Rejected GBs and Eras ( dislike and suggestion )

[DeletedUser8400]

I want to just state that I think it is unfair that some players have GB's outside of their era. Sometimes 2 or 3 eras ahead of themselves. While I understand that guildmates and friends gave them all the goods to get it to make it available for them, but it isn't fair for the rest of us!
So can you guys please make it a requirement that in order to build GBs of XYZ era, YOU MUST be in that era.

In plain and simple words: You can't build GBs era(s) ahead of you, you can only build from your current era and below.

Sometimes these benefit them in different ways other than PvP and GvG or for GE. Sometimes it allows them to clear up a lot of space in their city to build more wonders as some GBs give out population. There where some people getting the lead in PvP as a result of this.

While I understand that they can't be removed overnight for the players that already have such cities, I do have a suggestion and solution for it. LET THEM KEEP IT! The catch? Disable all the benefits from such GBs and they will only be reactivated when they reach such era for such GB. Simple as that.

This is to make it a more fair and balanced game among players. It does not take away anything from the general public nor adds any unfair advantage(s) to anyone. It simply regulates those that have found an exploit in the GBs/Era procedure. I hope this gets implemented fairly.

Thank you for your time and I hope to hear from the devs regarding this matter.

 

[DeletedUser]

Whether it is a good idea to build such GB's is another question. That depends imho totally on one's play style

it is a good idea to almost all playing styles

only depends what GB that playing style needs
many want the Arc. some wants Alcatraz, other the Chateau. Arctic Orangery too
(I know it because I sell the goods)

not all GB are wanted: nobody wants to build the Gaea

ok some extreme playing styles don't need it
I had on OF neighbor with NO GB
he plays the: I don't need any GB at all-style

 

[NormaJeane]

not all GB are wanted: nobody wants to build the Gaea

As far as I'm concerned Colosseum can also be added to your list

Still it all depends on how one wants to play... and fortunately FoE gives room for many play styles

 

[DeletedUser8400]

An 'edge' that is available to every player.

Not sure if u have read any of my other posts but I have mentioned that just because an exploit is available to everyone, does not make it fair. The exploit is still and exploit. More of it is in reply or post #17.

Every person is able to set trades for future era's goods. Every person above IA has the ability to put FPs on higher era players GBs to pay for the goods.

While this is true, this is not at all an issue. I mentioned earlier how I would be fine for trading purposes ( trading higher goods for lower ones ) but when it comes down to building a GB you SHOULD be required to learn the technology in that era for X GB. ( as stated in post#17 ). Again, a game based and inspired off of real life would mean you SHOULD be required to learn the tech.

My inno provides my population.... no population means no city... my entire city gets broken because of someone wining that my hard work isn't 'fair' to a lazier player?

This is exactly the mindset that makes people go for these exploits. The mindset in which you do not want to actually challenge yourself in building your city by actually building residence, gain more land expansions, deal with the issues of happiness from more population. And learning to place things around and what will stay and go in your city. Instead u want to jump eras ahead without learning the technology and use a future GB to an era that will benefit you in ur city IS in fact the easier way out. Even though putting all the work to get that stuff is indeed work and it does take time and effort, it doesnt change the fact that its an exploitation that benefits you in population.

My traz provides my military... so I can't play GvG anymore because.. same reason?

Being one era away from it, I would say is fair enough but jumping ahead 3 or 4 eras is not. So this would be ok. Any GB in which the player is one era away is something I don't fully object to.

DT provides me with higher age goods I trade down to help me negotiate LVL 4 GE. Can't do that anymore I guess.

In the time ive played this game, I have never had an issue on getting goods in my era with the goods from my era or below me. I also have completed LVL 4 GE each week and maintain a surplus each week. I roughly have about 200 goods left from each resource from my era and the previous era due to me being able to plan my city and make trades during the week and weekend per week each week for the past 8 weeks so far. I've accomplished this by a combination of fighting in GE encounters and Negotiations. Not sure why you feel that the only way to acquire such goods would require only higher goods. Maybe you should actually try to do things within ur era and find solutions to ur problems? To be fair I would not know the best way to tell you what to do and not to do. My concern is in the exploitation of GBs and the eras.

