• Good day, Stranger! — Are you new to our forums?

    Have I seen you here before? To participate in or to create forum discussions, you will need your own forum account. Register your account here!

Update Discussion Discussion: New Spìre of Eternity rewards.

Pauly7

Magus
No you would just make a ton of "free" T2 floating around, making it even harder getting trades for T1. The problem is that they from the beginning made the mistake that we could win more than one set.
Well it's not ideal if the market is flooded with a disproportionate amount of T2, but so long as it's balanced and different people have each type then it's not necessarily a problem. Certainly not a fraction of the current problem.

Years ago they created a bit of an issue with goods sets that gave out T3. With those, however, they gave all people all different types, so for the unfortunate people who didn't have the sets they found it harder to get any of their T3 trades taken.

If a new set gave people T2 boost +1 then there would still be a balance between the T2 goods and people would need to trade them. If people built multiple sets it may even make T2 trading easier. The problem would lie with anyone who wishes to rely on cross-tier trading, i.e. the people who built too many of the new set... and that's for them to overcome.
 

CrazyWizard

Shaman
I am presuming, @InnoGames, that deciding to put old artefacts in as spire prizes on 6 week rotations must have followed a degree of analysis of the player base. I say this because the percentage of players receiving 9 artefacts in 6 weeks must be negligibly small. I won't even attempt this maths, because I know there are several variables to consider, including ones I don't have the numbers on, i.e. number of people who complete the spire (or average progress through the spire), number of people who play it at all, plus the likely number of artefacts to be won.

If I were to take a guess then I would imagine less than 1% of players win all 9 artefacts in the 6 weeks. Out of that small number I would take the educated guess that a healthy proportion were playing the game at the time of the original event, as people completing the spire each week are probably more likely to be more established players (just an assumption of a general likelihood.)

The point here is that the number of people winning 9 artefacts who actually have any use for 9 artefacts must be such a small number as to not even register as a factor.

Therefore, other than the above, the only people who will be interested in this idea are those people who have pre-existing semi-evolved buildings. Any of those people would happily accept an extra few artefacts to complete their buildings.

I know that I am covering old ground that I myself have gone over several times... probably in this same thread... but the point of my post, @InnoGames, is that if you took the decision to launch this particular initiative, then you must first have looked at the number of players who are currently active in the game and who have the building already which isn't already at level 10. It occurs to me that the number of people in this second group are probably even smaller than those in the first, but you must have familiarised yourself with this number... right?

If I'm right, then I ask again - Why?

This is to solve the issue with the Spire Library Set, but not only does it not solve it at all (people with multiple sets still have multiple sets and other players can no longer narrow the gap), but it also generates a growing number of disgruntled players like @Sigyn, who have lost the Spire Set and nothing worthwhile has replaced it.

Why look and single out a single prize,
The question should be... is the spire as a whole still interesting?

The answer to that if you ask me is a big yes.

Then it doesn't matter what the prizes are, There will always be prizes you like and you hate, and the best part is the prizes you like and you hate might be 180 degrees with someone else who tells the exact opposith.

I am happy these prizes are "reoffered" to those that still want them.
On my main these prizes are as useless as portal profits,
On my mini account where I did not always maximised the prizes because at that time it was useless to me, I am happy I now get a new chance again to improve those building

Same account 2 worlds different needs.

Just look around at players not in top fellowships, not active on the forum, you might be amazed how many are playing with level 7-8-9 evolution buildings
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Well it's not ideal if the market is flooded with a disproportionate amount of T2, but so long as it's balanced and different people have each type then it's not necessarily a problem. Certainly not a fraction of the current problem.

Years ago they created a bit of an issue with goods sets that gave out T3. With those, however, they gave all people all different types, so for the unfortunate people who didn't have the sets they found it harder to get any of their T3 trades taken.

If a new set gave people T2 boost +1 then there would still be a balance between the T2 goods and people would need to trade them. If people built multiple sets it may even make T2 trading easier. The problem would lie with anyone who wishes to rely on cross-tier trading, i.e. the people who built too many of the new set... and that's for them to overcome.
I can't see this work in reality, because they have created a crap situation giving everyone scrolls.

They could actually tweek Moonstone to give boost+1, it would then more evenly distribute trading. - But it will still not get rid of the problem that some has ex. 14 sets.

Yes i remember the sets giving T3. They gave a descent amount :)

I have a Panda, it gives a little T2, around 8k every other day, to me though it's also the MM spells that makes in interesting. Or did, as i only catered then.
 

Pauly7

Magus
Why look and single out a single prize,
The question should be... is the spire as a whole still interesting?
Of course it is, but I never said that the spire stopped being interesting or worthwhile. I just said that there were players not happy because nothing worthwhile has replaced the Library Set.

Just look around at players not in top fellowships, not active on the forum, you might be amazed how many are playing with level 7-8-9 evolution buildings
Maybe you're right, but this is why I've asked for a number. I still don't see it though. I occasionally see someone like that, but I question whether they're the sort of player (if they're still playing now) that is actually bothered about playing the spire to finish that set off.
 

Pauly7

Magus
I have a Panda, it gives a little T2, around 8k every other day, to me though it's also the MM spells that makes in interesting. Or did, as i only catered then.
Well the Panda should be giving you triple that in chapter 15, i.e. 8-9k of each T2 good per 48 hours. By comparison, though, a chapter 15 Jester's Tavern gives around 60k of T3 every 24 hours, and there are several like that.
They could actually tweek Moonstone to give boost+1, it would then more evenly distribute trading. - But it will still not get rid of the problem that some has ex. 14 sets.
They could tweak the Library set, or release a different one, whichever. It's not the same thing though. Right now there are tons of scrolls on the market that everyone is trying to get rid of so people trade it away offering a profit as that's the only way to get to the head of the queue, if you want some silk or crystal that is being produced in much smaller amounts across the board. If the new (or modified) set was offering different people different types of T2 goods then there would be the same demand for each of them so everyone could trade them. The problem, like I say, is people then producing way too much T2 and having to cross-trade to get rid of it. If people are not taking the trades, though, then the only thing that will happen is that people will have to have less of those sets or cross-trade the T2 goods away at 1:1 for T1 (for example). The only problem, though, is for the individuals with way too many sets.

If they were to release a whole new set then the point is kind of moot anyway as they could do whatever they wanted with it to balance the game. They could make it give a little T1, T2 and T3. So long as it's good enough to make people want to replace library sets with it then problem solved.
 

anonglitch

Co-Community Manager
Elvenar Team

New Rewards for the Spire of Eternity



Dear Humans and Elves,

Starting Sunday 18th, the Spire of Eternity will have new rewards.

Please, check out our Announcement here.

Kind regards,
Your Elvenar Team
 

CrazyWizard

Shaman
Of course it is, but I never said that the spire stopped being interesting or worthwhile. I just said that there were players not happy because nothing worthwhile has replaced the Library Set.


Maybe you're right, but this is why I've asked for a number. I still don't see it though. I occasionally see someone like that, but I question whether they're the sort of player (if they're still playing now) that is actually bothered about playing the spire to finish that set off.

You'll never get numbers from inno-games they never release those.
The spire set was too powerfull, That was an easy conclusion day 1 it was released, too powerfull and game breaking / time bomb due to all players creating scrolls.

Due to the nature of the prize system in the spire you can never replace it with anything on a similar level.
Because of you want it to be replaced with something similar, due to the prize nature you get another super building you can get in an unlimited quantity.
The issue is not that a prize is good but that you can aquire many of them. the spire set on it's own ain't game breaking, but when you can get many of them it becomes a game breaker.

I find artefacts a natural replacement, it's one of those few things that do not break the game if you get many of them, it takes way to long for it to show up in the spire to be detrimental to the events itself, and it's a nice thing to have for those that do not have it yet complete or had none at all.

How many times have we seen questions about gaining artefacts in the past? when all bases where aviable in the academy we got many of those posts every single week on many fora.
So there should be enough need for these prizes.

As a second, If you aquirred your 20th library set, ain't those parts became just as useless as the artefacts are to us.
Even an insanely strong building at some point becomes mood when you have too many of them.

So to most (not all) of the people who complain about the "useless" artefact where already most likely already on a point where also library parts where on the brink of becomming "useless".

So I do not really see any difference between the two.
 

Pauly7

Magus
So to most (not all) of the people who complain about the "useless" artefact where already most likely already on a point where also library parts where on the brink of becomming "useless".
There isn't any point where I've said they should keep the Library set as it is. That is clearly game breaking, as you say. It's not a straightforward problem to solve, but their solution does nothing to help - which is to allow everyone to keep the sets that they have... or perhaps I should rephrase that - to make it still worthwhile for people to keep their old sets.

There are two options - 1) Literally nerf the spire set. They know that would go down badly. 2) Release something of equivalent power. It may mean having another set that is more powerful than they are comfortable with, but it would improve the situation we have right now.

So there's the problem of people having multiple sets. You could limit it to one set, but that doesn't deal with the existing problem. So, even though it may not be the best thing for the game, if you released a new powerful set that is at least game balanced then this would be a preferable possibility. As a slight variation, you could limit it to one set, but then keep changing it to something new once every 3 weeks. Supposing they designed 6 new sets, all equally attractive as the spire set, but each one different - One gives T2 goods (boost +1 or similar), one gives T1 goods, one gives T3 goods, one gives mana and seeds, one gives coins and supplies, one gives sentient goods. Then they could cycle these things round in 6 week rotations, similar to what they're doing now with artefacts. Yes it would give a lot of people a lot of everything, but you would have a good deal more balance than you have right now.
 

CrazyWizard

Shaman
There isn't any point where I've said they should keep the Library set as it is. That is clearly game breaking, as you say. It's not a straightforward problem to solve, but their solution does nothing to help - which is to allow everyone to keep the sets that they have... or perhaps I should rephrase that - to make it still worthwhile for people to keep their old sets.

There are two options - 1) Literally nerf the spire set. They know that would go down badly. 2) Release something of equivalent power. It may mean having another set that is more powerful than they are comfortable with, but it would improve the situation we have right now.

So there's the problem of people having multiple sets. You could limit it to one set, but that doesn't deal with the existing problem. So, even though it may not be the best thing for the game, if you released a new powerful set that is at least game balanced then this would be a preferable possibility. As a slight variation, you could limit it to one set, but then keep changing it to something new once every 3 weeks. Supposing they designed 6 new sets, all equally attractive as the spire set, but each one different - One gives T2 goods (boost +1 or similar), one gives T1 goods, one gives T3 goods, one gives mana and seeds, one gives coins and supplies, one gives sentient goods. Then they could cycle these things round in 6 week rotations, similar to what they're doing now with artefacts. Yes it would give a lot of people a lot of everything, but you would have a good deal more balance than you have right now.
I 100% agree on that they should fix the current sets as the issue is not improving any time soon.

In the current prize system of the spire i's not possible of limiting to 1 set.
You cannot cycle between 3 sets without creating a system multiples.

And last but not least 3 sets would be horrible, it would stagnate the entire t2 trade system. people could just build 1 of each and never bother the market ever again for t2.

I know this very well as this is pretty much the case for years now for me with T1 as I het a mixed amount of 500K T1 per day from my harvest set.
You do not want to create a market where new players cannot trade there goods because nobody needs there T2, no matter what kind of T2 it is.

And as an example, those sets would become just as "useless" as the moonstone set eventually.
1618478700849.png
In the spoilered example, I do not see how any of those pieces would be more usefull than an artefacts.
This is the result of over 1 year of playing the spire, I could have just as easily complained about the "useless" moonstone set as some complain about the "useless" artefacts.

You can always nitpick about the details, but thats contraproductive.
 

Wibbly Woo

Spellcaster
@CrazyWizard Your concern around trade nicely captures my concern with the boosted+1 proposal. If the goal is to restore a healthy market, giving everyone two trade goods instead of one at a tier seems a bad strategy.

That said, I am not convinced the problem is as bad as made out. Yes, scrolls are comparatively worthless to trade, so in my scroll cities I simply don’t bother much. Build just enough scroll production to cover my needs with a small surplus, and cross trade for my other T2 needs. Ironically the abandonment of scrolls cities actually makes other tier goods that pair with scrolls more valuable. If you are complaining you can’t sell the scrolls you are producing, why are you still producing them?
 

DeletedUser

Guest
@CrazyWizard Your concern around trade nicely captures my concern with the boosted+1 proposal. If the goal is to restore a healthy market, giving everyone two trade goods instead of one at a tier seems a bad strategy.

That said, I am not convinced the problem is as bad as made out. Yes, scrolls are comparatively worthless to trade, so in my scroll cities I simply don’t bother much. Build just enough scroll production to cover my needs with a small surplus, and cross trade for my other T2 needs. Ironically the abandonment of scrolls cities actually makes other tier goods that pair with scrolls more valuable. If you are complaining you can’t sell the scrolls you are producing, why are you still producing them?
Because it's my boost :cool:

Most with those sets are not building manufactories for producing even their boosted goods. They just try to trade, which results in low amounts of silk and crystal. I have two cities in two different parts of the map, and it's a big problem both places.
 

CrazyWizard

Shaman
@CrazyWizard Your concern around trade nicely captures my concern with the boosted+1 proposal. If the goal is to restore a healthy market, giving everyone two trade goods instead of one at a tier seems a bad strategy.

That said, I am not convinced the problem is as bad as made out. Yes, scrolls are comparatively worthless to trade, so in my scroll cities I simply don’t bother much. Build just enough scroll production to cover my needs with a small surplus, and cross trade for my other T2 needs. Ironically the abandonment of scrolls cities actually makes other tier goods that pair with scrolls more valuable. If you are complaining you can’t sell the scrolls you are producing, why are you still producing them?

+1 is fine since that has been established already, it still requires all players to visit the market.

+2 is a different story and one that I dislike for the same reason
 

Wibbly Woo

Spellcaster
Because it's my boost :cool:

Most with those sets are not building manufactories for producing even their boosted goods. They just try to trade, which results in low amounts of silk and crystal. I have two cities in two different parts of the map, and it's a big problem both places.
So the people who have no choice but to produce scrolls are the people with multiple sets producing the massive excess of scrolls? Sorry, no sympathy with them!

Yes, it is annoying to know that trading my scrolls in scroll boost citespecially isn’t going to happen, but it really isn’t a problem if I adjust and produce other tiers for trading. No one is forced to produce exclusively scrolls...
 

Pauly7

Magus
And last but not least 3 sets would be horrible, it would stagnate the entire t2 trade system. people could just build 1 of each and never bother the market ever again for t2.
You misunderstand my suggestion. I was saying that one set would be for T2, and a third of people get either crystal, scrolls or silk. A second set may be T3 with the same rules and a third set would be T1. You then have maybe three other sets that offer different things... and you do limit people to having one of each set. It won't completely solve the problem, but if you make it worthwhile for people to replace the first 6 of their Library sets with one each of the new thing, then you go some way towards clearing the issue.
 

Pauly7

Magus
So the people who have no choice but to produce scrolls are the people with multiple sets producing the massive excess of scrolls? Sorry, no sympathy with them!
I don't think that's what he meant. It doesn't matter what your boost is to determine whether you have lots of spire sets. People can produce scrolls more easily by having several spire sets so they don't build manufactories to produce any T2. The problem @Elivar meant is that the people that do have a scrolls boost, but aren't generating millions of them from Library Sets can no longer get their boosted goods trades taken.
 

Wibbly Woo

Spellcaster
I don't think that's what he meant. It doesn't matter what your boost is to determine whether you have lots of spire sets. People can produce scrolls more easily by having several spire sets so they don't build manufactories to produce any T2. The problem @Elivar meant is that the people that do have a scrolls boost, but aren't generating millions of them from Library Sets can no longer get their boosted goods trades taken.
I got that, my point is that the correct response is to stop even trying to produce scrolls for trade and find other ways of acquiring T2 goods. TM2 is one option, over produce T1 or T3 and cross trade is another.
 

Pauly7

Magus
I got that, my point is that the correct response is to stop even trying to produce scrolls for trade and find other ways of acquiring T2 goods. TM2 is one option, over produce T1 or T3 and cross trade is another.
Are you suggesting that people with scrolls boosts start building silk and crystal manufactories? That's the worst thing of all to do.

Cross-trading is an option, but the value of the cross-tier trade also gets diminished and it's still the people with scrolls boosts who end up losing out.
 

FieryArien

Necromancer
I got that, my point is that the correct response is to stop even trying to produce scrolls for trade and find other ways of acquiring T2 goods. TM2 is one option, (...)
Are you suggesting that people with scrolls boosts start building silk and crystal manufactories? That's the worst thing of all to do.
TM2 != non-boosted T2

While Traveling Merchant 2 is in no way as efficient as max-boosted T2 manufactory, it’s also in no way as inefficient as non-boosted T2.

PS: It’s not a solution anyway. In my opinion it’s just a way to ease the problem a bit.
PPS: I’ve got one scrolls boosted city (together with planks/gum and dust/bismuth!). I’m wondering if it wasn’t a mistake to keep it.
 

CrazyWizard

Shaman
I got that, my point is that the correct response is to stop even trying to produce scrolls for trade and find other ways of acquiring T2 goods. TM2 is one option, over produce T1 or T3 and cross trade is another.
If every scroll boosted player would switch to crosstrading it would bork the market even more and would totally collapse it. it works as long as a limited amount of players are doing this.
 
Top