| David Walker (Golden Rainbow) | Thursday, April 5, 2012 - 11:29 pm 
This request has spawned from the "W3C - Reductions in income and cost" thread and many concerns over time about what makes up government costs, especially when non-explanatory answers are sent in response to questions about government costs.
With areas of government expenditure other than "government costs", we get a basic amount of data in whcih we can make decisions in the game.
We don't see how many people are employed in the government other than those already shown, although, this can be worked out in a laborious way.
How much is the government using in supplies each month?
How much is the salaries costing?
In what shape does the empire penalty take form? Eg. more employed workers, increased use of supplies? or a straight forward cash penalty that vanishes?
How much do we contribute to the Security Council fund? (I believbe that comes in government costs as well).
GMs, you seem to have answered other threads and ignore the one about government costs .... please provide data.
Are empire penalties being reduced in line with base values?
Why do you say government costs should be 20-30% of country income? Is it that it is linked to country income in some way?
By refusing to say that empire penalties are being reduced in line with base values will lead many to conclude that empires are being made worse off.
Please, members of the playing community support these questions. Please stay constructive and do not make requests of compensations. Let's keep the argument clear and precise to get the information so badly needed.
Thank you All. |
| SuperSoldierRCP (Little Upsilon) | Friday, April 6, 2012 - 12:28 am
I agree with david
We need to know how these are calculated
I ran an empire of 6 the same way 2months ago i do now. The only difference is i make Dramatically less because the GM makes these updates that seem to have no backing or sense."As if they make these numbers up out of thin air"
I used to make 500B a month(total)
I ran 80-85B monthly in government costs that was ok(since i also dished out 100B a month in Social Security costs, 100 in Health/Education)
But now that the GM "Magically" says governments use 20-30% of the income, i call bullshit, we need AND have the right to know how are countries spend government costs. Just because i work hard and make more money with a nation i should throw more into government? With the shrinking corp income and increased sizes goods do not get cheaper but more expensive. AKA harder to manage nation buying and more workers/less income means "Increased" weapons which is like shooting a dead horse with a 12guage to make sure its dead
I'm all ok with spending money that benefits my nations but i should see how much my nation spends for what it gets.
-----------For the Game Master Reading this--------
I pay good money to play a nice game, as it stands most players think that
"GM live in a fairy tale land"
because you have become so disconnected with the players. When the the last time there was a posted update that came with praise?, was respected, or even was WANTED?
The numbers don't lie, look @ the life of a player if a players lifespan was 2years, now its 6months something is wrong, its time to change(evolve) but you must do it with the players and help suite them to. |
| Christopher Michael | Friday, April 6, 2012 - 02:41 am
I support and agree with David's questions.
Straight forward, detailed answers to these questions would help ease the angst that seems to be rampant in the game at this time.
Thanks! |
| Tom Morgan (Kebir Blue) | Friday, April 6, 2012 - 04:10 am
I support the release of the Govt. Cost algorithim.
Cheers,
T
(p.s. I am not the Treseaurer) |
| David Walker | Friday, April 6, 2012 - 07:43 pm
Just to clarify, the request is for a breakdown of the Government Costs and answers to specific questions relating to components of Government Costs.
If there is a mass member request for this, it will be harder for this issue to be ignored.
A statement by the GMs is currently more noticeable by its absence. |
| Jo Salkilld (Golden Rainbow) | Friday, April 6, 2012 - 07:57 pm
I'd really like to see a breakdown of how Government Costs are calculated. Add my name to the list!
Hugs and respect
Jo |
| Redman (Little Upsilon) | Friday, April 6, 2012 - 08:54 pm
I agree with all here in that we need to see this formula so that we as players can start adjusting what we need to. Andy has said in another thread that corporations are bigger, work forces are bigger and because of this each change implemented or game tweak has a much more damaging effect on our countries and economy.
We see government spending going through the roof with these changes and are powerless to combat it. Please give us this information so that we can adjust our country spending to combat your constant tweaking of the game, which is obviously more damaging now then in the past. This would cut down on the email you get and the questions regarding government spending.
What causes this spending to sky rocket? Why does a country which basically mirrors it's neighbor in stats have twice the government spending? We will be able to see for ourselves and adjust accordingly. Please give us something to help combat your interference.
Regards,
Redman |
| Keto (Little Upsilon) | Friday, April 6, 2012 - 11:00 pm
I'd like to see a break down of all costs pertaining to countries.
