I see more and more posts about gold usage and I have to say, I'm not bothered by gold usage at all. There's the obvious defense of how gold spammers pay for the servers, which is true, but I think the game has to be making a pretty decent amount of money since a minimum of 2$ or even less with sales gets rid of ads. By the way if you get rid of ads, it gets rid of ads on your email, which means all Bytro games are ad free forever. I've played games where to get rid of ads you needed to spend a minimum of like 5$, but CoW just says buy anything. I get gold spam is annoying since in extreme cases you pretty much can't win against someone, but I feel like people get a little too mad at that. I'm speaking from personal experience, but there's been many times where I've been doing great but some dude not even due to gold usage destroys me. One time I had 3x someone's army size but they destroyed me completely with two large stacks of artillery. Admittedly that was definitely a lack of skill on my end but still, losing to someone and not being able to do a whole lot isn't exclusive to someone spamming gold. The only instance where I can see it being rightfully annoying is if you're doing great, you've taken over your continent and the neighboring continent(s) but some guy on the other side of the map has 30000 units and you just watch as they destroy their 2/3 of the map while you just sit and watch. Gold users usually go for solo wins, I don't think I've ever seen one join a coalition, so they can ruin whole games. Besides all that, the big reason I don't mind them is because they're hilarious. There's nothing funnier than opening the newspaper and seeing "Belgian Congo has 600 units" on day 2. The rage people go through when they realize the power of their enemies is just too funny. I'm sure other people feel way differently than I do towards this topic, and I'd like to hear arguments as to why gold usage has any negative impact on the game.
I don't mind gold usage.
This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.
-
Well to counter your argument - sort of.
Have just finished a game when we had chief gold spammer. It was obvious part way through that he was going to be difficult to beat so we said join our coalition. He then ignored everything we asked, was rude to the coalition leader, spoke behind his back slagging him off but worst of all single handedly like a maniac ignored everyone else and decided to go 'Hitleresque' and go from eastern Europe through to the Pacific in order to win the game - albeit for the coalition but really for himself.
The coalition leader threw him out for being an utterly selfish player, so he started his own coalition (within a day - thought it was three but that's another story) and decided to take his original coalition on by trying to get them to defect away from its leader no doubt for evicting him.
He then got hammered by 15 rockets, and in a day had rebuilt with 20+ top of the range interceptors and AA etc, everything 7*. Totally ludicrous.
The original coalition eventually won, but it was the worst game I have participated in for an ****hole.
Glad when it was all over tbh. -
lol gold users join coalitions too (speaking from experince, one joined mine before :D)
Onandonandomnom wrote:
I see more and more posts about gold usage and I have to say, I'm not bothered by gold usage at all. There's the obvious defense of how gold spammers pay for the servers, which is true, but I think the game has to be making a pretty decent amount of money since a minimum of 2$ or even less with sales gets rid of ads. By the way if you get rid of ads, it gets rid of ads on your email, which means all Bytro games are ad free forever. I've played games where to get rid of ads you needed to spend a minimum of like 5$, but CoW just says buy anything. I get gold spam is annoying since in extreme cases you pretty much can't win against someone, but I feel like people get a little too mad at that. I'm speaking from personal experience, but there's been many times where I've been doing great but some dude not even due to gold usage destroys me. One time I had 3x someone's army size but they destroyed me completely with two large stacks of artillery. Admittedly that was definitely a lack of skill on my end but still, losing to someone and not being able to do a whole lot isn't exclusive to someone spamming gold. The only instance where I can see it being rightfully annoying is if you're doing great, you've taken over your continent and the neighboring continent(s) but some guy on the other side of the map has 30000 units and you just watch as they destroy their 2/3 of the map while you just sit and watch. Gold users usually go for solo wins, I don't think I've ever seen one join a coalition, so they can ruin whole games. Besides all that, the big reason I don't mind them is because they're hilarious. There's nothing funnier than opening the newspaper and seeing "Belgian Congo has 600 units" on day 2. The rage people go through when they realize the power of their enemies is just too funny. I'm sure other people feel way differently than I do towards this topic, and I'd like to hear arguments as to why gold usage has any negative impact on the game.
For the Frontier, once and for all, the Red Planet has been colonized...
Call of War User: RhonianConfederation
Discord Username: Premier Livonian of the Frontier#9560
Newest Let's Play: ?
