Public Corporations Inconsistent In Re: Resources Used

Andy I don't know why you think players will be wiped out without war levels. It is impossible to completely wipe a player out because their main country is in secure mode, and their CEOs cannot be touched. I'm not sure if you have noticed, but there is almost zero player interaction in this game right now. I remember before war levels this game was alive and booming. Do you not think there may be a correlation?

Having a very experienced player in war level 15+ wiping out your empire is a risk, even if one country survives.

FB is the right place for this.

User interaction is up and down all the time.

Conditions have changed in gaming in general.
we don't know and you don't know why things happen.
You can link things together but you can also link other things together.
I wish I knew.

PvP wars are now quite easy and can take place with even large war level differences.
this is on all worlds and especially on FB.
So the whole discussion is about attacking c3 countries?

Or you could just do the smart thing and let players be able to set their own resource tax percentage

Is that related?

do you mean the payment by enterprise corporations to the countries?
If it was in your hands, what percentage will you pay?

Andy, I have agree with John Galt.

Playing the war game in any other world than FB is almost pointless it seems.

Playing the war game in FB is almost pointless, because most people stay under war level 3, and there's so few potential targets that attacking any one group is paramount to reducing the activity in the world.

I do enjoy the game engine, however, the more I play the game, returning for such a short duration so far (a few months) and aggressively building, I'm running into numerous problems...

---Corps are just not as profitable as they used to be. Many corps, like Chemicals, were built and I began bleeding money. CEOs are making so little money from these unprofitable corps, even with the prices high, that I built just 20-30(?) corps and looked at that CEO after few weeks, it had amassed 7T in debt!!! How??? So far every CEO account I started did that!! The ONLY WAY I'm able start a

I've played war games without protection from PvP before, they tend to follow a familiar pattern.

1). The game opens, everyone is really excited, people join because it's new and everyone is hopeful that it's going to be an awesome game.

2). The fighting starts, people get wiped, rebuild, wiped rebuild.

3). After getting wiped out enough times, the majority of the players, get sick of rebuilding and quit.

4). The big war players, that usually bought their success with a credit card. Start to complain to the Game Managers, that there is no one to fight, everyone is either too strong, because they are also a super war player, or has left the game, because they got sick of being wiped out.

5). Finally, even the war players leave, since with no one weak left to attack, they have nothing left to do.

6). The game closes down.

Yes, everyone wants to recapture the hop

DanNation, I don't know what war games you have played to come up with your response. Every PvP game I've ever played has a thriving community which relies on mutual defense, human interaction, and combining of resources.

I think you've just made up what you've responded.

When a game has a low barrier of entry and abundance of resources, you don't have to "rebuild" much at all, so the loss isn't as great, like a chess game. Reread my example.

My first empire was only an empire in that I had 10 states. I was not a warlord, nor had I invaded other players. I was attacked, and being attacked opened my eyes to the need for being war-ready. Then I entered the war game, and still had invaded very few people (maybe 2) until the rivalry with another fed ended in world war.

So your statements make no sense.

Also, the reason games do not severely restrict PvP interaction is that

I would also like to provide a real life example which recently occurred.

A player, Red, played in LU, with an empire of 5-6 states. He had not played the war game and said a friend helped him acquire the states he had.

Well guess what? He was attacked. It woke him up to the reality of war in the game. The attacker is a very experienced player and was well prepared for the war.

Guess what happened? It spurred human interaction!!

He began reaching out, looking for friends, and though we answered, he still recognized that his cause was a good as lost. So he was ready to give up his states. Instead of leaving the game, THE GAME BECAME FUN FOR HIM TO PLAY! He now has risk. He's interacting with other players! He's discovered a whole new side of gameplay! Does he weep about what he lost? No! He's excited and slowly building an empire now on Fearless Blue! Actually, he now loved the war aspect o

Sorry one more point.

Look at what exists now. War levels and built-in (excessive) limitations.

And now people are not playing because it's deathly boring. No one interacts.

+1 to Adam's post. Players interaction is the main driver of this and most of the games. Risk is what awakens all the players, without the risk there is no excitement.

Economy is so limited, war costs are so high, no active armies, 99% CEO losing money in trilions.

I know it can be better, i hope for it with all my posts and suggestions.

I love this game because i know how great it can be.

Having to be on a state of alert isn't fun, it's stressful. I don't play simcountry to 'stay alert' rather to build and grow a country. Being forced to stay alert and always be on the defense, would ruin the game.

For every one player that 'joins a fed', after being destroyed, many more stop playing. That is exactly why they introduced war protection in the first place. The constant wars were destroying new players. Some rejoined like you, most simply left.

Fundamentally, Simcountry is an economics simulation game. With the option of war on the side. The challenge and strategy of building up a country or enterprise overtime, is what makes the game truly rewarding.

