Version 0.8 mapeditor

[hatchfactory]

I just have a second but if this is a discussion about memberships, IMHO as an amature developer, the big difference between the free and paid memberships should be an ad based revenue program with proceeds going into your pocket (giving you more motivation to invest time and to further improve Warbarons). Paid members would of course, along with said goodies, be free from ads. I know there are people who will detest the idea and think they deserve something for nothing (let the whining commence) but if Warbarons wants a future it needs to bring in significant revenue, and I don't see that happening from the handful of loyal fans who will buy memberships.

[KGB]

Strach,

Actually I agreed with your idea about the Battle Calculator providing an advantage and I also said it's a bad idea to have it for Gold Users. However I think the advantage is not as huge as you think it is for experienced players (Newbies is another matter). However it is significant enough that instead the game should prevent Battle Calculators from being used entirely by hiding everything. Otherwise the game loses a lot of it's appeal because everything is automated by the calculator.

Piranha/SnotlinG already have stated before that Gold users wouldn't get any real advantage. So I too am puzzled by the idea of having a Calculator for Gold users. Unless that Calculator is only for Solo Play in which case it doesn't matter.

HatchFactory,

Your idea about ad's providing revenue is a good one. Makes total sense to me. Along with other things I suggested like delaying turn times in solo games, restricting total number of games a player can play in, better user interface etc should make most players want to eventually get some kind of membership.

KGB

[LPhillips]

We'll all have to see what form the calculator takes for gold members. If it's a simple simulator that cannot be accessed/used at the same time we are playing, then perhaps it's not a problem at all. I dislike even the perception of advantage that it might create, but we all ought to wait just a bit and see what it looks like.

Bengute,
All of your suggestions for gold members seem both desirable and unobjectionable. A more detailed review ability for games would be very nice as well, perhaps even in-game. It could show us the quantities of units (generally and specifically) we produced, lost, and killed in a given turn. Units killed by, say, Pikemen would be equal to (# of units killed by stack)x(% of stack composed of Pikemen). This would allow us to really see how effective our various tactics were. Upkeep per turn, including upkeep per unit type, would be appreciated also. All of this involves a lot of tracking and programming of course.

KGB,
I like your suggestions excepting much of your section 5. Many of the interface advantages you cite appear to step right over the line into competitive advantages. B) and C) are borderline, but D) is simply a handicap that will really edge out new players. In fact, they're the ones who need to easily view unit stats. I sure don't, and most players won't by the time they become paying members.

[KGB]

LPhillips,

Everything I proposed in section 5 is completely available via other more time consuming menus or other screens like the Warpedia. So I am not sure how there is an in-game competitive advantage. Just a time saving one which is exactly the kind of thing paying members should get in order to speed up their turns.


I also thought of one more thing I'd really like for Gold/Silver members that would be the most useful of all at least for me:

6) Longer Turn Times: Gold/Silver members should have their turn time set to 5 days even if the game is set up for less than that (say 24 hours). This helps those of us who have to take business trips or weekend trips and can't always find games to play with long turn times (90% seem to be set for 24 hrs). Nothing is more annoying than that issue.

KGB

[kenc80]

6) Longer Turn Times: Gold/Silver members should have their turn time set to 5 days even if the game is set up for less than that (say 24 hours). This helps those of us who have to take business trips or weekend trips and can't always find games to play with long turn times (90% seem to be set for 24 hrs). Nothing is more annoying than that issue.

KGB

Totally agree with KGB here. Turn time is killer for me too. Its why I dont play a lot of ladder games. I would definitely pay for the ability to expand turn times. I dont hold up games and play every chance I get but business, weekends & the fiancee do make it tough for me to keep up in 24 ladder games. Please implement this! PS Still dreaming of 3.5 day ladder turns!

[TheVic]

That the turn time is not valid for all players in a game would be very irritating, if the turn time is not as one desire, one need only to create a game with suitable turn time.

