Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo Wars Series

Blitz pay to win? how to fix it

OP intrepidomar

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2
I'm more concerned with the fact that it's unplayable atm. I've lost every single round so far. I'm consistently trashed by armies over twice the size of mine. It sucks. The games sucks right now.
Lol. I'm sorry to laugh at this, but I mean.. Comeon heh. That's just your play level. You are fighting other players that are better then you. You just need to learn the game and get better at it. One aspect of improving is loosing. Find out what others are doing and you might see what you are doing wrong. I've only gotten to play 4 matches so far, but I've won each one of them and I am by no means some legendary RTS player. You just have to learn the system.

Tips:
1) Include fast units in your deck. You want fast units so you can quickly grab the energy drops. The more energy drops you get, the more army you can field.
2) Consider playing 2vs2. Sometimes you might get some heat off you by playing with a team mate.
3) Build a balanced deck. Have units off every cost in the deck. If you add a Vulture at 140 cost, then make sure to also add a Marine at 20. Scorpion at 110, then add a cyclops at 30. Make sure you have units that counter air, infantry and vehicles.
4) Design a deck with purpose. Is it going to be a quick mobile army or a sturdy, slow, punchy army? You could design a deck mainly based on tricks and abilities, long range artillery and so on. For you I would recommand a very basic deck however. Avoid using cards like Scarab and Condor. They will just distract you from your goal.
5) Keep playing. Play, fail, learn, play again. Check out youtube videos and see what others are saying. And most importantly; don't give up.

Good luck.
I play 3v3 because there are more armies to contend with at a time so there's some time to build an army but I do have a balanced army. Thanks for the tips.
I think at the end of the day they will keep it this way because most new games have included some sort of easy win mechanic and they know people buy them or they wouldn't put them in there, if they made blitz not pay to win sure they would have the communities thanks but if they leave it as pay to win they get much more money out of it and that's really all most businesses care about these days, but I think they didn't go overboard and -Yoink- the game up like cod did with their newer titles, so I respect them for that but yeah if they made blitz have an in game currency to level cards they would loose money , simple as that and that's why they won't do that.
Please refrain from bringing back old posts. Thank you. If you want to comment on the issue I would suggesting creating your own thread in the future.
Warzone was not Pay2Win, and these microtransactions seem less intrusive, so HW2 is not pay2win.
Well, technically it is, because Units get a big advantage from Multiple cards, and such is hard when you only get 3 a day!
I'm not saying up the amount you get a day, In fact I think I've just come to accept that it is, and even more so than Halo 5 cause it is the literal equivalent of increasing the damage of your assault rifle every time you get that card.
Its pretty Pay to Win, its still fun though!
Halokid003 wrote:
I think if it is pay to win or not will show in time, either ways the fact that the cards are permanent unlocks and not 1 time use scams is 1000 times better than rhe REQ system.
That makes it worse on the p2w front as well. Because now your money is a permanent investment. Your units are permanently that much better every game. Whereas with WZ if you bought packs, your 'advantage' was finite. Additionally, in a fps game, your advantage is only as good as the person holding the gun. Whereas in Blitz, high rank cards can take on multitudes of cards that are supposed to be hard counters to them. All one needs to do is put them in range to kill stuff.
Warzone was not Pay2Win, and these microtransactions seem less intrusive, so HW2 is not pay2win.
Well, technically it is, because Units get a big advantage from Multiple cards, and such is hard when you only get 3 a day!
I'm not saying up the amount you get a day, In fact I think I've just come to accept that it is, and even more so than Halo 5 cause it is the literal equivalent of increasing the damage of your assault rifle every time you get that card.
Its pretty Pay to Win, its still fun though!
Note I said this before Halo Wars 2 came out.
Warzone was not Pay2Win, and these microtransactions seem less intrusive, so HW2 is not pay2win.
Well, technically it is, because Units get a big advantage from Multiple cards, and such is hard when you only get 3 a day!
I'm not saying up the amount you get a day, In fact I think I've just come to accept that it is, and even more so than Halo 5 cause it is the literal equivalent of increasing the damage of your assault rifle every time you get that card.
Its pretty Pay to Win, its still fun though!
Note I said this before Halo Wars 2 came out.
Oh -Yoink- you did! I went too far down, sorry buddy! Haha!
Warzone was not Pay2Win, and these microtransactions seem less intrusive, so HW2 is not pay2win.
Well, technically it is, because Units get a big advantage from Multiple cards, and such is hard when you only get 3 a day!
I'm not saying up the amount you get a day, In fact I think I've just come to accept that it is, and even more so than Halo 5 cause it is the literal equivalent of increasing the damage of your assault rifle every time you get that card.
Its pretty Pay to Win, its still fun though!
Note I said this before Halo Wars 2 came out.
Oh -Yoink- you did! I went too far down, sorry buddy! Haha!
Lol no problem.
Warzone was not Pay2Win, and these microtransactions seem less intrusive, so HW2 is not pay2win.
Well, technically it is, because Units get a big advantage from Multiple cards, and such is hard when you only get 3 a day!
I'm not saying up the amount you get a day, In fact I think I've just come to accept that it is, and even more so than Halo 5 cause it is the literal equivalent of increasing the damage of your assault rifle every time you get that card.
Its pretty Pay to Win, its still fun though!
I disagree totally. Haven't paid a dime and played a fair amount of matches at most (I'm level twenty something) and my cards are all around level 4-5. After level 6 the difference between cards become really minuscule and the advantages between the two are sooo hard to detect. Add in the fact that you are paying for random cards and can't decide which to level up and I can't see how this is "pay to win". Maybe pay to get to a higher level faster maybe but it doesn't take much to be on the same playing field without dropping a dime
blitz isnt p2w.
blitz is more a kind of highlevel mode (endgame mode)

