UlasanAnime.com – The “FairyTale Ja Irarenai” event in the game has introduced a new ranking system that significantly alters player strategy, moving away from simple pay-to-win mechanics towards a more complex interplay of time, stamina, and strategic choices.
The event’s core mechanic revolves around a new ranking system that dictates how players approach gameplay. Players are presented with several options regarding stamina usage, ranging from 2 million, 4 million, 6 million, to “MM” (likely representing maximum stamina). This choice directly impacts the subsequent gameplay loop.
Following the stamina selection, players can choose between two recommended songs that offer slightly more points, or opt for a “job.” Alternatively, the event song itself is available. Crucially, the event song does not consume stamina but requires song tokens and doesn’t count towards the five required “non-event-song things” needed to earn tokens.
The process involves completing five non-event-song activities that consume stamina. Upon completion, players receive one event song token, with a maximum of 99 tokens that can be stored. Each of these five activities also awards a certain number of event points, with the amount directly correlating to the stamina used. For instance, choosing a “job” yields about half the points compared to a “recommended song” for the same stamina tier.
You might also be interested in : Eventer Police Meta
A key aspect of the event’s design is the inverse relationship between stamina spent and token acquisition efficiency. The less stamina players use to complete the five required activities, the more event song tokens they can obtain for a given stamina expenditure. This means that while lower stamina plays might require more time to accumulate points, they ultimately yield more event song tokens for the same overall stamina cost.
This efficiency mechanic leads to distinct strategic paths. Players who do not spend money on stamina or have a limited stamina cap are advised to play with the minimal stamina cost per set of five activities. This approach maximizes their overall points because playing the event song, which is highly rewarding, becomes more feasible with a larger number of tokens obtained through low-stamina plays.
Conversely, players with unlimited spending capabilities or very limited time to play, who need to maximize their score at all costs, should opt for the maximum stamina per five activities. While the event song does offer rewards for players engaging in higher stamina activities, these rewards are not substantial enough to outweigh the benefits of consistently grinding with the lowest stamina settings and then focusing on the event song.
The core of the player confusion, as observed on platforms like Reddit, stems from a misunderstanding of the event’s objective. The realization that utilizing the lowest stamina setting yields more points can be counterintuitive. However, the event prioritizes maximizing the total event score rather than pure efficiency. For rankers and “whales” (high-spending players), stamina is not as constrained a resource as time.
Ultimately, a hybrid strategy is recommended for players aiming for a high rank. The scoring system has shifted from a straightforward “play normally or pay to win (P2W) by spending gems” model to one that encourages normal play with the option to spend gems for increased points over time. The scaling now heavily favors players who can play the event song most frequently. This presents two avenues for whales: they can grind using either 75 or 150 stamina. The latter offers a modest advantage, perhaps a 50% increase in points for double the stamina, but it doesn’t drastically reduce the overall time required, unlike the traditional gem-crunching method common in other ranking events.
This event introduces a complex calculus problem for players. The author’s intuition suggests that the “pay-to-lose” grind, reminiscent of Greemas Million Live battle ranking events, makes traditional P2W gem crunching for typical Platinum Star Tour (PST) events less effective. It appears that achieving a competitive score in this event, even two days in, is significantly more challenging than in previous iterations.
The prevailing meta is straightforward: instead of focusing solely on the best efficiency, players must anticipate and outmaneuver their opponents. While understanding efficiency remains crucial, the psychological barrier preventing some players from spending or adopting less efficient but necessary routes means that groups of players without the “Greemas 1200th place ranking mentality” will likely experience narrow score groupings. These players will naturally gravitate towards the maximum efficiency model. Those aiming for a Tier 2 ranking will quickly adapt, either by committing to a full-throttle approach or by attempting to extend their efficiency to higher scoring tiers.
The author finds this shift in the meta intriguing. However, it also represents an outright nerf to P2W, leaning more towards “pay-to-lose.” The trap lies in the potential for players to spend their time grinding with minimal stamina and still fall behind their competition, or to spend money only to achieve fewer points than players with more time and unwavering dedication. The direct correlation between playtime and final score, by fixing the number of tokens and detaching them from the ticket system, is both a positive and a challenging aspect of the event.
In conclusion, this event offers a greater variety of paths to victory, alongside an equal number of opportunities for players to inadvertently hinder their own progress. This increased complexity and strategic depth can be seen as an overall improvement to the event’s design.
