Discussion News from Beta (may contain spoilers!)

[Killiak]

This is from the Beta announcement:

"Some adjustments might still be made, but we wanted to make the Royal Restoration Spells available for you now, so we can start gathering your feedback again."

The problem lies in the concept of the word "might". Therefor, the players need to speak up so that 'might change' becomes 'will change', into something that delivers on the promise and is useful to most players.

 

[LazyTony]

This is just like the crystal lighthouse nerf. The mods disappear for a day or so after an announcement they know will cause an uproar, in the hope its going to die down.

 

[Pauly7]

This is just like the crystal lighthouse nerf.

This is much worse. The Crystal Lighthouse nerf was an unpopular change made that was not explained clearly. This is a complete retraction of a promise from over half a year ago that has shaped the way that people have played the game ever since, which is why I am way more upset.

I know it's just a game.... all those thinking that.... but still, we put our heart and souls into some of this stuff.

 

[Timneh]

I agree with @Pauly7 when the RR spell was first announced it was going to replace blueprints for upgrading magic buildings and also upgrade event buildings, now blueprints are staying as the only way to upgrade magic buildings(or diamonds). The new RR would replace the blueprint on a 1-1 basis and 1 spell would upgrade 1 building by 1 level. When RR was released on beta the 1st time they made it so 1 RR would be needed per square that a building used and 1 blueprint would be worth 10 RR. From what they first said a 5x5 building could have been upgraded with 1 RR because 1 blueprint would become 1 RR, they changed it so that 25 RR would be needed which would have been 2 1/2 blueprints. In the beta release 10 or 11 RR would be available from each tournament now we will only get 5 and they still have not sorted the problem that blueprints are only useful to players that have magic buildings which was 1 of the main problems that prompted them to make changes in the first place. They say there might be even more changes so god knows what the final result will end up being.
I don't think things will ever improve with the way the devs do things so maybe it is time to close all my WS and manufactories and move on to pastures new, i have already asked my FS if anyone wants to take over my account.

 

[LazyTony]

This is much worse.

Agreed Pauly. I meant that the response from Inno's representatives is the same in both situations - i.e. to hide.

 

[Pauly7]

Can I just say also - if you are following this thread and this is something that affects you also, please do have your say, even if only to say something that has already been said.

I am not sure if we can have any influence here, but if the general populace are showing their concern then it will hold much more weight than if it looks like the complaining few.

 

[DeletedUser3571]

I'm waiting to learn more before i decide anything. But i would say that with out the option of converting blueprints it would be a terrible idea.

 

[Lelanya]

I'm waiting to learn more before i decide anything. But i would say that with out the option of converting blueprints it would be a terrible idea.

Heya Pompey Wolf, thanks for your input. I am preparing my statement, which will take some time as it needs research and careful phraseology.
Consider this: I personally am holding more blueprints in one place than any one person on the server. I have the one magic house I was given, and it's all I will ever own unless given more.
And that city is just finishing chapter 11 Halflings!

 

[RainbowElvira]

I'm more or less an observer of this thread. I do not have a single blueprint and my oldest event buildings are 2 chapters old. When the first RRs appeared on beta, they totally replaced the BPs. You could have used them for both event and premium buildings. This was in accordance with the promise Inno gave us. But it was bashed by the players at the moment it was published. Some players then suggested to leave the blueprints as they were and to add the royal restorations to the lower chests. Inno did as those players wished, and now there are comments that this was the worst move ever.

In my opinion, the first solution on beta was fine - maybe with a little tweaking.

 

[DeletedUser3451]

In my opinion, the first solution on beta was fine - maybe with a little tweaking.

thinking on it, you might be right. although there are numerous other viable options too, which would have never been given a thought as there is enough work done on this already, to be easily scratched and started all over again.

there will always be people that are not really happy unless they have it their own way. it is to be expected. however, a promise made should be a promise given, especially if it took them so long. but Inno , as any other company, listens to the feedback that is more in line with their own decisions, and if there is none such feedback - with the easiest demand, even if it's made by few and despite what majority wants. i've seen other companies take a single dumb suggestion out from hundreds viable ones, and then handling the outcome with the "you have asked for this yourselves". i have no idea how many people have suggested keeping the blueprint into the game, but they can't have been majority, as it's obvious none of the people here isn't happy with it, or at least none have said it openly.

sadly, i'm not surprised at all.

 

[Pauly7]

In my opinion, the first solution on beta was fine - maybe with a little tweaking.

I agree entirely... I had a couple of "queries" with the original solution, such as the whole 10 spells vs 11 spells question, but it seemed reasonably fair and I was excited for it to be implemented.

The solution, it seems to me, is quite easy, if that's what they're looking for - make all blueprints transferrable for 10 RR spells as originally planned, but let them also stand as original blueprints to upgrade a magic building if a person would rather.... simple.

Sadly, I don't think it's this simple as far as Inno's reasons and intentions go, but I won't go into my thoughts on that at this point.

 

[DeletedUser7733]

I stand by my original opinion. I think it's great that RR spell is available in lower chests so even people that play in a relaxed way can get some. I didn't agree with the conversion rate, it's was too low to compensate people for the effort that they put in to get 10 chests. My suggestion was to do the conversion rate so that players can still upgrade the highest chapter's size of magic buildings out of the converted BP into RR. This is just a one off compensation and shouldn't have a huge influence on intended game play. Another issue is, how many RR spells to put in the 10th chest. I don't think it has to match up with the conversion ratio, this is a future game play and people will only put as much effort in it as they think is worth it.

 

[DeletedUser5532]

Consider this: I personally am holding more blueprints in one place than any one person on the server.

How did you get that info, as even support have no way of seeing a comparative amount across all players. They can only see player by player .

 

[DeletedUser1829]

In my opinion, the first solution on beta was fine - maybe with a little tweaking.

If you look past the emotional responses to the heart of the issue there was several flaws with the previous version, hence it got changed. The new version addresses all of those issues. It has created a new one though, which they can fix easily with a little tweaking

The only flaw I see with the current version is the lack of a non-diamond use for blueprints. If they address that matter then we have a fairly good option (hopefully). The most effective solution (to me) is to have a mechanism to convert BP into RR, something that would have to be planned, programmed and tested. They could however come up with an entirely new non-diamond use for BP, only time will tell.

 

[m4rt1n]

The simple solution in my opinion if the conversion rate is as was suggested at 1:10 then a Magic Building upgrade capped at 10 RR's would solve all the problems and keep 99% of players happy.

 

[Lelanya]

How did you get that info, as even support have no way of seeing a comparative amount across all players. They can only see player by player .

Well hello Hartman I was thinking of you today as well. I could give a detailed answer, but I am not referring to Beta Lel, but rather my signature account Boudicca Lel on EN2 Winyandor. Do feel free to launch a thread in my honour if you really MUST know, tho.
@Mykan could you refer me to the posts, please, that inspired your conclusions? I've encountered a player who swears that the big diamond spenders on US2 tossed a hissy fit and put away their credit cards for a week, thereby influencing Inno's decision to withdraw RR last year. I don't think anyone will believe some nebulous promise that 'eventally' Inno will discover another use for blueprints. As Thagdal pointed out above, we have already been pre-penalised for this and are owed some sort of reasonable compromise

 

[Heymrdiedier]

The simple solution in my opinion if the conversion rate is as was suggested at 1:10 then a Magic Building upgrade capped at 10 RR's would solve all the problems and keep 99% of players happy.

how about making it 1:15 and 15RR cap? the average size of al magic buildings is just under 15, that rounding up is compensation for the very long wait?

 

[DeletedUser5976]

If the current setup is kept, with just one change, which is allowing BP's to be exchanged for RR's for the original 1:10 rate, the 10 chest fellowships will be getting 15 RR. This may also be the incentive for more fellowships to go for 10 chests. And all those fellowships with non spending members will be able to exchange their accumulated BP and finally upgrade their long cherished event buildings. That will make most people happy. As others have pointed out before having spenders happy is in Inno's interest, but spenders' happiness also depends on the happiness of their non-spending FS-mates and neighbours.

 

[Deleted User - 341074]

@LadyHavva nailed it as did a few others i think.
Add the ability to turn a BP into 10 RR and the current system covers all concerns.
Maybe some F2P will be sad that they can't upgrade a 3x5 event building with 1 BP, but after offering us 11 per week and then 5 plus nothing for BPs I'm pretty sure that we aren't shooting for the moon anymore.

 

[RainbowElvira]

The only flaw I see with the current version is the lack of a non-diamond use for blueprints.

Having two spells that do essentially the same is already a flaw in my opinion. That there is no conversion BP -> RR is another, like you mentioned. No conversion RR -> BP is yet another.

Add the ability to turn a BP into 10 RR

I think this will even make it worse. The conversion can only be in one direction, otherwise one of the two spells is obsolete. So a BP can upgrade anything while RR is event building only, thus is more powerful - and the BP is only in the 10th chest.

Less than 1 % of the fellowships gets 10 chests in tourney regularly. (12 / 1508 on EN1) This is not the majority, even if it looks like that on the forum. Assuming the suggested 1 BP : 10 RR ratio, these few FSs would get 3 times the RR spells that a 9 chest FS gets. I think this is extremely exaggerated.

This may also be the incentive for more fellowships to go for 10 chests.

True. But is this what we want? Why?

The first solution made an effort to level the playing field - which would have helped the majority. The new one caters to maybe 2% of the players. Sorry, but I cannot see any improvement.