Tournament Fairness Suggestion - Remove Continuation

I know this is probably gonna be downvoted and buried faster than I can type, but I believe the option to pay 75 gems to continue in the tournament after losing 4 matches should be removed. It makes the whole idea of a ‘tournament’ absurd. Imagine a world cup in any sports, in which if a country is kicked out, they just pay a million $ and are allowed to continue.

I agree as long as it is removed from the POV challenge quest.

4 Likes

The tourneys are designed to take people out quickly. Losing just 4 battles out of 25 is very likely.

The reason for the continue is to make money for SG, and allow players willing to ‘commit’ to that investment to proceed in the tourney.

I don’t usually spend it, but if I’m doing well on day 4, and a few battles knock me out, it’s worth 75 gems to stay in and go for the top 1% or 5%.

Others paying gems to stay in doesn’t hurt you.

1 Like

Well, it puts me on a lower rank compared to you if I got as far but decide not to spend gems. Pay to win in its most literal sense imho and just not what I understand under an honest ‘tournament’.

5 Likes

Though I agree with you, very much so, as long as the tournament is tied to POV, the chances for SG to remove it are pretty much non- existent.
Myself, being CTP, doling out 75 gems just to continue, never set well with me.

1 Like

We don’t have down votes :+1:

As above, though, if SG was purely interested in competition it wouldn’t exist.

But they love the :gem:$

5 Likes

Q: Why did SGG put limits on raid tournaments when losing a battle already lower your scores and we can’t have control over how many times our defense could get attacked further lowering our control over the leaderboard?
A: For the :gem::gem::gem:
Q: image

1 Like

Yeah, the downvote thing was more metaphorical. But I fully agree, SG would never remove this feature due to the gems people are willing to spend. :confused:

1 Like

I guess my position is this

  • it didn’t use to exist
  • I like some of the special rules
  • it makes some 3* and slow heroes quite interesting and fun.
  • so it’s all free loot

So I don’t hate it but yer, it’s not a real competition

3 Likes

I vote for it to be removed

Removing the continue option at the cost of gems without removing the tournament in the POV would screw our chances of getting to finish POV, or at least getting the epic ascension mats.

I always complete the tournament challenge of PoV without using continue.

3 more attacks and I complete the current one.

I am F2P.

2 Likes

I am afraid that I must also echo previous sentiments of necessary removal from POV for this suggestion to be viable. While I am FTP beyond the occasional mass alliance offers, the reality is that the loot from the tournaments is not really the reason I play them, the POV is. As such I also agree with @JonahTheBard who points out that it is not necessarily a real competition, but does have unique rules that make it fun to bring back some older heroes. My suggestion might be this. When and if there is another live developer/player Question and Answer session perhaps add a discussion about changing POV not to require the tournament as a significant amount of points. The amount of variety in the POV can be maintained by encouraging clearing levels with 3* teams or other incentive.

Unfortunately there is another large elephant in the room. Namely the money and players spending on the “Freemium” currency. The fact is some people have the time to grind to several hundred gems without buying and these gems are theirs to spend as they wish. If someone calculates that the time they put in this game to acquire 75 gems is worth a continue I don’t think it viable for other players or for SG to mandate they spend their gems, which they have earned, as any other commodity. On this subject loot tickets make this even more difficult, but I can’t think of a reason why someone playing their way and spending their “Freemium” currency as they see fit is unfair to anyone else who also has the option to spend how they see fit.

TlDr version: I don’t think we can compel players to agree not to continue and while POV options need to be considered I don’t see tournament continues being dismissed without communicating with the developers and somehow offering an equally compelling reason to fill the same issue. At the end of the day SG remains a business and why shouldn’t they want players to spend their “Freemium” currency or even real money on a way to continue playing the game they enjoy? Viable alternatives are very hard to think of because of this.

1 Like

Basically it boils down to this:

I agree with the premise of the post, but if the continue opportunity goes away, so should the 4-life limit.

Losing affects your score and further matchmaking anyway, so this will still result in reasonably adequate results - as well as mitigate RNG effects for those who just happened to lose a lot early.

That said…this loses monetization of the thing, so it isn’t realistically going to happen.

Nicely done.
I admit, have done better this POV in the tournament, but seem to have a knack to face off against mostly fully emblemed rosters and some unforgiving boards😆
I just look at it as a comedic tragedy and laugh.
And sometimes I win.

1 Like

I understand the predicaments related to PoV and of course I wouldn’t want any change having a negative impact on completing PoV. But well, it’s fictional anyway as devs will probably never remove a feature that makes lots of people repeatedly spend 75 hard earned or paid for gems.

As for my own PoV, I guess I’ll complete the last tournament challenge without spending gems. Otherwise I’ll just skip it; don’t need those points. In the end, it’s only 15 attacks per tournament on average, which is manageable for me and my roster. On the other hand I rarely make top 1% because I never spent those 75 gems. If I’m out I’m out.

Anyway, thanks for your valuable feedback, everyone!

Instead of trying to bilk every last gem, just drop the continue all together and let people play their tournament energies. Constantly sniping gems in a million little ways is annoying enough, but it should never be a barrier to basic play of game formats. Lose a level and have to gem or start over, okay, fine. Have energies you can’t spend because of prior losses–thats much more annoying and arbitrary to me. Im personally free to play until they start dropping some of the most annoying stuff, like arbitrary ‘defeat limits’ that require spending gems to work clean.

1 Like

Maybe instead of 75 it’s 10 per x. That way everyone is happy and 10 per x instead of 75 for the whole things is a much better deal.

I used to think it was 75 per X… Imagine my delight when I found you got 4X for 75 gems!

Why did that make you delight? They could make it 0 and actually let people spend gems on summons.

Cookie Settings