Essentially what you're asking for is an easy button to get all the players better than you to quit or be frozen for being better. I spent almost a year putting all my FPs into trades with people to get the buildings that I wanted and leveling the buildings them.

Yes i understand that there was work put into getting all of that accomplished. Not denying that. I also don't believe it is an easy button for players that do not exploit the GB req'. If you can provide me with a more insight as to how a player that does not exploit the game by getting GBs ahead of his era has it easier than one that does, I am willing to say I am wrong. Because essentially I am saying and stating that players who do jump ahead eras and get those GBs are taking an easier road than those that aren't. It's easier to claim someone is better when you have a array of GBs that aren't even in ur era or one era in your range. The problem is the mindset of the player who already has all of those GBs and fears loosing them. I have stated that I do not wish to tear them down for the player that already have them. I mentioned that for those that already have them, their structure still remains but their perks are deactivated until such player reaches that era. But as I look back now on what i said before, we should make it activate 1 era prior to that GBs era. This will force the player who owns them to move up in his era. Afterall, whats wrong with playing with other players who are essentially at your same level and not abusing any system? That isn't unfair towards anybody.

What you are suggesting would break the cities of those who spent a very long time strategizing and actually working to improve their game.

At first it does seem that way. Everyone that already has advance era GBs in lower eras feel threaten. But isn't a game suppose to be about the struggle of accomplishing something and feeling rewarded? Is there anything wrong with having players of the same era vs each other or play among their own rank?
But this is nothing new in the gaming world. Every game has set so that players with X level of skill or era will face off another player of such skill set or near it. Nothing wrong with that. Its just been so long, from what it seems, that quite a few people have been GB era hopping. All because of a flaw that does not require the player to learn the technology or get close to it ( one era away )

Sorry for the long post but I felt I had to address some of your feedback.

 

[DeletedUser8400]

why is having a higher GB an issue ?

Please see post/reply # 17 for further clarification.

 

[DeletedUser8400]

isn't getting 100 free FP and 200 goods from filling one GB not an unfair advantage (because of having a level 80 Arc and Chateau)

As long as ur within one era from that gb it is ok to build it, being far behind from a GB is the problem.

 

[DeletedUser8400]

high era players (with GB they are allowed to have according to you) are and will exploit the game because of their GBs

so why do you only want to take the exploits of low era players (trying to do the same as high era players) but letting the high era players do what they do the whole day

My problem is with any player of any given era earning GBs outside of one era away. If any player builds any GB within his era and lower ( or even one era away ) He/she has put in the work to learn the technology and spent time and fp's to get there. That would not be an issue as they actually went through the process of getting there. The problem is with the GB era hoppers. In the first reply/post I stated that it probably should be a requirement to be in that era. While now talking to a few people and hearing from them, one era away is fair as well. But there should be a requirement so that people dont GB era hop.

 

[DeletedUser5097]

Getting back to the original post, once again: As our CM pointed out, in this game it is intended game behaviour.

Reasons for the opportunity to build GB's that are actually far ahead of one's age might be:
• Generating more income (for the game) and/or
• Generating more interaction between players :
After all, being able to build such GB's will depend on buying all resources necessary AND/OR will depend on one's guildmates or friends willing to help out with such GB's (usually this involves a load of FP's and trade goods).

Whether it is a good idea to build such GB's is another question. That depends imho totally on one's play style

If the last reason is realy the thing behind this system, then well done Inno, this system is
a huge success; players trade goods and fp's for this.

Oh well, besides of that. I find it a bit strange system at first, because it allows a time paradox
in the game. A GB with much higher tech. then the city can other, but how cares about that?
Now I know the reasons behind it, I understand it much better. If I would have develop a simelar
game I maybe would do the same. Since it's maybe vital in this game, since it's a game of Inno
and there trade mark is that they fully run on money from players how buyed diamonds. If FoE
don't makes enough money Inno will shut down the game. Think of Lagoonia a few years
ago.
So at the end of the day, I'm glad that they created GB's, especialy with this reasons, but also
learning more about special buildings around the globe. However as a side note, I don't
understand with this knowledge, why they decided to not launching the second OF GB... after
thinking twice of the infulence by GB's on the game. I wonder what the catch is.

