Paying to Win

DeletedUser

Guest
Replies in bold

Except in a first village this is not a little advantage, this is a huge advantage. Faster builds = higher level barracks/stable = more troops = more farming = faster to noble. Also you'll have a greatly increased number of troops in the same time as other people who haven't paid. Assuming you can manage 24/7 queues that is. When you go to noble, you'll lose fewer troops when you clear your target, and consequently have more left to noble several more villages quite possibly, as well as having a reduced rebuild time for the units lost.

In short, p2w is dangerous in the right hands, in others it's largely a waste of money. You have to have 24/7 queues to make it really profitable. It's the same as anything, you can give a noob or inactive every single tool that the "pros" have, but they'll still fail miserably. Every new feature will do better work for the "elites" no matter if it's designed to quash them or no. Only limited haul worlds can hold them back in my opinion.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
You asked for an advantage, I gave you it.


I wouldnt call it much of an advantage, not enough to warrant so many complaints on this thread and so much drivel from a few posters.


Except in a first village this is not a little advantage, this is a huge advantage. Faster builds = higher level barracks/stable = more troops = more farming = faster to noble. Also you'll have a greatly increased number of troops in the same time as other people who haven't paid. Assuming you can manage 24/7 queues that is. When you go to noble, you'll lose fewer troops when you clear your target, and consequently have more left to noble several more villages quite possibly, as well as having a reduced rebuild time for the units lost.

No its not a huge advantage, if your queues are 24/7 and you farm efficiently then all reduced building time really does is increase the points of your vil quicker than others who arent using the feature and putting you in a position where you have to noble a shit low point vil. If your a good/great/elite player then you'll cope perfectly fine against players using it, proven by the poor nobling on this world. The only players really affected by it are 'noobs' but they have more important things to worry about.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser103944

Guest
No its not a huge advantage, if your queues are 24/7 and you farm efficiently then all reduced building time really does is increase the points of your vil quicker than others who arent using the feature and putting you in a position where you have to noble a shit low point vil. If your a good/great/elite player then you'll cope perfectly fine against players using it, proven by the poor nobling on this world. The only players really affected by it are 'noobs' but they have more important things to worry about.

Why would you have to noble a low point village? What Irish said is right, if 2 players are at the same level, they have the same troops, same farming, same village build, both queues 24/7, one starts reducing the time taken to upgrade hq/stable/barracks and still able to keep the queues going, they will have more troops than the other player. It won't be a massive difference but why would they noble a worse village when they have more troops than they would if they didn't use p2w? Your argument makes no sense.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
It won't be a massive difference but why would they noble a worse village when they have more troops than they would if they didn't use p2w? Your argument makes no sense.

You answered the question yourself, it wont be a major difference. If both players are at the same level then (and im assuming you mean a good level) a backtime from the player with slightly less troops will do the job. Then the guy who wasted how ever much money on prem will be left red faced.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Mania, mate this Delete bloke isn't the full ticket as some would say! Give me a break :p
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Delling if anyone isnt the full ticket its quite clearly you and as humor isnt a strong point of yours stick to whining like a little girl
 

DeletedUser103944

Guest
You answered the question yourself, it wont be a major difference. If both players are at the same level then (and im assuming you mean a good level) a backtime from the player with slightly less troops will do the job. Then the guy who wasted how ever much money on prem will be left red faced.

That wasn't your argument, you said the player who used p2w would have to noble a 'shit low point vil'. Don't avoid my question; 'but why would they noble a worse village when they have more troops than they would if they didn't use p2w? Your argument makes no sense'.

The massive difference I quoted was referring to troop counts.

This has nothing to do with backtiming, 1 player being better than the other etc. The argument being presented here is about the advantage one has of using p2w, not the 'advantage' of the non-p2w player being better than the p2w player.
 

DeletedUser110685

Guest
No its not a huge advantage, if your queues are 24/7 and you farm efficiently then all reduced building time really does is increase the points of your vil quicker than others who arent using the feature and putting you in a position where you have to noble a shit low point vil.

Are you saying that they would have to noble a low point vill because they get nobles so early that no one around them will be big? This is an advantage because they would be able to grow the village more quickly than it would have otherwise. If you're saying that they wouldn't be able to clear a large village, you are wrong.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Delling if anyone isnt the full ticket its quite clearly you and as humor isnt a strong point of yours stick to whining like a little girl

You mad fella?

I put on this show to wind up fools like you, and you bunch of PP Abuses, you wouldn't stand a chance without it :D

Great account by the way mate! :D
 

DeletedUser

Guest
That wasn't your argument, you said the player who used p2w would have to noble a 'shit low point vil'. Don't avoid my question; 'but why would they noble a worse village when they have more troops than they would if they didn't use p2w? Your argument makes no sense'.

