Stop, you're killing me.

Dealing with the disparity in corps ... that some always make money and some always lose ... has got to be the root of many of the problems.

Solve that, and a lot of 'interventions' can be also be dismantled ...

Hugs and respect

Jo

it would kill everyone except the people with the services corps for every action their is an equal and oppiosite reaction hmmmm I'm sure it would balance out eventually idk going through some sort of economic catastrophie would be FUN which is the point of a GAME eventually things would balance out or you can be a stingy bastard and back off slowly and everything will be ok or you can not do anything and forevermore endure our pointless progression halting complaints

THANKS ANDY!!!!!!

i always kinda looked at it like quality could be halved, for double the production, or something like that.

like 1 ton of 300Q could instead be 2 ton at 150Q, it kinda balances out that every one buys mid-range q and sells high. perhaps allowing a setting, so that when players notice a shortage of supplies, we can convert quality into extra quantity?

just a thought

I agree.

The GM keeps telling use no ones buys high Q why not let me make double or triple production instead of high q

that's a really good idea

Now i'm afraid of putting the greens in and just follow the corps with reds which are in shortage of supplies. Because while they are in greens, they will end up too high on the best price strategy so i will be skipping all the greens for now.

If i do how ever, see any reds do become green and they stay on too high for long period of time, it will too be deleted, just like the gold company did. Not all should end up like the gold did.

Just as long as i see or should we say (we see) each month as some left and none sales on best price strategy on their market situation.

Thank you, Anthony.

This is another thing that totally confuses me and takes away the playability. You can pull up a corp type pop-up and see, when the over supply has been too big for too long, you can see the closure of hundreds of a corp type in one month. Obviously a GM intervention, no one player can close 100 corps of the same type in one month on a regular basis. The strange thing is, you look at the supply graph for several months or a year later and there is very little, if any, reduction in supply. What on earth am I to make of that?

So I am presuming these are C3 corps closing and along with the GMs policy of not interfering too severely with market trends this doesnt effect the supply much. But the maths of that just doesn't add up which ever way you compute it (except in base SC number system maybe).

We need transparency people! I call for a non governmental quango to be set up for an independant enquiry. And I expect the results by 2015.

Who's up for the chair? Romeo Vicardi maybe...

If you notice, many c3 corps close just as they are old enough to be purchased by players. Just as soon as they mature to that point they close and another type of corp is built in that c3. This is most notable on FB. This is GM supply manipulation and how it's controlled.

So many times I have tried to purchase a c3 corp only to see it vanish before it matures to that point. There is no other way for this to happen unless it's direct GM intervention. Manipulation keeps us in check and keeps players from making any kind of profit.

Crafty makes the point I brought up two months ago when you all jumped all over me. Soon... We will have only one way to play and that's the forced direction of the gm's. With little to no maneuverability or freedoms to do anything with your corps.

how does all these corps buy 180ish Q, and sell 270ish Q? i mean, where is the 180 Q comming from? the c3s, which are getting slim on some worlds now.

if we where able to adjust our quality into production, it would give us a safety nets of sorts for dramatic events. and might even give some teeth to common markets?

it makes since to me anyways.

I agree it would give teeth to cm allowing for local trading and, more selfsuffiency... BtW andy what was the point of removing 100Q and making it 120 can we go back to 100Q again

Why did say this shit for?!...

Any way. I would rather try and keep out of trouble as much as possible and keep to the code. I just hope i don't get banned from the game as i do enjoy playing it and watching the numbers grow up or down base on their market situation. I don't want to get paranoid and start causing trouble to any one. I'd rather keep it to my self and just accept whatever the game has to offer, just as long i keep the rules and not blaming others or the gamemaster since they have more power over others on the account holders.

Thank you all. Anthony.

As you know, it's always been that way Orbiter. If things are becoming more dependant on producing quality that is demanded instead of expecting money to appear from nowhere then isn't that a step in the right direction, for a closer to reality simulation at least.

I'm not sure what you mean by our being able to adjust our quality into production...you can adjust to make 120 to 330Q at your desire.

This is strange. As soon as i deleted the gold company, the numbers on the chart has been stable if that is the word. This only happened when i deleted it and it gone back to 90m on average and in reds. If i brought it back to the country, it'll start to fluctuate back to green and red, so on. What the hell. Something is up with it, if any one noticed this.

Thanks, Anthony.

A lot of corps fluctuate wildly Anthony. Gold is one for sure. You should judge them from their year to year performance really as monthly is too unstable. I have a few gold corps that I accept sometimes make losses as overall they seem to make more than they lose. I havent got actual numbers on that, just seem that way...so good enough for me!

Right now the way i find it you lose money selling higher Q goods

I've tested both cases.

Buy 120Q you get 200Q(when upgraded)
Buy 200Q you get 280Q(when upgraded)

In both cases you only gain 80Q points giving you 80% the price you paid. So if it costs 100 you can sell it for 180.

The problem here is that no one buys high Q so you have to sell it for less as "Andy" stated. So really your buying 200Q and selling it as 260-270Q
But with 200Q you can sell it for 10-20% over market because that it what everyone wants ATM.
This further proves that the GM can give a rats butt(didn't use the other word because i could get banned for bad language lol). There ENTIRE game is flawed to be honest. They are adding 450Q fighting level to FB but navies still sit at 120Q? When was the last time i saw an update that came with lots of praise and was something that directly in-packed playibilty.

Andy knows everything so maybe he can explain this mistake in the econ system or maybe shead some light on why no ones buying high Q goods?

Thanks Crafty for clarifying that.

Super, it worked out to be 190 quality to get 277.5 quality with full upgrades. I've been testing this, so far it's quite well on 190.

Thanks, Anthony.

Well you definately buy under 200, I've been sticking with 170 it seemed to do better than 165 what I was at. But who intentially buys products at >200? so someone buys this junk? still puzzled, I guess the any quality noobs, and c3's I guess I'm ripping people off =(

There is a need for products of 200+ and even 300+ quality.

Some corps save money when they average the quality of their supplies by mixing quality.

Ideally, a corp buys high quality for cheap supplies it uses in large numbers, and 120 quality for all other supplies. To get the average product quality to around 296, it's often cost-effective to buy some supplies of 300+ quality.

Our Dear Leader once said that corps that sell very high quality products get a subsidy. The buyers pay as if the product has a cheaper quality. The automation pays the subsidy to the seller.

It's hard to monitor that voodoo math. But many corps selling 300+ quality are very profitable.

I might try 300 quality on one corporation and see if it makes any difference.

Anthony.

The maximum quality settings for existing corporations is 250. And 350 quality for automation settings.

Anthony.

Check this out


The C3 Army at War Level 11 Units Quality
LR Land Division: 2@ 200Q
Land Defense Division: 5@ 400Q
Small Supply Unit: 8@ 300Q
Large Supply Unit: 8@ 200Q
Defensive Helicopter Wings: 15@ 400Q
Interceptor Wings: 60@ 400Q
Air Force Attack Unit: 1@ 200Q
Attack and Bombing Wing: 2@ 200Q
2 responses Stealth Bomber Wing: 30@ 450Q
Garrisons at all targets: Many 500Q

Lol and after destorying all that you get a WHOPPING!!! 11T CASH WOOT OMG OMG THE GM HAS BLESSED US SOOOOO MUCH.

We only have to take out 15-60 400Q wings(which you cant buy you have to buy 350Q then upgrade yourself).

Then we get to fight 450Q stealth bomber wings and 500Q garrison. All for 11T cash thats awesome.

Heres a real idea for warring Instead of cash how about also giving us the opition to take the Gold coins = to the market value of the war level(winning war level 11= 150GC. Maybe they should also look into adding 1M pop per war level so in the end you get 18M pop nation and 150GC. that be alot more of an incentive for warring since the war game costs your countries first born with no promises of making a profit

Awesome Super dude. You done well.

Really though dont that seem rediclous?
Fighting levels that even players cant obtain and the game does more damage then you can?

In one attack you lose 150 mid range to stealth bombers/normal heli removal(thats 45B in weapons per atttack @ 300Q)
45B per attack in losses * 45attacks needed for removal of helis/stealth bombers = 2.02T

Plus i still have to destroy the targets/garrison
100,000 per shell * 75,000 per attack * 3 for Q effect = 22.5B

Now you take 2attacks to remove garrisons/destroy the target(remember capitals and city's sometimes need 3 attacks)

50targets per war * 2attacks = 100 attacks
100 attacks * 22.5B = 2.25T

We are @ 4.5T is costs from just using tank/art shells and mid range missile batteries, theres still other ammo types/weapons to account for.

The GM need to really rethink the warring situation. The MATH doesn't lie.

The need to fix it. 1.5T * war level seems more reasonable with the fixes in the game.

War level 11 would be roughly 17T in cash which is more then it is now but also more welcome to players in terms of making money. The GM failed to remember stealth bombers can double attack and attack "anything" this causes great losses and very quickly eats away profit.
-------------Side note-------------
I just did a C3 war and i blew up all the cities/capital/ around 10 factories and i only got 9 almost 10 WI points out of 40.
The GM really needs to double the deaths done per war. I shouldnt have to blow up every city and the capital 3 or 4 times over to get the points needed to win

Well,im not much into side of the war machine type,im more of a economy side type.So, i wouldnt know much about it.Im sorry.