Demolishing Level 5 buildings

[Thejollyone]

I demolished a load of storehouses to make room for the new Improved ones, and was gutted at the lack of resources we get back for that.

Now BB have introduced the epic woodyards, there will be people who will be deleting a load more L5 buildings, and this will be on the increase I guess with the advent of the other planned epic buildings.

Surely we should be getting back a percentage of the "total" resources we have used to level these up? And yes, even gems for those silly enough to have used them at L5 (lol).

[Dragavon]

It was our own choice to upgrade, and it is our own choice to tear the upgraded buildings down when new buildings are available. I am in the same situation myself, but I do not think we should get anything back. We can choose not to tear down buildings if we think it is unfair

[Thejollyone]

I do understand that, honest But BB want us to invest with (perhaps) gems for the new epic workyards, they gotta give something back, surely?

[fishslice]

I feel for you jollyfog. Many of us have done the same and its a really bad decision from BB not to refund a % of the total cost of developing a building. I recently deleted well in excess of 150 L5 Nobles and replaced them with Frozen Manors. That really hurt.


And before anyone says I shouldn't have upgraded them with the new features coming, like many long established L50 players they had been fully upgraded for about 12 to 18 months now.


Its going to be the same debacle when the new improved silos come online, unless the developers have a drastic rethink and adopt some of the suggestions posted on the forums.

[Dragavon]

I do understand that, honest But BB want us to invest with (perhaps) gems for the new epic workyards, they gotta give something back, surely?

Why?

That would be like going to McDonalds and ask for a refund on the burgers you ate before when they start offering a bigger better burger.

[Thejollyone]

thanks fishslice, the angle you have added with regards to not previously knowing this would happen just adds to my argument

[Thejollyone]

Why?

That would be like going to McDonalds and ask for a refund on the burgers you ate before when they start offering a bigger better burger.

Because they give the players no incentive to invest in the new buildings for gems...?

[Dragavon]

New buildings are better. It is our choice to trash the old ones and buy new. We can all choose to keep the old buildings if we do not think the upgrade is worth it.

[Thejollyone]

"New buildings are better" thats a contentious statement Im afraid. But the game has never been fair IMHO in giving resources back for those invested. But hey-ho..

[Bluesavanah]

Life is full of choices, you got a good trade off on the storehouses by way of vastly improved capacity and a license back, if you bought the workyard its still a pretty good trade off being as what your likely to demolish (foresters and coking) weren't that expensive in the first place and you've had good use most likely from them. Your still getting a load of licenses back.

Now silo is the choice of all choices if yours are lvl 5. They cost quite a bit to upgrade, you only get space back so you have a big dilemma, but given that 1 improved silo can nearly run 6 farms (buffed silo/unbuffed farm) it can be a considerable amount of space.

Chances are this will become more frequent sooner rather than later, who would bet against improved watermills sometime soon and workyards that replace at least parts of other chains. No one forces you to upgrade (except for rare quest requirements) and no one forces you to tear stuff down. I have torn down many lvl 5 buildings and never really regretted doing so, just be a little more cautious before you upgrade stuff and you'll have no regrets.