Utter Nutter Posted January 14, 2018 Author Share Posted January 14, 2018 2 hours ago, Jeremy Graham said: If you read the discussion, half of them are talking about inflation caused by money generated through code in different cases. So... yeah, it's not Seb and his alliance taking over the world with this magical bank. Not trying to be rude, but you should probably re-read some of the posts that have been made. And your point is? I don't think I mentioned anything about inflation in my response to Long Shanks, just that it would be automated (as he thought it was controlled by Seb and his alliance). No need to parrot your point to everyone, because it's been discussed at length by other players. What are the effects of inflation that you have in mind? Just curious. to add to the inflation concern, it would require a 5b investment to produce 10m a day. I think I read somewhere that there is currently 80b worth of liquid money flying around Orbis, if all of that were to be deposited in the bank (very unlikely) it would produce the same money than 15 nations of 15 cities each can already produce. just to add figures, the top alliance at 100% tax must be making over 400m a day overall. and thats just 1 single alliance. how much money would it take to equal 1 alliance's income to add to this inflation? 200 billion so the inflation of new money generated is not really that big in an Orbis wide scale Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Edward I Posted January 14, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted January 14, 2018 1 hour ago, Seb said: I only see 2 people arguing against this. this two people have 6 and 7 cities and are new to the game. This is incorrect. There are at least nine players before this post who have expressed varying degrees of skepticism or opposition to the idea. Several of them have quite a few more than six or seven cities, and several of them are older players. I've quoted them below for reference. On 1/12/2018 at 8:53 PM, James II said: I trust the private banks more than Alex tbh. On 1/12/2018 at 9:18 PM, Sun Yat-sen said: No, this stupid. Everyone is just gonna hide their shit there and would increase inflation. On 1/12/2018 at 10:36 PM, Frederick said: Nope. On 1/12/2018 at 10:53 PM, Dr Rush said: What have you wrought? You have me agreeing with these two. 1. This adds a new source of money without adding a method that takes it back out at an equal rate. The interest on the city loans even though its larger is going against smaller principle. So unless there is a massive uptake in the whale tier this system will add more money to the system then it removes. See inflation. 2. Any form of income needs to have a risk with it. Even infra carries a certain level of risk, this carries basically none. 3. Blockades? 4. Need to hide your alliance's rebuild cash? 5. I see newbies not knowing what they are doing taking out city loans right off the bat and not being able to grow properly as a result. 6. What if you have negative income? 7. What if the loan payments put you into negative income? On 1/12/2018 at 11:43 PM, Psweet said: While I like the idea in theory... I don't like the idea of taking away the agency of players and turning it into an inflexible/infallible game mechanic. (bugs/imbalances aside...) We don't need this precisely because we DO have player-run banks. Hiding your cash is trivial these days. People who "aren't comfortable" investing in private banks need to get over themselves. By this point private banking has been around for at least two and a half years, possibly even longer. On 1/12/2018 at 11:51 PM, Sketchy said: A non-player driven alternative seems like a bad idea. The more player-driven systems in place the better, using mechanics should be avoided unless it helps to aid the player driven systems rather than replace them. Also this provides an easy place for people to hide money. That happens quite a bit already, this would make it considerably worse by allowing individual nations to hide their money independent of their alliance administration. Better tools to create private banks would be preferable. Like "organizations" independent of alliances that can include multiple members, have their own organization page, a shared bank (with public records) and the ability to trade with that organization rather than a nation. Then you can simply emulate the mechanics of alliances, and have that bank be lootable by raiding members of the organization rather than the alliance. On 1/13/2018 at 4:21 AM, Long Shanks said: Yes the power of coding, Then WHY wont Alex code in a banking system, where nations can deposit any sum they want and get a daily % added to said sum within the protected bank system that no nation can even raid, a protected vault, in the same bank they could also take a loan from the game and have it taken out automatically at every turn of the game, I am wondering WHY have this if Alex is just going to code in money for you upon any mistakes you make then why not simply code in a bank system, it could be set at % so private banks can still run on some level, I personally think having any alliance in any game having that amount of power to have any amount coded in that they lose put the whole Econ of the game at risk. If i buy Steel in the hope of reselling it at a higher price but find myself short and have to sell early and lose cash that's my risk, BUT you are taking ZERO risk but plan on making a huge amount of cash for no risk at all. What happens if you are raided, or caught up in a war will all your funds be coded back in ? On 1/13/2018 at 2:50 PM, Holton said: A neat idea, but in this genre of game we need to remember that a lot of things like this have to be handled through role-play and player-made things or we're just an iOS app game. 3 hours ago, Darth Revan said: This in my opinion is a terrible idea, players have worked hard to build up the banks they run and player run banks are an interesting aspect of this game, why try to destroy that aspect? People value the security of their investments, and for some that is the most important aspect, if this update goes through you'll be seeing an exodus of funds from private banks to this cheap coded alternative. This proposed change will ruin something that gives P&W a unique angle. 1 hour ago, Seb said: dude, you are taking things way to personal here, go keep your private bank and make your profits I also see 1 private bank owner trying to discredit the proposal, you made your point, as weak as it sounds, tis time to let others comment it. Rather than making ad hominem attacks on @Psweet, I'd suggest you address the substance of his posts. None of his arguments have been framed as a defense of his legacy or material interest in private banking; rather, they've been constructive critiques of a proposal that is explicitly based on reducing risk and inter-player interaction. If you don't want to take it from @Psweet, take it from @Sketchy or @Dr Rush or any of the other players posting critiques based on the balance effects of this proposal. Your responses have still largely failed to explain how this would positively affect the game balance: Why is reducing inter-player interaction a good thing? What, exactly, is wrong with incentivizing players to rely on alliances, banks, or one another for liquid cash? Inflation is a persistent and growing problem in the game. The whole point of the resource update was partially counteract the effects of inflation. Telling us that the extra cash created will total only tens of millions of dollars a day doesn't address the facts that: 1) Inflation is a compounding, long-term problem (tens of millions of dollars today that are reinvested become even more cash tomorrow). 2) Creating a world bank would induce a greater supply of lendable money and thus of interest payments to players and alliances (therefore, ceteris parabus, increasing inflation). 3) Income that is totally divorced from material production in-game (e.g. buying infrastructure or producing resources) is an inherently troublesome proposition both in the sense that makes the game less immersive (the reason lending or borrowing money is lucrative in real life is the capacity to invest it in productive activity) and in the sense that it risks inflation. (If investing, directly or indirectly, in infrastructure or resources is more lucrative than investing in the world bank it will be preferable; if not, then you've created an asset with artificially high returns, which in turn drives inflation even higher than it already is.) In short, this is a deeply flawed proposal that should not be implemented. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoot Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 2 hours ago, Seb said: dude, you are taking things way to personal here, go keep your private bank and make your profits, I only see 2 people arguing against this. this two people have 6 and 7 cities and are new to the game. I also see 1 private bank owner trying to discredit the proposal, you made your point, as weak as it sounds, tis time to let others comment it. The reason no one else is commenting is that Psweet (and others) have already made perfectly good points explaining why this is a terrible idea and you haven't even attempted to address them, but have instead just cried bias. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiki Mod Dr Rush Posted January 14, 2018 Wiki Mod Share Posted January 14, 2018 On 1/13/2018 at 1:00 PM, Seb said: the funds would be coded back in if you are in a war at the same time the CD expires and you happen to forget to renew it. it would be a negligence of the player. and this CDs can be bought in a set day of the month, lets say 1st of every month, or the first 2 days of every month. If you don't invest it then, you miss your chance and gotta wait another month. That way you reduce the chances of it being an exploited system. but if you are so worried about exploits, tell me what exactly are you afraid of and how would you fix it, this thread is to find out opinions and all this failsafe mechs that could be implemented to make it good. 1. private banks already have that source of extra money, so this would be an alternative to this private banks. 