Great post, @rentmoney. You have written what I've been thinking for a while :0)
Rewarding only the top 10 players of a season, or only the top 4 players in a tournament of 100 players isn't really motivating.
Both the season rewards and the tournaments are won by the same small group of players over and over again.
I do understand that those players want a return on investment, though. But I'd like to see the reward more spread too.
Most people I know don't even take part in tournaments, because - let's face it - most of the tourneys take up a lot of time, and they know they can't beat the 'regulars', so why waste an hour and a half or 2 - only to go home with nothing?
Personally, I love to play tourneys. I see them as a great learning experience. I only have a chance at winning in the silver league, but today I joined a diamond league tournament. I figured I would at least have 4 battles to try to learn from the bigger players (double elimination, BO3). I even managed to win a battle, lol
The season winner gets 250 beta booster packs??? I didn't even know that. Actually, I wish I could go back in time and not read your post, so I wouldn't know. Why on earth does someone with a maxed deck need 250 booster packs, while there are so many people struggling??
Thanks for reading and commenting. I don't know why more don't come to the same conclusion as us and many others. The screen shot proof I provided of another similar modeled BILLION dollar business applying the strategy should be a big red sign to switch to that model. Tournaments are fun but if people play hundreds of them and cash 0 times they will become frustrating instead of being fun thus causing loss of players. Paying out the top 10 - 20 % will create more winners while still allowing the best players to win the bulk of the prizes.
Yes and along with that they get Ark this season. Which is worth about 0.39 as we speak. Its a huge prize for first place. Even if they took 50 boosters away that would be enough for 2 boosters for another 25 players in the league. This would still leave 200 boosters + sponsored prizes for the first place winner which is still a great prize to win.
If you ask me, Dollar signs have taken over their brains, lol.
At first, I thought only the newcomers without money were locked out, but after reading this, I feel like I don't count either.
It would indeed make a lot more sense to keep more players happy than only the top 10. The system is not sustainable like this. But for some reason, they don't want to see...
(Btw, have you seen anything about my experiment in which I try to build a starter deck without investing? If not, check out @itisjustme)
It looks like the founders have taken notice as the next big 1000 Steem game has 16 places paid. To their credit they do take into consideration the suggestions of the players.
Hmmm, interesting experiment you got going on. When I did mine months back I used a starter pack and nothing else. No upgrading cards at all, Silver league was easily attainable with just the starter set cards. With buying/selling cards I suspect a person could reach gold 1 with some luck and an abundance of time due to the fact that I face some level one teams when I am in Gold 1.
There are some key differences in our experiments and I look forward to following the progress and seeing the outcome.
Me too. It would have definitely been lot easier back in the days when there were free booster cards handed out.
I know they do listen to valuable suggestions of their players. I really respect that.
(And maybe it was a coincidence or maybe it was not, but it was aggroed who bought my Silvershield Archers card from the experiment account, lolà