 |
|
|
|
Monday, February 9, 2009 - 08:02 pm  Tom/Jozi.... Why are you ignoring the fact that corps selling all products every month of qualities over 298 are not being paid properly? Your only come back is to accuse these players of not selling all their products each month when in fact we are selling these products. So it is not a case of not having any buyers. These corps are selling their products and not being paid properly for their quality. It is stealing. Plain and simple. Doesn't matter who else is getting the cash, but when they seller is getting ripped off, it is paramount to theft. PERIOD. Quit beating around the bush and giving stupid irrelevant excuses and fix it. We worked our asses off to build these corps up to max quality and effectivity just to see you make them go into the toilet because you refuse to allow them to be properly paid for the products that they sell. How is this a good business model? Yes you may keep some players through vigorous changes and adaptations of the War Engine, but you will lose many to not being able to explain nor understand how the economic model works in your own game. Good day. (P.S.) For those of you wonderring why I titled this thread "Ignoring the Obvious"... Watch how they ignore this thread and the problem this thread brings up.
| |
| Monday, February 9, 2009 - 08:27 pm You know what the answer is going to be, Dan. Quality that high never really existed. No one actually bought it. It was merely subsidized by the GM. Therefore, withdrawing the subsidy is not theft. The issue lies within the entire BS system of high quality with no function or market for it, after they structured corporations and base pricing to rely on selling at those high Q prices to remain profitable. There's the theft. Only subsidies kept this sham afloat. Pull the subsidies.... You know full well, Dan, that this is not a real economy at all. Aggregate supply and demand are controlled by W3C through programmed country and corporation supply requirements. Supply is more responsive due to players building corporations, but W3C still sets production figures retaining the ability to change total supply on a whim. Prices are fixed through base pricing with minor tolerances for player generated activity to push prices slightly higher or lower until backordering takes over. It's the illusion of a functioning economy with the illusion of free markets, but still just an illusion.
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 12:50 am And "The OBVIOUS" is driving away would-be new players who could potentially be recruited by the existing player base. Witness this exchange... [15:47] Geoff. . .: lol, nice, the game looks interesting, i might join in [15:48] EWT [NS]/HailandKill [AE, LW]: The GameMaster has made a recent habit of FUBARing the economic engine, you no longer get paid properly for very high-quality product [15:48] Geoff. . .: oh, maybe not then
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 12:53 am Hey Keith was that scripted or what??
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 12:58 am No, we had just been discussing how my nuclear stockpile on LU would be enough to nuke every town >25K pop in Canada five times over, and he seemed interested...but then I had to give him Teh Warning.
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 01:06 am so in other words . . .scripted, yes? What I dont get is how thats the first thing out of your mouths when someone new is in chat and states they are thinking about joining. Its kinda odd to me. Discouraging others intentionally while playing the very same game doesn't make sense. Its like you all are trying to get some revenge on w3c because of your inability to make enourmous amounts of gc and get rich off a game. Very childish don't ya think?? I am not singling you out, I am just saying that this behavior is becoming very rampant in chatrooms, and its bothersome. Sorry just caLLIN IT.
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 01:16 am No. When I came here, it was much easier to properly build an economy, because you got paid what you had your trade strategies set for, for high quality product. Never mind the documentation strongly encourages fully upgrading corporations. Now, you no longer get paid properly for high quality product produced by a fully upgraded corporation (unless using a VERY low supply quality that keeps the Q somewhere between 250-296, depending on where your trade strategies are set). I was talking with him about another aspect of the game, and he expressed interest in joining...you think I shouldn't warn him about this issue? *I* continue to play in the hope, possibly vain, hopefully not, that Tom will eventually listen to player feedback and redress the issue. My membership goes through autumn, after all. I'd be more than happy to invite him to play when this issue is FIXED. And I would tell him that the problem had been corrected. Alas, it has not.
