MONETIZE. ROLES.

[Knuffeldraak]

To be honest, I think this could create a great line of support to BMG's funding. Every company needs an income, and if it can be done in a proper and gives the desired results, it will motivate BMG into investing more time into role implementation and balances.

At least, I wouldn't mind purchasing access to roles, as long it's not overdone of course .

But I am wondering; will Amnesiacs be able to take premium roles?

[Tormental]

But I am wondering; will Amnesiacs be able to take premium roles?

Yup. If the Host added it to the round, or someone with the role got it from "Random Town" or the like, then the Amnesiac would be able to pick it from the graveyard in that round. Unless it's unique! XD

[BetaSpectre]

I'd probably leave the game if OP Pay2Win roles were released.

[Tormental]

It takes time for a role to get made. This won't change that,

You don't think monetary incentive would POSSIBLY make roles come out a bit quicker? Really? You don't think that if it became lucrative they might even have a roles-only Dev added? I mean, I'm just mentioning what could possibly happen, because you're saying there's no way... which is assumption.

the most it could do is make them want to make more roles and ignore everything else that needs doing.

You're speculating again.

See above

You can direct me to incorrect info as much as possible, but it's still incorrect.

People probably aren't going to buy a role they think is weak.

So you think all future roles will ONLY be weak or OP, because it suits your pre-determined position of not wanting paid roles.

Got it.

If medium, for example, was buyable, who would buy it? Almost no one.

Good thing we're not talking about making Medium buyable.

Take what you said here, and replace "Medium" with "Arsonist". Suddenly the point falls apart, no?

Of course the pirate pack isn't really powerful. It's an aesthetics pack with some scrolls and coins, it literally can't be powerful.

You missed the point. People buy it with real money, and it's not powerful - when you said people would only buy something powerful.

So essentially you agree here that your previous point was invalid?

Yeah, but anyone who exclusively plays ranked, like lots of people do, are forced to buy them if they want to get everything they can get out of the game.

This is a "won't someone PLEASE think of the children?!" level concern. In other words, this matters little and you're making it sound like a big deal.

So what if people playing ranked can't play an "extended role list" role?

So... what...?

You'd might as well look at something like World of Warcraft and say: "This is unfair. People can't play the new races unless they get the DLC. So Blizzard should never ever do DLC because I don't like that."

See above

Still doesn't matter how many times you direct me to incorrect statements...

Scrolls don't affect anything after roll selection though.

Role selection is one of the most important parts of the whole game, though.

This does.

So what?

And the targeting thing is entirely part of the meta, not the game.

The folks against this idea brought meta into it, so let's not backtrack now that I used it.

Again, anyone playing ranked is locked out of these roles if they don't buy them. I'd consider that detracting from the game.

I wouldn't, because it doesn't detract in any way.

And I noticed you completely ignored my post on how this would mess with ranked.

Why are you so arrogant as to expect others to answer everything you say exactly how and when you want?

If you think extended roles in Ranked will ruin ranked, that's your opinion - but nothing more than opinion. It's not based on evidence, fact, statistic, anything else other than how you personally feel. You haven't experienced a single round where paid roles ruined a round for you, primarily because they don't exist. (Yet?) Secondarily, because they wouldn't ruin rounds.

How would you like me to answer your "I dun wanna"?

With "But I wanna"?

[Tormental]

I'd probably leave the game if OP Pay2Win roles were released.

I agree 100%.

Luckily, nothing about this suggestion says the roles would be OP - and if they're not OP, it's not pay-to-win.

It's natural for people to be afraid of change - like "OMFG NO PAY TO WIN OP ROLES FOR $20!!!!"

But in actuality, what we're talking about is "reasonable and balanced extended roles for like 99 cents."

Hell, no one here is really even discussing that it could be 99 cents or X hundred town points, which would render a lot of the concerns about fairness and accessibility completely moot!

[DizzyWaddleDoo]

It takes time for a role to get made. This won't change that,

You don't think monetary incentive would POSSIBLY make roles come out a bit quicker? Really? You don't think that if it became lucrative they might even have a roles-only Dev added? I mean, I'm just mentioning what could possibly happen, because you're saying there's no way... which is assumption.

