• Dear forum visitor,

    It looks as though you have not registered for a forum account, or are not signed in. In order to participate in current discussions or create new threads, you will need to register for a forum account by clicking on the link below.

    Click here to register for a forum account!

    If you already have a forum account, you can simply click on the 'Log in' button at the top right of your forum screen.

    Your Elvenar Team

Moonstone Library should be limited to a single building (like other special sets)

Ashrem

Oh Wise One
I can only imagine the outrage of people who already have them placed. It also severely impacts people who have just the one set. If we want the spire prize to be a 'great' set, limiting to a single copy makes sense.
  • Your suggestion says that players who already have them get to keep theirs, so they'd be special, now you say the people who already have them placed will be outraged. Which is it?
  • Unlike event buildings (which can mostly be obtained by just doing your normal activities), the Spire buildings are not free. They result from significant good and troops sink (which the game needs to keep in balance) and serves to keep players entertained who are waiting for new content).
  • They also require space that can't be used for something else.
  • Some of us think the buildings can be a useful and integral part of the game but require an even handed balance of what they produce. Changing things people already have is hard. Taking them away is harder. Taking them away from future players while leaving them for existing players is somewhere in the middle. You're proposing the devs pick one of the two hardest options instead of the least hard (which is already being voted on in another suggestion). I doubt that will fly with the devs, let along enough people to get past a poll.
["Fixing" the scrolls --> Boost+1 doesn't solve the power problem as I mentioned -- it still lets people fill their city with them instead of manufactories. If anything, it makes it more powerful because the resource it produces won't be devalued anymore.]
There is no power problem. The buildings require at least as much space as any number of other buildings that do the same thing. Lots of people never bother to place them. Others place them and replace them as they proceed through the chapters. Others collect them because they are cool. Choosing to use them instead of Snow Owls or a Carnival set is a choice, based on what you get for the 24 squares.
 

Deleted User - 4646370

Guest
Spots in the Spire where event buildings show up can either be replaced by additional time/coin/supply instants, or just be removed and the other percentages increased accordingly.
I think you mean set buildings. This should be fixed.

If you go back and look at what I quoted, you'll find I specifically said that in response to
You're right, I first missed that the quoted sentence was meaning other buildings would be removed too.
 

LisaMV

Well-Known Member
I love the Moonstone Library set, and love adding on more buildings. I now get 2 CC's every morning, and it is really pretty to boot. It's a fun puzzle to create, and I love the little floating piles of pink each morning to start my Elvenar day.

This is not a deep analysis, like some of you brilliant players that go on and on in great detail about which does what better in some chapter with goods I haven't even heard of yet... lol. Listen to them!
 

samidodamage

Buddy Fan Club member
@LisaMV
Thanks for reminding us that not everyone plays the game to develop optimum efficiency! :D Some folks like buildings just because they like them!

That said, @michmarc is way better at the math than I could ever be and makes and shares very detailed spreadsheet data that explains stuff very well. They also usually have a very balanced, data-point driven approach to problem-solving in various areas of the game. I am quite frankly stunned at this suggestion and trying very hard to understand it. I don't think I've ever seen them advocating for solutions removing player choices from the game before posting this one:confused:.
 

DeletedUser22644

Guest
@Ed1960 and @ALLANONN

I get your general summation of your opinion, but we don't get the WHY of that opinion. The importance of telling us why does two things: generally it clarifies in you own mind why you are of the opinion you are; and 2) more importantly: it tells us reasons for agreeing or disagreeing with you, and thus, potentially furthers the conversation. So I ask, why do you oppose this suggestion?

AJ
I am against anything that retroactively nerfs the game, as was done in the past to the players and caused such a severe disruption. Not to mention that if they fix the scroll issue then I cant see a problem with the set.
Also, I'm not surprised that it's unpopular because it's just a sign of how strong these buildings are. I suspect that it's not something that players want, but it's something the game needs.
I disagree strongly that they are overly strong and would say Winter Market Set is far more powerful and you could have 3 or four of the sets. Or the Lava Egg as a single item.
 

Enevhar Aldarion

Oh Wise One
I disagree strongly that they are overly strong and would say Winter Market Set is far more powerful and you could have 3 or four of the sets. Or the Lava Egg as a single item.

The problem with arguments like this is that anyone who started playing after any of the older sets were available will, of course, not have any access to them. We are talking a year and a half since that Winter event that let people load up on those set pieces. That are a lot of players who have started since then. And a good number of players who got the set and have since quit playing. Besides that, we have only had the Spire and the Library set for about 10 months now, so it really should only be compared to event buildings released during that time, if you want to figure out how powerful the set is.
 

StarLoad

Well-Known Member
I had 4 of the winter market sets and built up 3 mill in Mana and never needed any other Mana productions. I have now dropped 2 into storage and added Seed productions in its place. Taking away my choice to have and build my city MY way rather than YOUR way is going to get a NO from ME every time. Not to mentions the complexity, it would add to the spire and like reduce the value of worthwhile prizes that are available.
 

Captain Asgard

Active Member
Hard no from me on this one. Not everyone is ever going to have a complete Moonstone Library. I never will. In my Beta city I recently got a Moonstone Gate. I love that thing. In fact, I did a little chair dance when I got it, then promptly placed it. I'd love to have a couple more if I'm lucky enough to get them, and I don't think me having three Moonstone Gates is going to hurt anyone. So, don't futz with my stuff, please, and don't take my choices away.
 

DeletedUser22644

Guest
The problem with arguments like this is that anyone who started playing after any of the older sets were available will, of course, not have any access to them. We are talking a year and a half since that Winter event that let people load up on those set pieces. That are a lot of players who have started since then. And a good number of players who got the set and have since quit playing. Besides that, we have only had the Spire and the Library set for about 10 months now, so it really should only be compared to event buildings released during that time, if you want to figure out how powerful the set is.
I agree it is apples and oranges, and also a matter of luck for some sets, I only bring it up to highlight the idea that to change the Number of any past set with be a massive issue for some and a so what to others. I know that I took a break and did not participate during the "Bear" event so I missed out on the Brown bear. So yes I am at a disadvantage compared to others for the same time, but thats life.
 

shimmerfly

Well-Known Member
This gets a no from me. I also love my library set. It gives me something to strive for in the Spire besides time instants...and if I get a piece ( even if it does imbalance my scrolls boost ) I woudn't want it any other way.
 

tincture

Member
Sort of off topic, but I was curious about the mention of the Chess Set. I didnt know that the chess set was 'unique' and had been hoping it would show up in my crafter so i could get a current-chapter version. If i want to update the chess set to my current chapter do i have to use RR or can i build the set and then sell it off to get it to show up again in the crafting options?
 

Ashrem

Oh Wise One
Sort of off topic, but I was curious about the mention of the Chess Set. I didnt know that the chess set was 'unique' and had been hoping it would show up in my crafter so i could get a current-chapter version. If i want to update the chess set to my current chapter do i have to use RR or can i build the set and then sell it off to get it to show up again in the crafting options?
You don't have to build it. You can shred it for fragments and then it will appear again in the crafting recipes.
 

Enevhar Aldarion

Oh Wise One
I agree it is apples and oranges, and also a matter of luck for some sets, I only bring it up to highlight the idea that to change the Number of any past set with be a massive issue for some and a so what to others. I know that I took a break and did not participate during the "Bear" event so I missed out on the Brown bear. So yes I am at a disadvantage compared to others for the same time, but thats life.

Yeah, I was sort of joking in a previous post that all evolving and set buildings should be reduced down to just one of each if that were done to the library set. It is Inno's own fault for screwing up and letting people game the system and get way too many of some of these buildings. I think the vast majority of players would not even notice if the numbers were reduced to even a max five of each evolving and set building. How many players would that even affect, probably under a hundred worldwide.

I have been wondering if we would even get a repeat/update of the Bear event, but adding a fourth one, like they did with the Phoenix event, but I am starting to doubt we will. We already know the next event, which will start at the end of July, so that will really be our Aug event, instead of a Bear repeat.
 

michmarc

Well-Known Member
Your suggestion says that players who already have them get to keep theirs, so they'd be special, now you say the people who already have them placed will be outraged. Which is it?

Context. In the original proposal, I was saying that people who already had multiple copies of the set could keep them. (E.g., I was not suggesting that we go into people's cities and remove duplicate copies.)

In the line that you quoted, I was referring to reducing the output of those buildings (retroactively) and players who already had them would get upset.

It's actually the same idea -- as much as it may be 'fair' to everyone, I am not advocating for any change that would take away something that someone already has. It just prevents people from getting multiple sets in the future.
 

DeletedUser22644

Guest
It is a major difference to say that INNO should prevent future sets from being more than one per player vrs saying an existing set piece that some get by choice and effort be limited to one per player, unless you already have multiple then its ok?

Sorry but your thread title is wrong and deceptive ....
 

Ashrem

Oh Wise One
I also agree that the previous events where you can earn multiple grand prize buildings (bears, phoenixes, etc) was a mistake and I think Inno realized that as well since their endless quest events have gone away
Almost. It's gone from anyone who is willing to buy lots of diamonds, and anyone who is willing to put out a lot of effort, to only people who are willing to buy lots of diamonds.
 

BrinDarby

Well-Known Member
@michmarc ,
You went too far to limit # of sets/bldgs ...... chg the rules to add 1 simple phrase.... " & connected to main set piece".
Thats really what your suggestion was aimed @ ..... the reason the pieces are so powerfull is because you don't
need the main Library..... I now support the other thread in the +1 chg, so by adding the above phrase... then it does
solve both issues..... ( the current fix'd good : scrolls , and .. the creative way ppl use 1-2 pieces of this set )

I mean lets get real here..... even ElvenGems promotes the creative use of these pieces in unique ways.....
its not some secret only pass'd between friends..... hahahahaha ..... why shouldn't smart ppl benefit from
using thier IQ to thier advantage ?????
BrinD
 

sam767

Well-Known Member
I don't fully understand the rationale behind the suggestion. One of my suggestions to re-balance spell fragments is voting. I am happy with my 4x moonstone footprint. If we want to do more radical surgery on Spire rewards I vote for:
1 eliminate portal profits for players before dwarves. Rebalance other rewards.
2. Reduce portal profits for high chapter players who are probably drowning in them (I have 4000% last time I checked).
3. Make moonstone building expiring at 100 days. Increase their probability verses the worthless (to me) portal profit and trading station.
4. Restore the DA in gateway to 20%.
Any number of other tweaks.
I'm OK with the way the rewards stand now, but, if we are going to nerf the moonstones, please, please nerf the worthless rewards as well and give me more DAs and genies.
Moonstone is a benefit available to all players equally. The desire to nerf it puzzles me.
 
Top