| Monday, July 20, 2015 - 07:15 am |
I know that this has been brought up in the past, however this is something that would add greatly to the realism of the game, as far as public safety, you have a lot, like military, Relief teams, but fire and police would make it more believable and it wouldn't be something that would be hard to implement either I wouldn't think. I keep hearing things about space this and space that......I see a lot more people playing on the planets than with space travel/trade anyway, just saying, I would love to see/ or cant wait until it is implemented in the game, I like this game a lot and been playing for over a year now, and still learning every day, love the detail keep up the good work everyone!
| Monday, July 20, 2015 - 01:42 pm |
Currently their cost is a part of "general cost of govt". Other than separating their cost to a different line item, what are you suggesting?
Would the president have decisions to make in this field?
What effects would more or less spending in public safety have?
Is it fun and why?
| Monday, July 20, 2015 - 02:09 pm |
I just think its needs to be its own dept, and you could even go as far as putting fire stations and police stations on the map. The basic Four I think would be Police, Fire, Paramedic, Border patrol..
| Monday, July 20, 2015 - 02:11 pm |
I was say the effect would be crime rate would lower,( well if there was a crime rate.. and it would add to security form rebels and help with disasters "Fire, Paramedics"
| Monday, July 20, 2015 - 02:55 pm |
It is unlikely anything would be added to the map. Too many objects on the map is often, already, an issue. Crime rate is not a thing and I am not sure how its addition would add to enjoyment of the game.
I do agree with changes to rebel and disaster mechanics. Based on recent experience, it appears revolt chance is calculated for each corp, penalizing countries with greater numbers of corps. Welfare rate does not seem to be as important as it should be in this area as well.
For disasters, I would assume the original intent was to encourage community by assisting fellow players. However, most players see them as more punitive than an excuse to communicate with other players. Also , the caps for creation of certain relief tools is often too low for large countries to see to their own recovery.
Both these features could be improved but are manageable and currently tolerated by most. If public safety became a factor, the question would be does it add fun to the game, in my opinion. Focus on additions that add enjoyment to daily play would be a better investment of resources.
| Monday, July 20, 2015 - 04:22 pm |
You should just play "Dick Tracy-Top Cop". Google it.
| Monday, July 20, 2015 - 08:45 pm |
Did we ever get trains ?
| Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - 01:13 am |
Yes I believe so...
| Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - 09:24 pm |
Did someone say TRAINS?!
| Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - 10:51 pm |
Still no trains Dub
| Wednesday, July 22, 2015 - 01:35 am |
One of these days...
| Sunday, July 26, 2015 - 10:06 pm |
We have been too busy with the mobile app.
Police etc. makes sense if we add a crime rate with influence on the security "feeling" of the population and influences welfare.
Maybe more important, a pollution index, that depends on the type of industry you have and energy you use, having influence on health and on welfare.
The are more similar ideas.
don't hold your breath.
We would like to bring the app to a higher functionality level and use the same user interface also on PC screens.
Personally, I would like to add a natural resources feature that is more realistic.
currently, you can set up mining corporations everywhere and they seem to be able to mine for ever.
| Monday, July 27, 2015 - 08:27 am |
As a player whose economies often rely heavily upon Oil corps (which are also presumably pollution-heavy), I find your words above rather terrifying! If such large changes were to happen would players be given the option to exchange corp types beforehand, with no delay or penalty?
| Monday, July 27, 2015 - 02:58 pm |
Presumably you would have some notice that the deposit was running out and it would be up to you Dub when to close the corps or to re-tool them. Can't see how you can expect instant solutions to this, seems like Andys' ideas are to make things *more realistic.
| Monday, July 27, 2015 - 05:20 pm |
Changes, when such features are added will be slow.
also, producing oil can be quite clean.
using it is a different matter.
this is good example:
to make it work, we will have to introduce more forms of energy.
start to make it possible for corporations to use other types of energy (not all at the same time).
already now, you can purchase electricity from nuclear powered stations. Many times it is much cheaper than electricity from oil powered stations. (check the market page for Nuclear power).
if we add electricity from coal (cheap and polluting), gas, sun and wind, there will be a more realistic choice.
also CO2 emissions should be part of it.
| Monday, July 27, 2015 - 06:31 pm |
I do like the idea of limiting resources and adding additional effects for the use of certain types of energy - both of these add another layer of strategy to the game. There is even potential for additional diplomatic/geographical strategy if one considers emissions and resource deposits.
The issue I personally see with having finite Oil resources is that you are effectively limiting the natural progression of the corporation, as determined by the game mechanics:
1: Many players build with the sole goal of taking a corporation truly public, this is a fundamental part of an economic plan which affects decisions on population demographics, education, health and welfare. If oil corporations inevitably close they will become useless for this particular type of set up - IPO'ing can be fiddly and expensive, so why bother wasting time and resources on something that wont last? Not to mention the fact that you are presumably still spending the same production plant fee, and investing the same capital, that other infinite corporations require.
2. If an Oil corporation can be moved rather than closed once deposits are exhausted, we will still run into the same issue as above - relocation affects workers, welfare etc, and can easily kill a truly public corporation. And I hardly think presidents will want to move their state corporations outside of their own countries, unless the current income model is revised.
For the simple reason it makes Oil corps a bad investment for Presidents, overnight, I would imagine ample warning should be given, as well as compensation or 'free conversion' of affected corps.
| Monday, July 27, 2015 - 10:58 pm |
There will be the possibility to move the corporation but the profit model must be be adapted.
the profit during the production time must be sufficient to pay for the added cost.
we think that there should be a cost paid to the country for the concession (the right to build the corporation, pump the oil and sell it), and then of course, it will die, or have to be moved and pay for another concession.
so these corporations must be more profitable during their economic life.
The oil reserves should be sufficient for full production during a period of between 6 and 12 real months.
This is 1000 to 2000 game months.
0.25B a month of added profit will bring 250 to 500B extra income.
We did not do any definitive computation to figure it out but it has to make financial sense.
| Monday, July 27, 2015 - 11:25 pm |
It seems to be an interesting idea, and may go some way to igniting diplomacy and geo-politics again.
The "concession" each oil corp pays to the host country sounds a lot like a lease to the mineral rights. It may just be the way you have phrased it, but it appears that this concession/lease to the country would be paid up front in a one off lump sum? That could raise the following issue:
1: Dubhthaigh Oil 1 pays AndyCountry 5T up-front for the right to mine oil, of which the AndyCountry has enough in deposits to supply 1 Oil company for 1000 game years.
2: 9 additional oil corps pay AndyCountry 5T each for mining rights and he accepts (who wouldn't).
3: My corporation will only have enough oil for 100 game years.
4: In buying leases I am always effectively gambling 5T on a guess of how much oil i might actually receive.
5: Also, the production cost of oil thus varies massively, distorting the market.
I guess the way around this is a monthly concession/lease fee, or to pre-allocate a certain amount of raw material tonnes to each corp that applies?
Additionally, you have suggested the corps may live for 1000 to 2000 game months, even without renewal. This raises the question of how quality will affect the amount of oil each corporation utilises. Will a truly public oil corp with quality >200 require more oil in its production process than a state corp at 120 quality? Or will corps simply extract the same volume of oil but at a quality comparable to their production process? If it is the former then there becomes an issue in how concessions/lease payments are calculated between corporations of varying quality.
| Tuesday, July 28, 2015 - 03:52 pm |
Sadly we still don't have TRAINS. At least that means train tracks require much less maintenance.