Why should an empire with 10 countries pay more for government costs than an empire with 3 countries? Doesn't sound fair does it?
Why do my corporations show "too high" when I'm selling at 120Q and why won't the offer price from my corps decrease as does the going price of products? This should be automatic shouldn't it?
Why are government costs higher for a country with weapons than a country with no weapons?
I did the math with the population of 1 country. Employed,unemployed,housewives,disabled,school children,highschool students,university students,advanced students, soldiers and officers, and 6,000,000 people are un accounted for. Why? Where are they?
I can go on and on, but like everyone else we would like answers for all our questions. We all really get fustrated when the GMs don't reply. Andy has been alot more active answering some questions but not the ones pertaining to our country profits being depleted.
This will only lead to more players leaving the game. The war game has already been crippled, so no one cares to fight like we once did, now you are taking away our profits giving players no reason to continue playing this game. |
| Inanna (Fearless Blue) | Saturday, April 7, 2012 - 08:29 am
/hums Jeopardy tune quietly in the background.... |
| Steven Ryan | Saturday, April 7, 2012 - 09:53 am
i asked ages ago |
| Tom Morgan (Kebir Blue) | Saturday, April 7, 2012 - 11:28 am
My government costs have been declining for 18 game months.
Har har I'm magic I am. |
| Steven Ryan (Golden Rainbow) | Saturday, April 7, 2012 - 12:01 pm
mine for about real month |
| David Walker (Little Upsilon) | Saturday, April 7, 2012 - 07:43 pm
The GMs stay silent, so lets keep up the pressure.
Government costs are for many the largest by far in running a country yet we have no information about them.
The information is available because it has to be computed to work out our costs but yet we're not allowed to know.
Transparency is always the way forwards. |
| David Walker | Sunday, April 8, 2012 - 10:28 pm
The GMs have been replying to other threads but not this one.
Is it an unreasonable request? |
| Inanna (White Giant) | Sunday, April 8, 2012 - 10:41 pm
No David... It is a...
|
| SadHappySucker (White Giant) | Monday, April 9, 2012 - 12:53 am
My God David, you do harp on, don't you?
Keep up the pressure?! "Transparency is always the way forwards."?! I have to ask- you do realize this is a game, don't you? The reason the GM's don't reply to your questions is probably because they're rolling around on the floor laughing at how incredulous you are.
You're the main reason I don't waste my time with this forum- I login and it's like being at a local Labour Party rally(and not a very good one at that.) |
| David Walker (Little Upsilon) | Monday, April 9, 2012 - 01:05 am
Lol, Wendy, you always makeme laugh.
As for SadHappySucker, well ......
This is a game and I voiced my opinion to keep it purely as a game many years ago before real money could be made.
Now that it is a real money game, there are real questions to be asked when something effects your real money balance.
I wouldn't let my bank allocate charges based on their whim. I wouldn't let my shop change the price of the milk before I got to the counter. I don't expect to not know what I pay for.
You say: "You're the main reason I don't waste my time with this forum- I login and it's like being at a local Labour Party rally(and not a very good one at that.)"
I do not often raise issues this publicly but it is so critical now and has been ignored completely with meaningless answers over the years.
Sucker, all that takes place in these forums is part of the game. I also doubt the GMs are rolling on the floor laughing as I doubt they want to answer the questions for reasons they keep to themselves.
If real money had not entered the game, it would not matter but as I pay almost US$10 a day in government costs, I'd like to know what it's for.
As for politics, I believe in the bottom up approach and not that of Labour. |
| Jiang Hu Warrior (Fearless Blue) | Monday, April 9, 2012 - 01:22 am
david said it best.....all that takes place in these forums is part of the game....and really really there is no CONSPIRACY in simcountry if any gamemaster doesn't want to respond with an answer you want reguarding whatever question you pose thats how it is!(play the game), as for government costs we believe in the bottom up approach nothing else matters |
| Christopher Michael | Monday, April 9, 2012 - 03:17 am
I don't agree with everything David says on these forums. We have certainly been on opposite ends in discussions on here before.
David has his own agenda in this (real $), but that shouldn't take away from the fact that it would benefit the game community as a whole if we could know how government costs are computed.
As Warrior says, we may not get an answer; but there's nothing wrong with trying! And I don't think it was very constructive to attack David for being an advocate (sucker). |
| Inanna (Little Upsilon) | Monday, April 9, 2012 - 06:03 am
yeah Chiwoo, the whole conspiracy bit was a joke, but your defensive posture only fuels the fires of this type of curiosity. |
| SadHappySucker (White Giant) | Monday, April 9, 2012 - 01:18 pm
"Now that it is a real money game, there are real questions to be asked when something effects your real money balance."