 

[DeletedUser8400]

Getting back to the original post, once again: As our CM pointed out, in this game it is intended game behaviour.



Reasons for the opportunity to build GB's that are actually far ahead of one's age might be:
• Generating more income (for the game) and/or
• Generating more interaction between players :
After all, being able to build such GB's will depend on buying all resources necessary AND/OR will depend on one's guildmates or friends willing to help out with such GB's (usually this involves a load of FP's and trade goods).

Whether it is a good idea to build such GB's is another question. That depends imho totally on one's play style

I clearly can see why people would build GB's ahead of their eras, thats a given. Anyone who's played this game long enough can understand that. I also understand getting the goods from friends and guildmates helps build a more interactive community, which is a plus for the game and its players. I don't question if its a good idea to build GBs that are ahead of you, bc on paper when its written it sounds good. But the problem lies in the unforseen reaction that this causes among other players of the same era. But if you can provide me with information on how the developers themselves stated that its a good idea to jump 3 or 4 eras or even 5 eras ahead and build those GB as fair gameplay, I will say no more on the matter. Because only then I will understand where the dev's stand.

 

[DeletedUser8400]

damn I have an edge compared to that city
I get 49 FP from my palace sets (8 palaces, 9 eastern towers and the rest what is needed to get full bonus)

and that with luck, time (looking often at the wheel) and NO diamonds

should that edge turned off too ?

I don't have a problem with people gaining any given of number of times special buildings from events or so forth. That is fair play when the event happens. Everyone has a shot at it while its active. My post clearly makes the reference to GB era hopping.

 

[NormaJeane]

... But if you can provide me with information on how the developers themselves stated that its a good idea to jump 3 or 4 eras or even 5 eras ahead and build those GB as fair gameplay, I will say no more on the matter. Because only then I will understand where the dev's stand.

Alas, I cannot provide such information for the simple reason I have no access to it - after all I'm just a volunteer moderator

Whether certain things in a game are to be considered fair or unfair will in my opinion be very dependent on one's perception of any game.
In this game any player being able to do so is allowed to build GB's far ahead of one's era.
Some will consider this a fair challenge, others may consider it unfair competition.

No matter how individual players feel about this particular game opportunity, it has been an allowed opportunity since the introduction of GB's and personally I doubt very much if changes on this will be implemented in the near future.

 

[DeletedUser8277]

you SHOULD be required to learn the technology in that era for X GB.

There is nothing in the tech tree which unlocks a specific GB. This is not in the game anywhere, you're just making things up to try to prove your point but you honestly don't have much of a point beyond you feel it's not

fair

Speaking on which:


Advanced GBs are 1) In accordance with the rules standards and legitimate and are achieved by not cheating or trying to achieve UNJUST advantage. So unless you are saying they GBs are a blonde bout of good weather by the very definition of the word you are wrong.

Before you try to twist the words unjust advantage- working for something and obtaining what you earn when all players have the ability to do so
is not an UNJUST advantage.

In the time ive played this game, I have never had an issue on getting goods in my era with the goods from my era or below me. I also have completed LVL 4 GE each week and maintain a surplus each week.

Is that because you played the game via the rules and set your city up according to your play style as the game allows? Funny, as did I. You played how you wanted to, I played how I wanted to. But you're complaining that somehow my way was not fair even though you could have played my way yet chose not to and your solution to this is to have everyone who did it my way essentially deleted from the game.

Being one era away from it, I would say is fair enough but jumping ahead 3 or 4 eras is not. So this would be ok. Any GB in which the player is one era away is something I don't fully object to.

Every GB in my city I have had since LMA. I paused for 9-10 months in LMA to spend the FPs getting the goods to acquire them.

Because only then I will understand where the dev's stand.

devs have already shown where they stand by incorporating the ability to do so into the game since the introduction of GBs.

Maybe you should actually try to do things within ur era and find solutions to ur problems?

