I know that, this Game is heavy p2w direction, but not really rewarded at the Top, so if people really wanna hunt every Month for new Toys its their Choice.
I just said what an Ideal Situation would be and to be truth, this Threads that popps Daily off are a Nightmare with random Discussions and Votes, the truth is we cant decide which way they go but we as the Player can choose if we want spend all the Money with an Endless Circle.
There is a reason why People Quit and why Top 1% is bored, cause the Game is Static with low Variety.
Bert’s right we can’t decide which way they go. But it’s worth it to stick around and see.
Especially if you’ve spent money in the past!
I can’t believe the developers would support the idea of making the money folks spent yesterday: de-valued, or even worthless tomorrow
What make this game so great and keep players:
Where is the paywall?
Before you can spend a little or no money and play for a long time and develop a hero set. And if you want you can raid hard and make it to the top list
I have but don’t stay long because emblems and less heroes and the attacks multiplied. But it is nice to take screenshot and show friend in line.
So now opposers say I am not good enough and must stay in platinum.
Now a paywall and boring for everyone. I don’t understand why
I don’t know, I think, that you should be able to beat, depending on the ability that each person has to handle their heroes.
Not because you have the last hotm impossible to beat.
Thank you, I tried to edit your wording and it said there is a time limit; like I said, I’m a
Pollster noob…
I really did try to be neutral, and not say anything negative with either option. It wasn’t so easy to spell this situation out… and I think I did all right.
Especially being biased… I just want to know how widespread this idea is. It’s definitely a hot topic right now. And it does seem to be a trend.
If Telluria becomes obsolete 2 years from now. Maybe the Telly fans won’t care, they’ll just play with the new toys.
In the comments is a good place for if that’s positive or negative, (at least that’s what I thought). Anyway, yeah…
Do you want heroes that are ideally balanced, but errs on the side of being stronger or providing a new function in the game? A hero that is actually interesting and actually will be used?
Do you want heroes that ideally balanced, but always errs on the side of being weaker than previous heroes so we can prevent any amount of perceived power-creep at all costs?
That’s your biased opinion, and it is absolutely biased.
I could say what you’re actually trying to ask is:
Do you want interesting heroes or
do you want to kill the game by making all new heroes weaker than old heroes to keep the status quo?
Take off your tinted glasses and look at Clarissa. Are you seriously suggesting that every single new hero released is stronger than all previous heroes currently? Because that is exactly what you’re suggesting by saying that we are not ever experiencing heroes erring on the side of being weaker.
Clear misrepresentation of what people are saying.
Again, it would exactly be like me saying that “Some folks have requested new heroes to always be weaker than old heroes and are useless in order to maintain the current status-quo, thus they’re always asking to nerf every single hero that is tested.”
That’s just not a fair representation of their stance, nor is yours a fair representation of other people’s stance.