If all paying members have a turn time of 5 days, it is a significant advantage to play fast games, as everyone will miss one in a while. And what happens in a large game with 8 silver/gold members, the pace could be EXTREMELY slow after a while. Have played more then one game with players that just stop taking there turns when games goes bad, or take one in a while and miss some, prioritizing the other games. Really undesirable as that would be the outcome, just play chess on the net and see how often you just have to wait out the opponents clock!

There are several "free" web games that are just unfair if not paying, so one must ask if this is for income or just to pay the server costs. What are the vision? Would be wiling to code for free, and have offered that previously.
Also see the devising of maps and items as a good thing for Gold members, but play support? No.

[ezras]

A gold member is usually going to be someone who is committed to the game and is on everyday, multiple times. If I play all of my turns within 5 hours of them posting and then have a weekend meeting or overnight, or camping trip the penalty of a missed turn is severe. I highly doubt that any paying member will be able to ride the clock. In fact I am willing to wager that "Gold" members have the lowest average turn time out of the entire community. In fact I would like to see the average turn time of members posted before entering a game... this type of feature would allow a different restrictions on games so you could have a 5 day turn but limit the players entering to average turn time is x.

Only point I am trying to make is that the players paying a premium are the least likely to take extended turn times.

[LPhillips]

I have a hard time trying to rationalize the idea that anyone should have special privileges regarding turn length. If you sign up for a game with a certain time limit on turns, shouldn't everyone have to obey it? I would personally refuse the extra time, because it would make gold members an irritation to the rest of the community, especially those looking to play quick games. I would expect gold members to be the pillars of the community, the guys you look up to and go to advice. Hopefully we can avoid privileges that would cause irritation or resentment.

The argument ezras presented occurred to me as well, but after reading his clear presentation it just doesn't seem very strong. A lack of de facto abuse does not really justify the privilege. Rules are rules, after all. Especially those you agree to up front like time limits.

[KGB]

That the turn time is not valid for all players in a game would be very irritating, if the turn time is not as one desire, one need only to create a game with suitable turn time.

The problem with this is that many players won't join games with 5 day turn around times because they are afraid of what you described: waiting forever for their turn. So you are left with joining 24 hr games or not playing at all Then what happens if you want to challenge someone on the ladder and they refuse a 5 day turn limit? This ends up fragmenting the community into 24 hr players and players who play longer turn games. So my next proposal would be the same as KenC80, the minimum time for any game be increased to 3 days which I am sure no one wants.

Ezras is correct that 1 missed turn can ruin an entire game that you may have invested a lot of time in which is very frustrating. I also agree with him that Silver/Gold members tend to be players who are playing regularly and not dropping out of games (which seems to be the bigger problem to me, players drop out and never actually play more than 1 turn so you have to wait 20 days for them to time out in the game).

If you are against Gold/Silver members getting 5 days for all their turns, then perhaps they can get +24 hrs per turn successfully completed allowing them to bank up to 5 days (5 turns in a row played within the game limit). Then if you go away for a few days you use up the banked time so at most someone can stall 5 days one time before they use all their banked time up.

Hopefully we can avoid privileges that would cause irritation or resentment.

This is impossible. Gold/Silver members need something for their support and something to encourage players to move to that membership level. So the privileges by their nature need to make other players envious otherwise there is no reason to join. This particular thing is not an advantage because anyone can simply set the game time to 5 days in every game.

KGB

[kenc80]

I'm not necessarily asking that Silver/Gold members get 5 day turns no matter what time game they play.

I just wish ladder games had a slightly longer option and if there was someway for Gold members to get a little more time or have a larger bank of saved time (I love that idea KGB) that would be really cool.

Look, I dont want to beat anyone because they missed a turn, I want to outmaneuver them. If there is a way to give Silver/Gold a little more cushion on turns, why not?

We do want to motivate folks to want to upgrade their membership. Their should be tangible advantages for investing in the game. Why not give S/G Members a little more cushion on expiring turns?