| Tom Willard (White Giant) | Sunday, February 15, 2009 - 11:12 pm 
Cash levels in all worlds are decreasing. More players are exchanging their cash into gold coins and the excessive cash levels diminish.
The cost of financial services is diminishing too and is currently insignificant. As cash levels are reduced even a higher percentage of financial services, is having a very limited effect because most countries have exchanged their cash into gold coins.
There are very few countries in each world paying for financial services. These countries belong to some of the richest players who for some reason, want to keep their cash and not exchange for gold coins.
We assume that they know that one day exchange rates will fall and hope that their cash will be more valuable. This may happen but the cost of financial services may be higher than the exchange rate profit. Exchange rates will not fall for now and may be increased short term. They will only decrease when cash levels have landed to acceptable levels.
The cash levels will continue to fall and financial services percentages will remain or increase, to convince everyone that there is no future in huge cash reserves.
Someone complained recently about the price of a Jeep. It was 4-5 millions! True, this is outrageous. What he forgot to mention, is that many countries buying Jeeps, have 15T in cash.
He compared of course to the price of a military Jeep in the real world. Well, how many countries in the real world do you know who have even 1T in cash? Let alone 15 or 20T.
The price of Jeeps should go down and the cash levels too.
Thousands of gold coins have been given in the past weeks to presidents and CEOs for their cash and more is underway. The number of available gold coins is high and they will of course be able to exchange gold coins into cash whenever they need it. This also happens a lot. We see many transactions on the cash market, both in and out of gold coins.
The fact that cash is exchanged into gold coins is meaningless in terms of cash availability as everyone can exchange back into game money whenever they want to and need cash in the game.
The need for cash, long term, is reduced
In recent months, both the cost for countries and their income decreased. The need for cash in corporations decreased because raw materials are cheaper and the stock of raw materials they hold costs less than before.
The cost however, depends on many parameters. Much of the cost of governments depends on the cost of materials and salaries. Materials cost fluctuates on the market. It can increase temporarily and then decrease again. The long term trend is down.
The cost of the army depends mainly on the cost of ammunition and ammunition price is high.
One of the reasons for the high price of ammunition is that some countries and some large CEOs who have a huge amount of cash, are buying everything on the market and store it. They do this to manipulate the market which is part of the game and they also do so to keep high cash levels, believing that they will be able to sell later and their cash will be more valuable in the future.
This is another reason to reduce cash levels. It is unfair, if a couple of players with very large amounts of cash are able to increase the cost of war for all players in all worlds.
Our recent announcements of weapons quality and the possibility that quality will be reduced in time for ammunition and weapons that are stored for a long time, was immediately followed by some significant sales of weapons and ammunition in 3 of the 5 worlds.
This may be a coincidence and maybe it is not. We just see larger numbers of ammunitions and weapons appearing on the market. This has happened several times before, mainly when the new war engine appeared to require smaller numbers of weapons. Many countries and enterprises dumped many weapons and ammunition on the market.
We are planning some tuning of the weapon industry that may increase production and reduce cost per unit. The corporations that produce these items will have a little more product but at the same total price as before and their profitability will remain unchanged.
We hope that mainly ammunition cost will decline. If it does, the cost of the army and the cost of war will decline too. There was some progress recently but the cost should decline more. |
| John R | Sunday, February 15, 2009 - 11:51 pm
I find difficult to explain this matter for two reasons: because it is absurd and because of it's blatant obvious absurdity.
Words lack to explain what the eyes see. |
| John R | Sunday, February 15, 2009 - 11:53 pm
Has you don't have the audacity to show us the numbers, I will post what I can.
| Cash | | | | Countries | Enterprises | Sum | | KB | 3.333.661.348.244.160 | 2.186.960.673.826.840 | 5.520.622.022.071.000 | | FB | 800.976.098.718.542 | 1.788.215.874.945.790 | 2.589.191.973.664.330 | | WG | 7.930.669.911.102.030 | 4.381.524.042.265.110 | 12.312.193.953.367.100 | | GR | 6.619.850.294.091.260 | 2.072.128.963.778.360 | 8.691.979.257.869.620 | | LU | 12.319.307.483.627.400 | 4.283.060.694.298.120 | 16.602.368.177.925.500 | | Sum | 31.004.465.135.783.300 | 14.711.890.249.114.200 | 45.716.355.384.897.600 |
| Assets | | | | Countries | Enterprises | Sum | | KB | 7.082.076.595.437.270 | 7.648.098.070.424.440 | 14.730.174.665.861.700 | | FB | 4.260.607.519.129.500 | 8.709.512.744.171.930 | 12.970.120.263.301.400 | | WG | 15.486.013.171.116.300 | 17.464.630.012.563.600 | 32.950.643.183.679.800 | | GR | 13.468.495.881.803.700 | 8.104.775.557.078.710 | 21.573.271.438.882.500 | | LU | 19.975.403.239.790.600 | 23.092.006.805.611.400 | 43.067.410.045.402.000 | | Sum | 60.272.596.407.277.400 | 65.019.023.189.850.000 | 125.291.619.597.127.000 |
| Production | | | | Countries | Enterprises | Sum | | KB | 131.353.281.785.817 | 77.296.851.310.000 | 208.650.133.095.817 | | FB | 140.836.983.164.703 | 91.923.084.690.000 | 232.760.067.854.703 | | WG | 272.026.792.402.088 | 176.106.716.390.000 | 448.133.508.792.088 | | GR | 202.710.548.856.000 | 88.915.548.420.000 | 291.626.097.276.000 | | LU | 381.258.374.746.565 | 234.950.737.250.000 | 616.209.111.996.565 | | Sum | 1.128.185.980.955.170 | 669.192.938.060.000 | 1.797.378.919.015.170 |
Cash compose about 60% of the assets of every world. 80% on FB.
Cash reserves are only two game years of the world production. Whereas on FB is only 1 game year.
Every world is tending towards FB. |
| Tom Willard (White Giant) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 12:41 am
Indeed I should have added the numbers to make my point.
Cash level should be way lower.
who needs 45.000 trillions.
We started with >45.000T in GR alone.
The complete world economy as we know it is probably less than 500T.
This is an alternative scenario:
A rich country will have an income of 300B to 700B per year and total production of 2 to 3T
The US has a GNP of probably 10T with a population of 300 Millions.
Cash reserves in china are now 1.4T with a population of 1.4 billions.
A country with 60 millions will have maybe 500B in cash. More than Russia with three times the population.
If the country needs more cash , it will exchange 1 of the 500 gold coins it got for the current cash reserves.
It can of course have much more cash but who will ever think of an astronomic amount of 10T in cash?
A Jeep will cost much less than the curent 5 millions or whatever it costs right now. |
| John R | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 12:50 am
Ceci n'est pas une pipe.
It is a lovely image. Rene Magritte made the drawing of a pipe and below he wrote "Ceci n'est une pipe." It translate has This is not a pipe. It appears to be a contradiction, but it was true. That was the drawing of a pipe, not a pipe itself.
Simcountry should have a subtitle placed somewhere saying This isn't the real world.
Changes should occur to enhance the functions already in place, add a little bit of challenge or to assure some sort of equilibrium. Instead, changes have been made to corrupt those in place and turn the game unplayable, effectively killing it for all of us - for those who play now and for all those who are to come.
What is an acceptable cash level?
Such a question would be best answered by "let the market decide".
If the Cash Market was easier to use and if the war machine was properly tuned, I'm pretty sure the "market" would attend to itself.
But it is clear that you have your own idea of what is ideal. The determination to force that ideal unto us is also very clear. And in the process, you have broken our hearts, our will to play, our countries and accounts. We have no reason to stay here any longer.
I believed it would have been much wiser to make some modifications to the war machine, increasing the risk for both countries and enterprises and the benefits as well. At least, in that process, money would be burnt in a way players enjoyed it and could get some gratification out of it, besides piles of GCs...
But that alternative would have been wiser for another reason, a much greater reason. We fuel our economies not to only to gain the GCs to keep our expiration dates at bay, but also to gain the money we need to wage or finance war.
If, for some reason, the amount of cash we keep in our nations is less than what we need to conquer a country, much less wage a campaign against another player, we cannot enjoy a part of the game.
If, for some reason, we the time we need to generate enough money to buy the weapons and ammo needed to conquer a country belonging to another player is one or two real months, we won't have the patience to wait to enjoy a a part of the game. In fact, that part of the game will be of extremely limited enjoyment.
You see, we have a profit to invest in war. When we are ready, we have converted enough of that profit into weapons and ammo, we burn them in war. Then we wait, until we can do the same again. And again, and again... It could be said this was the market regulating itself.
What triggered your need to intervene was... our peaceful nature. We didn't wage war, we only converted into GCs what was necessary, so we stockpiled our cash... What was the harm? What IS the harm?
Seeing has our peaceful nature is becoming an obstacle to our own monetary regulation, I can suggest some changes that will remove the aversive stimulus to war - I'm speaking of psychology here, not of Secured Mode or War protection or anything like that. But do you wish to hear them?
Ah... If my cash reserves are really bothering you all that much, you can delete them. But only, if you remove financial services and undo what you did with quality cap and supply quality. I really wouldn't mind, if what is needed to stop this absurdity is to delete all of my 8000T assets. |
| quaxocal (Golden Rainbow) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 12:54 am
If you can reduce the cost of ammo and wars substantially, I think it will reduce the need for large amounts of cash. This is your main problem with regards to cash. Both are too expensive. Too much ammo is needed to war, and its way too costly.
Q |
| John R | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 01:01 am
Real worlds values mean nothing to me. Numbers by themselves, without proper context, mean nothing as well.
Like I said, Simcountry isn't and cannot be the real world. And in your attempts to reach realism, you have repeatedly cost us our enjoyment. None cares about the how realistic the amount of cash reserves or prices are, for as long as they make sense.
We all feel this. We all know this to be true. Can't you see it? |
| Tom Willard (White Giant) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 01:19 am
Lots of words Laguna but you have no issue at all.
How can the cutting of everything by a factor of 10 change the game? cash down by a factor of 10, prices too, cash reserves too. what is your point?
Who cares about the numbers as long as the logic is the same?
You don't like other aspects of the game? fine.
You brought FB as an example of a dying planet because cash levels went to 2.500T?
nonsense!
For 5 years I get a monthly mail telling me that the worlds and the game are going down the drain.
Most times it is a player who is fed up with some change (His navy cannot destroy a continent any more).
At the same time, I get many mails each day, telling me how great it is and much more than that.
People stay here for years and they probably enjoy some of the game and they enjoy fighting with us and shouting at us...
There are always people who like some changes and don't like others and I promise you that many more are being prepared.
At the end of the day, Simcountry must continue to evolve and sometimes fix some errors made in the early days. Some of the changes will be to your liking and some not.
I just don't get this bla bla bla about some stupid amounts of cash as if we rob you of anything.
No, we let you exchange game money into gold coins that allow you a lot of privileges in the game.
This includes the privilege to exchange gold coins back into game cash if needed. This is only if your 5 or 8 T in cash will not be sufficient.
Gold coins are used for many other functions and will be used even for much more in the future. They remain a currency in the game that is independent of what happens in your countries and enterprises, and are usable and valuable in many ways. |
| Keith Allaire (Little Upsilon) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 01:26 am
Tom, I have no conceptual problem with converting excess cash to GC. I have done it on occasion with my CEOs after the announcement of enterprise financial services, though I have tended to set my countries to buy armaments for purposes of achieving higher game levels instead.
However, the cash market as it exists now is a pain in the neck for sellers of game cash to use.
Why not give users of the cash market the option to set their bid plus a percentage the bid will change for each day the offer is not met, like the mechanism for ordering in-game product?
I would much rather have a system to exchange GC where I can place ONE bid, set its "trade strategy," and wait for a suitable transaction, than have to manually monitor auctions to prevent someone else from outbidding me.
When will this impediment to using the cash market be addressed, Tom? |
| quaxocal (Golden Rainbow) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 01:28 am
Tom, more uses for gold coins would be a great idea honestly, if it were pushed to high on the priority list. Right now, primary use of gold coins for those who don't need cash, is for them to sit and collect dust, except for extending registration, or extending war protection. The current boosters, for lack of a better word, suck in most instances. The spending boosters are ok, the corporation boosters are next to worthless. I have no experience with the rebellion one so can't comment on it.
