Open Discussion Pertaining to Monetization Model of Supremacy 1914

Quote from Sandman

I believe GM should exist, however should have the option of creating games that GM can not use.

They should also limit the amount of GM used per game every 24 hours. Example: Day 1 the player uses 25k from GM and this is the limit. On Day 2 he can use GM again, however the daily limit will be 25k GM.

But about other means of monetization ... I do not know if they ever thought of creating a virtual store that sells items related to the theme of World War I. It may seem like a ridiculous idea for a gaming company, as it would certainly be very complex to put this into practice. But a similar idea would be a store inside the S1914 that the player could buy skins for the avatars of the games. For example: in a certain map I'm with Germany and I would like to change the default photo of Kaiser for another photo of him only that colorized and for that it will be through a collection of images that the S1914 makes available, some free and others paid. Obviously you would have to remove the player's option to put any photo. It may also seem like a ridiculous idea, but it's something that does not affect the game's balance like GM, which can totally change the course of a game, while what I'm suggesting is just one of those common things in these popular games that love to sell "cute items" for players to spend their money, but that does not affect the game.

I would like to hear other players' opinions on these ideas.

Display More

I like that idea, and would like to expand it. I've always wanted to change city and country names, because as North Canada, for example, after you invade South Canada, you're the only Canada. I'm not sure how this would be implemented, but having an option to change country/city names for goldmark could be a good idea.

Quote from DemonPrince

I like that idea, and would like to expand it. I've always wanted to change city and country names, because as North Canada, for example, after you invade South Canada, you're the only Canada. I'm not sure how this would be implemented, but having an option to change country/city names for goldmark could be a good idea.

I have also thought something similar, but I always wonder how it would be implemented.

Perhaps adding new mechanics to the game will make it more viable to have new ways to use GM as long as it does not alter the game's balance.

One thing I wish I had was a map editor. Who likes to play roleplaying would like this, even more so if it were possible to change the provinces, names and even adapt the units for the time you want, for example: a roleplaying that happens in 323 BC the warships will become triremes, the tanks on elephants, heavy tanks on armored elephants, the railway cannon would become the siege tower and among many other possibilities.

I have no idea how it would generate money for Bytros, however it would attract enough players which would generate money because they would buy GM.

Quote from Sandman

a roleplaying that happens in 323 BC the warships will become triremes, the tanks on elephants, heavy tanks on armored elephants, the railway cannon would become the siege tower and among many other possibilities.

Hi Sandman,

Bytro do have a similar game like this called New World Empires, based on the discovery of the New World. If you are interested you can check it out by visiting http://www.newworldempires.com and using the same login details as you do on Supremacy 1914.

Hello

I just wanted to point out one thing when it comes to use of GMs in Supremacy

In most of the games GMs allows you to boost troops 10-50%

Now it is slightly different in Supremacy.

You can have army with 10% of morale/stance and you boost it to 100% in a matter of seconds that makes difference of 1000% in couple of seconds.

So my thinking is - why no to block repairing of units -if they will die players using GMs will have to spend more GMs to build them once more.

Players not using GMs will have bigger chance to win encounters when they will finally catch enemy army out of morale.

I met a guy lately who was able to spend 6 mln GMs just on the war with me. He was buidling fac lvl 4 in a destroyed province, building couple of stacks made of 50 arts, 40 tanks, 40 cars, 50 cavs and was atacking on speed march healing units after every encounter against my planes. I do not have to say that railways were also build to speed up march. Gold Rush in a finest form.

Then he decided to build 90 planes and repair them instantly to get rid of my planes. I do not have to say how much time, skills and GMs it cost me to finally stop him.

So yeah, if he was not able to repair units I would kill more of his units while he would spend more gold on producing them. Because it is cheaper to heal a unit than to buy gold resources and speed up unit production.

Small idea but may be helpful.

I don't feel comfortable about commenting on GM as it is now, as (and I'm going to receive hate for this) I actually do feel it is balanced enough, just due to the fact that the amount you have to spend on a game to actually give yourself a ridiculous advantage costs a fortune.

