Time Warps and Worm Holes

[Deleted User - 4646370]

After all, "move all your goods mfrs up 9 hours" is a darn powerful spell and probably something worth getting once you reach the top of the spire 10 times in a row (and get some cc or other lame prize 9 times in a row for doing so.)

I made some calculations in my first city (ending chapter 16) :
In 3h I produce ~100k goods in my factories, which is about the cost of an encounter in 30th province, 2*. Could be ×2 with MM + Storm/Aureate phoenix.
Squad size for this encounter is 6075 (base squad size being 4050), which I produce in about 1h45 in my barracks. Could be almost 1.5× faster with brown bear.
Considering I lose 1 squad per fight, the same 2 encounters I can cater with a 3h time warp used at max efficiency would have costed me less than 3h worth of time instants in barracks (used at max efficiency) if fought.
So these rtime warps are not so insane... and 9h are even worse for factories as it's only less than 2×3h in factories while being as 3×3h in barracks (except if short training time)

Edit : about the "1 squad lost per fight" :
If L is the average number of squads lost per fight, in an encounter in a province X, as squad size is SX/20 where S is base SS, you lose LSX/20 units, so LSX/5 for the whole province. Summing this for X going from 1 to N, you get LSN(N+1)/10 units, or LN(N+1)/10 squads, lost in a round in provinces 1-N.
Then, I looked back at the dust tournament when I counted all my losses 15 weeks ago, and I got L between 0.8 and 0.9 for 2* round, with Fire phoenix + Dwarven armorer.

 

[T6583]

I'm with Kekune and Ashrem. This seems very complicated and I don't feel there is enough here at the moment to support it. Exactly how would they work? Will there be different ones for different things? Are AW's and event buildings that producse good, supplies, coins, troops etc also affected? What use are they to players with uncovential playstyles that rely on event buildings more than they do on actual workshops and factories? What sepcific time amount would it reduce something by and would there be multiple different ones such as with the time instants? What makes them worth the additional effort if they're only short time reductions other than they can be applied across your entire city with some way to prevent stacking of them? A 15 minute time reduction across my entire city doesn't help me that much and as Kekune mentioned it would then through off my collections with items that are not affected by the time reduction. I also don't see the neccessity for it in how it will improve the game. I feel that this is something that there will be players that will eventually take advantage of and find a way to abuse it in not just FA's but also in other events as well as general game play. In my opinion there are ways to balance troop production and goods for catering etc. There's MM and PoP spells, AW's that increase factory production, time instants (which at one point seemed rare to me and now there's an abundance of them), AW's that produce free troops, AW's that provide free goods, AW's that boost troop strengths, event buildings that boost troops or provide free troops, event buildings that provide free goods, portal profits for guest races so you don't have to use other city resources to produce them.....the list goes on.

 

[SoulsSilhouette]

I would rather if Inno did mini events with the production times decreased, but with an announcement that for 24 or 48 hours this would be available. Hopefully it would take place on one of my days off....LOL. I'm not much in favor on something that would take an act of the Ancient God's to attain. I work... A LOT..... If they paid me a living wage to play this game, I wouldn't care ... but as it is... I would never see any real benefit from any of this. I would think that I'm not alone in being employed and quite busy with life.o

 

[ajqtrz]

I'm with Kekune. Too many moving parts and potential downsides for me to get behind without a lot more specific details, and even then I think I'll be hard sell.

I don't know why (or if, frankly} you thought the complexity issue was about players having a tough time figuring out how timer instants work, as opposed to the actual stated concern that there too many ways it could potentially unbalance the game. Cynical me considers the possibility it was a deliberate misinterpretation in order to paint me as calling players stupid in order to manipulate them to supporting your position.

The first quote is what you said. You refer to Kekune. You then, apparently, summarize Kekune's position as saying it's about "too many moving parts." The "it's" inferred is, of course, referring, in Kekune's comment, to the actual proposal, and therefore, your "too many moving parts" would refer to it, as you say. The question is not, to what the phrased referred when you used it, but if the referral to Kekune's was clear. I would suggest two things. First, the shorter the reply the more room for confusion. Kekune does not use the phrase "moving parts" and thus, it is left to the reader to infer to what in Kekune's post the phrase refers. By using a short summary that required the reader to go back and re-read the original comment, you left room for "slippage." And that's what you got. My own use of "too many moving parts" was quite clear. It referred to the complexity of the game as a whole. That was my error in interpretation, of course.

Second, ascribing motives to a mistake is not only cynical, it's probably not in the best interest for civil conversation. If my misunderstanding was a "deliberate misinterpretation in order to paint" you "as calling players stupid" etc.... how is this known? Did I say I was intending such? Your "cynical" feelings should, I believe, be set aside in the name of a civil discussion. Ad hominem remarks are seldom useful.

Third, since my own response and use of "too many moving parts," was obviously describing the entire game, how did you get it was about "players having a tough time figuring out how timer instants work?" I believe when I said "Too many moving parts" is sort of funny since the game has about as many "moving parts" as any I've seen. This effects that effects this and so on and so on. But it's a good point. Complexity is difficult to master and adding another layer may be too much for some." (emphasis added), is about as clear a statement as could be made that I was referring to the game in general, not to "figuring out how timer instants work," as you state.

Thus, it is, as you demonstrate, pretty easy to miss what somebody has said and respond to what they didn't say. That a short phrase like "too many moving parts" can be referring to a wider or narrower scope is obvious. That I choose the wider scope was a misunderstanding. That you made the same error when you read my comment even though the reference was much clearer, just shows how easy it can be to make such a mistake. Did you do it on purpose? I think not. But if you can make such a mistake and not do it out of a desire to manipulate people, how about giving me the benefit of the doubt and being just a tad more civil?

Finally, to address the point at hand, speeding up multiple buildings does not, necessarily, make the game more interesting, but earning such rewards does. It gives a reward which some players, including myself, should find challenging to earn and useful to use once earned.

AJ

 

[Ashrem]

This feels really complicated

The first quote is what you said. You refer to Kekune. You then, apparently, summarize Kekune's position as saying it's about "too many moving parts."

assuming i was "with him" on more than his opening statement is your error. The suggestion is overly complicated, even before considerations of how common it should be and where to insert it into the game in order to control that Commonness. It interacts with too many other things to be easily slotted into the game and therefore represents a high effort for the return, which does precious little to increase the appeal of the game to the general player. A small number of people will receive a moderately small benefit, while the majority of players will face something else they can't have which large, established, players can.

Second, ascribing motives to a mistake is not only cynical, it's probably not in the best interest for civil conversation.

As you have mentioned before. If I ever do anything that identifies me as anything other than a cynic, and not terribly concerned with how my brusqueness is received, it's probably safe to assume I've been hacked.

lComplexity is difficult to master and adding another layer may be too much for some." (emphasis added), is about as clear a statement as could be made that I was referring to the game in general, not to "figuring out how timer instants work," as you state.

I reject the notion it's a "layer." It doesn't rise anywhere close to the level of requiring an adjustment in how people play the game. It's a perk. A moderate perk that appears headed towards accruing only to a few players, like so many other moderate perks in the game. Hence my my confusion about why it was brought up in a way that appeared to paint me as saying it could confuse players. I have zero concerns that players would be confused.

That you made the same error when you read my comment even though the reference was much clearer, just shows how easy it can be to make such a mistake. Did you do it on purpose?

Well to accurate, I responded to the possibility it was deliberate, rather than assuming it was. Which was deliberate on my part, and is why I couched as a possibility, rather than an assumption that it was the case. Had I assumed it was the case, I would have used those words, rather than "considers the possibility." I'm generally not going to leave someone's words laying unnaddresed if I think there's a chance they are being used as a subtle attack. I'm aware that does not make for the most-civil-possible conversation, but I'm unlikely to change it. I don't think I'm capable of assuming negligence over malice in a disagreement. I assume my opposition is at least as intelligent as me until they show otherwise, and you've given me no reason to assume you are not as intelligent as, or more intelligent than, me. I freely admit I am a cynic. If your words can be interpreted as manipulative, I'm probably going to react as though that is a possibility. I genuinely wish I were a different person.

 

[ajqtrz]

Well to accurate, I responded to the possibility it was deliberate, rather than assuming it was. Which was deliberate on my part, and is why I couched as a possibility, rather than an assumption that it was the case. Had I assumed it was the case, I would have used those words, rather than "considers the possibility." I'm generally not going to leave someone's words laying unnaddresed if I think there's a chance they are being used as a subtle attack. I'm aware that does not make for the most-civil-possible conversation, but I'm unlikely to change it. I don't think I'm capable of assuming negligence over malice in a disagreement. I assume my opposition is at least as intelligent as me until they show otherwise, and you've given me no reason to assume you are not as intelligent as, or more intelligent than, me. I freely admit I am a cynic. If your words can be interpreted as manipulative, I'm probably going to react as though that is a possibility. I genuinely wish I were a different person.

Skipping the whole "complexity" question I do wonder if you believe you have a choice or not in how you respond to others. You may feel cynical and that's a reaction. But the action of typing up a reply need not reflect your feelings if you choose to consider the need to be a bit more civil. Your personality is pretty much set by the time you are in school, (some say earlier), but your ability to get over the flaws (if they be flaws) in your personality -- including ones that harm civil discourse -- remains. You can choose to type up your answer on the fly and let the cards fall where they might, or you can stop. read what you've written and see if you could say it better or more civilly.

The use of the phrase, "consider the possibility" is, technically speaking, a rhetorical device (some would say, 'trick'). One does not ask your interlocutor to "consider the possibility" if you think the possibility has no merit. It's a very old trick, and falls under the general rhetorical device of amplification. You amplify the focus of the argument by adding "other considerations," some of which are meant to undermine your interlocutor's influence. Saying in an election for a treasure that our opponent "might be a crook" is true enough but who would say it unless they thought there was a real chance such might be the case? That's how the audience would take it, anyway. "Consider the possibility" is just another way of doing the same thing. In the case of suggesting we consider the possibility of a person's motives, it's just a veiled ad hominem remark.

AJ

 

[Ashrem]

The use of the phrase, "consider the possibility" is, technically speaking, a rhetorical device (some would say, 'trick'). One does not ask your interlocutor to "consider the possibility" if you think the possibility has no merit.

You are misinterpreting. I didn't ask anyone else to consider the possibility. I specifically said it caused me to do so, and specifically indicated that's because I am a cynic. I did not use it in any rhetorical sense. I said exactly what I meant and did not ask anyone else to do the same.

 

[Kekune]

Third, since my own response and use of "too many moving parts," was obviously describing the entire game, how did you get it was about "players having a tough time figuring out how timer instants work?" I believe when I said "Too many moving parts" is sort of funny since the game has about as many "moving parts" as any I've seen. This effects that effects this and so on and so on. But it's a good point. Complexity is difficult to master and adding another layer may be too much for some." (emphasis added), is about as clear a statement as could be made that I was referring to the game in general, not to "figuring out how timer instants work," as you state.

I'd have emphasized a different part, there. The point where you implied this could confuse players is right here:

Complexity is difficult to master and adding another layer may be too much for some.

I understood that to mean that some people might have difficulty mastering said complexity. Sounds like that's not what you meant, but I don't think your meaning is as clear as you intended.

the shorter the reply the more room for confusion

More words aren't always better. There's a reason people like Hemingway.

 

[T6583]

@ajqtrz If I recall in my last post I asked several questions about your idea and how it may work. I’m giving you the chance to try to change my mind from being against it to supporting it.

 

[ajqtrz]

I'm with Kekune and Ashrem. This seems very complicated and I don't feel there is enough here at the moment to support it. Exactly how would they work? Will there be different ones for different things? Are AW's and event buildings that producse good, supplies, coins, troops etc also affected? What use are they to players with uncovential playstyles that rely on event buildings more than they do on actual workshops and factories? What sepcific time amount would it reduce something by and would there be multiple different ones such as with the time instants? What makes them worth the additional effort if they're only short time reductions other than they can be applied across your entire city with some way to prevent stacking of them? A 15 minute time reduction across my entire city doesn't help me that much and as Kekune mentioned it would then through off my collections with items that are not affected by the time reduction. I also don't see the neccessity for it in how it will improve the game. I feel that this is something that there will be players that will eventually take advantage of and find a way to abuse it in not just FA's but also in other events as well as general game play. In my opinion there are ways to balance troop production and goods for catering etc. There's MM and PoP spells, AW's that increase factory production, time instants (which at one point seemed rare to me and now there's an abundance of them), AW's that produce free troops, AW's that provide free goods, AW's that boost troop strengths, event buildings that boost troops or provide free troops, event buildings that provide free goods, portal profits for guest races so you don't have to use other city resources to produce them.....the list goes on.

More words aren't always better. There's a reason people like Hemingway.

@Ashrem Hemingway took a whole book to tell the story of an old guy catching a big fish. LOL. It's books he wrote, not short replies in a forum. Different format, different needs.


@T6583 Questions answered. I would envision there being an instant you earn at a high cost in time and resources either as a crafted item, an event prize, or in the Spire. This instant would be applied to any set of matching buildings. Workshops all at lvl 12 would get the instant if you applied the instant to one workshop of that level. Ditto for residences, goods productions (perhaps T1, T2 and T3 as separate instants). They would not work for single item things like AW's -- or other event buildings that don't allow instants to be applied anyway. As suggested, they would be limited to the number of buildings (15 would probably be a good limit). There would be multiple instants as there are now, and it might be they max out at 9 hours. Thus, 5 minutes, 10 minutes, 15 minutes, 20 minutes, 30 minutes, 45 minutes, 1 hour, 2 hours, 3 hours, and maybe even 9 hours. As for their usefulness during and FA, one could restrict the goods type to the highest of each level. Most players do not have complete T1 sets at the level of their highest goods mfr, so they couldn't be used to complete the various mfr based badges. And limiting them to 9hr would keep the use of them to complete blacksmiths as well. In any case, Since they would be limited in the number of mfr's they could effect and all had to be at the same level, they could be used to bring groups of buildings into alignment for collection purposes. I've often had to do this for single buildings that get out of sync and it would be nice to have my workshops in line with my goods, for instance, so I didn't have to wait 10 minutes for my workshops to finish and could collect workshops and goods at the same time. As for players with "unconventional playstyles" what about those who play for the "beauty" of the game and thus have a lot of space taken up with roads in order to beautify their city? Isn't the need for space for the visiting races in impingement on their playing style? Such considerations are, of course, important, but the game pretty much dictates what you do once you have a goal or goals in mind. The addition of Time Warps does not change that but only adds a (not layer, for heaven's sake, LOL) feature to the game and thus opportunities for some and not others. As you noted the time instants have become common. These time instants would be valuable because they would, in effect, be equivelant to up to 15 of the standard time instants.

As for the "abuse" factor, the limits proposed in quantity offered would make it difficult to horde them (though of course one could do so over a couple years), and the limit of the number of buildings effected (the 15 with the most time to completion OR the 15 with the least time to completion, perhaps), would make it very difficult to "abuse." In any case, on the subject of "abuse" I already consider the FA's abused as players build FA cities with 300 workshops because they are big enough to do it and the game allows it. It can't be "abuse" if the game allows it, even if we players aren't happy with it.

Hope that answers your questions.

@Kekune

The quote: "Too many moving parts" is sort of funny since the game has about as many "moving parts" as any I've seen. This effects that effects this and so on and so on. But it's a good point. Complexity is difficult to master and adding another layer may be too much for some."

To which you responded: "I understood that to mean that some people might have difficulty mastering said complexity. Sounds like that's not what you meant, but I don't think your meaning is as clear as you intended."

To which I respond: Since you understood what I meant, as you say, how is it that it "sounds like that's not what (I) meant?" The phrase "complexity is difficult to master" is the condition and, in context, "adding another layer may be too much for some" implies 'too much difficulty for some, " which appears to be what you got out of it. Perhaps I should have worded it more traditionally as "some people might have a hard time mastering more complexity.' If there is any confusion it might be that you are looking at the specific complexity of the added instant type (the "said complexity" in your response) while my statement addresses the quantity of complexity overall? Clarity is always difficult if one starts with differing assumptions about the subject being addressed. But that's why we have discussions -- partly to sort it all out.

AJ

 

[Kekune]

Since you understood what I meant, as you say, how is it that it "sounds like that's not what (I) meant?"

Well, I'm not sure.

and adding another layer may be too much for some.

"Adding another layer" = this proposal; therefore this is "too much" (i.e. "confusing") for some players.

But you seemed to say (pretty clearly, I thought) that isn't what you meant:

since my own response and use of "too many moving parts," was obviously describing the entire game, how did you get it was about "players having a tough time figuring out how timer instants work?"

At any rate, I'm not interested in arguing this point. But as an observer of the original argument, I don't think your points are as clear and obvious as you believe they are.

 

[SoulsSilhouette]

Just addressing the abuse issue....

Everything can be abused. Inno provides the keys to abuse through the purchase of diamonds that basically can get you through anything without actually playing the game.

I save up all my AWKP instants for the fellowship adventure and for quest completion. I save certain time instants so that I can quickly complete MA recipes that I need for the FA. I use my longer time instants for upgrades to satisfy quests in events. Is this abuse because I save enough instants to make 10 blacksmith badges in less than a minute? Is it abuse that a player can purchase the badges through diamond purchases? It's all in the way you look at it.

Perspective is King.

 

[samidodamage]

Just addressing the abuse issue....

Everything can be abused. Inno provides the keys to abuse through the purchase of diamonds that basically can get you through anything without actually playing the game.
...
Perspective is King.

Bolding is mine

My perspective is:
I appreciate the players who purchase diamonds for whatever reason. These purchases help provide a game that many of us can play for free or at a significantly reduced rate. I certainly do not believe it constitutes abuse.

 

[Ashrem]

More words aren't always better. There's a reason people like Hemingway.

@Ashrem Hemingway took a whole book to tell the story of an old guy catching a big fish. LOL. It's books he wrote, not short replies in a forum. Different format, different needs.

Thanks for tagging me in your reply to something somebody else (Kekune) said. That always predisposes me to be in a good mood [/sarcasm]

 

[ajqtrz]

Thanks for tagging me in your reply to something somebody else (Kekune) said. That always predisposes me to be in a good mood [/sarcasm]

Yep, I missed that. Sometimes it's is difficult for me to keep straight all the little things people say and who said them. Sorry.

AJ

 

[T6583]

@SoulsSilhouette I don't disagree with you. Abuse may not have been the best term. I'm looking at the word abuse to mean not using as intended. (I will also admit I am guilty of doing this myself) I fully agree that if Inno gives us the tools to do something then it's not cheating or anything like that. I'm looking at this more from the perspective of is it really needed and how many complaints are we gonna see due to how some players might use the tools we are given. People complained about others setting up shanty towns for events because they felt those players got an advantage. This led to Inno requiring leveled workshops for one of the event in 2019 which then became over turned. Also the whole random quest thing in my opinion was due to complaints. But that's a whole different discussion.