If you can reduce the numbers by a factor of 10, why not just lop a 0 off everything and be done with it? |
| Tom Willard (White Giant) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 01:29 am
Laguna,
Does the amount of cash connected to any reality?
do you enjoy typing 15 zeros?
start typing then.
in simcountry, we would like to see smaller numbers and bring prices of many items to a more acceptable level.
Yes, we do get many complaints about the fact that an airplane cost close to a billion.
so an airplane should cost 50 million but cash level should be 123.5 Trillions?
what is this all about?
the number of zeros?
you feel rich typing zeros?
lets talk about how to make the enterprise game more challenging?
or how to introduce natural resources or add R&D and quality for weapons, making their capabilities depend on their quality level
or what about allowing everyone to design her own products and weapons?
some suggestions, on how it should be done will help a lot.
I am typing here for an hour or two because this discussion about zeros has gone into the absurd.
In general, I spend my time trying to improve the game. |
| Keith Allaire (Little Upsilon) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 01:32 am
As I said, using the Cash Market is enough of a pain for those who DON'T have 8000T to dump and who just need to occasionally convert profit to GC.
Did you ever consider how TEDIOUS it would be to offer 8000T of game cash on the Cash Market, Tom? I cringe at the thought of offering 60T, much less 8000T. |
| Tom Willard (White Giant) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 01:33 am
We will shortly introduce direct trading of gold coins for cash on the cash market with direct offers and direct trading.
it will solve this problem once and for all. It is high on our priority list along with some more functions, boosters and others.
look at the number of updates each week, and more coming tomorrow, we are moving very fast and will try to catch up on a lot of requests and features we have promissed before. |
| Jack Frost (Little Upsilon) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 01:35 am
It was always a pain trying to get rid of 70T down to less then 20T again. So much to the point that I was constantly paying between 15 and 20T for 20 coins when if I wasn't trying to get rid of it quickly I could have bought 20 coins for around 10 to 13T. The cash market isn't exactly user friendly.
With Regards,
Dragoon |
| John R | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 01:37 am
My words come from my experience and knowledge. If you can show me anyone that cames to even near to what I know, holler.
Also, I suggest you stop talking with tuco. 
His radiation is a dangerous one.
Pot and kettle.
Quote:Who cares about the numbers as long as the logic is the same?
So, who cares to tune them down? You? Why? Is there a problem with the way things were? Is the answer... no?
Why don't we ask the players of Fearless Blue if they are happy with the minuscle amounts of cash they have. Well, I play there and I cal tell you: no. If you have been reading the forums, you would have noticed everyone is saying no.
How many times have you heard me saying Simcountry is going down the drain? Probably just the one I just said today. I am telling you that you are KILLING the game by pieces with this. You don't like the word killing, fine. Use "limiting gameplay" instead. You are setting a ceiling, you are curbing behaviour, you are limiting the game, you aren't letting us play freely.
I will not convert my cash into Gold Coins to follow a failed policy. To see the world bank loaning money is an indication of lack of money. As a responsible player, I am trying to prevent the intervention of a wild card and supplying demand. |
| Tom Willard (White Giant) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 01:39 am
Nobody wants to exchange 8000T.
We saw someone exchange cash into 200 GC in no time. This was several days ago.
If needed, we will add offers of 50 gold coins. this was never requested. we can do it in 1 minute.
on the other side of the trade, we always offer money on any offer of gold coins making sure you ALWAYS can get money for your coin.
I would like us to remove ourselves from this market but we must make sure there is a market.
we see that people prefer to trade between themselves and only use our offers as a last resort.
The direct trading I explained before will probably make it easier and make our offers obsolete. |
| John R | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 01:42 am
For the record, my struggle is with financial services and profitability.
I don't care how much a cup of coffee costs. |
| Stuart Taylor (Little Upsilon) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 01:48 am
You know Tom, I as many others play other online games too and you know what? Not one of them has as many people complaining as on Sim Country. Why don't you ask yourself why that is?
John R is one of the most experienced players on here, if not THE most expreienced. I learnt a lot from him when I first started and I still am. Perhaps if you don't want to listen to the rest of us complaining, you could at least listen to him. I am more than happy for him to be my representitive as i'm sure many others would be too. You have your point of view, we have ours. And as your customers, surely that we should have a say in how things are handled.
I feel sorry for Jozzi. He's the one whos going to get it in the neck the next time a chat is set up with him, but again - I can't see that happening anytime soon. Perhaps you could join us in the next chat session Tom?
Anyway, I digress.
Tom, there is not a business in the world that could survive if it didn't have its customers best interests at heart or listenend to their complaints. But no matter what anyone says to you - you fail to see our point of view.
Can you imagine Sim Country without its veterans? No? Well I can - and its not too far away either the way things are going. This is all a step too far, and in my opinion - a step backwards. |
| Tom Willard (White Giant) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 01:50 am
Laguna,
What is this about tuco? who is tuco?
???
You do not have to exchange your cash and we will complete this operation.
Unfortunately, cutting a zero from everything is not possible or otherwise we would have done it long time ago.
Fortunately, it does not cunsume much of our time and we will continue with the things that really can improve the game.
we will have to agree to disagree.
A suggestion:
can we all log into our countries and each one of us will build 5 to 10 ammunition corporations in each country?
there are many workers free in many countries and 100-200 corporations in each world will probably reduce ammunition prices and cut the cost of war. this will be great for everyone.
and the cost in the countries will fall. even in the ones where it did not fall until now.
yes? |
| Beast (White Giant) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 01:56 am
there are free workers because all of the workforce continually is converted into low level workers. Regardless of what we do, there is a shortage of high level workers, and an excess of low level workers. We can't set up more factories because we don't have enough high level workers. |
| John R | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 01:59 am
tuco... cannot be explained with words. Lets leave it at that.
Fine, carry on... Let me not be a thorn on your side. Let me not tell you there are other ways to address the same issue. Let me not even dare to suggest something as silly as the invisible hand.
Quote:can we all log into our countries and each one of us will build 5 to 10 ammunition corporations in each country?
Wanna hear what I had in mind?