2. why does all money have to have a risk? I don't see why it can't be risk free with a very low income source. 3. how would blockades affect it? 4. I guess you could hide that money but it would only be available for withdrawal once a month 5. the code would prevent such a thing because the loan would only get them 1 more city and would have a payback automated system for 30, 60 or 90 days. 6.to have negative income you would need to be at war and your infraestructure destroyed, I think that in the case of the nation being at war, a pause on paying the loan could be coded in, private banks have this rule too, where nations don't have to pay their loans while they are at war. 7. that just doesn't make sense unless you have absolutely no infraestructure, but I guess that if you can't pay the loan, you will never be out of debt and 1 city is all you will ever get out of the bank. in the excel sheet I sent I made an example of a 100m loan (for a nation buying its 14th city) in which the nation would have to pay 2m a day of the loan (if the interests were 0.5% daily or 3.5% weekly) a nation with 14 cities can easily make twice that much money. lets say you want to buy your 10th city, that loan would then be 40m at most, so your payment would be less than 1m a day for a 60 day period. a nation that doesn't make 1m a day at 10 cities is doing something incredibly wrong. 1. Private banks simply collect and redistribute money already in the game. What your suggesting is adding a new source of cash into the game without a matching drain. See inflation. 2. Because we are trying to play politics and war which is a game, not play watch numbers grow bigger on a spreadsheet. 3. The point is you need to specify how blockade mechanics will effect this. This is needed both to address exploits, and also a chance to add interesting features to your module. 4. The withdraw time isn't really meaningful to the issue, which is money being spirited away from looting into an untouchable bank. 5. A. You have now said something completely different from your op so which is it. In any case you haven't actually addressed any of the issues with newbie growth rates being tinkered with. We already have a hang up after the end of objectives and a lot nations quit at that point. Your suggestion creates a worse hang up in that improperly used this can leave a new nation with basically no income. 6. & 7. Pwseet already addressed the other playstyles thing but missed a rather glaring exploit here. Okay, so assuming you implement this in the logical manner which is that loan payments are added as per turn expenses like every other expense. And right here we run into a bit of an issue, the game if your in negative income and out of cash simply forgives the extra debt. This is problem because certain whales are already at the point where it takes more then a month to save enough cash for a city. So with this module they could take out a 30 day loan that has payments that are higher then their income, and have the excess debt just disappear at the end of the 30 days. This essentially caps the price of a city to 30 days of your income. 8. New point, you have stated that you feel instant cash for rebuilds is a good thing. I would counter that it rather defeats the purpose of going to war as a rather large portion of the damage you do to an enemy is in the lost income during rebuilding. 9. New point, I have never heard a good argument for removing meta gameplay in favor of a hardcoded mechanic. 6 Quote 23:38 Skable that's why we don't want Rose involved, so we can take the m all for ourselves 23:39 [] but Mensa is the cute girl at the school dance and she's only dancing with us right now to get our friend jealous 23:39 [] If Rose comes in and gives Mensa what she wants, she'll just toss us aside and forget we ever existed 23:39 zombie_lanae yeah I do hope we can keep having them all to ourselves 23:40 zombie_lanae I know it's selfish but I want all their love 6:55 PM <+Isolatar> Praise Dio Pubstomper|BNC [20:01:55] Rose wouldn't plan a hit on Mensa because it would be !@#$ing stupid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doughnuts Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 (edited) 4 hours ago, Seb said: You are not making sense, this bank would just be part of the game code, not a private bank and not controlled by any player. no player would profit from anything except those investing. you are again repeating something that doesn't make sense, I wouldn't control anything in the bank, it would be part of the game itself. I get the feeling you are just trolling this post with nonesense Also just to point out only due to someone having 6 or 7 cities and new to the game can still see the massive flaws within this and how it will massively effect the game in a bad way, no trolling was meant but my replies was to the level of the OP, complete silly and way off the mark. Edited January 14, 2018 by Long Shanks 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utter Nutter Posted January 23, 2018 Author Share Posted January 23, 2018 I finally know why Psweet tries to sabotage everyone of my attempts, he is jealous https://pastebin.com/2sXeu9ur Psweet and Paul Warburg conspiring against me is the best news I have heard today 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Revan Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 23 minutes ago, Seb said: I finally know why Psweet tries to sabotage everyone of my attempts, he is jealous https://pastebin.com/2sXeu9ur Psweet and Paul Warburg conspiring against me is the best news I have heard today Awfully looks like you're trying to discredit critics of this plan without actually addressing their concerns. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Josh Freer Posted January 23, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted January 23, 2018 7 Quote Honour, Fury, Fire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utter Nutter Posted January 23, 2018 Author Share Posted January 23, 2018 (edited) only my investors should be concerned about this, and they are allllll really happy. funny thing is that Paul came work for me for a few months, he got paida commission for the loans while I managed them anyway because he was too lazy to do it himself. then he decided to make a bank of his own over a year ago, so I gave him money at 2% interest so he could make a good difference and get started. he would then loan at 5% to 9% and make a good profit with my own money. I didn't care because I wanted to help him oh boy how wrong was I. but oh well, you can't change the nature of people, ducks will be ducks freer, you show up in that convo too, and you too are salty because you were a historic lame banker keep burning yourself please, I having the day of the year give me more Edited January 23, 2018 by Seb 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Frawley Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 Two main objections to this. 1. Real banks, government and development agencies take losses, and the countries that fund those entities take those losses too. A true risk free return does not exist, and hard coding one in the game simply re-bases a zero return to whatever rate it is setup at. If it were to be setup, it should run as a unit trust, with depositors 'buying in' to the bank, and selling out as the price changes dependent on loss rates and returns. 2. Alex shouldn't be adding features that replace functionality that is or can be easily provided by players. However given that Alex knows that these features are provided by players, why couldn't he simply add a loan market to the game where buyers/sellers of money could locate each other easier, or as others have suggested, an organisations page. Either way, if loan repayments to a bank are automated, they should be pre/post alliance tax at the alliances discretion. You cannot pay debt from money you owe the tax office in the real world and that option should only be available if the alliance agrees to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 Seb, some advice, may want to take a break. You're not listening to criticism, instead you're seeing the opposition as bias. That's a quick way to kill any possible support you could receive, and if it continues, it could also kill your reputation elsewhere too. 4 Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Scarfalot Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 I actually think that a world bank for the purposes of stashing resources in a place that can't be touched by war is a good idea. It's already perfectly doable through players, but the thing is that players, by necessity, have interests and their own circumstances. It would be worthwhile and healthy for the game for there to be a bank that's expensive, but always available (outside of blockade, but perhaps accessible through normal bank transactions), consistent, and completely safe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starbuck Posted January 27, 2018 Share Posted January 27, 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pewdiepie Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 Wait so alliances will have to much money, this will cause hyper inflation and wars will be worthless if you could hide your recorces in bank Quote ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiki Mod Dr Rush Posted February 5, 2018 Wiki Mod Share Posted February 5, 2018 Should I take the lack of a response as concession of all points? Quote 23:38 Skable that's why we don't want Rose involved, so we can take the m all for ourselves 23:39 [] but Mensa is the cute girl at the school dance and she's only dancing with us right now to get our friend jealous 23:39 [] If Rose comes in and gives Mensa what she wants, she'll just toss us aside and forget we ever existed 23:39 zombie_lanae yeah I do hope we can keep having them all to ourselves 23:40 zombie_lanae I know it's selfish but I want all their love 6:55 PM <+Isolatar> Praise Dio Pubstomper|BNC [20:01:55] Rose wouldn't plan a hit on Mensa because it would be !@#$ing stupid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.