I reckon tonnes of people have left the game in such frustration and lots of people would say "nah don't play Supremacy 1914 - it's pay to win". Imagine if all those people came back to the game and subscribed to it, and then told their good friends, and they told their friends how awesome Supremacy is, and so on. Bytros would be making plenty of dough.
Another advantage of this model is that without goldmark, you can't buy your way to a win, and so it stops the players that keep winning using Goldmark from winning more Goldmark and becoming the dominant players. Goldmark is a self fulfilling prophecy that rewards those that support the system financially (helping them become the dominant players) - but ultimately it makes Supremacy a lesser game that you really can't win without cheating (Goldmark). Lets be honest. Almost everyone hates that except the few. Goldmark driven games dumbs down the collective by rewarding poor strategy and big spending and penalising skill that is not backed by a big wallet. If the collective pays for the games, then we can incentivise good gameplay, intelligent strategy and gamesmanship, hence creating a smarter, more evolved gaming community. As different from a divided, money driven, ultimately dumbed down gaming community. Pay-to-win is only good for Bytros. its not good for the community. Functional subscriptions or Pay Per Play is a win-win for BOTH the community and Bytros. The game improves, the players improve and largely everyone is happier. Participation is higher when you pay to play. The game becomes about how you play the game rather than rewarding unskilled victories fuelled by pay to win.
Lets Support PLAY-to-WIN, not PAY-to-WIN.
