Analysing the real value of Great Buildings

[DeletedUser109385]

Even with the increase in medals they are worthless compared to what you can rake in from gb donations.

With the increase they will be useful in the long term, not all GB donations give lots of medals . Donations are temporary, you are not going to get many medals unless you keep feeding your contributions with FPs, the GBs that give medals however will give medals without you doing anything, just sit and click on them daily and voila medals!
Every approach has its advantages and disadvantages

 

[DeletedUser110168]

With the increase they will be useful in the long term, not all GB donations give lots of medals . Donations are temporary, you are not going to get many medals unless you keep feeding your contributions with FPs, the GBs that give medals however will give medals without you doing anything, just sit and click on them daily and voila medals!
Every approach has its advantages and disadvantages

THEY WILL NEVER BE USEFUL IN THE LONG TERM, EVEN WITH AN INCREASE!

Think about the uses for medals for a second, expansions and AA GvG map. The top players have millions of medals right now without having either Gaea or Colo, and in most cases they don't have Deal either. They donate to gbs for medals, and they have millions of them. SO yes, while donations are temporary, if you want to get anywhere in this game that is how you farm medals quickly and efficiently. Just think about the amount of fps It would take to level up all three of those gbs to lvl 10, now Imagine how many medals that could get you in terms of fp donations. There is no comparison.

 

[DeletedUser110168]

If someone built that, they would have no use for pvp towers. For perspective, the iron age tower gives 25 medals in a week.

There is no reason to do PvP in IA anyway, the smallest barrack is 2x2 which is 4 squares. 4 VTs in that same space would produce 36 medals per week, more than using that one barrack to win the PvP tournament.

 

[DeletedUser12146]

THEY WILL NEVER BE USEFUL IN THE LONG TERM, EVEN WITH AN INCREASE!

Think about the uses for medals for a second, expansions and AA GvG map. The top players have millions of medals right now without having either Gaea or Colo, and in most cases they don't have Deal either. They donate to gbs for medals, and they have millions of them. SO yes, while donations are temporary, if you want to get anywhere in this game that is how you farm medals quickly and efficiently. Just think about the amount of fps It would take to level up all three of those gbs to lvl 10, now Imagine how many medals that could get you in terms of fp donations. There is no comparison.

Like my friend already said, don't build GB's if you need them for medals, the calculation just doesn't work.
Yesterday I made around 200k medals by investing in GB's. How much time (on what level) you need to get that amount from GB's?

 

[DeletedUser109385]

Like my friend already said, don't build GB's if you need them for medals, the calculation just doesn't work.
Yesterday I made around 200k medals by investing in GB's. How much time (on what level) you need to get that amount from GB's?

When I invest in GBs the highest I can get for 1st place is around 2300 medals, for me contributions take so long than collecting them from GBs, how can you make a profit of FPs from contributing to GBs? The FP swap threads can't guarantee you first place. If I invest around 1700FPs to level one of my GBs to level 10 I will get 500 medals if for colosseum daily, you simply accumulate those medals in the long term so when you buy expansions they will be useful. The thing that I don't find efficient about GB donations is that yes you get more medals but you need to be first place and for me often you make a loss of FPs instead of a profit because contributions don't give much FPs unless you have a high levelled arc.

 

[DeletedUser12146]

When I invest in GBs the highest I can get for 1st place is around 2300 medals, for me contributions take so long than collecting them from GBs, how can you make a profit of FPs from contributing to GBs? The FP swap threads can't guarantee you first place. If I invest around 1700FPs to level one of my GBs to level 10 I will get 500 medals if for colosseum daily, you simply accumulate those medals in the long term so when you buy expansions they will be useful. The thing that I don't find efficient about GB donations is that yes you get more medals but you need to be first place and for me often you make a loss of FPs instead of a profit because contributions don't give much FPs unless you have a high levelled arc.

I don't invest in GB if I don't make a profit, and I only enter GB if I can secure my place, simple as that.
Ofc you will not get many medals from lvl10 (but you will from multiple lvl10 GB's).