@ajqtrz I'm not sure I understand why it is worth going after something this high cost when I can get the same benefit just using a time instant, especially for players that don't have a high number of items. For example I have only 2 of each boosted factory fully leveled. I only have 6 workshops. 23 residences. I would only need 12 regualr time instants. I have millions of goods and no issue with my supply or coin. I also only have 4 techs to finish until I'm done with Ch. 16 in one city. My other city is in Ch. 14 and has around the same number of residences, 6 factories (2 of each boosted), and 7 workshops (soon to be 6). I have no use for anymore factories or workshops. I have a combination of magic and non-magic workshops and residences. How would this affect those? Why would I go through the trouble of going after something so rare when it looks like there's very little benefit. You make the arguement that it wouldn't affect AW's but yet I have alot of AW's that have 3 hour collections. So if those are off from the others how would this "time warp" instant help me as those AW's are part of my collections that I have set up to corrispond with my workshops, factories, and residences as well as with certain event buildings. If something gets off I can use a regular easily obtainable time instant. Right now it looks like this "time warp" instant is only beneficial to players with high numbers of workshops, factories, residences etc. I'm sure that there are players wthat fall into that catagory. I however don't exactly know any of them. Alot of players I personally know (again I'm sure there are plenty of players out there who don't do this) reduce the number of workshops, residences, and factories as they move through the game. You mention that it won't work on buildings that regular time instants don't currently apply to. Regular time instants work on pretty much any building you can upgrade (without RR spells) including AW's and the MH. Time instants however (as far as I know) don't work on collections for residences, event buildings, and AW's. So I think you need to get a bit more specific with how your "time warp" instant will work and what exactly it can be applied to. You say it would be difficult to abuse during the FA's if for example it could only be applied to the highest level workshops. All I have to do is teleport my 6 workshops into my inventory. I then set up 100 level 1 workshops. Since I have no additional workshops these would be my highest level. I can do the same thing with my factories. This is a way I can abuse them by not using them as intended. If a limit is on them for how many each instant affects again I can think of ways to get around this. People using things as not intented may eventually lead to the Developers either nerfing something or removing it all together. Example in my opinion the WW's. (I'm not going into that whole discussion either. Just trying to make a point). I would also like it to be a bit clearer on how exactly these "time warps" would be obtained. Would they be offereded in the crafter as a prize, as a craftable item, at the final boss fight at the top of the spire. I have plenty of CC's and spell fragments that I can craft anything my heart desires in the crafter. I spend money on the game. If they're offered as a craftable item I could easily create a stock pile of them unless a limit as to how many one has in inventory is implemented. I go to the top of the spire every week. I failing to see how this would even be on par with the genie or even the 50% PP spell right now. And I will admit that the 50% PP spell doesn't feel like I've won anything when I get to the top of the spire as well as a few of the other prizes.

 

[ajqtrz]

@T6583 You are right that it wouldn't be worth much if you have enough time instants. But if you don't? A lot of players don't have 15 instants of the same size. This is just one way to earn one big one.

As for the players who might use/want them, you are also correct that, as proposed, they would benefit the small to medium players more than the larger players. The larger players, I think, have plenty of time instants, the small to medium, not so much. Thus, the "uneven" benefit might help balance the inability of many players to do what larger players often can more easily. In the long run it may help with retaining those players, though, truthfully speaking, who knows if the impact would be that significant. Probably not, but you never do know about such things until you try them.

The WW is, of course a great example of something "here to day, gone tomorrow." It, obviously, had too much an impact on diamond purchases to offer it too often (or at all, perhaps). This is not dealing out diamonds. Thus, it is doubtful it would have much of an impact on the game except as, perhaps, an incentive item to purchase diamonds.

Keeping a group things in sync is difficult, especially when you have a lot of them. The AW's may have 3 hr productions, but they are single items and don't currently, use time instants anyway. The time warps aren't about moving single buildings up, but about groups. For this reason even if you could, of course, make them applicable to AWs, who would use a 15 building 1hr time instant to move a single AW into sync with things? On the other hand, moving 15 workshops up 1 hr would be beneficial in the FA (though expensive), and in the general game. Ditto for the 6 T1 goods that are out of sync, or the 5 armories. And, of course, there are times you are waiting on resources and could use them NOW.

I've been in a situation that I'm trying to finish a research and am short of some goods only to lose 10% of something needed while I wait for my goods to finish. This would help that situation because I could use a time warp to finish the goods production I need.

One has to wonder at the removal of large workshops in order to apply time warps. Removing large workshops would probably have a larger impact with the increase of the total number of workshops than the application of a time warp, which would be limited to 15 of those workshops. Taking out 4-6 large workshops would probably mean you'd replace them with a 16-24 lvl 1 workshops anyway, something you can already do. So if this were going to be done, you are right that a time warp would only encourage this behavior. However 4-6 teleports is a lot to lose for the benefit of using a time warp. Like I said, the motivation to build more lvl 1 workshops is probably the greater of the two motivations.

Winning would be up to the devs, but I think the Spire is a good place to use these as a "top" prize, especially if that top prize is a significant movement for up to 15 of something, like workshops, T1 goods, T2 Goods, T2 Goods, MA, or even armories (I need a lot more orcs). Even if these aren't considered a "top prize" they sure beat more SF's or CC's.

