Its BULL about the removing Tournament when people have spent resources

All those Metallica cats were using Lianna!

1 Like

Imagine for a second that the postal service announced in the local papers that twice a year they were going to, as a novelty and a gift to the public, leave a steaming turd in every mailbox that they service in lieu of mail. Now, the first Turdsgiving was met with widespread disapproval, save for a few who found the ordeal quaint and thought that wiping the fecal matter from inside their mailbox really helped break the monotony of daily life. As the postal service then announced that a second Turdsgiving was planned for the end of the year and that the turds would be far runnier and filled with dysentery this time around, the memory of reaction to the inaugural Turdsgiving gave them some pause.

They then held a town-hall meeting and polled the attendees for receptiveness. Of the responses, “what the hell is wrong with you people?” secured the overwhelming number of votes with “okay, the first time was kinda funny, but please do not leave runny feces in my mailbox” as a distant second place finisher. As a result, the postal service decided to discontinue Turdsgiving, and instead just deliver mail as usual. Then, from seemingly nowhere emerged the fetishists wielding torches and pitchforks. There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth from this disheveled group, but several chants could be distinguished from the rabble:

“This was a service PROMISED TO US. It isn’t so much about the feces as it is the principle. First, they discontinue the provision of feces and see that we tolerate it. Now we have even less variety and normies are content to just get our same boring mail every day. What next, now that they know they can push us around? Do they stop delivering mail altogether?”

“This town hall was not representative of the populace, and the results were RIGGED by sampling bias! In defiance of all common sense I, on presumptive behalf of the general public, declare that scat fetish intuitively MUST be extremely mainstream because I personally find it appealing.”

But amongst the chants, one stood out loudest and angriest:

“I already bought gloves and a squeegee from the dollar store in anticipation of this event. You cannot just announce poo in mailboxes then cancel last minute because an overwhelming majority of people didn’t want runny poo. I demand reimbursement for my gloves and squeegee!“


This literally made me LOL. :joy:

1 Like

Think i can smell the pitchforks coming… Lol

This is so funny :slight_smile: when I’m bored, I’ll investigate if it was the same forum users that are responsible for the crap loot on tourneys, that made that cancel thing now :smiley: thank you very much :smiley: just had my 1* ready on my alt, but now they’re fed away. I don’t need compensation, I just want less whiners here on the forum. On both sides. Just leads to bad decisions :smiley:


Looking at the timing, and human nature, I think this is untrue.

I think Devs always regretted the decision to add classes to 1* / 2* heroes.

I think the poll, and the discussion among staff before the winter break, allowed a lower guilt threshold for a decision they had made months ago, but felt bad about actually implementing.

Devs have added a trickle of 3* heroes to gem summons because they discovered players will spend gems to pull Melia, Hisan, Rudolph, etc.

This generates money for SGG.

Activities for 1* / 2* heroes do not generate money for SGG.

In the end, this is a business.

Hopefully Zynga has not bought out the two clones, since new competitors must use innovation to get market share from SGG.


Nope that was a different section of the playerbase i believe but would have to go back and reread that thread(though really don’t want to)

1 Like

The squeaky wheel gets the grease, as is so often the case in life.

For the record, I have some maxed and emblemed 2-stars that I rushed to make for the last tournament and finished in the top 1% (I think, may have been top 5%). I was not looking forward to a 1-start tournament at all and welcome the decision to get rid of the 1- and 2-star tournaments.

The extra space they’ll free up means I won’t have to shell out any gems to expand my hero roster again for quite a while yet.


While funny, i think you went a little overboard here, don’t you think?

I’m not fragile enough to feel offended, but maybe you want to re-phrase it in a more light fashion.

A cogent argument. Thanks.

I have stated many times on this subject that I fully believe that the devs were looking for an out on the feeder Tourneys. Monetary reasons would make the most sense. I believe the poll was rigged in the choice of forum and secrecy.

At the same time…

Players actively sought to remove wanted, unique content by other players for a 6% increase of their status quo.

