Mustapha00
Well-Known Member
Other peoples financial investment into this game has no affect on you.
You could not be more wrong.
Other peoples financial investment into this game has no affect on you.
And I'm fine with that. It's their money and their choice as to how to spend it. But let's not pretend that their choice to spend currency in the game does not given them an advantage.
But how does their city advancement affect you in any way? Being plundered? There's ways to avoid that. GBG? Join a diamond league guild and ride their wave. You can get a substantial amount of fights and negotiations in even if you're going against a stronger guild(s) that season. And some seasons you even win.You could not be more wrong.
I did say that money spent does play a part
Pay-To-Play will beat Free-To-Play about 95% of the time.
And both the P-T-P-ers and the developers love it that way.
And I'm fine with that. It's their money and their choice as to how to spend it. But let's not pretend that their choice to spend currency in the game does not given them an advantage.
But how does their city advancement affect you in any way? Being plundered? There's ways to avoid that. GBG? Join a diamond league guild and ride their wave. You can get a substantial amount of fights and negotiations in even if you're going against a stronger guild(s) that season. And some seasons you even win.
Aside from those two baseless excuses, there is absolutely no way that another person's spending has an affect on you. Sure you progress slower than them, but what's it matter to you? Enjoy the game how you play it and improve on it. You're more than capable of making a diamond farm or two, camping it out in Iron Age with a CF.
I've played and done my research on a fair share of popular, competitive games and this is the farthest from p2w. It helps but its not necessary. You look at a game like Lords Mobile where you have several aspects that take $20k+ to level fully to be considered somewhat competitive, I don't think you have any room to complain about the micro transactions in this game - especially when other people's spending doesn't impact you.
No, you did not say money spent does play a part. Let me refresh your memory:
Going from a claim of 95% dominance to saying you meant 'playing a part' is at best disingenuous.
The 95% quote is not reflective of the game as is. To make it relevant you would have to change it so much as to be unrecognizable and wind up with something like:
While time in game and play skill are the dominant factors in game state, given relatively equal time in game and skill in game, money can be a decisive factor.
Is that what you meant to say?
Very
I don't get it. So what if it does? Lot's of players have all kinds of advantages. What the OP proposes is a separation for the money advantage. How about the time advantage? People playing 5 years or more only? Smart players, let's exclude the dumb ones? We all start the same, some survive some don't.
In my replay to Algona, I freely concede that players who have played longer do have an advantage over players who have not.
But that advantage is magnified by choosing, if they do so, to spend money.
I'm sorry, but the current system of PvP requires absolutely zero skill. To pretend otherwise might soothe one's conscience, but is a denial of reality.
Pay-To-Play will beat Free-To-Play about 95% of the time.
But that advantage is magnified by choosing, if they do so, to spend money.
BUT that's life. Get used to it.
You mean aside from acquiring the skills of city building, resource management, managing the tech tree, mastering DCs and Events, selecting and acquiring SBs, selecting, acquiring, and leveling GBs?
Like it or not, the skill set behind plundering hoods successfully, daily, week in and week out, is the same skill set used to master any aspect of this game.
Players need skill and time in game to utilize money. Either time in game or skill win out over money that does not have skill guiding spending.
Since diamonds do nothing but buy time, those two things (spending money and playing for a long period of time) are essentially the same thing. One is not magnified by the other, they are interchangeable. In fact I'd argue that someone who's been playing for 5 years for free will still have the advantage over a P2Per who's only been playing for one or two. And of course, both will have the advantage over newer F2Pers, which is as it should be.
You do (rather reluctantly) concede that time in game is a "major factor", but yet you don't acknowledge that your concession renders the argument that the alleged 95% success rate that you attribute to spending $$$ is flat-out wrong (unless one considers a 5% contribution "major"). You can't have it both ways.
But let's not pretend that all (most?) is well-balanced in this game.
Competitive disadvantage? So what? The game can't be "won". Ranking, both individual and guild, means absolutely nothing. Nobody can destroy anything in your city. The only real attraction to this game is to play it in a way that brings you pleasure. If being competitive brings you pleasure, I would submit that you're playing the wrong game. Sure, there's competition here, but you can't "win" it. That's why there's whining from all sides to every aspect of the game. People have come to expect to be able to "win" at everything. Never mind reality. Life in general can't be "won", that's why rich people are no happier than poor people.And those who cannot, for whatever reason, avail themselves of that advantage will continue to suffer a competitive disadvantage and will- rightfully- complain about it. Get used to it.