You keep handwaving criticisms away as speculation, when that's literally all that can be said about this idea. And you're a hypocrite because you're doing lots of speculation too. Try coming up with an actual argument, kthx.
They don't know how the community will react to buyable roles, they won't invest in hiring someone to do this full-time without knowing if it'll be a flop or not.

the most it could do is make them want to make more roles and ignore everything else that needs doing.

You're speculating again.

You keep handwaving criticisms away as speculation, when that's literally all that can be said about this idea. And you're a hypocrite because you're doing lots of speculation too. Try coming up with an actual argument, kthx.

People probably aren't going to buy a role they think is weak.

So you think all future roles will ONLY be weak or OP, because it suits your pre-determined position of not wanting paid roles.

Got it.

If a role isn't strong and is just average, lots of people will consider it weak. Medium, for example, isn't really a bad role.

If medium, for example, was buyable, who would buy it? Almost no one.

Good thing we're not talking about making Medium buyable.

Take what you said here, and replace "Medium" with "Arsonist". Suddenly the point falls apart, no?

Most of what I've seen of the community doesn't consider Arsonist that strong either.

Of course the pirate pack isn't really powerful. It's an aesthetics pack with some scrolls and coins, it literally can't be powerful.

You missed the point. People buy it with real money, and it's not powerful - when you said people would only buy something powerful.

So essentially you agree here that your previous point was invalid?

No, you missed the point. The pirate pack cannot be powerful, and it can't be weak either, thus, even mentioning it as evidence in this case is irrelevant.

Yeah, but anyone who exclusively plays ranked, like lots of people do, are forced to buy them if they want to get everything they can get out of the game.

This is a "won't someone PLEASE think of the children?!" level concern. In other words, this matters little and you're making it sound like a big deal.

So what if people playing ranked can't play an "extended role list" role?

So... what...?

You'd might as well look at something like World of Warcraft and say: "This is unfair. People can't play the new races unless they get the DLC. So Blizzard should never ever do DLC because I don't like that."

A large section of the community sticks to ranked.
WoW is already a paid game anyway.

Scrolls don't affect anything after roll selection though.

Role selection is one of the most important parts of the whole game, though.

What they do with the roles is more important.

This does.

So what?

It affects actual gameplay.

And the targeting thing is entirely part of the meta, not the game.

The folks against this idea brought meta into it, so let's not backtrack now that I used it.

Still, the skins themselves don't kill the person

Again, anyone playing ranked is locked out of these roles if they don't buy them. I'd consider that detracting from the game.

I wouldn't, because it doesn't detract in any way.

So you think being unable to play as a role at all doesn't detract from the experience? Mm'kay.

And I noticed you completely ignored my post on how this would mess with ranked.

Why are you so arrogant as to expect others to answer everything you say exactly how and when you want?

Because in an argument if you just ignore something it makes it look like you don't have a response to it.

If you think extended roles in Ranked will ruin ranked, that's your opinion - but nothing more than opinion. It's not based on evidence, fact, statistic, anything else other than how you personally feel. You haven't experienced a single round where paid roles ruined a round for you, primarily because they don't exist. (Yet?) Secondarily, because they wouldn't ruin rounds.

How would you like me to answer your "I dun wanna"?

With "But I wanna"?

Nothing you've said is based on facts, statistics, or evidence either. If you're gonna criticize someone, don't do the same thing as them.

[Mroz4k]

To be honest, I think this could create a great line of support to BMG's funding. Every company needs an income, and if it can be done in a proper and gives the desired results, it will motivate BMG into investing more time into role implementation and balances.

At least, I wouldn't mind purchasing access to roles, as long it's not overdone of course .

But I am wondering; will Amnesiacs be able to take premium roles?

I can tell you pretty surely it wouldnt. Considering about 90% of people posting on this thread are against the idea and most of them argument with it being against the "free to play" policy this would actually pretty much murdered the community.

And it really wouldnt bring that much. There is better, easier, more relient ways to increase the funding, really.

[BetaSpectre]

If the roles were affordable within 100 wins, then I'm all for it, but some of the new content seems to be cash only. And its not fair to other people. Monetizing roles takes away from the in game experience of another player. I'm of the same opinion of scrolls, but I can still have a decent chance of getting a role anyhow.

[Magnasword2]

Everyone saying this is "Pay to win" The premise is that if a person buys it and uses it then everyone in the game has a chance to become that role.

Tormental said that the idea is people have the option to buy the role to use it as a party host not so people can abuse it to win.

[Tormental]

You keep handwaving criticisms away as speculation, when that's literally all that can be said about this idea.

That's why I'm hand-waving it. Because it's speculation presented as what will happen.

Proposal: "What if they added a T-Rex pet??"
Speculation: "This is a bad idea I don't like. A T-Rex would be too big, taller than all the houses. Also, no one would get it because dinosaurs aren't cool anymore. This will ruin rounds when you lynch someone and their OP T-Rex gets mad and eats all the other players! NO."

See what I mean?

And you're a hypocrite because you're doing lots of speculation too.

And while you can call it just speculation - the same way I can call it on you - the fact remains I'm not the one presenting my ideas/concepts as what will definitely happen.

Try coming up with an actual argument, kthx.

Since you're arguing against the original post, I'd think that's your job.

They don't know how the community will react to buyable roles, they won't invest in hiring someone to do this full-time without knowing if it'll be a flop or not.

It seems like you didn't read what you're responding to. I said that could happen if role sales turned out to be lucrative. Your point here was done before you wrote it.

You keep handwaving criticisms away as speculation, when that's literally all that can be said about this idea. And you're a hypocrite because you're doing lots of speculation too. Try coming up with an actual argument, kthx.

What a snotty little thing you are. XD

If a role isn't strong and is just average, lots of people will consider it weak.

So what? If it adds a new STYLE of game play, that's what's interesting and what would hopefully drive sales. You seem to have a very black & white idea of "Strong OR Weak" with no subtlety or nuance that you can't shake. Come join us in the realm of detail! It's fun here and possibilities are limitless.

People would buy the Jester role if it had never existed just for the new style of play. Say they wouldn't, and you'll lose all credibility.

Most of what I've seen of the community doesn't consider Arsonist that strong either.

The question is if Arsonist would be bought/used, also you have no idea what most of the community you've seen thinks of Arsonist. I sincerely doubt you've had Arso debates with everybody in the majority of rounds you've played. This what what I mean about presenting certain untrue things as facts.

No, you missed the point. The pirate pack cannot be powerful, and it can't be weak either, thus, even mentioning it as evidence in this case is irrelevant.

I'm losing the ability to make sense of your gibberish as time progresses. All you said here was "No, you!!" and repeat the same stuff I just disproved.

A large section of the community sticks to ranked.

Prove that.

WoW is already a paid game anyway.

So is ToS, on Steam and soon Mobile. It's weird that you seem to be implying games you pay to play can have extra paid content, but free indie games shouldn't. Isn't that a bit backward on the face of it?

What they do with the roles is more important.

Your opinion. Mine is that they're at least equal if Scrolls aren't more important.

What you 'do with' Framer will never be as 'important' as getting Jailor all the time because of your scrolls.

It affects actual gameplay.

Bypassing argument and assuming you're correct - So what?

Scrolls affect game play, new free roles affect game play, paid skins and houses affect game play... SO... what?

Still, the skins themselves don't kill the person

Neither would a paid role. You have no point here, then?

So you think being unable to play as a role at all doesn't detract from the experience? Mm'kay.

Purchased roles would be available to people through multiple means, even to non-buyers. Please read what you're replying to and stop wasting my time with repeated nonsense.

Because in an argument if you just ignore something it makes it look like you don't have a response to it.

Have you stopped beating your wife?

Nothing you've said is based on facts, statistics, or evidence either. If you're gonna criticize someone, don't do the same thing as them.

[/quote]

The difference is I'm giving an idea.

You're citing reasons the idea won't work.

The burden to back up your BS is on you. I'm just giving a concept that would be interesting and beneficial.

If you don't understand that... well, I'm just going to go ahead and say you don't understand that, actually. It's pretty clear at this point you're not comprehending much. Pretty much just because you're desperately trying to fire rockets and something you don't prefer.

[Tormental]

Considering about 90% of people posting on this thread are against the idea [...]

Okay, I hate to say this - but that's an outright lie. You just ignored 50% (or more) of this thread. -_-

You just made the game pay to host/pay to win.

Read the original post, please.

[DizzyWaddleDoo]

I would be more okay with this idea if it was something like having the ability to buy the ability to be the role early before anyone else can, possibly also coming with some scrolls for that role, and then a few weeks or so later it becomes playable for anyone no matter what (and the role can't be rolled in ranked during the time it is pay to play).

Ninja edit: You know what, I've had enough of your shit. I'm just gonna respond to the parts that really annoyed me and ignore this afterwards.

You keep handwaving criticisms away as speculation, when that's literally all that can be said about this idea. And you're a hypocrite because you're doing lots of speculation too. Try coming up with an actual argument, kthx.

What a snotty little thing you are. XD

Wow, you can insult people, you must be so great at defending your ideas.
-Said no one ever
You apparently think insulting your opponent is a good strategy so I'll just keep that in mind.

No, you missed the point. The pirate pack cannot be powerful, and it can't be weak either, thus, even mentioning it as evidence in this case is irrelevant.

I'm losing the ability to make sense of your gibberish as time progresses. All you said here was "No, you!!"

You compared a pack of aesthetics to roles. Those two things have no correlation whatsoever. If your brain is too small to realize that, then that's just too bad.

So you think being unable to play as a role at all doesn't detract from the experience? Mm'kay.

Purchased roles would be available to people through multiple means, even to non-buyers. Please read what you're replying to and stop wasting my time with repeated nonsense.

I was talking about in ranked. Please read what you're replying to and stop wasting my time with repeated nonsense.

Because in an argument if you just ignore something it makes it look like you don't have a response to it.

Have you stopped beating your wife?
Oh look, a loaded question to try and make me look bad. I don't even have a wife.

And with that you've gone onto my foe list. Goodbye.

[Tormental]

Ninja edit: You know what, I've had enough of your shit. I'm just gonna respond to the parts that really annoyed me and ignore this afterwards.

My responses to your annoying behavior annoyed you. Shocking.

Wow, you can insult people, you must be so great at defending your ideas.

If you act snotty, I'll say it's snotty. Again, as I've had to point out multiple times - what is your point?

You apparently think insulting your opponent is a good strategy so I'll just keep that in mind.

And you think that picking out one insult and highlighting it will cover over the fact you have nothing to stand on. You're a hair above picking on spelling.

You compared a pack of aesthetics to roles. Those two things have no correlation whatsoever.

It was in response to someone saying no one would buy something that doesn't affect their game that much.

So I said people buy cosmetics that don't affect the game that much.

The fact that you completely missed the point isn't my problem,

If your brain is too small to realize that, then that's just too bad.

Wow, you can insult people. You must be so great at defending your points. Said no one ever.

Gratz, you are officially a hypocrite.

I was talking about in ranked. Please read what you're replying to and stop wasting my time with repeated nonsense.

Here, you're pointing out something that doesn't matter as if it mattered. Whatever, du.

Oh look, a loaded question to try and make me look bad. I don't even have a wife.

Exactly. Just like when you say "You didn't answer me - so that means I'm right."

You're missing a lot of stuff, here.

And with that you've gone onto my foe list. Goodbye.

I couldn't care less about being scrawled into a tattered, tear-stained diary with Sesame Street stickers on the cover... in crayon.

[Gobln]

I think the conclusion to this suggestion is "nah"

[Tormental]

Sorry, Goblin. I really do hate to be such a dick - but you're pulling that out of nowhere.

I did a rough count of who was "for" or "against" in this thread, and the numbers are actually even.

Just because the people against it are shrieking the loudest doesn't mean there's more of them. The few shouldn't decide the fate of the many in this case.

That's the thing - I'm actually looking at what's really happening and not just saying whatever I feel like to support my position. -_-

[deferentsheep]

/change my vote to the other side because i only said that this suggestion should be added sarcastically because of how terrible it is

[Tormental]

I didn't count your obvious trolling as a pro-vote.

[Ansem555]

Just out of curiosity, is my post counted as a "pro" this topic? Or is it just a different beast entirely considering it contained a totally different suggestion?