I have dropped 60 bucks on a game before where I was losing but it has never worked, ultimately just due to the fact that the attacker was the better player. GM has only helped either as convenience whenever I can't be bothered to wait 2 hours before building something else as I'll be AFK, or in bottleneck cases where i need to build a fort level or 2 quickly, or churn out a single battleship before someone else. Late game GM is entirely irrelevant, unless you're willing to drop hundreds of dollars.

However, I do believe there is a more efficient model for for the devs to get money from the game and that would be more creative benefits for getting premium. I will would be extremely willing to pay monthly if I was granted tools to edit preset maps so I can craft RP scenarios., basic things like setting province owners, production and build level limits.

That's one idea I have, but the gist of what I'm saying is that you need to find way's to encourage players to see the premium as worth it. It gives premium something that I believe is quite sought after by regular players, and grants the devs a more reliable source of income instead of sporadic GM spending.

Just to add info to what Mopp2 said- U need to know when and how to use GMs.

Sometimes buying one railway or one bomber is worth more than creating 50 golden artillery piece.

When I was fighting guy who has spent over 6 000 000 GMs solely on the war with me I was forced to use gold recon as he was creating stacks of 30- 50 x every equipment out of nothing and it was impossible to rely solely on the spies. I was also forced to rebuild airfields GMbombed by him. And to keep advantage in the air against his golden fighters I had to repair my machines.

Same with 100 uboots made out of thin air and sinking your fleet of 500 LCs because he GMed you route and produced 100 uboots out of one empty province. Even if you are the best player in a whole gamee- you will not be able to do a thing against such a trick. Well you can hide in the middle of the ocean and stop using your fleet- but does it make any sense?

So in general I had spent around 220 000 GMs against his 6 000 000+. Without them I would not stand a chance even though I crushed him time after time. basically because he GMed other wars too from what I saw and heard and finished having 2000 provinces against my 400 and army 10 times bigger.

So I am not sure if balance that Mopp2 talks about is real - but in my experience it is not.

You can outmaneuver account (I do not believe you can have players who can sit that long) which sits 24h/day with superior knowledge,experience and skills but against millions of GMs they will mean nothing.

As I see it - using GMs forces opponent to use GMs, quit a map or become the best player in the whole game.

It is good model for seeling GMs but I would be more happy if experience and skills could rival GM gameplay on an even terms as they rival activity based gameplay.

I would be even more happy if free GMs (moderator GMs, tombola GMs, map winning GMs, ) would be used only in economy - not in a war ,spying activity or building/repairing units. This would make sense from both ends as you would know straight away that the guy who just build 50 BBses paid for them 10 dollars and it is now up to you if you will invest any dollars to win a war. Same for devs- if someone wants to win a map - she/he needs to invest money in the map, not randomly received free GMs.

I do acknowledge that there are indeed players willing to buy that much GM but really it is rare and usually very pitiful as that means they dropped a huge amount of money that not everyone is usually rolling in to spend on such a game. Sure it sucks if you lose to an otherwise terrible player spending hundreds of dollars just to compete, but such instances obviously are few and far between.

Setting a GM spending limit seems the most logical solution. I mean, if they're willing to spend that much I'd imagine they'll immediately resume their spending after 24 hours, so its not that revenue for the devs is lost, it's just spaced out. He'll probably still buy 6 million GM , but over the course of a few weeks, not in a day or 2. Also, gives good players some breathing room from just being overwhelmed from an instant spam when they actually occur.

yes good point

6 mlns were spent in 5 days while for example 1 mln GMs was needed to win Supremacy Solo Tournament final in 2014.
I would say that limiting GMS to lets say 100 k per day would allow me to win a game easily just by skills.

200-300 k Gms per day- I would have to sit 2-3 h more

400-600 - I would have to sit a lot and as I dont like that I would spend money on GMs

600-1200 k GMs per day - you have to sit a lot plus pay Gms.

