and untested, but has the potential to offer an alternative means of funding servers and at the same time adding a new angle to online play. It could be an interesting experiment if nothing else.

Your constructive input could be useful.

M_Gunz
06-09-2007, 12:20 AM
What's to stop two people from joining after paying their $5 each then for the next hour they
take turns killing each other 25 times. Each gains $20 for an hours 'work'.

Who is going to bankroll that?

LEXX_Luthor
06-09-2007, 01:53 AM
Offline players will bankroll it. They always have.

Whirlin_merlin
06-09-2007, 03:39 AM
Hux looking at Hyperlobby it appears that luckily this will never be needed. Plenty (myself included) enjoy the idea that we give fun to others.

To me the pay and reward system would make it more about the money than the joy.

XyZspineZyX
06-09-2007, 06:54 AM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
What's to stop two people from joining after paying their $5 each then for the next hour they
take turns killing each other 25 times. Each gains $20 for an hours 'work'.

Who is going to bankroll that?

I used to play online auto racing. It was pay-for-play, but of course, no real money benefits to the players, they earned "game" dollars for winning races

teams were involved: your team could race, enter into Club racing events, and had rankings and standings in which the best times were constantly updated in real-time for the purposes of determining a club winner for the week. Players got individual awards in the form of "money" for doing well, and teams got "money" for doing well in Club events

Sounds idyllic, right? Who can possibly lose? It's based on fair team-play AND individual accomplishment. Perfect!

Until of course, players learned (in the first 10 minutes) that they could exploit that system

Entire teams of dozens of players would throw races. Whether by disco-ing the race, or using vastly inferior cars, they would set up a deal with other teams, in which one team wins, the othe loses, by design. The "losing" team gets a cut of the individual race winnings after the race, while the "winning" team enjoys the "money" from winning weekly events due to their artificially boosted rankings

There were entire teams, including mine at one point, that purposefully kept it's members in the dark while cheating them- players were encouraged to race certain events strategically by the scheming team "leaders", while everyonce actually tried, but no amount of trying could get us out of the hole were in, because it was rigged- which you bet I stopped when I ran the team

In Hux's example, presumably you can't "swap" money. But there will always be the situation you describe, and you have hit the nail on the head:

Squad 1 and Squad two make a deal: today, Squad one tanks it, and squad two gets the money. Tomorrow, Squad 2 tanks it so Squad 1 cashes in. And they will do this whenever they fly against each other

Meanwhile, the "pot" of money is finite. And Squad 1 and 2 are merrily stealing everyone else's money with their phoney-baloney "fights". When they want some challenge, they fly against other squads. When they want easy cash, they fly against each other

And want to bet that this system would lend itself to "Squad Upgrades", such as successul squads get perks, even as minor as their little names getting to be in a speical color or some other bitsy BS in-yer-face tidbit? You trade in 1000 bucks for getting a speical script for your team members or for getting them a team prefix? You bet this can and will happen. And all the while the cheaters prosper while the honest players actually foot the bill

No
Damned
Way!

I couldn't agree with you more

Huxley_S
06-09-2007, 08:27 AM
Good points.

I think what Lexx said about making it less "all or nothing" is spot on.

M_Gunz and BBB obviously there are loopholes that would have to be plugged. Like I said, 5 bucks is probably way too much. It would be better to be some kind of micro-payment thing with rules that prevent cheating. I'm not sure what those rules would be but you've given some examples of how cheating might occur, so that's a start.

Merlin, you're right that there is no need for this. There will always be free servers donated by enthusiasts and that's great. I'm not even saying that I'd be the biggest fan of what I'm proposing, only that it would add something to the sim that doesn't currently exist.

M_Gunz, let's now say that every death on the server deducts money from your winnings (with the minimum being 0 i.e. you can't go negative). I.e. Two guys in a server playing for an hour (let's imagine it's still 5 bucks for clarity) the 'pot' is 10 bucks and let's say that 1 dollar of that is the commission for the server.
Now, the maximum that any one of the players could win is 9 dollars but if the pilots are fairly evenly matched, then it's more likely that one player earns 5 dollars (i.e. breaks even) and the other player makes 4 dollars i.e. he pays the server commission. If there aren't enough kills, the remainder of the pot is split equally.

