When my Gold hits zero, I will....

124»

Comments

  • rockykostonrockykoston Member Posts: 1,505 ★★★★
    edited April 2018
    Holy ****.. no matter what side of the argument I am on, this was EPIC!! hahahahahaha @Mmx1991

    EDIT -

    Also, I am just messing with you!! I dont care if they want to give tons of gold or not.
  • This content has been removed.
  • DiablosUltimateDiablosUltimate Member Posts: 1,021 ★★★
    Mmx1991 wrote: »
    zwqq7cjbuoda.png

    In fact I did sell 70-80 4star champions few days ago and most iso that I got out of it, and trust me - it doesnt solve gold shortage
  • AmonthirAmonthir Member Posts: 754 ★★★
    Their basic problem is that a big part of any Collecting game is leveling and ranking the people/monsters/champs you get. It's fun to see the numbers go up. But a basic resource should never be a bottleneck past a certain level of gameplay. However, they have locked a large portion of gold income behind the Arena gates, which means that unless you have buttloads of free time to grind large amounts of boring arena, gold can be easily drained just ranking a single high-value champ.
    A lot of this can be alleviated by adjusting the gold reward amounts for EQs. Currently, Master and Uncollected award much less gold than much easier fights in Act 4, and there is not a good reason for that. Gold rewards for Alliance/Solo events also need to increase to keep up with the game's 'inflation' of rank-up materials. The rare mats should be the bottlenecks, not the most basic resource.
    Selling ISO should be extra gold, but not something expected just to maintain pace.
    A monthly Gold Realm would be nice, but I think a correction of rewards to match speed of the game would go a long ways in helping.
    I don't think it's reasonable to expect to be able to rank a new 5* straight to 3 or 4 as soon as you get them, but the reason you can't do that should be cats, not gold, especially since it's the cats that are the reward focus for many parts of the Game (obviously not all).
This discussion has been closed.