Announcement

**Triggus** · 05-08-2020, 08:55 AM

For some reason you guys steered the discussion toward cheats, the point of the cap is not only to rule cheaters outs but actually limit P2win factor in the game that was designed not to be money sink (and devs quite proud of it) in the first place. Keeping in mind that the top players from the new revamped ANB aren't doing very well outside of ANB quite often having few or no medals at all indicating that they aren't veterans with accumulated super secret knowledge and tons of gems over time. This are people in majority who "abused" their way into top by spending hundreds $$ (not to mention "alternative" way of getting gems) because they can and will and this is legit..but is it right and adding value to the gameplay ?
And me among many others do not like this model, there are reasons why we've chosen Eternium and one of the key factors was that P2W element in the game was limited to bare minimum (still providing devs with revenue and paying players to make their life easier in the game reducing time needed to farm etc).
And as I already mentioned most of the players with massive gem pools they managed saving over time or by painstakingly 5 staring story mode over and over again, knowing how hard these were to get even having a lot (100k +) rarely are throwing all in for single anb.

I myself am not a big fan of free gaming (the free gaming idea born actually p2w model) If we happy to pay a lot for fags or booze why not to pay for our "hobby", the best model is still imho subscription model that is dying nowadays, all pay the same, monthly having access to all the game has to offer only the skill and dedication plus some luck makes a difference on how you perform. But this is gone, that's fine. As many I buy the gems per day, season pass and some gems or value pack here and there to support devs and limited time I can dedicate gaming. And this was working fine until recent changes to ANB that support p2w in the way that have never had place in this game before. So there is a problem here and it will need to be tackled somehow either by placing the right cap (not too low not to high from the majority point of view) or other measures devs could come with or many players(including me) will probably consider their options if nothing changes next anb.

**Tin Man** · 05-09-2020, 08:34 AM

LoXRoX Fundamentally? If you want to have a thread discussing capping the number of gems you may spend during ANBs then have that discussion. Leave any discussion regarding alternate rules players as a separate issue that is much bigger than any discussion about gem spending. Any time you introduce the topic of alternate rules players the discussion will go sideways and any productive discourse goes out the door.

This thread started as a very narrow discussion on limiting the sharing of gems between regular and ANB heroes, not on a gem spending cap. Limiting the sharing of gems between regular and ANB heroes without a hard gem spending cap is fundamentally faulty at best. Attempts to point that out were not taken well and accusations of embracing alternate rules made.

I still feel that limiting or eliminating the sharing or gems between regular and ANB heroes would serve to mostly harm players who use acceptable rules. Capping gem spending during an event? That is a whole different discussion.

That, in a nutshell, is why I am done with this thread just as others have said they are done with the thread. Once a thread goes off the rails it is near impossible to return it.

Free2Play and Pay2Win are not mutually exclusive and Free2Play does not necessarily mean no revenue for the developers.

Nhat Suckers at this game UNITE!

How could I let that one slide?

Now, I have an ANB that I actually need to play sooner or later. I am still level 54 for goodness sake. Best of luck to every! May you accomplish what you desire.

**skunkwork** · 05-09-2020, 10:20 AM

For me limiting gems will only cause problems for us who spend hours and hours farming for gems, me alone spend atleast 4 hours/day farming for gems(making new character everyday/watching ads/speed running).
Restricting us on our hard earned gems is a lazy idea. We work for it and we will use it according to our own discretion.

**Stusmith50** · 05-09-2020, 10:53 AM

Would a 20k gem transfer limit, limit your spending?

**Tin Man** · 05-09-2020, 12:25 PM

Originally posted by Stusmith50 View Post

Would a 20k gem transfer limit, limit your spending?

Why limit any transfer if you do not cap the spending allowed during ANBs? If you cap the spending allowed during ANBs then the transfer limit should match the spending limit which, in turn, renders the transfer limit meaningless.

You want to penalize Free2Play players that spend hours and days, legitimately, farming gemstones while leaving the option for unlimited gems available for anyone that wants to buy them?

Seems to be a huge imbalance there. Just limiting the sharing gems seems like a really, really unfair proposal.

Proposing to limit the sharing of gems, regardless of the reason, just seems like a rather poor idea.

So, y'all that get 255 gems a day from ad boxes can enjoy those ad boxes and the limited gem sharing while those of us that don't get ad boxes are limited by sharing with no way to make up the loss of 2040 gems that are available to players that can view ad boxes, which is over 40% of the proposed sharing limit. Even if you up the sharing limit to 20K, then that is still over 10% of the larger limit.

So, does that mean if you open one ad box that your sharing limit should be reduced by the 2040 gems? That would seem to be a nightmare for the developers to get right when there are so many long term bugs.

**Paul123** · 05-09-2020, 02:19 PM

Instead of putting a cap on the gems used on ANB. Another idea would be changing the ranking system to points system and take into consideration the gem used . I'm sure someone can come up with some formula.

**Verminnard** · 05-09-2020, 08:22 PM

While I dont agree with all points made by Tin man which resulted in a post from me in the middle of a really crappy day. Sorry for that Tin man. I do agree with the fact that while i thought it was decent idea, it is really a dead idea. You cant do it without somehow hurting the free players which was never the intent. Tin is correct and i have no problem stating that. It does not solve what I feel is the real issue behind it with out taking away from the experience of the honest player.
Thanks for considering and talking about it all the same. If we want a better game it is we the players that need to come up with things that drive the game it that direction.

**steampunk** · 05-09-2020, 09:58 PM

Another idea,

When ANB character is deleted. All ANB record is also removed so the player can play the event all over again from the beginning.

Of course all gems that was spent on the first try also gone.

Atleast for those who play horribly (like me) can do something other than wait for another ANB.

**Tin Man** · 05-09-2020, 11:04 PM

Originally posted by Verminnard View Post

While I dont agree with all points made by Tin man which resulted in a post from me in the middle of a really crappy day. Sorry for that Tin man. I do agree with the fact that while i thought it was decent idea, it is really a dead idea. You cant do it without somehow hurting the free players which was never the intent. Tin is correct and i have no problem stating that. It does not solve what I feel is the real issue behind it with out taking away from the experience of the honest player.
Thanks for considering and talking about it all the same. If we want a better game it is we the players that need to come up with things that drive the game it that direction.

You know what? Discussion is a good thing.

Honestly? The foundation of your idea is decent. I just tried to point out some possible unintended consequences without some tweaks. In the greater scheme of things? That is not the most important issue.

I am sorry that you had a really crappy day and I hope things improved. There is enough stress going on right now in life without things related to a game adding to it. If any of my actions or words added to your crappy day, for that I am truly sorry.

Keep the ideas coming.

Stay safe. Stay well.

**13ft shadow** · 05-10-2020, 07:10 PM

1st off, can completely understand how people would be unsure about this. without long thought, or having explored every angle properly, including testing. it would appear to be creating issues for some, but let me ask a question for anyone who feels this will harm free to play players over the course of this new eventium marathon. it would seem that implying such, without proper testing would be not recommended..

so, has anyone that is worried about this being a problem for honest free to play players, unable to pay or receive ads, actually ever spent 20k or over 20k for any 1 single individual anb event?.. im just asking lol.. are you even aware what is capable if being purchased for 20k gems, before implying such, or are you just totally assuming that wouldn't be plenty for said individuals to feel comfortable, while knowing others are like capped?.. lol

is anyone here actually trying to imply, that with the new schedule of seasons/anbs, (4 season/year and 6anb/season) that 20k gems isn't more than fair to an "honest" free to play player?.. lol just how many "honest" free to play players do you believe will farm 480k gems/year? i guess i just still don't understand the issue here.

i defy "honest" free to play players tell me that they farm well over 500k gems/year and don't want to keep extra gems for boosters for main

LMAO

this is just silly tbh.. hopefully adrian and dp crew can see this is just best all around, for everyone.

best wishes to all, and hope you enjoyed your gold league play!!!
-shadow13

**Tin Man** · 05-11-2020, 12:22 AM

Originally posted by 13ft shadow View Post

... so, has anyone that is worried about this being a problem for honest free to play players, unable to pay or receive ads, actually ever spent 20k or over 20k for any 1 single individual anb event?.. im just asking lol.. are you even aware what is capable if being purchased for 20k gems, before implying such, or are you just totally assuming that wouldn't be plenty for said individuals to feel comfortable, while knowing others are like capped?.. lol

The short answer to your question? Yes. Just did it. Then again? I readily admit that I stink at the game.

Keep in mind that your current post and the original post for this thread are two different topics.

Your post? Capping gem spending during ANBs.

The original post? Capping gem sharing WITHOUT capping gem spending during ANBs.

Capping the ability to share gems while leaving ANBs without a gem spending limit that matches the sharing cap clearly hampers the Free2Play players. Not sure how you can say anything other than that. Only allowing the initially proposed 5k gems to be shared between ANB and regular heroes while allowing unlimited gem spending during the same ANB would be completely unfair to players that do not want to buy gems during ANBs.

Having a gem spending cap for ANBs? I have said is a valid and worthy discussion. However, you are bringing up a topic that is completely different from the original premise of this thread. Questioning the responses to the original thread while discussing a completely different topic just muddies the waters. The original post even states that "I understand, people can still buy gems in ANB and many will." after saying "Limit the number of gems that can be used from the main account during ANB or separate them completely" so I really do not understand how you are equating the concerns expressed here with those concerns applying to your proposed cap.

A hard cap can not be read into any post until post #6 and is not clearly mentioned until post #7. While commenting on post #7? The original poster even clearly states that the "Purpose is not to limit the amount of gems you can use or buy in ANB. Just limit the amount you can bring over from your main account at the start of ANB. People would still be able to buy as many gems in ANB as they saw fit."

How do these conversations apply to your proposal for a hard spending cap? Are you trying to say that you are proposing a hard, 20K gem, spending limit while only allowing 5K of these gems to come from a player's existing reserves? That is not how I have read any of your posts.

Quit mudding the waters by taking the thread topic off the rails. Your discussion of a cap is not the topic of this thread, as originally posted, and should be brought up in a separate thread.