A loophole here would be if a player was able to exit the server as soon as he'd made his profit. So there would need to be a safeguard to prevent this from happening. Also, people are unlikely to be joining a dogfight server at the same time, so that would also complicate things. Any ideas?

BrotherVoodoo
06-09-2007, 08:36 AM
Maybe the gambler in me is slightly interested, but the majority of me is thinking this would suck. I would probably have to start a 12 step program.

Huxley_S
06-09-2007, 03:46 PM
OK it seems that gambling for money in a WWII combat sim is not most people's cup of tea, like practically everyone.

OK.

But I can see some kind of scope for a more advanced scoring system... a Kudos league, based on the same principles, except no money changes hands.

Perhaps a new player joins an account on a server and starts with 5 Kudos points, etc etc etc

I'll work it out myself and post my idea when it's ready, since pretty much everyone else who's posted has been like "no can do dude"!

OK! Storms off in a huff. I'll be back!

[Not going to have internet at home for the next month so anyway]

Adios!

FritzGryphon
06-09-2007, 04:02 PM
It's difficult enough for new players to get the courage to come online and play.

Financially punishing losers would ensure no new players ever go online, and probably cripple sales of the game as well.

If any pay-to-play is required, it needs to be equal among everyone, or there'll be many simmers quitting out of disgust. Any prizes or awards for winning need to be purely symbolic.

AKA_TAGERT
06-09-2007, 04:33 PM
Good points

russ.nl
06-09-2007, 05:02 PM
I pay to play when I buy the game. And you can't punnish a community by making them buy there winnings just because some people can only play this game like a fps.

Huxley_S
06-09-2007, 05:23 PM
Punish?

Dudes... you have got this all wrong. I will try to think about putting this over in a better way. Ciao.

Freelancer-1
06-09-2007, 05:29 PM
Hux,

I think there might be a small segment of the community that may be interested in something like this.

Why not set up a beta version that doesn't cost the player anything and uses some sort of game dollars for payouts?

That way you'll see if there is any interest and at the same time see what exploits people come up with. Get all the kinks worked out before you you get the real thing running.

DuxCorvan
06-09-2007, 05:49 PM
Casino Air Sim? No, thanks. If I'd want to gamble I'd rather lose my estate before a nice croupier gal.

Anyway, I can't think of a better way of discouraging new online users and convert the servers in a mafia shootout.

Worst idea ever since Coke Aquarius.

K_Freddie
06-09-2007, 05:56 PM
BBB462cid says how it will happen, just like in real life http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif
Sorry your idea of making a quick crooked buck has ..... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Huxley_S
06-09-2007, 06:07 PM
Originally posted by Freelancer-1:
Hux,

I think there might be a small segment of the community that may be interested in something like this.

Why not set up a beta version that doesn't cost the player anything and uses some sort of game dollars for payouts?

That way you'll see if there is any interest and at the same time see what exploits people come up with. Get all the kinks worked out before you you get the real thing running.

Yeah... I think that's the way to go... some more complex scoring system that could be translated into bucks but not necessarily. I'll have a think. Cheers!

Viper2005_
06-09-2007, 06:46 PM
I see all sorts of problems with this.

- It might well be subject to legislation governing online gambling. It would certainly place an instant age restriction upon players.

- With money involved, the chances are that very serious efforts would be made to exploit the system.

- If this was run at server level, to make money for those people running dedicated servers then there would likely be issues associated with the software license. Surely the publishers would want a cut of this money? With that said, can you imagine the pay to play (paid to win) system remaining optional for more than about 2 minutes?

- If your scoring system is even remotely unbalanced, you'll see very strange behaviour in the game as everybody migrates to the most lucrative aircraft and mission.

- Empty servers offer easy ground attack options and therefore potentially easy money. Flipped on its head, that means that there might potentially be considerable additional costs associated with low server populations, unless you're prepared to disable the ground attack option.

- It would be very very expensive for new players. It would also be very difficult for them to learn, since experienced players would have a strong disincentive to pass on their skills to potential future opponents.

- Automatic team balancing is incompatible with squads wanting to fly together, yet without it the chances are that team numbers would be extremely unstable. With many servers out there the best option when at a disadvantage would probably be to leave and fly elsewhere, unless you're making everybody buy their flying time in long(ish) blocks of say an hour or so. I expect that in the absence of an external control mechanism the teams would organise into all reds or all blues so that everybody could just get on with hitting ground targets. A2A would only happen in the absence of ground objectives. But since a2a is much more uncertain than a2g, the chances are that servers only offering a2a would be unpopular with the majority seeking to make money from their flying.

In general, if the system is designed to make money, for every player who turns a profit there must be many who turn a loss.

If you run a system which allows people to make worthwhile profits from their flying, the chances are that a number of people will lose substantial sums of money, and in the longer term this will generate a backlash of negative publicity.

Pure pay to play is much more sensible IMO, since it opens fewer cans of worms.

JG14_Josf
06-09-2007, 06:50 PM
Depends..

I read the first reply as far as the quote above and thought: 'diaper'.

The idea is more than interesting. It is revolutionary.

ElAurens
06-09-2007, 07:07 PM
Are you forgetting that any money "won" in this scheme will be seen as income by the Internal Revenue Service and taxed?

A scheme like this would also place monetary value on "points", hence opening up another avenue for the IRS or Inland Revenue, or whatever they call it in your respective country to tax the game.

This is the stupidest idea I have ever heard.

I'd check the chemical makeup of whatever it is you've been drinking lately.

Honestly.

M_Gunz
06-09-2007, 09:47 PM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Its gambling. Nothing new under the FB sun.

Actually it is not gambling but falls into the "games of skill" category.
What can I say, friends of mine built "games of skill" arcade machines that paid tokens back
in the mid-80's that did get used in NYC.

Still with this one, 2+ cooperating players can reap unless the paybacks are capped to pay-in.

Viper2005_
06-10-2007, 02:54 AM
Are you sure that online dogfighting is really a game of skill?

I'd say it's got a lot in common with poker once you start flying full switch because of the number of very important factors in the equation which remain to a greater or lesser extent unknown to the player, rather like a poker hand:

- Enemy position
- Enemy energy state
- Enemy SA

As such, I would suggest that any assertion of "game of skill" status might be subject to legal challenge.

Makabi-
06-10-2007, 05:59 AM
I rarely ever play IL-2 online for free, having to pay would only put the seal on my status as an offine-only flyer.

BSS_CUDA
06-10-2007, 06:52 AM
Originally posted by ElAurens:
Are you forgetting that any money "won" in this scheme will be seen as income by the Internal Revenue Service and taxed?

A scheme like this would also place monetary value on "points", hence opening up another avenue for the IRS or Inland Revenue, or whatever they call it in your respective country to tax the game.

This is the stupidest idea I have ever heard.

I'd check the chemical makeup of whatever it is you've been drinking lately.

Honestly.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif this has got to be the stupidest idea I've ever heard. pay to play is bad enough but this is SUCH an assanine idea I don't even know where to begin. all the potential problems and drawback that could come up from this online gambling make my head spin. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

M_Gunz
06-10-2007, 08:51 AM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
Are you sure that online dogfighting is really a game of skill?

I'd say it's got a lot in common with poker once you start flying full switch because of the number of very important factors in the equation which remain to a greater or lesser extent unknown to the player, rather like a poker hand:

- Enemy position
- Enemy energy state
- Enemy SA

As such, I would suggest that any assertion of "game of skill" status might be subject to legal challenge.

It sure would.

All it took to get "game of skill" was the player had to time when to hit a button based on
visual cues, at least then for NYC. You -could- win every time.

Yet if I lay money down on the outcome of a race or a ball game or a match, it is gambling.