I have no problems within my era. I have the solutions, you just don't seem to like them though if doesn't effect you AT ALL. You have also not provided a single way in which this effects the game negatively. You keep saying it's not fair... but how is that? I have something they don't have, I worked for it they did not... so it's not fair? But how does it affect them?
Inno- Contains my population so I have greater city room for GBs.
Arc- GB contribution bonus + treasury donation- none of which have any ill affect on my neighbors
DT- So I'm more likely to aid people?
Traz-Producing unattached military of my own age same as GE
AO-a small percentage for critical hit-which could be the only thing they would need to concern themselves with if I were a plunderer
Chateau-Quest bonuses-Doesn't affect anybody else.

So for every advanced GB I have only 1 has a 5.5% chance to affect anyone else negatively and only would do so if I were a plunderer. As most do I use it for GvG, which being as though any person in any era can fight in any era they have the troops for, doesn't affect them. I could be in OF fighting in INA GvG if I wanted to be.


Of course I take this personally, the same way you would if someone decided they thought they were 'tattling' on you to the devs and trying to get your game taken away. I've broken zero rules, never even bent them. My city has nothing to do with you, my city has very little to do with my actual in game neighbors. Why, by any stretch of the imagination, should they respond to you when every person who has responded to this thread including the CM disagreed with you? It would seem the logic leading you to the conclusion 'everyone else is wrong and I am so right I deserve a 1 on 1 with a dev' is the same one that lead you to 'they worked to get something and I didn't so I should complain'. You feel as though you deserve more than others but shouldn't have to work as others do to get them. Each playing field you encounter should just be leveled, nay tilted in your favor upon your arrival. Every loss should come with a participation trophy of equal measure and dare one person achieve what you did not. And you don't just want to prevent your perceived injustices from happening in the future, you actually want to take them away from those who have already earned and worked for them. All so you can FEEL like something is more (the incorrect definition) of fair, when in truth nothing would change for you and your game.

For the game to change the rules now and take away something from players which was earned by them that is what would actually be unfair given the definition of the word.

 

[DeletedUser8400]

Alas, I cannot provide such information for the simple reason I have no access to it - after all I'm just a volunteer moderator

Whether certain things in a game are to be considered fair or unfair will in my opinion be very dependent on one's perception of any game.
In this game any player being able to do so is allowed to build GB's far ahead of one's era.
Some will consider this a fair challenge, others may consider it unfair competition.

No matter how individual players feel about this particular game opportunity, it has been an allowed opportunity since the introduction of GB's and personally I doubt very much if changes on this will be implemented in the near future.

Fair enough. While i do not expect this to happen instantly or at all, I do hope Inno takes it into consideration and does do something in regards to it. Like that one fella said, it is a time paradox.

 

[DeletedUser8400]

There is nothing in the tech tree which unlocks a specific GB. This is not in the game anywhere, you're just making things up to try to prove your point but you honestly don't have much of a point beyond you feel it's not

The first sentence of your is something i never said was there. I said GBs are in eras. To prove that you can simply go to any FoE wiki and look up GB info and you will notice how GBs are categorized. They have eras. I never said that the tech tree unlocks GE.

Advanced GBs are 1) In accordance with the rules standards and legitimate and are achieved by not cheating or trying to achieve UNJUST advantage. So unless you are saying they GBs are a blonde bout of good weather by the very definition of the word you are wrong.

The Fair definition does make it clear that trying to achieve an unjust advantage part, which clearly is happening with some of these GBs. How can you say you that you got the resources for inno tower as fair?

Lets think about that for a sec.Inno tower requirements:

550 Electromagnets ( achieved from MAGNET FACTORY. MAGNET FACTORY requirement: Contemporary Era and Automation tech .)
200 plastic ( achieved from .requirement: Contemporary Era, and Petroleum Industry tech. )
250 Bionic data ( achieved from .requirement: Contemporary Era, and Bionics tech. )
500 Robots ( achieved from .requirement: Contemporary Era, and Automation tech. )
250 GAS ( achieved from LNG PLANT. LNG PLANT requirement: Contemporary Era, and Petroleum Industry tech. )


For the most part it seems that players did not achieve such tech or era at all. Not even for an era before Contemporary Era. Lets look at it another way,
Did you/others reach the "Contemporary Era"?
Did you/others research " Automation", "Petroleum Industry" and " Bionics" technologies?
Did you/others put up 9,386 Forge points to be at the gates of Contemporary Era? This means you only finished PME but have yet to research any tech in CE to be considered CE.