In addition, remember the 15 limit is, itself, adjustable. Perhaps a whole set of 5 buildings, 10 buildings, 15, or even 25 would work if as the amount of buildings to which it applied goes up the duration goes down? 5 buildings at 9 hrs, 10 buildings at 3 hrs, etc.... There are many possibilities and, unfortunately, a lot of impact is dependent on exactly what would be offered, how many, the scope, and the type of time warp.

AJ

AJ

 

[T6583]

As for the players who might use/want them, you are also correct that, as proposed, they would benefit the small to medium players more than the larger players. The larger players, I think, have plenty of time instants, the small to medium, not so much. Thus, the "uneven" benefit might help balance the inability of many players to do what larger players often can more easily. In the long run it may help with retaining those players, though, truthfully speaking, who knows if the impact would be that significant. Probably not, but you never do know about such things until you try them.

Right now this appears to be a flaw to me. Right now some veteran players are starting to feel penalized by being in the "end game" as alot of stuff lately seems catered more towards smaller and mid-sized cities. Younger cities also have alot more benefits available to them to get through the chapters more quickly such as portal profits and time instants. There are players who started playing a year ago who are now in Chapter 13 in my FS alone due to use of those items. 1/3 the time that it took myself to do. Those things weren't available to alot of us veteran players. They also rebalanced the Dwarves chapter recently to make things easier / better for the newer players. They're currently rebalancing the way tourney works and one of the reasons for it was the smaller cities and new players (I need to watch the video again because right now it looks like a bad thing to me). Veteran players were incouraged back in the day to build up our AW's. Now we're penalized by that in the Spire (and possibly soon to be tourney too). The larger cities put alot of time in effort into getting to where we are. Sorry if I feel that smaller cities shouldn't be able to do what larger cities do more easily. I'm more than willing to help a smaller city grow and teach them some of the things I've learned over the years (mostly the hard way). I'm not sure that smaller cities require anymore tools to catch up to larger cities. They already have so many advantages. I recommend maybe rethinking this position a bit more.

There are many possibilities and, unfortunately, a lot of impact is dependent on exactly what would be offered, how many, the scope, and the type of time warp.

This is an issue in that if you would like to try to get this idea to move forward it needs to be a bit more defined. I think this is way too open ended at the moment for the developers to work with. I think you have an idea that is at least worth discussion despite my position on it. Maybe with more discussion it can become a more consise (spelling?) / detailed idea that doesn't leave as much room for multiple interperations / confusion. I at least now have a slightly better understanding of your idea just with the discussions had thus far. With some more work it, your idea can be come even more clear.

 

[Ashrem]

I think that large amounts of detail in the comments is not working in the idea's favour. I feel like I understand the goal less than I did the first time I replied. That said, the general notion has intrigued me from the start, if not the specifics of the proposal. In particular the "time wrap" has caused me to wonder about something that seems simpler for the developers, in the form of an effect which speeds up your clock, instead of coding a function that is like existing timers but would apply to multiple different things in different ways and have to worry about maximums and type of buildings.

Something that is of equal difficulty to obtain for all players, and causes their city's clock to advance (either a set amount, or at a increased rate for a set time? it might be too powerful if not balanced carefully with availability and short duration limits (probably nothing over an hour), but I think it's a lot easier for developers to implement, and less danger of the keeners developing abusive side-uses.

 

[T6583]

the general notion has intrigued me from the start

I agree. I just couldn't grasp it which is why I'm asking all of these questions to try to figure out exactly what the idea is.

Instead of coding a function that would apply to different things in different ways and have to worry about maximums and type of buildings, Something that is of equal difficulty to obtain for all players, and causes their city's clock to advance (either a set amount, or at a increased rate for a set time? it might be too powerful if not balanced carefully with availability and short duration limits (probably nothing over an hour), but I think it's a lot easier for players to understand and for developers to implement.

Now if this was the idea being presented I could definitely get behind it. If its something that applies to the entire city. The in might be worth the time and effort needed to obtain it. I think that this might be what @ajqtrz overall goal is. I might have caused some over thinking with all of my questions in trying to understand his original idea.