Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, elit eget consectetuer adipiscing aenean dolor

Unlimited buy ins for events bad

Basically, this is a real simple issue of the rich getting richer. These events are very similar to eBay because even if you outplay someone another person can just “bid” more to win orb of power.
On Xbox we have one guild buying, very forcefully, all the 1st place event positions which is solely due to tier 7 in shop being unlimited.
I get the argument they want to make money but seriously, in an indirect way, you keep a game free of cancer (the infinite buys eBay nature) and you attract more players than when you’re overly greedy.
Leaderboard should mean something and more than just one guild should reap rewards if they do well. Which is trivialized completely by infinite buy ins

1 Like

If it wasn’t infinite it could cause lot of ties and i doubt the devs want to give more then one power orb per event

The only thing they are getting is some Orbs of Power that ultimately have a very simple purpose, craft Zuul’Goth. And no player is being hindered by not being in the leaderboard, it’ll just take longer to craft the card, which by the way is not even good…


Not true. The way the enemies scale ensures this to be very unlikely, and if it does happen, scale them even higher

I saw several perfect run so yeah tied is possible


I want this to be like NASCAR where the most skill wins. Currently its like eBay in which the wealthiest win. I’m all for currency sinks in games so if cap at tier 7 not enough, then make it 10. Point is, is the Richie riches of the game are just getting richer and no one has a chance but the one guild due to wealth alone

After wasting more than a thousand of gems they gain what? 300 back, not sure how that makes them richer…


And I doubt what you say bcuz at boss lol 500 there is a little luck that needs to be present since one shutting your stuff

The only thing they get for 1000s of gems spent is bragging rights of being able to craft Zuul’Goth before the rest of us. That is not much of a win in my opinion.

Welcome to the board Goodwill @Rogu3 ! :smiley:


They will be able to test how utterly pointless the card is first hand. I’m so jealous…


LOL, spot on! :smiley:

1 Like

And why are people so against my premise? To brag of something you won through skill or brag of something you won through wealth and power.

I ask you this. Which is more meaningful\honorable in any game or sport?

Trying to achieve things not made out of pixels? :thinking:
I get what you believe is right, but it’s not a relevant measure of skill when you understand the system behind the whole thing is so simple that; considering a cap for sigils to be bought, which translates into a limited amount of battles, you would find out that there is a limited amount of levels “Zuul’boy and his groupies” would reach. Making things even more predictable/easy anyway. Ties would also be normal as @Rickygervais pointed out.

1 Like

Community is so backwards from other FTP games I’ve played. In those games if devs went this far into pay to outright win rarest resource in game there would be backlash from gamers

Oh not gems. In Xbox chat (apparently here too) everyone’s fine with this c rap but me
Oh well

Scale more

Everyone’s ignoring that part

I think I figured out why. Newer players aren’t leaderboard climbers like me and the ones vocal against my point of view are quite alright buying wins instead of earning wins

No, it seems like you are not being able to understand or simply trying to troll us faking sheer ignorance…

Ok, i’ll take the bait:

Let’s say that each Shop Tier confers only ONE SIGIL, and if there are JUST FIVE SHOP TIERS and you start with NO SIGIL AND THERE ARE NO VALRAVENS. The max number of battles everyone could play is five. By your own terms this seems fine, even if we scale things at a pace of 100 levels for each battle there would be a lot of people being tied on 3 or 4 wins.

You can mix and match any number of starting sigils, shop tiers, scaling levels after each battle and other factors that are not random, like Valravens appearing/escaping, and you have a closed enviroment very propense to present same results for many players.

Then things would boil down to people complaining about how unfair that one, or more, Valraven(s) flew away and now they can’t be at the Top 1 on the leaderboard anymore. Such is life…


The problem is you are blaming players for trying to get more resources and craft that metaphorical lovecraftian paperweight. The devs or much more likely the publisher is the culprit in creating such a system and pushing us more and more into it with various cash shops through gem shops which after a point there is only one real way to get the amount most need. I am all for criticizing the model and have done so. Many here have done so to a varying degree. The problem is you are punching down, not up and are being met with those who have to an extent been beaten down enough by low expectations or unrelenting optimism with a sunk hole relationship (which I’m guilty of). Perhaps look around the forums to join the choir instead of essentially complaining about the 1%.


You have scaled it to 5 battles? Ofc ties would happen then
Tier 7 being capped (in my hypothetical world) is lots of fights. Not sure on exact number but factor in 4 a day plus starting amount plus tier 7 is at least 60 battles
And ironic thing is you just helped me prove the idea of frequent ties is pure fallacy due to one word
Val ravens are a bit of rng which helps ties not happen. And if all of this somehow let’s ties be a normal occurrence you let the enemies scale to 600vwhere surely one bad cascade ends one person’s game yet another conquers