GM's need to back off a little (Fearless Blue)

I posted this in another thread but Tom M stated it deserves its own thread in hopes the GM takes note:

I think the GMs should just leave us alone for a couple months before they change anything else if they feel the need. Every thing they do effects everything. Mostly bad for us, but things calm down in a few days. With all the constant changes nothing gets to even out and no one can get adjusted. It can be a real pain and especialy confusing to the "Young ones"

Slow down and think?...... that's just not capitalistic!

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

...constant changes nothing gets to even out and no one can get adjusted.<!-/Quote-!>

Agreed.

I think the GMs need to stop changing the game so rapidly. I would suggest that for the next 2 months, no 'new' features be implimented. How about fixing bugs in the War Game? There are many things which need to be fixed before anything new can be added.
I think its not too much to ask- if anything we're giving the GMs a two month holiday...
T

I can distinctly recall "change" being the thing that most vets desired. And with every new change came a resounding, "bravo GM!"


I strongly warned most of you on nearly all the dramatic changes you requested and encouraged the gm to implement. The many voices of reason were drowned out in favor of a select grouping of veterans with a clear agenda, and an impressive execution at pushing GM to believe that this is what everyone wanted and would be great for the game.

I don't like to say I told you so, but I told you so. I also told you, "be careful what you wish for, it won't always be what you expect."

Just a random though from my random thought generator. I don't mean for this to trump Homer's point. But the point he is making has been echoed for months before some implementations and nothing changed.

I think GM would do well to ignore the whining of players and rightfully

i called once when the GM didnt show any resonce to the game in about 3 months, was woried about the game in general(i was a newb about 8 months into it) and one of my first posts, saw game changes now and the, good. THE GAME IS ALIVE. Thing is it was good to hear from them , not to now actualy partake in the actaule playing of the game. I recall a small change, i wondered why my country was losing tons of money.. a vet told me, just ride it out it will go back to normal, it did after about 2 or 3 days. this happened once a month, the "butterfly efect" where a small change effected everything. same as this programe. no biggie, we delt with it. we vets had to explain the same thing again to new people, perhaps once or every 2 months. NOW its going on to the point where the GAME cant get a grasp of whats going on, thing are tiltering when they shouldnt and cant recover from the multible changes. riding it out now is hard to do and imposible f

Wendy, it's fine to say "I told you so!" in hindsight, but that will get us nowhere. This post is directed at the GMs to slow down NOW, not to say "We shouldn't have done that!" I do recall having conversations with you on EXACTLY this topic, where you said EXACTLY what we are suggesting now.

The big problem right now is that the updates are coming thick and fast, and as a player with limited time, I cannot spend hours just scrolling through my countries changing settings every 2 weeks. I'm sure many players feel the same way.

Also, Government Costs... We know where the money goes. The GMs pockets. So the recent rise... hmm... I'm going to shush now before the mute button is activated.

Cheers,
T

Wendy, I know your just itching to condem tom or me, let it go, i bitched to the GM well befor you did and i think it got one reply, going back about a year ago or more when things got out of hand. and tom, your right, people are finaly listening. At this point, i couldnt give a rats ass about my trillions, as far as im concerned, i beat this game many times(if theres a such a thing lol) im concernened about the future and where its headed. My only thing i think i could say to the gm's is to stop playing the game, we are NOT trying to beat YOU. WE(membership) want to play each OTHER, not YOU! YOU(GM)need to manage the game, improve on it, make it more inviting and have US vets stay longer to help the YOUNG ONES to cement simcounties future. And maybe, the only way is to for now, let it run..................

Eh, I don't figure I have any influence in the decisions they make so whatever on that end.

I think a roll-up of changes in a quarterly update would probably be better than constant small changes, but then there is the issue that the GMs very clearly don't understand the net effect of any specific change, the changes are always poorly documented and explained, and the changes usually are bugged for the next three years.

I don't know what to say other than, "It can't be helped." More could be said, but there's little point.

EDIT: Frankly, the war game should just be removed. There's no point in even having it. If both players understand the wargame, multiple factors ensure neither player can win.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

EDIT: Frankly, the war game should just be removed. There's no point in even having it. If both players understand the wargame, multiple factors ensure neither player can win.<!-/Quote-!>

I can't believe it's not butter! Proly the only reasonable thing left to do. Trash and revamp completely. If you guys can't come up with a better way to war, outsource or consult with some gms in games with a thriving war model.

