| Michael | Friday, August 26, 2016 - 08:39 pm 
Is there another server problem on White Giant as alot of goods have large negative values -such as Chemicals -9,000,000 and Services at -15,000,000. Affecting how corporations perform. |
| SeizeForce | Saturday, August 27, 2016 - 12:57 am
It's because of idiots who keep buying and selling things in other worlds. We had an oversupply of pharmaceutical products in Kebir Blue that is only just righting itself after like a game year now. |
| Zen | Saturday, August 27, 2016 - 08:49 pm
On White giant there are 2972 services corporations, which produce around 10,402,000,000 services per month( with contracts ). In the past few months the world demand for services hasn't went under 25 billion. Simple solution is to build more services corps.
There are 2682 chemical corporations. They produce a base of 4,224,150,000 and with contracts again it is probably lower in the market supply. Chemical corporations use a lot of mining materials, which most players do not produce. So the supplies needed to make chemicals are much lower on white giant. Making lower profit for chemical corporations. However chemical corporations are still profitable, and services corporations are very profitable in most cases.
I think this is normal. Nothing wrong with the servers. The market is still pretty bad, but there is a lot of profit to invest in. Which is why I started a new empire on White Giant to invest in. Hopefully, it will become my largest econ empire. My corporations are never short on supplies. I like to keep a low water mark of 10 months with an order strategy of 20 months. This is only on white giant. In most cases I use the default settings.
Edit: I would encourage other players to invest in White Giant as well. Together we can #MakeWhiteGiantGreatAgain |
| John West | Saturday, August 27, 2016 - 11:56 pm
I set Low Water Marks to higher numbers than Order Quantities to avoid hitting "Spending Caps."
For example:
Low Water Mark: 250,000 anti-aircraft missiles
Order Quantity: 2,500 anti-aircraft missiles
If you did the reverse, anti-aircraft missiles probably wouldn't even be ordered.
I build stockpiles over time, and if I want a lot more of a particular commodity then I order in all my countries and/or enterprises, then move them via spaceports where needed.
It doesn't make sense to me why people do the opposite, setting Order Quantities considerably higher than Low Water Marks. How do they even get their supplies? You can only order so many resources at once (which I am against as I think if you have the cash then you should have no hardcoded limitations to spend it). . .I assume the game orders some supplies that are required for countries' populations even if your Order Strategies conflict with your "Spending Cap," although probably not according to your configuration. Furthermore I assume corporations do not have "Spending Spaces." In the past I had order strategies for weapons that were higher than my "Spending Space" allowed, and upon inspecting my trade page I observed that orders were NOT being made.
250,000 missiles / 2,500 missiles = 100 months / 6 months = 16.66 real days to accumulate this example stockpile.
If I were to Order Quantity 250,000, or a higher number than the Low Water Mark as most people likely do, than I would expect to come back in 16 days and see no missiles.
My corporations Low Water Mark is 24 and Order Quantity 9. My countries Low Water Mark is 24 and Order Quantity 7. This means every month if they have less than 2 years of supplies, these entities order more than half a year of supplies. Remember that your corporations only requires 1 month of supply to produce. I have noticed reading the chatter on this forum about order strategies that it seems that most people do the reverse, and as such I suspect they have low "Spending Space" (if they have any at all).
I would like to say again that I do not understand why there are "Spending Caps." I suppose it's to force markets to remain stabilized. If you have the cash you should be able to use it freely just as you can in the real world, as this is a SIMulation after all. . .unless the only government type you could choose is communism, there is absolutely no logical explanation to me why these "Spending Caps" exist, because they do not exist in the real world. Last I checked I could choose other government types besides communism, such as 'dicatorship' and 'democracy.' On that note (not to change the subject), why can I not choose 'republic,' but I suppose the developers are unaware of the difference between 'democracy' and 'republic,' so whatever . . . If somebody wants to order 100s or even 1000s of trillions of dollars of resources, they shouldn't expect to receive it immediately because there likely isn't enough supply, as well they should expect to pay a premium. That is how markets work, because in the real world there ARE massive movements of currency (see stock exchanges) made daily . . . and these traders (hedge funds, central banks, etc) know better than to make such massive orders as my rather extreme example, but there is no such thing as "Spending Caps," and they can at any time choose to make such orders. In simcountry enterprises have a lot more currency (perhaps inflated over a thousand+ years) than in the real world, and so speaking relatively I would say 100T simcash is probably roughly equivalent to like 1 or 10B USD, so perhaps my example of dropping 100T or 1000T commodity orders is not even so unrealistic after all. Anyway, that what I think about "Spending Caps," but these caps are here so I adjust order strategies accordingly to ensure I get what I've ordered as well keep my "Spending Space" free for manual orders.
