Not sure if it's already been suggested but I’d like to be able to lower the level of a building without puling it down and starting again even if I didn't get any recourses back in return
Printable View
Not sure if it's already been suggested but I’d like to be able to lower the level of a building without puling it down and starting again even if I didn't get any recourses back in return
-1
it does not make any sense why you want to downgrade anyway?!
Since price for downgrading would probably be the same as upgrading I dont see anyone using it.
it's quite a good idea but, not sure this feature would get enough use to make it worthwhile BB developing it and i feel it goes against the current game mechanic.
Could you give us an example scenario where downgrading a building would be beneficial?
to balance a production of a raw material. iron ore for iron smelters for example
Pause building then.Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolisM
-1
disrupts the economy of the game.
Already destroy many lvl 6 buildings, soon new Bakery coming, will have to do same again, but then I will need more Grout which is good for lower leveled players. Now, add granite as well, need to "work" for it, for ex. will buy ls and someone will gain my payments. We must "waste" one part of the funds given by the game.
While I can think of a few times I wish I hadn't leveled something up or things changed in such a way I wouldn't mind taking a level back, I agree with the majority and think that would not fit with the economy of the game. If things have changed and you ended up unbalanced to the point you can't make things work, I think you need to "bite the bullet" and tear the offending building down and start anew. That would fit in so much better to the flow of the game, and the importance of decisions about leveling up. It teaches the lesson to not just level up all buildings every chance you get every time if you aren't sure that's the direction you want to go.
So yeah - turn it off, tear it down, level something else up, those are the logical choices imho.
Although I have had situations where I was sorry that I upgraded a building and wished that I could reverse it, I agree with Xibor - the whole point of the game is to have to re-balance your economy as you level up, and yes, that also includes tearing buildings down and losing the resources we invested. So sorry, but -1.
So you all think it's a better idea to just pull down a building and wait up to 10+ days before it's rebuilt? And who can be bothered to keep pausing building? It would be a lot better if you could just downsize, I've got 3 lvl6 stables that I don't use most of the time so they’re paused, I'm not pulling them down as I have plenty of space, now I've added an elite stable that doesn't use many horses and I have just enough wheat production for a single lvl5 stable, so my only option is to build another stable and upgrade it to lvl5 when I already have 3 lvl6, downsizing would be a much better option
No Steve, your options are to increase wheat production to balance the need. The whole idea of the game is to upgrade, upgrade and upgrade whilst keeping production of resources balanced. You should have learnt that during the tutorial phase!Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve1077