Credits for Cash

[Atzuya]

+8% on gross income might sounds too OP, but it's actually comparable to the bonus we usually have from the color stock bonus right now. As in, it's a nice thing to have but not exactly game-breaking. A nation with 20k infra and full commerce would likely get 300kish extra daily revenue. And at the prize of 8 credits... actually that's a terrible investment if the bonus only lasts for a month ._.

 

I'm more thinking about 2% +$25,000 increase on gross income for 1 credit, and unstackable. Not really over-the-top, but you can break even easily with a medium-sized nation. It will also help to put an ever-increasing 'minimum' price on the market. If a lot of nation can get 3 million easily from 1 credit over 30 days, would you sell it below that price?

[Pyer Toh]

Perhaps, if you redeem 5 credits, you can get an extra city...it's just difficult enough that it won't necessarily make it pay-to-win.....maybe if the cost was dropped? i dunno

[Pyer Toh]

I believe that if you actually create more things for in-game money to be spent on...like military tech and having different geographical types for cities that will each affect the cost of building that city while different geographies will yield different resources or bonuses, then it will allow for more reasons to buy credits and redeem them. But then to actually make it work, maybe the cost of a credit should go down to $4 or something that most people could afford O:

[Atzuya]

A brand-spanking new city just for 5 credits? Oh boy all those nations with 15+ cities will be jolly-dancin if that's true

[Solo Man]

Shoot, I'd pay 50 or 60 credits for a city without hesitation if I had the chance

[Ole]

Credits to resett the City timer? so we can speed new members up to like 7/8 cities in a day

Edited November 16, 2015 by Ole

[Kevin D]

I buy 3 credits ever month or so. If you raised the money amount I would buy more. But I would like each credit to me 3-5 million.

[Yukon Don]

The idea of alliance benefits (i.e. controls) is good...as is the idea of giving a percentage income bonus.  As nations grow the value of $1,000,000 becomes almost inconsequential.  

 

However the idea of resetting the city / project timer is too overpowered in my opinion, and genuinely moves to a pay-to-win model.  

[Hooves]

However the idea of resetting the city / project timer is too overpowered in my opinion, and genuinely moves to a pay-to-win model.  

It literally reeks with pay-to-win. 

[KyleisthegreatKyle]

I agree with a lot being said here, and I especially agree with the idea of creating missions. Those would make the game even more interesting and add a twist. I think that I would quite like those.

Edited November 19, 2015 by dufrenekm

[Aerys Targaryen]

Personally I don't buy credits because unlike other games, debit card or internet banking is not working here. Only thing that works is credit card. I'm not sure how many face similar issues, but if there are many, correcting that will help a little.

 

EDIT: I'm living in India. I guess most of the players are in U. S., so I guess only a few people will face this problem.

Edited November 19, 2015 by Aerys Targaryen

[Fox Fire]

So you're just trying to find a way to increase the money you make? That's stupid. 

I'd like to buy credits on the market, but not if the price is being doubled or tripled. 

[Prefontaine]

Add perks. Make them require credits.

[Prefonteen]

Current redemption price for credits is $1,000,000 each, but they average around $1.5-2m on the market. 

 

However, less and less people are buying credits each month, a large portion of people are using their credits for VIP and player advertisements, which are both good things, but unfortunately that's not everyone, and a small chunk of usual sales.

 

I thought that spending more money on advertising to bring in more players would ultimately lead to more credit purchases, but that doesn't appear to be the case either. I'm trying to come up with ways that we can increase the number of credits that are purchased, which ultimately stems from the value of the credits.

 

What can we do to increase the value? With the amount of money that alliance banks have stored these days, it doesn't seem that anyone really needs to buy extra money. One thought I have is increasing their infrastructure value from 50 to 100. Yes, that would mean large players could build even larger cities, but extra infra only does so much. Extra slots aren't really needed for large players, and we see stagnant growth in cities due to infra costs. If we could make it easier for larger nations to get infra at high levels, we might see bigger cities (more damage to do in your wars ) and an increase in demand for credits.

 

The other option is to simply increase the amount of money they can be redeemed for. Again, I don't want a pay to win game, but it's kind of a necessary evil of the monetary inflation in-game.

 

I guess my question for everyone is, at what monetary benefit ($1,000,000? $1,500,000? $2,000,000? $3,000,000? $5,000,000?) would you be willing to spend money to buy a credit? I think we're below the equilibrium point currently and have a shortage of demand, so I'm trying to figure out how to change that.

 

I'm not sure if this will be useful to you, but I suppose i'll put down my personal rationale.

 

When I joined the game (at its beginning) bought (max) credits on a monthly basis. As time passed I have ceased doing so for a few reasons, being:

- A year ago, the relative benefit gained from donating was much larger than now. As you have already stated: Inflation has made credits much less advantageous.

 

- This one ties into the previous one: My alliance at the time (Syndicate) came with pretty much no pre-existing nations, and no bank. Part of my purchases and subsequent growth was utilised to fund the rest of the alliance in its initial growth stages. It was a 'greater good' kind of thing. As tS has grown, so has its capacity for financing. The need for credits has been reduced.

 

Now, a part of my reasoning for donating has also been to help support the development of the game. There are a few OOC factors at play for me to stop donating as well.

- The exploit issues a while back played a huge part to me personally. I do not blame you personally for the occurrence of the exploits. As a start-up game, they are bound to happen. That said, it's rather demoralizing to invest in a nation in-game, to then find out that hundreds of millions (which was at the time a huge amount) has been flushed into the game, benefiting other players. Last etc. were banned and I do believe I made one or two more donations after that.

 

- The proxy war has been the reason for me to permanently stop donating. After the exploit issues (which came to light during the Guardian-VE war), it was rather demoralizing to see more hackings during the proxy war. It is as if we see such occurrences in every major war, and these matters generally influence politics to a huge degree. The hackings during the proxy war were an incredible annoyance. Now, I do understand the solution you brought to the table at the time, and why it was done in that particular fashion. That said,  For the Syndicate personally, it saw what was likely the greatest feat we as an alliance accomplished in large part undone, with much of our opponent's pre-war strength restored, while our own recovery was minimal (as we took most-all of our damage before the rollback point, and our opponents took most damage afterwards). While these are ingame proceedings, it was, as a donator, frustrating to invest in a game, see multiple hackings, and then be put at a disadvantage in the solution presented.

 

To summarize a rather long post: My personal reasoning is rooted in seeing a lower RoI on purchases, as well as demoralization by hackings and a more specific case in the proxy war. I don't fault you for the latter: You are doing what you can based on what information you have available to you. That said, my personal financial situation, while I have no reason for complaints, is not strong enough for me to not have to make choices when it comes to what I wish to spend my income on, and as I weigh what to pay for and what not, these are factors that do play a role.

 

I hope you won't take this as unconstructive criticism. I am mostly hoping to provide you an understanding of my personal motivations. If it's shared by others, then well- perhaps it can be useful. If not, well- we can simply ascribe it to the ramblings of a foreigner.

[Prefontaine]

I know a few other donate players who feel similar to partisan, that and the consistent roll out of changes they didn't like. It's a small few who feel that way but combined with the fact that credits don't offer as much of an in game boost anymore combined with the hacking events and unpopular changes, you're gonna lose some people.

 

That and the guardian pip I donated for long ago was removed. So you're never getting my money again!

[Buorhann]

A couple of things that deter me from purchasing credits?

 

The early moderation issue of the boards that I was involved with and the reroll from the Proxy War.  While understandable, it's frustrating to see the hard work go away and affect the peace talks afterwards.

 

So I pretty much second what Partisan said in his long winded reply.