I swear to lord if you call me Premier I will crucify you, I prefer the name Livonian :> -
one gold user joined my coalition and had 105 units by day 3 as the UK in world at war.. then he went AFK, its really not fun playing with gold users either
-
Sometimes it is, sometimes they are friendly and you can have a good time. I forgot their user but i'll miss the person. I was USSR (before the nerf) and they were Persia, I was preparing to invade and demanded they submit to me and they declined and showed me their map. I may or may not have crapped about 3-6 bricks in 30 seconds. They had far better equipment than I, and not much more divisions, but enough to erase me from the map in 4-5 days.
cl0xy wrote:
one gold user joined my coalition and had 105 units by day 3 as the UK in world at war.. then he went AFK, its really not fun playing with gold users either
I decided to invite them to my coalition and we became allies, Him, Germany and I. Good times man. Good times.For the Frontier, once and for all, the Red Planet has been colonized...
Call of War User: RhonianConfederation
Discord Username: Premier Livonian of the Frontier#9560
Newest Let's Play: ?
I swear to lord if you call me Premier I will crucify you, I prefer the name Livonian :> -
I'd side with gold usage there, as I think that you need quite a ton of gold to compensate for bad skill. To be honest, most really "good" players like challenges and proving their skill to themselves, so they tend not to use much gold. There isn't that many people who could afford spending 200k gold every game, and many of those who could afford still don't do it because... why'd you waste so much money on a game.
BladeFisher wrote:
Well to counter your argument - sort of.
Have just finished a game when we had chief gold spammer. It was obvious part way through that he was going to be difficult to beat so we said join our coalition. He then ignored everything we asked, was rude to the coalition leader, spoke behind his back slagging him off but worst of all single handedly like a maniac ignored everyone else and decided to go 'Hitleresque' and go from eastern Europe through to the Pacific in order to win the game - albeit for the coalition but really for himself.
The coalition leader threw him out for being an utterly selfish player, so he started his own coalition (within a day - thought it was three but that's another story) and decided to take his original coalition on by trying to get them to defect away from its leader no doubt for evicting him.
He then got hammered by 15 rockets, and in a day had rebuilt with 20+ top of the range interceptors and AA etc, everything 7*. Totally ludicrous.
The original coalition eventually won, but it was the worst game I have participated in for an ****hole.
Glad when it was all over tbh.
I get that sometimes gold users can be very difficult or impossible to defeat, especially if they're very good at gaining the most advantage they can from the gold (which requires good strategic thinking). But I see so many people playing 20 games at once, that I don't think it's a real issue. You may have to lose one game, but the win isn't important. Stats and wins can be very misleading sometimes. I think what's more important, is you can say to yourself that you've done a good job. You lost the game, but a gold user beat you, so it wasn't bad skill causing your loss. Just don't take games seriously
"In CoW, don't stamp on things before looking. Rakes are everywhere!"
"Don't underestimate noobs; if they don't know what they're doing, how can you?"
Hornetkeeper -
No necessarily. You've never really seen a real gold users. One time on world at war 100p there was a player who had almost 30% mightiest army on day 16. We might've had a chance against him. I actually gained some progress, but he proceeded to spam more units. At the beginning my border had only 100 of his troops and I had 200. By the end he had produced 300 within a few minutes. A gold spammer has enough gold to compensate for bad skills. If he loses one troop it will simply be replaced by 20.
Hornetkeeper wrote:
I'd side with gold usage there, as I think that you need quite a ton of gold to compensate for bad skill. To be honest, most really "good" players like challenges and proving their skill to themselves, so they tend not to use much gold. There isn't that many people who could afford spending 200k gold every game, and many of those who could afford still don't do it because... why'd you waste so much money on a game.BladeFisher wrote:
Well to counter your argument - sort of.
Have just finished a game when we had chief gold spammer. It was obvious part way through that he was going to be difficult to beat so we said join our coalition. He then ignored everything we asked, was rude to the coalition leader, spoke behind his back slagging him off but worst of all single handedly like a maniac ignored everyone else and decided to go 'Hitleresque' and go from eastern Europe through to the Pacific in order to win the game - albeit for the coalition but really for himself.
The coalition leader threw him out for being an utterly selfish player, so he started his own coalition (within a day - thought it was three but that's another story) and decided to take his original coalition on by trying to get them to defect away from its leader no doubt for evicting him.
He then got hammered by 15 rockets, and in a day had rebuilt with 20+ top of the range interceptors and AA etc, everything 7*. Totally ludicrous.
The original coalition eventually won, but it was the worst game I have participated in for an ****hole.
Glad when it was all over tbh.
I get that sometimes gold users can be very difficult or impossible to defeat, especially if they're very good at gaining the most advantage they can from the gold (which requires good strategic thinking). But I see so many people playing 20 games at once, that I don't think it's a real issue. You may have to lose one game, but the win isn't important. Stats and wins can be very misleading sometimes. I think what's more important, is you can say to yourself that you've done a good job. You lost the game, but a gold user beat you, so it wasn't bad skill causing your loss. Just don't take games seriously
-
exactly, i was playing against the USA as germany, my allies were USSR and UK. USA had no allies. The USA had a very good army and belonged to a level 160 player We were looking forward to a Great War, it started with a bunch of artillery and rocket spam, all of a sudden we were winning, our bombings have scared him off, he had one 189,000 casualties combined, we had 37,000. Then he comes back with 8 10 stacks of commandos and heavy tanks and a row full of full level artillery 3 stack, we were all sleeping and all of a sudden I wake up and we have faced 370,000 casualties combined in a 13 hour period.. I’m like.. WHAT? I ask ussr what even happened and he said that once he killed one of the stacks, 5 more 10 stacks would come, UK said he put 78 spies into USA land and discovered he smth close to 1980 units at day change, and he also had 76% of the worlds mightiest army.
vietcong2005 wrote:
No necessarily. You've never really seen a real gold users. One time on world at war 100p there was a player who had almost 30% mightiest army on day 16. We might've had a chance against him. I actually gained some progress, but he proceeded to spam more units. At the beginning my border had only 100 of his troops and I had 200. By the end he had produced 300 within a few minutes. A gold spammer has enough gold to compensate for bad skills. If he loses one troop it will simply be replaced by 20.Hornetkeeper wrote:
I'd side with gold usage there, as I think that you need quite a ton of gold to compensate for bad skill. To be honest, most really "good" players like challenges and proving their skill to themselves, so they tend not to use much gold. There isn't that many people who could afford spending 200k gold every game, and many of those who could afford still don't do it because... why'd you waste so much money on a game.I get that sometimes gold users can be very difficult or impossible to defeat, especially if they're very good at gaining the most advantage they can from the gold (which requires good strategic thinking). But I see so many people playing 20 games at once, that I don't think it's a real issue. You may have to lose one game, but the win isn't important. Stats and wins can be very misleading sometimes. I think what's more important, is you can say to yourself that you've done a good job. You lost the game, but a gold user beat you, so it wasn't bad skill causing your loss. Just don't take games seriouslyBladeFisher wrote:
Well to counter your argument - sort of.
Have just finished a game when we had chief gold spammer. It was obvious part way through that he was going to be difficult to beat so we said join our coalition. He then ignored everything we asked, was rude to the coalition leader, spoke behind his back slagging him off but worst of all single handedly like a maniac ignored everyone else and decided to go 'Hitleresque' and go from eastern Europe through to the Pacific in order to win the game - albeit for the coalition but really for himself.
The coalition leader threw him out for being an utterly selfish player, so he started his own coalition (within a day - thought it was three but that's another story) and decided to take his original coalition on by trying to get them to defect away from its leader no doubt for evicting him.
He then got hammered by 15 rockets, and in a day had rebuilt with 20+ top of the range interceptors and AA etc, everything 7*. Totally ludicrous.
The original coalition eventually won, but it was the worst game I have participated in for an ****hole.
Glad when it was all over tbh.
People who say that they faced a gold user and beat them “easily” hasn’t faced a real gold spammer -
That's what I'm talking about. i've also experienced mass gold users. But do you call that a problem? He defeated you. But does that matter? You know it was gold what made him win, not his skill, so if you don't get really upset about just a game, just say to yourself that your strategy was good. And would have won the game. That's what I do, no need to have the win on my profile, atleast my opponents can underestimate me in future battles.
vietcong2005 wrote:
No necessarily. You've never really seen a real gold users. One time on world at war 100p there was a player who had almost 30% mightiest army on day 16. We might've had a chance against him. I actually gained some progress, but he proceeded to spam more units. At the beginning my border had only 100 of his troops and I had 200. By the end he had produced 300 within a few minutes. A gold spammer has enough gold to compensate for bad skills. If he loses one troop it will simply be replaced by 20.
You guys are not getting me at all. What I'm saying is you're exaggerating about something as unimportant as a game. If you really tried hard in it, and then found out everyone was so much better than you and were laughing at you the whole time, yes it may be pretty depressing. But a gold user? It's not his skill what beat you, there is no reason to be mad about it as you still can say to yourself that you've done a good job. Wins aren't important, that's how I interpret it and I'm quite okay with gold. I don't like it either but f2p just comes with downsides."In CoW, don't stamp on things before looking. Rakes are everywhere!"
