Yes, this is my feedback for the BUILD NOW, option for the Wheel of Misfortune.
Currently, it costs only 41 fuel to craft a Wheel of Misfortune via the build now option (WOM). However, to craft it without the build now option, it takes 50 fuel. 25 for the Death Wheel, and 25 for the motor assembly. Shouldn't that be the other way around???.
Whoever made the build now cost for the WOM obviously didn't take into consideration the fuel cost for building the WOM's death wheel and Motor assembly costs, or didn't care. Probably a mixture of both.
I already crafted my 3 WOM's and I didn't feel like dismantling one of em to provide proof for the build now cost.
I was quite upset when I 1st realized this because I had already made my 1st 2 WOMs. It's just an 18 fuel difference, but I would've been far more willing to pay 9 fuel less for the WOM, and save the resources in doing so. This needs to be fixed because it further suggests that the Devs don't check on fuel costs like this. Perhaps they don't play the game like they used to, or perhaps they've never noticed this, or maybe they did notice it and decided to leave it alone. It's ridiculous, and ruins the purpose having items like the "death wheel" and "motor assembly" in the 1st place, why would I spend the time, effort, and fuel trying to craft two items to craft a WOM, when I could use the build now option and SAVE FUEL, time, and effort (something which this build now option does). (I want that reimbursement too, if there is one). This doesn't seem like a Bug/Glitch since the Devs obviously had to set this price cost intentionally.
Also, if someone could post a screenshot for the build now cost for the WOM, I'd like that, to reinforce my claim. No sweat if no one does though, because surely the developers can check this price cost.
A BIT OFF TOPIC BUT:
Also, its cheaper to craft a two 50-ammo boxes then it is one 100-ammo box. and although it's more cost efficient to craft two 250-ammo boxes then it is five 100-ammo boxes, you use the same number of resources by crafting ten, 50-ammo boxes.
THE MATH: If you build two 50-ammo boxes, it'll cost you FOUR fuel, whereas if you build one, 100-ammo box, it'll cost you FIVE fuel. Last time I checked, 4 was one less than five, meaning that it costs 1 fuel less to craft two 50-ammo boxes than it does one 100-ammo. This makes crafting ammo by 100 the LEAST cost efficient option in the game. If you want 100 ammo, you craft em by the 50's.
Now for the 250 Ammo box. 100 doesn't evenly go into 250, so we'll base the cost difference on the price to craft two 250-ammo boxes, which gives you 500 ammo. It costs 20 fuel to build two 250 ammo boxes, whereas it costs 25 fuel to build five 100-ammo boxes. Which means you save fuel by crafting em in 250's then you do 100's, a GOOD thing. HOWEVER, it costs the same amount of fuel to craft one 250 ammo box, and five 50 ammo boxes.
Nothing's wrong with the fuel cost for the 500 ammo box. This is the most cost efficient option. The 250 ammo and 50 ammo boxes tie for 2nd, and the 100 ammo box comes in dead last.
Shows you that they need to "get there heads back in the game". This could easily be fixed by increasing the fuel cost to build a 50 ammo box to 3 fuel.
Now I do believe that at least ONE person up at Con Artists Games knows how to do simple math (right?). But stuff like this suggests otherwise.
Hope they start doing price checks soon. Bring in the abacus even, if it's necessary to make better, and more reasonable fuel/craft costs in the future.
Edited by Fredswar1, 07 June 2017 - 10:56 PM.