Why don't you give a higher priority on auto-build for ammo and weapon corps? That way, and assuming most would be built in C3, you would be lowering the cost of war and when a war starts, you would be removing a lot of "excessive" game cash from the game, since it would all go into C3s and from there to one big black hole. |
| Tom Willard (White Giant) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 01:59 am
I love listening to Laguna and many others and many experienced players among them.
many of the current game features are based on players responses and suggestions.
I just fail to see why 15 zeros are better than 14?
I do agree that the economy of countries is very important but that does not depend on the number of zeros.
if Laguna means that the profit in countries is too low to allow for the pourchase of weapons, that is clearly a legitimate point.
I think that to correct it, we need to make the price of weapons and ammunition go down.
We can of course start adding products to the market out of the blue but that is unfair to the players who are producing these products.
so the way to go is to change the structure of some of these corporations to produce more with no damage to their profitability and to build more of these corporations. |
| Tom Willard (White Giant) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:03 am
High level workers are produced at the pace of 24.000 per game month.
There is no conversion into low level workers anywhere in the game.
Young people, if not educated, are starting as low level workers. this is where LLW come form.
just build the corporations.
if the number of high level workers is insufficient, build anyway.
starting the next month, there will be 24.000 low level workers converting to HLW each month. |
| Beast (Little Upsilon) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:04 am
I have not been building corporations. Many countries of mine have corporations that are all entirely upgraded. Why am I continually falling further and further into shortages of high level workers? |
| John R | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:05 am
Oh, and yes, increase production. Certainly. Either that or decrease the usage of ammunition in training and/or attacks.
So few are the players that wage war, yet the market cannot sustain an on-going war between a few players without adding products. |
| quaxocal (Golden Rainbow) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:05 am
Tom, 100-200 corporations in each world will NOT NOT NOT reduce ammo prices or demand.
You really don't get it do you?
This is ammo supply/demand on Golden Rainbow as of this moment:
Defensive missiles-
The demand for this product was 2,293,707 last month.
The supply was 29,885.
Anti-Aircraft missiles-
The demand for this product was 1,911,528 last month.
The supply was 26,190
Missile interceptor missiles -
The demand for this product was 3,106,109 last month.
The supply was 29,616.
How is a couple hundred corporations going to solve this? How would SEVERAL THOUSAND corporations of EACH TYPE solve this?
There are between 1000 and 2000 of each type of ammo corp on Golden Rainbow, with a couple outliers.
Demand is greater than supply, by factors of 50 or MORE!
Do you even play this game at all? Laguna has enormous assets and play time on ALL 5 WORLDS. I would think he knows what he's talking about.
Tom, I have noticed you are systematically ignoring every post I put in your threads, and I'm ok with that. But it is pretty bad when I have to repeatedly point out the lies and mistakes in your logic and what you say for everyone else to see. I realize I'm being quite blunt about all of this, but I'm getting to the breaking point with all this.
Your spin on everything is NOT going to work anymore. Players are going to know the truth. One way or another.
Q |
| Keith Allaire (Little Upsilon) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:06 am
"A suggestion:
can we all log into our countries and each one of us will build 5 to 10 ammunition corporations in each country?
there are many workers free in many countries and 100-200 corporations in each world will probably reduce ammunition prices and cut the cost of war. this will be great for everyone.
and the cost in the countries will fall. even in the ones where it did not fall until now.
yes?"
Why? Where is the profit incentive for us?
Before you undertook your Quality Nerfing, ammunition corps were somewhat more profitable than other corps. This was because shortages were severe enough that we could use aggressive trade strategies such as charging 400 for 333 product and still sell product.
Now, we cannot get paid for aggressive trade strategies. The profit motive in building a munitions corp is no different than that in building a plastics corp anymore.
After I noticed the change I stopped building ammo corps in my CEOs. Look in my CEOs on LU and you will see that they have plenty of old ammo corps, those built before your Quality Nerfing. |
| Tom Willard (White Giant) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:08 am
Laguna,
I am afraid you do not get the economy of C3s but that is not important.
If C3s have free workers or even 50% of what they need, they start a corporation.
There is a priority for the ones needed most and C3s have many ammo corporations.
in the game news tomorrow, you will be able to read that we intend to start closing corporations in C3s, that produce products that are in oversupply.
this will free workers and the automatic building of corporations will hopefully do the right thing.
Unfortunately, we have more shortages but some ammo corporations may stop producing because they lack raw materials. so all new corporations are welcome. |
| Beast (Little Upsilon) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:08 am
Very useful information Q. Please keep posting. Regardless of whether or not Tom responds, I will get a laugh when I see you post statistics such as you did above.
Thanks
EO |
| quaxocal (Golden Rainbow) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:09 am
24,000 High Level workers is NOT sufficient for large population countries, Tom. MANY players have complained about this for MONTHS, and you and W3C refuse to listen or do anything about it.
This needs to be on a sliding scale based on population or workforce population (recommend the latter). |
| Tom Willard (White Giant) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:14 am
24.000 per game month?
I have several large population countries running and it is easy to build one or more corporations each month.
we can also just forget the whole education system and move unlimited numbers around.
For now, I would not like to trivialize the game. |
| John R | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:17 am
I know how auto-build determines which corps are created. You don't need to post it on the game news for me.
What I meant is if that if X market had only been supplied at 50% and a weapon market at 50% as well, the weapon market would get priority over the other. That shortage would be considered more severe by whatever factor you so desire. That is why I said "higher priority".
I do get your point of lack of supply though. |
| quaxocal (Golden Rainbow) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:19 am
Tom, your countries are NOT large. 60 Million is NOT large.
Tommi on Golden Rainbow: Population Size 58,798,905
For those of us who are at say 90 or 100 Million, the problem is extremely severe. Combine this with another issue, the LARGE amount of retirees each month, and the shortages become worse.
I will repeat. MANY players have complained about this for MONTHS.
You know how I get around the HLW problem? I have to CONVERT approximately 30-40K of something else each month. And this is just to prevent shortages. That leaves me next to nothing to build a corporation with.
Oh, and if I try to stockpile HLW, you know what happens? They MAGICALLY convert to LLW! And don't tell me I'm wrong, as I and others have seen HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of HLW disappear in ONE game month this way, and change into LLW.
Solution is easy: Adjust the 24K upward for larger countries, on a sliding scale, or even an absolute if you prefer (say 48K for those above 60 or 70M).
