Proposal: Official In-Game Marketplace for Champions (Controlled Trading System)

I’d like to propose an feature idea that could benefit both players and developers: an official, controlled in-game marketplace that allows limited trading of high-tier champions.

The goal is not to create a free-for-all trading economy, but a regulated system that increases player engagement, perceived value of progression, and long-term spending confidence.

Core concept

Introduce an official marketplace where players can buy and sell selected champions under strict rules. This would transform duplicate pulls and roster progression into tradable value, while keeping the game balanced and fair.

Suggested rules for balance

1. Only 7★ champions are tradable.
2. Champions must be unawakened to be listed.
3. Sales use in-game currency (Units), not direct real-money transfers.
4. A marketplace fee (e.g., 20%) goes to the developer on every transaction.
5. Weekly trade limits per account to prevent abuse.
6. Progression requirements (e.g., Paragon/Valiant+) to access the marketplace.
7. Purchased champions become temporarily bound (e.g., 30-day lock) before resale.

Benefits for players

- Reduces frustration from bad RNG by allowing resale of unwanted pulls
- Increases the perceived value of roster progression
- Encourages long-term investment in the game
- Creates a more dynamic and interactive player economy

Benefits for developers

- Increased spending confidence: players are more willing to invest if assets retain trade value
- New recurring revenue stream through marketplace fees
- Higher engagement and retention among endgame players
- Stronger in-game economy centered on official channels instead of unofficial markets

Risk management

A regulated system with limits, fees, and eligibility requirements would help control bot farming, inflation, and pay-to-win concerns. The marketplace should enhance progression, not replace it.

Conclusion

A controlled marketplace could modernize the in-game economy by giving digital collections real liquidity while preserving competitive balance. With the right safeguards, it could increase both player satisfaction and developer revenue.

I’d be interested to hear feedback from the community and the developers on whether a system like this could fit the long-term vision of the game.

Comments

ahmynuts

Lol. Lmao even

Average_Desi

20% of units sent to developers?

GroundedWisdom

I must say, it's been a long time since I've seen a trading post.

GroundedWisdom

No, many reasons no.

rlf4n3

I don´t like the idea, most of the fun of the game is collecting them champions and they really have worked to make the newest champions kind of available for everyone, since some years ago the only way to get them was through the featured crystal and the titan kind of fixed that issue, I have some new champions fully awakened and ranked which was unthinkable without spending some time ago.

Regarding your other points:

Benefits for players?:

- Reduces frustration from bad RNG by allowing resale of unwanted pulls

What kind of champion would you not want but someone else would be willing to pay to get it from you?, instead I think that the pay to win would be predominant and I repeat the fun chase would be over. Also, they have sold some champions for money, how would you include and value those in the trading market?

- Increases the perceived value of roster progression

I believe it reduces it since your champions can be gone at any point.

- Encourages long-term investment in the game

I don't see it tbh, there is long term investment without this.

- Creates a more dynamic and interactive player economy

I believe it would restrict it, the number of players abusing this would be insane., just imagine farming units with a lower account and then using them to buy the bad champions from your main roster.

FrostGiantLord

There's a reason they removed selling champions, what makes you think they'd allow trading

SummonerNR

No, no, no, no, no, no, nope, no, never, no, o, no.

(only a unit transfers) - well units are funded by big spenders willing to pay a lot of money converted into units, to get champs. And they will.

People who continually open a bunch of crystals will “re-fuel” those sold champs anyways as they just pull them again after a while. And sell again, etc.

(well the seller is only getting units, not the money) - and who would set the Units (sorry, didn’t read in detail at top), what about Alt Accounts that happen to pull a top champ, then sell it to their primary acct and dirt cheap price. ((unless you suggest going to eBait style auction to higher bidders))

Selling an account (or sharing, etc) is against ToS, and this is basically a way to sidestep the rule by buying yourself into a big account without really playing.

There's a ton of other aspects as to why not, all have been brought up over the years. And partly why even Holiday Trading (ahem, Gifting) was shut down a while back.

No way they are gonna allow Trading.

Hey, let me “borrow” such and such champ, I need to do such and such content today. Then we’ll return him to you tomorrow. Etc, etc.

Raffo

Thanks for the feedback — I expected strong reactions because this topic touches the core economy of the game. I want to clarify a few things.

The idea is not to replace progression or remove the excitement of chasing champions. RNG would still be the primary way to obtain them. A controlled marketplace would mainly act as a pressure valve for duplicates and unwanted pulls, not as a shortcut to skip the game.

Regarding pay-to-win concerns: spending already accelerates progression today through crystals and offers. A regulated system with progression requirements and purchase limits could control extreme cases rather than create new ones.

Alt account abuse is a valid concern, but modern online games address this with account age requirements, binding timers, trade limits, and verification systems. A black market already exists outside the game; an official system would allow developers to regulate what is currently unregulated.

I understand that many players value the purity of the current model. My intention is not to argue that trading must be added, but to explore whether a carefully restricted system could increase long-term engagement and perceived value without harming competitive balance.

Even if the conclusion is that it would not fit the game, I think it is a discussion worth having.

Fit_Fun9329

Chatgpt served you well

Raffo

If using tools to organize ideas makes the discussion clearer, I don’t see that as a bad thing. The important part isn’t how the text was written — it’s whether the arguments make sense or not.

I’m more interested in discussing the substance of the idea than the method used to express it.

That’s fair — and just to clarify my intent: this idea isn’t about trying to bypass progression or turn the game into a trading simulator.

My main goal with the proposal is to explore ways to increase the perceived value of every player’s account — the time invested, the effort spent building a roster, and even the money some players choose to put into the game. For many of us, our accounts represent years of commitment. I’m interested in discussing whether there are systems that could recognize and reinforce that value without harming game balance.

Even if trading isn’t the right solution, I think the broader question is worth exploring: how can the game continue to make long-term investment feel meaningful for all players?