Loan Markets - coding loans into the game

[synthesis]

Do you just want to take the food out of Sheepy's mouth? For shame.

 

This would eliminate the demand for donations by making loaning players money almost completely risk free.

 

Also, everything I said in the previous thread about this:

 

1: Easy to take advantage of players. You know how some people occasionally trick players into buying really bad trades using gimmicks? This could have the potential for that but be INFINITELY worse. A player could see "Oh, gee, a hundred thousand dollars? Awesome!" Click accept, and then find out that all their revenue is taken forever because, look at that, the 100k was actually a loan that had 2000% interest. You'd have to implement an expansive array of mechanical and moderation-based tools to prevent !@#$ like that.

 

2: How would this deal with embargoes?

 

3: Computer programs can't be reasoned with. What if you go to war while you have a loan out? I, as a human being, can defer the debtor's payments until after the war. A program couldn't do that. So you'd have to implement another mechanism if you wanted any kind of flexibility. Oh, look at that, more coding, more things that could go wrong.

 

4: Makes setting up multis more profitable. Way more profitable. And it makes it easier to get money from your multis to your main without it being suspicious. Nothing to see here, just a guy who borrowed money from me and then went inactive! It's okay, though. I get first dibs on his revenue (before anyone can even attack him to take it) from now until he ceases to exist.

 

5: The general inflexibility of a program that automatically does anything would have to be compensated for with more complex, nuanced features. And with each additional feature and nuance it becomes easier and easier to pull the wool over the eyes of an unsuspecting player.

 

Sheepy: Your Game currently has a player run financial sector that is made up of myself and several other players. Your choice is simple. You either let a robust, innovative aspect of the game (which is UNIQUE to your game) continue to grow and evolve into who knows what or you destroy it. Any game can code mechanics in and force things onto the system that way. That's nothing to brag about. It's much more impressive to create an environment where those things happen organically. Nobody else can say they've done that. It's something that makes your game unique. It makes it yours.

 

And it adds variables to the political and economic climate that wouldn't otherwise exist! I understand where Guardian is coming from. They want predictability and uniformity. But it's the individuality that you allow to thrive that makes politics and war so great. If everything cool should be coded into a game then there would be no players. They would all be code.

 

I'm kind of dismayed by players that continuously pay lip service to allowing more and unique organizations to germinate in politics and war when they try to crush player made organizations just such as those at every turn.

 

1.  Therefore you put a hard limit in of the maximum percentage of payback, say 200% or something along those lines, you won't ever pay anymore than double what you asked for.  Problem solved.

 

2.  It makes no difference, e.g. you can't take a loan from someone that is embargoing you, but of course, if you already had that loan who then placed an embargoe on you, you would just continue paying back as normal, OR you add an element of risk to it, by saying blocking repayments on people you have embaroged, which might make you think twice about doing so, as you won;t get your  money back whilst an embargoe is in place.  Either option could work.  Problem solved.

 

3.  Then hard code it, so that if you are at war with the same person you got a loan from, you the payments automatically stop, or just a war in general would stop payments.  This would only apply to offensive wars, defensive wars would stop payments.  Problem solved.

 

4.  No it doesn't you are just scare-mongering, you have a vested interest in this not happening, so this point is BS.  It makes it no more likely to happen than it already does.  Everything is logged and tracked anyway and it makes no difference on donations, most people would join an alliance and get the money anyway at low levels.  Problem Solved.

 

5.  Then don't use this particular part of the game, I fail to see how this a problem.. Problem solved.

 

See, all problems solved. 

Edited February 13, 2015 by synthesis

[Ashland]

1.  Therefore you put a hard limit in of the maximum percentage of payback, say 200% or something along those lines, you won't ever pay anymore than double what you asked for.  Problem solved.

 

2.  It makes no difference, e.g. you can't take a loan from someone that is embargoing you, but of course, if you already had that loan who then placed an embargoe on you, you would just continue paying back as normal, OR you add an element of risk to it, by saying blocking repayments on people you have embaroged, which might make you think twice about doing so, as you won;t get your  money back whilst an embargoe is in place.  Either option could work.  Problem solved.

 

3.  Then hard code it, so that if you are at war with the same person you got a loan from, you the payments automatically stop, or just a war in general would stop payments.  This would only apply to offensive wars, defensive wars would stop payments.  Problem solved.

 

4.  No it doesn't you are just scare-mongering, you have a vested interest in this not happening, so this point is BS.  It makes it no more likely to happen than it already does.  Everything is logged and tracked anyway and it makes no difference on donations, most people would join an alliance and get the money anyway at low levels.  Problem Solved.

 

5.  Then don't use this particular part of the game, I fail to see how this a problem.. Problem solved.

 

See, all problems solved. 

1: Okay, so with Placentica's suggested system that wouldn't work.  Read the OP or don't comment.  It's really just that simple.  And if you implemented a system where that were possible, it require a different type of loan structure.  I also think you don't understand interest and the time value of money.  Which is going to make you talking about loans and lending in general pretty hilarious.

 

3: Just more room for players to be tricked and taken advantage of/multis to be funneled.

 

4: You are insane!  First of all your logic is idiotic.  "You have a vested interest so you're wrong."  Not how logic works!  You're just saying random words!  It's like you're just slamming your hands against the keyboard and auto-correct is trying to make heads or tails of it.

 

5: Lmao.  "Reason why this part of the game would be bad." "Well then don't use it."  Wow.  If you don't see the problem with that thinking, then I can't help you.  I can only put the dots so close together for you.  You have to actually pick up the pencil yourself.

Edited February 13, 2015 by Ashland

[SoS]

Until the day coding pays interest on your savings, there is an option for compound interest for your savings. http://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/4716-hexagram-savings-and-loan/?view=getnewpost