Building storage 2

[DeletedUser6807]

Well the previous thread went well don't you think.

Soggy, I said I'd read over your "puzzle post"

You were right, I was not taking the actual act of "moving" the buildings into consideration, only the end result.
I wish I could have seen that sooner.

I also appreciated a well explained scenario of abuse. These 2 instances are indeed what I was looking to see.

I'll also answer your motive question,... since you put things the way you did. I've never thought the game needs to be easier, it's quite playable.
The motive for my posting is,..
I don't think its "right" that you cannot recover the only buildings that at the least require extra effort to achieve, and what seems even more wrong to me is that they can cost actual money.

I would like to know something thats for me just a clarification, several times during your post you have addressed your persona as "we". I trust your not multiple people, so is "we" an Elvenar support group or some type of affiliate?

Cheers,

Azurax

 

[SoggyShorts]

I'm glad that I was able to answer your question.(finally)
For those of us that spend a lot of time on the forums the topic of storage has become somewhat tiresome. Even though it was your first time suggesting it, for some of us it was the 25th time rebutting it, so if I was a little short, I apologize.

The only time I could find that I used the word "we" was when I said
I'm not sure you understand what we mean when we say "puzzle aspect"
I was referring to myself and @Iyapo who had mentioned "puzzle aspect"

As I said, there are dozens of threads on the subject, and some of the forum regulars just take turns explaining what the possible downsides of any storage system may be. For myself, they all blur together at this point, so I might use "we" to refer to the general consensus.

That, or maybe I'm a Nigerian prince using the royal "We". BTW, any thoughts on why no one has responded to my emails lately?

 

[DeletedUser6807]

I guess your right, it was actually 2 "we's" and an "us"

 

[DeletedUser4671]

Watching this thread closely. Do not derail this one

 

[Ashrem]

I don't think its "right" that you cannot recover the only buildings that at the least require extra effort to achieve, and what seems even more wrong to me is that they can cost actual money.

For the most part, the event buildings shouldn't require much extra effort to achieve. The quests are (in general) designed to fit in to the normal progression of a city.

Elvenar requires regular tearing down and rebuilding to progress successfully. All of the building options get better (or more accurately, more efficient) over time. Getting attached to buildings is a meaningful choice, because it means choosing between a more efficient city and one that you find more attractive. I think most of us eventually face disappointment over having to tear down or upgrade some of our buildings that we find interesting and attractive. In the long run, I don't think it's especially likely that many people will want to re-place a building they've pulled off into storage other than almost immediately, because it will mean giving up something more effective.

I suppose a person could consider whether the storage function would be useful to them if the building once stored has to be left there for a minimum of 30 days before it can be re-deployed. That would reduce it's usefulness as a work around for not having enough space to shift things around.

 

[AtaguS]

Butting in to offer a personal point of view....I've often thought about how convenient it would be if I could store a building for one reason or another. I've thought about how much I wish I could move an expansion, once placed. And I've wished I could rotate buildings to suit my own design anesthetic. And other stuff...

While I don't think this game is perfect by any means, I do appreciate the special challenges it presents by way of forcing me to make decisions on numerous levels (aesthetics vs productivity, ranking vs. tactical progression, etc) that, sadly, getting all my wishes would render irrelevant. or, at least, less challenging.

So, I've had to get rid of buildings I liked, but all in the pursuit of a different goal I didn't even know I had back when I got that building. Have had to change the pace of how I play, as well as how far reaching my layout strategy stretches, all in response to the challenges that not having the above wish list leave me with. Most wondrous of all, I've had to accept and pursue the fellowship of my FS to meet many of the challenges presented. Something I once thought I would resist to the last.

Gotta say, still on the fence about some of the limitations I see...but overall satisfied.

 

[DeletedUser8083]

It appears that we have two different ideas to accomplish the same purpose...check out my post today titled, "Allow building swapping when moving buildings". Both suggestions would work very well together.

 

[DeletedUser6807]

Well hopefully I'm doing this "correctly" as I truly do not understand the directive given me to not "multipost"

I suppose a person could consider whether the storage function would be useful to them if the building once stored has to be left there for a minimum of 30 days before it can be re-deployed. That would reduce it's usefulness as a work around for not having enough space to shift things around.

And a one time usage.

 

[Ashrem]

Well hopefully I'm doing this "correctly" as I truly do not understand the directive given me to not "multipost"
And a one time usage.

The Inno forums discourage people posting two or more messages in a row. That can be a frequent problem when someone loses their temper and starts to pile message on top of message. I wish they used a little more latitude in enforcement, since it is not always a problem, but it is what it is. It doesn't help that the term multiposting means something here that is not typical of forums.

And a one time usage.

One time usage is a limitation, but it doesn't actually have any affect at all on its usefulness in rearranging your city, since most people don't need to rearrange very often, and sticking one large building in storage has a huge effect on your ability to rearrange your other buildings freely.

