@Chronos5
I'm not the OP.
Presently, I don't think I have a single GB that can be levelled with less than 1500 FP. I have level 80 Arcs.
Nobody is talking about anything that will result in massive FP losses. For the most severe disasters, which will be spaced several years apart, the very most you'll loose, at the very most, the equivalent of one production cycle, and that only if your entire neighbourhood and FL decides to plunder you, rather than help you. If enough decide to help you, the damage may be fixed before you wake up in the morning, and before very many (or any) have discovered your vulnerability.
To make it clear: We're talking about plundering, with the differences from regular plundering being:
- All buildings, including GBs, are vulnerable
- No preceding battle is necessary
- FL'ers and guild-mates can plunder
In short: If you loose 500 FPs, you're in a lousy guild, you have lousy friends, and you have a city that can afford the loss. Also, with such guild mates, FL'ers, and sleep habits, you should most definitely not turn this function on. Not least, you should have a doctor look into your sleeping; it's not natural to sleep for that long.
For me, one daily collection involves about 150 FPs, on my main world. It would sting, but, when all comes to all, it's just one cycle, out of 365 in a year. One great thing about it is that it'll be proportional for everyone; no one will get off easy, and no one will loose more than they can afford.
You're right that, sometimes, it's wise to assume that other people may be more intelligent than oneself. However, considering that you somehow managed to imagine that we were talking about damaging GBs, it hardly applies to me in this instance. It does, however, apply to you. How on Earth could you believe we were talking about damaging GBs? In an astounding display of arrogance and hubris, you thought we were blithering idiots. Then you follow it up with complaints over what you perceive as a rude answer... It's almost impressive!
Thank you! You've successfully proved us both wrong. Well done.
This does, of course, change the math significantly. Re-calculating will be simple enough, though, as it's a matter of replacing a single constant: Instead of 1 in 20,000 per year, the chance will now be 1 in 20,000 per day, or, if you will, 1 in 55 per year. Reliably evening out the results will take 20,000,000 days, instead of 20,000,000 years. I'm still right about the vitamins, though. I'm also still right that the chances of rewards are far to low.
Your turn to admit to your mistake.
*re-disentangling myself from your phantasms*