no-gold-game premium feature request

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • no-gold-game premium feature request

      Who would like to see a "no gold" game option for Premium players who pay a subscription? 16
      1.  
        Yes, I want to pay the game maker so I can play even and fair games. (12) 75%
      2.  
        No, I like it the way it is. (4) 25%
      The designers have done an excellent job making a fun strategy game online that is one of the better simulation games available that doesn't require download. I've been playing strategy games with hex and counter since the late seventies and I actually like this game. I understand the free to play and pay to win model and will not complain about it too much as it is not a secret and the developers need to get a return somehow.

      My suggestion is to have a "goldless" game option for premium subscribed players only. I would be more than happy to pay a subscription if I could play games on an even playing field.

      I play this game and I make this suggestion only because the game is so well designed. It stands above the average Skinner Box pay to win slot machine game.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by dirge: typo ().

    • I support any and all of the suggested paths.

      A check box on game creation.
      A check box on game creation that is only available to HC players.
      Making a "gold free" game only available on a per game / per player payment.
      Making a "gold free" game only available on a per subscription / per player payment.

      I don't have a problem spending money on this game. Actually, my wife might disagree. ;)

      Let's put this the other way. I will happily spend a few shekels for the opportunity to play a game that does not have the looming potential balance of my credit card.
    • F. Marion wrote:

      I support any and all of the suggested paths.

      A check box on game creation.
      A check box on game creation that is only available to HC players.
      Making a "gold free" game only available on a per game / per player payment.
      Making a "gold free" game only available on a per subscription / per player payment.

      I don't have a problem spending money on this game.
      Roger that.

      I would gladly pay 5,000 to 12,000 gold units (the equivalent of U.S. $2 to $5) to create or enter a game that was gold-free and everyone is on an absolute equal footing at the outset of the game. That is the most challenging COW environment, with only your own tactical skills, your talent in managing your industrial build-up, your ability to negotiate alliances with your fellow players, and a little bit of luck to separate you from everyone else.
    • Yes I want love tihs whether it was a premium HC feature like $20 a month or even a little higher or with regular HC but you pay 5000 gold or 10,000 gold to have a feature of no gold use within a game. Also like someone else mentioned I understand developer make money from people buying gold and many players buy in game so they want to make money but if you have people pay up front and have a equal playing field is more fun for the consumer. It is an option and people that use gold will still buy their gold I think this would add to their revenue not take away because people like me would end up paying more to play. Now I only pay for the HC and I do not mind contributing to the game so the $5 or whatever I pay a month to play is no big deal but something like that will have me paying a lot more
    • Yep.

      I have participated in past PL games. I missed the last go round for staff games this time but will keep an eye out for them.

      I have not played in a staff game so I can't speak to how that is done but the PL games tend to add an additional layer of rules that, IMHO, get in the way of the game itself. I would like to see that 'gold free' option made available outside of those constraints.

      Anyway, hopefully this stays near the top of the wish list.
    • A set limit for a given game would also be entertaining.

      In fact, it might be the amount "paid" to enter the game.

      I could enjoy a game with a 10K gold entrance fee and that amount is all that I have available for that game.

      This would level playing field of wallets, possibly reduce the tendency to abandon a game and still maintain the profit margin for Bytro.
    • i also would like a monthly subscription if it meant no gold use in game.
      it would cost me more than i usually spend on gold, but it would make the game more enjoyable, and bytro would gain more money. if it is an option bytro could use both monthly and periodical and not lose any revenue
    • F. Marion wrote:

      A set limit for a given game would also be entertaining.

      In fact, it might be the amount "paid" to enter the game.

      I could enjoy a game with a 10K gold entrance fee and that amount is all that I have available for that game.

      This would level playing field of wallets, possibly reduce the tendency to abandon a game and still maintain the profit margin for Bytro.
      That is essentially what would happen if this idea is implemented.

      A player would spend X amount of money to ensure that no additional gold would be spent on the game they are in.
      By spending money on that feature, they would be setting the limit to the money spent for the feature.

      The company wins because the feature generates revenue. The customer wins because they have an even playing field.
      Gold users win because they will naturally choose the games where they can spend gold.
      In fact, that would be even better for the company, because it would concentrate gold users more into gold influenced games and when you have multiple gold users in a game competing against each other, it can result in a decent amount of money spent. It basically becomes an auction.