Help us identify Gold Usage

Carlos Spicy-Wiener wrote:

So, if the devs and bytro were to implement this brilliant idea, should they also turn the HC logo into a dollar sign ($)?

Pablo22510 wrote:

Personally, yes. But on a global point, looking at the pros and cons for all of us, no.

Quasi-duck wrote:

Pablo22510 wrote:

Personally, yes. But on a global point, looking at the pros and cons for all of us, no.

So is that a maybe....?

StrangeTalent wrote:

Actually, I only intended on the suggested feature to be on select games, similar to my suggestion earlier about paying gold to have no-gold games.

wildL SPQR wrote:

This idea is very, very bad. People would stop using gold and those that do would be bashed hard until they leave the game.

As already suggested, it's a much better idea to have certain special games without the gold options, but with a gold price payed in order to enter.

The winner could take a big % of that gold into their stash to encourage this type of game. The competition would also be fierce.

Then it would actually be WORTHWHILE to pay to enter a game and wouldn't cost Bytro a dime, in fact they would earn money on this. Because 1) You'd be appreciated for winning, since everyone would know the winner didn't gold. And 2) the winner would take home some gold to spend in the normal games.

StrangeTalent wrote:

yes, i would pay gold to not play against gold

the public enemy wrote:

StrangeTalent wrote:

yes, i would pay gold to not play against gold

this feature was in s1914 with the alliance league, the price was 20.000 to enter in the game, 20k/in 5 persons is 4k per person, so we paid 1,4 euros for match without gold, in theory 1,4euros for match is so expensive for me, but it's the best way if you need a game without gold.

oceanhawk wrote:

the public enemy wrote:

StrangeTalent wrote:

yes, i would pay gold to not play against gold

this feature was in s1914 with the alliance league, the price was 20.000 to enter in the game, 20k/in 5 persons is 4k per person, so we paid 1,4 euros for match without gold, in theory 1,4euros for match is so expensive for me, but it's the best way if you need a game without gold.

Your so Spanish lol, using the comma when you should be using the .
Haha, but otherwise, we would end up paying a lot of money, just so we could play the game gold free. Some people might even just spend that money on gold instead...

Id rather just see a gold free option, for alliance games, as that is where it is really mostly needed

the public enemy wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

the public enemy wrote:

StrangeTalent wrote:

yes, i would pay gold to not play against gold

this feature was in s1914 with the alliance league, the price was 20.000 to enter in the game, 20k/in 5 persons is 4k per person, so we paid 1,4 euros for match without gold, in theory 1,4euros for match is so expensive for me, but it's the best way if you need a game without gold.

Your so Spanish lol, using the comma when you should be using the .Haha, but otherwise, we would end up paying a lot of money, just so we could play the game gold free. Some people might even just spend that money on gold instead...

Id rather just see a gold free option, for alliance games, as that is where it is really mostly needed

i agree, the gold usage in alliance games... normaly we don't allow that gold usage then if bytro don't put a button, in my opinion, support team could control the gold ussage and give the match win to the other alliance. ONLY MY OPINION! NO OFFICIAL!
PD; I could not avoid to use comma

oceanhawk wrote:

the public enemy wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

the public enemy wrote:

StrangeTalent wrote:

yes, i would pay gold to not play against gold

this feature was in s1914 with the alliance league, the price was 20.000 to enter in the game, 20k/in 5 persons is 4k per person, so we paid 1,4 euros for match without gold, in theory 1,4euros for match is so expensive for me, but it's the best way if you need a game without gold.

Your so Spanish lol, using the comma when you should be using the .Haha, but otherwise, we would end up paying a lot of money, just so we could play the game gold free. Some people might even just spend that money on gold instead...
Id rather just see a gold free option, for alliance games, as that is where it is really mostly needed

i agree, the gold usage in alliance games... normaly we don't allow that gold usage then if bytro don't put a button, in my opinion, support team could control the gold ussage and give the match win to the other alliance. ONLY MY OPINION! NO OFFICIAL!PD; I could not avoid to use comma

Its in your Spanish Blood haha, comma over full stop. hehe, speaking of Spain, its one lovely day over mijas costa
but yes, I think gold should have the option for alliance games, I agree with you support staff, could manage but it is just easier. Eitherway, I think that trying to make anti gold for general public matches, is just barking up the wrong tree...

the public enemy wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

the public enemy wrote:

oceanhawk wrote:

the public enemy wrote:

StrangeTalent wrote:

yes, i would pay gold to not play against gold

this feature was in s1914 with the alliance league, the price was 20.000 to enter in the game, 20k/in 5 persons is 4k per person, so we paid 1,4 euros for match without gold, in theory 1,4euros for match is so expensive for me, but it's the best way if you need a game without gold.

Your so Spanish lol, using the comma when you should be using the .Haha, but otherwise, we would end up paying a lot of money, just so we could play the game gold free. Some people might even just spend that money on gold instead...Id rather just see a gold free option, for alliance games, as that is where it is really mostly needed

i agree, the gold usage in alliance games... normaly we don't allow that gold usage then if bytro don't put a button, in my opinion, support team could control the gold ussage and give the match win to the other alliance. ONLY MY OPINION! NO OFFICIAL!PD; I could not avoid to use comma

Its in your Spanish Blood haha, comma over full stop. hehe, speaking of Spain, its one lovely day over mijas costabut yes, I think gold should have the option for alliance games, I agree with you support staff, could manage but it is just easier. Eitherway, I think that trying to make anti gold for general public matches, is just barking up the wrong tree...

Maybe if we advertise this and get people agree with that we can send it to Bytro

Diabolical wrote:

CaponeIU wrote:

2.) Anything that will deter another player from possibly making these purchases themselves. If I decide to buy gold, then it's really not anyone else's business except the company and myself. I do not have to let other players know about it and neither does the company or the game. Except the fact that it can happen and play accordingly, no need to identify things made or enforced with gold.

3.) Anything that will encourage the non-purchase. This is obvious as I don't believe that Bytro is a non-profit organization so why would they agree to anything related to taking money away from the company in any way, shape, fashion or form.

Actually, there is no anonymity when using Gold to buy dozens of units and max out your buildings on day 1. That much should be obvious.
I always like to trot out my suggestion of one Gold-free match per person while all other matches that they play must be Gold-allowed. And they can start/join one new Gold-free match only upon winning or being eliminated from the previous Gold-free match. And that would reduce match abandonment.

It's a way of keeping the poorer players happy without losing the richer players. And, the poorer ones, when they can afford it, will be more likely to buy Gold later on. But if they are discouraged by always losing to Golders, they are more likely to abandon the game. And without enough poor folks playing, the rich players will have no pawns to eliminate in their rich games.