Something a little more certain for your spend - shards?

It’s known to be a commonly re-occurring frustration expressed by different people that they don’t get adequate value for their spend. This drives people to leave the game, or discourages people who want to stick with the game from continued spend. (I fall in the latter category).

I think we would all agree that it’s desirable that SG get a decent income from the game. It funds their ongoing efforts to continue to improve and expand it and this benefits all.

So I asked myself, what would encourage me to spend while not allowing people to simply max out a team overnight?
For me it’s knowledge that I am getting something concrete for the spend, even if the gems that I purchase do not produce immediate results when I cash them in.

So the idea is this:
A spend in gems awards you a ‘shard’. Each shard comes with a small absolute boost in percentage terms of pulling 5* from your next gem summon. As you spend more you accrue more shards which stack to increase your boost percentage. This means simply: The more you spend, the higher your chances of actually pulling a 5* over time on subsequent gem summons. This is returning you something concrete for your spend.

When you get a 5* from a gem pull then this consumes your shards, and you start again from there.

There would need to be some discretion over the thresholds… how much total spend should give you a ‘good’ (say over 50% chance) of getting a 5*? Should there be a cap at less than 100%? But that’s really all just detail.

Given this, I would be far more inclined to spend on gems. I’d be less irritated taking a run of bad luck over a £20 spend (say) if I know I’m still left with a greatly boosted chance of getting a 5* in a subsequent gem pull.

Yes, if you spend enough you can be more sure of building a team of all 5*… but that’s the case already. (I discuss this in some detail in this post). All that’s being modified is the amount of spend you need to get you there.
Really I think it would be to SG’s benefit to encourage people to be tempted to spend to those levels, because it’s better income… and people are more inclined to spend if they can be sure their increasing spend is offering them increasing chance of getting just reward for it.

It also doesn’t take away from the ‘Gambling’ element of the game, which (distasteful as some may find it) does offer a degree of interest and excitement for certain types of players.

Sure this may lead to further consequences (like more people with stronger teams)… but this isn’t necessarily a bad thing. It just requires a bit of innovation as to how the increased community of stronger players can compete and evolve to ‘stay fresh’. Plenty of different ideas here - but that’s a subject of different threads.

Other uses can be found for the shards as well… example cashing them in to exchange for an ascension item (or a pull from a pool of rare ascension items) etc.

6 Likes

Chance of 5* vs 1 ascension item that’s been driving me crazy for months looking for it.

Win either way, right?

3 Likes

Exactly.

Would you be more inclined to spend then?

I’m inclined to spend whenever I’m not flat broke :grin:

I love the shard idea.

2 Likes

To anticipate a potential issue / concern about this idea:

What happens with the players who have already spent a great deal to build their team? Would they feel hard done by because they may have got there with less spend under this system?

They can be awarded shards in retrospect based on their historic spend… assuming of course SG retains accurate records of this.

1 Like

Hmmm, I suspect crying between the haves and the have nots if you institute credits for old spends. Why not do it on a going forward basis? “This is something new, everyone gets to try it at the same time…”?

3 Likes

I assume that big spenders don’t really care about shards anymore.

But i liked your idea.

1 Like

I feel it should be done on a ‘going forward’ basis… but throwing out ideas in anticipation of potential hurdles.

2 Likes

Gotcha… I know I read some facsimile of shards before. I think it was to exchange low level heroes for higher, or inventory ingredients for completed items. You could sell me on a whole slew of shard products. :wink:

If you want 5* grind out more money or good luck with lvl 20 training camp its simple as that.

1 Like

(On re-read, I pick up the difference in interpretation of ‘grind’ but leaving my post as is because I don’t have time to edit. Work calls.)

It’s not all about just wanting 5*. (Having an increased chance of 5* is certainly a pleasant bonus).
It’s more about giving an incentive to pay. At the moment I don’t pay because I feel there’s too high a chance of not getting any value for my spend (because I already have a reasonably mature team). This leave the grind as the ONLY option available.

I’m afraid just having to grind to get a 5* is not practical if you’re not augmenting with money and I choose not to augment with money because it’s not good value.

Result: I will before long get bored of the grind. You then lose me as a player and SG are denied even my participation in watching their ads.

Alternatively give me a reason to spend that will lessen the length of grind and will address the perception of lack of value for the spend. The result is:
a.) SG get an income stream from me that is denied to them at present
b.) SG keep me as an interested player and advocate for the game.

Not a fan of ‘just keep it as it is’. I feel there’s a fundamental flaw with the economy that is not well advised to ignore. You will always get the fans of the game ‘as is’ but it’s necessary to keep evolving to try attract and keep new players while keeping the existing happy.

3 Likes

bump

Not cool to bump your own posts… but lots of activity on the board recently and seeking further feedback / visibility for this idea.

(Won’t bump again. If it fades away to obscurity from here then so be it).

1 Like

Yet this may motivate much of the player base. :wink:

The trick is to incentivize players at all levels of the game, not just end-game, or those who’ve been here six months. Naturally SG would have to appeal to each strata of players in a different fashion.

No argument! Heh!

Agreed. What would best address the perception?

As always, a pleasure to read your words.

2 Likes

If I understand the idea, shards would skew the distribution towards our rare outcomes over time—essentially reducing the odds that a 10x roll produces only 3* or 4* heroes. While I like the idea of insurance against a bad stream I’m concerned that:

  • the devs will reduce the odds of drawing a 5*so that the odds over 100 rolls remains unchanged

  • the focus on 5* is too narrow. A 4* draw is a lot better than a 3*

  • how would you generalize this to non-hero draws?

1 Like

the devs will reduce the odds of drawing a 5*so that the odds over 100 rolls remains unchanged

In my view they shouldn’t. The idea is to incentivise direct payment. Balancing to keep good returns down in the face of this is not adding that incentive.
Yes, this will increase the population that has 5* heroes over time, but I feel the DEVs should then look at innovations or content that allow those with the 5* heroes to remain adequately challenged.
There is that situation at the moment… but just takes longer to get there. Eventually if you play long enough and spend enough, you get a stable of 5*s… but as things stand there’s a chance that more people get discouraged and leave before getting there. Why would you actually want to encourage people to leave by limiting their ability to get the top heroes? This does not benefit the devs, and it doesn’t benefit the game.
Instead come up with a means of keeping the game interesting (and continue to spend) when people have maxed their teams. There are a number of different ways this can be achieved and can be explored in other topics. I don’t feel that artificially limiting the acquisition of good heroes for people who are willing to pay because you just want to ‘defer’ the time where too many will have high quality teams is a desirable game strategy.

the focus on 5* is too narrow. A 4* draw is a lot better than a 3*

I actually gave this some thought when typing my original post and withdrew my inclination to include 4*. 2 reasons for this:
1.) 4* will always need higher probability than 5*. So by boosting the odds through shards and then consuming them, you are far more likely to get the 4* consume your shards than a 5*. As a paying customer, I will be equally frustrated to see my expensive and hard-earned shards being consumed to ‘yet another’ 4* and we’re back where we started - I will be disinclined to spend because I don’t need the 4*.

2.) I feel the balance for 4* is already not too bad, with reasonable chance to pull one on gem summons. If you’re spending to the level where you get sufficient shards to make a 5* likely, I expect you would already have got a decent stable of 4* from the summons you’ve done to that point.

how would you generalize this to non-hero draws?

Not sure I’m following the question. I feel the shards would apply to Hero, and perhaps to Troop draws only. Their boost will only apply when you consume gems for a summon. If you are summoning from hero (elemental or epic) then you have 5* hero chance boost. If you are summoning from Troops then you have max tier Troop chance boost. Either way, if you succeed in pulling the max tier hero or troop, your shards are consumed.
Alternatively you can choose to ‘spend’ your shards in a special branch of the shop for rare/ascension items you can normally not farm.

This leaves quite a wide economy for the shards - plenty of opportunities for them to be used, and still promotes an avenue to continue to spend if you have a stable of 5* as you will still want the ascension items.

The rest is just about balancing the ‘boost’ value or the ‘shop’ value of the shards against the amount to be spent… but just knowing that every dollar I spend in the game gives me an additional chance of getting something worthwhile will keep up my interest/desire to continue to spend.

2 Likes

I’m resurrecting this suggestion, with another context in which Shards can prove useful.

They can be a way of introducing more perceived fairness to the Titan loot system, in which the top performers (A+ and A) could win shards of items (related to their Performance grade and loot tier) in addition to the regular loot rolls.

Refer to linked:

3 Likes

I liked this in context of “Always give Player A and A+ something good”…

@Little_Infinity

This is a great idea. I posited a similar one in a different thread, although I wasn’t as fully descriptive, and tbh I like this better. (Passes over a satchel of gems in gratitude). I’m probably newer to the game than you and am on the edge of not spending more because of the high chances of little to no return on my hard-earned money.

The one thing I would pull from my own idea to add into this discussion is the concept of targeting.

Let’s say for example I have a thing for Lianna and for some reason think Kadilen is for the birds (example only, I would love either one). If I draw Kad I would cuss the E&P gods loudly (again not really, just taking literary license).

How about a “Preferred” button on each hero’s card in the summons area? This would direct the summons more toward that character in the event a 5* is the lucky pull.

I wouldn’t want it to be a guarantee, merely an influence. There are people in my alliance with one or two strong preferences both for and against specific characters, who would love this and who have said they would spend more if such a thing was implemented. We also have a former member who hated a specific character because it was a visual reminder of a very bad person from his/her past.

As you’ve said, it would coax more players to spend; it certainly would do so for me.

2 Likes

Thanks for the support (and for bumping the post as a result :slight_smile: )

Not sure I buy in to the ‘preference’ idea - I think it would prove too controversial for the player base. I think a lot of the draw of this game is its inherent randomness. (People, for some reason, find Lotteries and Bingo fun :wink: ). Shards does not take away from the random aspect of the game… it just takes away the disincentive of realising that you’ve got nothing for your spend after x number of pulls.

All ideas are worth consideration, of course, but I’d prefer to keep the outcome fully random. This, in its own way, would encourage people to continue to spend as they will want to try repeating the shards draw again to get that specific special hero they want.

I don’t think it’s a bad idea… just don’t think it’d be everyone’s cup of tea.

2 Likes

My thought on “preferred” heroes is players would curse the game gods if they attached the button and still got something else. Human nature. The unconscious assumption would be “I asked for X, why didn’t I get it?”

Interesting idea though (I like it). Hmm…

2 Likes