Sorry for your bad feelings, because of non-proportional return.

Everyone plays for winning. But we cannot take it too serious. We cannot forever win in a game when fellow opponents also like to win.

Even if we pay, we still need to compete in order to win, or be successful. If we want proportional return for every dollar you spent, this game must not be an environment you enjoy. If we find a game that simply paying can ensure winning, we will not feel winning is valuable.

It is fair that payers have advantage, but both paying and non-paying managers should have chance to win. In case, the first line in algorithm of matches is 'payor vs non-payor => payor win', I personally don't believe the game has fun.

It is hard to swallow when some match results are hard to be explained. I also involved in a few discussions on specific examples in this forum. But I still don't think the game is largely unfair in general.


BTW, many people complains about Cup. But it is natural that there is less people feeling successful in Cup because there are more teams to compete for 1 Cup title (chance is 1/128 or 0.78%), and one half of the managers were knocked out after only participating 2 matches before knocking out. In contrast, all teams participating CL play at least 6 group stage matches.