You can't just be successful just by spamming corps. Success in this game is rewarding, because it isn't instant, success is hard earned, a long term and meaningful achievement. Countries aren't just bases for the next shoot out,

DanNation, you're completely missing the point.

1. Being alert is just being aware... if I leave my front door open, someone is going to walk through it. At minimum I can close my door. Even better is to add locks. Best is to have a state of the art alarm system.

... and yes, it is fun!

2. Simcountry is a real-world simulation, which incorporated war at the very beginning of the game, even though there was no navy, there was ALWAYS war. Per my examples, the game THRIVED when there were NO war levels. People didn't start leaving in drove UNTIL THE BARRIER TO ENTRY INCREASED (reduced resources, i.e. population declined). Large populations mean more money from the economy, means more weapons for the country, and increases the ability of a nation to not only defend itself, but attack when necessary. Lower populations make it more difficult across the board, and dramatically increases the time it takes to realize succ

I 100% agree with Dub on this. This game still attracts an incredible amount of new players but almost none remain. This is a huge missed opportunity. Most people who play games like this do so because of the possibility of war. It drives every interaction in this game. What is the purpose of accumulating cash if not to buy weapons with it. War levels need to go. At the very least eliminate them on FB as a trial run. I guarantee it becomes the most active world in the game if you do that.

Remember you can never be wiped out in this game (except FB). Design your economy to be centred around 4 CEOs and your secure mode. Store extra weapons in CEO, extra ammo in secure. Then just have fun with your unprotected countries. If you lose them, oh well... You built your economy around your protected assets so no big deal. Get more and fight back. I guarantee you will have a blast.

Why are we clinging to this horrible war level model that m

On one area, we kind of agree. War levels do need an upgrade.

Currently, I don't interact with C3 war mechanics, because doing so, would quickly force me into war level 3, and a PvP game, that I never want to be a part of.

Players shouldn't be forced to be made permanently vulnerable to attack, because they experiment with C3 war mechanics. There might actually be some more people willing to interact with this part of the game. If it didn't force them to be open to attack, from players that they have no way of possibly defending themselves against.

The threat of PvP basically makes C3 wars off limits to most Simcountry Players. Originally, I considered going just upto war level 2. But as soon as people started demanding on the forum, to be allowed to attack war level 2 players. I knew I couldn't risk it, all it would take is a dev listening to those demands, and I'd have to delete everything and start again on

Daniel I thought you have only one country. With one country in secure mode, no one can attack you under any circumstances, regardless of your war level. That is how players should ideally opt out of PVP. Either have one country in secure or pay for war protection boosters if you want an empire. Players who want an empire and who do not want to pay for boosters should have to defend their lands. Otherwise there are literally no disadvantages to having a massive empire. War levels should not play any role in this if we want this game to go back to its former glory.

Will current players quit if this happens? Possibly. But a change like this is not meant for current players. It is meant to retain new players who are quitting because the game has no player to player interaction. I think the best of both worlds is to have FB and one other world switch to no war levels, and have the other 3 worlds stay the same. Compare the data after a year and see what

I looked again into the contribution to the country.

All non state corporations pay it, independent of the product they produce.

Public corporations, where the country is a majority share owner do not pay the this contribution.

There is an exception for corporations that make very large losses. They the payments are then stopped.

All this is in place for a long time.

What changed recently is the cost of natural resources.
The cost is up and increases the cost of raw materials for some corporations.

some use more, some use smaller quantities depending on the product they produce.

I have now reduced the amounts these non state corporations pay as a contribution to the country. The corporations remain attractive for the countries where they reside.

Andy,

"I have now reduced the amounts these non state corporations pay as a contribution to the country."
What are you saying you have changed?
Have you reduced 'Countries Resources Used' taxes?
Is that on all product types?
Or all just ones that use large amounts of natural resources?
Or just ones that are losing money?

"Public corporations, where the country is a majority share owner do not pay the this contribution."
I think this may be an oversight.
It makes it very difficult for a country to take a Corporation public, and still make money.
By owning fewer shares, the country doesn't receive much of the profits.
At the same time, it doesn't receive the taxes that non-state Corporations pay.
It makes State controlled Public Corporations, the worst of both worlds for players.

"There is an exception for corporations that make very large losses. They the p

Andy, big thanks on behalf of all CEOs, makes life a bit better than before.

Agreed!

Daniel,

This "tax" is not per type of corporation.
It is the same for all corporations where the state is not a share holder, or just a very small one.

There is an exception for corporations that make large losses and this could look like product dependent.

The reason is that some corporations that use a very large amount of natural resources are the ones that suffer from the high price of these natural resources and make losses.

Some agricultural products (use of potassium), gasoline and air craft fuel using a lot of oil etc.

I just reduced the amount paid to the country for all the "non state" corporations.