Adjust spire set goods output

[Kekune]

I just think it's better to come up with a different set or different pieces to them with different attributes. Changing the main purpose of the buildings it not a good idea in my opinion. I don't think you will change it.

This makes sense. I think Ashrem's idea for different buildings is great. However, it does seem more likely to me that the devs would make an easy change like this before adding in new buildings and reconfiguring the overall distribution of spire prizes.

I'll update cons list later to include that any change would require fellowships and individual players using the buildings to adapt in the wake of those changes.

 

[Yogi Dave]

I don't mind a change, we just have to adjust as always,
This is a ticking bomb that I prefer to be adressed, I to have a town running on moonstone sets but if the goods change then I just use the market to turn them into something else, nothing really changes.

I do agree, it needs to be addressed. The sooner the better. Yes, we always have to adjust. I'd just prefer a different method. Change to an entirely new set that has the same foot prints, same connection rules, same extras except the goods produced in them are boost relative instead of fixed.

 

[AtaguS]

I agree with @Yogi Dave there is a slight con in changing productions. You can imagine now a FS with e.g. 11 crystal-boosted, 11 silk-boosted and 3 scroll-boosted, the missing scrolls being produced by all the fellows' libraries. Such a FS would find itself suddenly overloaded of crystals.
But even with this slight con I'm still for this change.

In your example above, this fs only has 3 scroll boosted players. Is this because of the abundance of scolls available via the moonstone library? As a scrolls boosted player, I'd hate to think that I'll have a harder time getting into a fellowship because no one needs or wants more scrolls around. This is *not directed at you specifically, I see that you are on board with a change. It just serves as an excellent example of how the moonstone library has effected scroll boosted players.
Boosted goods are not an options (unless I want to continuously create new emails for new accounts and waste space in a world trying for the boosts I'd like - no thanks) and so any introduction to the game which inhibits a boosted players chances of playing on a level field must be undone, in my opinion. Regardless of what "fixes" or adjustments other players and fss have come up with in the meantime. I've been very hesitant to completely remodel the way I approach scrolls because of an event item - even a reoccuring one such as the library - because of Inno's track record of changing things up. One thing that never changes is your boosts and the need to trade your goods effectively to play - either alone but even especially as part of a fs. But if I had scrapped my factories or weighted my fs against scroll boosts...and Inno then changed its mind on the moonstone pay-outs, I wouldn't necessarily be surprised.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

All I can say is that for a set with two buildings with Moonstone in their name, that only one of them ever produce Moonstone at all, and that is only if you get the Gate in chapter 12 or 13. I think I was already in chapter 14 by the time this set was added to the game, so that really annoys me. Also, I understand it being a library and the connection with Scrolls because of that, but how about some Ink too? Maybe the Mana Plant could become an Ink Fountain for players getting it in chapter 13 and up. Or if too many players rely on those for Mana, have one or two of the Scrolls links in the library change to Ink in chapter 13.

 

[Deleted User - 1178646]

I do agree, it needs to be addressed. The sooner the better. Yes, we always have to adjust. I'd just prefer a different method. Change to an entirely new set that has the same foot prints, same connection rules, same extras except the goods produced in them are boost relative instead of fixed.

That has both advantages and disadvantages.

A change to the moonstone set output can be done in 5 minutes, downside is the lore aspect.
Building a new set means that former parts become unaviable, you can no longer complete the set, nor upgrade it as you advance trough the chapter. you essentially have to start all over from scratch.
Building a new set also takes a lot of time, they have to come up with a new "lore" idea, then they have to have artist work out those ideas and be reevaluated.
Then they need to be balanced, evaluated again, entered en coded into the game and then released. we are talking about multiple months once they set there mind to this idea.

This is a lot of effort making the chance for succes smaller (as it cost more time and money) and taking a lot of time to get it implemented.
While the other could be implemented tomorrow on beta if they want to.

Thats why I prefer modding the current set to just give +1/+2 goods and forget the lore aspect, instead of taking the long, more difficult and tedious route.

 

[Sir Squirrel]

I agree that this has created a over abundance of scrolls that puts scroll boosted players at a disadvantage trying to trade there scrolls (at least on Arendyll where I am scroll boosted.) I vote yes to see this changed to the players boosted good that could then be traded with out throwing out the balance in the trader. It seem there are more players boosted in steel, scroll, dust in my trader, so trading scrolls was already tough as it was. Now I have offer 10% on every trade and they still sit for days sometimes.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

It seem there are more players boosted in steel, scroll, dust in my trader, so trading scrolls was already tough as it was. Now I have offer 10% on every trade and they still sit for days sometimes.

That is one of the nine possible boost combinations, so if most of the active players in your region have that, then yes, you and all your neighbors are sort of screwed when needing other goods. You only real hope is that Inno moves new players into those inactive spots for the other boost combos and you get more trades showing up.

 

[Risen Malchiah]

Full disclosure, I am scroll boosted and don't use this set. Perhaps I would find it useful if it produced something else. However, as a general principle, I'm not in favor of changing buildings people have already acquired. It creates way too many problems and people get upset, as Yogi Dave described. But, I believe these work-arounds would be great:

I'd prefer to leave the Moonstone set as it is, but replace the set given by the spire to something new which is adjusted according to your boost.

replacing future Spire Libraries with an identical-footprint building that has a different production. or alternatively, mix it up, with three different buldings you can win in equal proportions. "Spire Library" "Spire Museum" and "Spire Gallery" each producing a different good.

So changing the existing building, no. But changing future versions of it, or adding new buildings to the set, I can support.

 

[Yogi Dave]

Too many snippets to quote from everyone responding here, but there is a definite consensus that a change is needed. We've mainly talked about scrolls, but a couple have pointed out other goods. However, it's the scrolls that seem to create the biggest problem. Our differences are in the way to change it. There seem to be two similar ideas and both have advantages and differences.

1. Keep the existing set. Simply change the goods to be boost +1 or +2 which would change all the buildings in existence. This is the OP's proposal.
2. Keep the existing set as is, but discontinue it and replace the one in the spire with a new set, keeping the same size and other attributes, just changing all goods to be boost +1 or +2. This is basically what I've proposed.

The first one is by far the simplest, as @CrazyWizard pointed out and could be done very quickly. The second one would take time with new artwork and lore story.

Is it possible to suggest both in the proposal and let the devs decide or does that make it too complex a suggestion? I don't think it would be too complex and would be better than two separate proposals to solve the same problem.

 

[Yogi Dave]

Building a new set means that former parts become unaviable, you can no longer complete the set, nor upgrade it as you advance trough the chapter. you essentially have to start all over from scratch.

This is the case with all sets and event buildings in general. They would still be upgradable by RR spells. It's the same thing we always adapt too.

Building a new set also takes a lot of time, they have to come up with a new "lore" idea, then they have to have artist work out those ideas and be reevaluated.

Making new buildings is what the game is about. Eventually, the Moonstone will become very stale and have to be changed out anyway. Perhaps, they are already working on something new to keep the spire from being static. I hope so.

Then they need to be balanced, evaluated again, entered en coded into the game and then released. we are talking about multiple months once they set there mind to this idea.

As far as the balance and evaluation is concerned, it's the same in both cases since they both only change the goods being boost relative. So, it's really only the artwork and lore that is different and needs to be tested.

This is a lot of effort making the chance for succes smaller (as it cost more time and money) and taking a lot of time to get it implemented.

I can't argue with that. It will take more time and have a smaller chance of being accepted.

While the other could be implemented tomorrow on beta if they want to.

I think this is too optimistic, but it does make the long time vs short time argument seem stronger.

My bottom line is there needs to be a change, I prefer a new set, but will vote yes if the OP keeps the idea to only be a change to the existing building. Eventually, the buildings in the spire should be changed to keep those building from being just another pile of rubble in our inventory, but that is up to Inno for now.

 

[Risen Malchiah]

Is it possible to suggest both in the proposal and let the devs decide or does that make it too complex a suggestion? I don't think it would be too complex and would be better than two separate proposals to solve the same problem.

Well, it would affect voting. One option I would be completely against, while the other I would vote in favor. Including both suggestions would force me to vote no simply to avoid disaster if the devs opted to change the existing building. We've all seen how angry people get when a building someone worked hard to obtain gets nerfed or changed.

 

[Yogi Dave]

Well, it would affect voting. One option I would be completely against, while the other I would vote in favor.

I think you are right. It muddles the subject too much for a simple Yes/No vote and the voting choices would quickly get to complex.

 

[Kekune]

We've all seen how angry people get when a building someone worked hard to obtain gets nerfed or changed.

Has there ever been a change like what's proposed? That is, where a building produces the same quantity and value, but changes only the type of good? I'm only aware of flat-out nerfs. I'm curious if there's precedent for this.

 

[Pheryll]

Has there ever been a change like what's proposed? That is, where a building produces the same quantity and value, but changes only the type of good? I'm only aware of flat-out nerfs. I'm curious if there's precedent for this.

There may have been some of that on Beta before going live, but the closest thing you would see on live to it happening is this from release version 1.45:

So far, event buildings that produced Orcs or Mana, all produced just supplies on lower levels. This has now changed, to give them more value to you. They're going to produce resources that are more relevant for the chapter you are in when you receive one of these buildings. So instead for only giving supplies on lower levels, from now on they will give the following rewards:

• Buildings producing Orcs:
  Chapter 1-5: Supplies
  Chapter 6-7: One of your unboosted Tier 3 Goods
  Chapter 8-Infinity: Orcs
• Buildings producing Mana:
  Chapter 1-5: Supplies
  Chapter 6-8: One of your unboosted Tier 3 Goods
  Chapter 9-Infinity: Mana

At the time there were not that many complaints, especially since other buildings were offered in late chapters providing T3 goods. Now that T3 buildings for late chapters are running scarce, and the wishing well is not heavily offered, there have been some complaints about the resulting imbalance.

 

[SoulsSilhouette]

This sounds very good, but as it solves one problem, it produces another. Changing the goods produced by an existing buildings does not sound very fair to me to those who have utilized them in their city design or FS balance.

I've seen a chapter 15 city boosted in scrolls but doesn't have any scroll factories. When I looked closer, they had 6 moonstone libraries and a bunch of endless scrolls with the appropriate other set pieces to maximize scroll generation. That produces a lot of scrolls with no cost in population or culture or of coins and supplies to keep production going. It that changed to silk for them, it would take quite a while for them to recover. Their city would be dysfunctional for probably over a month. Yes, it's an unorthodox setup, but is it fair to do that to them? I can see someone reducing their need to produce scrolls allowing them to produce more of their other boosted goods. So, this is an example that contradicts your 2nd pro of it penalizes someone boosted in scrolls.

I have a fairly large moonstone set specifically for the scrolls. It makes me a scroll provider. My T2 is crystal, so making it become T2+1 wouldn't create a change for me. If I was boosted in silk getting crystal instead of scrolls doesn't sound so bad, unless I'm in an FS that is overloaded in crystal production and has too little scroll production. This would exacerbate the problem of too much crystal and too little scrolls until people leave the FS and new ones are brought in. In this case it penalizes an FS that has found a way to adapt to the member load it has established.

It's not hard to imagine a decent number of people using the sets in this manner. Would this change be fair to them? Would you want this change if you were in those shoes?

I'd prefer to leave the Moonstone set as it is, but replace the set given by the spire to something new which is adjusted according to your boost. Although, I'd like to see it be boost -1 instead of +1. There are so many buildings already that are +1, let's go the other way for a change. I think that would give a better balance to the individual. I've got several things that produce scrolls. I'd like some silk, please. There have been discussions of changing what buildings are produced in the spire but they have seemed to devolve into trying to totally rebalance the goods. Just change the set to a different one every now and then. Eventually you end up with too many of any type of set from the spire, even if they are boost +1 or -1. The spire set needs to change every now and then if you want people to become more engaged in it. ... but that's another idea for another thread.

I am currently using what the moonstone set provides to plump my inventory, to provide trading. I don't think it would be fair to change that set. I think the idea to create a new set of builds, perhaps in the second leg of the spire might be a good idea and then yet another in the third. It would also provide a lot of incentive for those of us who like those sort of producing sets to go further into the spire when they can.

 

[Darielle]

This sounds very good, but as it solves one problem, it produces another. Changing the goods produced by an existing buildings does not sound very fair to me to those who have utilized them in their city design or FS balance.

I've seen a chapter 15 city boosted in scrolls but doesn't have any scroll factories. When I looked closer, they had 6 moonstone libraries and a bunch of endless scrolls with the appropriate other set pieces to maximize scroll generation. That produces a lot of scrolls with no cost in population or culture or of coins and supplies to keep production going. It that changed to silk for them, it would take quite a while for them to recover. Their city would be dysfunctional for probably over a month. Yes, it's an unorthodox setup, but is it fair to do that to them? I can see someone reducing their need to produce scrolls allowing them to produce more of their other boosted goods. So, this is an example that contradicts your 2nd pro of it penalizes someone boosted in scrolls.