Q |
| John R | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:20 am
If you don't want to eclipse the education system, you can make the amount of HLWs that is converted each month depend of the Education Index, instead of being a fixed 24 000.
For X Index, you get w HLWs converted. For 2x index, you get 2w. Or 3/2w. Or whatever is reasonable. |
| quaxocal (Golden Rainbow) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:24 am
LG's solution is also a very good one. |
| Stuart Taylor (Little Upsilon) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:25 am
Tom, your country on LU - Tommi has a pop of 61 million and makes 25B per month. You have 25% unemployment - most of which are LLW's and you have a shortage of HLW's.
No offence - but your own country defeats your arguments.
Everyone, boycott Tommi on LU |
| quaxocal (Golden Rainbow) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:30 am
LOL Stuart.
I checked his country on GR, it has low numbers of MLW/HLW (in the 20K's each). But it has almost 50K Executives! 37K high tech executives! Full employment though of the corps, and 90% overall.
By the way, it was said MONTHS ago you guys would fix the employment % issue I raised months ago in SC chat to I believe it was YOU Tom. Employment above 96% is next to impossible to achieve.
Q |
| jason (Fearless Blue) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:33 am
" I am mostly playing this game of pretend becasue it used to give me the chance to have large amounts of pretend money." yes I must agree with nute here, i did love playing because there was no limit. I could make cash buy gc's, save cash in my ceo's, what ever I wanted to do. so Tom I must ask you now are you trying to run people off from playing this game? |
| quaxocal (Golden Rainbow) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:36 am
Tom, look what you've done. You've got Jason agreeing with Nute!
If you get Wendy agreeing on this, the world might come to an end. |
| Keith Allaire (Little Upsilon) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:48 am
"24.000 per game month?
I have several large population countries running and it is easy to build one or more corporations each month.
we can also just forget the whole education system and move unlimited numbers around.
For now, I would not like to trivialize the game."
Hmm. I went digging through the exclusive poll results to find the solution I proposed to this NEARLY TWO YEARS ago. Of course you never implemented it and the shortages continued no matter how you tweaked the workers amounts.
790. Educational Priorities Status: We agree [ top ]
Detailed Description:
We should have the option to set "vocational training" priorities...i.e. set priorities for the ratio of LLW/MLW/HLW like we do with managers, doctors, teachers, execs, etc. now.
W3Creative, if it is worried about sudden changes in the balance of workers, could even set it up so you have two separate "totals" to juggle, one for workers and one for professionals, if they didn't want a flood of workers to suddenly get promoted to professionals through such a system. This way changes would not take place overnight, but would take a bit of time, like altering priorities for professionals does now.
The mechanism for establishing priorities for LLW/MLW/HLW would work identically to setting priorities for professionals.
It would also give players a reasonably efficient way to react to the infamous staff requirement changes that W3 has been known to implement from time to time, and increase the importance of having a good educational system, because players would be able to do more with a good educational system.
50 gamers voted for the proposal.
17 gamers voted against the proposal.
The proposal has been ACCEPTED.
W3Creative reaction:
This point was talked about many times with a lot of proposals. We agree that there is a problem here. Most proposals to-date, had a disadvantage of making the whole education system obsolete by trivializing the movement of workers between the three groups.
This proposal is the first (Or we really missed something in the past which is possible) that we think can be introduced, solve the problem we have, and not destroy the education system, which is essential in the game.
It is not very easy to implement as it cuts through many parts of the game and requires that removal of the current procedure and all the corrections and tunings that take place on top of it. We will however implement it. |
| FarmerBob | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 03:02 am
Point 1. SimCountry product markets are not free markets. There is no such thing as "base pricing" in free markets. They are command markets.
eg The CEO of Nike does not call Washington DC to ask what he may charge for a pair of basketball shoes. SimProducts,in comparison, are priced by you, W3C.
eg Your adjustments to base pricing show weapons pricing declining in the face of outrageous demand. In a free market, prices would skyrocket in such a scenario. Please do not insult our intelligence by implying that players, individually or collectively, can move prices outside their programmed ranges by their own actions. Players dumping or buying alters supply or demand numbers, but most assuredly does not significantly alter prices. You know that, Tom, and explained price ranging in another thread.
Therefore, the costs of militaries, war stocks, and simcombat operations rests entirely in W3C's hands.
Point 2. If the education system drew solely from the pool of LLW as claimed, high index education would logically show LLW shortages as the full mass of LLW within a particular demographic "went to college" instead of entering the labor force. This is the exact opposite of the current situation. LLW numbers are excessive while HLW shortages, with no demand from upgrades, continue to plague many empires.
Something is not functioning as advertised. Furthermore, the dissappearance of large numbers of professionals, that cannot be explained by population bubbles, continues to occur regularly.
With all due respect, Mr. Williard, there is a large hole in your ship and you are taking on water. The passengers are warning you that the craft is sinking, but as long as the view looks rosy from the bridge, you sail on into disaster.
You would do very well to listen most closely to Laguna and act upon his advice. |
| ebby247 (Kebir Blue) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 03:26 am
willard, i don't know how you can build corps. in my countries there are great shortages in hlw and now in mlw's. and i don't have enough higher level professionals. and these are in countries with over 150 education indexes. |
| Lelouch Vi Britannia (Little Upsilon) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 03:38 am
I wonder why Tommi has 20 trillion in cash... |
| Stuart Taylor (Little Upsilon) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 03:40 am
Good point Loki! |
| Petra Arkanian (Little Upsilon) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 04:07 am
FORUM:
Tom Willard (White Giant)
Monday, February 16, 2009 - 02:14 am Click here to edit this post 24.000 per game month?
I have several large population countries running and it is easy to build one or more corporations each month.
we can also just forget the whole education system and move unlimited numbers around.
For now, I would not like to trivialize the game.
====================================================================
GAME NEWS:
14. Medium Level Workers and other worker shortages [ top ]
Some structural shortages keep showing up in some countries, and some players wonder what the reason is for these shortages.
Most shortages show up in very populous countries that have excellent education. The number of people educated each month exceeds in fact the number of students in these countries. This should not happen and the education system should be updated to limit the number of graduates.