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 01:31 am iM GONNA SAY THIS AS PLAINLY AS sAM AND lAGUNA HAVE SAID TO ME, i ALONG WITH MANY OTHERS HAVE ISSUE WITH THE CURRENT WAR GAME CHANGES. . . . bUT . . .ADAPT OR MOVE ON. CASE CLOSED. Quite a few people are exiting the game because of the changes, yet I don't see them rambling on discouraging others NOT to play because they aren't happy. They don't like something they leave. Truth is . . . it ISN'T that bad cause you continue to play. If that were emphasized in your statements to others about joining the game maybe you wouldn't get the response, "Geoff. . .: oh, maybe not then . . . " It would go alot better if you said exactly what you said on this forum. "This or that isn't pleasing me atm", but, "*I* continue to play in the hope, possibly vain, hopefully not, that Tom will eventually listen to player feedback and redress the issue." And something tells me you will be playing loooong past autumn.
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 01:41 am Wendy. Thus far I have cut you a great deal of slack and even defended you antics as healthy for the dynamic of the game. However, I have determined from conversations with you, that you have little idea of how this sim actually operates, and therefore have little to contribute. See your pointless and utterly irrelevant posts above. So. Shut up. The adults are talking.
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 01:49 am Hey Bob I know you are like 40 yrs my elder but show some respect home slice. I may be a lady, but I get my hands dirty too. Just cause you are all pissy you aren't gonna subsidize your retirement off the game doesn't mean you have a right to discourage others to play the game. If you don't like it. . .ADAPT or MOVE ON. And take your own advice and shut it while you are at it. I don't ask anyone to defend me or otherwise so get off the horse and be respectful old man.
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 01:53 am I have the right to make whatever recommendations about the quality of the game to third parties that I will. I simply told a prospective new player that the game does not pay corporations properly when the corps produce high quality product. Which has been shown to be true. He was free to act on such information as he will. If Tom wishes to draw new players to the game, he can start by responding to the concerns of the players that already play the game, who have substantial ability to recruit, or deter, new players by word of mouth. Nothing more, nothing less.
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 01:53 am "Its like you all are trying to get some revenge on w3c because of your inability to make enourmous amounts of gc and get rich off a game. Very childish don't ya think?? " YUP, and about as childish as a senior citizen telling a dignified woman to shut it. If I have to be subject to your "abuse" and "anti game growth rhetoric", I will continue calling it how I see it. You seem a bit upset Bob for me not saying anything negative to you at all, would you like a depends?
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 01:56 am OMG . . . no she didn't!
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 01:59 am LOL And that is why you are told to "shut it", little girl. Act like an adult, get treated like an adult. Act like a child....
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 02:06 am m entitled to voice my opinion here as much as anyone else. I voiced my disagreement without telling anyone to shut it. TYVM. For an older gentleman you sure are out of character ATM. Take your own advice and SHUT IT. Your Welcome, and should you need anymore . . . . let me know
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 02:07 am OMG, Oh yes she did. . .
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 02:11 am No, you merely falsely accused me of scripting it with no evidence whatsoever, and without logs preceding the relevant section that I posted. I will not post the rest of the logs here because I do not wish to disclose the exact contents of my nuclear stockpile (as I did to a friend I met waaaaaay outside of Simcountry), to every Tom Dick, and Harry that actually DOES play Simcountry.
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 02:14 am I voiced my disagreement without telling anyone to shut it. TYVM. And I can . . . Problem??
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 03:20 am dignified Adjective calm, impressive, and worthy of respect Collins Essential English Dictionary 2nd Edition 2006 © HarperCollins Publishers 2004, 2006 To quote Inigo Montoya: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 03:25 am Core rules of Netiquette from: http://www.albion.com/netiquette/corerules.html Rule 1: Remember the Human (<----you FAIL) Rule 2: Adhere to the same standards of behavior online that you follow in real life (<----FAIL?) Rule 3: Know where you are in cyberspace (<----FAIL) Rule 4: Respect other people's time and bandwidth (<----FAIL) Rule 5: Make yourself look good online (<----FAIL) Rule 6: Share expert knowledge (<----fail) Rule 7: Help keep flame wars under control (<----FAIL) Rule 8: Respect other people's privacy (unknown) Rule 9: Don't abuse your power (not applicable) Rule 10: Be forgiving of other people's mistakes (<----Fail)
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 03:26 am LMAO!@
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 03:26 am 3 guesses as to whom I refer to. (no need to say aloud)
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 03:29 am http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNBWf54RvsI
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 03:43 am " 3 guesses as to whom I refer to. (no need to say aloud)" If you say her name three times she magically appears to troll a thread... Wendy.. Wendy... Wendy!....
