<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>https://ttgg.club/wiki/history/Talk:Rules:Buildings?feed=atom</id>
	<title>Talk:Rules:Buildings - Revision history</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://ttgg.club/wiki/history/Talk:Rules:Buildings?feed=atom"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://ttgg.club/wiki/history/Talk:Rules:Buildings"/>
	<updated>2026-04-27T16:08:35Z</updated>
	<subtitle>Revision history for this page on the wiki</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.45.3</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>https://ttgg.club/index.php?title=Talk:Rules:Buildings&amp;diff=215&amp;oldid=prev</id>
		<title>imported&gt;Catcherinthesty: 10 revisions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://ttgg.club/index.php?title=Talk:Rules:Buildings&amp;diff=215&amp;oldid=prev"/>
		<updated>2014-03-30T01:55:53Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;10 revisions&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;New page&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div&gt;== Military Applications ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This is going to be the part I feel I will have to scrutinize the most. Apart from that, what other changes and balances did you make? Once again, I think it would be helpful to have information regarding the changes you&amp;#039;ve made. Specifically, what you&amp;#039;ve balanced differently as far as costs, primary and secondary effects are concerned.&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
--[[User:ryecatcher15|ryecatcher15]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I have done my best to leave as much of the original structures details intact. A few exceptions did come up but I don&amp;#039;t recall what they were off the top of my head.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The biggest change is of course in military applications and I am positive that it will take some tweaking to get the balance exactly right. As far as that goes, for the time being, I have gone with choices that I considered logical more than focusing on game balancing / breaking effects. &lt;br /&gt;
--[[User:LordNightmare|LordNightmare]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I think it would also behoove to forgo things like &amp;quot;unlocked&amp;quot; and such - just indicate what is granted instead. I&amp;#039;ll likely reformat to this effect unless you object. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
e.g.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;Military Applications:&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039; Healing Potions Resource unlocked; Alchemy, Bomb, Poison Resistance, and Poisoning Abilities unlocked. ==&amp;gt; &amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;Military Applications:&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039; &amp;#039;&amp;#039;Resources&amp;#039;&amp;#039; Healing Potions; &amp;#039;&amp;#039;Abilities&amp;#039;&amp;#039; Alchemy, Bomb, Poison Resistance, Poisoning. &lt;br /&gt;
--[[User:ryecatcher15|ryecatcher15]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I find this acceptable.&lt;br /&gt;
--[[User:LordNightmare|LordNightmare]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Base Value ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Does this attribute have any use under these rules? --[[User:ryecatcher15|ryecatcher15]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
No. Under the Special section in the building explanations there is a description of them as bonus points. They have no in game effect other than being a number that can go up. I am not concerned about them at the moment, but see no reason to remove them as they may be relevant later. --[[User:LordNightmare|LordNightmare]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Army CR ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I think things that increase the CR&amp;#039;s of Armies needs to be expressed separately, such as &amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;CR +X&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;; this will make it simpler. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
e.g.:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;Military Applications: &amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;Increase the CR of troops available for recruiting by 1.  ==&amp;gt; &amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;Military Applications: &amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;Available CR +1&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
--[[User:ryecatcher15|ryecatcher15]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I find this acceptable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
--[[User:LordNightmare|LordNightmare]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Dance Hall ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In the official rules, this costs 4 BP. Obviously, they may be overestimating the difficulties of Unrest, and possibly the assumption that Corruption and Crime are not necessarily good, and I could see sizing it up. It gives a net gain of +3 to primaries, +2 to secondaries, one adjacent house and 1 Unrest (roughly equivalent to -3 to primaries, save that it can be restored fairly easily - call it maybe -1). So the arguable nets is +2/+2 -1H.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Tavern, comparably priced, is +2 to Primaries, +1 to Secondaries, and has the same adjacency requirement without the Unrest Penalty (and a gain in value, which is unnecessary).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I dunno. It looks about right, but it seems weird to make such a drastic change.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>imported&gt;Catcherinthesty</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>