To be honest, I wouldn't mind the war game being reduced to axis and allies rolls of the dice. If the battles are left to chance those who excel at econ would rule since they could purchase and support larger armies. Maybe an oversimplification but I cannot quantify in words how disgusted our war games makes me feel at times.

Funny thing is if you google Simcountry you'll find loads of outside forum posts where gamers congregate and they are full of "That game is going to die" becuase of resets, charging to play some worlds, and the list goes on. This game has been "dying" or "doomed" for over a decade now. But here lies simcountry. As much as we all hate it, we love this game all the more.

I just wonder why the GM seems to do that pisses every player off regardless if they mean it or not. It just seems that is what is happening repeatedly.

I think it is just some big conspiracy to get you all to quit once this top secret government project to scan your hardrives and your surfing habits is completed.

The last paragraph was a joke...(for those of you who are too dense to realize it on your own)

I agree with Homer and Tom......let the game ride for a while.

The government cost posts that I've read indicates that a good many of players are having trouble in that area.

When my gov. costs skyrocketed on GR, I cut services, Social security, etc, and they went back down.....I have no clue if that would bale out those who are having severe problems with the costs or not.

I did have something to do with one of the most recent updates that was released by the GM's. I complained 4 or 5 times to them in emails about the fact that I had countries that I bought from other players that had 100 fortifications in them. Being an econ only player, it hurt my economy due to paying soldiers sitting on their arses in the forts.

The GM's were gracious enough in the last update to include letting presidents destroy their forts without that annoying blue screen saying 'your defense is too low'.

Changes

36 hours after this discussion started, the 'Gamemaster' un-leashed arguably the largest changes, "announced" or otherwise, in recent past.

There are so many ways that profits have tried to be manipulated down-ward recently, it's not even worth trying to list them all.

But, take a look now, at the workers used in "High Tech Services", CEO corporation, as it has nearly doubled for High Tech Engineers since the time that it was announced that "corporations would increase in size by about 10%":

