Forwarded Sets

[samidodamage]

I guess, I won’t ever make a suggestion again here.

Don't let these posters/players get to you; we need new ideas around here, lol!
They're a tough crowd, but you're now in the spot where you're the one who has to go back and edit the first post to reflect the ideas discussed here and how they can be handled/incorporated. The process is detailed in the read before posting sticky, but generally:
After you're sure everything is exactly the way you want it, you tag a mod and ask for an official forum vote. It's a yes/no vote over a specific time frame with the end date of the vote visible. No changing the original post after the voting has begun. It's like changing the wording of a referendum on a ballot after some folks have already voted on the previous wording: not allowed. I've seen ideas fall apart in the voting stage because someone left something out of the original post. Most veteran players thought it was 'obvious' how that situation would be handled, but there were loads of 'no' votes because it wasn't there.
Also, this entire process only pushes the idea through to the global CM's. They have a 2 week process for voting on ideas submitted from all the global forums that determines which one(s) goes through to the devs each cycle. The rules and process were developed in conjunction with the devs.
I'm convinced the whole thing's so convoluted and layered because (as a group; not individually) the devs prefer moving forward with their own ideas uninhibited by us pesky players, lol! So if we stop pushing through new ideas, it's a win for them.
As to your question about *why* a player would want to upgrade set bldgs separately? I'll use myself and Moonstone Library set as an example. I'm a Spire veteran from the days when you could get multiple of those sets. I have 10+ complete sets placed in both cities (and more in Summonings, just in case, lol!). I like using the 1x1 bldgs to complete the 'upgrade a bldg' event quests and I also can use more of the resources they produce now that I'm in sentients. However, those libraries take 16 RR's to upgrade and I don't need more of the resources they produce. I keep them for the CC's and that doesn't change with chapter upgrades. So, I'd never choose to upgrade the entire set.

 

[mucksterme]

Goodness. I guess, I won’t ever make a suggestion again here. It seems my play style is not advanced enough.
why would you ever want to unfuse it, or upgrade it seperately?

What is the problem? I might have missed something but I did not see anyone being rude or condescending.
Is it just that you think your ideas are so perfect they need no input from others?
The whole idea is to get input from others.
Not too long ago I made a suggestion and after it was kicked around a bit I decided it was a lousy idea.
Mostly what I see here is people liking your basic (very basic) idea, but saying how they would improve on it.
For that you'll leave in a huff?

 

[Yogi Dave]

Goodness. I guess, I won’t ever make a suggestion again here. It seems my play style is not advanced enough.
why would you ever want to unfuse it, or upgrade it seperately?

Welcome to the forum and don't be intimidated by us. We can be a rather contentious lot. Your idea is a good one, but it's best for us to discuss ways to improve (or disprove) it, to make it better for the game at large. There are tons of different playstyles. Regardless of anything said here, this is your thread, and you get to add, refine or remove info in your initial post. Don't be bullied into changing it in a way you don't like. You own it. And, even if it isn't accepted, there is a lot to be learned from seeing the points of view of many of us. It's a good place to pick up ideas you can use in your game.

As to your question about why someone would want to unfuse a set, some sets are huge if you able to get more than a single set (my moonstone library set is 133 squares and my winter market set is 122) I don't have the room to move the whole thing at once to a new spot and usually it needs to be arranged differently in the new spot.

As for separate upgrading, I'm like @samidodamage. I like upgrading the mana plants which are 1x1 for event quests, but I never upgrade the gum trees. In the Winter Market Set, I'm pretty much the opposite in that I upgrade my 4-18 sq. Frosted Christmas Trees since they give awesome amounts of mana when linked. The smaller pieces are not as important, but some I still upgrade for their goods production. I don't really need those goods, but they come in handy during a FA.

 

[Lady Dastardly]

why would you ever want to unfuse it

It is also possible to get additional pieces of a set after the original event that awarded the set. In that case, you often need to rearrange to accommodate the new piece. For example, the silver league prize in the most recent event awarded a Tome containing your choice of 1 Forbidden Ruins set building. I now need to rearrange my existing set pieces to get the most link bonuses from my new piece. Sets are frequently not as static as they seem to be at first glance.

 

[Pheryll]

There are a few considerations that may be hardcoded in that would make the suggestions here difficult to implement.

1) Dimensions for buildings are recorded as if they are all rectangles both for the buildings location and for moving it. Many sets are not rectangles when fully assembled. This may mean that moving a fused set may require a rectangular assembly. I recall that when the copper dragon was given incorrect dimensions, that I was appearing to move a 2x3 when in actuality the game was regarding the true location of the building as if it were 3x4.

2) Having a separate building to represent a fused set may indeed work if the building only represents a single instance of each of the set buildings, each one being at the same chapter. If one wanted custom arrangements with multiple of a certain building within the fuse or buildings at different chapters, then these custom buildings used to replace the set would no longer be citing a specific line in the game resource files, like all other buildings would.

3) Fusing and unfusing will run into the same problems of moving a building outside from the set (that is a reset of all the production counters).

 

[Genefer]

What is multi-link abuse of building sets?

I would be happy to only have to confirm moving a piece of a set once rather than each building in the set. Maybe the confirmation could be "would you like to move buildings belonging to the Pilgrims retreat set.... ?" I don't want to accidentally move one so l want to confirm my choice, but it really is annoying to have to confirm for each linked building.

I am wary of the term fuse, because it would be really unfortunate to lose the ability to upgrade individual pieces.

 

[Genefer]

I guess an option to link & unlink would work - as long as they can be unlinked this would eliminate the need to confirm each piece and allow for easy movement.

 

[Singura]

Thank you for your encouragement. I will see, how I need to phrase my idea, so all aspects are considered.

 

[Singura]

What is the problem? I might have missed something but I did not see anyone being rude or condescending.
Is it just that you think your ideas are so perfect they need no input from others?
The whole idea is to get input from others.
Not too long ago I made a suggestion and after it was kicked around a bit I decided it was a lousy idea.
Mostly what I see here is people liking your basic (very basic) idea, but saying how they would improve on it.
For that you'll leave in a huff?

No, I do not think my idea is perfect, but I am not a game developer, and I have no idea what is doable, and what not, so I don’t know how to phrase it any differently. And this is my first time making a suggestion, so excuse my inadequate process. And maybe you can give someone some slack next time, before answering so arrogantly.

 

[Ashrem]

No, I do not think my idea is perfect, but I am not a game developer, and I have no idea what is doable, and what not, so I don’t know how to phrase it any differently. And this is my first time making a suggestion, so excuse my inadequate process. And maybe you can give someone some slack next time, before answering so arrogantly.

Some of the crankiness is just weariness from having seen a lot of ideas come and go. some of it is just that crankiness is Muck's default setting. There's a pretty good pinned post in the Suggestions forum that ask people to read it before making a suggestion, though it gets missed more often than it gets looked at:

https://us.forum.elvenar.com/index.php?threads/ideas-and-suggestions-read-before-posting.27826/

Very few suggestions pass as first proposed, and polls are supposed to get added by the mods once a consensus is reached on how the suggestions should be worked. The polls will run for 14 days and need to get a majority support including enough total votes to show that the community is engaged with the idea, so you may want to remove the poll which is there now so it doesn't create confusion.

Most of what has been offered here is ways that we think would make the suggestion more palatable both to other players and to the developers, not an attempt to criticize the idea. I think your idea has caught positive attention, now we'd like to help polish it into something that might get done.

 

[ajqtrz]

I have a bunch of partial moonstone library sets and 8 complete ones (3 in storage). They are all in the same area and form a giant set of it's own. The great thing about it is that the borders are easily shifted so the shape of the whole thing can change as I need "just another row here" or "another column there" for the things that surround my giant moonstone library farm. Linking the complete sets, for me, would work well as they rarely change their location. Linking all the pieces, partial sets included, would greatly harm my ability to constantly re-arrange my city. So whatever fusing process might be implemented, that's another aspect that has to be considered. It would be nice to be able to collect all the mana and gum at once, but not if it ruins the flexibility of the farm.

Just some thoughts.

AJ

 

[Ashrem]

I have a bunch of partial moonstone library sets and 8 complete ones (3 in storage). They are all in the same area and form a giant set of it's own.

AJ

I hear ya. Now if I could turn this into a single item, even if I couldn't break it again. I'd be tempted....

 

[Mykan]

Goodness. I guess, I won’t ever make a suggestion again here. It seems my play style is not advanced enough.

Don't be discouraged, there was a lot of positive/interested feedback to the idea. Getting an idea approved here is simple compared to getting it to the devs. The first post is the only thing looked at when an idea moves on, so the more polished the first post is the better the chance the idea can move forward. It is very rare for an idea to be polished enough from the start to get a vote quickly or minimal feedback, typically these are most likely very simple ideas or from people who regularly post suggestions and work through the process.

Most people posting are adding thoughts or ideas to help polish the idea based on their experience, personality or game style. If your newer than the rest that is great, you have a different perspective that can be hard for an experienced player to see. At the end of the day it is your idea so you get to choose what changes (if any) are made and when you are happy your idea has the best chance of getting through the various stages of the process. Once your happy the voting can begin and best of luck. Even if you are lucky and your idea gets all the way to and approved by the devs it can still take years and years to be implemented.

 

[Singura]

Don't be discouraged, there was a lot of positive/interested feedback to the idea. Getting an idea approved here is simple compared to getting it to the devs. The first post is the only thing looked at when an idea moves on, so the more polished the first post is the better the chance the idea can move forward. It is very rare for an idea to be polished enough from the start to get a vote quickly or minimal feedback, typically these are most likely very simple ideas or from people who regularly post suggestions and work through the process.

Most people posting are adding thoughts or ideas to help polish the idea based on their experience, personality or game style. If your newer than the rest that is great, you have a different perspective that can be hard for an experienced player to see. At the end of the day it is your idea so you get to choose what changes (if any) are made and when you are happy your idea has the best chance of getting through the various stages of the process. Once your happy the voting can begin and best of luck. Even if you are lucky and your idea gets all the way to and approved by the devs it can still take years and years to be implemented.

Thank you for your kind and encouraging words!

 

[Blind Squirrel]

To be able to link all buildings in a complete set to one building. This way when rearranging your city one does not loose, forget, or have to search for all parts of the set.
The buildings can be linked for moving purposes, but can be unlinked once placed. This way, each single building can be upgraded by itself, or additional building parts can be added at anytime.
Maybe could be done by highlighting the buildings, which prompts a message”link to next building“

I do want the ability to Unlink them for more than just upgrading. There are times when I am rearranging my city when I do not have space to move an entire set as is. Or that I may need to reconfigure how they are put together, due to space issues.
How I would REALLY like it to work (solutioning here, sorry) is to have the option to select 'Move Set' from the Set tab, and move it that way. Then, once it is moved, it reverts to the way it is now. The only purpose of linking them is to make moving easier, so just make that an option on the Set tab. Then it's clear (because you're on the set tab) that you are referring to the set and not just a single building).
I would also like this to connect ALL buildings, in case you happen to have more than a complete set (*cough* Moonstone Library *cough*). Not just one each.

 

[quin629]

Voting No even though I like the concept of being able to move a set as a single unit, because of the exact wording of the final proposal:

Would be linking sets to one unity a good idea, if you can link and unlink them to be upgraded.​

The devs sometimes do give us what we asked for. Exactly what was asked, no more & no less. As a prior poster noted, players may make assumptions about how something might work but if those aren't the words that might not be what happens. The wording above says you can link & unlink to be upgraded. It does not say you can link and unlink for different collection times, or to move or store some parts but not all - only for upgrading. I'm afraid of being given only what was asked for. I'd rather keep what we have than lose the current flexibility.