From my understanding, the MT part of this comes in making the paint job PERMANENT, so you wont lose those paint tokens if you die, enabling you to repaint your next bot very easily.  Without using MT tokens, you will lose your paint chips on death and have to find/buy new ones to get a new paint job.

Am I correct in this assumption?

And on Thursdays:  Gay2Win

Yes, I understand that the token will apply the paint, but will the paint items be consumed in the process?  And, can you apply the paint any other way?  Like if I just left those paint items on the paint screen when I undocked, would those show on my bot?

I just thought it would be cool if by buying the tokens, you circumvented the consumption of the paint items, so if you got blown up you could reapply those same colors easily without having to find/buy them again.  So the tokens wouldnt be the ability to apply paint, but to preserve the paint items for multiple uses.

Either way, I'm sure I'll be buying some!

Well, I know what the tokens do, but what I'm bummed about is that there will be NO way to paint it without paying for tokens.  Id like to be able to paint the bot with a risk of losing those paints, or buying a token that applied said paint job but spared the paints to be used again when I die.

I certainly hope not, because then the mesmer will look even more smug than it already does.

Personally I HATE micro transactions in none f2p games. I pay the devs my hard earned cash (3 accounts atm) so they make the game better. Not so they can cherry-pick every new feature that I paid for with my sub and then sell it too me a second time if it can be "monetarized" (spelling?).

That is simply wrong in my eyes. Either my sub pays for the game (including all the features that my sub was used to develop) or you should change your pricing model. Either that or don't waste my sub on developing stuff that I have to pay for a second time.

However, I can live with RMT as long as it's VANITY only and does NOT influence any player driven markets (such as ammo/ships/mods created out of thin air for RL $$$).

I still find it unfair to let me pay your graphics dudes for new skins and then I still have to pay them a second time for every new skin. But I guess I can accept you wasting my money to sell it back to me again as long as I don't feel like i'm being scammed (70$ for a monocle) or as long as I'm not forced to double pay you to remain competitve.

Imho I'd rather pay 3$ more for sub but then get the entire game (and not finance projects/features that i won't benefit from).

Just my 0.2 NIC.

To me Micro transactions say 10p per paint job is acceptable, if I am regularly loosing bots then I should be focusing on my lack of pvp / pve skills and NOT on pretty pink pony's.

What I love about this system and I think very nice is the way the paint system currently works, with your paint slowly degrading as you take damage apply your nice paint scheme and watch it weather as you successfully survive combat.  Of course this will require a respray at some point but well at least you will not have lost your bot.

Can't wait to paint a gropho blue and watch people try to hide just behind a hill expecting direct fire mag guns

If I play the "Pay-to-play" type of MMO, it's because I want for every gamers the same chances.

If it's about money, then there is no fun.

If you lack money, rise the subscription fee, but dont force RMT in the game.

That said, I do think painting those mechs would be a cool feature

The math there is fairly good, except for one thing, 90% of the player base from a week ago were 300% more dedicated to the game then 10% of any other mmo community. *s*

But seriously, there are no sparkle ponies for sale in Perp, but if Eve'sters hadn't shown up, I would have bet that 90% of the player base would have bought paint jobs, and 100% would use them to make pink bots on thursdays

On the other hand, 90% would quit too if they introduced a $25 heavy hauler. Dev's know us almost as well as we know them, we even shared the destruction of the office toaster (my it rest in peace).

Don't take our word for it, just hang out and you'll see for yourselves.

I can only speak for myself, but I have no problem with MT per se. I actually like the idea of supporting the developer of a game I like and getting something nonconsequential like pink paint in return.

In EVE the situation is a bit different though: A subscription is already one of the most expensive MMO subscriptions, their idea of support seems to be $20-$70 which I find ridiculous, they had previously actually announced plans to have these items made by players, when you call them on it they start rambling about $1000 designer pants, they publicly stated that their implementation of the store is so incomplete that they may have to sell spawned coloured ships until it can do trade-ins, they refuse to answer the non-vanity mt question with a simple yes or no and if they did then there's still that they had actually implemented them before in the form of paid attribute remaps, and the worst part of it is last summer they announced that EVE itself wasn't going to get any major fixes or new content while they work on Dust and WoD and code EVE has in common with them, so we know those monocles actually support their purely mt based and confirmed pay2win games Dust and WoD instead of EVE. Oh yeah and that's only the technical part. There's also those various leaked documents that show clear contempt for the player base, to which they don't even want to talk btw., they preferred to announce a one week comms silence and a meeting with a handful of players who are essentially drinking buddies of the developers on account of regular free trips to Iceland. And as if that wasn't enough it turns out they can still give interviews to newspapers, they just don't want to talk to their players.

In other words they pulled pretty much every single crap move they could come up with and now there's something for everybody to rage about. Had they implemented ship paint to work like EVE's equivalent of the plan in this dev blog, i.e. paint from the LP store and then an mt payment to apply it, I would have a hangar of pink ships now and I think it's a fair guess that most of the rage would not have happened.

I doubt it, from a purely business point of view. They are currently burning $8.5 million in cash per year due to Dust and possibly WoD development. Both of these games will be mt based; of Dust we know they've been talking about pay2win in the form of guns you buy and so on. There are just about two possible short term outcomes. One is Dust succeeds, but that will tell them that mt and pay2win is the way to go. The other is Dust fails, but that will mean they're sitting on a huge debt and either need every straw they can cling to to extract more money from their players or find some other way to realize their virtual assets i.e. sell out.

For what it's worth, I wanted to check it out when it was released but the lack of a trial at the time scared me away. There was little to no public information about it and no way to find out what the game is like. This has been rectified since, and hence I'm here; maybe I'm not the only one.