Boards›Teamfight Tactics

Direct Buy System for TFT

TendajiX·7/21/2019, 5:20:35 AM·2 votes·680 views

I just played a game where I went on a 17 match winstreak, eliminated all but 1 player with a 58 hp lead over second place... and then lost.

I lost all 58 hp in a complete sweep, leaving the question, why did I suddenly go from overwhelmingly dominant, to complete fodder?

Well, it's probably because I spent 200+ gold saved from my rampage re-rolling,only to never find the [2 gold] Varus I needed to win the game.

That's it. That's all I need to win the match, and with 200+ gold, I couldn't find a single [2 gold] champion. And no, that's not hyperbole. Needless to say, I was a bit frustrated... Which is why I thought of this idea:

item 3400 ** THE DIRECT BUY SYSTEM** item 3400

The most frustrating aspect of TFT is easily gambling on the limited champion pool. No matter how much gold you have, you're still left to RNJESUS a comp together. Which is how, like in my example, you can end up with 200+ gold and the inability to actually complete your team comp. That's why you should be able to direct purchase a champion without rerolling for 15x their original cost.

So, for the different tiers: 1. [15 gold] 2. [30 gold] 3. [45 gold] 4. [60 gold] 5. [75 gold]

You would be able to straight up purchase your desired champion from a drop-down menu, or maybe by clicking on the champion. The major constraint of this would be that direct purchases could only be made for champions you already own.

Without a Yasuo, a player still couldn't purchase Yasuo for even 75 gold. If you feel like the prices are too low, and would lead to people only stocking gold for direct purchases, there's already another 1-to-1 system in TFT.

That being XP.

Going by tier again, this is how much XP you would forfeit by using a direct purchase: 1. {12 xp} 2. {28 xp} 3. {44 xp} 4. {60 xp} 5. {72 xp}

XP is always guaranteed to be effective, as it goes towards increasing your team size. Leveling up just to add a lvl 1 Fiora to a team comp can draw enough agro away for your carries to get off spells, or even mis-position enemy assassins to focus fodder. Not to mention, she could potentially add noble or blademaster buff to one's team. It's a serious strategic consideration to direct purchase a single [2 gold] Varus over getting 28 XP.

I don't think this system has the potentially to break strategic diversity, or ruin the sense of risk-taking TFT has, but it does bring a much needed level of pragmatism to the game-mode, making it much less frustrating (and more viable for ranked play).

3 Comments

saphireflame1237/21/2019, 6:05:16 AM1 votes

I like your general thought of this, but not many people ever get to 75 gold in their hand at once in a game. For me the highest I've ever gotten to was 64, so this wouldn't help much. Also, if you were to forfeit xp, then if you deleveled from it and got your champion, you would have to remove a champion already on your team without being able to put the new one in.

This idea has a lot of holes that could be patched up to make it a smart idea, but right now its not thought through. What would be the point in buying a champion to complete your comp or level up someone you have on your team if you had to remove at least one champion from your team? And what if you are given the champ you needed RIGHT after you bought it? That would make everyone feel cheated and ripped off.

The gold is too much. Lets say this. You are 1v1 against first place as second place, and you only have 8 health left, so one defeat will lose you the game. You need a Swain to level up your swain to rank 2. You have 78 gold (this is rich), but you also need to upgrade a lot of other champions, and you buy your Swain. Now, since you spent 75 gold on him, you only have 3 left. Then, you get a Brand from the market, but don't have enough gold for him and can't sell anything to buy it. The round starts, and your-still-rank-1 Brand dies as soon as it starts. The battle was close, but you lost and now the game is over with you in 2nd place instead of first. Do you think that's fair?

Subdue7/21/2019, 6:53:56 AM1 votes

Golds are nice to have but team composition is invariably more important. If instead of stockpiling 200g you spent that on extra champions on the board and completed another synergy or two you likely would have won, and sooner too.

Get27/21/2019, 10:43:33 AM1 votes

"I just played a game where I went on a 17 match winstreak" and now I found out why it ended and I want you to do this thing so I can win more and more and more because 100% WR should be allowed because that makes total sense.

You went on a 17 winstreak You win way more than you lose You lost one game Nothing needs to change except maybe the factors that gave you 17 wins in a row

"No matter how much gold you have, you're still left to RNJESUS a comp together."

You're ignoring the bit where you start to see champs spam your store, and you're not picking them up as alternatives because you want X thing. You're ignoring the bit where you'd be creating a static gold strategy (now I can 100% pick and finish my teams? Hex ya!) Now I see where you will disagree with this, but this will mean even more GET X CHAMPS and force a comp strategy because now you can finish them later and buff them if you just farm gold.

And then there's the bit about everyone having a tier 3 draven on the floor at the end of the game. Because that's not possible, eh?

In other words, this would be like paying 10 bucks for one scratchoff ticket, but you are guaranteed to win 12 bucks every time, as opposed to buying 10 dollar tickets and maybe winning 3 bucks back.