THE GOLD

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

    • ok i was just playing the Antarctica map 19 hrs left till victory ALLIED with a buddy and all of a sudden a man who has spent more than 50,000 gold (the amount you would win) and beat us i mean he made rocket fighters in thin air i just today checked and he has 455 TROOPS, AND has 51 tactical bombers i mean day 3 he had 10 fighters (my buddy's spies). My point is is that it is absolutely ridiculous that you can use that much gold i understand that is how they get their money but come on i am pretty sure he used over 100,000 gold for pete sake i almost want to quit it was so bad so all i am asking is that please make a gold limit so that you can only use a certain amount of gold daily, weekly, or monthly.

      #helpthenewpeople
    • Yeah it happened to me once where an empty province a minute ago would have produced 3 nuclear rockets or 20 units strong division of armored units, although the situation of ours are different for the gold user did not need to spend that many to win, while yours being on Antarctica map, there's little place for negotiation as this round only allows 1 winner, they may not have skills, time nor the ally to get the sweet taste of victory. I guess since they have paid it, they do deserve that sweet taste of victory, but i dislike how it sounds since you probably struggle to get in your position before engaging against that gold user in the end only to lose it all. I don't think this will ever change based on what a Mod said.
    • In the current business model the revenue to pay for the servers and developers comes from sales of gold. People are free to buy and spend as much as they wish, in the same way that you don't prohibit people from buying expensive cars or boats if they wish.


      While gold can play a role in a game, there have been many more times that I have been defeated by skill or attentiveness of my opponent than by any amount of gold.
      War is a game that is played with a smile. If you can't smile, grin. If you can't grin keep out of the way til you can. - Winston Churchill



      VorlonFCW
      Senior Game Operator
      EN Support Team | Bytro Labs Gmbh

      >>> Click Here to submit a bug report or support ticket <<<
    • VorlonFCW wrote:

      In the current business model the revenue to pay for the servers and developers comes from sales of gold. People are free to buy and spend as much as they wish, in the same way that you don't prohibit people from buying expensive cars or boats if they wish
      I dont agree with your comparison above. If gold in this game was allowing the purchase in game of better cars and boats than what the rest of the players without gold could get then i would be complaining.
      Now on the other hand if gold was only allowed to be used in game to purchase the gold plated of existing guns, tanks, plane or boats, or even diamond platted of existing tanks, planes or boats then you would get no complaints from me.



      Why dont the game designers allow players to use gold only to beautify existing units.
      This could be CoWs revenue source, and you would not get any complaints from me, and they can spend as much gold as they like.

      CoW could allow gold spenders to give the standard soldier more colourful uniforms of their choice, and I would fight them with my standard uniformed soldiers any day with no complaints.
      Some games like Company of Heros allow players to purchase different camouflage schemes for their tanks. CoW could do something similar and continue it on to planes and ships. Get gold from players to paint the std unit whatever colour or camo they like.
      Allow gold to be used as above, and hence dont make it unfair in battle to those that dont use gold.

      The post was edited 6 times, last by BattleIvan ().

    • @BattleIvan: I read that you very unhappy with the income politics from Bytro. Every second post from you get's in the same direction...

      But did you ever try to change the side? You are the Chef of a company that has a income for you and you personnel. You have a commitment for this family's. You get income from unknown people, some spend more some spend less. Some of them a unhappy some of them are pleased. Why change this system with a big risk to loose it all?
      Did you think that many players will give a lot of money for Golden Tanks? Some players spend a lot of money for a direct win. Some of them spend more than 100 dollar in only one single game.

      I like your idea and i have also a lot of good ideas suggest in the past years, but it's a dilema.

      See how many players buy the High Command? So less :(
      We can try to get a special gold free event each month for player of the HC, that's all.


      But it's only a small group of players that unhappy with the situituation. This community is not so big, for this group of dedicated players we have already the gold free Players League and in the future The Dirty Dozen. We can be happy with this. I have spend a lot of time, to get this gold free community events.


