qzjul
Administrator
Game Development
Posts: 488 Apr 22nd 2010, 17:52:49
farmers currently don't sell food mid set really.... so it won't affect a farmers income
-------------------------

wtfluff have you been smoking? :P

what strat do you think 80% of tags at war are running middle set?

war tags run some farmers sure, and some of them surely sell bushels; but they are (as a consequence of war) usually smaller, and don't affect the bushel market nearly as much as the full-on netting farmers....

unless you're referring to a late-mid-set bushel-dump that happens when a stocked alliance goes to war...

Dump the 2b, and instead of making it a straight 0.1%, log function with a topout at like... a percentage or two or three or something. More you got on hand, the more corrupt everyone gets up to the point where they just can't fit any more money in a wheelbarrow.

sorry. no definite/good argument here..but the amount of b*llfluff posted above is hilarious. :D
-
i think changing it will shake the game alot. many existing strats will be different. but i think this should be it. we all cannot just figure the game and keep winning. time to just throw some spanners into the woodwork.
-
that said, i think we should at least have a cap. otherwise, there will be no stocking! :D

qzjul, I am not really getting what you are thinking.

It doesn't matter if the war tags are running 7k to 16k acres farmers by middle set. What matters is that the income of around 80% of most war tags mid-set will be hit pretty hard by that change. We war as farmers for a reason (c-indy have crap costs, crap income and crap tech; we can't tech with turns we use to attack and tech is going to crap prices by mid set, even more if your country can't really grow because you are doing war hits; too many oilers kill the market; cashers always are fluffed when they lose population no matter the attack type and tyr casher is a really an awful strat), not because we really like it (if we did, our best players would not start the set as techers).

For that matter, the rep/land to techer strat used by SOF and other smart tags in war sets as a way for vet players to continue playing doing well while having little time on hand will also be screwed because they won't have the advantage of destocking (their cheaply acquired bushels due to early stocking, btw) at inflated bushel prices mid-set.

Anyway, I need to stay retired some more and stop posting on threads like that. :P

I don't know what qzjul is smoking, but I sold bushels mid set last reset when I finished 11th as Fascist Farmer, why? To keep buying tech and jets to keep grabbing.

This whole idea of making changes purely to shake things up is fair enough, but really hasnt got much to do with the cash limit, reguardless of the cash limit, people need to stockpile unless it was completely removed, which i think almost everyone can agree wouldnt be good for the game.

The major effect to consider imo would be upon war's, and i dont think the server could sustain fs's being more powerful than they already are, given the turns per day, and size of alliances right now.

If your looking at changing the cash limit, purely for shake up purposes, reduce the limit to 1b meh.

Remove the cap altogether but let earthquakes eat a lot of cash and turn corruption rates into a higher log progressive tax rate. That way, we would have to figure out the best balance of cash/food stock and timing. Those that solve it first - win.

i think solidsnake is onto something. if you want to change the cash limit, reduce it.

that would at least make the market more active and change up the trends maybe. i would like to see more options/activity with the market not less.

a jelly bean to whoever gets the first $1 bil cash grab

i disagree... reducing the cash limit will restrain the market more, as more wealth will be tied up in stockpiles, which then become unusable....

liquidity is important -- if all your assets are tied up in $200-300 bushels, you can't *use* that money for anything....


and forgotton/Eric; the bushel peak won't be slightly as high I would guess, but that doesn't really affect the warrers that much; both sides, after all, are running farmers, and the price would likely be kept to early-stocking prices i'd guess; i'd guess you'd get a 40-45 long stretched peak rather than a sharp $60 or $65 peak




see the problem with a limit... you're right SS, why 2B? why not 1B? or 10B? or 5M?

i vote we go with a 5M limit... then my 10kA casher will overflow every turn...




why don't we just go back to $24 PM bushels, would that make everybody happier? heh...

$42 pm bushels =)

heh try different stuff =p

its your game.

change for change's sake is pointless. what the game really needs are players. :P

If there is no need to stock bushels, the market will stay bellow 40, likely between the private market sell price of 32 and the break even public price of 35/36, as it does during the first few weeks of the set.

It would mean a 30% revenue cut (more or less) for farmers during those times price usually go over 50.

Anyway, I already had my say over this. :)

but there would be a need to stock bushels

more focus on getting more players and less focus on screwing the game up with things like standing orders and market recalling etc


fluff

It seems a bit of a way to dumb down destocking :P which i dont really mind.. but unless you adjust farmers it seems a bad idea...

But who's gonna want to play a game where the rules haven't really changed in about 10 years and almost every player is someone who's been playing it for 10 years and you don't really have the option of playing with guys who don't really know everything backwards and forwards?

What I'm saying is that it is pretty stagnant.

alright i'm just going to stop following this thread now since it's the same arguments from everyone over and over again now :p

my stance is still that removing the 2b limit alone with the server the size it is will really mess things up, and the ensuing panic will be bad for the game

moving forward, including 2b limit removal as part of a large basket of changes which are planned and announced well ahead of time is definitely an avenue that I'd like to see us go down.... there is no longer a technical reason for the 2b limit... then let's remove it. But let's do it smartly so we don't completely fubar a game that's taken lots of effort to rebuild right before we're going to start marketing it.

Unusellable or massively devalued stock, which is something I think we all agree will happen with the 2b removal, is something that will turn off players, and those players will turn off the types of players we need to keep - more casual players.

Just make a bank of some sort. Add interest, bam. New stuff to do. Maybe use turns as a penalty for depositing/withdrawing money, or just take some of the money itself.

then start simple with makin the cap bigger and see how that fairs

^
|
what he said

There's way too much already on this thread, so many of my thoughts have probably been posted already.


Without the 2bil limit, farmer strat dies without another adjustment, and oiler weakens considerably. Both rely on people stocking them in order to be effective.

There'd have to be a large negative for keeping that much cash on hand to balance it somehow. Corruption is an interesting idea, but I don't know that it's enough. Now turning that up to say 5%, or even higher, may change things. Stockers are already used to losing 6% on buying and selling of goods, as well as price drops in between.

Another issue is that resellers still wouldn't be affected much. Perhaps an amount charged once a day on login as interest could be a better alternative than playing it by turn.

yea but 5% per turn would kindof negate the entire point; you already don't keep food on hand because of the losses....

What about the alternative of offering Certificates of Deposit with the market for stocking? 1% interest on 1 week, 2% on 2 weeks, force people to buy bushels for short-term stocking.

thats an interesting idea.... not 100% sure how that'd work... and by week might be restrictive, especially for servers < 1 week

I got an idea. Why don't you stop fluxing with the formulas and give us a new government?

Even if you remove the cap, or lower it, or whatever, it's still the same damn game.

Give us something NEW! A new feature! Not just tweaks and auto-uploads. I'm talking about actually updating the game itself!

i have a new government drawn up but there was much debate as to whether or not it would be overpowered...

and standing orders weren't enough of a feature? heh... but alright...

Make a government called TANarchy that has no units, no advantages, and can only get 500 land.

^ rofl

itd be the new canada

someone got a point there. FS in this server is just too devastating these days. :(

it may just be me, but i dont think standing orders have had a good effect on the game

judging by the variance in the tech prices, i'd have guessed that they stabilized the prices somewhat; which is a good thing for techers, tends to make them not drop as quickly; and SO's are good for cashers w/ patience, as you can get the cheaper tech...

aponic
New Member
Posts: 12 Apr 24th 2010, 22:45:21
What about the alternative of offering Certificates of Deposit with the market for stocking? 1% interest on 1 week, 2% on 2 weeks, force people to buy bushels for short-term stocking.
-----------------------

I want CDO's to be implemented. :P

Standing Orders doesn't affect the game as much as a new government would.

I consider Standing Orders a tweak, not an actual change to the core game itself.

How about letting us buy/sell missiles. Everybody would stock if they could stock missiles. Warfare tech would be selling for 10k per point.

And think about how much more fun end-of-set destocking would be with nukes?

/me can actually here the sound of Canadians cringing in horrer

Warfare tech would be selling for 10k per point.
---> then everybody would play techer... and then it would be $500 a point; then nobody would play techer....

so no, it wouldn't a balance would be achieved as usual...

what would a nuke be worth on the last day? probably not as much as you stocked it for... sounds like bushels would still be worth 32 though; so i think it would stay the same...


missiles were removed from being able to be bought & sold years ago, probably because it unbalanced things

I think it was 12 years ago, pretty sure I started just after you couldn't buy/sell missiles anymore.

qzjul is obviously a damned Canadian!

"kemo
Member
Posts: 86
Edit Post
Apr 25th 2010, 17:42:14
^ rofl

itd be the new canada
"
We have way more land than anyone else besides Russia.... so comparing it to Canada is crap! :p

Yeah but most of your land is a frozen wasteland :p

and it's full of Canadians....not sure which of those two is worse...

Buying and selling missiles should not be as easy as they were in the past. There should be a floor price of at least 200k - 500k cost per missile. Otherwise people can just stock like crazy.

As to the problem of people going techer to research Warfare tech to gain a profit, more power to them. Warfare tech would, as quizul said, fluctuate, but that doesn't mean that other techs won't. What would make people not tech techer? As you start stockpiling missiles, people would be stockpiling SDI.

it's not full of canadians, it's mostly empty....

the frozen parts have oil and gas.... WHICH WE WILL LORD OVER AMERICA AND USE TO FINANCE YOUR DEBT UNTIL WE JUST TAKE THE NORTHERN STATES TO ADD TO CANADA!!!!

except Michigan... we don't want Michigan. Well... just detroit... we can pacakge windsor/detroit together and make that a separate west-bank style territory

phear the polar bears!

and we need Denver to get the quebec nordiques back... err the colorado avalanche... or whatever you want to call them today

DAGGA SHOULD BE UNBANNED!

JUSTICE MUST BE FAIR

FREEDOM FOR DAGGA