Gold

OpiateOfTheMasses wrote:

z00mz00m wrote:

Moss20 wrote:

THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT I HAVE BEEN MAKING. NOT ENOUGH UNITS, THINGS TO DO, BUILDINGS TO SPECIALIZE AND BUILD, DEFENSES TO ERECT ETC. ... TO ENGAGE PLAYERS.

SORRY FOR CAPS (not sorry lol)

playing homefront. I control 40% the map, can only build 5 units per day. thats nonsense. (of course without gold)

again, not a diss, but constructive observational suggestions.

I don't understand this complaint regarding "not enough to do".If you want a faster paced game, play a speed map. The game is already too fast for a lot of people.

Not enough units? There are plenty of units.

Plan your movements. And of course, don't lose your units.

Are you primarily limited by resources or manpower?

Do you build industry in your core cities and resource provinces?

I don't use gold, and I have plenty of units to keep me busy.

What kind of units and stacks do you build?

I've noticed that a lot of the gold users don't seem to be very good players. They don't build industry. They don't build "smart" mixes of units. They just over-compensate their short comings by churning out lots of units with gold...

I see more of that with multi accounters tbh.

Someone investing 300$ in a game is likely serious about his/her game.

Someone spending 1k is likely what you are talking about. lol

z00mz00m wrote:

6thDragon wrote:

I've seen some pretty egregious multi-accounting too. And what's worse, Bytro doesn't address support tickets to report it. I've seen players bragging about how easy it is to multi-account in the newspaper.

Perhaps a few more checks and limitations could be put into place when countries conquer others with no casualties. I've seen multi-accouters log in, give all their resources to another account and move all their troops to sea; allowing the main account to have a massive resource boost and rapid early expansion. But I've certainly taken many of other countries without casualties too; very easy to do with arty against an inactive player. Perhaps limiting day one trades in resources would make it more difficult for multi-accouters.

They could limit trades, especially early trades. This would negate some of the benefits of alliance play, where we share maps and help each other right away, while other potential coalitions are still in the process of discovering each other. Some consider this an unfair advantage.

Before deciding if this is fair or unfair, please also consider how players, especially alliance mates, combat gold users. It takes a concentrated effort to go hunt a whale. If early and asymmetrical resource trades are disabled, that would make it harder to take down those whales.

Apologies to Moss20 if this sounds personal. It's not intended to be personal. But a heavy spender will attract this kind of attention. If we look in the newspaper and you have 2x-4x the army of anyone else because you paid to remove the manpower cap, we will come for you and we will take you down.

You seem to think all golders are bullies. This is not true.

And what is a whale? where is the line? 100$ spent makes you a whale?

Like what is the magical number? lol

And, I think I have made it clear that capping gold to a certain amount per game would make the game way more fun.

Its just favoring long term income to fast cash grab. I cannot make that big call though, only Bytro. lol

Ingame, if chasing me as a perceived whale turns you on, go for it, come for me lol. Its only a game gang. I am here to have fun. Hopefully others as well.

K.Rokossovski wrote:

I don't really see the problem with multi-accounters. Someone pushing all his land and res from one account to the other early game is WAY less dangerous than two close friends working closely together.

BUT. I agree with the two or three close friends working together. Luckily for me I have a few good gamers to rely and play with.

I also think all of you players commenting in this thread would be fun to play with .. so hit me up for a game

Moss20 wrote:

I do not take anything personal, especially not from regulars on forums like you. I value your input and suggestions. You seem to think all golders are bullies. This is not true.

And what is a whale? where is the line? 100$ spent makes you a whale?

Like what is the magical number? lol

And, I think I have made it clear that capping gold to a certain amount per game would make the game way more fun.

Its just favoring long term income to fast cash grab. I cannot make that big call though, only Bytro. lol

Ingame, if chasing me as a perceived whale turns you on, go for it, come for me lol. Its only a game gang. I am here to have fun. Hopefully others as well.

This is a refreshingly honest and friendly discussion about gold use. Much appreciated!

Gold is controversial. Some of us non-gold-users are traumatized by some gold-users who can turn the game upside down in a few minutes. For example, using gold to heal bombers units during combat. Some guy builds 2 strategic bombers, barely survives an attack on my well-patrolled city, but he keeps healing, so the "bad" tactic works. Eventually, my fighters wear out, my air field wears out, and I lose my air force. This is a terrible gaming experience. And there is no way to combat this tactic.

Another use of gold seems more reasonable - to me. Say you're busy and you can't be online all day. You log in after a day of inactivity, and you build a bunch of structures and units really fast. It's the same structures and units you could have built anyway, you're just paying so you can be less active. Time is money.

What's not OK - to me, these are personal opinions - is for someone to build a bunch of units at once, pay for additional manpower, and build an army 4x the size of the next person in the game. Then go and bulldoze their neighbors. What's the point of that? It's just like healing bombers. It breaks fundamental aspects of the game, making it unplayable to everyone else around that person. These other players become helpless NPC's, trapped on the same map to scream and shout and provide minor amusement to the gold spender who wipes them off the map the way a Barbarian in Diablo might swat away a single goblin.

How do you make sense of this, Moss?

Moss20 wrote:

I have zero issues spending 300$ on a game if it lasts a month. I might put 60$ at the start and a few add ins as i go...

Moss20 wrote:

I am here to have fun. Hopefully others as well.

Hello Gents.

The Terms of Service is very clear on how far this conversation may go. This topic has come up many, many times. and often has a tendency to off the rails and violate the TOS which states

" 1. e)The denunciation of Gold users is not permitted and leads to an immediate warning. The use of Gold is an explicit part of the game. The same applies to the premium account. It should be noted that violations of criminal laws in the internet are also subject to prosecution and can be brought to the police. "

Here is the Link to Forum Rules

OneNutSquirrel

EN-Moderator

OneNutSquirrel wrote:

Hello Gents.

The Terms of Service is very clear on how far this conversation may go. This topic has come up many, many times. and often has a tendency to off the rails and violate the TOS which states

" 1. e)The denunciation of Gold users is not permitted and leads to an immediate warning. The use of Gold is an explicit part of the game. The same applies to the premium account. It should be noted that violations of criminal laws in the internet are also subject to prosecution and can be brought to the police. "

Here is the Link to Forum Rules

OneNutSquirrel

EN-Moderator

Bytro head must have gotten water inside

How did I denounce gold use? I didn't press him to not use gold nor did I lambaste him for using gold. I took issue only on his two faced facade of caring about the collective experience of all actors in a game when he clearly doesn't, not gold use per se.

Imagine actually believing you're gonna be taken seriously in your wishes for everyone to 'have fun' when you casually just drop $300 in a game. At least anchor your justification for such action in something valid, like "it keeps the game alive" and such, not some cheap insincere tripe.

There's no need to go negative here, Sakki.

We are having a civil discussion. I'd like to keep it that way.

I'm genuinely curious about all the different ways people play CoW, with and without gold.

Z. Sakki wrote:

How did I denounce gold use? I didn't press him to not use gold nor did I lambaste him for using gold. I took issue only on his two faced facade of caring about the collective experience of all actors in a game when he clearly doesn't, not gold use per se.

Imagine actually believing you're gonna be taken seriously in your wishes for everyone to 'have fun' when you casually just drop $300 in a game. At least anchor your justification for such action in something valid, like "it keeps the game alive" and such, not some cheap insincere tripe.

No gold, No game.

I was going to continue to discuss this, but I believe Sakki is not going to be able to discuss.

@z00mz00m I will mail you privately.

Thanks for the discussion all

Anyone not sure of where the crossed line is.. please check Forum Rules Link Here.

Thread is Closed