GOLD LIMITATION SUGGESTION...A good one, this time.

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

    • GOLD LIMITATION SUGGESTION...A good one, this time.

      OK, so Gold usage is always such a controversial topic among the community of players. Some people love it, some people hate it...and some people like using vast quantities to give their opponents a real reaming...if you know what I mean.

      Well, we all get it. Bytro needs the money, blah blah blah. It's an old argument, and nobody ever wins or feels like they're able to make any headway on this discussion. Well, like so many of them, I've tried many many times to offer alternative fundraising suggestions, and none of those have ever been adopted...nor even taken seriously, I'd imagine. Others have had ideas too, some good, some...well, not as good. But at least the community is trying to come up with ways to assist our favorite game maker in staying afloat.

      And, it is a self-evident and indisputable truth, that most of those who can support the company by buying Gold, would be happy to support Bytro by alternative means since the clear majority of players are adamantly opposed to using a premium-point system to unbalance the playing field -- so to speak -- for multiplayer games such as this.

      Anyway, obviously, Bytro's never going to dump the Gold premium point system, despite losing so many thousands of players each month. Since that inescapable and unfortunate reality can't be helped, I have a new idea...one which I think might be acceptable enough to the staff at Bytro...such that those of us more-committed players can at least not see our hard-earned competitive status within our matches be suddenly -- and overwhelmingly -- discarded by those few who patently abuse the Gold premium-point privilege.

      ~0~

      My idea, simply put, is to place a limit....not on the spending....but on the amount of time, in which Gold can be used. My biggest complaint about the premium point system -- and I know most players agree with me on this point -- is that, after many weeks or months of playing in a single match, when the game has narrowed down to a small list of surviving players, someone gets the bright idea to crack open their wallet and turn a heavily-contested match into a complete rout against their competitors.

      That last-minute game-changing uber Gold usage makes a match which was fun, often spirit-filled, and full of happy banter, turn into a joyless match filled with bitterness, stress, hurt feelings, incendiary language, hate-filled accusations, name-calling, recriminations, and even vindictive behaviors. Late-game Gold usage causes so many problems on so many levels that it turns people off of this game. I've seen -- and known -- many players who would rage-quit this game over heavy Gold usage, late in the game. And I'm telling you, this need not be!

      I can also tell you, from personal experience, that on numerous occasions, being an expert and high-ranking player, I've had many a match be totally spoiled -- after literally months of playing -- by one or more of my opponents who -- unable to compete against my strategies -- decides in the late-game to start using Gold in vast quantities because, for some reason, they want to win...no matter what. Those types of players are totally content to pay to win when they face annihilation at the foot of a smarter or luckier player, like myself. On those occasions -- which are quite numerous, frankly -- I have been totally burnt up on the inside...just like so many others facing that horrible situation.

      ~0~

      Let me put it this way. If I play a match, and am dominating -- or at least doing very well -- for weeks or months, and my competition eventually overcomes me, pushes me back, and finally destroys me -- but does so with strategy, cunning, and guile...well -- then I have total respect for them...and their achievement. I don't like losing anymore than the next man. But I can accept it and can applaud my opponents' victories because, to me, this "game" requires sportsmanship and the community is like a big family. I can be happy while losing, knowing I'm giving it my all and that I'm being bested in a fair manner by someone (often many at the same time) who outwits me, out-thinks me, uses better diplomacy, or any number of other "better" reasons.

      But when one of our family's black sheep starts to use underhanded tactics -- like backstabbing their allies, for instance -- then, righteously, I and the rest of the players in a given match should -- and often do -- dispense justice in the form of rallying together against them. But, we -- the community within a given match -- can't dispense righteous justice in one single type of occasion...that being late-game heavy Gold usage. The problem is, though Bytro forbids most forms of cheating, since they don't forbid Gold usage (or at least try to contain it within reasonable limits), they are tacitly endorsing a sometimes-very unsportsmanlike behavior by those few whom I speak of....those that would wait until their opponents have nearly won a match or at least nearly defeated them, after weeks of time and man-hours of work which has been put into a match, to go on a spending binge with Gold.

      Well, obviously, since Bytro forbids harshly speaking out against Gold in general, I can't say what I really want to say. And that's OK. But the limitation that I offer should be considered acceptable by their forum policy.

      ~0~

      Well, if you haven't figured it out yet, I would like to propose that Gold spending be curtailed to a specific time limit. Perhaps it could be only in the first four weeks, that Gold can be used. And, after that, it's cut off, entirely.

      Or, perhaps it could be pulled back...or phased out, even...over the course of a match. For example, in the first three weeks of play, anyone can use Gold as much as they want, 'till their hearts are content and their wallets are empty. Then, during the fourth week of play, put on a daily limit of perhaps 10,000 Gold. In the fifth week, limit it to 5000 Gold, daily. And after five weeks, Gold usage is dropped to zero.