As a result of this error, the number of professionals is growing too fast, too high and they come from the numbers of workers. The education system does not produce new people. It moves people from one group to another. Too many workers are in fact being graduated into high level professionals and the number of workers is declining.
We can keep tuning the algorithm that decides where to take the workers from. We have done so again in today?s update. It is either low level workers or medium level workers. The tuning of the numbers does not change the fundamental problem of too many graduates in an overheated education system.
We plan to update the education system and make sure it will never produce more people coming out, graduated, than the number of students going into the education system. This will solve the problem once and for all.
In the mean time, countries that have that problem are converting professionals back to workers. Instead, you can tune down the education system, reducing the numbers of graduates and mainly the number of unemployed graduates and by doing so, solve the problem of low workers numbers.
============================================================
DISCREPANCY?
Yes.
And by the way, tuning down the education system doesn't work. All it has done for me is continue to produce worker shortages, while giving me less professionals each month to convert. |
| Orbiter (Fearless Blue) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 10:24 am
Hello,
their seems to be an explosion of posts from W3C, it seems as if they are actually trying to communicate with the players
this is a good step, perhaps a bit late
W3C, i'm sorry i have no other place to post this...so it will be here, as it seems approriate
"The US has a GNP of probably 10T with a population of 300 Millions.
Cash reserves in china are now 1.4T with a population of 1.4 billions. "
this was to make an example that the current money system in sc, is unrealistic
IT IS UNREALISTIC, it is a game
i have tanks, that don't shoot, if shot at, and have tanks that just will not allow me to shoot...
i understand that we have offensive weapons, and defensive weapons. no problem their. i understand that offensive weapons, attack, and do not defend, and visa versa... still no problem. but why force all this realism, into the econ market, when my units, will not respond with weapons that are appropiate to the situation?
to add to this, ammo reduction. to be fair, that is what is going on, ammo reduction... W3C, please back off, we are playing a game. their are many more things to make the "realistic" before you start going after ammo supplies...
to add to that, many people play this game, as a long term game. their are hundreds of 3 month games i can play... but i play this one, because i can build an empire, over time. many of the change that YOU W3C are making, YOU ARE MAKING IT HARDER TO PLAY THE VERY GAME YOU DESIGNED
you are slowing taking away the flavor, now i must say, over all, i agree with many of the changes, lower the cash levels, ok. the whole quality thing, whats the point of selling 333q if no one is wanting to buy that? over all, i get it, i get what you are trying to do. but you seem to have forgotten, this is a GAME. you have to give us, a cool feature, for everything you take away. but you seem to approach this, from the perspective, of each feature you take away is cool...
that is what the players are taking about, when they say you aren't listening to your customer base... you take things away, and expect us to think, "wow this is great, i'm making less money now, how realistic..."
jeese, give us, weapons that fight both ways... give us "beach heads," give us limited secured mode... stop taking, start giving...
Josias |
| Zdeněk Pavlovský (Fearless Blue) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 10:41 am
You would like to know who is tuco Tom Willard?
tuco is niemand, however, tuco proved his ability to grasp game mechanics in dozens of online games where he came on top among 100s or 1000s of competitors.
tuco also likes to believe he has the ability to predict or to spot a "success" from a "failure" not only due to his understanding "how things work", but also because he has diverse empirical experiences to compare with and draw conclusions from.
tuco is also arrogant, but its hard not to be when his predictions, unlike predictions of majority or even the so called "experts", come true more often than not.
Anything else you would like to know about tuco Tom Willard?
If I wanted to be an ass I would now ask:
Who is Tom Willard? |
| John R | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 03:04 pm
I meant it as a joke, tuco, and he didn't know. There is no need to be petulant.
You said GR started with 45Q of cash and you wished to diminished that amount by a factor of 1/10. Well, GR now has 6.6Q and I own 1.9Q of that. Assuming I would behave as it is expected and asked, that amount would have already dropped to 4,5Q. So, it would appear you have already reached your target on what cash reserves are concerned.
Also, you can't set just aims for the amount of cash a world should have. That will largely depend on the amount of paying players there are in each world. There more there are, the more cash there should be.
You were wondering why the richest players in this game refuse to exchange their cash into GCs. There are about 6, 7 players that stand out than more than most. I haven't spoken with them as to why they convert or not their cash into GCs, but I can speak for myself, as the richest player in the game. I don't convert my cash into GCs because I don't want to. I'm not waiting for opportunity or dominance. I simply don't want to. I earned my game cash so I could have the GCs necessary to keep my registration and wage wars. I don't want to have a huge pile of GCs to continuously temp me to convert them to real cash instead.
As far as Financial Services and other changes go, I will ignore them. I will ignore them because I won't allow you to determine my decisions for me. You can try to influence, but you are imposing more than influencing. You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar too. Allowing the Gamemaster to sell GCs is a sort of honey.
Don't think that by diverging this conversation to other issues I will forget what matters:
Financial Services - the butchers of success, the place where money disappears.
Quality Cap - what happens when you sell a product of 360 quality? It is sold as one of 296. Don't be surprised if you can't pay the bills.
Compensating Quality - apparently, the game can't find the kindness in its heart to pay the difference in quality when a higher quality product is sold as if it was of inferior quality after nearly 8 years. Can't allow the game to create more of that money to build up those cash reserves now, can we?
Why does it cost you to remove financial services and undo the changes done that really hinder our profitability? Mind you I'm not speaking of the scaling back of income and cost.
I can see the direction this has been going for over a year now, but reasons behind it are still a mystery to me. Show me, and show them, the whole picture. Tell me what you think is wrong, not what can be improved. |
| Parsifal (Kebir Blue) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 03:08 pm
I refer to Keith Allaire's 2 year old proposal(see above) and one line in the W3C response to the worker problem.
"It is not very easy to implement as it cuts through many parts of the game and requires that removal of the current procedure and all the corrections and tunings that take place on top of it. We will however implement it."
