Not if they charged for the transfer.
1 Like
People keep saying that, but no one will explain how… or not in a way that makes sense.
If I can trade with, or give valuable heroes to my friends - they therefore don’t need to do summons of their own by purchasing gems/offers etc from SG. The need to do summons is decreased greatly if you can simply trade for the heroes you desire.
Also - it ruins the game. I’ve seen it be the downfall of many a young game…to mis-quote a famous song
See my comments above on that. Works for Mats, really doubt it would work for Heroes.
So you’re saying you would willingly give away extra heroes for free if you could?
To my alliance members or friends? Absolutely.
1 Like
Example of how trading would decrease amount of summons:
I have 5 alasie, 4 drakes, 3 khionas, 4 vivicas, 2 albies 3 zims, etc
Let’s say the only 5* left i want in the game are guin, panther, evelyn, zeline, gm, ares, magni, arthur
I traded some of my dupes for those 8 heros.
Then I’m done paying for summons. Sure new heros will come out which I’ll still have left over dupes i can trade for them or tc20 5* that i can trade if i dont need them as well. So basically let’s say i spend $100 a month on summons(hypothetically) and that goes down to $5 or less due to simply trading for heros i want. Then mutliply that by idk say a 100 other players who have steered towards the same tactic.
Just like that SG sees a loss of $114,000 a year from those 100 players that normally made them at least that.
Then blow that up to an even larger scale. As many have said, it would kill the game. Once profits become losses, the game dies.
6 Likes
I would like trading.
Trading within the team with members over 30 days within the alliance, they would have a far better knowledge of the mechanics of the game and goals.
Trading only once a month option, this promotes team spirit and effort to build towards the end of the month to trade but knowledge of all the pros and cons.
I don’t believe SG revenue would be damaged with rules for trade, they have provided 4 TC which can produce what is on offer within the summons.
Trading within the game with restrictions/rules doesn’t mean lost revenue it means more players will join.
1 Like
#1 reason it won’t happen is it lessens monetization for SG (as stated and explained above)
Another scenario: SGG put a restricted n° of low cost gems.
“Caio” create an alt account “Tullio” and gets twice as many discounted gems.
The goodies would be sent to Caio and the suitable 4* heroes would be sent to Tullio to build an invincible “twink’s alt-alliance” and gain ascension materials with ease both on atlantis summons, various stuffs and wars.
No, I mean, if it really started meaning something to maintain Trophy levels over 2800, then maybe. Currently, I can put up pretty much any team and maintain a trophy level ranging from 2500 to 2750 at any given time. I’ve mixed and matched. I"ve put rainbow teams up. I’ve even put up Them defenses or All same color defenses and it really does not make much of a difference. My trophies remain above 2500.
I’m sure there are a lot of people who just put in their “Best” defense and just set it and forget it. I change mine up and not because I want to see how the defense will do. I Change it up because it makes virtually no difference in my trophy count and it’s more interesting for people attacking me than if they see another Alasie, Zeline, Guin, GM, Sartana defense.
I guess that’s a long way of saying that I don’t think trading will change the landscape of the top defenses much at all.
1 Like
So you think Alberich should be worth $2000 and SG would go out of business if heroes were a little easier to get…?
You can’t launder money in this game lmao. You don’t get your money back. The whole concept of washing money is to take dirty money and make it clean to avoid legal trouble.
The point is not “going out of business” which i totally think is not the case, but if you have to gain from this in a business perspective.
And the answer is nope, they have nothing to gain and only to lose.
And as you can see, many players wouldn’t be happy either.
It’s a high risk change that can give you less income then before.
If you lead the company called Small Giant, would you do that?
Yeah I would. The majority of the player base would love trading in some form. And it’s an additional way for them to make money if they tax trades. I don’t think they’d lose revenue at all. Most people occasionally buy gems for a 10x pull during an event or something. They aren’t optimistic they’ll get anything good but they try. Now if they could trade heroes they don’t want for heroes they want, that’s a different place SG makes money that they wouldn’t have before. Let’s say I make a 10x pull and now I have an extra Wu Kong. He’s just food to me. But if somebody else has an extra Hansel and needs a Wu Kong, SG can make idk like 150 gems on this transaction. Seems win win for everyone.
@Elpis, SG has a ton that they could gain from this. The more people who have 5* heroes, the more ascension materials they’ll need, so SG will most likely see an uptick in microtransactions for the smaller deals that include those ascension mats.
Adding trades could also help out the f2p people who come across people like me, willing to give them a 5* that I got from tc20 (because I’ve farmed too many), which in turn will help player retention. The more people playing this game, the more fun/competitive it would be.
There are a few of you saying that, in a top alliance, SG would lose money because those alliances have a surplus of heroes that they can just trade to each other and that is true. But say both people involved in the trade would have to use 30 gems apiece… then SG would make money from people willing to buy gems simply to trade.
People are still gonna pull for new HOTM, events and Atlantis (I’m telling you, that isn’t going to change), and only trade heroes they either don’t want or have a surplus of and 9 times out of 10, they’ll want a hero that someone else most likely paid for. So if both people are using heroes that they bought using gems that they paid for… how is SG losing? (Notice how this scenario is less specific?)
There’s people in this game that spend even thousand of dollars every month chasing a single hero. More then one actually, we all know that. There’s no “tax” that can make up for it.
Eventually only at really high price, that makes spenders have a even more unfair advantage.
Because people want something, it is not necessary the right thing to do.
People want less taxes. Always.
You give them less taxes, but you have less money and can’t give them the same services as before.
Now people complain you don’t give them better services.
But you still give them less taxes.
The punch line is… people often want something because they don’t think of the consequences.
1 Like
It’s so difficult for me to imagine people who think heroes like Hel or Alberich should cost players thousands of dollars. That’s just not a good business strategy lmao they will lose their client base like this.
If they really have to gain from this, you think they don’t already put in place?
We are just players with our own conviction, they are a company gained millions much probably with a business plan and several business professionist suggesting new strategy every month.
If they evaluate this is something getting them more money, they already do it months ago.
1 Like