      Registration is now open! - The Dirty Dozen

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

    • Thank you for your reply above.
      You have me wrong if you think I dont realize that Bytro need to make money - I understand that.
      Maybe you have misunderstood me. When I asked for the Pay-to-play game, the standard game was always still another option that would still be selectable.
      I was a gold spender. CoW is a great game. CoW will always have people that will want to play the standard game and have too much money and spend on gold for CoW. I have spent over a $1000 on gold in CoW. I dont think Bytro will be in any danger of not having people wanting to play the standard game and spend gold.
      Even my suggestion of a 2nd type/option when creating a CoW game called Pay-to-Play would still bring in money for Bytro. True there may not be as many players that want to play a Pay-to-play game. It would probably be for the more serious Tactical/strategical player that wants to play a game just for tactical/strategical skill with no influence on anything by gold during the game. I enthusis during the game. I said before also that before play even with the pay-to-play game that Bytro could get more money from players by having other options that they could pay up front to open other options in the game for all players - for example - extra resources, faster run times etc.
      So I am not saying at all that Bytro doesn't make any money - they have a good game and should be reward for that, and for having this forum and for keeping the game going. I am also not saying that they should discard the game already being played. You already have options in the player game creation where players can choose to pay gold for a better AI player. All I am saying is that CoW have ANOTHER option here where players can select either 1. standard game with gold use allowed (the existing game) or 2. Gold up front for a Pay-to-play game with no gold usage once the game has started.
      Players like me when I spent on gold know they need gold to do any good and will not probably play the Pay-to-play game as they know they want be able to relie on gold to win or do any good.
      It will only be the seasoned, veteran player that wants a good game, and not to be beaten by some young player, still wet behind the ears that has bottom less pockets. There will be players that would be happy to pay for a game to fight other good players just on their skill in tactics and strategy without gold in game. They would also probably be willing to pay Bytro for other selected pre game extra options to add cost to the cost of the basic pay-to-play game such as extra resources and faster run times (just two of 10 mentioned before).
      So I do understand that Bytro needs to make money, and i hope you keep getting the bottom less pocket players that I have played (at one stage I was probably considered to be one myself).
      I think you will always have the gold spender and you need to keep catering for them to keep getting their money.
      What you may now lose is the serious veteran strategical/tactical player that wants a good strategical/tactical game where gold doesn't give any advantage to one player over another just because he/she is richer.
      The question is does Bytro keep this type of player, and still make money off this type of player at the same time as well by giving this type of player slightly different game creation options?

      The post was edited 7 times, last by BattleIvan ().

    • Xarus wrote:

      But it's only a small group of players that unhappy with the situituation. This community is not so big, for this group of dedicated players we have already the gold free Players League and in the future The Dirty Dozen. We can be happy with this. I have spend a lot of time, to get this gold free community events.
      Thank you for the CoW Players League and the future - The Dirty Dozen.
    • This has been suggested many times before - BOTH pay-to-win and pay-to-play versions of the game. Nonetheless, the company's management has chosen not to implement this. It is their game, and they're free on the business model they want to apply to it, no matter what we, the community of mere mortals, think about that. They have their reasons, even if they are beyond our comprehension; and the company is prospering, so they are probably right, as well. Even if it is unfair from a gameplay perspective, it makes perfect sense from a business perspective; and the game could not exist without a business perspective, and we'd all still be playing text-based games.

      I don't feel frustrated about meeting a coiner anymore, even if I did in the past. When I encounter one these days, I see it as a bit of community service to fight them, and make them spend as much money as possible for Bytro's coffers. Of course it is impossible to win if they keep spending more (and also have some idea on how to play the game), but I know that MAKING them spend it generates income for the company which runs my favorite FREE game, and that actually makes me feel good on the day I lose my capital to an army supported by 200 planes...

      The one thing I still completely fail to understand, is why anyone would do it at all, and put the extra queen on the chess board... but hey, I don't understand why people would buy an original Van Gogh either...
      Everybody has a right to be stupid, but some people abuse the privilege. - Josef Stalin.
    • I completely understand the need for Call of War to make a profit. It's a good game, and the designers deserve to benefit from it.

      It does seem that CoW could offer games that do not allow spending of gold within the game itself, but that require spending gold as an entry fee. That would allow the better players a chance to really test their skill, while also allowing CoW to profit.

      Or, perhaps in addition to showing the other stats of the game, one could also see how much gold each player has spent?

      I am not sure that the number of players who are frustrated by prolific gold spenders is as small as some seem to think.

      It is supposed to be a game, after all, and allowing one player to BUY victory does make it something less than that.