Quark Games forums

Kevin32402 wrote:And for those who hated on us or doubted us just look at our winning medal and talk about it every time you see one of us in another world.

Oof........... I'm so glad this is almost over with. Time to finish up. My husband will be so happy when this is done with. No more valor until like I don't even know.

Hey guys I was wondering If someone has a guild , can all the guild members attack on certain position @ the same time ? I there anyway to do that please reply I will be thankful

Regards

I find it funny how people complain about gold spenders i have used 20 bucks in a world and 50 bucks in another. add my super activeness and forget it im usually in the top 3 every wold i play in. All it takes is a little activeness from you and your team and you are solid.

i agree with fire most of you cry and complain because you can not grasp the concept of the game or just arent that good at it and trust me not everyone is good at the game. I lost the first world i played in, do i lose any more? no i do not because you meet more active players and make more friends.

all in all stop complaining and be active. do something about it form a team and kick butt. bunch of freakin cry babies lol.

kevin keep up the good work bro

And for those who hated on us or doubted us just look at our winning medal and talk about it every time you see one of us in another world.

Guild world 2 is pretty much done and still people are talking about day 1 it's so funny. Next time instead of crying use alittle strategy and team up for an all out assault. Not once did I see any teamwork outside our guild besides unitards defending each other at the end. I don't know how half of you guys won worlds but I guarantee you will never win a world with me in it gold or no gold. Good luck everyone and happy hunting. See you guys next winter!!!!

What I continue to find amazing is the people who think this game would go anywhere without gold spenders. This game is a free download. Last time I checked, programmers had to be paid, servers rented, electric bill paid, and etc.

I defend it because you won't see Quark employees on here doing so, but you will have more than a few players coming on complaining (a fair percentage who have probably spent more on 1 X-Box game than Valor). I've seen too many games go down the tubes due to lack of a money. And for the record, I doubt very seriously my gold budget even ranks in the top 25%, but I have forced people to spend gold on truce and such, more times than I care to count.

Yup, I'd agree in part, there is some truth to a statement such as that. But everyone in the GW1 or GW2 world got there by winning, and I have yet to see a guild that has won a world that hasn't had their share of gold buyers. They simply don't exist. If you have an organized guild, with good leaders that your players like, and perhaps 2-5 players that prop your guild up fast, chances are you will win your world. GW and w100 are 1-offs in that the amount of gold required is higher, but its obvious that those conditions were met. If you have an organized guild, with good leaders that your players like, and no gold players, your chances are going to be dependent on whether or not other guilds have those gold players. Regardless, I don't think many people would disagree with the statements about gold buying these days. Just read the forums. It gives you a huge advantage, especially in the 1K worlds. I don't think anyone can argue that point and that's all I am saying. It certainly takes away from the "those guys are good respect earned" to the "Oh look gold buyer". Its amazing how defensive the gold buyer defenders are however. Amusing to a point.

bkray1 wrote:You are correct, and I bet you will be seeing a lot of this in the near future. People want to play games. As they can no longer play without "keeping up with the jones" I suspect a lot will move on. A lot already have. But don't call it strategy or skill. Anyone can buy an army.

I suspect some will move on. I also suspect that we will see some changes as to how smaller worlds run. As far as calling it strategy or not, I've been playing war games in a myriad of forms for 35+ years. Those who lose (or think they will lose) have a tendancy to attribute the result to ANYTHING but their own fault. It's much easier to throw up their hands and point to X as the reason for their failure. As with other games, I see that a lot here.

LordFirefall wrote: If any guild went into GW expecting not to spend money, they probably shouldn't have bothered either.

You are correct, and I bet you will be seeing a lot of this in the near future. People want to play games. As they can no longer play without "keeping up with the jones" I suspect a lot will move on. A lot already have. But don't call it strategy or skill. Anyone can buy an army.

bkray1 wrote:All I am saying is Gold takes the overall strategy away. A monkey with a 10K bankroll will outplay you any day, period. Bicker and defend your strategy all you want. You have a serious leg up because you have heavy bankrolls. Even your description of your strategy says so. A guy that drops 250-500 on day one in a 1K world needs no strategy. Just pay to win.

Gold, at the rate of $250-500 a day, if its the only player in the world, takes away the overall strategy. But I'm sorry, that is not happening at a high rate. You always have the option to move to another world, where its not happening. Gold or no, if the players of GW can't band together and take down a heavy gold spender, they probably didn't need to be there anyway. If any guild went into GW expecting not to spend money, they probably shouldn't have bothered either.

However, to expect a business to forgo income because you feel it isn't fair is unreasonable.