      Obviously, some model, like what I proposed here, could...and should...work. The point isn't that Gold should be restricted in a match -- even though most of us would like to see that -- the point is that your competitors can spend all the Gold they like in the first few weeks of a match. And those of us who can't or don't choose to use Gold (either due to financial, technical, or ethical reasons) face the possibility of losing such a match without having committed and dedicated such a substantial amount of our time and of our lives and of our sanity to that match. And so, to lose a match to a heavy Gold-user in the first few weeks stings only a little. We can lose, we can quit, and we can move on to another match....no harm done. But, to lose a match after many weeks, or even months, to a heavy Gold user, stings a lot......a whole lot......sometimes terribly so.

      ~0~

      continued in the next post...
      It seemed like such a waste to destroy an entire battle station just to eliminate one man. But Charlie knew that it was the only way to ensure the absolute and total destruction of Quasi-duck, once and for all.

      The saying, "beating them into submission until payday", is just golden...pun intended.

      R.I.P. Snickers <3
    • ...continued from last post.

      ~0~

      So, to you good Bytro people....please find a way to limit Gold usage to the first few weeks of play. Let the players who choose to spend money on this game be content with all the great gains they can make during that time...putting themselves on the path to an easy victory. And let the rest of us who can't spend money on this game be content in the knowledge that if we lose early on, we haven't suffered so much. Life goes on as normal.

      Please, this is absolutely my most conciliatory and reasonable suggestion on limiting Gold usage. It doesn't hurt the community ——— it actually helps the community by curtailing anger, resentment, and stress ——— and it won't cut into Bytro's profit margin because heavy Gold users will simply spend it all more-upfront than waiting until late in the game. It would actually also give encouragement to many of the players that have been -- or are thinking about -- leaving this game. For those of us dedicated long-time members of this great community, I know that there are some of us, who don't pay for supporting Bytro, but who might be incentivised and encouraged to start doing so. If they can see that Bytro adjusts it's policies even just this small amount by adopting my proposal, many of them will want to do more to keep this great company afloat.

      ~0~

      To use myself as an example, I can't afford to buy Gold. It's not a big issue. I just don't have the money. But if I did, and if I could afford to buy Gold, I still wouldn't. And I love this game and I love Bytro for producing it. I have said, before, that if I could, I would spend money on game merchandise, bling, High Command, and many other things. But, on principle, I wouldn't buy Gold. Yet, I know from talking with many other members of our playing community, that there are those whom can buy Gold and would like to do so, but think it too much of a crutch. Many of those players, however, might -- and probably will -- change their mind and go ahead and buy a little Gold, on a regular basis, knowing that -- in the end -- by having a time-limited usage, they won't feel like their hurting their fellow players.

      Also, were I ever to be in a position to buy Gold, I can tell you I would feel a lot less guilty about the prospect of it, knowing that other people wouldn't need to be afraid of me possibly ruining their long-time-spent matches by using vast quantities late in the game. I would only use it in small amounts on fairly-rare occasions and only use larger amounts to counter other heavy Gold users in the early game, where it counts the most. Besides, early Gold usage can set a good trend for a player. It's also quite handy at helping out the less-experienced players to survive a little longer. Late-game Gold usage just doesn't accomplish any of that. All it does is cause many hurt feelings within the player community...like having a disruptive uncle who shows up at the family reunion all drunk and making an ass of himself.

      ~0~

      Well, anyway, this has been my attempt to bring together the community and the staff into one accord on a single policy change that could really diffuse all the bitterness, all the resentment, and all the hurt feelings of those of us in the community that have had our matches ruined by very unsportsmanlike behavior late in the game.

      Hopefully, Bytro's staff can see the wisdom in my proposal and find some way to integrate it into the game.

      Thank you.
      It seemed like such a waste to destroy an entire battle station just to eliminate one man. But Charlie knew that it was the only way to ensure the absolute and total destruction of Quasi-duck, once and for all.

      The saying, "beating them into submission until payday", is just golden...pun intended.

      R.I.P. Snickers <3

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Diabolical ().

    • Well, actually, it doesn't affect the spending (which most of us would not like), but increases the profit of Bytro. I still agree with Diabolical though. To simplify it this way, I have tried to summarize it like this:

      1. Restrict time to use (ex. first 3 weeks no limit, later no using), or...
      2. Slowly limit gold usage over course of a game (ex. first 3 weeks no limit, 4th week 10k, 5th week 5k, etc)
      3. Makes players who get wiped out early less mad
      4. Bytro still earns about same amount since the spending would be focused in early game
      5. Non-gold using players would be happy since if they survive till late game, it will be mostly strategy

      One not-so-good scenario though: Heavy golders will buy TONS of gold in the beginning, uses it to quickly take over the world. The end.

      Hopefully this can make players (and devs)who visit this thread know what Diabolical's suggesting.
      "As long as there are sovereign nations possessing great power, war is inevitable." Albert Einstein

      "Giving up is not an option in war, for it proves one's incapability and incompetence as a leader." - Me (Little Racoon)
    • I'm in a game right now that has been totally ruined by a big spender. Though he did his spending early to revolt a province across the Pacific and reinforcing it, until he was ready to use it. Game should be over in another day or two. This example also brings into question the whole rating system as his kill ratio is some ungodly high ratio that makes @MontanaBB look like a rookie, and he has one of the best ratios I have ever seen for a low to non expenditure type player.

