I've been thinking a lot about Gold Marks and how annoying it can be to run into people who dump tons of gold into the game and while they may not win can still ruin the experiance for someone who is looking to try to match tactical wits with someone and not have a war of wallets. Now, before people break out the flame throwers, i understnad GM is how the game is "free to play" so i am not compaining about the concept of gold marks, i am just proposing a different way to use them, perhaps as a different mode of play. Granted this would require the creators to put new systems in place but as i have seen different versions of Supremacy roll our and different maps i dont think my suggestion is out of the realm of possibilities. Finally, this is just a suggustion.. a thought experiment. Perhaps other games have tried it or there is some flaw i am over looking. Its just an idea. Ok, so now after i doused myself with flame retardent... here is is
A Gold Bond game is a game that does not allow in game purchase of Gold Marks. Period. Once the game has started you are NOT allowed to purchase any additional Gold Marks. However, to join the game you need to buy "Gold Bonds". Its a buy in cost. EVERYONE needs to pay in to join. Everyone who wants to play pays the same amount and gets GOLD BONDS. Gold Bonds are only good for the game you buy them for. Use them or lose them. But you can spend them anytime you wish, and exactly the same way you would spend gold marks.
The designers could figure out the **average GM** players buy during a game. I have no idea what that amount would be. But lets assume for the moment the average amount spent by ALL the players in a game is $20, then that would be the buy in price. The desginers would still get thier $$ and everyone would need to chip in who wanted to play.
The game wouldnt start until all spots were filled, and if the game didnt launch/was cancelled the Gold Bonds would be turned into Gold Marks. I think that may be the the biggest caveat. I am not sure if people would buy into this, i think it really would be what the buy in cost was.
Anyway, its just a thought experiment. Perhaps this sort of thing has been already discussed ad nauseum. But its new to me.
What do YOU think?