But as I say - just forbidding him to repair his units with GMs all the time, after speed march or getting hammered by bombers/range units, would make a huge difference on the battlefield. Now it is enough to make sure unit is not targeted by arts, RG or planes and you can click Golden repair. We can stop that by starting melee fight with targeted stack but what chances do you have against golden stacks?

Normally I would quit a game and move to next one but because I made some promises and I invested a lot of time int that map, plus I saw how weak golden player is I decided to give it a go. It was hard but at least I learned how to play against this kind of opponent. I cannot imagine how to win if opponent knew half of the things about game mechanics I know now.

Quote from NarmerTheLion

There was such feature in the past but bytro's partner in it wasn't very relayable so it was removed as it caused more issues that gains. I don't know how much such ads could gain but all bits help off course.

Well, about 30 000 GMs with everyday use and focus..hehe ..

I am an old member and i know this on first hand...

My opinion of goldmarks is the same as it has always been.

I do not agree with instant build.

I do not agree with province morale hits.

I do not agree with instant troop locations.

I do not agree with instant building destruction.

I do not agree with anything that allows a paid user to steamroll a free user in anyway.

I would rather see an advertisement then have a month worth of work be credit card destroyed.

(The Worst Feeling In The Entire Game)

With that said this is how I think goldmarks should be used.

Creation of a in-game shop would be great.

Let players pay to buy unit looks.

Fort looks things of this nature.

Give us the tools to show off that we support the game without the ability to instant win a war if we choose.

I buy high command and get nothing besides a chat box and a sticker.

I surely don't buy it because I get anything good from it.

Yes build ques are nice.

Rally points are cool.

However In my months of using high command I have never been able to be idol in a game long enough for those perks to really matter.

I would rework everything about High Command.

I would remove the things above.

I would allow goldmarks to be used to buy resources (A Huge Perk Already)

Shift the model from heavy handed victory to a more cosmetic in-game shop

I am all for supporting the game.

I love this game but I also love the community free or paid users.

I'm late to the party. But after being afk for a loooong time, the GM discussion is still the same as years ago.

Supremacy is a unique game with a huge potential.

It has a bug attraction for high quality RTS Gamers.

And those players do start with Supremacy 1914. But as long as a pay-to-win scheme is possible, those playrs will leave again sooner or later.

You do not need alot of GM to enjoy an easy win.

=> Use GM in every way that is NOT causing a pay-to-win.

Alot of games do this. And nobody minds.

LoL, Mushroom wars, Fortnite, ....

I do feel that with the intended switch to the mobile platforms, there is a much bigger opportunity to get away from the pay-to-win GM system and start with a pay-for-looks/fun GM system

REMOVE the option to pick custom made flags/pictures for free

With your game result, you get a "Treasure Chest". Winning-2dplace-3d place: better chest.

Start with Treasure Chests (but give them a fancy WWI name)

Have them open in 48 hours

With GM you can open them faster

the chests contain pieces of "Great Leaders/Kings/...". collet pieces of to complete the hero. A hero gives you a small bonus. e.g. 5% extra oil or whatever. 5% is a huge advantage in a long game

the chests contain skins, flags, ...

Set up a "shop" where you can buy skins pices, hero pieces, flags, ...

Want a personal flag or picture: pay with GM

Coalitions: pay with GM

set up a competitive S14 scene. S14 organisation: entry fee = 0 GM

Allow persons to set up their own tournaments, but they have to pay GM to organise a tournament.

and on and on and ...

Quote from Macdouwe

REMOVE the option to pick custom made flags/pictures for free

This even thought itis the marketing model of other games, would be a very upsetting move people dislike heavily when you take something free away all of a sudden, they hate it more then when it had never been free.

The original post was about both GM & HC so i will start with HC.

I don't think there should be any changes made to HC, it is very good value for what it offers, it does not give a ridiculous advantage to players and offers some very convenient features that are available to everyone at the same cost so there is no concept of pay to win.