While on the subject of corporation configurations I will mention that I believe it is best to set Corporate Taxes and Profit Transfers to 0 if possible because you will still receive the money because corporations can only hold so much cash and will release excess cash held anyway to the controlling enterprise or country. This will drastically increase the market value of the corporations allowing for IPOs if desired, as well forcing competing enterprises to give you a lot more cash if they decide to bid on your corporations. This will also encourage other enterprises to invest in your countries thus increasing revenue from "Income from Enterprises" which can be found on the Profit & Loss page. It is my perspective that all you are achieving with taxes and profit transfers is allowing CEOs to buy your economy cheaply and move it out to other countries with lower tax rates if they wished to do so (also known as 'outsourcing').
#MakeWhiteGiantGreatAgain |
| Zen | Sunday, August 28, 2016 - 04:38 am
John West that is because I change my supply quality as my corporations upgrade. I dont want 2 years worth of 150q supplies when my corporation gets upgraded, I also dont want 215q supplies in an unupgraded corporation. That would make sense however in an old country with all upgraded corporations. I may start doing that. Most of my countries only last a few decades before I sell them off to another player. When you close a corporation all supplies in the corporation are lost. My corporations never ever run short on supplies with the standard order strategy.
#MakeWhiteGiantGreatAgain |
| John West | Sunday, August 28, 2016 - 08:00 am
That business strategy is understandable, although not something I would have expected to see. I do not think most people share a strategy similar to yours (that is building countries specifically to sell), but I could be wrong as I do not know what people are up to with these countries of course. What I explained is in regards to setting up corporations for let's say 'set-and-forget' more permanent operation as I assume most people are interested in figuring out how to configure a corporation/country in general just so that it is profitable, and so I just threw in my .02 on order strategies because you mentioned order strategies. Since you also mentioned your corporations don't run short on supplies, I'll also point out that my corporations do not run short on supplies either with the order strategy I laid out in the case anybody would be wondering.
#MakeWhiteGiantGreatAgain |
| Michael | Sunday, August 28, 2016 - 04:34 pm
John West. I would like to know and am curious as to your definition and difference between democracy and republic. Most republics but not all are for the most part democracies. best Example the United States (sometimes considered to be the world's first modern republic).
I generally set my buying strategy to either Best or do the Follow Product which first field I put -8 and then 8 for second field. |
| John West | Sunday, August 28, 2016 - 07:43 pm
Yes I use 'best' for buying and selling strategies as well. With fully upgraded corporations, you shouldn't see even surplus products go unsold for long.
In regards to your question, a 'democracy' is direct rule by the people. That is where the people vote on every matter of state, and the majority always decides the path of the society. Sometimes they even vote in a dictator, but they also vote them out at times as well. Whenever a large group congregates in the capital city of a 'democracy,' the laws can be altered to no limit. These laws are usually not complex and regularly changes. 'Democracies' do not have constitutions, only CULTural traditions. 'Democracies' are usually extremely nationalistic. As far as I know, there are no 'democracies' in the real world. An example of a 'democracy' is ancient Athens. 'Demo[s]-cracy' s a combination of two Greek words, 'mob' and 'rule.' 'Demos-cracy' literally means 'mob-rule.'
A 'REPublic' is rule by REPresentatives, which are put in power by majority vote from various local areas. Most nations in the real world are 'republics.' An example of a 'republic' is ancient Rome, which was ruled by a "senate" of representatives that represented different districts of Rome. Sometimes these representatives vote in dictators ("consuls," and later as Roman expanded, "emperors"), but they also vote them out at times as well. Sometimes these dictators were voted in with term limits, but often also reelected. Whenever the representatives meet in the capital cities, laws can be altered to no limit without something like a constitution, but usually not with the potential of wild fluctuations as with a 'democracy.' Laws are usually implemented gradually and these laws unfortunately often times get overly complex and bloated with self-interests. 'Republic' is a combination of two Latin words, 'res' (thing/affair) and 'publica.' (people) 'Res-publica' literally means 'people's-affair.'