i've never bought something but my average cardlevel is nearly 4 and my acc lvl is 25.
the keys are dailys and weeklys.
o Hova x wrote:
Warzone was not Pay2Win, and these microtransactions seem less intrusive, so HW2 is not pay2win.
Well, technically it is, because Units get a big advantage from Multiple cards, and such is hard when you only get 3 a day!
I'm not saying up the amount you get a day, In fact I think I've just come to accept that it is, and even more so than Halo 5 cause it is the literal equivalent of increasing the damage of your assault rifle every time you get that card.
Its pretty Pay to Win, its still fun though!
I disagree totally. Haven't paid a dime and played a fair amount of matches at most (I'm level twenty something) and my cards are all around level 4-5. After level 6 the difference between cards become really minuscule and the advantages between the two are sooo hard to detect. Add in the fact that you are paying for random cards and can't decide which to level up and I can't see how this is "pay to win". Maybe pay to get to a higher level faster maybe but it doesn't take much to be on the same playing field without dropping a dime
Well you see, the pay-to-win aspect is still there, as small as it is, considering the fact that you are leveling up your cards, and having to choose which one you level up hardly has to do with anything. Believe me, I love Blitz, and I have a good opinion about it, its a good game, but there is undeniably a fragment of pay-to-win, as small as it is, because you are technically getting an advantage in units over others, and that advantage can technically be gotten and also spammed in order to get your cards to a higher level than the enemy, allowing you to have a better, not necessarily perfect, but undeniably, better percentage of winning.
It is in it's smallest form (which is great), but its still there, and I can settle with this over Halo 5's Req System.
o Hova x wrote:
Warzone was not Pay2Win, and these microtransactions seem less intrusive, so HW2 is not pay2win.
Well, technically it is, because Units get a big advantage from Multiple cards, and such is hard when you only get 3 a day!
I'm not saying up the amount you get a day, In fact I think I've just come to accept that it is, and even more so than Halo 5 cause it is the literal equivalent of increasing the damage of your assault rifle every time you get that card.
Its pretty Pay to Win, its still fun though!
I disagree totally. Haven't paid a dime and played a fair amount of matches at most (I'm level twenty something) and my cards are all around level 4-5. After level 6 the difference between cards become really minuscule and the advantages between the two are sooo hard to detect. Add in the fact that you are paying for random cards and can't decide which to level up and I can't see how this is "pay to win". Maybe pay to get to a higher level faster maybe but it doesn't take much to be on the same playing field without dropping a dime
Well you see, the pay-to-win aspect is still there, as small as it is, considering the fact that you are leveling up your cards, and having to choose which one you level up hardly has to do with anything. Believe me, I love Blitz, and I have a good opinion about it, its a good game, but there is undeniably a fragment of pay-to-win, as small as it is, because you are technically getting an advantage in units over others, and that advantage can technically be gotten and also spammed in order to get your cards to a higher level than the enemy, allowing you to have a better, not necessarily perfect, but undeniably, better percentage of winning.
It is in it's smallest form (which is great), but its still there, and I can settle with this over Halo 5's Req System.
If you and I can both agree that the advantage is extremely small then I think the term, pay to "win", is being used too loosely. You aren't guaranteed a win or even given that much of an advantage to close the skill gap. If someone is better than you they're going to beat you regardless. Plus that small advantage lasts early on in the game life cycle. If someone has played the game moderately they are no longer at a disadvantage to someone that has paid a month ago (even the smallest of amounts). The guy that just got the game yesterday will be at a disadvantage to everyone anyway regardless of money spent. I know it sounds like I'm ranting but those are the biggest reasons on why it isn't play to "win". More like "play to win". How can anyone even tell who paid anymore anyway? Lol
o Hova x wrote:
o Hova x wrote:
Warzone was not Pay2Win, and these microtransactions seem less intrusive, so HW2 is not pay2win.
Well, technically it is, because Units get a big advantage from Multiple cards, and such is hard when you only get 3 a day!
I'm not saying up the amount you get a day, In fact I think I've just come to accept that it is, and even more so than Halo 5 cause it is the literal equivalent of increasing the damage of your assault rifle every time you get that card.
Its pretty Pay to Win, its still fun though!
I disagree totally. Haven't paid a dime and played a fair amount of matches at most (I'm level twenty something) and my cards are all around level 4-5. After level 6 the difference between cards become really minuscule and the advantages between the two are sooo hard to detect. Add in the fact that you are paying for random cards and can't decide which to level up and I can't see how this is "pay to win". Maybe pay to get to a higher level faster maybe but it doesn't take much to be on the same playing field without dropping a dime
