whal Posted November 4, 2007 Report Posted November 4, 2007 Money Gain per 60 minutes -659,949 points(In 22 minutes) "Negative income: It should not be possible to have enough mercenaries to have negative income. If you can find a way, keep in mind it is illegal. Negative points results in “bugs” which some players have complained about in the past. Rather than put up with the “I consciously decided to attack someone with negative billion points out, and now I have inherited his debt, and it’s your fault!” complaints, I have made it so negative points should be impossible. If you can concoct some method of doing it, don’t."
Aileron Posted November 4, 2007 Report Posted November 4, 2007 oops... That was written before the core changes messed up. One of the changes was going to be limiting mercs to a certain limit. If that was in place, it would be true. However, now you can simply get negative income by buying too many mercs. In your case, just don't buy any mercs for a while. Its not really illegal to accidentally get negative income...just when you intentionally get it.
whal Posted November 4, 2007 Author Report Posted November 4, 2007 ok well I had my per $ back to 300k,but needed mercs soo...Money Gain per 60 minutes -1,848,199 points Couldn't you make something where the min. number of points cant be less than 0 or something? My u.p helps alot on this problem but dont see why you should make - money .
JDS Posted November 5, 2007 Report Posted November 5, 2007 we have been over this issue of negative money ALOT but there is no progress to eliminating it.. i think aileron foolishly thinks its a good idea.. when clearly it is not
Dav Posted November 5, 2007 Report Posted November 5, 2007 it is a good idea IMO, stops you going nuts on mercs and making a wage from atk only. It in a way limits the number of mecs you can have and adds another level of planning when it comes to building your army. in your case your absolute desire to build your numbers much faster then you should be able to by normal methods has incured a penalty.
Aileron Posted November 5, 2007 Report Posted November 5, 2007 We've tried positive income...that was a disaster as the top 2 were ppl who simply bought all the mercs.We've tried zero income...that was still flawed as some people would buy all the mercs, and everyone else got massed.We've tried negative income, and we've only had a few cases of problems: One from somebody who intentionally shot himself in the foot in order to "prove" it was a bad idea, one from someone who wanted to quit but decided to do it with class, and now a third case from someone who inherited money from the third place player and managed to, in two days, jump from 30th to 5th place. Point being, positive or zero income ruins it for everybody, while negative income ruins it for a handfull of people in isolated cases. I tell you what though...if I can edit the core next round without tripping off the security device, which after double checking with the people who made it, I think I can do, I can put a cap on the number of mercs. After the cap, I think it would be best to take out the negative income. Then we could elimate the problems that remain, and also the tactic of buying a lot of mercs so that you can have a lot of soldiers, no defense, and still not present a good target. *cough* *cough* JDS *cough* *cough* Without the cap, its the least of three evils. I won't argue it isn't an evil in and of itself; its just the least undesirable of the three options. The bigger question is: "How is 'inheritance' going to be solved?" I could make it a rule, but that wouldn't be ideal. Idealy, I want to solve that problem for both the 'sell off your defense' and for the transfer service so I could put that back in, because the good things about that tool were that it provided a lot of role-playing options, more tools for clans, and has the best counter to the 'train all your soldiers so that no one can attack you' routine. *cough* *cough* Aileron *cough* *cough* Why am I *cough* *cough* criticising myself? *cough *cough* The bad thing about the tool is people would give all their stuff to someone else before quitting, or now people would give all their stuff to someone with a deduction bonus ship. Any ideas on stopping inheritance next round in a settings-based manner would be welcome...my best idea is to boost UP's effectiveness a little, crudely attempted in the past by increasing its degree. UP can't be transferred, and if UP is the strongest stat, then true inheritence can't occur.
ra$ta420 Posted November 5, 2007 Report Posted November 5, 2007 What about setting a merc cap,but this merc cap is all about how big your army is..like having an army of 10,would let you buy 1 merc ,army of 20 is 2 and so on.so the number of mercs you can have is all depended on how big your army is. This way having a negative income would be impossible because you can not buy the amount of mercs needed to have a negative income,based on your army size.
Dav Posted November 5, 2007 Report Posted November 5, 2007 merc cap cant be done due to limits in the core. It was considered before negative income if i remember correctly.
Recommended Posts