• 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

[Rejected] Change to Prevent Time Creep on Collections

Enevhar Aldarion

Well-Known Member
How many / Which expiring buildings would it effect?
Trading outpost and trading station are 48 hours. The ferris wheel is 24 hours. The carting library is 24 hours. Monument of ancient knowledge and ice lindworm are 48 hours. And those are just the ones I have out in my city right now, but I know there are others that I would have to look up to add.
 

Ashrem

Well-Known Member
Trading outpost and trading station are 48 hours. The ferris wheel is 24 hours. The carting library is 24 hours. Monument of ancient knowledge and ice lindworm are 48 hours. And those are just the ones I have out in my city right now, but I know there are others that I would have to look up to add.
Okay, and what is the balance danger with them? If you did everything perfectly the most you could gain on any of them is four extra collections in 100 days. What balance danger do you perceive in a 4% improvement of output in exchange for never missing harvesting something every 23 hours for one hundred days? 104KP instead of 100 after 3 months? Maybe 104 broken rune shards instead of 100 after three months?

The buildings that output every 48 hours for 50 days are irrelevant. The number of players who could manage to collect every 47 hours for 24 or more days out of 50, and never miss the 48 hours all the other days, all in order to gain a single output from the building is probably effectively zero. None of those buildings represents any measuarble possibility of players gaining anything over the stated output.
 

Enevhar Aldarion

Well-Known Member
Okay, and what is the balance danger with them? If you did everything perfectly the most you could gain on any of them is four extra collections in 100 days. What balance danger do you perceive in a 4% improvement of output in exchange for never missing harvesting something every 23 hours for one hundred days? 104KP instead of 100 after 3 months? Maybe 104 broken rune shards instead of 100 after three months?

The buildings that output every 48 hours for 50 days are irrelevant. The number of players who could manage to collect every 47 hours for 24 or more days out of 50, and never miss the 48 hours all the other days, all in order to gain a single output from the building is probably effectively zero. None of those buildings represents any measuarble possibility of players gaining anything over the stated output.
Don't ask me, ask the devs. They are the ones who made these things so that you can only get 199 collections from a wishing well, and not the 200 the math says you could, or only 99 collections from a ferris wheel and not 100, and so on for the other expiring buildings. Do you really think they will shorten the timer to give us more collections with that kind of programming? If they wanted us to have the max number of collections that the numbers say we could get, they would have made it so we could collect from the buildings when we first put them out, rather than make us wait for the timer to count down. Maybe that would make a good suggestion for expiring buildings. Give us a collection as soon as the building is built, so that we can get that full 200 or 100 or 50 or 25 collections.
 

Ashrem

Well-Known Member
Don't ask me, ask the devs. They are the ones who made these things so that you can only get 199 collections from a wishing well, and not the 200 the math says you could, or only 99 collections from a ferris wheel and not 100, and so on for the other expiring buildings.
I don't feel a need to ask them, because I don't think those things are particularly intentional. And I think that reading any intent more focused than picking a nice, even, number of days is pointless.

If that's the entirety of your worry, I'm content to let them decide what they will. I don't hold a lot of hope for the idea anyway, and I don't think expiring buildings is going to be the line in the sand that causes them to reject it.
 

Xelenia

Senior Forum Moderator
Elvenar Team
Alright, we got feedback!... Not what you wanted to hear though.

The developers do acknowledge the problem you have all brought forward, but unfortunately, they do not see the collection times as something that negatively affects the game in any way as it is currently. Thus, it is not something on their radar at the moment but if any free time presents itself as they enhance the game, they will happily revisit the described problem brought forward in the initial post.

It May not be what you all wanted to hear, but at least you have a response!

Xelenia
 

AtaguS

Well-Known Member
Alright, we got feedback!... Not what you wanted to hear though.

The developers do acknowledge the problem you have all brought forward, but unfortunately, they do not see the collection times as something that negatively affects the game in any way as it is currently. Thus, it is not something on their radar at the moment but if any free time presents itself as they enhance the game, they will happily revisit the described problem brought forward in the initial post.

It May not be what you all wanted to hear, but at least you have a response!

Xelenia
Thanks for forwarding it @Xelenia and thanks for the feedback, much appreciated :)
 

Some.one

Well-Known Member
Alright, we got feedback!... Not what you wanted to hear though.

The developers do acknowledge the problem you have all brought forward, but unfortunately, they do not see the collection times as something that negatively affects the game in any way as it is currently. Thus, it is not something on their radar at the moment but if any free time presents itself as they enhance the game, they will happily revisit the described problem brought forward in the initial post.

It May not be what you all wanted to hear, but at least you have a response!

Xelenia
Thank you for following up.