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 04:04 am Boo!! is that better, quit yer bitchin and play the friggin game. "ADAPT OR MOVE ON." SC SLOGAN 2009
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 04:24 am dammit Messiah. Didn't you ever see Beetlejuice?
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 10:25 am wtf? how have "ignoring the obvious" turned into *wendy vs everyone*? /me shakes head Since I have the time let me babble on my fav subject. In every online game - which had elements of economy and warfare - I played, starting players were provided with starting virtual piece of land - "resources" and means of adding some value to them - "workers". Using "resources", "workers" and basic economic principles known from the so called real world players, with more or less success, either expand - over a period of time - their virtual lands, or virtual workforce, or produce virtual money, or combination. So far so good? Lets see what happens next. In every online game - which had elements of economy and warfare - I played, players start with X and end up with X + Y. Now, in a game where virtual assets remain virtual, where there is no way to exchange them for assets real, the added value Y is of no concern for the GM. It remains a meaningless number, usually used to compare performance of players playing the game. However, in a game where the added value Y can be actually cashed out, when it becomes a number of meaningful ~ real value, its of great concern of the GM. Why? Simply because of the begging question: Who will pay for the added value Y? Who will exchange it for .. cash? This is the biggest illusion of this game. The illusion that everyone - players and the GM - can win = everyone can make money. If that was so, if it was possible for everyone to win, the politicians and economists in Davos wouldn't have to babble about packages, plans and measures they gonna come up with to help shrinking economies around the world with intention of battling the biggest nightmare of every economy = unemployment, as they simply could send everyone to play ... Simcountry. Recession? Depression? Worry not, play Simcountry! Who cares if "quality" has any meaning or use? Who cares if the economic model is just an illusion? Of course it is since its .. virtual. It works on basic economic principles and if people like playing the game theres no problem. The problem is that not everyone can win and someone has to lose. Now rise your hand who wanna lose... real cash?
| |
Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 02:33 pm
Could you please reconcile these two quotes, Wendy? You appear to be contradicting yourself.
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 03:01 pm Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 04:04 am Click here to edit this post Boo!! is that better, quit yer bitchin and play the friggin game. "ADAPT OR MOVE ON." SC SLOGAN 2009 I hope that helps with your constipation T
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 03:25 pm LoL I'll do as I please TYVM. This isn't YOUR thread or YOUR forum. To think you own a thread is very naive of you. Speaking of being all that is left, I thought you were leaving the game? Guess not, it figures. . . I called you on that too. You won't leave but your objective is too happily discourage as many others as possible from playing. Right. "Its like you all are trying to get some revenge on w3c because of your inability to make enourmous amounts of gc and get rich off a game." Thats how I feel about your anti game-growth ramblings, and I am right. Its tiresome and boring already. So T you will cry and cry, but crying wolf too many times means no one will listen. "ADAPT OR MOVE ON."~SC SLOGAN 2009 (Quoted by two very good vets and possibly THE best and then there is me of course) T I hear X - Lax helps constipation if the first solution didn't. Proly wouldn't be such a bad idea to go easy on those bananas. 
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 03:33 pm Do you have nothing better to do than troll these boards Wendy? Everything up to and including the first adapt and move on comment was (relatively) useful and contributory. You made your point. Why do you continue to post? Why shouldn't we, as players, have input into this game? Yes, adapt to changes, but are we not the people whom the game makers should be tapping to get feedback and ideas? If something is wrong, should we not be letting them know? Hell, you are so annoying I can't even really fault Treasurer for calling you a bitch. Not sure exactly how the rules work, but accurately describing someone like he has should not be considered any violation at all.