The massive difference I quoted was referring to troop counts.

This has nothing to do with backtiming, 1 player being better than the other etc. The argument being presented here is about the advantage one has of using p2w, not the 'advantage' of the non-p2w player being better than the p2w player.

increase the points of your vil quicker than others who arent using the feature and putting you in a position where you have to noble a shit low point vil.

Not sure how this can be any more obvious
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser110685

Guest
Delete, why would they have to noble a shit low point vill?
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Delete, why would they have to noble a shit low point vill?

Because abusing p2w means there obviously larger in size than players not using it unless they find a pointwhore (in which case great) thus meaning they will need to noble a smaller target. Anyone that keeps up with p2w and have the troops to back it obviously has a degree of knowledge and skill thus meaning they will be a hard target. Dont get me wrong certain players will go after the harder targets, but alot of p2w whores go for the easy route.

Delling ive grown bored of you, get back to your less than average account as its clear you have nothing rational to say.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser110685

Guest
In which case they can grow the smaller vill faster after nobling than it would have been growing otherwise.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
In which case they can grow it faster after nobling than it would have been growing otherwise.

Certainly, however, thats yet another installment of x amount of prem which in the long run is a huge waste of money as eventually the p2w features become obsolete. But thats not the argument im trying to have, my case is players using 'reduced build times' vs 'players not' a lot of people are bashing the feature (which is available for everyone) when in reality you can compete perfectly fine without spending however much money.
 

DeletedUser110685

Guest
Sure you can compete, but only because there just aren't many good players around.

Two players of equal skill, one using a lot of pp, the other not, the one using pp will grow significantly faster and have more troops.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
That depends on how you define good (but thats a whole different debate lol)

The only way you can say that is if both accounts are in the same 7x7 (same farming area), are online at the exact same times each day every day (equal activity) etc otherwise its impossible to make that argument.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
-Delete-, I think you play a different game than I do. I farm most of my 35x35 before nobles, and I very rarely clear anyone unless they're a direct threat/attack me. I know from past experience that I can outgrow most players and am active and experienced enough to split and backtime those who I can't, which then devolves into a mess, but a fun one.

However, if I used p2w and grew faster than everyone, I'd be keeping an eye on competitors. If I think they're putting up smithy, I'd match, if not, I'd build more troops. If I have nothing good in my area to noble then it's doubly imperative to get to nobles fast so I can build up a second village, but I'd much rather take a large player village.

Back to the original argument, it is an absolutely massive advantage if you're against someone near equal in skill. If they don't have money to waste, they'd be days later getting to an academy and with far lower troop count. I'd be able to raise a full noble train before they even get an academy, and then it all comes down to luck etc with splitting and backtimes, stacking the train in different ways, as you said.

But the end result is that I would have the option of striking first and with a larger troop count. Consider a level 15 barracks production for weeks over a level 20 for instance. With 24/7 queues, you get the extra barracks levels while keeping pace on everything else.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser110685

Guest
That depends on how you define good (but thats a whole different debate lol)

The only way you can say that is if both accounts are in the same 7x7 (same farming area), are online at the exact same times each day every day (equal activity) etc otherwise its impossible to make that argument.

Assuming equal activity and farming area yes.

It may be impossible to test, but the advantages of pp are obvious. There are several areas of startup in which the advantages are clear:

During bp, you rely on mines heavily (in all but the very best of areas). Using the 20% res bonus, high level res production flags, and reducing the cost of mine buildings and the buildings up to stables would all allow you to get a constant stable queue way earlier than had you not been using pp. Getting constant lc production even a few hours earlier can have a big difference.

Another stage where pp users have an advantage is the HQ rush. PP users should not need to upgrade the HQ further than 20 if they are reducing building times, saving them a lot of time and resources.

Reducing construction time of barracks and in particular stables allow you to get the faster production a few hours earlier, which might not seem like a lot but it all adds up into more troops. Buying a high level unit production flag also means more troops.

Reducing construction time on smithy and farm upgrades means you will get an academy a lot earlier. High level coin flags allow you to produce nobles faster.

The end result is more troops and quicker nobles.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
-Delete-, I think you play a different game than I do. I farm most of my 35x35 before nobles, and I very rarely clear anyone unless they're a direct threat/attack me. I know from past experience that I can outgrow most players and am active and experienced enough to split and backtime those who I can't, which then devolves into a mess, but a fun one.