Current Employment and Salaries in the Company

Occupation		Employees		Estimated employees at 100% Hiring		Salary
Low Level Worker		52,000		52,000		19,800	I Inanna All worlds 05 Apr 2012 08:47Link CP you are thinking about "Services" Corporations. They use about 40K HT Engineers. "High Tech" Services use 80K last I built one and this was a few weeks ago. The increase is about 7250, up from 80,000 which in this case is actually less than but really close than 10%. I'm not trying to argue the point, I just wanted to make sure you weren't confused or mistaken. I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure HTServices always used 80K HT Engineers. A Andy All worlds 05 Apr 2012 21:05Link There were no changes in the numbers of workers of any type, in any corporation for quite some time except for several nuclear corporations. Numbers of high tech engineers have not been changed. The example above does not show a change. This is unclear. There were many changes in the last 5 years and indeed, numbers may have increased significantly. On average, over the years, the numbers of workers in corporations went from 150.000 to 250.000. luckily, or we would not be able to run nearly a million corporations game wide, 6 times per day. Some changes in the composition of corporations occurs automatically, when you upgrade the corporation (efficiency). Then, the number of workers declines and the numbers of managers and high tech people increases a little. This has always been part of the game. recent changes were aimed at proportional reduction in the base numbers in the game. base salaries and base product A Arccuk (Little Upsilon) All worlds 06 Apr 2012 00:54Link Here are the worker requirements for a couple of UNUPGRADED corp types (notes taken mid november 2011) :- HT Services Low level workers 56000 Medium level workers 57000 High level workers 22000 Low level managers 4600 Medium level managers 3800 High level managers 720 Executives 600 High tech engineers 77000 High tech seniors 15400 High tech executives 1220 Services Low level workers 93000 Medium level workers 74000 High level workers 22000 Low level managers 7700 Medium level managers 4900 High level managers 750 Executives 400 High tech engineers 38000 High tech seniors 7600 High tech executives 550 I'll let someone else have a look at the precise differances between then and now, however I feel the need to point out that the reason I have not updated the spreadsheet since then is that worker types upgraded too often to keep ac A Arccuk (Little Upsilon) All worlds 06 Apr 2012 00:56Link PS. If anyone wants the worker requirements from any corp in november 2011 let me know. At the time I had made a note of all requirements for corps avaailable to build on WG at level 4 and below. C CorporatePartner (Golden Rainbow) All worlds 06 Apr 2012 01:02Link All corporations have seen dramatic increases in the use of all High Tech workers, gradually increasing in every corporation over the past [earth] year. These changes have continued until now, and this has been closely followed in many corporations, including High Tech Services, as listed above, which previously used about 40-45,000 High Tech Engineers. In fact, the number of High Tech Executives has increased much more, around 5-10 times, and if you look at the actual data, it is very easy to confirm. Corporations in the High Tech category used to use about 250 High Tech Executives, and that was before the "increase of 10% in corporation size". In addition, the number of High Tech Seniors has also dramatically changed, where the numbers are much higher than before, and the comparison of numbers needed to the High Tech Engineer amounts has also dramatically changed, so that what once was about 4 High Tech Engineers per 1 High Tech Sen C CorporatePartner (Little Upsilon) All worlds 06 Apr 2012 01:54Link [Example of a corporation that used to have --0-- high tech workers.] Corporation type: Cattle (CEO/private, upgraded corporation, with medium (310) salaries) Current Employment and Salaries in the Company Occupation Employees Estimated employees at 100% Hiring Salary Low Level Worker 82,500 82,500 20,460 Medium Level Worker 78,750 78,750 27,280 High Level Worker 14,500 14,500 34,100 Low Level Manager 13,500 13,500 40,920 Medium Level Manager 8,850 8,850 54,560 High Level Manager 2& C CorporatePartner (Fearless Blue) All worlds 06 Apr 2012 02:08Link [Example of a "new" corporation type with highly un-balanced workers] Corporation type: Weapon Quality Upgrades (CEO/private, upgraded, with low (157) salaries) Current Employment and Salaries in the Company Occupation Employees Estimated employees at 100% Hiring Salary Low Level Worker 11,250 11,250 10,362 Medium Level Worker 9,000 9,000 13,816 High Level Worker 50,000 50,000 17,270 Low Level Manager 15,350 15,350 20,724 Medium Level Manager 14,200 14,200 27,632 Hi S SuperSoldierRCP (Little Upsilon) All worlds 06 Apr 2012 02:57Link Medical materials Occupation Employees Estimated employees at 100% Hiring Salary Low Level Worker 77,000 Medium Level Worker 87,000 High Level Worker 17,000 Low Level Manager 11,400 Medium Level Manager 8,800 High Level Manager 2,640 Executive 380 380 High Tech Engineer 46,800 High Tech Senior 10,600 High Tech Executive 520 thats upgraded look @ them on any world explain to me why they need 99K Low level workers and 98K medium level workers...Thats a shit ton of workers. Id love to hear a GM reasoning on that When your ready Andy... Id love to hear the GM reasoning for the need of so many workers. *waits for response* C CorporatePartner All worlds 06 Apr 2012 04:47Link The general message is what's really important here, not bickering endlessly over this-or-that detail. And, frankly, the one who should have addressed this and the many other perplexing, deleterious, and ubiquitous changes is Jozi. There was a "Jozi Chat" promised many times, but he has not been heard from for a very long time, more than an [earth] year or more. And, really, his absence has really shown, as it has apparently allowed some "rogue" changes to the fundamental structure of the Galaxy/site in his absence. I Inanna All worlds 06 Apr 2012 07:50Link <!-Quote-!>Quote: And, really, his absence has really shown,<!-/Quote-!> This is very obvious. Painfully so in many cases. A Andy (Kebir Blue) All worlds 06 Apr 2012 08:54Link The number of workers being so large was explained many times but I am glad to repeat. There are two main reasons: 1. You cannot have small corporations like in the real world because then, countries would have 500.000 corporations each and no one will be able to manage. you can have 1000 services corporations with a tiny man power each and a tiny profit or loss or you can have 1 with 1000 times the production, man power and profit/loss. 2. Each corporation requires many transactions each game month. There are 80.000 to 100.000 in each world and they require 2 million multiple data table transactions daily on each world. Running 2 or 3 times more corporations will, even with the current generation of the fastest 8 processor servers, be impossible. The population keeps growing. In the past year we have gradually increased the size of corporations by an average of 15.000 or maybe even a little more. < Sign in to reply