By doing the math on fps ( info from this wiki http://forgeofempires.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Age ) that is how many fp's you would need to be in that era. Now someone who just bothered to go only to Industrial age, would only need 4,836 fps. Doing that math it seems someone is 4,550 fps away...I would say thats quite a lot. Slightly less than what they clearly have achieved themselves. Lets not forget that they still would need to research the proper techs to get those plants that produce those goods that they need to collect for the Inno tower.

Enough with the fps math, lets go to the resources you need. Did you actually get the raw resources to build the stuff the plant requires? No? You don't say....Ok, I'll give u the benefit of a doubt and say u were an era before and traded them with someone. Thats great! That's what trading is for. But did you have the resources from PME to trade it in for? no? wow....seems kinda unfair now doesn't it. Ok then, taking into example that a player might be in the Industrial era....that said player would be about 3 eras behind ( not counting INA itself )....that means that in order to get 200 plastics he would have to trade at a ratio of 2:1, 400 PME goods for 200 CE. 800 ME goods for those 400 PME, and for those 800 ME he would have had to trade 1600 PE goods. Im not saying its not possible to do so, but it sure as hell is not easy. And thats assuming you find the right people willing to trade with you along the way. And this is just for 200 CE goods....The number goes higher for 250 bionic data and gas, Further higher for 500 Robotics and 550 electromagnetic.

That is all under the assumption that you played 'fair'.
Now if u had friends and guildmates help you get those good in a 1:1 trade ratio, then it's quite obvious that they want to help you get something that you yourself don't want to put in the work. Hence why your not leveling up at least to be in PME. That too me sounds like an undjust advantage.

How can you have the audacity to claim 'fair' and 'just' because you had friends or guildmates Give you the stuff needed either in one or several trades? IF this information does not prove to you that it is an UNJUST ADVANTAGE by slashing the required FP to research, The goods requirement and the Tech requirement ( which doesn't include how many fp's u had to spend on the continental map to get those resources for trading ), then You my friend are need to look at this several times to understand it.

But I'm sure someone as bright as you will understand what is fair and what is an unjust advantage.

Is that because you played the game via the rules and set your city up according to your play style as the game allows? Funny, as did I.

Funny that it is, because I did not go outside of my era and leaped across to get benefits that are meant to aid someone in that era. Hence why its an exploit.

I have no problems within my era. I have the solutions, you just don't seem to like them though if doesn't effect you AT ALL. You have also not provided a single way in which this effects the game negatively

Your solutions are to cut your research, cut ur resource goods req's, cut just about anything req'd to reach such era or goods. How is that even solving a problem within your era? All the perks you mentioned are the perks that are unfair and impact other players negatively whom want to get first place in PvP, GE, and/or GvG. Don't know how much more clearer it can be.

I've broken zero rules, never even bent them.

Ive never said you had. That was your own personal assumption.

Why, by any stretch of the imagination, should they respond to you when every person who has responded to this thread including the CM disagreed with you?

A disagreement is not a valid point to make in which your stating that your right because the majority agree with your point of view. If such things were true in life then women wouldn't be allowed to vote, slavery would still exist, and other horrible things in life would still have remained. But thats going off topic, just felt the need to mention it as it helped prove my point about what a disagreement really proves.

t would seem the logic leading you to the conclusion 'everyone else is wrong and I am so right I deserve a 1 on 1 with a dev'

That seems to be an assumption of yours. I've never said otherwise.

You feel as though you deserve more than others but shouldn't have to work as others do to get them

Again, another of your assumptions. I never stated that I deserve more than others. I simply am making a suggestion in the 'feedback' section of this forum. I gave my reasons as to why. The title itself is a clear indicator about what I am talking about. Nothing in it say 'need' or 'deserve'. But I can see why you would assume that.

...Every loss should come with a participation trophy of equal measure and dare one person achieve what you did not. And you don't just want to prevent your perceived injustices from happening in the future, you actually want to take them away from those who have already earned and worked for them.

Another assumption of yours. I do have to agree on the 2nd part of that quote. To some extent having a more fair and balanced GB rule and req's endorse would prevent future injustices among players. The last part of me wanting to 'take them away' from those that 'worked for them', is inaccurate. I said I want to deactivate it until they reach either the era prior to that GB or that GBs era itself. I would happily also settle with letting them keep them but as of XYZ date have a req' that they must be one era or within the same era to build them.

All so you can FEEL like something is more (the incorrect definition) of fair, when in truth nothing would change for you and your game.

I do feel that making such req's possible would make it fair for all. Whether it changes or not, only time will tell. Hence why I brought my concern and feedback into the 'feedback' section of the forums. Glad you got a few things right so far.

For the game to change the rules now and take away something from players which was earned by them that is what would actually be unfair given the definition of the word.

Agreed. It would seem harsh and unfair. So is cutting FP's, resources, and technology requirements. So with all being said and laid out, what would u suggest be a better way to approach it, without leaving it as it currently stands? Keep in mind that it is in regards to GB era hopping that my concerns are on. As far as those that already have them, I would agree to let them keep it and their perks but any future players would have to abide by the requirement. So what would your feedback be as you yourself now know what is 'fair' and an 'unjust advantage'?

 

[DeletedUser8277]

Agreed. It would seem harsh and unfair. So is cutting FP's, resources, and technology requirements. So with all being said and laid out, what would u suggest be a better way to approach it, without leaving it as it currently stands?

There is no need to change it. It was intended as is and the one question you keep skirting is HOW DOES ANY OF THIS AFFECT YOU?? Or anyone else for that matter? How do my GBs impact anyone elses game is such an egregious way I should no longer be allowed to play it?

I'm not going to get into all of your desperate attempts to skirt every issue raised by every person here using methods of comparing buildings in a game to the plight of slavery and women's suffrage. Really, bravo on that one. Every core point you are trying to make is wrong and faulted.

No, I have not unlocked the building in FE that produced some of the goods.

Just like many people in FE did not unlock them as they did not have the required boosts so what did they do for them? TRADE. They traded equal goods, I traded hundreds of FPs. FOE also does not have a fair trade policy, so long as my trade partner felt my 600 FP was equivalent to their goods that's it. You don't get to decide that, my trade partners do.

In fact, I could have TRADED inno diamonds for them.

Something tells me you had to have known this before you spent all that time adding up FPs. Any good you need, tech tree, GBs, GE, unlocking levels in GE etc can be bought for diamonds no matter your era. I could finish the CMap right now using diamonds and negotiating.

Currently, no matter what era I am in I can use diamonds to buy any good I want and unlock any GB I want. What more proof do you need that everything you are saying is not what the devs had in mind? And what do you tell to someone who spent the $120 or so dollars to get their goods and build their GBs early? Sorry but when I looked at your city your advanced GBs offended my feelings? I know it didn't effect me at all but just knowing you had something I didn't really didn't sit right with me?

And all of this is moot. You FEEL it is unfair, it does not meet the definition of unfair yet you persist because of your feelings.

The game gives us 3 choices on acquiring goods: Be in the position to make them yourself, buy them with diamonds, trade with someone who has them for something they want. And you somehow think 2 of those 3 options need to disappear along with the players who chose to use them.

The solution to this problem is for you to stay in your own lane, focus on your game and what you're doing and spend less time poking your nose around other peoples cities picking apart the things you don't have.

Is your next argument going to be 'well they shouldn't be able to buy them either because some people might not have money and looking at those that do might make them feel bad inside?"

There is not a single point that you have made that has shown advanced gbs are, bad for inno as a company, bad for the game in general, bad for the players that build them, bad for the players around them. All you have done is pointless math, horrible analogies and talk about how you feel.

I'm not going to bother with this anymore. No one has been able to talk any sense into you. Something isn't unfair when the opportunity exists amongst all to do the same things. It is initiative/desire/laziness that is the difference, the opportunity exists for all and if some don't take the time to learn the game/desire advanced GBs/ or can't be bothered you don't punish everyone who did learn/wanted them/worked for them.

