**WINTER OF WOE - BONUS OBJECTIVE POINT**
As previously announced, the team will be distributing an additional point toward milestones to anyone who completed the Absorbing Man fight in the first step of the Winter of Woe.
This point will be distributed at a later time as it requires the team to pull and analyze data.
The timeline has not been set, but work has started.
As previously announced, the team will be distributing an additional point toward milestones to anyone who completed the Absorbing Man fight in the first step of the Winter of Woe.
This point will be distributed at a later time as it requires the team to pull and analyze data.
The timeline has not been set, but work has started.
There is currently an issue where some Alliances are are unable to find a match in Alliance Wars, or are receiving Byes without getting the benefits of the Win. We will be adjusting the Season Points of the Alliances that are affected within the coming weeks, and will be working to compensate them for their missed Per War rewards as well.
Additionally, we are working to address an issue where new Members of an Alliance are unable to place Defenders for the next War after joining. We are working to address this, but it will require a future update.
Additionally, we are working to address an issue where new Members of an Alliance are unable to place Defenders for the next War after joining. We are working to address this, but it will require a future update.
Cavalier Crystal in Store sucks!
J0eySn0w
Posts: 864 ★★★★
As far as feedbacks are of concern, I think the drop rates for the Cavalier crystal in the store is terrible given you'd have to spend real dollars. I decided to close one account, got a few dollars in there and decided to throw it in the game. Taking it slow with those crystals by going for the class I want but nothing good, 3stars the best was a 4star. The game is indirectly an online casino. You win big one day and most days terrible, at least for me. Those crystal in the store should have a better drop rates than the ones purchased with units. And 3 stars should be remove from it, its Cavalier for the title sake and it being bought with real money.
There's a halal guys near, it's better to call a few friends and spread them with some gyros and platters.
There's a halal guys near, it's better to call a few friends and spread them with some gyros and platters.
21
Comments
In a perfect world no one would spend money and no one would get anything except through game play. But in the real world it takes money to make a game. So you either have to charge a subscription to everyone so everyone pays the same thing, in which case all free to play players can no longer play at all, or you sell advantages over everyone else for cash.
The values in the cash offers aren't great, because they aren't supposed to be great most of the time, because its not about what you get for cash, it is about how much of an advantage you need over the other players to be willing to spend cash. If you need a lot of advantage over the other players, we don't need your money. There are *tons* of players willing to spend lots of money that *don't* need a huge advantage per dollar over all the other players in the game. We want *their* money, because last I checked that was $250 million dollars of money; plenty enough to support the game. The game doesn't need, and doesn't want your money if you need more stuff for your cash.
If you think the values in the offers are not good, then you shouldn't spend. But you have to realize that it is *intentional* that they aren't good, because the goal is not to make the best possible values so the most number of people spend. That's a pay to play game. This is a free to play game, where the goal is to have the *minimum* number of people spend, that is still enough to support the game (and in this case, allow the company that bought the game developer to make their money back).
Random is when every partitioned possibility has the same chance of occurring as the relative size of the partition without dependencies. Or if you prefer, in this case every champ that can drop has an equal chance of dropping (outside of stated different chances).
I have seen no evidence that this is false, and I've seen laughable instances where people tried to prove it true and accidentally proved it false with their data.