I'm sure I read somewhere that you make a whopping $600 per year from this game.
I will personally pay you that amount to not take this game so seriously. If you're an adult and consider £31.50 per month as "real money" then you clearly need to spend less time playing this GAME and more time working a paid job. |
| Sunny (Kebir Blue) | Monday, April 9, 2012 - 02:01 pm
Enough bulls**t bickering, and more focusing on the topic.
All we want to know is the algorithm / how the costs are worked out, we won't stop until this information is released.
End of, good day. |
| Inanna (Fearless Blue) | Monday, April 9, 2012 - 03:29 pm
Yes SadHappy, I feel you are out of line by leaps and bounds. Not everyone has to subscribe to your narrow point of view. Criticizing David's success in the game is very bad for the game. You frown because he makes any amount of gain, while you do not.
If he makes a little cash for his non-profit cause why do you care anyway? Your animosity seems to be rooted in the fact that he is successful. I'll remind you David has been a part of some of the most important parts in the game that hold it together. True it is just a game, but you limit yourself to the game side of it and that is your choice. Your comments reflect the fact that you take the game and his money making too serious. Not the other way around. |
| SadHappySucker (White Giant) | Monday, April 9, 2012 - 05:57 pm
Sunny- I understand that. Why don't we make a formal request for some cheat codes, too?!
Inanna- At what point did I criticize anyone's success? I didn't. Nor do I understand how it's bad for the game. One could counter that certain people make this game inaccessible because they take it so seriously it loses the element of fun.
Again, I've not criticized anyone's success- I don't even know the success of David's that you speak of. If--as you seem to be doing--you value success by real life profit then I would suggest it is you that has a narrow point of view.
I make no criticism of anyone trying to make a little cash for a non-profit cause, but seriously- if you wanted to help and make a difference, would you really do so by playing SimCountry?
Me pointing out that he takes the game too seriously means that I'm taking the game too seriously is a bit much of an oxymoron for me.
Some things aren't meant to be understood and this game certainly wouldn't be any fun if everybody knew exactly what I's to dot and T's to cross. |
| Christopher Michael | Monday, April 9, 2012 - 06:21 pm
SadHappySucker, if you don't care about the gov. cost computation, then why are you here commenting on this thread??
It seems that we are under attack by your comments, simply for asking a question.
You have a right to voice your opinion....but so do we.
Wendy makes some excellent points (what is the REAL reason you have such an issue with David??), and Sunny says it best:
Let's STOP this 'bickering' and get back to the point of this thread! GOVERNMENT COST. |
| Inanna (Little Upsilon) | Monday, April 9, 2012 - 11:14 pm
Actually AssHat numero uno, David has been responsible for one of the longest standing federations in this game, for many years. He has also brokered many peace deals between his federation and other powerhouse federations of that time. I could go on, but you can't hear very well. I don't judge David's success by his real life profits. I have not known how much he has made nor have I asked or cared, until you brought the issue to light now. My evaluation on David's long time success has been measured by nothing more than the things he has accomplished in the game with no financial gain in mind.
Your whole tone is condescending to David with relation to his selling coins for real money. All you have done is criticize him and based the backbone of the argument you pose on that very insignificant fact.
Quote:I'm sure I read somewhere that you make a whopping $600 per year from this game.
I will personally pay you that amount to not take this game so seriously. If you're an adult and consider £31.50 per month as "real money" then you clearly need to spend less time playing this GAME and more time working a paid job.
I can read very well. If this isn't a condescending criticism I don't know what is. And beyond that, it is way out of line, and you wouldn't pay anyone any sum of money to do anything, which makes you more the asshat than I thought previously.
I do understand how some people can become confused by some wierd perceptions they accumulate along the way playing this game.
I'll give you a true example. One day, not too long ago. After staying awake for a grueling war session I woke up and when looked down I realized I had a penis!!
But then I woke up. OMG!!! It was a waking dream!!!
People need to stay tethered to reality.
My example was about as pointless and stupid as you criticizing someone who can gain from some portion of his success, and claim this proves he takes the game too serious.
Oh, and I still like you a lot. Just a little less than yesterday. Have a great day.