Well you see, the pay-to-win aspect is still there, as small as it is, considering the fact that you are leveling up your cards, and having to choose which one you level up hardly has to do with anything. Believe me, I love Blitz, and I have a good opinion about it, its a good game, but there is undeniably a fragment of pay-to-win, as small as it is, because you are technically getting an advantage in units over others, and that advantage can technically be gotten and also spammed in order to get your cards to a higher level than the enemy, allowing you to have a better, not necessarily perfect, but undeniably, better percentage of winning.
It is in it's smallest form (which is great), but its still there, and I can settle with this over Halo 5's Req System.
If you and I can both agree that the advantage is extremely small then I think the term, pay to "win", is being used too loosely. You aren't guaranteed a win or even given that much of an advantage to close the skill gap. If someone is better than you they're going to beat you regardless. Plus that small advantage lasts early on in the game life cycle. If someone has played the game moderately they are no longer at a disadvantage to someone that has paid a month ago (even the smallest of amounts). The guy that just got the game yesterday will be at a disadvantage to everyone anyway regardless of money spent. I know it sounds like I'm ranting but those are the biggest reasons on why it isn't play to "win". More like "play to win". How can anyone even tell who paid anymore anyway? Lol
Well you tell me what to call it without making me sound like an idiot, hahaha!
The only reason I call it that is the fact that it is what it is by definition (or at least the definition to which it has been used) and I use it mainly because that's what I think is the best way to put it, considering that referring to micro transactions in any game (Except Overwatch apparently, for good reason, haha!) is derogatory, and is often frowned upon by many, including me. Its not technically like that for Late game, but by the logistics that goes into the formula of Blitz, it only applies to those level 5 and under, I guess that makes the term viable... but for a certain time period? Ahhh! This is hurting my brain dammit!
o Hova x wrote:
o Hova x wrote:
Warzone was not Pay2Win, and these microtransactions seem less intrusive, so HW2 is not pay2win.
Well, technically it is, because Units get a big advantage from Multiple cards, and such is hard when you only get 3 a day!
I'm not saying up the amount you get a day, In fact I think I've just come to accept that it is, and even more so than Halo 5 cause it is the literal equivalent of increasing the damage of your assault rifle every time you get that card.
Its pretty Pay to Win, its still fun though!
I disagree totally. Haven't paid a dime and played a fair amount of matches at most (I'm level twenty something) and my cards are all around level 4-5. After level 6 the difference between cards become really minuscule and the advantages between the two are sooo hard to detect. Add in the fact that you are paying for random cards and can't decide which to level up and I can't see how this is "pay to win". Maybe pay to get to a higher level faster maybe but it doesn't take much to be on the same playing field without dropping a dime
Well you see, the pay-to-win aspect is still there, as small as it is, considering the fact that you are leveling up your cards, and having to choose which one you level up hardly has to do with anything. Believe me, I love Blitz, and I have a good opinion about it, its a good game, but there is undeniably a fragment of pay-to-win, as small as it is, because you are technically getting an advantage in units over others, and that advantage can technically be gotten and also spammed in order to get your cards to a higher level than the enemy, allowing you to have a better, not necessarily perfect, but undeniably, better percentage of winning.
It is in it's smallest form (which is great), but its still there, and I can settle with this over Halo 5's Req System.
If you and I can both agree that the advantage is extremely small then I think the term, pay to "win", is being used too loosely. You aren't guaranteed a win or even given that much of an advantage to close the skill gap. If someone is better than you they're going to beat you regardless. Plus that small advantage lasts early on in the game life cycle. If someone has played the game moderately they are no longer at a disadvantage to someone that has paid a month ago (even the smallest of amounts). The guy that just got the game yesterday will be at a disadvantage to everyone anyway regardless of money spent. I know it sounds like I'm ranting but those are the biggest reasons on why it isn't play to "win". More like "play to win". How can anyone even tell who paid anymore anyway? Lol
Well you tell me what to call it without making me sound like an idiot, hahaha!
The only reason I call it that is the fact that it is what it is by definition (or at least the definition to which it has been used) and I use it mainly because that's what I think is the best way to put it, considering that referring to micro transactions in any game (Except Overwatch apparently, for good reason, haha!) is derogatory, and is often frowned upon by many, including me. Its not technically like that for Late game, but by the logistics that goes into the formula of Blitz, it only applies to those level 5 and under, I guess that makes the term viable... but for a certain time period? Ahhh! This is hurting my brain dammit!
Lol yeah at the end of the day I guess the terminology doesn't matter, I get what you're saying now and I don't like them at all either. Sadly it looks like it's here to stay in gaming for the long run as long as a corporation can make a lot of profit from them.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2