 

[DeletedUser6807]

The Inno forums discourage people posting two or more messages in a row. That can be a frequent problem when someone loses their temper and starts to pile message on top of message. I wish they used a little more latitude in enforcement, since it is not always a problem, but it is what it is. It doesn't help that the term multiposting means something here that is not typical of forums.

Or when someone simply cant figure out how to multi-quote from several post without all of the quotes being gathered at once.
As like maybe they stated,...Concept.

One time usage is a limitation, but it doesn't actually have any affect at all on its usefulness in rearranging your city, since most people don't need to rearrange very often, and sticking one large building in storage has a huge effect on your ability to rearrange your other buildings freely.

This would be true in regards to the "effect" it would have on the mechanical end of it. (the act of movement) the time something would have to remain in storage would as well have an equal impact on "ability to move".

I'm still trying to figure a way to get all of this into parameters that are definable beyond measures such as "huge" or "significant".

So as of the impact these features would have in a more complete aspect to city manipulation I'm still uncertain.

However, regarding soggies post describing an abuse scenario they would be ideal tools for the job since the one using them wouldn't care how many times he'd need to use them, once is great!
And if this exploit could last several chapters who cares about thirty days?

That in itself shoots it down for me.

Cheers.

 

[DeletedUser6807]

I came up with another concept for building storage,..

What about an actual in city storage facility you could choose to build or not?
It would only require regular resources and If built comes with 1 free "storage pass".
The footprint could be maybe 2 average buildings. and the facility could hold a maximum of 4 structures.
Only 1 storage facility per player would be available, and once built can never be deleted.
The storage passes would be a single use non purchase item.
There would be a twist however. Once a structure is placed in storage it can only be retrieved with a "storage release",
Storage passes, and storage releases would be an either or choice every event.

feedback?

 

[SoggyShorts]

I think that might swing things in the other direction. It really depends on the sizes.
What could be placed there? Just event buildings, or others too?
Being able to hold 4 structures (let's use Phoenix Cults for example) frees up 80 squares, or just over 3 whole expansions.
To offset that how big would this building be? 5x5? bigger?
How many passes could be won in an event? There are about 6 events per year. If it's only 1 per event, that storage building is taking up a massive chunk of real estate forever, and the benefit is that you can place and retrieve 3 building per year? Just to hang onto a seasonal reward with outdated stats?

 

[DeletedUser6807]

I think that might swing things in the other direction. It really depends on the sizes.
What could be placed there? Just event buildings, or others too?
Being able to hold 4 structures (let's use Phoenix Cults for example) frees up 80 squares, or just over 3 whole expansions.
To offset that how big would this building be? 5x5? bigger?
How many passes could be won in an event? There are about 6 events per year. If it's only 1 per event, that storage building is taking up a massive chunk of real estate forever, and the benefit is that you can place and retrieve 3 building per year? Just to hang onto a seasonal reward with outdated stats?

As far as what buildings allowed, my focus of concern was those that are purchased, but also event buildings and decorations because "coining" may have occurred to obtain them, basically anything that is not rebuildable.

The foot print it would take up in the city,... I was thinking maybe a best ratio of 1/4th capacity worst ratio 1/3rd. original thoughts were 5x5 or 5x6 . I also thought maybe it wouldn't have to look like a storage shed in order to keep an attractive landscape. Maybe it could be a 4x7 or 4x8 garden with a pool or fountain in the middle. I also think it shouldn't have to be connected by a road.

The reason I envisioned it as permanent was to reduce both aspects of exploitation and abuse.

As far as "passes" and "releases" go my thoughts were, every event would offer one, it would be the players choice which one they received.

I don't know the proper term for the reward building levels so I'll call them tiers.
I keep seeing this idea as "storage items" being a quest line reward between 1st and 2nd tier.

That"s all I have at the moment.

 

[SoggyShorts]

Looking at the potential uses vs the cost of having it take up a 5x5 space makes me think I would never build one.
Sacrificing an entire expansion for a building that I could use 3-6 times a year doesn't make sense to me, especially since anything I put in there will have very bad stats compared to the buildings that will be available to me by the time I take it out.

 

[DeletedUser6807]

Looking at the potential uses vs the cost of having it take up a 5x5 space makes me think I would never build one.
Sacrificing an entire expansion for a building that I could use 3-6 times a year doesn't make sense to me, especially since anything I put in there will have very bad stats compared to the buildings that will be available to me by the time I take it out.

The biggest issue I've had regarding this concept was trying to figure a formula to calculate the effect.
The stumbling block has always been the "movement" aspect of the puzzle effect scenario you posted.
Each time it is added to the equation its like trying to get a drink of water with a sieve, you dip it into the bucket but by the time it gets to your mouth the volume has changed.

I knew I was missing something somewhere. and moments ago it came to me,.. I was hung up on the sliding puzzle so much I wasnt seeing that there is no true movement.
To explain, nothing travels from one point to another, it is either "here" or "there"
Now that movement can, be expressed as an absolute there is a way to define as a ratio or percentage the impact a space, occupied or unoccupied has in relation to the other spaces of the city.

There is however another part that cant be truly measured but only expressed as a "probability".
The value of one square in one city will vary from player to player even if they are in the same chapter and research level. In another post I cited that a ratio existed between space/benefit, since that is a variable the best that can be expected is a probability, which is actually a viable term in computerland.

 

[SoggyShorts]

The value of any given square is a little tough to figure out, but if you make a few assumptions I think you can get close.

Players in chapters 3-8 that have gone through their second major event should be able to get all of the culture they need from pop/culture buildings. Of course if they spend all of their event resources on less efficient buildings that won't be the case. Personally none of my cities have built a normal culture building since December (other than chapter 9 for mana)

Because of that I generally value space at max pop/sq for that chapters normal residences. It's also how I pick which event prizes to go for. Of course some space is needed for goods+supplies, but since the number of factories needed never really changes I just ignore those squares.

 

[DeletedUser6857]

I don't see using building storage as a means of circumventing the inherent challenge in designing your city as a desirable thing. I have seen building storage used in another INNO game but the underlying reasons for it and the mechanics were quite different.

The building storage in this case is a won object that can be used once to put a won event building back into your inventory. When coupled with one of the additional items that can be won, one-up kits and renovation kits the building storage makes sense in the general game strategy. The one-up kit upgrades the building one age/chapter. The renovation kit upgrades to the current age. First thing to note is the special buildings in this game are harder to win and less frequent for the average player than they are in Elvenar (this is based on the super cool loot I got in the last Phoenix event). Like in Elvanar their strength is tied to the stage of the game when the are acquired. But by using the store building you can store an old favorite that just isn't cutting it in the current stage of the game. Then when you acquire a renovation kit or more than one one-up kit the old favorite can be reborn with relevant stats.

I'm not sure this makes sense in Elvenar since the drop rate and availability of special event buildings is higher. When your old event buildings are getting weak relative to the chapter you are in an new event will come along and they can be replaced with the new coolest stuff.

 

[SoggyShorts]

@Wood Wanderer IF one-up kits and reno kits are ever implemented here(blueprints secondary use?) then yes, there would indeed be a reason to store buildings this way.

 

[DeletedUser6807]

The value of any given square is a little tough to figure out, but if you make a few assumptions I think you can get close.

Players in chapters 3-8 that have gone through their second major event should be able to get all of the culture they need from pop/culture buildings. Of course if they spend all of their event resources on less efficient buildings that won't be the case. Personally none of my cities have built a normal culture building since December (other than chapter 9 for mana)

Because of that I generally value space at max pop/sq for that chapters normal residences. It's also how I pick which event prizes to go for. Of course some space is needed for goods+supplies, but since the number of factories needed never really changes I just ignore those squares.

Another aspect that could be considered is game play style.
If I would have known my city could function without a barracks I never would have built it. Unfortunately I now have a fairly large building that is useless to me. The same with the armory. I never use them for anything other than troop recruiting quest in events. The armory can be deleted, but I'm stuck with the barracks. This also has an effect.

"Because of that I generally value space at max pop/sq for that chapters normal residences. It's also how I pick which event prizes to go for. Of course some space is needed for goods+supplies, but since the number of factories needed never really changes I just ignore those squares."

The number of factories needed could be an ever increasing number if one was playing a different game style. Say industrialization.

In which case the square value is space/yield,.. not to say space/yield doesn't apply across the board to all aspects since every square truly is a yield, it is just a matter of what it yields. pop,cult,goods etc.

"@Wood Wanderer IF one-up kits and reno kits are ever implemented here(blueprints secondary use?) then yes, there would indeed be a reason to store buildings this way."

I've mentioned the reason storage like this is pertinent several times, I guess I'll bring it up again, There is another reason that storage is important, actually more important than event buildings is purchased buildings.

Regardless all of the storage scenarios I've read in response suggest that by the time you could get your event building back into the city it would be horribly outdated,.. this therory assumes a great period of time will pass, or that the players research will advance to the point a significantly improved stat building will be available to them. Or that another event will happen, in which they WILL win a better building

 

[DeletedUser6857]

The number of factories needed could be an ever increasing number if one was playing a different game style. Say industrialization.

That's an interesting concept. What is the object of industrialization as a game style. Understand being a farmer/goods producer as opposed to using fighting for province acquisition. But since the production of the goods buildings grows as you progress and your boosts go up why would you need to continuously build more? What would the benefit be of building vast stores of goods?