Wow. |
| SadHappySucker (White Giant) | Tuesday, April 10, 2012 - 12:48 am
OMG Inanna you are so off-topic, we've supposed to be campaigning for transparency!
Perhaps my understanding of an "AssHat" is wrong but I've been led to believe that it is essentially someone that pays to play this game. Ergo, any "AssHat" is good for the game, as, well--you know--if the game doesn't earn money and can't pay server/hosting/staff, then there is no game. The irony is you either play this game without paying and get called a "n00b", you or pay to play this game and get called an "AssHat." In fact, you could argue that people that take money out of the game are very bad for the game- akin to "golf farmers" on World Of Warcraft.
As condescending as it may seem I will quite happily pay David £31.50 per month towards his not-for-profit cause if it shuts him up for a while. He can message me and it can be arranged- surely if he's really doing this for the cause then this should be a fantastic deal for him?
I, uh... I also don't see where I laid down an example. So hopefully you can point me in that direction, else I'll just assume that you first and foremost need to be tethered to reality. Though I have to admit, I did giggle when you said penis.
I'm glad you still like me, though I'm not sure who you are and if we've ever conversed. |
| Jo Salkilld (Golden Rainbow) | Tuesday, April 10, 2012 - 01:20 am
Why do so many threads in this game go completely off-topic and end up in flame wars?
That's a rhetorical question and does not require a response ... back to the subject under discussion please.
Gamemasters: it would help many of us to understand how Government costs are calculated. You have given us the actual algorithms for other things in the past, like Finance Index. This one would really help us to understand and play the game better!
Hugs and respect
Jo |
| Laguna | Tuesday, April 10, 2012 - 01:22 am
Hahahahahahaha!! I missed reading these. |
| Madhatter 2.0 (Fearless Blue) | Tuesday, April 10, 2012 - 06:45 am
First off just wanna say. I dont like you one bit Sucker. Come to Fearless Blue some time. Just wanted to put that out there.
Being able to understand how the government cost are computed not only will help the older players. But all players to understand how the financing of there country works. Its simply economics. Having all the information at your fingertips to better understand the situation of your economy. I could care less about transparency. All i want is the information in order to come up with a better strategy of running my empire. |
| Andy | Tuesday, April 10, 2012 - 08:58 pm
It is clear that everybody wants to have government costs reduced.
this is an old discussion going on as long as the game is running.
having a complex formula published on the forum is not going to help in any way.
There are probably more opinions on this than people in the game and there is no need for a complex discussion arguing that some parameter should be reduced or increased to have government cost lower or much lower etc.
The parameters are known:
The number of countries in the empire (not in the account).
The population.
The government salaries.
The quality of materials used by the country.
Government cost is now reduced with other costs but other costs like education, health and defense are down more sharply.
This resulted in government cost remaining relatively high.
If you compare government cost between your countries, you will see that the percentage of gov. cost of the total cost is increasing with the number of countries, the quality of products and government salaries.
It is proportional to the population but becomes a little more expensive for highly populated countries. |
| Scarlet (Kebir Blue) | Tuesday, April 10, 2012 - 09:52 pm
Yeah, those are the same parameters as they've always been.
:/
I've always assumed the number of countries and population of the country determined the number of Government Facilities and each of those required x number of workers to staff and x number of products to operate.
Quick check of two countries on same world with different populations and government salaries:
Population: 30.1M
Government Facilities: 413
Government Salaries: 226
Product Quality: ~120
Government Cost: 9.4B
Population: 14.7M
Government Facilities: 225
Government Salaries: 102
Product Quality: ~120
Government Cost: 4.1B
Notice how the government facilities are roughly half in number in the country with roughly half the population? Notice how Government Cost is clearly less than half as much in the second country where government salaries are lower despite having slightly more than half the number of government facilities? |
| Jo Salkilld (White Giant) | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 12:23 am
Thank you so much for contributing to this thread, Andy. It's very reassuring to know that the GMs are listening to us. But wanting government costs reduced is not the issue that is being asked for here.
As players, we just want to know exactly how they are calculated, so that we know what we need to do to influence them. Yes, we want to reduce them, but we are not asking the GMs to implement a blanket reduction - or to do that for us. We are asking for the information to allow us to make our own decisions on whether it will be in our interests to change the factors that affect them.
This game has always been about the players having a variety of interactive elements that we can control. The more elements we can control, the more 'fun' the game is. The best players are the ones who understand the interactivity of those elements and configure their empires in the best way. Giving us this information will enhance the game for us.