There is a line and the exact placement requires a good bit of legalese, precedent and of
course money to decide over. Who ponies up the most effort and who is 'connected' decides
more than who doesn't. Cops and judges tend to not be swayed by mere physical law without
a proper mouthpiece and presentation. What means far less than who....

EDIT: consider a boxing match with prize money. You don't know you're going to win so is
that gambling?

DuxCorvan
06-10-2007, 11:24 AM
And who will fly Gladiators in an historical mission set, mmm? Everybody flying Lerches, trying to kick a$$ as frenzy psychos, stealing kills, going berserker, seeking cheats and insulting and threatening everybody in the chat. Just the online gaming we want.

Really... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Huxley_S
06-10-2007, 04:38 PM
Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
And who will fly Gladiators in an historical mission set, mmm? Everybody flying Lerches, trying to kick a$$ as frenzy psychos, stealing kills, going berserker, seeking cheats and insulting and threatening everybody in the chat. Just the online gaming we want.

Really... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

I would have thought that an all-Gladiator scenario would be perfect for this kind of thing, emphasising pilot skill above aircraft performance. As for cheating, Oleg's games are as cheat-proof as you can find. He takes cheating very seriously. Plus, tracks and server logs can help prove if someone has managed to crack the software and cheated somehow. Kill-stealing we've addressed, if all kills are divided between the team there's no such thing as kill stealing, there is only 'cooperating to get a quick kill'.

As for the tax and legalese. I have no idea. Put the server in the Cayman Islands? The US has strict laws on online gambling, specifically to protect the casino industry. But since this would not be in direct competition with casinos maybe there's a way through. A venture like this would certainly need some legal expertise behind it.

I don't think it would be as horrible as some of you seem to think. Obviously it's all just hypothetical anyway.

LStarosta
06-10-2007, 04:40 PM
Oleg's games are as cheat-proof as you can find.


Hahaha.

Joke?

Huxley_S
06-10-2007, 04:41 PM
Originally posted by LStarosta:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Oleg's games are as cheat-proof as you can find.


Hahaha.

Joke? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Obviously not. How do people cheat?

DuxCorvan
06-10-2007, 04:49 PM
The fact is: put money in it, and they'll try *hard* -not like now- to cheat, and when brainies try it *hard*, cheating is unavoidable sooner or later.

But to summarize it: it simply would make online experience very uneasy and hostile.

Huxley_S
06-10-2007, 05:07 PM
Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
The fact is: put money in it, and they'll try *hard* -not like now- to cheat, and when brainies try it *hard*, cheating is unavoidable sooner or later.

But to summarize it: it simply would make online experience very uneasy and hostile.

Having to sign up for an account and give out credit card and other personal information would deter and prevent cheating. It wouldn't be like now where anyone can anonymously join a server and act like a jerk. They could be banned permanently for breaking the rules. It wouldn't be a simple matter for the offender to just change his username and log back in, he'd need a different credit card with a different name and address. And since tracks provide a permanent record of what is said and done on a server, adjudication would not be difficult for a moderator. In reality, I think such a system would police itself. The players would report suspicious or offensive players to the moderator. The moderator could check the track and take appropriate action.

ElAurens
06-10-2007, 10:02 PM
You must be tripping.

Playing for money would flush this sim down the tubes faster than open modding of aircraft would.

Be.

Very.

Sure.

M_Gunz
06-11-2007, 01:44 AM
Dump your money into it then Huxley. You will find out soon enough which way it goes.

Comrade_Sasha
06-11-2007, 10:52 AM
I could see the 'pay to win' sort of thing working in a very limited form, and certainly not in the form mentioned.

My idea would be to set up a locked server, allowing access only to those who have a confirmed 'entry fee' (this could be the mythical $5 talked about). Once everybody was in, everybody is randomly asigned to a team (or, by arrangement, squadrons could go head-to-head) and aircraft selection is virtually unlimited (jets optional per server offering) or limited to a single type.