You know you are my bud. You are just bringing up a different topic.

**Montresor** · 05-12-2020, 04:05 PM

inasmuch as this is a thread about competitive balance in ANBs, and inasmuch as i am not bringing in anything from discord without context (since i'm not on discord!), hopefully this will pass muster to be included in this thread. this is a fairly complex topic.

So if i have followed this massive thread trail correctly, the crux of this biscuit is there's concern with massive, potentially-but-not-necessarily ill-gotten gem stacks upsetting the competitive balance in ANBs. Several ideas have been proposed to ameliorate this, including limiting gems from main, and limiting total gems spent. A couple of thoughts if i may:
1. limiting gems transfer simply shifts power to people who spend money on event packs
2. Limiting gems transfer also undercuts the value of ad-boxes outside of ANBs, and those may be a big source of revenue to the game (we don't know)
3. limiting total gems spent still allows botters to have an advantage (20k gems is a huge sum to me, although i don't farm gems and know it's possible to do so)

I would propose an alternate option, which is limiting the number of things that can be purchased during an ANB - temporarily close down the consumables shop, and have everything run through the ANB purchase icon. Each item would have either a gem or real currency cost. The ANB shop would have the option to buy anything from the consumables trader, and also the ANB specific bundles. Every item would also have a limit - say, three legendary crates, five master crates, unlimited XP / Gold boosters, ten gemestone selections, etc. real currency prices would be based around gem purchase prices.

This way, every player knows what the max potential spend by the top of the leaderboard is. The revenue stream in between ANB events (season pass, monthly gems, ad boxes) still retains value. People who don't have time to farm gems have the ability to spend actual money. And everyone knows what the max available spend is for competing for the top spot.

**Triggus** · 05-13-2020, 11:20 AM

Originally posted by Montresor View Post

inasmuch as this is a thread about competitive balance in ANBs, and inasmuch as i am not bringing in anything from discord without context (since i'm not on discord!), hopefully this will pass muster to be included in this thread. this is a fairly complex topic.

So if i have followed this massive thread trail correctly, the crux of this biscuit is there's concern with massive, potentially-but-not-necessarily ill-gotten gem stacks upsetting the competitive balance in ANBs. Several ideas have been proposed to ameliorate this, including limiting gems from main, and limiting total gems spent. A couple of thoughts if i may:
1. limiting gems transfer simply shifts power to people who spend money on event packs
2. Limiting gems transfer also undercuts the value of ad-boxes outside of ANBs, and those may be a big source of revenue to the game (we don't know)
3. limiting total gems spent still allows botters to have an advantage (20k gems is a huge sum to me, although i don't farm gems and know it's possible to do so)

I would propose an alternate option, which is limiting the number of things that can be purchased during an ANB - temporarily close down the consumables shop, and have everything run through the ANB purchase icon. Each item would have either a gem or real currency cost. The ANB shop would have the option to buy anything from the consumables trader, and also the ANB specific bundles. Every item would also have a limit - say, three legendary crates, five master crates, unlimited XP / Gold boosters, ten gemestone selections, etc. real currency prices would be based around gem purchase prices.

This way, every player knows what the max potential spend by the top of the leaderboard is. The revenue stream in between ANB events (season pass, monthly gems, ad boxes) still retains value. People who don't have time to farm gems have the ability to spend actual money. And everyone knows what the max available spend is for competing for the top spot.

This is an interesting idea indeed, just couple of corrections on your above points :
"1. limiting gems transfer simply shifts power to people who spend money on event packs"

Value packs are already limited to 3 per person not much of power shift , however you still can buy unlimited gems during the event, so whoever has the money and willing to spend still got this advantage as it is. As proposed limits of 20k are quite high and way above average single ANB spent , can't see this being issue, it will limit how much botters and IRL whales can spend though which is not bad thing from majority point of view

"2. Limiting gems transfer also undercuts the value of ad-boxes outside of ANBs, and those may be a big source of revenue to the game (we don't know)"

Oh well ad boxes are limited already to 50 a day, assuming someone do they all every day of a month we looking what 7500k gems from ad boxes ? (what about pc players or ios issues ? some people can't get any boxes at all) - then add the daily subscription of 100 gems this will add another 3k a month. Do the daily quests yet another 3k. we looking at 13,5 k gems a month. Now series of ANB will allow to use 60k total. You will still need a few months gap between ANBs to match it or run 5star story like there was no tomorrow. Yet as it seems to be we have people spending up to 50k per event, on top of that some vets have accumulated little fortunes over time having 100k plus - it does not seems they happy to spend it all on single ANB series considering how much time and pain it costed them to get these. So most of those who spent such a amounts are simply buying or getting it from "alternative" sources hence the amount of people without or very few medals occupying top of ANB LBs (they don't seem very veteran to me spending their hard earned fortunes)

"3. limiting total gems spent still allows botters to have an advantage (20k gems is a huge sum to me, although i don't farm gems and know it's possible to do so)"
This point is a bit illogical and in contradiction to previous 2 points, the more you can spend the bigger the gap between botters and legit players.

Announcement

ANB Idea, sounds crazy but give it some thought.

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment