 |
|
|
|
Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 02:36 am  OK Hefty and Company, You are bidding private corps controlled by my enterprise without my permission. I think this is a hostile action. Please retract your bid. CEO of JTG Enterprise
| |
| Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 02:59 am News of this transgression displeases WildEyes! We require the player names of the offenders.
| |
| Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 03:01 am The player name is Gothard43
| |
| Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 03:06 am add Anthony King to the mix. King Country.
| |
| Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 03:24 am This is an outrage! In retaliation and to show our displeasure we have declared war on Genie Alpha and Multiphasic Shields! To further show our supreme displeasure, we have decreed that there will be no shots fired! I hope this shows those little nuggets that SC R SERIOUS BUSINESS! rararar!!! Your multiphasic shielding is no match for my quantum torpedo~
| |
| Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 09:17 am I am wondering if there is a way to prevent from other player hostile bidding on my corps. Does this game have any active Game Master?
| |
| Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 09:51 am gamemaster@simcountry.com 
| |
| Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 03:35 pm If you own a CEO and it's another CEO bidding or a country Nationalizing your corps no, unless of course your corps are in a country that does not allow CEO's, sounds like a catch 22 doesn't it Otherwise they are of course, paying alot more than the corp is actually worth, so much more in fact they are idiots for doing so unless the corp is failing and would skyrocket in value after being removed from poor management. In which case them buying it is probably better than you keeping the "white elephant" You can of course always track them down if they have a country and declare war ... or hire someone to do it for you if you've no country.
| |
| Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 03:42 pm I noticed the newbs who bid on my CEO corps, bid on my corps which were located in their countries. After buying my corps they then closed them.??? One even dereged the country. They need to read the forums more before making decisions like that, and learn how to play the game. I would have decd them and taken their empire, but they are in secured mode or WP. But I am watching them.
| |
| Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 03:58 pm I simply don't care. I didn't care when I couldn't move my corp during a bid. Still don't care when I can move it freely and avoid the bid. Didn't care when corps were worth 120B. Didn't care when corps were worth 1T. Still don't care when people buy a corp of 300B for 500B. Someone buying one corp among thousands, hundreds or dozens does not justify the insanity, the time, the money and the prosecution, specially when the auction leading to that waste was a gain. It makes even less sense when it is a punctual event and the bid comes from a country. To me, an hostile action involves deliberate malice, not innocent ignorance. As such: If a player bid on you unaware of common etiquette, tell him how things go. If a player constantly bids on you, then do something about it. Things work best this way.
| |
| Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 10:05 pm Damn Lg whats wrong with you?
| |
| Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 10:25 pm There's nothing wrong with me, as I don't defy the natural laws of economics. There are a few things wrong with going nuts over bidding, though. It was restricted to when the corp belonged to an enterprise with over 1000 corps or it was a truly public corp. Now (for two years or something) it applies to all forms of bidding, against economic reason.
| |
| Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 10:53 pm There are natural laws of economics? And here all this time I was thinking that economy was a construct... silly me...
| |
| Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 11:03 pm Google can do so much... http://www.freeliberal.com/archives/000438.html Economics is a social science. It studies social phenomenons. Phenomenons may follow patterns from which laws are derived.
| |
| Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 11:27 pm Economy, as it is conceived by assigning value to goods and services (through whichever factors are used to assign value), is a construct. Those laws only hold insofar as the construct is upheld. You subvert the traditional conception of economy and the laws cease to be laws. Therefore to call them natural laws is silly. There is no quiddity about economy from which you can derive laws, and the failure to acknowledge this is the bane of social sciences. Look at how many of those laws are contingent on a free-market environment, for example. Edit: I should also never forget to play the "Oh, I don't really care so how about I play the game in the way that yields the most fun for me" card. Because, you know... that's kinda how it is. It's not like you're going to do anything about it, LG.
| |
| Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 11:35 pm this is a game not a lifestyle, or job. me thinks maybe lg forgets that.
| |
| Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 01:04 am You two don't even know what you are arguing.
