Are Stash Tabs Pay To Win ? Science

So, the only point p2w claimers have come up with by now is that they can't run two clients at the same time on their stone-age toaster? Pretty weak. PoE confirmed for non-p2w.

[Removed by Support]

"

johnKeys a écrit :

[Removed by Support]

Yes, around 80% of the time I'm serious. Now think of a real reason why stash tabs might be p2w. If you can't run two clients at the same time (the second client being on texture quality >9000 and using maybe 640 kb of RAM) you should upgrade to a medieval or renaissance toaster.

How can the argument that time = money be used to prove that more stash tabs is paying to win?

Say there are 2 guys named John Keys. They each play for 1 hour a day. The first one has 4 stash tabs and the second one has 50. The first guy spends an hour a day playing, just going to town when he reaches a waypoint or gets a big drop. The second picks everything up and goes to town every 5 minutes to put all that stuff in the stash. After a week, the first guy has played 6.5 hours and messed with his stash .5 hours. The second has played 3.5 hours and messed with items in his stash for 3.5 hours. Which one is winning?

"

mark1030 a écrit :

How can the argument that time = money be used to prove that more stash tabs is paying to win?

Say there are 2 guys named John Keys. They each play for 1 hour a day. The first one has 4 stash tabs and the second one has 50. The first guy spends an hour a day playing, just going to town when he reaches a waypoint or gets a big drop. The second picks everything up and goes to town every 5 minutes to put all that stuff in the stash. After a week, the first guy has played 6.5 hours and messed with his stash .5 hours. The second has played 3.5 hours and messed with items in his stash for 3.5 hours. Which one is winning?

This example isn't even close to PoE reality. The time advantage for someone with stash tabs is negligible. If I were to compete with johnKeys, I'd crush him simply because I have 2 sec loading screen while he has 30 sec loading screens due to his toaster. 100 loading screens later, I'd have a time advantage of 28*100 seconds, aka roughly 45 minutes. No stash tab amount in the world saves you that much time.

@JohnKeys so basically, all of your P2W concerns would be addressed if the minimum specs didn't include stone age P4 toasters? Or would you still blame GGG for personal hardware failings if you were running below the minimum specs, but running none the less, and another person running on a toaster was also below spec, but bought stash tabs? Sorry, that whole 'equal starting point' is throwing me. It's a problem that is quite relative, as someone with my own exact hardware would be able to mule just fine and the argument would be completely invalid. But, if you're at or above minimum requirements and can't mule, there's possibly a kernel of validity.

"

mark1030 a écrit :

How can the argument that time = money be used to prove that more stash tabs is paying to win?

Say there are 2 guys named John Keys. They each play for 1 hour a day. The first one has 4 stash tabs and the second one has 50. The first guy spends an hour a day playing, just going to town when he reaches a waypoint or gets a big drop. The second picks everything up and goes to town every 5 minutes to put all that stuff in the stash. After a week, the first guy has played 6.5 hours and messed with his stash .5 hours. The second has played 3.5 hours and messed with items in his stash for 3.5 hours. Which one is winning?

[Removed by Support]

i'd like to speak up here, because i'm "highly experienced" playing with low tabs

i do have an account with 14 stash tabs, but for fun/challenge/yolo, i play on the 4 tab one. it makes me feel like a Spartan.

is it a disadvantage? from a mathematical, practical view, yes.

from a psychological view, sometimes not, because of the "mark1030" factor he described. when you have a limited amount of space, it encourages you to weight things a bit differently.

items worth keeping have to be worth more, period, unless you want to offload that extra time dealing with organization across multiple accounts, juggling items that people want to buy, for sale, and this leads into complications because of the indexer's "online" system. more opportunities to forget something.

being listed as "offline" for even an hour can easily cost you a missed sale.

so the easy solution to this, on low tabs, is to ignore lesser items instead of dealing with them the same as you would with say, 30 or 40 stash tabs.

however, the flip side of having extra stash tabs, especially for people like me who can be hoarders, is that you can waste time hoarding things that you shouldn't be hoarding.

so for me having low tabs is in some ways an advantage because it forces me to constantly weight items on whether or not they are keeping. "limbo" is like, half a stash page. there's no time for "limbo" it's keep(sell) -- or vendor.

in summary:

With good stash management, and good decision making organization/etc, more stash tabs is definitely an advantage -- to a point. They have diminishing returns.

For most people though, like me, the real advantage is somewhat minor and it can actually be a disadvantage, surprisingly -- if you have bad item management, bad hoarding tendencies, etc. You will just create a bigger mess.

the "p2w" concept is more of a spectrum than a "yes/no" thing. stash tabs are def. on the spectrum because they directly affect gameplay. are they very deep into the spectrum? no. it's not a massive advantage.

"

johnKeys a écrit :

@b15h09, you didn't get it.
well that post was my absolute best attempt. I give up.

Oh, I get it. It's just that your perspective is from someone who can barely run the client once. Mine is from someone who can run it 5 times without much issue (when we could). Yes, in your situation, with someone else having an equal toaster, there could be some kernal of P2W if the other guy bought a stash tab. However, if all involved parties were running below requirements, that should absolve GGG of even that kernel of P2W in your mind, no? By all rights, all parties have no business playing the game until they pay 2 play with a modern computer. Or is it still pay to win, because the advantage can be bought, even if the advantage can also be had for free?

@b15h09,
the point is, tabs can range from minor convenience/advantage in your super-computer case, to full-blown knock-out in my "medieval toaster" one, or anything in between these two extremes.
I think that's the "spectrum" Veruski mentioned, without getting into the whole psychological things in his post.

but they are - without a shadow of a doubt - an advantage given to one who pays for them, over one who does not (or pays for something else), assuming their starting point is equal.
by contrast, if I buy pink pixie wings and you don't - regardless of your computer or anything else - my only "advantage" over you in-game, is one "fabulous"-looking big Marauder.

that's P2W, unless you can come up with a different definition.
the only thing left to argue about, is the "degree of Pay-To-Winess".