I have always stated the devs pitted player against player for their wanted outcome.

Still shocked by the selfishness of the community. Zero empathy shown for a minority of players over a trivial, once-every-16-week Tourney.


Thought it was 32 weeks?

1 Like

2* Tourney and 1* Tourneys spread out 16 weeks apart. Happy to clarify.


I probly misread somewhere, no need for clarity now though. Think once every never is all the clarity needed at this point

Once every 16 weeks isn’t worth the investment, and more frequent would increase the investment, either way it stifles growth of up n comers, costs veterans for roster slots, doesnt bring anything new to the game we don’t already have, etc

I think surface arguing with “poll of 132 killed the dreams of millions” is an easy argument to make

But i think at the end of the day it basically boiled down to the reward vs cost ratio of these particular tourney types leans much heavier in the cost than the reward. That and no money to be made from 1&2* heroes. Along with devs regretting making it part of original tourney feature in the first place.

Multiple reasons outside of an opinion poll

I could probly poll 450+ players right now outside of this forum, wouldn’t surprise me at all to get the same results. Visiting any game or line chat reflects similar feelings to what we see in this forum regarding the tourneys.

Poll may have been a small sample size, but i don’t think it’s inaccurate reflection of the player base


This is a market survey/poll which use statictical approach using sample.

This is not a general election which use the population.

Here is the difference, in election, majority of the voters make the decision.

In market survey/poll, costumer feedback is gathered from enough sample size which represent the population. The final decision is up to the developer whether they want to follow costumer voice or not.

1 Like

I’ve paid no attention to the 1 and 2* tournaments up till now because I had no intention of entering them so I didn’t even look at the threads. But it does seem to have upset a fair number of people. Poor communication by SG IMO. The decision may be defensible, but I can see how people were led to expect this thing would happen and annoyed when it didn’t. A suggestion upthread about sending in-game mail to all players to encourage them to vote seemed very sensible, but alas, they already didn’t do that. Maybe a thought for future changes.

As for whether they did the right thing: it could be quite fun for new players to ease into the whole raid/war thing by a low level practice event, or for more experienced players to go “back to basics” just for a trot down memory lane, why not? 1* seems pretty pointless but 2* do at least have enough skills to practice tactics, are equally free and easy to obtain and not much harder to level. For that, let them exist, and if people feel they have to enter just because the event exists that’s purely their choice! For my part I have no problem ignoring all raid tournaments as they aren’t really my thing. (I’m not saying never. I got into standard raids eventually because chests innit, and am quite enjoying them now. Mostly.)

But I’m somewhat shocked at people who by their own admission could be competing in the big league, but prefer the little league because they could win. That’s kind of missing the point of having a “basic” level tournament. It’s like your dad entering the 11-year-olds’ sack race because he doesn’t stand a chance against fitter parents - embarrassing and proves nothing. I’d struggle in the world Scrabble championships but at least I can beat my 6-y-o grandson. Go me.

Seems to me that the way to make 2* tournaments fair (and 1* if they had a mind) would be to make them emblem-free. At one bound it would make it accessible to new players and let established players prove their skill, not their wallet. How about free emblem refunds for 1 and 2*? The food/time is neither here nor there but emblems represent a considerable investment in play time, money or both. So those complaining do have a point IMO.

So much for a subject I have no interest in, eh…

Not really. For survey polls - the serious ones - people are chosen carefully to be representative.
This was a simple forum poll, which results in “who cries louder”. It’s no real representation of the game, not enough newbies here :stuck_out_tongue:

But I don’t care, it is what it is.

1 Like



You are not wrong.

What annoys me is the poll was sloppy.

It offended my professional training.

My professors would not have passed such a project.

But I am learning that multi million dollar businesses and transparency are not two things that go together.

In the end, 1* / 2* tournaments make SGG zero money.


You are correct, the time spent was too short, they should have provided the link in game message. @AngelOfDark666


But that’s exactly why it would make it a lottery that anyone can take part in Rigsy :joy: