grantweep
2012-01-23 |  | Best Original Idea |  |
This is the best original idea I`ve heard in a long time. Credit goes to PIstolPete, not me for bringing it up.
We all know that there have been recent shortages in minerals across the servers. Mineral miners have always been a rare breed of income path on TB because they tend to make waaay too much minerals than is needed.
So the solution? Make ships cost minerals only. There may need to be some exceptions to the rule with ships such as pyth and beginner ships like M.hal or T.ryu since the idea with those ships is that they dont cost minerals in the first place.
But I propose that ships that already have mineral requirements have their $$$ costs transfered to minerals.
If needed, we may need to tone down mineral production from miners a little bit to adjust for this change, but I think this is a good suggestion because it is:
1) simple
2) helps fix TB servers (as far as I can tell, there are either huge shortages or huge surpluses or minerals most servers)
3) practical: this is something that admins can do without stephen`s help. |
|
FlashysDomain
99+ day(s) ago | I don`t know. I think the best original idea was from the GF awhile back. I won`t disclose it...I think it`s an illegal act between adults in the majority of the states in the US. |
TheOttomanEmpire
99+ day(s) ago | Agreed. |
Ragnarok
99+ day(s) ago | Why would you tone down mineral production from miners? This would drastically increase the demand for minerals. Instead of that, say that other races get boosts to mineral income to adjust for this change.
Secondly, does this $$$ cost transfer also include upkeep? Are you suggesting that ships have upkeep in terms of minerals? Or is there a set amount and then no more? Does this mean an end to $$$ upkeep? |
GradualIncline
99+ day(s) ago | Interesting idea. I was originally set against it, but now I`m less sure. Anfit is right about the TB problem, but I will admit to being interested by the idea. Of course, it would take a lot of testing and balancing before I`d consider this idea workable, but it is interesting. Would it be possible to make the DM like this to test it at some point? If it doesn`t hit a logistical snag that is. |
Anfit
99+ day(s) ago | Ok, I get the point.
I don`t like it. Not because its a bad idea - it`s a good one, and it would probably balance the market after a while.
I don`t like it because it introduces a brand new game altogether. It does not change the balance. It rewrites it altogether. While RT and perhaps ultra is fast-paced enough for most users to be able to welcome change I don`t think it would be so for normal. Look now - food was on the high for months (it`s been roughly six months since I`ve been semi-active) current postings and price suggests there has been no rise of new food producers - and the pay off is certainly high. And that`s just an incentive to change, not a forced change. If we change the rules of the game for all, the game will lose players. Too many of us have been at it for too long, with the same empires without a restart. I`m judging current acceptance for rapid changes in TB is low - because players are habitual and aged (game-wise at least). |
MajorDinero
99+ day(s) ago | Anfit, if you are getting at what I think you are getting at: ships cost upkeep, so of course you are going to have to sell minerals, silly. |
PistolPete
99+ day(s) ago | Thats an excellent idea Grant! :P
An addition that crossed my mind. What would happen if the max price on minerals was allowed to be 5000? Would make it less attractive to stach up minerals when there is too little of it, as the prices would be too high. |
Anfit
99+ day(s) ago | Why would empires be selling the minerals, then? |