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 04:15 pm I agree with Wendy. We shouldn't discourage others from playing the game. Let them make up their minds about it themselves. There is an introductory period that allows them to do that for free. We are still here, so it must be worth the $4 a month to us. Furthermore, what troubles vets about the game isn't necessarily going to have the same affect on new players. That said, it isn't wrong to give new players a realistic preview of the game if they want it. It should be done with a degree of discernment. Also, a bitch is a female dog. Wendy is not a female dog, so that is not an accurate description, Archangel. It's a pejorative, plain and simple. We should continue calling her a bitch knowing the full implications and risk involved. And FarmerBob is one hip old geezer. I wish all old people were more like him. And Wendy, you are overly concerned about Treasurer's regularity. Mind your own BMs. BC
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 04:24 pm LMAO BC
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 04:54 pm If Wendy has the right to troll as she sees fit, then the other game users have the same right in relation to what they say to possible new players. Frankly, given W3's attitude towards the established playerbase, I'm surprised the veterans aren't trying to organise a boycott. I will continue to dissuade others from playing this game for as long as W3 continue to ignore good advice and suggestions.
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 05:06 pm Boycott .. last time I remember someone called for .. boycott I and few others ended up quitting the game, while those "simcity" kind of players, those who hold they "investments" dear, and those who live in denial, or in other words majority stayed, bent over, adjusted and life went on. All been done and failed. There was also SC terrorist, else mentioned player called Silver, who tried to fight W3C over some game related issues. And what happens to terrorists? They get banned. So ...
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 05:20 pm "If Wendy has the right to troll as she sees fit, then the other game users have the same right in relation to what they say to possible new players." Katt, Rights are given and taken away by the GMs. Seems to me that you were the one leading the charge when Treasurer lost his right to the forums. So we have little stand to use "rights" to justify our arguements. Besides, this isn't about rights. This is about how we SHOULD behave. What we OUGHT to do. It's all a matter of opinion, but I think we are all pretty reasonable here. Is discouraging people to play how we ought to behave? And by the way, don't take this as a defense of Wendy. We just agree on this issue, which has become comepltely off the original topic. Sorry T. BC
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 05:25 pm Bids up T, 50 gc each, what do you say?
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 05:38 pm Yay !!
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 05:40 pm You know T we couldbe much better friends if you tried to play a bit nicer 
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 06:54 pm Well, I'm sorry to see you go Treasurer. It is unfair that you, and others, have been affected this way. You guys can't be replaced. Good luck. I hope to see you around. BC
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 08:42 pm The word bitch has many definitions, only one of which is female dog. It can, is, and should be used in the pejorative sense to describe Wendy there BC. You should know better than to only take one line out of the dictionary and not expect to get called on it. I do not see any problems whatsoever as to someone telling new players problems with the game. Think of it as a consumer advocacy service.
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 09:51 pm Archangel you could apply it to yourself as well. No one is going out of their way to label you as such though. If you have a problem you know what to do.
| |
Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 10:24 pm
No, the ability is given and taken at the GM's whim. But my right - my inalienable right to express myself - is not given or taken by any man, woman or entity beyond my own mind. As for how we SHOULD behave, well, that is - as you say - a matter of opinion. Personally, if I knew a car was faulty I would dissuade others from using it. The same is true of this game. If a new player asks for my help, advice or opinion, I will be honest. I will tell them exactly what my experience has taught me of this game. If you see that as a dissuasion... Well, that is more a reflection upon the state of the game than of my rendition of events. I remember when players like Treasurer were new. I remember the enthusiasm, the eager thrill to play the game, to enjoy it, to become great at it. To be able to build up something of value, monetary or sentimental, over the course of real years and enjoy doing so. That was the beauty of SC. It was open-ended. It had practically no limits. Now, I see the vice-like grip of the game gods willingly and deliberately strangling what little life remains from this game. I see players desperately trying to hold on to what is not so much an investment in money as an investment in time and heart. And I reguarly watch in unbridled horror as the GMs trample over that with not even a backwards glance. Yes, we piss, we whinge and we moan. But that is because this game has, does or did mean a lot to us. And every day the GMs seem to relish the very act of depriving us the fruits of our labour. The bottom line is that we want this game to be fun and successful as much as, if not more than the GMs, simply because we are the consumers purchasing the service. What the GMs reguarly fail to notice is that we know this game as more than just code. We play it. And if they were to truly do the same, they would maybe understand. And then, just maybe, they would listen. But you and I both know this will not happen. Somewhere along the line W3's attitude has changed. And the result is to drive those who know best how to help them away.