"Don't underestimate noobs; if they don't know what they're doing, how can you?"
Hornetkeeper -
If you recruit cheap lvl 1 units and several your neighbours are inactive you can have 105 units on day 3 without gold.
cl0xy wrote:
one gold user joined my coalition and had 105 units by day 3 as the UK in world at war.. then he went AFK, its really not fun playing with gold users either
But yes. It is not possible without quick expand without own losses. -
^
Last Warrior wrote:
If you recruit cheap lvl 1 units and several your neighbours are inactive you can have 105 units on day 3 without gold.cl0xy wrote:
one gold user joined my coalition and had 105 units by day 3 as the UK in world at war.. then he went AFK, its really not fun playing with gold users either
But yes. It is not possible without quick expand without own losses.
For the Frontier, once and for all, the Red Planet has been colonized...
Call of War User: RhonianConfederation
Discord Username: Premier Livonian of the Frontier#9560
Newest Let's Play: ?
I swear to lord if you call me Premier I will crucify you, I prefer the name Livonian :> -
You've never seen a real one have you. There are ones that are willing to spend thousands of dollars in game in order to win. They can spam thousands of troops in seconds.
Hornetkeeper wrote:
That's what I'm talking about. i've also experienced mass gold users. But do you call that a problem? He defeated you. But does that matter? You know it was gold what made him win, not his skill, so if you don't get really upset about just a game, just say to yourself that your strategy was good. And would have won the game. That's what I do, no need to have the win on my profile, atleast my opponents can underestimate me in future battles.vietcong2005 wrote:
No necessarily. You've never really seen a real gold users. One time on world at war 100p there was a player who had almost 30% mightiest army on day 16. We might've had a chance against him. I actually gained some progress, but he proceeded to spam more units. At the beginning my border had only 100 of his troops and I had 200. By the end he had produced 300 within a few minutes. A gold spammer has enough gold to compensate for bad skills. If he loses one troop it will simply be replaced by 20.
You guys are not getting me at all. What I'm saying is you're exaggerating about something as unimportant as a game. If you really tried hard in it, and then found out everyone was so much better than you and were laughing at you the whole time, yes it may be pretty depressing. But a gold user? It's not his skill what beat you, there is no reason to be mad about it as you still can say to yourself that you've done a good job. Wins aren't important, that's how I interpret it and I'm quite okay with gold. I don't like it either but f2p just comes with downsides.
-
Lets assume you're playing as the allied doctrine and you expand quickly. You have to either choose between building a level 1 production building or focus on leveling up your production centers in your core.Therefore, it does not necessarily mean you'll have greater troop production. Troop production can't be immediately built up. Therefore, day 3 is highly unlikely. 50 to 60 is possible without high command for the allied doctrine on day 4.If the player rapidly expanded they might be able to get to 60 to 70 at max on day 3. Meanwhile, if they have high command they might be able to get 70-85 units. However, 104 is not realistic at all, even for allied doctrine.
Last Warrior wrote:
If you recruit cheap lvl 1 units and several your neighbours are inactive you can have 105 units on day 3 without gold.cl0xy wrote:
one gold user joined my coalition and had 105 units by day 3 as the UK in world at war.. then he went AFK, its really not fun playing with gold users either
But yes. It is not possible without quick expand without own losses
-
nah he was only on like 9 hrs a day he said, and he took all of france, all of norway, 20% of North America i believe, Brazil in South America and he also took Japan, Korea, and south china, he also told Ma-Clique he was using a bunch of gold but I dont know if that has any truth to it (this was by day 6) by day 6 i think he had like 290-320 units I THINK but cant remember was prob a little bit over 310 though
Last Warrior wrote:
If you recruit cheap lvl 1 units and several your neighbours are inactive you can have 105 units on day 3 without gold.cl0xy wrote:
one gold user joined my coalition and had 105 units by day 3 as the UK in world at war.. then he went AFK, its really not fun playing with gold users either
But yes. It is not possible without quick expand without own losses.