      Personally I am willing to pay to play a non gold or gold limit game just to avoid this type of BS. How hard could it be to program a charge of "X" gold for a game, per player to then not be able to use it, or be limited to spending "X"?
      "A good plan, violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan next week." - General George S. Patton, Jr.

      "Do, or do not. There is no try" - Yoda
    • Peter Mat wrote:

      This example also brings into question the whole rating system as his kill ratio is some ungodly high ratio that makes @MontanaBB look like a rookie, and he has one of the best ratios I have ever seen for a low to non expenditure type player.
      Who will that be, I wonder? Just tell me privately cos I'm just curious about stats. I love stats.
      "As long as there are sovereign nations possessing great power, war is inevitable." Albert Einstein

      "Giving up is not an option in war, for it proves one's incapability and incompetence as a leader." - Me (Little Racoon)
    • Hey there @Peter Mat

      Most of high stats are somewhat fake. A lot of players get stat obsessed and start another account once they get the game and then start comparing their own stat to that of others. The average stat in the game is 1, makes sense since one unit you lose is one more kill for someone else in pvp. So every kill is a death to someone else. The only stats that logicly arise are the ones you can get through terain bonuses and using your troops right. That means when you use infantry you use them to defend since their defense rating is 50% higher than attacking ones, using tanks in open fields, putting submarines in front of convoy's, stuff like that. Doing these kind of things over a periode of time give ratings higher than 1, the more effectively you can exploit the use of your troops the higher your rating will be.

      However, When new players start the game they have no idea what is what so in the beginning everyone usually loses a lot more troops than they kill. Comming back from this in your stats once you figure this out is quite hard so a lot of players make a new account to look more impressive.

      I find it hard to put a number on it but lets just say that the higher someone's rating is, the more likely it is that they fought and won games by fighting weaker players. I ran into a player quite recently that had a rating of 3.36 ''that rate talk I can play'' he added in his messege to me when he basicly told me to watch out. But he only had a total of 500 troops lost. Meaning if I could get only 1 succesful attack through on his troops his rating would drop. When I explained this to him he went inactive.

      So I would not be to scared of people's ratings if I were you, the higher someone's rating is the more likely it is not that persons first account. Also, these kind of players do not fight battles they can not win. This keeps their rating up but makes them lose a map here and there.

      Apart from that something a high rating can also tell you is that someone is a gold user. Not losing troops because you heal them up whenever you can is quite good for your rating. Using gold also means players are able to create troops for every situation they encounter. The reverse is also true, low ratings with a high percentage of maps won can also indicate that someone uses gold. This would be someone that is not very tacticly skilled and just buys new troops everytime. You should be on your guard for both when playing a map.

      Good luck in your future games,

      Edepedable

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Edepedable ().

    • Peter Mat wrote:

      I'm in a game right now that has been totally ruined by a big spender. Though he did his spending early to revolt a province across the Pacific and reinforcing it, until he was ready to use it. Game should be over in another day or two. This example also brings into question the whole rating system as his kill ratio is some ungodly high ratio that makes @MontanaBB look like a rookie, and he has one of the best ratios I have ever seen for a low to non expenditure type player.

      Personally I am willing to pay to play a non gold or gold limit game just to avoid this type of BS. How hard could it be to program a charge of "X" gold for a game, per player to then not be able to use it, or be limited to spending "X"?
      There are games without of gold. You can join them for free.
      "Then, when you run out of ammunition and the enemy continues to advance - to the bayonet, when they break your knife - to your hands, when they break both of your hands - to your teeth, when you get the last tooth knocked out, as long as you move, as long you are there - attack! When they mortally wound you, see to it that you fall in their way, so they have to go around you, jump over you or move you - bother them even in death!" speech of lieutenant Tasic before battle of Cer 1914.
    • Patriota75 is correct in that there are games where gold usage is forbidden or restricted. This includes the CoW players league games and Private games.
      Unfortunately these games still run with the CoW revised building and construction costs etc that in my opinion were introduced to make players need to use gold to make the game work better.
      I agree with Peter Mat that CoW should make available games where you pay 'X' amount of gold before hand in order to play, and then have no gold usage during the game. I would add though that I would want in this what I will call a Pay-to-Play game that the current revised building/unit costs should be returned to what they were before.
      I have said it in other posts, and sorry I will repeat it here, that I accept Bytro Labs need to be making money to stay in existance - I dont think anyone is saying they should not. I dont think they should be manipulating the dynamics of the game in order to get more gold from us - it is spoiling the game.
      Have a Pay-to-play game, where everyone pays to play. In the game creation phase, there can be additional gold payment options (that increase the cost to play to every player) like:-
      a. increased resources;
      b. reduced tech development times;
      c. reduced building/unit construction/production times; and
      d. faster run times.
      Incentives could also be added such as, at game end:-
      a. the four highest scoring players get their gold back - or get a free pay-to-play game;
      b. the rest of the players get their score recorded, and added to other scores from other Pay-to-play game scores (none free game earners), until a pre-accepted score is achieved to earn a free Pay-to-play game.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by BattleIvan ().