[Tormental]

I didn't count yours as "pro". I wanted to be as exact as possible, so if a post didn't say "yes" or "no" in some clear way, I didn't count it at all.

[ShortcutButton]

Sorry, Gobln. I really do hate to be such a dick - but you're pulling that out of nowhere.

hue
No I am not a child

I'm all for this.

[Tormental]

I set up a poll to make things clear:

http://strawpoll.me/5614878

[Tormental]

A'ight, cool head prevailing, but it seems like the vote's being skewed due to a lot of votes for one option within 10 minutes, but let's see what happens. Like 40 flooded in for one option only within moments.

A lot of votes have also been kicked by the automated system for appearing fraudulent, I think, because some come in, then disappear...

[ibney000]

Thoughts on adding roles regularly:

1: I do not believe that roles should be added frequently. It messes with the meta and in he end will make things unbalanced and unfun.

2: I do not think that a separate Kickstarter for roles should be made as they haven't completed the roles from the last kick starter yet anyways. Not that I think they should add vampire hunter and vampire admit will simply just destroy ranked. How is that role gonna work and how is it going to be ballenced? Werewolf is overly underpowered and forger, while a awesome idea, just doesn't work very well and ends up being a worse version of the janitor.

3: I get where this is coming from but from a person who has developed (forum) games and gets the idea of game ballence and how everything must interact with each other, which I am sure you all do as well, it just doesn't work to add roles at a consistent rate like this.


Thoughts on your idea:

1: Cool concept. Getting people to test roles for themselves while giving incentive to the secs to add more. I believe we already have a testing grounds thing but I have never looked into it so I would not know.

2: I believe that monetizing roles like this would cause harm to the community. It's asking people to pay to beta roles which in my mind doesn't sound too fun. Many roles will be overpowered and many will be useless. This system reminds me of one from back when I use to play minecraft. There was a survival games server type thing where players could buy roles and use them to fight in a 3000 by 3000 block radius. They could build and it was fun and stuff. The problem arose when they added roles that were op. While they were eventually nerfed they were useable for let's say a month or a few weeks. Anyone with that role would dominate and it wouldn't be fun to play. This leaving servers ghost towns. Not fun. The way you propose makes it a bit better by still making it a lottery for if you get the role or not. But it still gives the chance for a role that you paid for to be taken out of the game or severely nerfed to the point where there is no reason to have it in the first place.

3: keeping a standard set of roles that works for every situation is in my opinion the only way this game is going to last. Things need to be balleneced. If you don't believe my example look at some of the most successful games of all time, CSGO, LOL (I believe they add roles a lot but I don't know so I will point it out), DOTA2. These games are balleneced. They stick with a set of things that work and improve upon them via community feedback. They work really hard to make things the best for their players. That's something I am sure the secs will do, but can they do it while making a role every week or even every month? I don't think so. The decision team is too small for something like this. Stretching yourself too thin is something you never want to do. The job becomes no fun and you quit doing it.

Now if I blatantly contradicted myself somewhere point it out and I will fix it. If I missed something you said I am sorry and I will take anything back that is unwarranted. I will say I am voting for no.

[Tormental]

At the end of the day, I'd encourage BMG to try one pay role and see what happens. Can't hurt to attempt it, and if there's some huge revolt like some seem to tacitly threaten, they can always reimburse it as town points and make the role free.

[Tormental]

Moderator Arckas (who was involved in this thread after nasty posts were made by others, dunno if they contacted them, too) has asked me to apologize for not being respectful to people who were already disrespectful in this thread and threatened me if I don't discontinue being 'disrespectful'.

Since I was answering the unkind behavior WITH unkind behavior, I am declining to apologize for mirroring others' content.

I am also declining because I've seen threads with much worse go unchecked, and this seems cherry picking.

(Thirdly, I have nothing to apologize for anyway. It's internet.)

I won't be talked to in a fashion I am not allowed to turn back on someone to give them their own medicine. So if you see me disappear from these forums, you'll know why - and you can check my channel for a video about it.


To be clear: I wanted to offer an idea to BMG and possibly help players and whoever else with a positive contribution. The fact that people came in after that and crap-talked or talked out their butts is no responsibility of mine and I addressed it as I saw fit.