Once the thing starts, it's off to the races and the top scorer walks away with the pot- or, alternately, the top three split, or the winning team ,etc.

HOWEVER, you get only three 'lives'- after that, you're out for the duration.

The 'house rules' could be pretty much anything the server wanted to offer vis a vis kill stealing, vulching, and the like.

I don;t really think there is a problem with setting up something along these lines; after all, it's about the same as a football pool or birth date pool or what have you- the only difference is that with this the individual has an opportunity to influence the outcome through skill or lack thereof. Strong players would be drawn to it; weaker fighter jocks like myself would avoid it like the plague!

Huxley_S
06-11-2007, 07:38 PM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
Dump your money into it then Huxley. You will find out soon enough which way it goes.

No. It's not my thing. If it was I'd already have a server running. I'm not interested in Money, that's why I moved to Mexico 3 years ago and became an English teacher.

For me, this would never have been about the money but about raising the stakes. It wouldn't matter if it was only 1 cent, anything to add interest.

Huxley_S
06-11-2007, 07:41 PM
Originally posted by Comrade_Sasha:
I could see the 'pay to win' sort of thing working in a very limited form, and certainly not in the form mentioned.

My idea would be to set up a locked server, allowing access only to those who have a confirmed 'entry fee' (this could be the mythical $5 talked about). Once everybody was in, everybody is randomly asigned to a team (or, by arrangement, squadrons could go head-to-head) and aircraft selection is virtually unlimited (jets optional per server offering) or limited to a single type.

Once the thing starts, it's off to the races and the top scorer walks away with the pot- or, alternately, the top three split, or the winning team ,etc.

HOWEVER, you get only three 'lives'- after that, you're out for the duration.

The 'house rules' could be pretty much anything the server wanted to offer vis a vis kill stealing, vulching, and the like.

I don;t really think there is a problem with setting up something along these lines; after all, it's about the same as a football pool or birth date pool or what have you- the only difference is that with this the individual has an opportunity to influence the outcome through skill or lack thereof. Strong players would be drawn to it; weaker fighter jocks like myself would avoid it like the plague!

I like this idea, it isn't that far removed from what I was saying. We're not talking about poker, or a mindless bet on the horses... we're talking about flight simming.

I think what I proposed would turn into an exclusive (in the sense that only the skilled and cooperative succeed) club simply due to the nature of the game. A place for the best of the best to fly against each other for a small wager... and lesser pilots to go to watch and learn.

M_Gunz
06-11-2007, 10:26 PM
How far do you live from the rope factory?

Comrade_Sasha
06-12-2007, 05:49 PM
I can see the YouTube version already...'Flight Club', starring Flight Leftenant Bradley Pitt-Jolie ....

leitmotiv
06-12-2007, 06:16 PM
As we see from recent posts, people are already jiggering the game to win when no money at all is involved. Add money and then you will see some real cheating. If you want to experiment, go offline. That is as close as you will ever come to a pure environment. Add the human element and the chaos starts with random events and mayhem abounding. Way of the world. Best way to limit the BS is to join a serious squadron which only fights like-minded squadrons and avoid the mob scene servers.

Viper2005_
06-12-2007, 06:43 PM
Originally posted by Huxley_S:
Having to sign up for an account and give out credit card and other personal information would deter and prevent cheating. It wouldn't be like now where anyone can anonymously join a server and act like a jerk. They could be banned permanently for breaking the rules. It wouldn't be a simple matter for the offender to just change his username and log back in, he'd need a different credit card with a different name and address. And since tracks provide a permanent record of what is said and done on a server, adjudication would not be difficult for a moderator. In reality, I think such a system would police itself. The players would report suspicious or offensive players to the moderator. The moderator could check the track and take appropriate action.

Get real. Cheating isn't that black and white.

It's not about somebody hacking the game to produce a 500 mph Gladiator. That would obviously attract attention (which is the goal of many cheaters), but the resulting insta-ban would prevent it from being a profitable undertaking.

Somebody playing the game for money would be likely to employ far subtler methods. Elaborate macros are one obvious example.

