Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[FallacyofUrist]

I support Proposal 54.

Mainly because I have a horrible loophole I just noticed to exploit.

[FallacyofUrist]

Also, note that abolishing a proposal would not lead to any changes in the rules. Abolishing a rule does, but all abolishing a proposal would do is get rid of a proposal in the current turn.

The ironic thing is that my variant actually would have gotten rid of a rule.

[Elephant Parade]

Oppose 54. Loopholes are bad; until we spot the loophole and create a variant, we should all oppose 54.

[FallacyofUrist]

Don't worry, it's not as though it's horribly weaponizable or anything...

[Elephant Parade]

Below this paragraph is a proposal—one that, I think, will be one of the most controversial in the game! The goal of it is to eliminate exponential gain. Before all you rich people go OPPOSE OPPOSE OPPOSE, I'd like to state my rationale:

• People won't play a game they can't win. With exponential gain in play, it is impossible for new players to win, unless a big change—like this proposal!—happens, or the win condition doesn't involve money. If nobody new joins, the game will stagnate—and die, unless all the current players stick around until the end of the game. Currently, we have five players, one of whom can't vote. For a game like this, that obviously isn't enough. Oh, yeah, and three-fifths of the players are in one alliance; that's pretty dumb.
• With exponential gain, people who joined as little as one turn late have a huge disadvantage. As someone affected by this disadvantage, I may be biased, but you should be able to see my point of view if you take a step off your million-dollar estate.

Proposal 55 - Ending Extreme Snowballing / Total Money Rebalance: This law is divided into three parts.

Part I: Abolish the following rules:

• Rule 37, the non-functioning extra-vote law that would be horrible if it did work
• Rule 39, because it allows for exponential gain and interferes with future sections of this proposal
• Rule 50, because the average gain is incredibly high; see Fig. 1 (contained in another post) for a breakdown

Part II: Remove the following sections from existing laws:

• Proposal 32: "Players who own land get $50 income per plot."
• Proposal 25: "500$: Acquire one Holy Imperial Elector Vote."

Part 2.5: Transfer all money from players' bank accounts to their statuses. If this would give them more than $3000, any excess is converted into Extra Proposal Tickets at a rate of 1/$1000. Extra Proposal Tickets may be used in place of $1000 to create an extra proposal, as per the appropriate rule.

Part III: Add the following rules:

• Each player has a wallet. This wallet can hold a maximum of $3000. Any income that brings them above this limit, end-of-turn or otherwise, is lost forever. (At the time of the law's passing, all players with more than $3000 lose money until they have only $3000.)
• A player can hold no more than 1 Holy Imperial Elector vote. (At the time of this law's passing, all players with more than 1 Holy Imperial Elector vote lose votes until they have only 1 remaining.)

[crazyabe]

I Oppose Proposal 55.

Proposal 56 - Crazyabe's cash adjustment strategy: when a player joins, over The First 4 turns they are involved with this Game; they gain: 1/4 of the average of plots of land, 1/400 the Total of all cash currently held by players that have played since before the date of 1/13/15, and one Holy Imperial Elector Vote, EACH DAY.

[NAV]

Hello!
I support proposal 55 

[Elephant Parade]

I Oppose Proposal 55.

Proposal 56 - Crazyabe's cash adjustment strategy: when a player joins, over The First 4 turns they are involved with this Game; they gain: 1/4 of the average of plots of land, 1/400 the Total of all cash currently held by players that have played since before the date of 1/13/15, and one Holy Imperial Elector Vote, EACH DAY.

Too unclear, and not enough.

• Who is factored into the "average" plots of land? If new and inactive players are included, it'll be next to nothing.
• 1/100 of all players' cash isn't much. Assuming all players have the same amount of money—and they don't—and that two inactive players started playing again, they'd still only get money equal to 7/100 of the top player's, which is almost nothing. In reality, they'd probably get less than half of that.

Even after those four turns, they won't have as much money as the top players. That might not sound like a problem, but exponential-ness makes it completely impossible to catch up. The inability to catch up is why I think anything exponential needs to be removed.

Oppose 56, for the reasons I outlined.

[FallacyofUrist]

I oppose Proposal 55 because it interferes with my evil master plan.

[Elephant Parade]

I oppose Proposal 55 because it interferes with my evil master plan.

I hope you enjoy being one of 2-3 remaining players, because that is the destination the exponential road leads to.

Seriously, I know the current state of affairs benefits you guys, but the game *will* die if exponential money stays. People will drop out as it becomes clear they have no chance of catching up. You think it's a question of more-money-versus-less-money, but it's actually a question of live-game-versus-dead-game.

[FallacyofUrist]

Currently, money can't win or lose anyone the game.

[MonkeyMarkMario]

Proposal 57 - New Player Incentive: New Players, Starting with the turn Before this was passed get a number of plots equal to the highest players/2 (example: Person has 50(highest) Bob joins and gets 25) and money equal to Wealthiest Player's money/2 - 100 (example Person has $2000 Bob joins and gets $900)

Buy 1 Proposal, use the rest to buy land and bank.

Proposal 58- Land Nerf: Land now give $10 per plot but past 10 plots Half your plots no longer give you money but .1 fame/plot, .1 food/plot, .1 manpower/plot allocated to your liking. (Ex. Person has 30 plots, 15 give $150/turn, 15 1.5 fame).

This is a big nerf but I feel that if this not passed Elephant might start to gain support to nerf land and money worse. There you go Elephant Parade happy.

Support Proposals 53 and 54
Oppose Proposals 55 and 56

[Elephant Parade]

Currently, money can't win or lose anyone the game.

But it probably will, eventually. Even if the goal isn't literally "acquire X dollars", money will probably be incredibly powerful—and, since some players will have one-hundred times the wealth of others, that power will not be balanced. Currently, nothing can win or lose anyone the game, but "get lots of cash" is the closest thing to a goal we have.

The alternative is that money will eventually be totally useless, which is, I think, much worse than it getting nerfed.

Put yourself in a new player's shoes, for a moment: You just started playing. You make $500 per turn, where some people make $1000+. Pretty much all suggestions include, if not revolve around, money, excluding the meta ones. Looking at the things you can do with your money, you have literally no way to catch up. Do you continue playing?

Proposal 57 - New Player Incentive: New Players, Starting with the turn Before this was passed get a number of plots equal to the highest players/2 (example: Person has 50(highest) Bob joins and gets 25) and money equal to Wealthiest Player's money/2 - 100 (example Person has $2000 Bob joins and gets $900)

Buy 1 Proposal, use the rest to buy land and bank.

Proposal 58- Land Nerf: Land now give $10 per plot but past 10 plots Half your plots no longer give you money but .1 fame/plot, .1 food/plot, .1 manpower/plot allocated to your liking. (Ex. Person has 30 plots, 15 give $150/turn, 15 1.5 fame).

This is a big nerf but I feel that if this not passed Elephant might start to gain support to nerf land and money worse. There you go Elephant Parade happy.

Support Proposals 53 and 54
Oppose Proposals 55 and 56

It isn't enough. With exponential gain involved, there is no such thing as "enough"—only "not enough" and "too much"! With exponential sources of income, gaps are guaranteed to grow wider and wider until the person on the wrong side of the gap quits! If you continue to support exponential money, you are dooming the game!

More specific problems:
 

• 57: Giving new players a flat amount of stuff doesn't work, as—like I've said—they will definitely fall behind.
• 58:Plots aren't even the best way to get money, anymore; the stock market is better, and banks will be pretty strong in the future.

I'm not going to oppose this stuff—it isn't bad, in itself; it just doesn't work as a solution to the exponential problem.

Instead of what I said I'd do earlier, I'm going to buy plots until buying another would put me below $200. After that, I will invest $200 into the stock market.

[MonkeyMarkMario]

The $700 I have after that proposal change from what I said and buy 2 plots and 150 in stock and 50 in bank. Forgot the stock market passed.

It isn't enough. With exponential gain involved, there is no such thing as "enough"—only "not enough" and "too much"! With exponential sources of income, gaps are guaranteed to grow wider and wider until the person on the wrong side of the gap quits! If you continue to support exponential money, you are dooming the game!

No matter what exponential gain is Always going to happen, besides this game is ending at turn 30 unless someone stops that.

[Elephant Parade]

The $700 I have after that proposal change from what I said and buy 2 plots and 150 in stock and 50 in bank. Forgot the stock market passed.

It isn't enough. With exponential gain involved, there is no such thing as "enough"—only "not enough" and "too much"! With exponential sources of income, gaps are guaranteed to grow wider and wider until the person on the wrong side of the gap quits! If you continue to support exponential money, you are dooming the game!

No matter what exponential gain is Always going to happen, besides this game is ending at turn 30 unless someone stops that.

Uh, no it isn't? My proposal literally abolishes exponential gain. Exponential gain is entirely unnecessary.

Also, stopping the game's end is ridiculously easy—it takes one proposal, just like anything else. If nobody's on the victory track, nobody will mind delaying it.