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 10:51 pm "Personally, if I knew a car was faulty I would dissuade others from using it. The same is true of this game." ????? You wouldn't look very intelligent or sincere while driving the same car yourself.
| |
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 11:00 pm Theres always the hope that it's just a fuel blockage that will clear it's self if you keep the rev's up But if it's still stuttering when you give it to someone else, why would'nt you warn them about the problem?
| |
| Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 04:51 am The problem here is the age old love of money, that of the Gamemaster. The GM seems to have believed that waving profit in people's faces would bring in more players which in turn feeds their profit and their own love for money. To secure their own beloved profits they must make sure that nobody's tapping the pool to any significant amount which means your empire must not prosper too much. This was an error. It's a game, not a job or a casino. Instead of punishing the GM how about politely addressing the root of the problem which is appealing to greed to get new players involved.
| |
| Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 05:04 am in many states in the US there are lemon laws to protect buyers from purchasing cars that are well lemons there is no buy at your own risk everything should have a disclaimer somewhere and when buying a house the seller MUST state EVERYTHING that is wrong with the house or they are responsible for repairing even after sale. (yes i know you can sell a house "as is") but there are still ways around that if you know certain laws. but that is in the US and this is not a US game so the GM's can do whatever they want. No matter how right you might be, if you quit you lose and they win. If everyone would concentrate on economics and not war simplayers wouldnt be giving all those GC back to the game for cash to spend on weapons when they should be giving the GC back just to keep their empires active.. no need for the VISA swipe! Take away the Games visa warriors and you take the power back into the hands of the Players. help bring back the power T, we need all the help we can get.
| |
| Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 06:29 am If the GM wants to make more money from the game, why not just raise the membership fees instead of destroying the game from within? I'd much rather pay a somewhat higher monthly fee to play Simcountry with a stable economic engine, than pay the current rate to have ingame profits nerfed by unannounced stealth caps on trade strategies. If the GM keeps going the way he does now, my membership expires 19 October, should he REALLY expect me to renew? I have NEVER cashed out, but eight months is a loooooong time for me to start accumulating GC to do just that. Especially given that my empire is already pre-extended through 13 October and my CEOs through May. I've already spent a lot of those GC in advance. More than enough time to make them back.
| |
| Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 11:36 am If the GM does away with GC for cash then every reason to limit your prosperity is removed. Think of any Electronic Arts online game, do they give kick backs to entice new players? How many people do you know who cash out in World of Warcraft? People who do, do it on Ebay. There is no reason for the World of Warcraft to limit your levels because you never reduce their bottom line by doing well in the game. It is insane to have the people doing well in the game reducing the profitability of the game. It leads to exactly what you see, efforts to restrict profitability. It looks childish, ridiculous and the whole concept was a bad idea. Gamemaster sir, not everyone is on their knees worshiping the almighty Euro/Dollar how about running this game the same way the successful online games are run? We will play with out your carrot being hung in our faces. (the carrot is always designed not to be eaten of course) We see you dangling a carrot and we find the means to keep us from it, well, rude.
| |
| Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 12:19 pm The irony is that the players and the GM have common interest. Players want to have fun, and are willing to pay a reasonable price for it, and the GM wants to get paid for the service provided. If both sides get what they want, they are happy, and business grows. More players, more revenues for the GM, more the GM can offer back to the players in form of features and improvements. In such situation everyone can win as all have a common goal or interest. If other games can manage this, why cannot Simcountry? The recipe is not that complicated. Indeed, if it was possible to cash out a virtual character in the World of Warcraft from the GM, Blizzard or whoever runs the business for them, would have to worry a lot about players gaining levels, virtual gear, currency, mounts and whatnot, coz they be in constant danger of going bust. Lets find common interest, not conflicting interest.
| |
Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 02:24 pm
That's why so many of us are selling for spares and repairs.