For example, take a look at AO lvl74:

Where I will get, from single GB, 39.930 + 90% (arc bonus) = 75.867 medals...

ATM my program shows me this:

p.s. which is a bad profit, since half of that if helping friends with my full bonus...

And yes, you will need and Arc 90% to make FP+medal profits. Based on that, I would rather put all FP's to Arc instead of medals GB's. In a long term it will pay off.

 

[DeletedUser110168]

500 medals a day is way too good for Colosseum because it is available so early on

I get 240 something from Gaea per day when I was in IA. Does that mean Gaea is overpowered? (Available same time as Colo)

And yes, you will need and Arc 90% to make FP+medal profits.

Partially true. A 90% bonus will help a ton but I can turn a profit (not as large of one obviously) with my lvl 13

The FP swap threads can't guarantee you first place.

Actually... they can. Example from today: Level 13 arc, swapped 30 fps onto a gb of my choice in swap threads. Put in 37 to secure first and got 27 fps back. So I paid 37 fps to get 30 swapped PLUS 27 back into my inventory. That's a return of +20 fps. On a lvl 2 or 3 RAH. It is definitely doable if you are deliberate with your donations. (I do this multiple times per day on multiple gbs)

 

[DeletedUser109385]

Gaea is NOT available at the same time as Colosseum. It's impossible to build Gaea Statue until somebody reaches the Arctic Future.

You can still obtain blueprints for the Gaea by contributing into your guild Gaea statue if they have one, just like the many people who get Traz before reaching the progressive era.

500 medals a day is way too good for Colosseum because it is available so early on

If you are in Iron Age yes but later ages then not so much, I am quite sure a player in Iron Age would not bother leveling their Colosseum at level 10 unless ofcourse if they are that player who just loves biding their time but it would cost them a hell lot of time to get their Colosseum at level 10 because most players in Iron Age tend to have less SoK or Bazzars to make FPs than players in higher ages.

 

[DeletedUser110168]

Gaea is NOT available at the same time as Colosseum. It's impossible to build Gaea Statue until somebody reaches the Arctic Future.

Mate, I have a photograph of Gaea right next to my IA town hall on this forum... check out my forum journal

Note: yes it is impossible to build until SOMEONE reaches AF.

 

[DeletedUser110168]

It's also impossible to build it in IA without either someone giving you the goods or spending 20,000 diamonds on it

Colosseum is very easy to build for any player in IA

Buying, but yeah I get your point. All the same, is Gaea Overpowered? no, because it is AF. So what's the difference?

 

[DeletedUser110168]

Accessibility, levelup cost.

Colo isn't easy to get bps for in a developed world either, people just don't build it. I don't have specific stats on levelup costs, but maybe it's double? and it produces way more medals anyhow.

 

[DeletedUser110168]

It absolutely is. You can get loads of them from recurring quests from IA up through AF. You cannot get BPs for Gaea from recurring quests until AF.

So ultimately your objection comes down to availability of gb? If I understand it correctly.
But if Gaea, Deal as well are producing more medals, then who cares if Colo does as well?
Do you object to raising the medal count for ALL three of them?

You said a bit earlier that you don't think someone in IA should be getting 500 medals from a lvl 10, so how about 250?

 

[DeletedUser110168]

no. I think it should be like 60-70 for Colosseum.

60-70 would be just about even with VTs, don't see a reason to build it unless...

But really what needs to be done is scale the values as you age up, just as ToR relics scale as you advance.

Scaling rewards would totally go against these gbs. There are really only two gbs that scale: ToR and SV, but those are pretty special cases (and incidentally I disagree with scaling for SV anyway) If these three medal producing gbs are also scaled based on age, what gbs will be next? Will happiness boosts now scale? How about coin production?