When Rome expanded to control provinces, governors were appointed by the Senate in Rome. Because these provinces had their own autonomous leadership, they were their own sovereign nation-states under the military alliance of the Roman 'Republic,' and as such the Roman 'Republic' was the head of an 'Empire.' Similarily, when the Kingdom of England expanded to control other kingdoms, the kings and queens of England became 'Emperors,' (usually with the English king/queen holding the titles of king/queen of it's provinces), and thus the Kingdom of England became the 'British Empire.' America is also an 'Empire' today, in that the [representatives in the] District of Columbia rules over a military alliance of nation-states. Hence the name 'United [nation-]States.' The Senate and 'emperor' of America is not entirely unlike the Senate and 'consuls' or 'emperors' of Rome, except they are democratically elected by the majority, despite the rest of the 'government' on imperial and provincial levels being ruled by representatives. At the imperial level these are in two different assemblies which both are not unlike the senate of ancient Rome.
Point being, 'republics' and 'democracies' are two completely different forms of 'government.' Although most people think they are synonymous, they are not. Some 'republics' have 'democratic' aspects to them, but still maintain their representative foundations. Of the two, you cannot have an 'empire' without a 'republic,' but you can have a 'dictatorship' with both.
Simcountry only really has 'dictatorships,' but they allow to select a 'government type' in the settings page. Interestingly, 'republic' is not one of them, despite being the most common form of 'government' in the real world.
You may or may not find it interesting that 'govern-ment' is a combination of two Latin words, 'control' and 'mind.' 'Government' literally means 'control-mind.'
So I guess you could say I'm merely talking of different flavors of 'mind-control.' |
| John West | Sunday, August 28, 2016 - 08:57 pm
It may be worth noting that the [nation-]states of the United [nation-]States are themselves all constitutional republics. The United States itself is NOT a 'democracy,' it is probably the most legally complex military alliance of republics, with the alliance itself being managed as a republic. As this alliance is a collection of nations, it is actually also an 'empire.' So you could perhaps say it is an an 'imperial republican alliance of republics.'
and definitely not a "democracy." As I said there are NO 'democracies' anywhere in the world. 'Democracies' are ancient evolutions from tribes absent of a chief or king. Often times dictators that were sometimes elected in ancient Athens, as well leaders of alliances of Greek city-states (usually such leaders were kings of hereditary kingdoms themselves if not Athenian elected dictator-"kings,"), were titled the name of "king," but these were not quite as hereditarily inherited positions as in medieval times that is common of most dictators with the title of "king." In ancient Greece it was normal that the generals of these city-states would elect (perhaps more accurately said 'approve' than 'elect') a "[dictator-]king," but it was usually the oldest son of the previous king. These kings may or may not become a leader of an alliance of city-states, which were mostly kingdoms with the exception of Athens, by being elected by the leaders of city-states that comprised the alliances.
The President of the USA is not unlike a consul (dictator) of Rome, except he is elected directly ('democratically') by the people. In all other aspects however, the USA is a 'republic' on local/state/federal levels. If there were no term limits for this position (4 years and no more than two terms of 8 years), USA would probably eventually evolve into a hereditarily controlled Roman Republic-style empire once a leader influential enough got comfortable in that office, where 'democratic' presidential elections would be nothing more than formalities until there were no more elections. It would still likely retain it's representative 'republic' structure as Rome did, however, yet with a permanent dictator "emperor."
People everywhere who say "USA is a democracy" basically only understand the 'democratic' aspect of Presidential elections and have no understanding of the rest of the complex 'republican' structure that forms the bulk of the 'government' system. These same people are the same trendies who would unknowingly push America into a dictatorship, which would logically eventually evolve into a hereditarily inherited dictatorship (monarchy), as they have total disregard and even disdain for the representative 'republican' system. These same people would likely either be pathetic slaves to their 'democratically' elected dictator, or rebel from him the moment they disapprove of their leader, thus likely destabilizing or destroying their lands. because 'demos-cracy' is 'mob-rule', and sometimes the mob takes to the streets.
Anyway, that's my perspective on 'democracies' and 'republics' since you were wondering.
Don't ask me about [Bolshevik] 'communism' or my posts will likely, understandably, be deleted for violating European "hate speech" laws. You can do an Internet or YouTube search for "Leon Trotsky" if you were interested in the development of 'communism.' It may be worth noting that Trotsky, Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin were all financed and related to the same banking dynasty that controls central banks in western societies today. In Soviet Union and other 'communist' states of eastern Europe the masses were dirt poor but the few (1 percent) were excessively rich, not unlike America today. I do, however, think the Soviet/'communist' theme (the red armies' pentagram hats, pentagram pistol grips, pentagram tanks, and etc other stuff) looks really cool. You can't have 'communism' without the Red Army. |
| aska26ph2001 | Monday, October 17, 2016 - 03:56 pm
hi help
Country AC CM
World: White Giant
Continent: Lynx Minor
Region: Botana Norda
Help I cant order to World Market
I have negative supply
I cant order products used by population
many people leaving my country |