There are all sorts of rather devious possibilities available to the serious player, especially if given a budget.

For example, it wouldn't be too hard to produce a device-link substitute capable of optimising aircraft performance. Nor indeed would it be especially difficult to arrange for all the dots to appear in bright red. All that would be required would be some technical knowledge, money and effort. Likewise, it would not be too difficult to introduce automatic coordination, which has obvious implications for drag and/or workload reduction. With serious effort I can think of ways to produce a lead computing gunsight.

No software modifications would be required for any of this (though programming skills would be required), and therefore there would be no way of detecting this sort of ploy.

The effect would be to turn an average player like myself into something approaching a perfect player, with excellent SA, marksmanship and an uncanny ability to fly the aeroplane in an almost optimal way. You can't very well ban people for being too good, and therefore I suspect that within months of the introduction of such a system a number of extremely good players would start to clean up. I shudder to think what would happen if they started to work in teams...

ElAurens
06-13-2007, 05:34 AM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
Nor indeed would it be especially difficult to arrange for all the dots to appear in bright red.

Alrady been done, a few years ago, if you remember. And there was a way to make all your opponenets skins appear bright pink, that one was pulled in one of the online wars or one of the DF ladder leagues.

And then there is the log parser cheeat which could be readily modified into the perfect computer controlled aim bot.

Anyone who thinks this game is free of cheats is naieve, and anyone who thinks money wouldn't make it worse is a lunatic.

M_Gunz
06-13-2007, 05:57 AM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
For example, it wouldn't be too hard to produce a device-link substitute capable of optimising aircraft performance.

You can run devicelink online when no one else can?

rnzoli
06-13-2007, 06:20 AM
And since tracks provide a permanent record of what is said and done on a server, adjudication would not be difficult for a moderator. In reality, I think such a system would police itself. The players would report suspicious or offensive players to the moderator. The moderator could check the track and take appropriate action.
So what makes the moderator totally clean and unbiased? The moderator also earns money and this will undoubtedly influence his/her preferences...believe it or not.

Viper2005_
06-13-2007, 07:05 AM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Viper2005_:
For example, it wouldn't be too hard to produce a device-link substitute capable of optimising aircraft performance.

You can run devicelink online when no one else can? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No. That's not what I said.

But as an engineer I can think of some technical (admittedly "brute force") methods of producing a substitute which would be impossible to disable.

And if I can work out how to do it you can bet that other people can. If money was involved I'm sure that plenty of people would develop similar technology and make use of it.

It would require a budget since you'd need a second PC amongst other things, and therefore I think that at present it would fall into the "too much like hard work" category. Apart from anything else, once you've got the data you still need to make use of it effectively, and that's easier said than done unless you've got an engineering background.

It becomes something of a circular argument; if you know enough about the subject to extract the data & generate optimal profiles for your aircraft then the chances are that you know how to fly the aeroplane reasonably well in the first place and therefore don't have much to gain from what I estimate would be at least 2-3 months of hard work for somebody with the necessary engineering & programming skills, and require buying some potentially quite expensive kit. I can only see it being applied to performing "canned" manoeuvres (say the perfect sustained climb at Vy, or the perfect maximum rate sustained level turn for example), which are only of limited utility in a real fight. It is theoretically possible to extract information as the to the approximate position of the visible dots, and with some more maths you could have a go at calculating relative energy heights. But by now things are probably getting to be impractically difficult, and you'd need a monster rig...

OTOH, if there were financial rewards for victory, it might well become worth the effort because in addition to using the technology you could sell it...

And it would be quite an interesting project for a team of engineering students, since certain aspects of the methodology potentially have real world applications.

I won't go into any more detail because this sort of thing could rather damage the game, interesting though it is as an intellectual exercise...

FWIW, I don't cheat; you can verify that from my less than stellar stats! All I'm saying is that there are some pretty obvious ways of cheating outside of the game itself, and I'm certain that these methods would be used if money was involved in the manner suggested in this thread, which would rather take the fun out of it for all concerned...