Boards›Gameplay

All champion except for new ones and outdated ones should be the same price

Zerenza··1 votes·924 views

The champion pricing thing seems a bit outdated now since we have 130+ champs to pick from and starting out it's extremely hard to get champs you want since if you want a 6300 champion it'll take, if your lucky 63 games to get it (thats a win every game). It's kind of annoying for new comer's to see so many champions and want to play so many but only have enough to buy the cheap, outdated ones and have to work extremely hard to get one they might not even like.

I really think it's high time we rehashed the IP price of champions and made them all the same price maybe 1350-2000 or so now that it's more about picking the champions you want to play and learning them instead of having every single one so that you can counter something the enemy has.

I'v been playing pretty consistently for exactly a year now and only have 63 champions, atleast 20 of which i bought with RP and that's kind of ridiculous. I'v played almost exactly 1000 games as well so again, pretty ridiculous

The only times i think champs prices shouldn't be the same is if their brand new champs or their massively outdated.

New Champions: Camille, Ivern and Kled.

Outdated: Urgot, Galio and Warwick.

What do you guys think? Should every champion that isn't new or outdated be the same price so new player's can get the champions they want and learn them instead of having to play hundred of games for just a few champions?

10 Comments

dunder kill3 votes

You don't understand that LoL is FTP so that would severely damage their income. They are a business, not a charity.

Zerenza1 votes

Not the point, i don't think it would damage their income that much considering how much income they get from many other places, such as skins, tournaments, icons, ward skins, chests, keys, merch the list goes on. I also do not think it would severely damage their income because people would still buy champions with RP due to laziness(thats why i did it.) anyway,

Thanks for the pointless downvote though.

dunder kill1 votes

i don't think it would damage their income that much considering how much income they get from many other places

Please let me see your credentials for managing a multi-million dollar company? Because making pure BS speculations like that without having literally ANY information about how they make their income isn't helping your argument.

Zerenza1 votes

But you did the exact same thing, you have no idea how much they make from champion buys and neither do i so you made blatant assumptions as well without any grounded evidence.

dunder kill1 votes

My evidence is that the multi-million dollar company has it set up this way and they're successful. The burden of proof is not on the party that claims a system that currently exists and works.

You, on the other hand, are being an entitled whiny brat that wants Riot to fork over more of their product to you on top of everything they already provide for free. They owe you absolutely nothing and aren't about to listen to what some random child on the internet has to say about it

Avienal1 votes

{quoted}

You don't understand that LoL is FTP so that would severely damage their income. They are a business, not a charity.

The game has went on for a 'very' long time on skipping out reducing the price on champions that could easily be nearly a year back since their release. Very sure it would not hurt them to jump a few down from 6300 to the 4k bracket tier when they still have several dozen more still in the 6300 bracket. Simply enough: Game should spread out its roster more in terms of IP costs, cause its bloated with 6300 tier costs and some of them vary too hugely in terms of difficulty, gameplay, viability in current 'patch' and so many other things. Some not even getting to see the light of gameplay that much without being dropped nearly instantly.

[slayer-jinx-unamused]

With only that 3 token refund system and you don't have sand box mode to try champions before buying them outside of free rotations, it kind of eats its own foot in terms of tempting players better into wanting certain champions, only to have them regret it if the champion is hard to play for them or they can't enjoy playing them at all.

Godhri1 votes

No. Part of their money making scheme is making champions pricey. League is a game that requires a bit of commitment. There's a reason that they make free to play champions of the week unavailable in ranked. It's because you're supposed to try champions during the free week and then get accustomed to the different variety of champions/roles. Once you do (according to your estimation of 63 games), you should be adept enough to go ranked and have enough IP for your preferred champion.

It is also to help force you to learn the game which is beyond learning just one or two champions. Understanding all the roles from an intimate or 1st hand perspective can make your overall play that much better.

Ranked is meant to be competitive and quite frankly, for serious or committed players. If you are committed, you'll earn your things in due time.

If any reductions at all, I would suggest maybe capping the cost for champions that are not new at 4.8k IP or 5k IP at most.

Zerenza1 votes

I'v bought 63 champs but only really consistently play maybe 9? and of those i bought them with RP anyway, the point isn't about it hurting their income cause it probably won't. Regardless of rank, their are more current player's who have been playing for about a year or more than player's that have only been playing for about a month, and the vast majority of those older player's probably already bought the champs they play with consistently and have no intention of buying anyone else unless their new. I also don't really have the intent to buy many more champs, most of the ones i'v bought i thought i'd like but don't and i wasted like 63 games on some of those and that's a VERY long time.

I don't think it would hurt new player's skill level at all infact it might help them be better since they can get through champions and find a preferred play style faster, they can buy a champ for 1350 then if they don't like the champion they can simply not play them and farm for 10 more games for another one and maybe they like that one, maybe they don't.

Edit: It just takes WAY to much time for newer player's to get into the game and if they do decrease the price of champs maybe they should increase the number of champions you need to get into ranked along side it to balance it out. That way people with empty worry's won't worry anymore.

Here's another point i made to another comment.

My comment to the other person: "Not the point, i don't think it would damage their income that much considering how much income they get from many other places, such as skins, tournaments, icons, ward skins, chests, keys, merch the list goes on. I also do not think it would severely damage their income because people would still buy champions with RP due to laziness(thats why i did it.) anyway,"

Godhri1 votes

I didn't say it would damage their income. I said it was part of their money scheme. There is no logical basis for lowering the IP costs to the levels you are suggesting from a business perspective. The people they are more likely to make their money off of are those who are: impulsive buyers or committed players. The impulsive buyers won't be committed, but they will want to just rush through the tutorials, getting champions, etc in order to get to the "good" stuff. More likely than not, they will burn themselves out because they won't have committed enough to care about the game and leave, but it's ok. They just bought a bunch of shit. This is partially why they have "bundles" in the store.

The committed players are the ones who will take their time and play the game. They are the ones who will spend money over time or can be the target audience for products such as ultimate skins.

How does high IP costs for Champions play into this? The high costs will prompt the impulsive buyer to buy the bundles or a single champion. The high costs will make obtaining champions through playing the game seem more rewarding for the committed players because they actually had to work for it. This also makes skins more desirable.

It really doesn't take that much time to get what you want. As a new player, you're more interested in finding out about the game, thus a system that cycles free play champions suffices. If you should decide you want to commit, then you can work for the extra features (champions, runes, masteries). Yes, these are extra features because they are not a requirement to enjoy the game as a casual player.

Atreus Jones1 votes

I feel like they should actually rehash the level up system, every level up you get an IP boost for a game.

Or maybe at level 30 you get a token to choose a champion shard of your choosing

More from Gameplay

3 Refunds per season, upvote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay764 comments
7,167
votes
3 Refunds per season, upvote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay156 comments
3,510
votes
UPVOTE FOR URF
Gameplay606 comments
2,440
votes
Yes plz.
Gameplay456 comments
1,721
votes
3 Refunds per season, up vote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay114 comments
1,716
votes
When is ANYONE at riot going to address the awful new player experience?
Gameplay634 comments
1,383
votes

More by Zerenza

I'm so sick and tired of Nasus existing.
Gameplay127 comments
82
votes
Why aren't more items Melee only.
Gameplay107 comments
78
votes
What if Tiamat built into an AP item?
Gameplay152 comments
78
votes
Soooooo when we getting Twitch Nerfs?
Gameplay49 comments
61
votes
The ADC role is the only role where 95% of games have one class in said role.
Gameplay104 comments
59
votes
Making Kayn's Q a Double Cast Ability.
Gameplay45 comments
56
votes