However, if I used p2w and grew faster than everyone, I'd be keeping an eye on competitors. If I think they're putting up smithy, I'd match, if not, I'd build more troops. If I have nothing good in my area to noble then it's doubly imperative to get to nobles fast so I can build up a second village, but I'd much rather take a large player village.

Back to the original argument, it is an absolutely massive advantage if you're against someone near equal in skill. If they don't have money to waste, they'd be days later getting to an academy and with far lower troop count. I'd be able to raise a full noble train before they even get an academy, and then it all comes down to luck etc with splitting and backtimes, stacking the train in different ways, as you said.

But the end result is that I would have the option of striking first and with a larger troop count. Consider a level 15 barracks production for weeks over a level 20 for instance. With 24/7 queues, you get the extra barracks levels while keeping pace on everything else.

Im not arguing about your style of game play or how good/bad you are Irish, that would be wrong of me and pure guess work as ive never played with or against you (i dont think). Nor am i arguing that all the p2w features (reduced build times, market trades, +res%, buying flags etc) dont give you/players an advantage. Im simply pointing out that it doesnt matter if you use 'reduced building times or not' you can still compete throughout startup whereas Delling seems to believe you cant. After all is said and done it still simply comes down to activity vs farming efficiency. If your on an account with 5 coplayers, playing actively for 24 hours a day, farming effectively, spending 10 pound/dollars a week on p2w features then yes the advantages are going to be significant, however, the amount of accounts doing this on each worlds will be accountable on 1 hand. Most the players using p2w are probably solo players, spending a couple of quid each month on the + res perk and the odd reduced building i.e smithy levels 17/18/19/20. Players on the forums seem to think they speak for the vast majority of the world when in actual fact its the other way round, this is proven when it comes to threads such as new world settings requests, how often do you get the settings you ask for? The answer is very rarely because the players requesting the settings are far and few between on the grand scale of things. Coming back to my argument this thread seems solely focused on bashing Clueless. for using p2w and being rank 1, like ive said before p2w is available for everyone, p2w does nothing for activity, p2w wont farm for you in an effective way, p2w eventually becomes redundant. So instead of bashing the users (not aimed at you irish) just get on with it. You can still compete if you know what you are doing, if you dont there are plenty of guides and players willing to help out there. If you really cant bare it play no hauls or wait for a world without the new features..... or just simply stop playing all together, if Inno started losing money as a result of the new p2w features i have no doubt they would sack them off.

Assuming equal activity and farming area yes.

It may be impossible to test, but the advantages of pp are obvious. There are several areas of startup in which the advantages are clear:

During bp, you rely on mines heavily (in all but the very best of areas). Using the 20% res bonus, high level res production flags, and reducing the cost of mine buildings and the buildings up to stables would all allow you to get a constant stable queue way earlier than had you not been using pp. Getting constant lc production even a few hours earlier can have a big difference.

Another stage where pp users have an advantage is the HQ rush. PP users should not need to upgrade the HQ further than 20 if they are reducing building times, saving them a lot of time and resources.

Reducing construction time of barracks and in particular stables allow you to get the faster production a few hours earlier, which might not seem like a lot but it all adds up into more troops. Buying a high level unit production flag also means more troops.

Reducing construction time on smithy and farm upgrades means you will get an academy a lot earlier. High level coin flags allow you to produce nobles faster.

The end result is more troops and quicker nobles.

You cant pick and choose what flags you buy, also there are a number of flags worlds around which you can join and play for a week/2 to build up a healthy stock of useful flags, award whoring is the best/easiest.cheapest way to gain flags.

Again i didnt say anywhere that there are NO advantages to PP, my argument was focused on reduced building time and the fact you can still compete whether or not you choose to use it

Reducing the time it takes to build a smithy for instance level 20 (20 hours give or take) troops fully queued... level 10 stable.... (for an example) 7 mins per LC (guesstimate as i cba to check) reduced in half, reduced in half again, reduced in half again, reduced in half again, reduced in half again will leave you with... roughly 45 mins for a level 20 smithy upgrade.... in this time you build 6/7 LC.... how is that an advantage? If you took it further and insta built your acad straight after then youve in essence just jumped 700 points for a grand total of lets say 10 LC
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
Oh definitely, I absolutely agree you can be competitive without it, that's a given. At the same time, it's such a large advantage if you know what you're doing with it. Basically, you're never going to be ranked as high (or have as many troops) as those who use it correctly in the first village stage, and probably a fair bit beyond unless you have several great noble targets.

When it comes down to "elite" vs "elite", it will be as you say, not who payed the most, but who has the best timing/most friends.
 
Top