It's not enough to give us four elements that 'affect' the calculation. How do they affect it? We need to know.
How far do I need to reduce / increase the number of countries in my empire and how much of a difference will that make?
How far do I need to reduce / increase my population and how much of a difference will that make?
How far do I need to reduce / increase my government salaries and how much of a difference will that make?
How far do I need to reduce / increase the quality of materials in my country and how much of a difference will that make? And have you taken into account that increasing the minimum order quality from 100 to 120 will have affected this? It has definitely had an impact on Financial Index across the board. Have you adjusted the Government costs or FI calculation to take this into account?
Is there anything else you haven't mentioned that affects the calculation? Because, if there is, I would like to know about it so that I can control it.
When I make a change to these things, it has an effect in other areas. If I decrease population, I can host fewer corps, which will affect my income. If I decrease government salaries, I will earn less through income tax and if I run into worker shortages, my hospitals and schools may close. I need to know how much these things will affect Government Costs, to know whether the payoff is worth it.
PLEASE give us the detailed calculation! What reason do you have not to do this?
Hugs and respect
Jo |
| Tom Morgan (Kebir Blue) | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 01:10 am
Thanks Andy for acknowledging our cries, but I do agree with Jo on this one too. We need the details.
T |
| Gothamloki (Little Upsilon) | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 01:25 am
Agree with Jo. |
| Scarlet (Fearless Blue) | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 01:39 am
I'm going to agree with Andy.
Sue me. |
| Jo Salkilld (White Giant) | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 02:45 am
Thanks to everyone who agreed 
/me blows a raspberry at John
One more thing to say: Andy, having a complex formula published on the forum is going to help. If someone doesn't understand the formula then it doesn't hurt them, but it does benefit the ones who do.
Most of us are very good at understanding complex formulae. Please don't underestimate your customers - this is not, and hopefully will never be, a game which appeals to imbeciles.
Hugs and respect
Jo |
| Steven Ryan (Little Upsilon) | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 02:54 am
You should not be restricted to how many countries you have in an empire i dont want to be forced to close countries down that i have had for years i have never had these problems before now i am in debt and not prepared to pay out of it everyone should be compensated and the problem fixed so things can be normal again. |
| Jo Salkilld (White Giant) | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 03:04 am
With respect, Steve, that's not the point of this thread. We're not asking the GMs to change anything. We just want to know how it is calculated.
Hugs and respect
Jo |
| Christopher Michael (Little Upsilon) | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 03:25 am
+1 Jo. |
| Quarryman | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 04:07 am
I concur with Jo. |
| Steven Ryan | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 08:42 am
Well we should at least get compensated for the costs to our countries since the new changes why should we wear it. fiances may have got slighty better but what about the losses since the updates and the current loss a lot of players have got. |
| Andy | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 09:24 am
As I said, population is influencing the cost in a linear way. Scarlet gave an example.
You can reduce the quality or increase it and see the results. You can also play with government salaries.
You can easily compare results between your countries and other countries. There are plenty of examples to learn from. |
| Inanna (Golden Rainbow) | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 10:18 am
They don't want to publish the exact formula because when you think something is wrong, you can go use the formula and find out that something is not right.
We all know when you say anything is wrong, they deny some things until you can present proof.
So, if we never have the formula for how the cost is compiled, we can never present any real proof if we think it is too high.
The same applies for the welfare index. If we don't know how the game is supposed to apply this index to our profitability, we will never know if the feature is functioning correctly.
In this case players think that costs are too high while profits are going down. Some players think they are being overcharged. I think, as I have for a while now, that the welfare index is suppressing profits which is why the increases in Government costs are becoming noticeable.
In each and every case if we knew how to compile what these figures should be if we had the formulas, we could quickly check or prove the notion of dysfunction and go on playing the game. These posts and this conversation, along with all conspiracy theories would vanish.
There still has been no logical explanation as to why we should be denied these formulas to check for ourselves. leave it to speculation, maybe GMs and players begin to take offense to everyone's illogical ignorant conclusions. |
| Crafty | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 03:05 pm
Be careful though. If we all knew all the algorithms the game uses then it would, at least in theory, be possible to ascertain maximum/minimum values and run the 'ideal' country. If everyone could do that there would be very little experimenting, trying things out, discussing with others and scanning successful peoples countries/CEOs. In other words, no game play, what with PvP war about dead too. |
| Inanna (Golden Rainbow) | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 03:22 pm
Well then when problems are reported I would certainly like to have "Show us some examples or proof" to not be thrown in our faces every time something is wrong before I stop asking.