What is there in social that you do not understand? I will try to explain this in a very simple manner: Social sciences, such as Economics and Sociology, study social phenomenons, these can be understood as decisions and relations among human beings. Natural laws are synonyms with patterns in phenomenons. If you are saying there aren't patterns in people's decisions, you better warn everyone who practices a social science. We just might have all of our understanding about predicting behavior wrong. It sure will make it difficult to understand how to stop the galloping inflation that is just waiting to explode in the US. It will also make it a tad difficult to prevent a country from growing old. And a whole lot of other things... If you are arguing why they are named natural laws and not something else, sounds like a waste of time to me. They'll continue to print "natural laws" everywhere, whether you want to or not. By the time you people spend here, I sometimes I wonder if don't treat this game as a second life or job. Simcountry is a game. It requires thought to resolve problems of choice through decision, supported by information and yada yada. It is also an MMOG, so there are several social relations. Sounds familiar? The factors that govern your decisions in the real world, are the same that govern your decisions here. However, some may not be present or arranged in different proportions. Because this is a game, it doesn't mean they suddenly vanish. Restricting to economics: this is present on the corps you build, why you even build them in the first, the gold coins you purchase, the salaries you set, etc. This sounds a lot like gaming to me, and all within the pattern that would be expected in the real world under similar circumstances. Weaving this with the topic: My point was: "Someone buying one corp among thousands, hundreds or dozens does not justify the insanity, the time, the money and the prosecution, (...) [it goes] against economical reason." You people do not satisfy a natural law of economics. No curiosity to understand? Someone bids on your corp and you receive something around 300B. You spent 100B to create it, so you made a profit of 200B (plus any profit made from creation to the bid). Also, you didn't lost something of value, because the game replicates perfect competition markets, so there is a low entry-barrier (how many clicks are needed to open a corp?). The natural thing to do would be to incentive players to bid on your mature corps and formalize the process. Instead, the outliners react as if they had been infected with syphilis. Rationale? Don't ask me. The first process is more efficient, stable and just. Plus, people are only really having fun when all participants are having fun. I could say more... but judging by Yankee's post and by the threads out there asking for people to bid on their corps, I suspect there are those who have a clue to something. By the way: Economics =/= Economy.
| |
| Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 01:42 am tl;dr
| |
| Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 01:45 am Your problem.
| |
| Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 01:51 am Bidding on country corps is one thing. Bidding on my CEO corps is another thing. Most presidents including myself, encourage bidding on corps owned by our countries. Bidding on our CEO owned corps is not acceptable, period!!!!
| |
| Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 02:02 am You people really are something... Not acceptable according who? You really want to know who? It wasn't acceptable according to me, Yankee, RobG, Perlamo and a couple of others. We spread this throughout our own worlds: KB, GR and WG. FB is a different story. We had enterprises with over 1000 corps or several truly corporations. This requires effort to build. As such, we got annoyed when someone tempered with our effort. Even so, "diplomacy" wasn't a card that was automatically removed from the deck. Unlikely to be used, but not impossible. In my case, after I had built a series of countries with a profit ranging from 800B to 1T, I simply stopped carring. Never cared again since. Yankee no longer has his mega-enterprises and the others are gone. If someone bids on corp you simply built and can replace like it never happened, there is no effort to back-up your over-the-top reaction. Bidding is acceptable if it isn't done with malice. That's the only thing you people need to worry: malice. Understand that as it was us who began this, we are the one who understand this better.
| |
| Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 02:04 am I think Laguna has found Jesus ..... either that or he's had a stroke, or an alien has sucked out his brain and replaced it with tofu. Otherwise the only other explaination is he's in love (you cheating bitch!)
| |
| Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 02:05 am I'm only being reasonable, logical. Which is almost as rare to see in Simcountry as a stroke on a healthy person, hence the confusion (It's not my fault if Tom Cruise made a pass on me...)
| |
| Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 02:07 am But you are right .. I couldn't care less anymore, if I don't want so and so in my country I can get them out. The game has changed quite a bit from the time bidding on a corp would cause me to nuke someone for weeks. There is nothing they can buy from me they couldn't build themselves for alot less, and nothing I can't easily rebuild with the massive profit you get from a hostile bid even on a corp that is failing.
| |
| Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 02:28 am "Understand that as it was us who began this, we are the one who understand this better." Sure you do. I have my own reasons for not wanting other people's corps in my countries and they have nothing to do with the "old days" or anyone else who "began" anything. I'm sure other people are the same way, and if someone is having a knee-jerk reaction to hostile bidding rather than an actual reason to not want people to bid on their corps then that person ought to re-evaluate.
| |
| Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 02:35 am This behavior is neither natural or beneficial. It was gained through socialization and continues to be perpetuated in the same manner. If you don't want a corp in your country, then message him to move. If he doesn't, nationalize the corp. In which manner does attacking or nuking the countries of the CEO improve the situation? From what I've seen, in some cases it only makes it worse, as seen with Highlander. Rude messages are to be dealt with the Gamemaster, not with nukes.
| |
| Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 02:41 am Because we can't all be nice, civilized, first-world UN-card-carrying countries. Some of us have to be hard-liner rogue states. If you want to sit around all day being reasonable and logical, might I recommend a good high-level math book with plenty of problems to occupy your time? edit: Oooh, nice ninja edit. "This behavior is neither natural or beneficial. It was gained through socialization and continues to be perpetuated in the same manner. " Which behavior are you referring to? People becoming unhappy at uninvited bids in their countries or CEOs? It is not impossible that people might actually have reasons for this....
| |
| Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 02:56 am If it takes so much of you to actually provide a truthful reason, then something is wrong. I'm actually quite happy by simply being. The rest is just a bonus. This avoids a lot of problems, for what it seems. People don't deal well with the unexpected. The unnatural thing is how people react. If they were surprised by knife of gun, sure, gutting the guy would be a nice reaction. If the surprise is "let me give you some money" and the guy is gutted... dunno, doesn't sound natural and beneficial.
| |
| Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 05:48 am My reason is not only true but valid ... (You're breathing too much of my air)
| |
| Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 03:52 pm Maybe the reason is the weird design of this game. You have to get permission to build corp in or relocate corp to a country but you can bid any corp without permission. A new CEO cannot build in a country with a president but can bid any corp. Why not design it so that we have to get permission to bid corps?
| |
| Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 04:36 pm Let's first repair the game so that a CEO DOES need permission to relocate a corporation to a president controlled country.
| |
Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 05:45 pm
Agreed. I also think there is another science in evidence here, that being behavioural science. Players have been declared upon by Federations, particularly large and powerful ones, when they have placed hostile bids on corps. This is as good as an example of the fraternal nature of Federations as you are likely to see in Simcountry IMO. I don't like hostile bidding as much as the next person doesn't and I would like to see something put in place where permission is required, as Xenius mentioned.
| |
| Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 07:33 pm "I don't like hostile bidding as much as the next person doesn't and I would like to see something put in place where permission is required, as Xenius mentioned." It's called the "no ceo's allowed" checkbox.
| |
| Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 09:26 pm I have the option to nationalise any state corps that I do not wish to receive bids on. However, my private corps in my enterprises are unprotected from bids, regardless of CEO status in any given country. This is confirmed in a game news update dated April 14 2009... ---------- 27. Purchasing Private corporations [ top ] Purchasing corporations is possible if the president of the country where the corporation resides allows it. However, corporations that are already private can now be taken over even if the president does not allow the sale of state corporations in the country. Corporations that are private do not belong to the president and were taken over before. They can change hands without the president?s consent. ---------- I would like to see a checkbox that when ticked prevents any private corp from being bid on by anybody if the corp is profitable. I can see the justification for bidding on a corp that isn't performing well and the President of the host country wishes to address the issue.
| |
| Monday, June 29, 2009 - 12:26 am Hummmm guess I missed that or I'd have been screaming to Wc3. It's always pissed Wc3 off that people do alot of work setting up closed economy countries. Either way just let them pay the premium price and tell them to move if they don't, then up the taxes and when the MV drops enough buy it back. Or better yet simply run nothing but public corps then you can use your empire to drive the stock up so high they can't buy more than a token amount of shares.
| |
| Monday, June 29, 2009 - 01:11 am I have only ever lost one corp to a "hostile" bid and I wasn't disappointed, angered or frustrated. I received a handsome reward for a mediocre corp. It would have taken roughly 6 RL months to make the same amount in net profits, based on the corp's performance at that time. But it would have been nice if the President of the country had messaged me beforehand and asked if it was okay to do so. I would not have declined the request in this instance. It's the unwelcome bidding without communicating first that seems to irritate players the most. And don't forget, debt-bombing the corp is also an option if you spot the bid in time
| |
| Monday, June 29, 2009 - 03:11 am There is only one thing for me, you bid you die! end of story. LDI Minister of Peace jason
| |
| Monday, June 29, 2009 - 05:05 am I second that motion.
| |
| Monday, June 29, 2009 - 05:41 am I remember when I first started, I started nationalizing corps left and right in my country, because I wanted to own/control everything in my country. Of course, since then, I've realized how ridiculous that was, and appreciate how well everyone took it. I give people the benefit of the doubt when it happens to me now, remembering how nice people were to me about it; but I can't fault others for their more aggressive stances.
| |
| Tuesday, June 30, 2009 - 03:06 am Death to all who annoy the Samtator. My communication skills are limited to war declarations. /me stares at Laguna. Tom Cruise?
|