 

[DeletedUser109385]

Age only plays a small role in deciding how powerful a GB can be, in the case of Colosseum 350 for level 10 would be reasonable

 

[DeletedUser110168]

There are more than two GBs that scale

Okay I change my previous thoughts
There are NO gbs that scale. Percentage based boosts =/= scaling because they are independent of age. In the case of SV, while the rewards do get better with age, this is not an example of scaling because the percentage and supplies production are independent of age, likewise the goods amount from babel and the like are also independent from age (Up until ME). If the rewards in the form of an actual number or percentage are not age based, then this is not scaling. WW IS an example of scaling because the boosts (whatever amount you get back: medals, coins etc) ARE age dependent.

 

[DeletedUser110168]

Do you agree or disagree: Babel produces goods from the bronze age when you're in the bronze age, but iron age goods when in the iron age

Agree

therefore this bonus scales.

Disagree

Hint: Babel goods change in the same way as wishing well goods.

yup I know, and the same argument still applies

Basically your analysis says that 'scaling' = a difference in type, not amount. I digress.
Scaling=an increase in amount, not a difference in type.
Truly there is some scaling with Babel, when you hit ME and the goods production doubles in amount. But going from age to age does not count as scaling (unless you are going into ME). Amount of goods is independent of age until you hit ME, before that it is only dependent on fps contributed, and as such there is only one era in which it scales.

 

[DeletedUser110168]

The bonus scales because the goods are not only different. They're more valuable.

I guess we will agree to disagree, you have my views and I have yours

see how many people are interested in trading 1000 machine parts for your 1000 iron.

Quite a few if I pop in a few fps ;P

 

[DeletedUser110168]

You seem unwilling to concede a point when you know you're wrong.

Well that wasn't accusatory at all ;P

Technically we are both right, we just both disagree with each other

OED defines 'scale' as:
"2[in singular] The relative size or extent of something:" My definition, relative size corresponds to an amount increase.
AND
"1.2 A series of marks at regular intervals in a line used in measuring something:" Your definition, age is a mark at a regular interval used to measure progress.

We are both right

So now the reasons to prefer my definition:
1. Gbs are independent of age, you can get them at any time, as such, staying in one age the only way you are going to increase output value is with fps. Hence, you can improve output value irrespective of age.
2. Well it is definitely true that as you age up those goods become more valuable, that is an example of the goods themselves scaling in value, and if everyone was at the end of tech there would be no real value whatsoever. The only reason higher aged goods have more value is because people assign arbitrary pricing on those goods to get them.

So look at it this way: the definition you use is akin to a definition of a ruler, my argument is that this ruler is totally relative and because of that, totally unable to measure things.
In the real world, the length of every measurement of length is DEFINED. Here the value of higher aged goods can become worthless as soon as everyone achieves that age and is producing those goods. (thus undefined) Relative rules cannot hope to work because then no one knows the true value, by basing your argument on the relative aspect of the free market, the measurements are inherently UNDEFINED, and therefore unable to demonstrate real scaling.

 

[DeletedUser110168]

GBs are only partially independent of age. It's much easier to construct a GB from near your age than it is to construct a GB from 6 ages ahead. The increase in output is much smaller if you stay within your age than by leaving it at level 1 and moving through the tech tree.

I totally agree with all of this, evidently you haven't disputed my point
Point: Output value is tied to fps because gbs are independent of age (you can get what ever ones you want at what ever age you want).

It takes 8500 population and 73 tiles to produce goods out of 1 building in Arctic, but only 200 population and 9 tiles to produce goods out of 1 building in iron age.

I totally agree with this as well, and once again, you haven't disputed my point at all
Point: Goods are only valuable if they are from a different age, if everyone is producing the same age goods at the end of tech (AF), then they are no longer valuable.

Also, you never addressed any of my definition analysis (ruler example), nor the definitions from the OED I found

 

[DeletedUser653]

Guys please stop ruining a very very good tread on the value of GB's

Mods, is it possible to delete this bickering from the tread and put it in a new tread where they can debate the meaning of scales. many thanks