Even if we knew the min/max values knowing how an index is computed that does not give away the best settings. It will only tell you how what you do in your country is going to be used to compile x index. All inputs are generated by choices players make. Otherwise we have no way to provide the proof that seems to be required of us. |
| Crafty | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 03:48 pm
No Wenders, with some mathematical know how you can calculate optimum results from any given set of variables, providing you can define your optimum.
But, yes, I see your point of not being able to show a possible error if you cant see how a result is arrived at. But generally we must consider that all these indexes etc are derived by a computer and the chances of an error are extremely small. You and I both know that 99.9% of errors are player misunderstandings. |
| Steven Ryan | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 03:51 pm
done the playing with quality and reduction in salary still dosent rectify the obvious |
| Inanna (Golden Rainbow) | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 04:36 pm
Oh I know you didn't just say that CC. This game especially for as long as you have been around you know for %100 certainty that 99% of deviations from what things are supposed to do is NOT player error.
I would bet that in the last two years 99% of every major addition caused some abnormality or was bugged. Period and you know that just about sums it all up in a nutshell.
I'm not saying that they don't get fixed. Do a word search on "bugs" + "update" + "error" and tell me how many threads pop up. |
| Jo Salkilld (White Giant) | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 07:16 pm
I'm sure that the GMs do get a lot of messages complaining that there is a bug when, actually, it is just player misunderstanding, although I wouldn't want to guess at the percentage.
But you would think that giving us more information would prevent so many misunderstandings and reduce those emails, thus making life easier for them and more fun for us.
Crafty - your argument doesn't really work. If the formula really can be worked-out by testing, then why not give it to us, the way the GMs have published the FI and DI formulas? If it can't be worked out by testing, then why keep us in the dark about it instead of allowing us the fun of controlling it, the way we do with all the other aspects of the game? IMHO the skill comes with balancing the way in which all the aspects interrelate and affect each other, not with working out a highly complicated formula.
Hugs and respect
Jo |
| Inanna | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 07:25 pm
Haha Jo, I was exaggerating but I was only doing so for demonstrative purposes. I'm certain the majority is player confusion. Something the Gm has tried to improve, and publishing things like this would help end it. |
| Jo Salkilld | Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 07:29 pm
My point exactly Wendy
Hugs and respect
Jo |
| Crafty | Thursday, April 12, 2012 - 01:55 pm
All I can add is the really good players like Treasurer, Quaxocal, Blueserpent and others work out stuff by brains, trial and error and however else they do it. Giving formulae to us all just reduces the difference between understanding the game and merely playing it. Jo, I think the formulae are way to complex to actually work out exactly by trial and error, but my point was having exact formulae would make it possible to come close to ideal for everyone regardless of "the skill comes with balancing the way in which all the aspects interrelate and affect each other,"
Anyway, I'll shut up 'cause I really dont care atm, I just like discussing stuff with the more intelligent patrons of the game. |
| Inanna | Thursday, April 12, 2012 - 03:08 pm
Yeah I understand you sentiment CC. I am intelligent as well. But I have enough stuff in a day to break my head on. I come here to relax and unwind, not break myself down to work after work if you know what I mean. Trading forex makes me really drain my mind and this should be a form of entertainment. I'm not saying dumb it down so a four year old can play but it shouldn't be trigonometry either. Trying to figure stuff out without knowing the variables is kind of ridiculous and a real math problem. I don't work for nasa and everything I look at doesn't convert to equations in my mind's eye.
I'm not trying to drown you out, most people are here to play the game not make a second job of it. Your point as always is well spoken. |
| Crafty | Friday, April 13, 2012 - 10:02 pm
I stay with this game BECAUSE it is complex.
If I need something light, I now have a Wii |
| maclean | Saturday, April 14, 2012 - 03:35 am
ditto, crafty, but lately it seems more like the game is "can you figure out what wrench the GMs are gonna throw into the system today" rather than actually figuring out the actual formulae and mechanics and theory of the game model. That is, we're spending most of our time reacting to updates and supply fairies, not the game itself. This is a form of purgatory. |
| Inanna | Saturday, April 14, 2012 - 03:47 pm
I like that analogy, purgatory, lol. |
| SuperSoldierRCP | Tuesday, April 17, 2012 - 12:07 am
bump |
| Christopher Michael | Tuesday, April 17, 2012 - 12:26 am
David, are you still alive?? |
