Gem inflation

[Daruty]

As the game has grown, the amount of units and techs has increased a lot.
Meanwhile, most of the ways to earn gems have stayed that same.

Allowing people to earn gems by playing in multiplayer games feels like a good addition but I don't think that it is enough.

The amount of gems required to unlock all units and techs is still too huge compared to ways to earn them easily.

I would like to suggest something along the lines of doubling the amount of gems earned from campaign/scenario maps to make up for the amount of extra gems required; though I am not sure if this is the best idea.

Does anyone else see this as a problem and does anyone have any other possible solutions?

[Savra]

Well, there were a few other solutions to this problem, I believe it's in a separate topic somewhere.

[Daruty]

I looked before posting and was unable to find it, could you link the post?

[Savra]

I'll look for it when I get the chance.

[Savra]

Here it is:
http://www.ageofstrategy.net/viewtopic.php?f=220&t=6355

[Daruty]

Thanks!

[Daruty]

The topic seems to be mostly dead, is reviving it an option?

[makazuwr32]

Yes.

[Sunrise Samurai]

There is a point here. I came back after a couple years where I had 100% unlocked beforehand. Now I'm still working on unlocks after sinking some $20-30 (US dollars, not sure conversion rates) in (not all at once, admittedly). To a new player, there's probably enough to unlock that the best deal, the $42 option (3200 gems) will not unlock everything. And that's assuming they recognize this game is even worth it. (Which it is.)

Campaigns are not enough anymore to get nearly enough gems, even assuming a player is skilled and patient enough to finish them all at 3 stars. Daily login requires multiplayer participation, which can be frustrating if you always lose to players with stuff unlocked you don't have. True, there's the "No upgrades" option, but that locks off 99% of the game and most players aren't likely to bother. It even cuts out what little a new player may have unlocked, removing their rewards for getting the gems to start.

I'd suggest we start with some options between full and no upgrades games. Maybe "no embassy" would be a good one, allowing players with some gems under their belt a competitive option that doesn't cut everything away.

Daily challenges would also help, as detailed in the linked post above. Maybe make the easier ones give spell unlocks rather than gems. This way they aren't free gems so much as a way to make campaigns easier, which are then a more reliable source of gems.

Once per day gems for defeating ai opponents may be an option too. Perhaps 1 gem per 2 allied ai, with a bonus gem if defeating 5 allied ai for a total of 3 gems.

Gems for completed multiplayer games may be even better. Quantity would be based on game length, requiring at least 10-15 turns and needing longer and longer for additional gems past the first. Getting skipped or resigning before the end of the game forfeits the gems, so you'll stick around even if you're losing. I'm not too concerned about abuse because there's really nothing stopping someone from playing bet games against their own fake accounts already.