I think the 1* and 2* tournaments should be put on ice for now.
As stated by many users allready there are a lot of reasons not to have them. The main reasons being a lack of tactical options and limited roster space ( especially given the frequency of the tournaments and limited use elsewhere ). I don’t think that this is up for debate.
For me personally the main issue is the tactical depth. 1* and 2* heroes aren’t interesting enough and lack variety. What makes this game fun is the large variety of heroes at higher levels.
I would really like to see 1 and 2* tournaments in the future but first the main issues need to be resolved :
Depth : For 1 and 2 star hero tournaments to become a thing there needs to be more variety and depth. If SG would add 1* and 2* heroes to season 2 and season 3 and give each seasonal event and other events some 1-2* heroes that bring interesting watered down mechanics to the game they could create an interesting decision space for these tournaments. Mana control, Taunt, riposte, buffs and debuffs, cleanse and dispell etc. This game is so rich in mechanics and it would be nice to see some of those at the 1 and 2* level. These heroes could be a relatively rare reward for clearing stages during the events and in season 2 maps. Just as you would find 1 and 2* heroes while clearing levels except they have a chance to be event, season etc specific.
Roster space : Given the roster space limitations it would be nice to see the roster space split up per rarity. I understand limiting how many 3,4 and 5* heroes someone can have but it would be nice if there were more space available for free specifically for 1-2heroes only. Each rarity could get a certain amount of roster space. 50 spaces for 1, 50 spaces for 2*, 40 spaces for 3*, 30 spaces for 4*, 20 spaces for 5*. Each set could be expanded through levelling and gems.
Usefulness : In order for the 1-2 star heroes to be worth levelling the need more frequent use. Events are difficult enough to complete as is so perhaps some rarity specific quests could be introduced with good rewards. A quest that can only be completed using 1* or 2* heroes etc.
I don’t dislike the idea of these tournaments but in their current state they are a waste of time, resources and space.
I think the litmus test that needs to be used here is does this feature add anything to the game? I say this because diverse and changing playing conditions keep games from getting stale and that every game has an element of its player base that wants more stuff for minimum effort that will naturally oppose pretty much anything different. And that’s before it intersects with those who complain about something they just find hard.
Let’s take Field Aid wars for example, pretty much monthly we have yet more people piling into the same complaint thread about Field Aid wars and to be honest I reckon if you ran a poll on removing that war rule on the forum you would find a majority in favour of ditching it – especially as those with the most motivation to vote would be those who want it gone and you’ll have an exercise in watching self-selection bias at work. But even if there was a majority overall for its removal should it be. No, reducing diversity of playing conditions makes the game a little duller and Field Aid is pretty much the overriding reason why anyone powered up any of the Sand Heroes or Halloween heroes.
So in that case what about 1* and 2* tournaments? In my view 2* tournaments do add something to the game in that we have a single avenue in the game in which all players can easily obtain the same heroes (with the number of 3* now in time limited summon gates this can no longer be said about the entire 3* roster for FTP) that we have an opportunity to prove our board manipulation skills in which no one has a clear roster advantage. When the last 2* tournament came around I quickly powered up a couple 2* for it for the opportunity to see how my board manipulation skills compared against everyone else when roster advantages were controlled for (and I say that as someone with a roster containing more of the 5* heroes than it is missing) and came away in the top 1%. But the point here is that with all the heroes for the tournament easily available from TC2 it was the only tournament/playing condition in the whole game where we can test our board manipulation skills without roster advantages having an affect on the outcome. Personally I feel it is a shame so many don’t want to take the same opportunity to prove it’s their skills and not their roster that makes them the player they are. At twice a rotation it is hardly an inconvenience if they still don’t want to play it – I mean there are Field Aid players skipping a third of wars.
But on the issue of 1* tournaments they don’t have anything to add on top of what 2* tournaments already bring that I’ve detailed above but come with the downsides of taking up more roster spaces and having even less diversity amongst their skills. As such they’re not adding anything to the table that 2* tourneys don’t (whilst at the same time potentially limiting the frequency of 2* tourneys to include it) and for that reason should be ditched.
Now as someone who has powered up some 1* heroes after this announcement was made I really have no issue with it being cancelled, they really didn’t take much resources to power up and in the grand scheme of things there is bigger issues that could be dealt with instead. I certainly wouldn’t complain if you want to do a compensation bundle for everyone of a trainer hero in each colour but I’m not that bothered myself (though something like that might mitigate complaints). Though I would agree that reset tokens would be a bad idea – I didn’t emblem anything (because it was a bad idea but anyway) but had I done I’d just save them for resetting my bigger 4* or 5* emblemed heroes and take the hit on the 1*. I would imagine with the frequency implied for 1* tournaments that anyone that did emblem 1* heroes was expecting to reset them afterwards anyway.
