Perfect solution daf
Thank you. I do think it might work if they wanted to try something.
Hello Community,
My idea would be a marketplace for every one:
Raw material trading with the system:
Each player can trade with the system with â10% Feesâ.
Example:
X eating about 10000 iron.
The system requires â10%â, so you have to pay for X = 11000 food.
Change Heroes Cards:
Each of the hero cards offered as a bargain can create a free quote.
The one who wants to buy these cards has to spend premium currency.
Then the players have something of it, because these get â-10%â of the premium currency well-written.
Example:
Hero 5 * (price determined Small Giant Games) costs 1200 Gems, the player who has created the bid, 1080 Gems.
What should set Small Giant Games for values?
* The percentages.
* Price for each hero
The percentages and the displayed prices are only examples!
Best regards
Loss of profit doesnât seem like a legitimate argument to me, I have paid money in the past to try to get 4* or 5*, NEVER AGAIN!!!
Especially at these rates! The odds are TERRIBLE that you ever get anything above a 3*. I am excited that this idea of alliance trading has come to light, it gives me hope that this game can be saved. If something doesnât change soon, Iâll have to move on. I reached level 25 the other day, and I am still stuck with all 3* heros! Thatâs insane! Like there is no reward for my diligence.
Nope. I canât see it happening. The game is based on trying and hoping for that special card you want. If we could trade anything I would have had all team 4-5 stars after a few hours play. Even if you add a cost to the trade it is still a way to make the whole game mechanic fall apart. It is similar reason that you canât pay gems for a specific hero. Also: if possible to trade it would open up for all kinds of cheating with people having multiple account just to boost one account.
Except if they limited the number of trades, made trades have to be of like levels (three star for three star), and made trades cost gems I just donât see how this would be the end of the game thing. Yes open trades with no limit would be bad. I agree. I donât think trades with limits would be bad.
But you could be right, the Devs may hate the idea and it never come about. Only time will tell.
Yes, I agree. Some kind of limited trade would, at least, make it more fun to be in alliance. If limited correctly it wonât break the game and continue to fill devs pockets.
Our alliance also has a lot of chatter about being able to trade ascension items. I think with limits (e.g. You have to be with an alliance x amount of time before you can trade) prevents alliance hopping and slows down âsuper playersâ.
As for the profitability issue⌠thereâs a fine line developers have to walk. Some people are willing to spend money⌠to a point. If there becomes a perception that succeeding or advancing is impossible or too random to periodically move forward, then motivation to spend stops.
There is a real science to marketing and motivational psychology. Itâs not as simple as giving people a sale every once in awhile or giving away too much will reduce profits. (I might know a little about this⌠my Masterâs capstone project was on motivational techniques to increase performance outputs and profitsâŚ)
Sorry guys, but this is a really bad idea!
It would ruin the game and also the companyâs business model.
This would immediately create a real money market for items outside the game. People would farm items and sell them for real money. Players get the money instead of the company. No money, no game. Hackers would get interested too and you would start to see duplicated items that would ruin it even more. This happens in all games, it would happen here. Especially if this game gets a bigger player base.
It would totally kill the game economy and the progress system. You could create many accounts to gather items faster and trade them to your main character. You could just get boosted by friends without real effort or pay.
This will never happen and if it did, I would quit immediately
What if you could only trade like items? A 3* ascension item for another 3*. A 4* hero for another 4* etc.
Did you read the suggestion to limit the amount of trades allowed in a particular day and the suggestion to make like for like trades? If I have to give you a four star item for a four star item and a player can only do, say, three trades a day, there is little room for a pro-farmer. As for adding influence of real money into the game, what do you think Gems do now. Someone who buys Gems does have an advantage because they put real money into the game.
Itâs absolutely mind blowing to me how there are players or users of apps, games, products who come in full force in defense for a company, as if they are part owners of said company.
To me these types of commentators are completely out of alignment with the goals of what making gaming suggestions on forums is all about. I mean how egotistical to think you âKNOWâ the app developers revenue model or that their process needs defending. Spoiler alert! The developers can defend themselves.
You are not getting paid to speak on the companies behalf, so why even bother? If we wanted to hear about protecting a revenue model or such and such, we want to hear that from the developers themselves, not from some âarm chair non-investorâ.
Aside from that I can see that the developers are doing a terrific job of slowly interjecting ideas that we bring to the forum. I am very happy that they are listening/reading. Each update is an exciting step to a better game. âThank you development team for your hard work!â
I was reading the 1.5 notes and I realized how many of the changes clearly referenced issues brought up on the forum and their Facebook page. I agree, well done Developers.
Yes that 3 for 3 and 4 for 4 would take the money stuff off. But it is clear that real money trading would take revenue off the company. It is different if devs get the money than a player. A game canât be free either. It is either pay to play or pay to win. People who donât pay shouldnât complain about those who pay to win, because those pay their gaming too.
Ascension materials are rare, to make it slow to get a 5x80 team. This kind of trading would speed progress too fast. Would need to make these items rarer and make new ascension levels then.
If this was implemented no one would really get any stronger. Everyone would trade and get stronger and the ranking would be pretty much stay the same, except freeplayers would gain on paying players. That wouldnât be nice against playerâs who spent all that money to let others trade for the materials and heroes others paid for.
I share your frustration too. I just got A+ on 9* titan and a Damascus Blade as loot. Have 8 now. Would gladly trade that for a tabbard or rings. Except no one would ever want it
I agree on this feature. It will actually make players enjoy the game better as we can help each other become stronger TOGETHER to battle those Titans.
I donât think trading heroes is a good idea but donations of resources with daily limits would be good. Still need to support the game for those that want to buy gems for heroes but resources and items are somewhat limited for new players and abundant for higher levels. If there were a limit on how much can be either received or given based on level, that would increase player participation in alliances which is great for any game. Trading heroes is just not profitable for the gods that be.
Trade everything is trade everything. No limit, no regulation.
The biggest problem with this game is that all the money you could spend in trying to get a 5* most of the time goes nowhere. I get that there is a revenue model here but for god sake make spending money an actual incentive! And if you canât, then TRADE EVERYTHING!!!
I have been pushing for open trade system of some kind, but I do not believe it is in the best interest of the game to have no limit and no regulation. I believe there does need to be some kind of controls in place.
I agree, The game must go on
Yes I totally agree trading would help the alliances and encourage y younger pla years in the alliance