| |
| Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 03:34 pm "No, the ability is given and taken at the GM's whim. But my right - my inalienable right to express myself - is not given or taken by any man, woman or entity beyond my own mind." Show me an inalieable right and I'll give you the keys to my car. "That's why so many of us are selling for spares and repairs." Are you quitting Katt? If not, why do you keep playing? There must be some part of this you enjoy. If you are staying then the part you enjoy must be greater than what you dislike. If that is the case, then you are being disingenuous with new players and unjustly voicing your displeasure and encouraging them to not give the game a try. You, being used in the general sense. I think people that are giving their "honest opinion" are not doing so at all. Most are filtering out the things that they still enjoy about the game and presenting it as if it is completely bad. It's just a common bitch fest That's how I see it. BC
| |
| Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 05:36 am You on the pay roll BC? Did you play before and just changed your name? If not...I remember when you started. Trust Bro......It just does'nt seem the same any more. My main is nearly one year old (RL). Young compaired to some and old compaired to others. I'm hoping that this balancing out that the GM is talking about will happen soon. And I'm sure Katt is also waiting too see how it all turns out. You know.........Curiosity killed the........... Anyways, until then we will just have to have a little faith that all will be well and that we are not being taken for mugs.
| |
| Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 06:32 am I'm with Solomon Grundy on that one. games like WoW are so big because of word of mouth advertisement (...you often hear about how you can go an sell your account on ebay~ wow~ must be some game, I should check it out.) Can't get better publicity than that. ---------------------------- On side (negative) note (since this thread is about complaining, afterall...please don't read further if you don't want to get grumpy) The Status Quo: players can ~see~ w3c is being greedy. It's so visible that you have to be in a coma to not ~see~ w3c trying to scam people for as much money as they possibly can. everyone can ~see~ that practically everything they do is out of greed and ~not~ for players (without the players there is no game). furthermore, when everyone can see this, many people complain, so when they make their greedy little game changes, it creats a really bad,negative atmosphere. When i consider the point of view of a new player, coming in here and seeing this negative, spiteful atmosphere (IMHO)... w3c should downright embarassed of themselves ------------------------------------------------- (here is the grumpy part. sorrysorrysorry) to a few people who like to call people "bitch" as for the word "bitch" Personally, I find it offensive that anyone use that word. it's more offensive to me than F word. *so while, wendy and I do not get along well, I think very low of people who use that word to attack females with* (though, i know many don't even know where the word originated from and just how misogynistic it is..that is the point of this section of my rant) While i don't agree with all the points in this article, belowis brief article that clarifies ~why~ "bitch" is not just used as term for female dog and not just a ~ho hum~ banale word that one can use so flippantly and casually.. If you think its a casual, harmless word, then you are just deluduing yourself and trying to negate ownus by transfering it onto some weak justification (b..b...b.ut it only means a female dog. durr~). It's disrespectful no matter which way you mean it. http://www.bizchicksrule.com/calling-yourself-bitch-is-not-empowerment/ I promise you will never hear any other sort of feminist rant from me. iki-ryo is not a feminist. they are too scari for me. ^__^ sorry if i'm being too blunt and straightforward. (to anyone who is offended...which might be every male in this thread. please try to understand) :< I...I still love you. ------------------------------------------------- On a positive note, Our friend Down Under, JamesW, didn't get burnt in the fires, or drowned in the floods, or melt in the sun. He is alive and well. ^____^ \/.. ------------------------------------------------- I hope my post entertained you. Sorry that it was so long. Sincerely, iki-ryo (Alexiel)
| |
| Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 06:58 am your ~ scari! :P stop boycotting us and come back, or X will get lonely.
| |
| Thursday, May 31, 2012 - 11:15 pm Err. Uhm wow. Nice thread. Please come back Alexiel iki-ryo! The game needs you back. Me likes you. : D red
| |
| Thursday, May 31, 2012 - 11:21 pm Wow; what would she think of the game NOW??????
| |
| Friday, June 1, 2012 - 12:12 am pfft....sush now or should that be eat some more sushi.....if i could id write a song id make you fall in love hey hey....then again all sing where's iki
| |
| Friday, June 1, 2012 - 05:34 pm on regaining profitability. Since corporations are not being paid for high end quality goods correctly and since Enterprises are supposed to have a comparative advantage in the production of marketable goods (unless I'm reading things wrong) What would be the thoughts of soft-capping quality upgrades at 200, and giving enterprises a +25 qualitative advantage (no upgrades or upkeep required) and a further +5 advantage to those corporations who have 10 shareholders. (That could also be broken down into smaller discrete units if it is considered wise to implement game levels for Enterprises.) That would allow some corporations to still top out quality - for both market share dominance (which really has too high a cost) and pass on embedded quality. Albeit in an Enteprise, not a state run industry. The free market has historically produced better products more inexpensively than those controlled by nations. This would allow the market cap to remain - without making the player base suffer for it. And return the market impetus to the Enterprises (within game limits.)
| |
| Saturday, June 2, 2012 - 01:04 am we need to give quality a more important role in the game why buy 200 quality school when you can buy 100 quality school
| |
| Saturday, June 2, 2012 - 03:40 am That is it red! Over my knee now!
| |
| Saturday, June 2, 2012 - 01:00 pm What I am seeing is that the cost of running a corp is much too high to the possible profit a corp can make. The result of this, particularly in CEO corps is that on a good month with product in red and selling all immediately a corp can generate say...$0.5T. Once the product goes green for a month or two though, as they all do, the corp will easily lose 1.5 - 2T a month. So it needs to do well 75% of the time to just break even. If an ent or country has many of the same type of corp that goes green (product price falls) then the losses can be very large. Because of the many different supplies a corp uses the reduction in the received price is not off-set by the price of its supplies reducing. With me having thousands of corps it would be a real economists 12 hr day 7 days a week to manage this balance of cheaper supplies to product prices, I mean a REAL full time job. Conclusion, the reduction in monetary numbers has lessened corp income too quickly while the commodity market is not dropping fast enough to match. Soory if this sounds a bit muddled, I know what I mean but cant express it very well today... where did I put those meds...?
| |
| Saturday, June 2, 2012 - 04:04 pm Queen u must really be blonde.
| |
| Saturday, June 2, 2012 - 04:25 pm It wasn't muddled at all Crafty.....and I believe that you are absolutely correct. I'm seeing it more and more, especially in CEO's; high demand + good quality + recommended sales strats = losses. I've been tinkering around with sales strats; same result......corps loosing $$ when there is a huge demand.
| |
| Saturday, June 2, 2012 - 04:29 pm Shhhhh Redman that is ONE persona that doesn't need to be resurrected.
| |
| Sunday, June 3, 2012 - 03:03 am The joys of a recession.....took a bit to put all those unemployed back to work in the Duchy, and am still working on satellite states. Many thanks to the CEO's who assisted. And kind of a weird thought. With corporations at 225 or 230 quality in a country, why isn't the country's consumption of products in that industry's sector going up? The corporation is gaining market share but not more of a market. Maybe I should have been paying closer attention, but I assumed the consumption was tied to population, and the per centage never varied. (for example - the consumption of chocalate per capita in the Duchy has not varied by much at all - whether at 10 millions of population or 50). There are the pop ups on several features not implemented yet talking about secondary markets. Perhaps it's time for us to go after them? And let the country's get out of the way of the consumer. That would lead to increased demand, and profitability, surely?
| |
| Sunday, June 3, 2012 - 06:26 am Totally agree crafty. Profit is not falling proportionally equal to market prices. That is why I get so bent out of shape when the gm says that "this price and that price have gone down" when speaking about the market things(example weapons and ammo) when they have not. Not at all. Then boom another change before the last change has allowed the game to settle. Prices eventually fall but no where near as fast as profit. Quality of goods has go to find it's place again in the game. Weapons is where it will be. Weapons and ammo corps are the only place I can see where true parameters exist concerning Quality of goods. Demand is there for both low and high quality. High Quality now more then ever. You can tell because the game has made it almost impossible for weapons corps to ever make profit. It's always negative profit with weapons corps and with the high quality demand that should not be the case. Again, it's just incredibly hard to make any profit. ON a side note: Investment fund interest rates have fallen again. Sheesh man. How about giving us a break! Getting a fund built up takes a long time so why not let us reap something small instead of ripping everything away.
| |
| Sunday, June 3, 2012 - 08:22 pm Sigh....
| |
| Sunday, June 3, 2012 - 08:24 pm from Tampabayrayz. "Redman you remind me of EO. " Eo? What do you take me for a wild angry beast or something? Sigh. Muahahaha!
| |
| Sunday, June 3, 2012 - 11:20 pm You people sigh too much. lol
|
