Help us identify Gold Usage

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

    • 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.
      Sincerely, wildL
      EN Mod
      Report a problem

    • 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.
      That is how I took it, ST. I am not against gold usage. I have used it only to buy material when the market is empty and NEVER during a no-gold game. But If you join a 'non-gold' game, and then use gold, why join it in the first place? Obviously you are not going to follow the rules. This suggestion would be only for non-gold games, not all 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.
      I've been saying this for months. Nobody can complain that they lost due to gold. Also, making it standard on alliance matches should be a thing.

      The alternative would be to treat a no-gold option like Elite AI, pay gold to play or have HC. That way, the devs are making their money.
    • 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.
      Nunca fué un adiós, solo un hasta luego.
      It wasn't a goodbye, only a see you later.
    • 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



      If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists
      -Friedrich von Haye


    • 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 :(
      Nunca fué un adiós, solo un hasta luego.
      It wasn't a goodbye, only a see you later.
    • 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...



      If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists
      -Friedrich von Haye


    • 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...
      Maybe if we advertise this and get people agree with that we can send it to Bytro
      Nunca fué un adiós, solo un hasta luego.
      It wasn't a goodbye, only a see you later.
    • 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
      Agreed.
      Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival.
      -Winston Churchill

      Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching.
      -George S. Patton
    • 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.
      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
    • 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.
      makes zero sense
      Sincerely, wildL
      EN Mod
      Report a problem

    • I shouldn't have to explain it further just because you can't understand it. Look at my other many various posts. I talk about this every so often. But it's fairly well explained anyway.
      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