I do however think it would be a mistake to continue with the tournament if you don’t intend to continue them as whilst yes some may have prepared for this 1* tournament there will also be lots who don’t read the forum or who have adopted a wait and see approach who may then power stuff up in response to the first 1* tournament which will magnify your problem later when they find out it was going to be the only 1* tournament.
Would be possible to have parallel tournaments?
Like the event’s interface but for separate heroes’ rarity rotations while sharing the same rules.
Like having 1*/2* and 3*/4*/5* rotations at the same time. Joining a kind of tournament would let the player unable to join the other one (“are you sure” popup needed).
Anyway scoring would be weird due to splitted partecipations.
I would just send the community 20 gems each as compensation for removing the 1* tourney.
Case closed without much more consideration.
20 gems can cover the reset costs and it doesn’t take much at all to level 1* heroes.
2* tourneys should also be removed as the number of heroes within that category is extremely limited as the heroes with unique skills are non existent unlike the 3* heroes. It becomes a chore just to participate in it. I did a comparison of all possible 2* heroes and the stats are totally imbalanced and you will see only a handful of heroes within the tourney.
Had been thinking about something like this for awhile. There are a few rules where there is some niche hero that would appear to be really suited for it but then the frequency at which the tournament rule, element and rarity restriction all lined up would be far to infrequent to plan on just that basis. Now if each tournament rule and element restriction was three times as frequent as there are parallel 5*, 4* and 3* tournaments akin to challenge events running at the same time the equation changes and a few more heroes may just become viable enough to power. Would also give people who get knocked out of one tier of the tournament early the opportunity to continue participating in one of the other tiers.
Besides after the tournament loot was nerfed after the last tournament it’s not like having 2 additional tournaments a week will really become too big a giveaway.
Thank you for your feedback, everybody!
We had a long discussion about this, and the decision has been made: Based on the clear community feedback, we are not going to run more 1-star or 2-star tournaments.
I know this decision will be a disappointment to some of you, especially if you have spent emblems on your 1* and 2* heroes. For those you, I apologize. Luckily, as people have mentioned above, it isn’t too expensive to get most of them back.
As I said above, this is a bit of a lose-lose situation because some people are bound to be disappointed. Of course one could argue that we should have made the decision sooner, but I don’t think that’s a good reason not to do it now.
I’m not very happy, but I’m glad there is an ultimate decision. I hope, it stays so. Thank you.
My poor (but still good looking) Layla.
For me doesn’t make any difference, since I have no upgraded feeder. I also advised people, over and over again, in the other threads, to not level or keep feeders (for so many reasons) and those have listened to me then, shouldn’t regret now
That would be the worst possible option. First, you announced 1* tournament, and players leveled (some even gave emblems) 1* heroes, and now you say “Nope, we will replace it with 2* heroes (that also will have to be leveled, since most players fed those 2* from last tournament away)”, and by doing so, you will make double resource waste.
Whilst I disagree with the decision to remove 2* tournaments I want to first extend a big thank you on behalf of the community for taking the time to discuss the issue with the community and articulate the thought process going on amongst the team. Long may it continue.
Now I’m just going to recuse myself from the inevitable Remove Field Aid Poll and other polls to have other features removed that I expect this precedent will inevitably trigger, a couple weeks away from the forum might be for the best any how…
Thank you and thanks to the SG staff for doing your best to make a hard decision.
Does that include the scheduled December 1* tourney?
That is very annoying.
You could at least have run one 1* tournament before canning them. They make a nice break from the normal tournaments. Variety is the spice of life.
Will you at least be compensating somehow people who spent heroes and emblems preparing for these?
It’ll take 35 gems to get the emblems off my tournament 1* and 2* heroes, and even then I’ll lose 5% of the emblems I used. Not counting all their siblings that they had for breakfast, lunch and tea.
I hardly understand your organisation, sorry.
I don’t criticize your decision (even though i don’t really like it) because it was based on community feedback.
Small numbers of course, but that’s what you have to work on.
What i don’t really get (again) is the timing.
I mean, it’s several months that we have raid tournament, and several months the rules stated that 1* and 2* are part of it.
Now that finally it was announced to have one of them… you ask if we really want it.
Like… good morning?
Until now what you exactly have done?
@Alberto1 was right.
It was already asked in beta, and the result was pretty similar.
What an amount of roster space on my alt after cleanup: 57/110 used…
Please make an in-game announcement that 1* and 2* tournaments have been cancelled.
Some people don’t read this forum but do read the in-game rules. The rules state that tournament rarities include 2* and 1*. Moreover we already had a 2* tournament.
So there are people who have 2* trained heroes and 1* trained heroes who will never know that those tournaments are cancelled. Make the in-game announcement so they can get rid of those heroes.
Also update the rules please.
I think @mhalttu and the SG staff should be commended for this. I often give them a hard time, but here they listened to feedback and made the best decision for the community as a whole. It was no doubt a difficult one to make. I get that there are people upset, and I sympathize with them too. There was simply no way to please everyone.