Submitted One Down Kit

[JollyProgrammer]

We currently have a One Up Kit and a Renovation Kit, I am proposing a One Down Kit. A One Down Kit will do just that lower a buildings age by one era.

A One Down kit would not effect any GB or premium building that One Up and Renovation Kits do not currently work on. The most likely usage is to push building like a Statue of Honor to lower levels to help support a guilds need for lower level goods.

As I started playing, I always used my One Up and Renovation Kits to bring my building up to the next level. Little did I realize that leaving some of these building at lower levels would help my guild. Some players are asked to stay at lower levels to help a guild, by having One Down Kits, players can advance and still support the guild with lower level goods. It will also allow players to adjust building to help them with different level goods they may need as well.

Another good use for a One Down Kit is for building that produce troops. I do a lot of GvG and constantly change the troop building my traz if constructing for. One troop I can not get is Champion for any level other than my current level. A One Down allow me to lower the age on buildings that might make champions.

You should not be able to take a building lower than Iron age and I do not see anyway this could be abused.

Thanks all for taking the time to reply either for or against, your opinion matters. I have only been playing for a little over a year, most of you have been playing a lot longer, so again thanks for your replies, they help make me a better player.

First, thanks to The Lady Redneck for the idea of saving multiple Champion's Retreats just at different levels. I tried this and it works, and I will do this going forward. I will not be so quick to put them in auction now.

Second, When I first started, I looked around for a beginners guild to join and did join them. The guild did GE but not GbG or GvG, so no one really talked about the need for guild goods, they just pushed you to get a Arc and/or Obs, to get goods for GE. The more you raised up your building the more rewards you got to help yourself. Not once did it occur to me that a guild I might join latter might need some lower age goods and that I should leave some buildings at lower levels. It was not until I left the beginners guild and went to a more advanced guild where I really learned how the guild uses goods on my behalf. Most guilds have a mix of players at different levels. If you only have one player in an era, those goods might be needed in GE and GbG. I trade down a lot to get goods to donate to the guild. I will continue doing this but it would be nice to roll a couple building back to help out.

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

I feel like if this were ever implemented this kit would have to be much, much rarer than the One Up and Reno Kits. One of the challenges of having a guild that is involved in GvG/GBG/GE is stocking the guild Treasury. In order to do so, it takes a group effort, which should be what a guild is all about. If this kit were implemented and became as common as the other kits I mentioned, it would take away this challenge to a great degree. I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea, but I can see the down side as far as game balance within a guild is concerned if there isn't some sort of limit to it.

 

[spartacus2.0]

This idea has been proposed thousands of times before...

 

[The Lady Redneck]

It is relatively easy to have different levels of SOH's and Great Elephants in your city to help with treasury goods for different eras, There are also event buildings that give treasury goods. These also can be left in lower ages. CHampions retreats for different ages can be kept in your inventory and placed in your city as and when needed. Any other troop building from any age can also be built and deleted as required. So I cannot see this being something that would be of much use.

 

[mellofax]

This idea has been proposed thousands of times before...

We have decided to allow voting on this and if it gains support we will submit it. As a fresh revitalised forum area we are willing to consider (or reconsider) past ideas.

 

[Ebeondi Asi]

I am a yes on this idea. I would add a small bit of game complexity, rather than lessen game complexity. There are times when this idea would come in handy.
that it would make some tactics easier to implement? No problem. Those who want mistakes or past choices to never be correctable wll not like it nearly as much as more forgiving types of players. LOL
And I would add in the idea of just changing the One UP (when the player uses the Kit gets a choice in it) to be either One Up (or) can chose to make it a One Down. that would be ingenious IMO
Keeping the Reno Kit as is now.
If the One up was changed, a game decision would need to be made by programmers: Do all held 'old' One Up get changed. or only a new One Up/One Down type started, and the old one up grandfathered to only those stored already?

 

[Kranyar the Mysterious]

I've been racking my brain trying to figure out how this could be abused, and can't think of any. It does take away consequences of past actions, which I'm not necessarily a fan of, and so have mixed feelings on this one. I think I'll wait for a bit to vote until I read other people's take on it.

 

[DreadfulCadillac]

We've seen this suggestion before, I'm glad we are getting another chance to consider it due to the Ideas Rework. I do however concur with @Johnny B. Goode that if implemented, this kit would have to be very rare. If it isn't, it would totally ruin the strategic aspect that is involved when you try to stock your guild treasury with lower-era goods that you need. Furthermore, if it is common, Then there will be no consequences for blindly renovating all your goods-producing buildings. Provided that the devs manage this kit properly so that it isn't game-breaking, I'm an Aye.

 

[Graviton]

Suggested a million times, whined about on other social media ad nauseum...seems like it would only help players who rush the tech tree, or if you want certain goods in your guild treasury but you don't want to invite players from that Age. While I don't think Inno should encourage any particular play style, I do think that one of the hallmarks of a good strategy game is that poor planning is a detriment to success, or at least an obstacle to be overcome. Maybe I'm just a curmudgeon but I don't approve of something that ameliorates that. I'm voting "no".

 

[Pericles the Lion]

Isn't this really about the Guild Treasury and GvG? Past mistakes with Reno Kits and 1-ups can be corrected by aging up and not repeating the mistake. Players that need earlier era goods can trade for them and/or planting the goods buildings. Guilds can manage their membership and not have a problem with the treasury for GBG. I voted "yes" but I don't really see a need for them.

 

[Ebeondi Asi]

I would comment in the phrase" Game breaker" being used (by more than one player). If those using it could provide an example if how in the most wild and crazy circumstances usiing a one down even a thousand one down! could break the game mechanics.. i would like to hear about it please. (I'm calling your bluff)

As for the use being limited to Treasury needs and Champion/GvG.. I think it would also be useful for (in particular) Arctic Goods Oeanic Goods in event Buildings. For those who need to make more Promithium or Orichacum and want to make the needed regular Goods rather than trade for them.
Or any one Era down Goods needed for negotiations from Event Buildings. The Market is flooded with an enormous number of down trades, and few up trades already. this might help that slightly)
And even for players staying in an Era for longer than usual, as they gain better buildings, may want to take some new building back one Era.

 

[I am master of greatness]

This idea has been proposed thousands of times before...

yes but it is winning

 

[mellofax]

I would comment in the phrase" Game breaker" being used (by more than one player). If those using it could provide an example if how in the most wild and crazy circumstances usiing a one down even a thousand one down! could break the game mechanics.. i would like to hear about it please. (I'm calling your bluff)

I think this is a very fair point, and also a big part of a reasoned debate : please do fill everyone in on how you think it would break things - the more views considered the more the idea author can consider and perhaps we can fine tune the idea even more - remember its not just the community to win over - we also have to sell this to the devs

 

[Ironrooster]

I like this idea.
This is helpful for individuals as well as guilds.
It will of course make the game more complex as more options always do. But I think this is a good thing.

 

[Tony 85 the Generous]

Suggested a million times, whined about on other social media ad nauseum...seems like it would only help players who rush the tech tree, or if you want certain goods in your guild treasury but you don't want to invite players from that Age. While I don't think Inno should encourage any particular play style, I do think that one of the hallmarks of a good strategy game is that poor planning is a detriment to success, or at least an obstacle to be overcome. Maybe I'm just a curmudgeon but I don't approve of something that ameliorates that. I'm voting "no".

I have not been in a guild where the lower age goods were ever at a shortage. At the same time I could see how that could possibly be, but would require a a very established guild full of players that were a high age and were none of them were traders (ie., selling goods to lower age players to build high level gbs, such as selling Future goods for the arc to a player that is in early middle ages) at which time the trader could donate the goods to the treasury as there is rarely any use for goods more by a single player (not the guild) that is more than one age old.

 

[Emberguard]

Isn't this really about the Guild Treasury and GvG? Past mistakes with Reno Kits and 1-ups can be corrected by aging up and not repeating the mistake

Not if you want to build Champion Retreats in previous ages. Those can't be corrected

 

[Warrior Wombat]

Not if you want to build Champion Retreats in previous ages. Those can't be corrected

And why would you be building previous age Champion Retreats? The only reason I can think of, is for GvG.

 

[Warrior Wombat]

Lets see what it would do to an event building:

• lower the population (so the feature would have to check to ensure you have enough population to stop you going negative)
• lower happiness - so they get angry, meh
• lower the amount of coins, supplies and/or medals - meh
• lower age goods - why would you need that? because you/guild is running out?
• lower age troops (some event buildings give troops). Why would you need that?
  • The main reason I can come up with is for GvG and you don't have space to build the troop building/s. But it isn't the only reason.
  • Because you rushed the tech tree and to move on with the story quest, you need previous age troops and again, you have no room to plant that troop building
• Same amount of FPs - maybe if this is implemented, the amount of FPs need to change based on the era of the building.
• Same amount of diamonds.

Since I have been caught with the story line and troops, I am borderline on saying "no" (why should others not suffer from what I had to). And since it would mean more coding to check on the population, there are other things that need fixing before new features are added.

But having lower age Champion Retreats (yes, for GvG) would nice...

 

[Emberguard]

And why would you be building previous age Champion Retreats? The only reason I can think of, is for GvG.

Yes, but the post I was responding to said:

Past mistakes with Reno Kits and 1-ups can be corrected by aging up and not repeating the mistake.

There's no way to correct a building if the only way to obtain it in the required form is by aging down and it doesn't already exist in your city.

lower the population (so the feature would have to check to ensure you have enough population to stop you going negative)

That reminds me. There are Quests that ask for "have exactly X Population".

 

[Kranyar the Mysterious]

After reading everyone's posts I've decided to vote no, since having one down kits doesn't solve any issues that couldn't have originally been prevented with proper prior planning. It does take away some of the strategic decisions that need to be considered early on, and I feel a player shouldn't be rewarded for sloppy or inattentive gameplay earlier on in the game.