W3C - Crypto Space, Block chain & NFTs

We are repeatedly asked, also by interested people outside Simcountry about the possibility to participate in asset registration in a block chain.

Simcountry has a limited availability of countries, and other game assets.
Block chain provides a proof of ownership and a trading platform.

we are interested in your views.

Could a trading platform outside the game be used to cheat? Would we be using a cryptocurrency?

Asset registration is always nice. Even if it costs some money.

Crypto mining... I welcome it. Just a fair warning it will be HORRIBLY imbalanced. The player base is small. Only a few people will know how cryptos work. Of those few even fewer will have a (semi)professional rig suitable for mining and of those even fewer will want to put it use to generate whatever you come up with. The guy/girl that does do it though will completely mess up the tiny little market.

Even if you generate some interest for it outside of this game it will never be a decent sized market.

I think it would be amazing for the game. It would probably bring a lot of new players in also.

As someone completely ignorant to cryptocurrency, not sure how this would affect everyday gameplay?

We also think it could increase interest in Simcountry.

There are many variations of what could be done.

we could create our own crypto (already did) and allow conversions between gold coins and SC-coins stored in block chain.

There will be initially no market and we could keep it close to ourselves and the player base.
Maybe open it to others and to trading.

Another variation is NFTs.

Countries could become NFTs if the player decides to do so.
We could enhance the possibilities of players to create beautiful countries, personal sets of objects uploaded and when anyone clicks on the NFT, it will show the current map.
maybe damaged by war but ownership sticks.


The crypto space is marked by:

1. Limited availability - there are only so many coins and countries/other assets.
2. Proof of ownership using the blockchain.


Just ideas.

feel free to post your opinions.

My first question would be: Why?

What existing problem in Simcountry would be addressed by adding this?

In my own case, I see this more as a solution in search of a problem.

My second question would be: How?

How would the game and player base benefit from this?
How could it be manipulated?

In my case, I'm a fairly technical person but I don't really understand the "ins and outs" of cryptocurrency. I get why it was developed, for criminals and paranoids to have something to carry around value that is practically invisible, untraceable, completely anonymous, and outside government regulation.

Why would a nicely done, but niche, web-based game need something like this?

We are no crypto lovers at all.
we think that owning bit coins is like having shares in a non existing corporation.

However, they created two important areas of interest:

1. people like to own something that has a limited supply.
2. They created the Block chain feature. It makes it possible to establish decentralized proof of ownership. The technology is now used in many applications and is here to stay.

Blockchain is independent of any crypto currency which has never materialized as a currency.

What it can do for us:

There is a lot of interest in games that incorporate crypto technology.
There is a lot of interest in NFTs.
Most NFTs mean nothing and buying them is a hype.
There are however experiments with NFTs that represent an asset.

All this works within the suggested reality that limited supply of any items, combined with an excellent way to prove ownership is here to stay and evolving.

Being part of it makes sense.

We think that if some of our game assets will exist in that world it might generate a lot of interest in Simcountry.

for our players, owning a country which is also an NFT will establish ownership outside the game, that cannot change.
wars will have to end in a payment to the winner but NFT countries will remain with their owner.

if at any time, there will be more interest in this kind of Simcountry assets, players could trade them.

We did not decide anything at all.

we are experimenting with the technology and are looking at possibilities to use it.

Assets could be:

Coins, NFT-countries and special items that have a real meaning in the game.

I think making regular nations part of an NFT blockchain would be a bad idea. You're making a nation that is completely unconquerable. If I'm an expanding empire, there is literally nothing in-game I can do to add that nation to my empire.

Conversely, if I just want to antagonize someone, I just add that nation into an NFT blockchain and then there's nothing anyone can do to remove/prevent me. If you as the game admin chose to ban/remove me you'd have to pay me or I could potentially take you to court for "stealing" something I now own, and I have the blockchain to prove it.

Finally, if there's a large world-wide Federation war, NFT registered nations could be used as unblockable transfer points between battle fronts. I think if you would like to make a nation part of a blockchain, it needs to be in a region/continent/world that is specifically called out as "Peaceful".

Coins, maybe? I think they're to numerous, and potentially to quickly added or expended, to be good candidates. If I use 30 coins to buy a nation, and one or two are in an NFT blockchain, do I still own the coins afterwards? Or the nation/Enterprise/Corp they bought? I don't know enough about this.

I think a better option besides Nations and/or Coins might be player titles, at least as a place to start.

I'm interested in your ideas here, Andy!

Banedon Runestar,

Making countries into NFTs has consequences.

You should however consider that the idea of waging war and not conquering a country when you win, was raised here many times.
A war could end with the loser paying the winner an amount of money and keep the country, NFT or not.

Some are scared of war because of the risk of losing their country.
Many "main countries" are now also war protected.

Registering a country as an NFT to block some war action will make it more challenging and by the way, not for free.

Owning a country which is an NFT, visibly destroyed in a war, for everyone to see?
The owner will fix it quickly or remove it from the blockchain.

I don't think that a country with no assets, just registered should be allegeable to registration as an NFT. there could be some asset conditions or other conditions to do so.