As i have alluded to in previous posts, I believe that to correct this problem and many of the other problems we are complaining about, would require fundamental systemic changes, not easily addressed. I'm not an IT person, so I can't speak with authority on this, but it would seem that the system, over the years, has become so complex that unless the whole system is scrapped or tons or person hours and money are infused into fixing the present system, it will continue to be a patch job and not work properly. I'm not tuco, but I'll make a few predictions of my own. (1)Players and W3c will continue to argue about continued systemic problems with the game. (2)W3C will continue to state that there are no real problems--it's a matter of incaccurate perceptions on the part of the players. (3) Seasoned players will continue to leave the game. (4) New players will be unable to build empires with the constraints of the current system and will stay with the game only a few months. (5) Out of frustration, Laguna will leave the game, leaving no viable mediator between players and gm. (6) SC will either be sold or will cease to exist, since it has been unable to turn a profit since the beginning.
Call me a cynic, but my nearly 50 years in business and professional life have given me a few insights that only come from my many screw ups and a few successes along the way. |
| Vengent | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 05:23 pm
it's clear Tom has an agenda and a specific viewpoint, and won't dare let "puny" player perspectives impose on his omniscient developer view. |
| John R | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 07:38 pm
I believe I have found the perfect solution:
Instead of using the USD to compare cash reserves and production in the real world, I propose we use the ZWR, the Zimbabwean dollar. I think you owe me 900Q, Willard.
Willard gets his realistic numbers and things return to normal. |
| Kevin Henry (Little Upsilon) | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 07:53 pm
LOL! |
| John R | Monday, February 16, 2009 - 11:34 pm
How come I don't get a reply? Is it because Mugabe ran out of ink to print his money again? If that's the problem, I'll just peg $SC to the JPY instead.
The arbitrariness of the choice is as valid as the previous and as yours.
Game cash isn't convertible to USD, btw. Only GCs. Between one and other, many things can happen. |
| Martock (Little Upsilon) | Tuesday, February 17, 2009 - 03:36 am
Petra (aka Wildeyes) has summed it up nicely for what has been going on in my empire for a LONG TIME. The 24000 per month conversion rate of HLW's is simply to low. It's ruined the game enough for me that I really don't bother to log into my satellite nations any more. Once in a while I will but I'm usually greeted with not only worker shortages but also an earthquake or three. 'Tuning' my education system doesn't produce any results other than shortages else where. HLW's remain rotten no matter how many GC's I pump into buying population. Not being able to convert them over at a rate that fixes my shortages means I use GC to buy pop only to have it back to the same place in a day or two. It would be nice if we got an in-game message telling us precisely what our hard earned GC's bought us (i.e. how many llw's, mlw's, hlw's, etc)! Instead, you spend your coins hoping you'll get enough to cover the shortages for a day or two. I've given up on the whole war aspect of this game and really only want to see my empire live without shortages. I'll take some shortages but give me a fair chance at dealing with the situation. |
| John R | Tuesday, February 24, 2009 - 01:52 am
All the countries in FB own 286T in cash now. 500T in two weeks...
Not that I have a point to make or anything.
/me patiently waits to shout THAT WORLD IS INSOLVENT |
| jason (Fearless Blue) | Tuesday, February 24, 2009 - 02:01 am
WOW. How can we fight on FB if theirs no cash? |
| ShcyzMattiCa (Little Upsilon) | Tuesday, February 24, 2009 - 03:12 am
"I wonder why Tommi has 20 trillion in cash..."
I'm declaring on him RIGHT NOW!!! We wouldn't want him to be devastated by the financial services would we Muahahhahaaaa!!! |
| TuCulo EsMio (Little Upsilon) | Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - 05:16 am
I barely log in. make 170-200B a month and still have wtched my cash bleed. Ive changed nothing and done nothing.
Look at yorba on LU and try to explain where that cash is going. I dare ya. |
| Alexiel iki-ryo (Fearless Blue) | Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - 06:29 am
lol. I think people are not paying attention to a really interesting point...
because...i think W3C is forgetting that much of the current INGAME cash was BOUGHT on the bloody CASH MARKET with our OWN darned money because the ingame country makes crap all. country profit is nerfed beyond recognition.
LOL. and now w3c has the audacity to steal our ingame money from us by charging financial fees/taxes on our RL money (converted to game cash) that WE put into the game to keep our countries afloat and competitive.
(yes, some people that have been here and had empire built when game still made money arent as worse off as new players who just can't put together a decent country without a bit of coinage.
and now you have the nerver to double dip and take more of our money away. what is the point of giving gold coins when one pays for registration when you are going to charge us fees on the ingame cash we buy with it.
im sure someone can say this a lot more technically than I can, or say it with some really big economics/business terms, but i just thought i would throw it out there... :3 because i thought it was kinda funny.
(and i decided i didnt want to spend brain power to think too deeply into it, so, please forgive my audacity)
sincerely,
iki-ryo |
| Noproblem | Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - 08:53 am
Tom, if you could stop c3 corp building if anymore would oversupply the market, that would help a lot. Build just enough to leave maybe a little shortage, then stop building that type of corp. THat way the new corps would remain viable, and ceo and president corps would also remain viable.
As it is, there are too many of one type built, then they decline in time and eventually close. then the cycle repeats. BUild, but don't overbuild.
I know that would require a lot of programming, and everyone is really busy, so I don't even request a response.
That is my 2 coins worth of suggestion. |
| John R | Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - 05:37 pm
Players should pull out of the ammo market. It will be best for everyone if you do so. |
| Orbiter (Little Upsilon) | Thursday, February 26, 2009 - 08:58 am
i agree, *swallows* with nute gunray
the 4 dollars a month, is the assumption, of one empire, on one world, with no ceo...
you pay 36 dollars, you get 270 gc, thats enough for the reg of one country, empire, for 9 months, at 30 gc a month...
dropping an enterprise, or drop off a world that you are weak, will effectively cost w3c 4 dollars... a month, you want to hurt them where they have hurt us? this is the way to do it... its what they are forcing us to do anyway...
josias |
| The Grand Poobah (Golden Rainbow) | Thursday, February 26, 2009 - 12:25 pm
What if all players form a super common market and sell 100% of our products through it.
could we create massive product shortages? |
| dboyd3702 (White Giant) | Thursday, February 26, 2009 - 09:01 pm
"What if all players form a super common market and sell 100% of our products through it.
could we create massive product shortages? "
It may, but more likely since common markets do not work either; all of your corps will go bankrupt... |
| Pathetic Sheep (Little Upsilon) | Thursday, February 26, 2009 - 09:49 pm
Poobah,
That would never create any shortages. The products that you don't sell on the open market will be sold by CCC countries. Buying up all of a commodity will create a shortage. |
| Zentrino (Little Upsilon) | Friday, February 27, 2009 - 12:50 am
Why don't we just contract all of our electric power wither to ourselves or our corps? All corps use it. This would deny all C3 corps electric power and they would not be able to produce. |
| quaxocal (Golden Rainbow) | Friday, February 27, 2009 - 04:34 am
Any major shortages are fixed by the GM automatically.
I tested this out on a minor product to see if it was true. It indeed is.
Q |
| Keith Allaire (Little Upsilon) | Friday, February 27, 2009 - 04:39 am
And what if everyone immediate-ordered electric power with their spending space at the beginning of the month before fixed/best-price orders are processed? (I know it's something of a pipe dream to hope a boycott would go that far, but I wonder if it WOULD be possible to nullify a GM subsidy by inflating the demand...) |
| quaxocal (Golden Rainbow) | Friday, February 27, 2009 - 05:28 am
GM subsidy is based on the amount of demand. I believe its auto-programmed. They won't let a product get too out of whack.
Q |
| coolwind (Golden Rainbow) | Friday, February 27, 2009 - 11:43 am
Any of the stuff that we are talking about would probably have an effect in real life but this is a game guys, and anything can be countered by GM |
| FarmerBob | Friday, February 27, 2009 - 01:32 pm
There is one option that might be effective:
The declaration and maintanance of wars on all C3's on all worlds, effectively shutting out new player registration.
The likely counter would be to reduce to 1 month without action to force the expiration of war decs and certain C3's being placed off limit from attack.
However, it would be interesting to see if a concerted effort from enough players could pull it off. |
| ShcyzMattiCa (Little Upsilon) | Friday, February 27, 2009 - 03:13 pm
I know it would drive up costs, but why not just take them instead of keeping the decs open?
That may even force addition of another world, which a few of us have been asking for. |
| Keith Allaire (Little Upsilon) | Friday, February 27, 2009 - 05:57 pm
Because C3s are generally worthless other than as staging points and are not worth the HUGE spike in government costs and rebellions that'd be caused by, oh, say, 50 of them.
Besides, if you wanted to hurt GM, you'd not only dec on all C3s and maintain wars against them, but blow up all their corps and any new ones auto-built--forcing GM to print megamoniez to keep the c3s afloat |
| shaun (Little Upsilon) | Saturday, February 28, 2009 - 12:03 pm
just thought id mention my opinion to the gm gods about employment and gc cash market
how can you apply 1 standard of hlw conversion to a country with 6m population equaly with a country that has over 100m population? does that make any kind of sense to anyone? i can have a max of 24k hlw made per month but i can have 100k hlw die per month wtf is that about?
whoever it was that had a massive hlw shortage problem and was trying to fix it by adding pop this is how u fix it. you go take a c3. exchange pop until you get the ratios where you want them ie like 100% hlw. then you add 50m pop to that c3. then that c3 now has 10x the number of hlw it had before which you can then happily exchange empire wide.
what makes cash and gc markets annoying is when i want to make trades i want to do it fast. dont like for it to take days, and i often accept low ball gm bids for my gc because i dont feel like waiting. only times i sell to a player are if someone is asking me if i need cash begging me to buy it. would much rather you guys just match what other players are offering and accepting on a floating avg rate and immediately fill all orders in that range buying and selling and only let the outliers actualy stand the full 24 or 48 hrs or watever it is.
need more things to do with gc. add buying corporations with gc to the cash market already and allow me to use it to build up my ceo to 2k corps on LU and i will see to it i build 200 ammo corps of each the defense batteries ammo hell i would build even more if i thought there was space for them... how about you help me help you and set the random search for country functions to find me countries that actualy have surplus work force and low taxes that i havnt already built the max of a measly 6 corps in so i can get it done in a reasonable amount of time instead of seeing the same ceo blocked, high tax, worker shortage countries over and over again. also list all c3 corps for sale on the cash market so that i can get those as well to speed up my expansion and auto upgrade as well as cash flood them all to max so that they are almost worth 1gc a peice. or are you going to let us use fractions of a gc to bid on these corps?
and to make sure i dont go bankrupt why dont you see to it any time the market goes surplus start not only auto destroying c3 corps so that i can stay in business but building c3 corps needing what there is in surplus. for instance LU has a huge surplus of electric power so corps using EP should be built like FMU which uses a lot.
plenty more i could say but im risking a lot already having written so much i doubt anyone will read all that
just as a little sidebar this is one of the best games i ever played which is why i am so frustrated at its many faults but i dont normaly complain unless i feel horribly slighted and have only ever sent you guys 1 email and you fixed my problem quickly and i appreciate it. i feel like this could be one of the best games in the world and actualy make a good profit if you guys actualy ever get it streamlined for dummies and by profiting get me more people to play with as well making the game more enjoyable |
| Lolosaurus (Kebir Blue) | Saturday, February 28, 2009 - 09:40 pm
That's a good point. HLW conversion rates should scale according to country size. Currently the larger a country's population is, the harder it is to balance HLW. |
| shaun (Little Upsilon) | Wednesday, March 4, 2009 - 03:07 pm
You must bid at least 4,600.00B LU $ was bidding on 10 gc
just wanted to bring up a point that the value of gc cant realy be said to be set by players when there are min and max values set by the gm for such things, right? atm i think the new min is 460B to buy and it can be matched by the gm but players can list for below the min price just not recieve it. on the other hand players can spend 550b per gc from the gm so the value of gc is really just set by the medium or range between what the gm sets as min and max values no? or are they trying to keep gc values just above 460B and eventualy stop selling gc themselves and let its value rise up on to 1T! would be nice to know ahead of time i sort of spent all my gc lol just a thought |
| Jack Frost (Little Upsilon) | Wednesday, March 4, 2009 - 03:31 pm
don't worry shaun... I lost way more money then I should have by doing exactly what W3C wants and that is to convert excess CASH to GC So it makes me lose faith in their whole conversion system and also makes me wish I would have just stocked up on assets rather then use my money to buy GC which have greatly devalued.
With Regards,
A Very Unhappy Dragoon |
