Page 1 of 1

Why are Landmarks so non-profitable now?

Posted: 07 May 2018, 11:25
by BetterBear
Like, for example, a landmark hat costs 500 diamonds now only gives 800T?


This makes landmarks totally unworthy now. Even though you bought the packs, it is still super unworthy.
First of all, Landmarks are supposed to be moneymakers, because they attract tourists. So now if you think about it, the Oriental Pearl for example, which costs 500 diamonds with now only 800 monthly income, can only build 4 country roads? So that means that 7 level 2 RCI are even more worth it than something which is called a "landmark"?

The old incomes are so, so much better. Just add a single zero at the numbers, and it will be worth it now.

For example, just add a zero to the income of the Oriental Pearl (800) and with 8,000, it is worth it now. With an extra zero to the income of the Leaning Tower of Pisa, it will be worth it now (450T).

Re: Why are Landmarks so non-profitable now?

Posted: 07 May 2018, 19:33
by KINGTUT10101
I would also put a limit on how many of each landmark you can have if that hasn't already been done for all of them

Re: Why are Landmarks so non-profitable now?

Posted: 08 May 2018, 00:03
by BetterBear
I think this is done to prevent cheating.

But come on, who's a cheater who wanted to place 100 SWFC towers just for those income? Which means 5000 diamonds when you can earn the same amount of money with some few RCIs, and its free? Its common sense!

Re: Why are Landmarks so non-profitable now?

Posted: 16 Jun 2018, 06:02
by Sterny
Its fully decorative purpose imo