the pollux is 1 engine, even if you assume it's equivalent to a maxed CE in each era, which is still 1 engine which doesn't make that much of a difference compared to 5 pollux in era 5, 6 pollux in era 6.
i'm not saying the pollux is weak, i'm just saying that both changes has to be regarded.
"Time is expensive and time is the one commodity which we cannot broker! Therefore it is the most valuable commodity any of us have"
time will be obsolete, because the one buying the bonusses in the first post can be as good and as active has he wants, a semi-active paying person will always beat him. imagine you have a train shed of 25 in era 6 and someone else has a train shed of 35 in era 6, because he pays money.
while your devs seem to be able to program money-grabbing nonsense like video engines and overpowered pay2win bonusses, how about you go start fixing your database bugs, so for example schedules/trains/other things don't vanish over and over again? (that bug has been reported months ago, with the friendly information that it'll be fixed between now and the colonization of mars)
you expect people to pay - what should i pay for? you're not delivering a proper game to begin with (his is at the state of a tech-alpha currently), so there's nothing which money can be paid for.
The important question is what exactly does more mean!
if they'd planned to do specific game worlds with that option and leaving "regular" ones untouched, they would have announced that like they did in the past. also, their advertisement 'be within the first bunch of players trying this brand new feature' is clear in this matter
finally, let me quote the german version: "In der Zukunft hält dieses Feature dann vielleicht auch Einzug auf anderen Spielwelten"
"auf anderen Spielwelten" == on other game worlds
"Of course these browser-games are pay-to-win. Plenty of other non-browser multi-player games are also pay-to-win" sorry, but i disagree on that one. i have played (and still do play) a lot of other great games without pay2win.
please note that not all payment options are pay2win by default, it all depends on the outcome of each of them.
Daylie "Bonus" for Gold is a nice description for pay2win. If i take 2 players of equivalent skill, the one not buying these overpowered bonusses simply can't win.
How about you auction rank 1-10 of a game round to those players who bid the most amount of gold on it? that would give you a lot of money aswell, keep the game more fair and doesn't encourage the people who already create multis for sabotage to do this in a greater extend.
since i already wrote the full opinion in the german topic:
your change is useless, you're punishing people for watching videos (and (sometimes) providing browsing data & other data to 3rd party companies) while coming up with the lame excuse that you can't limit the "upgrade vouchers" for the new engine in any other way.
sorry, but changing the records/nullifying some is useless - some people ripped off a lot of freetime to get these and just because RN changes something, they get punished and others get a "free voucher" to set new records again?
i got about 314 and 310 coins on 2 servers.
no package bought, quest reward equivalent (items sold immediately if gotten by other sources) went into 3890 and 3560 extra coins.
taking your "1344" coins from quests, meaning i got 5234 and 4904 coins. this means that, for me, one diamond is equivalent to 15,82-16,66 coins (avg 16,2441)
in terms of the package:
taking your "623 coins from goods" + 350 + 7*16,2441, i get about 1086,71 coins, which is the equivalent of ~65,23-68,69 extra diamonds from the event.
since the top-1 person had ~340 on both worlds, it not only did cost me the win, but that also means that they bought 20% of their total diamonds by real money, and this is the top position.
this is like you could pay 20€(25$) at the end of a game round to instantly get 20% pp on top of your current ppQuote
i have to say, thanks for ruining a fun competative event with another buyout option
problem exists since 2 days, i had opened a german topic about it back then. no "support" response there aswell, no reaction at all (so far)
"Each player can only purchase one of these WInter event packages so the 7 gems is the max amount anyone can get via the packages"
your statement is false!
you get coins aswell, which translate in more coins (in regards of total amount being able to spend) translating in massively more than 7 diamonds!
Samisu: the fact that you're asking the question is a sign that (whoever did the decision) isn't good at math or did ignore the facts purposely!
since i won the winter event on multiple worlds last year, i can tell u sth:
if there was a person would have bought the most expensive package once, that would have already cost me the topspot. while i would have still ended up in the top tier(because i had just enough distance to the next tier), several people who ended up in the top tier would have ended in a tier lower just because of someone spending real money!
basically, 1x most expensive package gives more than 10% of the diamonds it took me to win the winter event, which is an insane amount.
just imagine at the end of the game round, during the endgame, you could increase your own PP by 10% of your current amount for 20€ each. people would totally love that........for sure.
if you want to sell career points for real money (which is basically what you're doing here), just add that option in your shop and stop spoiling the remaining fun parts of the game!
in the shop, there are option to buy 3 packages, let's take the biggest one. (note: depending on the world, the package costs vary slightly)
1200 gold cost 27$, the biggest winter event package costing 24$, giving 1200 gold aswell and the equivalent of 7 diamonds and 896 winter coins.
are you actually seriously putting pay2win options to this aswell? i recall your "words" from the primus and the appearance of the primus as a direct-buy option for real money, but do you have to put real money purchases to every small event now aswell? next year, you can buy additional 5 clash games/day for 5$ each or what's coming next?
so at least personally, i have to say, thanks for ruining a fun competative event with another buyout option.
it's clear that some mechanics implemented in px exist to change things around, which is a nice idea in general, like the pp from facility levelups if you deliver goods to it (and i don't recall someone answering my question in regards of that subject which i asked about that a few days ago)Quote
Most importantly it changes that fact that cities are being connected by players because these cities are "on the way" and this puts them at a disadvantage.
the reason they are on a disadvantage in the current state is because it of the attempted 'fix' of massive player gatherings in one single city during the endgame, which has basically shifted the gatherings to the border of the map. without that *change* center cities would just be as fine as they were before.
-not every change is a fix but some certainly are-
"Most importantly it changes that fact that cities are being connected by players because these cities are "on the way" and this puts them at a disadvantage. This mostly applies to cities towards the center of the map"
this is what i read out of this statement: "you want to fix 1 issue, produce 1 new issue and now you attempt to fix the issue by fighting it's symptoms while creating new issues which you hope will be less significant than the previous."