What should giveaway entry costs be?

No cap.

At 500pts a day, I think a 50-60 max (which covers virtually all AAA games) is an ample hardcap.

вuмp 🚃

1000 points, which you can buy with the golden subscription pack that will cost only 999 dollars and 99 cents. :D

How about a minimum as well?

With less points to spend, people will more think about where to spend them with a higher cap. But the question is, wil people still enter for the <10p ga's

Blood.

Reverting to the previous cap is a no-brainer; I don't have any strong opinion for or against the possibility of increasing it beyond 100p

I would be all for being able to apply a points-multiplier when making a GA, in the interest of support for public GAs.

Specifically with example of Tropico 5, such has usually requirement of 25p to be entered. And what I am saying is that it would be nice to be able to increase that entry requirement of points needed (to some cap, of e.g. 200p or 250p - with that option perhaps available only to GA makers level 1+ or such, and it saying behind the game's name e.g. "6x25=150p). So... when one makes a GA for it and sets that multiplier to 6x, then it would anyone interested in that game take 150p to enter that GA.

And that may of course seem rather expensive to many, but point is that among the users who have that game rather on top of their wishlist, even those 150p are probably not that an issue especially when it also means increased chance of winning due to lower amount of entries than the same public GA would have with only 25p entry requirement (and the GA maker can easily make that GA last for at least 48 or more hours so that any regular having it on their wishlist can plan ahead for entering it).

I mean, at least myself I would think it would be a nice 3rd option on how to approach making a GA instead of just thinking about whether I should make a GA for that spare key of e.g. Tropico 5 I have in group and/or high level. And that since the "points multiplied" would way lessen worry about that many are in low level GAs just joining for that +1 in library as they probably wouldn't for GAs with increased points when they could enter 15+ other GAs instead. All while those users who care about some particular game way more than about other games (including sometimes me of course) would likely have at least a bit of increased chances at winning in GAs for that game in that whole public GA setting.

How about this idea: Allow GA creators set the entry point value freely. Discussed more in detail here: https://www.steamgifts.com/go/comment/DcQ9GUu

Personally, I'm just waiting for the dust to settle. But thanks for the awesome GA!

I'm fine either way... Though I always thought it was a bit silly to see bundled games/apps that had 100/60 points for entry. Felt a bit too gamey.

All giveaways should cost 100p to enter.

I actually prefer the games which are around 10P for some reason...

Yep also I voted to remove the maximum limit. For me should be removed also the 100p.

We should keep the cap at one third of the maximum, so 166p.

Still, I voted for 💯

View attached image.

The point cap was raised but the decreased refill rate leaves users with fewer points to spend overall.
I myself seldom enter high-CV GAs, so I'm not really affected either way.
Anyway, thanks for the giveaways, Mully :)

Bump c:

I honestly don't see it make any impact at all ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ The additional 10 points for 60$ games won't make much difference, and expensive bundles are rare enough that it won't make a huge difference either. That's not to say that I'm against it, just indifferent since I don't feel it'll have any impact on the games themselves being played, people will always enter for expensive games or bundles (excluding software). The 100P cap never made sense to me either, if anything I'd just do away with the cap all together.

This discussion is pointless.

bump for swimming in excess points

cg: let us trade and sell points, please

View attached image.

Don't really care to be honest. Could very well be capped at 500, I'll probably never go below 400 anyway :P Actually it would be quite funny to have it capped at 500 and see how the users' points are used then.