You ask if this is fair to the ones who have scrolls as their boost with no factories, and just libraries without population requirements. But I ask you, is it fair to have a set in the spire that allows scroll boosters to get rid of their factories and have an unfair population advantage, over those who do not have scroll boosts and must have factories in their boosted items? I understand that it would be difficult to switch, but in my view, they've been getting an unfair advantage for a long time. Asking them to go back to simply "fair," should not be thought of as a burden. If there are things I haven't thought of in this, I would welcome enlightenment. I'm not infallible and may have overlooked something in your argument.

I think Kekune's idea is a great one. I don't think any one set of players should have unfair advantages over others, because of this or any other set that produces a specific item for everyone.

After reading through further posts, I think this also is a disadvantage for scroll boosters. So I'm even more in favor of Kekune's idea.

 

[samidodamage]

a set in the spire that allows scroll boosters to get rid of their factories and have an unfair population advantage, over those who do not have scroll boosts and must have factories in their boosted items?

I haven't yet solidified an opinion about the various options on how to reduce the problem of excess scrolls. But, I wanted to respond to this part of your post. I am scroll boosted in one city, crystal boosted in the other.
I have kept one Scroll factory (lvl 23, maxed for me at the end of Elementals) in my scroll boosted city where I do have an excess of scrolls (have about as many scrolls as crystal and silk added together there). My other 2 scroll factories were teleported at lvl 18 (fairy max lvl -1).
The scroll excess I have in my crystal boosted city is insane. I am in Ch15 there. I have twice as many scrolls as I do crystal and silk added together there! I teleported both my crystal buildings (lvl 26, amuni max -1) out of my crystal boosted city sometime around the beginning of this year. I brought 1 back out because I needed crystal to trade for silk, lol. I brought a second one out to help with event quests that ask for production of crafted goods. I'm keeping those two out for now just so I can balance my crystal by trading for silk and keep at least half as many of those 2 goods total as I have of scrolls, lol! So, for me, it actually gave me a population/culture/space advantage in my non-scroll boosted city but not in my scroll boosted city.
I'm pretty sure I'm not an example of the average player, but just wanted you to know it's not always the scroll boosted city that has the advantage.

 

[Ashrem]

but just wanted you to know it's not always the scroll boosted city that has the advantage.

Personally, I think they have a serious disadvantage. I'm not scroll boosted, and I'm still offering scrolls at three stars because I'm making over 100k per day, basically for free from buildings that give my population, culture, and catalysts.

 

[Kekune]

I have twice as many scrolls as I do crystal and silk added together there! I teleported both my crystal buildings (lvl 26, amuni max -1) out of my crystal boosted city sometime around the beginning of this year. I brought 1 back out because I needed crystal to trade for silk, lol.

This sums up the problem perfectly. You are boosted in crystal, yet severely reduced your production to make scrolls instead. So you're not offering crystal for scrolls (which means scroll producers aren't getting it from you) and despite having a surplus of scrolls you had to put a crystal factory back up to trade for silk, I presume because nobody wanted to give you silk for scrolls. When scrolls producers face that, what are they supposed to do? They can't suddenly start producing crystal.

This set isn't just somewhat better for one group or another. Its widespread use actively harms players with those boosts, particularly scrolls.

 

[Darielle]

I haven't yet solidified an opinion about the various options on how to reduce the problem of excess scrolls. But, I wanted to respond to this part of your post. I am scroll boosted in one city, crystal boosted in the other.
I have kept one Scroll factory (lvl 23, maxed for me at the end of Elementals) in my scroll boosted city where I do have an excess of scrolls (have about as many scrolls as crystal and silk added together there). My other 2 scroll factories were teleported at lvl 18 (fairy max lvl -1).
The scroll excess I have in my crystal boosted city is insane. I am in Ch15 there. I have twice as many scrolls as I do crystal and silk added together there! I teleported both my crystal buildings (lvl 26, amuni max -1) out of my crystal boosted city sometime around the beginning of this year. I brought 1 back out because I needed crystal to trade for silk, lol. I brought a second one out to help with event quests that ask for production of crafted goods. I'm keeping those two out for now just so I can balance my crystal by trading for silk and keep at least half as many of those 2 goods total as I have of scrolls, lol! So, for me, it actually gave me a population/culture/space advantage in my non-scroll boosted city but not in my scroll boosted city.
I'm pretty sure I'm not an example of the average player, but just wanted you to know it's not always the scroll boosted city that has the advantage.

Yes, I think there are both advantages and disadvantages for scroll boosters, after reading every post here. It depends upon the situation. Thanks for all that data; that's enlightening.