If its 2*, I have done that myself, that is why I don’t doubt about top 10% but top 5%.
The current system is not lottery but progressive, you got stronger opponent each win unless your opponent put weaker defense team compared to their rooster.
So the strongest player always got attacked most frequent especially in the latter days.
If you keep on winning you will have to face them, usually around day 3 or 4 if your squad do not have emblem.
It hasn’t been my experience, I find the third and fourth opponents harder than the fifth opponent for some reason. The rest seem a bit random
It is confirmed by the staff.
However, the system do not take into account the defense power but the best 5 in the rooster.
Suppose there are 3 players, A, B, and C.
A have best 5 combined for 4400 TP and put that on defense.
B have best 5 combined for 4425 TP but put other heroes in defense with 4410 TP.
C have best 5 conbined for 4450 TP but the heroes in defense is only 4350 TP.
The system recognize C is the strongest while A is the weakest.
So you will have to face A then B then C
But the defense TP will be 4400 then 4410 then 4350, just like you experienced.
That’s all well and fine but the reason I disagree with @DaveCozy is because top 20% or top 10% in a 1* tourney I would say in terms of achievability or odds is about on par with 2* and much easier than 3* and above, which gives a better roll of the dice for mats or eht
Is it for beginner only?
Because I never fall to top 10% in 3☆ tournament while using non-emblemed 3☆, always top 5% or higher.
But I failed to reach top 5% with non-emblemed 2☆. Afterall, power difference is more significant in 2☆ than 3☆ tournament.
No opinion for top 20% though…
Judging by the amount of 100 blemed 2*’s teams we all saw, there will be hundreds!
Such an excellent point of the power difference that the blems will make. Great point yelnats, well done! These food fights are not beneficial for beginners. They’re already complaining about roster space and how progressing in the game has not made sense for them to develop their 2*, let alone 1*…
Having 2* heroes stops making sense after the first month. Doesn’t leave a big window for a 2* tournament making sense either!
But having a 1* bench? That doesn’t make sense period
We are debating this, and will need to make a decision soon.
It feels like a bit like a lose-lose situation, because I’d like to cancel the 1-star tournament based on the vote but then there will be people who will be angry because they already spent resources in leveling their heroes up. To be completely transparent, I know that we will not be providing a reset token for every 1-star hero with emblems.
I am personally leaning towards cancelling the 1-star tournament based on the community feedback, but it’s a tough call. Perhaps the title of this thread should be updated.
The other question is what to do with the 2-star tournaments. Currently 158 people have voted, and 65% are saying that they should be removed. On the other hand, 158 people is very, very little compared to the whole community.
We could either replace the upcoming 1-star tournament with the 2-star tournament (thus making them twice as frequent) or we could get rid of them too.
It is 2 or 3 gems to reset a 1 star and you get all the emblems back
I could set up a Survey Monkey. Then send you the link to include in an in game email.
What are the top 5 languages of Empires ?
Example Question
2* Frequency / Frequenz/ La fréquence/ Frequenza/ Taajuus
Same/ Gleich/ Même/ Stessa/ Sama
You could postpone it.
Until you officially cancel 1* tournaments, the resources spent are not wasted.
Spending time an gathering a representative, random sample of feedback would help a lot.
I have some undergraduate training in gather customer feedback if you want my input. Or you could hire a contractor. Not a big project.
None of these decisions are irreversible.
But.
Announcing a cancellation will cause some to remove emblems and 1* heroes. So the worst decision would be to cancel and reinstate.
Postponing and gathering more data properly seems a kinder decision for your tier 1 customer support team.
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).
win/win situation.
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.