• Dear forum reader,
    To actively participate in our forum discussions or to start your own threads, in addition to your game account you need a forum account. You can
    REGISTER HERE!
    Please ensure a translation in to English is provided if your post is not in English and to respect your fellow players when posting.
  • We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Support or Forum Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitment page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply
  • Fall Event 2021


    Calling all Bakers! Read all about the Fall Event 2021 here!
  • Forum Contests

    Do you want to win great prizes? Don't forget to check out the current contest here.

Excess blueprint trade

  • Thread starter DeletedUser15432
  • Start date

DeletedUser15432

With regtards to the execss blue prints that are left over after a great building has been consctructed, would it not be a good idea to have an option of trading the blue prints you have got for either (2 for 1) a blue print of the second great building from the same age, or if you have constructed both, trading the blueprints for those of the next age (4 for 1). If you have constructed both great buildings for consective ages, there should also be an option to trade the excess blue prints in for either forge points (5 blue prints for 4 forge points which equates to 5 to 1) or diamonds (15 percent return)

Proposal:
With regtards to the execss blue prints that are left over after a great building has been consctructed, would it not be a good idea to have an option of trading the blue prints you have got for either (2 for 1) a blue print of the second great building from the same age, or if you have constructed both, trading the blueprints for those of the next age (4 for 1). If you have constructed both great buildings for consecutive ages, there should also be an option to trade the excess blue prints in for either forge points (5 blue prints for 4 forge points which equates to 5 to 1) or diamonds (15 percent return)

Have you Checked the Ideas section for the same idea posted by someone else? Is this idea similar to one that has been previously suggested?


Reason: This idea was posted a very long time ago, at the time everyone was complaining about the number of blue prints for great buildings that were in the inventory, this was an attempt to alleviate the problem. when level uncapping was introduced this problem was solved, however as a moderator has re-opened this thread as having some value, and asked for it to be formatted I will do so, I have copied in the original idea (April 2013) for reference at the top of this reformatted sheet. I will also breach down the idea into individual sections


Details: - Option 1 - trading for blue prints in same age GB's i.e 2 statue of Zues for 1 tower of Babel
Option 2 - If you have constructed both of the Great Buildings for an age and have excess blue prints and do not want to open up additional level you can trade 4 blue prints form any Great Building of that age for a single blue print of any Great of the next age
Option 3 - If you have constructed both Great Buildings for an age and you do not want to open additional levels up, you can trade excess blue prints for forge points at a rate of 5 blue prints for 4 forge points (given that to buy a blue print it costs 200 diamonds and to buy a forge point 50 diamonds - this works out at a ratio of 5 to 1 for old blue prints)
Option 4 - sell off excess blue prints for diamonds - for each blue print you would get 30 diamonds


Visual Aids: none


Balance: Seems fair


Abuse Prevention: These options can only be used for great buildings that have been constructed and have not had any additional levels opened up (level 10 for most GB's and level 11 for those who received the free level up vouchers on Zeus, Aachen and Del Monte)


Summary: As above
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser1094

Hi...
This idea has already been proposed before... Please, use the search-option before creating new threads.

I'll link to another (almost) identical thread -> GB blueprints

...and whatever GrossEyeEh & Taeriyn wrote in that thread, also applies for your idea.

I'm closing this thread as it is a duplicate.
 

DeletedUser2989

I'm opening this idea again because the "almost identical" idea didn't reference trading BP's for FP's/Diamonds. This idea seems unique enough (even though it is very old) to still warrant voting on, personally I'm neutral on it as trading for the other GB in the age would be nice, not so sure on trading for the next age up. I also don't mind "selling" BP's but not so sure on selling them for diamonds.

Edit: the other idea did reference trading BP's from one GB for another GB but still didn't take it further.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser96901

first: too many different parts of trading
some maybe good

but giving a -1 because of
"trading the blueprints for those of the next age (4 for 1)"

when the Future started I had over 200 BP of the Dynamic Tower
so if I could trade 4 to 1 I would already had 50 BP of the two new GB in seconds
could have ended with a complete set of one or both GB

btw: why opening an idea that is obviously so old that it was created before uncapping the levels :?
 

DeletedUser2989

btw: why opening an idea that is obviously so old that it was created before uncapping the levels :?
As I mentioned the original reason for closing it didn't seem valid to me (this idea goes further into trading BP's for things other than BP's the linked idea it was a "duplicate" of only referenced BP's) and you never know what kind of trading options people will want to vote on regardless of uncapping the levels. So long as an idea is unique and can still fit with the game as it currently exists (while also not suggesting something that is considered "Do Not Suggest") it deserves the chance for votes, even if they all turn out to be -1...

I have to say the more detailed version of this idea has some strong restrictions on it, I wouldn't be able use it at all (but that's just down to my play style). Still not something I see worth voting down but also something that seems so restricted it won't be all that useful...
 
Last edited by a moderator: