Hide gem box when viewing or raiding another base.

[iceageg]

What dahimi has done here is made a suggestion to improve the forums, not improve the game. We see useless new threads daily requesting being able to raid gem boxes. If they are not visible to attackers they will inevitably stop asking and we will only get the equally ridiculous request to add a gem storage that can be raided. I have never seen a request to be able to raid trees or rocks, so making them invisible is both unnecessary and unwanted because they do provide a limited tactical purpose.

What I see here is a very simple way to stop a very common problem with no drawback. It will eliminate about three useless new threads a day. Well done dahimi.

[TheConfuzed1]

Ah... If I cut it down does it have Loot?

It costs 25k gold to cut it down, and it pays back 75k, so you net 50k. It's sooo not worth it. I'd rather keep the little badge that says I was here, for Christmas 2013.

[TheConfuzed1]

... I have never seen a request to be able to raid trees or rocks, so making them invisible is both unnecessary and unwanted because they do provide a limited tactical purpose.

Actually, there have been many requests for just that.

[TheConfuzed1]

Your slippery slope argument holds no water with me. I'm suggesting a specific idea to target a specific issue.


In fact, demonstrably, different people complain about raiding obstacles than complain about raiding gem boxes. Uncollected gem boxes is also a more frequent complaint.


What, exactly, if I may ask, is your issue with this specific idea? It would probably be very easy to implement. It would also most definitely reduce the number of complaints regarding this specific issue.

It's not the idea itself that I am opposed to, it's the fact that I would prefer that time to be spent elsewhere in the game.

Slippery slopes do exist, but that was only meant to be in response to the previous poster. I never meant to imply somehow that you wanted our obstacles to be raidable!

Sorry if my ADD kicked in there for a second. I was having two different conversations, in the same thread, and apparently no one else realized it. Lol...

[iceageg]

Actually, there have been many requests for just that.

Must have gotten pushed off the first couple pages to fast by all of the requests to raid gem boxes, share resources, etc. I haven't seen one recently enough to spring to memory.

[dahimi]

It's not the idea itself that I am opposed to, it's the fact that I would prefer that time to be spent elsewhere in the game.

This is a fair argument. You should've opened and closed with that.

Slippery slopes do exist, but that was only meant to be in response to the previous poster. I never meant to imply somehow that you wanted our obstacles to be raidable!

They exist, but generally they are considered to be a logical fallacy unless you can some how prove it. In this case, a clear argument can be easily made that hiding the gem box should not extend to the hiding of other obstacles.

Sorry if my ADD kicked in there for a second. I was having two different conversations, in the same thread, and apparently no one else realized it. Lol...

You were the first person in the thread to mention trees. This added greatly to the confusion. If you wanna talk about trees, you should post in whatever thread trees were being discussed in.

[TheConfuzed1]

There have been several threads in the last week proposing to allow me to raid your Gem box if you haven't collected it. It is a bad suggestion and the OP is offering a way to remove the temptation.

This is the reason I brought up trees. I simply said that raiding gem boxes can not happen, because other obstacles could be next. I was agreeing that they should not be raidable, and I extended the possibility to show what could come next. In any case, I don't want any of it to be raidable, but I don't think they should be invisible--mostly because it's a waste of programming.

[Brick2025]

I have a better idea than hiding gem boxes...Put raiding gem boxes in the ruled out section.

[Denrochee]

I have a better idea than hiding gem boxes...Put raiding gem boxes in the ruled out section.

Because this sure cuts down on the first time forumers asking for resource donations right?

[dahimi]

but I don't think they should be invisible--mostly because it's a waste of programming.

Is it? Or is it a single character in a file? Traps are hidden for example. It might be a very trivial tweak to designate a particular structure as hidden. Could possibly done during a maintenance break.

I don't know that for sure, but it certainly does sound to me like something that would not require an inordinate amount of programming.

Now you could argue that you don't feel that this idea is worth even a second of developer time, but it does solve an issue that I personally have and does so in a way that has minimal to zero impact on the game.