Clear rules regarding talking about GMs

1. The rules are written as it is: "The denunciation of Goldmark is not permitted and leads to an immediate warning. The use of Gold is an explicit part of the game. The same applies to the premium account."

2. I think it's important the last part of your message: "In my case warning woks and I do not use map DE any more as there is no point in using it. "

I mean, if some player are signaling another player for using GM in the DE, that's clearly a tacit suggestion to unite all the Non-GM players to fight against the GM player, even if it was non-intended. My point is: we are way too much sensitive about GM denunciation in the match newspapers than the same denunciation in forum or chat, since the former has great potential to ruin player's experience in the game.

So, as stiff as it can be, the sole mention in the newspaper, the mere suspiction, from someone in the match that some player is using GM is directly considered GM denunciation and measures will be taken. And with that said, on the other hand, I don't think there are another reasons why would players talk about GM in newspapers. I mean, I don't imagine a player saying in the newspaper "Goldmarks are so great, I love them!" Even if there is one, that player surely would publish that message as anonymous, by the reasons explained aforementioned.

Summarizing, the ruler would be: if you want to talk about GM in the newspaper, don't suggest any player is using it and avoid any criticism about that coin. If any, chat and forum are better places to do that criticism, as long as it's argumented

Greetings.

Quote from Demonaire

Summarizing, the ruler would be: if you want to talk about GM in the newspaper, don't suggest any player is using it and avoid any criticism about that coin. If any, chat and forum are better places to do that criticism, as long as it's argumented

This indeed sums it up nicely, I know the current way of GM usage mainly on larger maps can be a heavy weight to lift but the fact is that only with constructive feedback can we try to change it.

Late game heavy GM will die easy since you will have army yourself to kill it. In the start of game only support of other is possible to kill him. I remember a 500 from the past we're the gmer gm all my city to 0 moral for killing him! In totally he spend 20m gm on that just for die in it , my and ally spend not even 400k gm together., For the game yay good found the server will stay free. For it was first time and only map I every lost around 200 city by revolt after day change.

I'll suggest a even better way, use external chats/forums so you wont risk to get banned.

Dont talk about GM's in S1914 and you'll be fine.

Insults doesn't need context. And if you were insulted by another player, you always will be able to send a ticket, relating all the situation developed. No "Report Article" button is needed for that.

On the other hand, my piece of advice in those cases is always take screenshots of the infringments in the moment it happens, just in case.

From my personal experience, people are being really harsh at people using GM, calling them names, being rude.
I understand it, I've also been in games where whales just rule the map.

Bashing gold users is not the problem, the problem is rude bashing.

Quote from SpartanBG

Bashing gold users is not the problem, the problem is rude bashing.

You'd get banned from both.

Saying that SpartanBG uses gold is reason enough to get banned according to the rules.

We can't change the Pay to Win system established within the Bytro Games, but while knowning that we'll probably get banned by being specific when it comes to P2W, well, then we better shut up and talk somewhere else or just leave the game.

I mean, I'm taking a look at the answers Dorado Games gave, those who made Conflict of Nations, with the help of Bytro, regarding users complaints about P2W and their game as a whole and it's simply disgusting.

I'll snapshoot some of them

This last one isn't from the developer but I think it's somehow related to this topic so I'll add it too

This last comment, sadly, is too true, specially the fact that you can't fool the steam community and you can't censure them, that's the reason S1914, CoW and CoN have 50/50 in votes of being good or bad and other F2P strategy games have over 70%, or more, of good reviews

Right now their votes are:

CoN: [Overall(317 opinions): 49% good and 51% bad]

CoW: [Overall(1.546 opinions): =51% good and 49% bad] Recent opinions(last 30 days) gives them 72% good opinions.

S1914: [Overall(47 opinions): 47% good and 53% bad]