| Jonni | Tuesday, May 17, 2016 - 02:44 pm 
Product Price Fluctuations
We have now slightly increased the range of product price fluctuations for some products in Simcountry. These products are mainly high tech products for now but we may extend the change to more products.
Products with high persisting shortages will now be allowed to become more expensive than before and Ones with persisting oversupply, will see the price of the product fall some more. The idea is to create more incentive for the creation of high profit corporations at the cost of corporations that make losses.
This has always happened in Simcountry in the past but these changes will make the difference larger. Corporations that produce products that are in short supply, will become more profitable and their market value will increase more. Corporations that are producing products that are in abundance on the markets, will make larger losses and might bankrupt earlier than before. |
| John West | Tuesday, May 17, 2016 - 04:59 pm
I do not understand why there are price ranges in the first place. Why do you have hard floors or ceilings to the values of commodities? What is this Venezuela or the CCCP or the DPRK? If there was a decreasing or increasing supply of a commodity, than why doesn't the value of the commodity continue to increase or decrease potentially infinitely (I think improbable) until supply is rebalanced? Why aren't the price ranges you have there merely an area where the value of the commodities when within it are 'balanced' that are automatically readjusted relative with other commodities? Is the answer going to be that companies potentially could make 'too much' or 'not enough' money? That would be tragic if we didn't ensure that *all* companies were profitable *all* of the time huhh. . . .
also perhaps unrelated yet similarly perplexing to me is why is there no tariffs on the commodities (the #2 source of income of most governments in the real world before personal income tax, besides the #1 source of income for many governments that do not have personal income tax)?? and while I'm at it why can't we adjust that personal income tax that would have some sort of impact (for example) probably on the stability of the nation resulting in an increased chance of rebel attacks or otherwise (another example, production efficiency?) positive/negative effects??
. .but more importantly than all of this about commodities, what I really want to know: why is it when you are making new army units, you don't have 1 more box for HOW MANY of these units you wish to make?? and on that same note, why can't we select multiple units to attack and attack with? It's 2016 however some aspects here like making 1 unit at a time and attacking only 1 unit with no more than 1 unit at a time makes me feel like I've traveled back to 1996 . .
The biggest mystery of all from my perspective though, is that every company is approximately a quarter million employees. I could understand if that was a default hiring level. Amazingly every company has approximately the same amount of employees. Why can I not adjust the employee level of the companies from 1-infinite (with automatically scaling supply requirements/production output etc)?? Should this be 'Soviet Country' rather than 'Simulation Country?'
Don't mind me. . I'm just some damn guy. I think I've heard somewhere that it can't hurt to ask, right? but don't tell me these things I bring up are too complex considering you've got spacetravel and war engine and logistics and such. I'm talking about considering [what is from my perspective] more logical algorithms in regards to companies and commodities, that's all. and I don't think what I'm talking about would be rocket science, but I have a feeling I'm going to get some sort of response implying something like that. . . |
| Al Sadius | Sunday, May 22, 2016 - 04:57 pm
The economic model of the game isn't terribly amenable to a full free market, sadly. This isn't Eve Online, where all production requires a player's conscious effort, most of it happens by automated processes in the background. Computerized algorithms with limited processor power(because they need to run literally about a million times per game day) operating in a market where players can bid up and down prices at will are going to get some nasty results. I know I'd seek out ways to rook the computers on a regular basis, and I'm not the only one.
That said, Jonni, if we're getting game news, how about saying something about WG's recent troubles? |
| Aaron | Monday, May 23, 2016 - 12:03 am
prices have ceilings and floors because some products are in shortage for real life years and some products spend real life years in oversupply. I dont get into details of why, I just accept that this is how its been and how it will be and try to only build corps that are consistently profitable. its easier than complaining and trying to get changes made. In my not inconsiderable experience when someone tries to get a change made it backfires in some unforseen way. That also is just the way it is and I don't get into the whys. Its less frustrating that way. |
| guido.nordhaus | Monday, May 23, 2016 - 02:58 pm
Just as a frame of reference: I had discussions about HTS, services and (back then) Oil being the most profitable corps because they are always in undersupply as far back as 2003 or was it 2005? Can't remember. Oil was nerfed sometime later, but still seems to be a good bet now that I'm back...
I'd go with Aaron: Just accept it and use the mechanics. |
| Madoff | Tuesday, May 24, 2016 - 05:06 am
I understand that bigger price fluctuations will make some corps more profitable. That extra game cash is nice for newer players since they need it most. But for the long term, I don't understand how increased profitability for some corps improves the game.
Players who succeed financially already accumulate more game cash than we can spend. The new increased profitability of some corps means that players will accumulate unplayable game cash sooner than later. When we accumulate fat stacks of unplayable game cash, the game can feel repetitive and pointless. That means that getting rich in-game is practically game over.
Sadly, I had to quit playing the game. I've accumulated 1.5 quadrillion in game cash in my direct trading account. Because of many game limits, I can't use that game cash for anything that interests me.
The game doesn't need more game cash. It needs more interesting spending opportunities for game cash. |
| Aaron | Monday, June 6, 2016 - 02:54 am
the more interesting spending opportunities were eliminated with secured mode and war levels. which really is because changes backfired in an unforseen way. its just the way it is. |