We are not done here at all.
We need to understand the consequences. what it adds and does it make enough sense to do it.

Hi Andy,

Like I said earlier, I'm not really up on how blockchains work.
I have no idea how hard it would be to add or remove something like a nation from a blockchain.
I'm raising points that might be useful, might be something you've not thought of, or might be completely irrelevant.

As I understand War Protection, nations under it can't even be war declaration targets.
If a nation is in a blockchain, they can be declared on, but they can't be captured.
I'm just pointing out some ways I can see that potentially being manipulated or abused.

Making a bunch of unique titles beyond the default set might be a place to start.
No game play repercussions, but something unique and distinctive that someone might like to have.
Things like "Grand Pooba", "Lord High Mucky Muck", "Head Cook and Dishwasher", things like that.

been into crypto currency for sometime now and trade the likes of XRP,Btc, Dodge,eth,etc. tho I don't have full idea about Non fungible tokens. NFT which is a digital asset that exists on a blockchain, this blockchain serves as a public ledger, allowing anyone to verify the asset's authenticity and ownership.
So if you own a country as an NFT you can easily prove you own it, No one can manipulate it in any way, you can also sell it, and in some cases this will earn the original creator resale royalties, Or you can hold it forever, resting comfortably knowing your country is secured on a blockchain.
Now NFTs are usually bought with cryptocurrency, and the blockchain keeps a record of this transactions. While anyone can view the country, the buyer has the status of being the official owner, a kind of digital bragging rights!
Some benefit of owning a country as an NFT might include, Ownership, Probable Scarcity, and most importantly immutability! (Now When a traditional online game platform shuts down, users traditionally lose all of their in-game purchases. NFTs, however, exist independently of a specific gaming platform and live on the blockchain itself).
I'd also state that despite the intention to adopt NFTs there are also hurdles to overcome, Most notably, these assets needs to be more appealing and intuitive to people who may not be highly tech-oriented. And because countries registered as an NFTs possess intrinsic value, there's a risk that some will be used predominantly as speculative assets, with the hope of selling them for future profits instead of using the assets within the gaming ecosystem as intended, and other hurdles too..
In conclusion NFTs is an emerging technology, and it needs more exposure..
for me the idea is welcomed!
I stand to be corrected tho.. thanks.

Thanks for your views.

As to not being able to conquer a country which is registered as an NFT, this is true but we see it as viable option.

In the past, there were repeated requests for such a feature.

the proposals were all aimed at wars without losing the country if the war is lost. Instead, the winner will be compensated with an amount of money, paid by the losing country.

These proposals aimed at making war less disastrous. Making it easier for players to decide to go to war without the danger of losing everything.

If we decide to go this way, we will have to make it possible for players to enhance the way countries look. better painting, more customizing of objects on the map and severe destruction of the map if a war is lost.

It means that some of these NFTs will be beautiful but could turn to garbage, in view of anyone who cares to look into it.

This might be a reason for players who lost wars, to either fix it all very quickly or unregister the NFT.

As to value outside Simcountry, I agree to what is said here but it depends on the interest in the game and in our assets.
The idea is that such a development might generate interest.

I support the war compensation thing and also what about other types of wars
Like where we can occupy a city or county in someone country

Occupying a small part of a country can happen during wars but it cannot be a stable situation.
Parts of countries do not exist as entities.

If we implement this feature, it will be either an occupation of the entire country as it is now or no occupation at all.

Right
I mean like annexing parts of land or cities in a country and yes we would not occupy the entire country, just the annexed part
I believe adding more reasons of war could really boost activity

Please reread what I wrote.

Implementing such a feature will be complex and may add a bit but not change the war game.

We have just made a huge change in the war game on all worlds (FB was done before).
Before the change, there was a big discussion on how important it is.

I am not sure is anyone at all used this new feature.

On paper, these changes are essential.
In practice, many times they are not so important.

There were two players who registered for the war world.

Ive said it before that annexing countries should be extremely rare and require the security council to be involved. I fully support long term occupations of countries. The expiration timers of wars would have to be paused while troops are occupying though to make it work. I think it would be cool to maintain an occupation of a country and have the other player try to kick them out with some kind of insurgency action.

You could even have some kind of a bonus for the defender called an insurgency bonus that gives them extra fighting power when a certain percent of their country is occupied.

Thanks John.
we will think about it. There are more things that need to be done to make this work.

Also I just want to add the country that is being occupied should have to give up a percentage of their monthly profit to the occupier based on how much of the country is occupied. That would be cool also

@john galt
yes i agree

Convert SC$ to SC Gold Coins.
Convert SC Gold Coins to SC Crypto Coin.
Convert SC Crypto Coin to Bitcoin.
Convert Bitcoin to "Real World Currency" such as USD.

lol.. @ gamemiser I can't wait to see SC coin Listed on PancakeSwap then followed by hobit and others Soon..

I agree with GameMiser. I would like to see game cash converted to gold coins, which can then be traded on a crypto exchange. That would add real world value to game cash. I have no problem financing whales with my economic empire in exchange for USD. Credit card warriors are good for the game, we need to bring them back.