Day 8 is the day, he was confirmed AI. All my allied mates went AI, and as yugoslavia I took Ukraine, Romania, Greece (was an ally but AI) Italy, Spain, Germany, and Sweden by day 13 I believe, but no one would let me into there coalition and + i put spies in there land and the coalition had like 1100 units combined so i just gave up and went AI anyways, I (yugoslavia) had 230 units. -
Exactly what I’m saying, yeah, you can just say to yourself “eh he is trash he needs gold to win.. whatever” but its crushing when you enter a war with them and they destroy your KD rate and then talks trash, when you were so close to winning.
vietcong2005 wrote:
You've never seen a real one have you. There are ones that are willing to spend thousands of dollars in game in order to win. They can spam thousands of troops in seconds.Hornetkeeper wrote:
That's what I'm talking about. i've also experienced mass gold users. But do you call that a problem? He defeated you. But does that matter? You know it was gold what made him win, not his skill, so if you don't get really upset about just a game, just say to yourself that your strategy was good. And would have won the game. That's what I do, no need to have the win on my profile, atleast my opponents can underestimate me in future battles.vietcong2005 wrote:
No necessarily. You've never really seen a real gold users. One time on world at war 100p there was a player who had almost 30% mightiest army on day 16. We might've had a chance against him. I actually gained some progress, but he proceeded to spam more units. At the beginning my border had only 100 of his troops and I had 200. By the end he had produced 300 within a few minutes. A gold spammer has enough gold to compensate for bad skills. If he loses one troop it will simply be replaced by 20.
You guys are not getting me at all. What I'm saying is you're exaggerating about something as unimportant as a game. If you really tried hard in it, and then found out everyone was so much better than you and were laughing at you the whole time, yes it may be pretty depressing. But a gold user? It's not his skill what beat you, there is no reason to be mad about it as you still can say to yourself that you've done a good job. Wins aren't important, that's how I interpret it and I'm quite okay with gold. I don't like it either but f2p just comes with downsides.
-
SHAME! SHAME! I'm just kidding, i don't really mind gold usage that much either in the game. It's a little annoying sometimes, but overall, i feel that people make a bigger deal out of it then it is. I personally cannot think of a single time where a gold user annoyed me or spammed gold and I've been playing for 4 years. Also, you would need a fairly large amount of gold to actually win a game with no skill and just gold.
Onandonandomnom wrote:
I see more and more posts about gold usage and I have to say, I'm not bothered by gold usage at all. There's the obvious defense of how gold spammers pay for the servers, which is true, but I think the game has to be making a pretty decent amount of money since a minimum of 2$ or even less with sales gets rid of ads. By the way if you get rid of ads, it gets rid of ads on your email, which means all Bytro games are ad free forever. I've played games where to get rid of ads you needed to spend a minimum of like 5$, but CoW just says buy anything. I get gold spam is annoying since in extreme cases you pretty much can't win against someone, but I feel like people get a little too mad at that. I'm speaking from personal experience, but there's been many times where I've been doing great but some dude not even due to gold usage destroys me. One time I had 3x someone's army size but they destroyed me completely with two large stacks of artillery. Admittedly that was definitely a lack of skill on my end but still, losing to someone and not being able to do a whole lot isn't exclusive to someone spamming gold. The only instance where I can see it being rightfully annoying is if you're doing great, you've taken over your continent and the neighboring continent(s) but some guy on the other side of the map has 30000 units and you just watch as they destroy their 2/3 of the map while you just sit and watch. Gold users usually go for solo wins, I don't think I've ever seen one join a coalition, so they can ruin whole games. Besides all that, the big reason I don't mind them is because they're hilarious. There's nothing funnier than opening the newspaper and seeing "Belgian Congo has 600 units" on day 2. The rage people go through when they realize the power of their enemies is just too funny. I'm sure other people feel way differently than I do towards this topic, and I'd like to hear arguments as to why gold usage has any negative impact on the game.
-
True, maybe my ones weren't as toxic as yours. But I personally don't care about k/d, and I sometimes even enjoy working with people trashtalking me, it gives you experience for chat (lol).
cl0xy wrote:
Exactly what I’m saying, yeah, you can just say to yourself “eh he is trash he needs gold to win.. whatever” but its crushing when you enter a war with them and they destroy your KD rate and then talks trash, when you were so close to winning.
And cl0xy is getting it unlike the rest of you. You're saying "you haven't seen a real one have you" which is completely out of point, as I never said gold usage couldn't destroy you quickly, I said be positive, you lost a game to unfair advantage not skill, just join a new one. But I get that some of you may take it more seriously than me, so I am sorry;)"In CoW, don't stamp on things before looking. Rakes are everywhere!"
"Don't underestimate noobs; if they don't know what they're doing, how can you?"
Hornetkeeper -
Alright, sorry if i sounded rude by the way, I was just kind of mad talking about that game because The person using gold had a giant mouth
