[Question] GB and guild

[BlackSand the Sly]

If you look at the context of this in relation to the OP and my response, the problem he seems to be facing is outsiders who can afford 1.9 are "sniping" the reward spots. That's why he asked if there was a way to lock out players from outside the guild. So it's not about what he's "charging" them, it's about them being able to get the spots before snipers grab them.

Yeah ... My bad, and I read it wrong.

.

 

[Emberguard]

If you are trying to help your Guildmates get Prints ... Then why would you charge them 1.9 in the first place?
Technically ... The top five spots don't have to cost more than a total of 15 Forge Points.

.

If you look at the context of this in relation to the OP and my response, the problem he seems to be facing is outsiders who can afford 1.9 are "sniping" the reward spots. That's why he asked if there was a way to lock out players from outside the guild. So it's not about what he's "charging" them, it's about them being able to get the spots before snipers grab them.

Yeah ... My bad, and I read it wrong.

.

It’s usually more beneficial for both sides to do levels at 1.9 rate.

If you as the Owner can afford to take on the bulk of the cost for a single level, you could have used the same amount of Forge Points to do multiple levels in quick succession @ 1.9.

It is still helping Blue Print seekers to get them to take the Blue Print only contribution rewards or lower spots @ 1.9, while getting those who can afford it to take the higher spots @ 1.9. It’s also far more obtainable for young cities to do it that way. Even if they have no Forge Point buildings they can afford those spots in a short time span. Set it up right and they only need 10 Forge Points total for 10 levels (taking the no forge point spots). If your Observatory is high enough to only have a Forge Point spot in 5th (level 32 > 33), then they can still get 3 Blue Prints for 10 Forge Points with 5 FPs returning to inventory.

Unless you really can’t give them more than a single level to gain Blue Prints from, then it can easily be spread over multiple levels to ease the burden of cost from both parties, and speed up the process due to requiring smaller amounts from both ends

 

[BlackSand the Sly]

It’s usually more beneficial for both sides to do levels at 1.9 rate.

If you as the Owner can afford to take on the bulk of the cost for a single level, you could have used the same amount of Forge Points to do multiple levels in quick succession @ 1.9.

It is still helping Blue Print seekers to get them to take the Blue Print only contribution rewards or lower spots @ 1.9, while getting those who can afford it to take the higher spots @ 1.9. It’s also far more obtainable for young cities to do it that way. Even if they have no Forge Point buildings they can afford those spots in a short time span. Set it up right and they only need 10 Forge Points total for 10 levels (taking the no forge point spots). If your Observatory is high enough to only have a Forge Point spot in 5th (level 32 > 33), then they can still get 3 Blue Prints for 10 Forge Points with 5 FPs returning to inventory.

Unless you really can’t give them more than a single level to gain Blue Prints from, then it can easily be spread over multiple levels to ease the burden of cost from both parties, and speed up the process due to requiring smaller amounts from both ends

I see where some players both benefit and get frustrated with the 1.9 rates.
It tends to create bad impressions of other players and conflict surrounding unenforceable and unsupported expectations.

As to the idea of locking Great Buildings to everyone but fellow Guildmates ... Guilds are not owed additional special protections from other players.

.

 

[Kranyar the Mysterious]

I see where some players both benefit and get frustrated with the 1.9 rates.
It tends to create bad impressions of other players and conflict surrounding unenforceable and unsupported expectations.

In the new world of Carthage, no one in my guild has an 80 Arc yet, but we still have a 1.9 thread. My Arc is in the high 20s (and the second highest in the guild), and I only use the 1.9 thread for it. Why would anyone take my reward positions at a huge loss? For the prints and medals. And I take top spots back. It is similar to using a leveling group, just more open. Once I hit the mid 30's I will probably switch to a global 1.9 thread for 1st and 2nd to minimize fp losses to guildmates unless they specifically ask for a position.

Most players refuse to take even 3-5 on the 1.9 thread and stick to the swaps. That is their choice, but they will continue to flounder there for a long time, while my city quickly advances way beyond theirs. Most players don't realize how much swaps favor those with bank and hold the majority back.

So if it creates a bad impression, my opinion is too bad, so sad.

 

[BlackSand the Sly]

Why would anyone take my reward positions at a huge loss?

It really depends on what the loss is and what the player wants.

Do you need me to explain to you how investing "floating" Forge Points on a Neighbor's Great Building, thus converting them into Packages you can store while selling them "short" but gaining Prints and Medals at the same time, can be beneficial in achieving your long-term goals and better prepare your ability to capture other opportunities when they are available ... On your own time and at your own discretion?

You can definitely waste more time looking for better deals or arranging more desirable options ...
But hey, I wouldn't have a problem with you doing that either.

.

 

[Kranyar the Mysterious]

It really depends on what the loss is and what the player wants.

Yup. True of everything, and is it really a loss if you get what you need? Having enough Arc prints to open a level early on can certainly be an issue, and overpaying some fp instead of spending diamonds to keep the train moving is often a win in it's own right. (Plus expansions. Can't overstate the value of those for making back the fp you lost quite quickly).

Do you need me to explain to you how investing "floating" Forge Points on a Neighbor's Great Building, thus converting them into Packages you can store while selling them "short" but gaining Prints and Medals at the same time, can be beneficial in achieving your long-term goals and better prepare your ability to capture other opportunities when they are available ... On your own time and at your own discretion?

You can definitely waste more time looking for better deals or arranging more desirable options ...
But hey, I wouldn't have a problem with you doing that either.

Ok....

While what you say is true, I'm not sure what any of that had to do with my post.

 

[BlackSand the Sly]

Yup. True of everything, and is it really a loss if you get what you need? Having enough Arc prints to open a level early on can certainly be an issue, and overpaying some fp instead of spending diamonds to keep the train moving is often a win in it's own right. (Plus expansions. Can't overstate the value of those for making back the fp you lost quite quickly).


Ok....

While what you say is true, I'm not sure what any of that had to do with my post.

That may actually be the point ...

It's all how someone chooses to look at things, and the expectations they choose to impose on others.
You would be surprised at the responses I get when I tell other players ...

"1.9 is not required, spots are never promised to anyone, my Great Buildings are never in threads, you can donate whatever you want whenever you want ...
And I encourage you to make a profit if possible.

Good Luck in Your Endeavors and Have a Lovely Day"

As relative as it may be to topic of the thread, incessant meddling in social affairs outside the actual game operations, is what leads people to think that providing Guilds or players with protections they are not owed might be a good idea.

.

 

[Sledgie]

That may actually be the point ...

It's all how someone chooses to look at things, and the expectations they choose to impose on others.
You would be surprised at the responses I get when I tell other players ...

"1.9 is not required, spots are never promised to anyone, my Great Buildings are never in threads, you can donate whatever you want whenever you want ...
And I encourage you to make a profit if possible.

Good Luck in Your Endeavors and Have a Lovely Day"

As relative as it may be to topic of the thread, incessant meddling in social affairs outside the actual game operations, is what leads people to think that providing Guilds or players with protections they are not owed might be a good idea.

.

I have a couple of players like you on my friends list. I'd love to have more.

 

[Kranyar the Mysterious]

That may actually be the point ...

It's all how someone chooses to look at things, and the expectations they choose to impose on others.
You would be surprised at the responses I get when I tell other players ...

"1.9 is not required, spots are never promised to anyone, my Great Buildings are never in threads, you can donate whatever you want whenever you want ...
And I encourage you to make a profit if possible.

Good Luck in Your Endeavors and Have a Lovely Day"

As relative as it may be to topic of the thread, incessant meddling in social affairs outside the actual game operations, is what leads people to think that providing Guilds or players with protections they are not owed might be a good idea.

Sorry, still not seeing your point.

I don't impose anything on anyone by being on a 1.9+ thread. I manage my buildings properly and if someone puts less than 1.9 on my building for a position they are either going to overpay for a lower position or get locked out. Their choice, my choice.

I am just fine with you self leveling if you want and letting people take what they want for what they want (I do this on my diamond farms), or using swap threads if you want. If you don't manage your buildings efficiently then the mechanics of the game allow anyone to take any available slot. That is a valid choice, but does come with what some people may see as undesirable consequences.

I see no meddling in social affairs outside the actual guild operations as you put it. While 1.x threads are a player construct, they are one that it is up to the player owning the building to control. It is built into the game mechanics, however unintentionally, and if improperly managed come with potential problems (for the person improperly managing). Player's desiring extra protections beyond what the mechanics provide are the snowflakes imho, since it is incumbent upon them to learn the game mechanics and how to properly implement them if they don't like the results they see. Choosing not to do something is still a choice as I was always taught.

 

[BlackSand the Sly]

Sorry, still not seeing your point.

I am just fine with you self leveling if you want and letting people take what they want for what they want (I do this on my diamond farms), or using swap threads if you want. If you don't manage your buildings efficiently then the mechanics of the game allow anyone to take any available slot. That is a valid choice, but does come with what some people may see as undesirable consequences.

That's wonderful ... Because I wasn't asking if you were okay or fine with any of it.
You getting the point yet ...


Edit:
Sorry but I think you are struggling with my broad reference to social meddling outside of game operations, and the desire of people to establish norms that are not based in how the game actually operates. It causes conflict when players have expectations that are not supported in actual gameplay.

The topic is the suggestion that Guilds may be allowed to lock Great Buildings to everyone but other Guild Members.
That would be imposing a restriction on players based in a social context (Guilds or General Welfare) and not currently supported through normal gameplay.

.

 

[Brennius 1141 the Hard]

Unfortunately, no. The best you could do is only open a level (speaking about levels above 10) when the guildmates that are going to donate are online to donate immediately. That's no guarantee that others won't sneak in there, but it cuts down on their chances.

Thank you but just might have to cut my friend list (wanted to keep for the other great buildings) they help me out so much, but want my guild to benefit from the observatory

 

[Brennius 1141 the Hard]

That's wonderful ... Because I wasn't asking if you were okay or fine with any of it.
You getting the point yet ...


Edit:
Sorry but I think you are struggling with my broad reference to social meddling outside of game operations, and the desire of people to establish norms that are not based in how the game actually operates. It causes conflict when players have expectations that are not supported in actual gameplay.

The topic is the suggestion that Guilds may be allowed to lock Great Buildings to everyone but other Guild Members.
That would be imposing a restriction on players based in a social context (Guilds or General Welfare) and not currently supported through normal gameplay.

.

This game is all about social context if you're not my friend or my guild you cannot donate to my great buildings... And it is set up more of a guild based game, guilds have better abilities and can gain more in battle together.

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

This game is all about social context if you're not my friend or my guild you cannot donate to my great buildings... And it is set up more of a guild based game, guilds have better abilities and can gain more in battle together.

Neighbors can also donate to your GBs. And if they put one or more FP on one of your GBs while they're your neighbor, they can still donate to that level of that GB even if they're moved out of your neighborhood. Once that level is completed, however, they cannot donate further unless they become your neighbor again or friend/guild mate.

 

[Ebeondi Asi]

Thank you but just might have to cut my friend list (wanted to keep for the other great buildings) they help me out so much, but want my guild to benefit from the observatory

I typically have cut any friend who places FPs on my Great Buildings who did not ask in advance. . No problem. There are thousands of possible Friends who will not try to snatch positions on your GBs.

 

[Ebeondi Asi]

Sorry but I think you are struggling with my broad reference to social meddling outside of game operations, and the desire of people to establish norms that are not based in how the game actually operates. It causes conflict when players have expectations that are not supported in actual gameplay.

...""It causes conflict""
The entire game is based on conflict. Most of the game rules promote conflict. Yet at the same time allow (if so inclined) to cooperate with others.