The same cannot be said for GM, if someone is determined to win I have seen them drop $100s of dollars into a single map - this is great for Bytro but for everyone else in the game not so much fun. It would be interesting to know the statistics of GM usage, I think they would help in working out a more equitable way to move forward.

Obviously there has to be a premium currency, no company is going to put effort into a game that doesn't raise revenue.

I would suggest more options when starting a game to allow player to decide what kind of game they would prefer.

1. No change, open GM spending for all

2. Buy in with no GM allowed in map (say 5k GM per player)

3. Limited GM - 2K buy in then a cap on daily spending

4. Delayed GM - No GM spending allowed for first 2 weeks

These are just suggestions and amounts are just pulled out of the air. Knowing what the average spend per map is would help determine fair amounts that would not reduce the income for Bytro and not be too rich for most players. There will still be the free to play maps as available now but also a range of options for those who prefer to use tactics over their wallet. There will always be players who want to pay to win in every game where there is a premium currency these people exist and let's be honest they are the ones keeping the game free for others. However there are those who are also happy to pay to play, that option does not exist in Supremacy at the moment, that could be a market worth tapping.

was already described in the opening post, but indeed: it is a very old idea.

the option to use GM to open a game in which you cannot use GM

Quote from NarmerTheLion

This even thought itis the marketing model of other games, would be a very upsetting move people dislike heavily when you take something free away all of a sudden, they hate it more then when it had never been free.

True. an easy way to fix it is this: have all excisting users keep the option.

And new users have to acquire the option

Here is one thing I would REALLY like:

allow a player, to pay the 5000 entry fee for gold rounds for other players.

I don't mind doing that once in a while, but apparantly it is impossible

HQ - when the person gets kicked or banned from chat , this person is unable to use HQ chat for which payed in real cash.

This is outrageous and proves even things that you paid for can be taken from you if some irresponsible kid-mods will decide they do not like you any more.

in extension - such bans should not affect alliance chat as they force players to move away from supremacy communication channels in order to restore communication with chat-excluded members.

Quote from Golden Frieeza

This is outrageous and proves even things that you paid for can be taken from you if some irresponsible kid-mods will decide they do not like you any more.

those "irreponsible kid-mods" have a higher-rank support member to who you can text and check if their ban is correct

Quote from Golden Frieeza

in extension - such bans should not affect alliance chat as they force players to move away from supremacy communication channels in order to restore communication with chat-excluded members.

i agree private channels shouldn't go away if banned from the chat, even i'd include whispers

Quote from Golden Frieeza

from you if some irresponsible kid-mods will decide they do not like you any more.

If there are kid-mods banning without reason you contact me and I"ll revoke the ban. However most of the cases it's the "kid-user" that can't behave. The chatrules are for EVERYBODY and also for EVERY CHAT.

High Command CHat is a public chat in which rules can be broken. And also wispher is by trolls used to insult and spread hate. If I can give a hint... Follow the chat rules and no ban would have been given in the 1st place, what is the use of a chatban if they can just private the people they were insulting,....

So I disagree the strongest, "Ooh your driving license was revoked. However driving to work is something that helps the economy so you can still drive to work, and you do actually pay car taxes..., it would be unjustfull to actually even revoke it".... real world for the same reason doesn't work like that. If you're punished you're punished globally which is logical as if you remove the negative effects of the punishment can you truly call it a punishment? If you don't want to be banned... follow the rules...

The Punishment offcourse doesn't have as goal to sieze your communication with your allies, so only ally chat I'd actually feel something for. As usually if you break rules which your ally members report... you'd probably be kicked from the alliance instead. But wishper, HC chat, ... Are chats that by trolls would surpass their punishment which renders the punishment useless.

Anyway I just checked the title of this thread and this all goes a bit offtopic so feel free to if you wish to reply on this to contact me. SO that this thread can truly focus on the monetization model of Supremacy1914

The best way to monetizing this game is to sell it to a company that knows what they are doing. I'm done.