Gems prices overpriced rip off.

[Herby]

Just checked the cost of gems the prices are way overpriced not to mention the prices of items or service require a lot of gems.

Each VIP status cost around 45$, to get to VIP 12 it would cost 540 $.

This company is way to greedy , never seen a micro transaction game has expansive has this, this game would be classed number 1 in my list most expansive micro shop.

Honestly they are better micro transaction game out there and that wont break your wallet like a cocaine addict.

VIP12 costs roughly $85,000 or 1,000,000 gems to get.

[Herby]

The problem with having LOTS of gems is you can outright buy hero cards and other rare items that take others a lot of luck to pick up. So if you're basically willing to blow cash like it grows on trees, you gain a distinct advantage over others who only spend a few dollars.

Why is that a problem? The game needs money to continue to run.

Each person has different monetary capabilities. $100 might be significant to someone, but completely loose change to another.

People who spend money for gems must be compensated fairly for. Buying heroes and speedups and rare items is perfectly justified.

[nwidjaja4_4755523]

Vip12 costs around 85k. That being said, I refuse to spend over Vip1 and the large vips in the game cannot beat me. I just had one tell me they will spend 5k just to beat me. In all the servers I have played I would say at a bare minimum people have spent 15k just to beat me. Where is my cut tynon because I am making you a ton of money?

[Klepto]

Why is that a problem? The game needs money to continue to run.

Each person has different monetary capabilities. $100 might be significant to someone, but completely loose change to another.

People who spend money for gems must be compensated fairly for. Buying heroes and speedups and rare items is perfectly justified.

I have no problem with fair compensation, but for the sake of game balance you don't let someone buy incredible amounts of raw power that are generally based on luck. When you do that, you hurt the long-term future of your game and encourage player burnout as the gap widens between the haves and have-nots.

This is even MORE true in games with direct PvP. Non-payers become discouraged as they always get picked over by the payers, and once the non-payers leave, the payers have very few others to contend with other than themselves, and eventually interest is lost because the community fails to thrive.

Contend with me all you want on this point, but it repeats itself over and over in free-to-play games that choose money over long-term community building, balance, and future financial success (see League of Legends as the golden standard of a free-to-play game that has accomplished this to the tune of over $150 million yearly revenue without allowing players to buy tremendous amounts of raw power).