I have nothing against a well designed F2P option, but sadly I think that what BioWare does isn't helping... no, I think it might even hurt the PvP in the game.

F2P members can play only 5 warzones a week for free, that means that some of those players will likely hit 50 without getting the free recruit gear (which if I am not wrong is tied to a certain valour rang). So, we might see more people without recruit gear in evel 50 warzones, and I doubt many of those players will have to credits to buy the recruit gear (credit cap and other things to buy at 50) or even think it is worth buying the gear for just 5 warzones a week.

Then we have the issue of the quickslot bars, I think we will see new and returning players alike who don't want to pay for UI elements (it was said by so many people how bad an idea they think this is, that I am surprissed why BioWare didn't dropped that crap). So, we will see players who cannot really compete or just be an annoyance since they don't have space on their quickbars for throwing the huttball.

Finally, as a subscriber I have to deal then more often with people in my team that I don't want to be there (players without PvP gear or who are just terrible, but this time not because they are bad players, but because they have to pay to compete). So, instead of getting a better game experience for me as a subscriber it will probably become just worse. While most other games that get a F2P option make it more fun for the subscribers, because they get new players to play with or against, BioWare is just giving us the negative aspects but none of the advantages a F2P option can has on PvP.

Did I miss something? What are your thoughts?

I have nothing against a well designed F2P option, but sadly I think that what BioWare does isn't helping... no, I think it might even hurt the PvP in the game.

 

F2P members can play only 5 warzones a week for free, that means that some of those players will likely hit 50 without getting the free recruit gear (which if I am not wrong is tied to a certain valour rang). So, we might see more people without recruit gear in evel 50 warzones, and I doubt many of those players will have to credits to buy the recruit gear (credit cap and other things to buy at 50) or even think it is worth buying the gear for just 5 warzones a week.

 

Then we have the issue of the quickslot bars, I think we will see new and returning players alike who don't want to pay for UI elements (it was said by so many people how bad an idea they think this is, that I am surprissed why BioWare didn't dropped that crap). So, we will see players who cannot really compete or just be an annoyance since they don't have space on their quickbars for throwing the huttball.

 

Finally, as a subscriber I have to deal then more often with people in my team that I don't want to be there (players without PvP gear or who are just terrible, but this time not because they are bad players, but because they have to pay to compete). So, instead of getting a better game experience for me as a subscriber it will probably become just worse. While most other games that get a F2P option make it more fun for the subscribers, because they get new players to play with or against, BioWare is just giving us the negative aspects but none of the advantages a F2P option can has on PvP.

 

Did I miss something? What are your thoughts?

Yeah I've been worried about this problem as well and I share your concerns about the influx of F2P players. Recruit gear is free and not tied to any valor rank, that's not a problem, what I think the most problematic aspect of PvP is, is that in the current system they absolutely don't have any chance to win.

The F2P guy will enter a warzone and what will he see? Giant stun and zergfest, where he spends more time cc'd than fighting enemies. War Hero geared premades that can kill him by just looking at him. Unbalanced PuG groups without a healer. Lose. Lose. Lose. Lose. Lose..... you get the idea. And on top of that they're going to get flamed for being F2P by elitist subscribers.

And he will ask "Do I even want to play PvP?" or "Why would I want to play a game that intentionally handicaps me with bad gear and makes me a free kill for anyone?" or simply "Where is the fun in this?".

I think the vast majority of the F2P players will enter one warzone to see what it's like. What they'll see will put them off for good and never return. I'm sure some F2P players will stick around but I honestly cannot see how the majority would. I think that going F2P without a proper and balanced matchmaking system is tantamount to financial suicide.

Ya if they add premade matching with premades waiting up to a few minutes to fight another premade (and fighting a pug if they can't) and add in same faction teams when needed then I think f2p could really help this games pvp.

However, if they leave the system as is then I doubt many f2p'rs will keep playing pvp for long and if they are the type that likes some amount of pvp (which even a lot of casuals do occasionally) then they will quit. If this happens then the pvp population won't increase and many people that are barely holding on will leave too.

So imo, if done correctly, f2p could save pvp but if not then pvp will be in a pretty bad state.

I love star wars and I love my classes and I want to keep playing but me personally I'm waiting here until either some matching system is in place or gw2 makes some capture the flag/etc. type wz's. Whichever is first. I hope its swtor.

given the fact that true f2p can only participate in 3 wzs a week, there will be no affect on that aspect of PvP.

now, world pvp is a totally different animal, since bioware cannot restrict world PvP access. i hope that this causes in increase, but this game seems to go out of the way to discourage open world pvp.

As the poster above me noted, f2P won't hurt pvp, it just won't help it with the current 3 wz's per week per character limit. Unless the PvP'er is willing to pay for the weekly WZ pass, they'll have 0 effect on current PvP, except perhaps a -slightly- faster queue pop on prime time hours.

Now any PvP'er who does buy the weekly pvp will effect pvp, and we can only guess at that. If they have the proper understanding of how MMO pvp is designed and the right mentality/attitude, we might get some decent new players and fairly good matches.

If the f2p crowd that does buy weekly passes thinks this is a casual game, we'll just get more Q.Q on the forum about gear/premades/healers/teamwork/fotmers or whatever excuse it is that week for people losing (other than their own lack of mentality/skill/effort of course.)

There will be epic battles in Outlaw Den and on Ilum for free chests with wz comms

thats what i am hoping for. True pvp isnt dumb limiting warzones, its open world pvp, and consideringg greedy bioware intends to give only 3-5 warzones per week any pvper will need to come to open world to have actual pvp

All they need to do is increase open world pvp rewards and give incentive for players to come, well expect the fun part of locking an entire planet up and not allowing anyone to enter. Although i do hope more people go to the republic, if most come to the empire there will be an isse with open world pvp