 

[DeletedUser]

Quite a discussion we have going here. I do love the Beta Community

Fair, unfair, just, unjust, exploits, era hopping (I love this one ). I just do not see it this way at all.

Any game mechanic or strategy, or play style, as long as it is potentially available to all players, is by definition fair, just and not an exploit.
I think what this really comes down to is players that put all their focus into early GB development, and those that do not. But again, these are strategies available to all, and it's each players choice how they approach it.

Even if for arguments sake we said there was a limit on GB's that you can only build them up to one age/era above your own, it still doesn't change the ingame affects if you are the player at less GB development than another.
I can get hammered and plundered daily by a player an age below me if they have attack GB's that are 30 levels above my own. However I do not think that is unfair to me, or an exploit by the other player. The fact is they put more time and effort into developing a city to be powerful in attacking, and I didn't. It's just a reality of gaming and different play styles.

Currently GB's have 3 requirements to build. Space in the city, a full BP set, and the goods to build it. Again this is available to everyone, so no one can inherently be at a disadvantage.
Is it a players fault that they build 5 GB's while in EMA, and I only built 2? No, it means they spent more time gaining BP's, that their guild may be better than mine in affording opportunities to get higher age goods. Maybe they Aid more than I do, or do FP swaps. They deserve to be ahead of me because they put more effort into it.

I don't want to influence anyone's opinions here. This is just my opinion as a player about our current system of gaining BP's and building GB's.
Thanks all, keep up the great feedback
Z.D.

 

[DeletedUser8341]

The very existence of the Dynamic Tower, to enable players to get goods ahead of their age (since only a moron - or someone already well in the future - would use it to get goods prior to their age) shows the intention that players can build GBs of advanced ages. Players who do not build advanced-era GBs are not playing the game to its fullest but that isn't a problem that those who do play it to full advantage should be penalised for.

 

[DeletedUser8341]

not all GB are wanted: nobody wants to build the Gaea

I do! I'm seriously considering getting the BPs and then the goods to make it my first GB in beta (at HMA).

Best happiness per square of any GB, added to better medals per square than anything else I've seen so far.

Yep. I want Gaea. Which just goes to show what we've been saying: many different styles! And anyone stands the same chance as me, whether its a mistake or a stroke of genius.

 

[DeletedUser7107]

I want to just state that I think it is unfair that some players have GB's outside of their era. Sometimes 2 or 3 eras ahead of themselves. .

I don't understand your thinking here. The game was designed and developed with the ability to have Gb in a higher era than the one in which you are in. What I object to is the term "unfair". If a player uses what is available to him in the game. the same things that are available to you, to gain an advantage, that is not "unfair", that is playing the game better than you might be..Now if the ability to build Gb from higher eras was limited to certain people, then yes I would agree, it would be unfair.
Remember, this is a strategy game, and those people with the best strategy will do better than other players. Indeed, the top players are always striving to find a better strategy, within the rules of the game, in order to gain an advantage. Hey, that's what strategy is all about, and it is what makes this game so fun to play.
Imagine trying to play chess, and the rule was that you had to move all of your pawns, before you could move any other pieces. It wouldn't be the same game. And neither would FOE be the same game if people were limited to GB of their current era.
Really, I don't think you have a valid complaint here

 

[DeletedUser8400]

The game gives us 3 choices on acquiring goods: Be in the position to make them yourself, buy them with diamonds, trade with someone who has them for something they want. And you somehow think 2 of those 3 options need to disappear along with the players who chose to use them.

I never said that. Nor did i implied it. The entire post is about making it so GBs are buildable one era prior to their era. You would still be able to trade and use diamonds for it.

In the end all of it is link, the amount of space you take up to the amount of population gained to the the military used of it. Otherwise if it wasn't you wouldn't worry about space, happiness, ect..

 

[DeletedUser8400]

So you are saying you want the rest of us to be limited to the pace you set?

I didnt say that either. I said when a player wants to build a GB such player should be an era prior to it or within that era. Not hop over 3-5 eras ahead to be able to build it.

EDITed to add this: Whatever pace the player wants to go at, whether rush through every tech and watnot is up to them. I have no problem with that. The GB era hopping is my issue.