Ratjoy.com » Forums » Suggestions, Technical Support and Feedback » .
You need to register or login to post a reply.
.
|
Sean Wright RJ: Mr. Wright CO: Sean Wright Post Rating: 0 + / - Total Posts: 32 Karma: 112 Joined: Apr 5, 2012 |
Posted on May 14, 2012 @David I disagree. I think the flaw is with the way insta-build is working. The point is it should not work with a new company, but a new player. The whole point of it is to kick start the new players not help all players. An established player should not be allowed to hire a new player and take advantage of the insta-build nor should they be allowed to start a new company and take advantage of insta-build.Perhaps insta-build should change to a 72hr noob period where all construction/research during that period is instant. Sort of like Evony. I do agree that what ever is chosen, if it is instant, make it instant. No additional clicks. The intended purpose was for noobs and if they can't find it only experienced players can take advantage. Again, my opinion and I believe the original intention was to get noobs started and make it so they can play right away as opposed to waiting for buildings to finish. @Scott Buildings need to be able to be cancelled and get rid of the 168hr max upgrade time |
|
graham shearlaw RJ: Graham CO: Funk Post Rating: 1 + / - Total Posts: 48 Karma: 11 Joined: Apr 9, 2012 |
Posted on May 14, 2012 B1
|
|
Sirian Aralim RJ: Sirian CO: Sirian Post Rating: 0 + / - Total Posts: 2 Karma: 10 Joined: Apr 9, 2012 |
Posted on May 14, 2012 B3 or more. You get too easily to a point where your factories spend more time expanding than producing, which i find ridiculous. Either reduce building time, or make it easier to instabuild.
|
|
Bob Malone RJ: Bob Malone CO: Malone Post Rating: 0 + / - Total Posts: 341 Karma: 191 Joined: Apr 17, 2012 |
Posted on May 14, 2012 The problem sounds like a bug. People are hiring noobs because it counts there level towards the build when it should count the owners! That is just the way I see it though. Ok I misunderstood the question... So yes, I agree with above statement, it's not a feature change/request , it's just a bug. At least it would avoid the (multi)account creation just for this purpose. |
|
Innocent Bystander RJ: Matthew Matician Post Rating: 0 + / - Total Posts: 76 Karma: 54 Joined: Apr 2, 2012 |
Posted on May 14, 2012 I'm with Sean Wright. Instabuild should be for new players only--and non-new players should not be able to hire new players to instabuild for them.Giving any extra advantage on a per-business basis (ie: remove restriction on new-players-only), only serves to exacerbate the issue where the person who runs the most companies "wins". |
|
Art Vandelay RJ: Arthur Vandelay CO: eightysixed Post Rating: 0 + / - Total Posts: 7 Karma: 12 Joined: Apr 3, 2012 |
Posted on May 14, 2012 Voting: B1.
|
|
Sean Wright RJ: Mr. Wright CO: Sean Wright Post Rating: 0 + / - Total Posts: 32 Karma: 112 Joined: Apr 5, 2012 |
Posted on May 14, 2012 @Innocent Bystander Thank you. You said that way better than I did.
|
|
Cian Kemp RJ: Cian Kemp CO: Cian Kemp Post Rating: 0 + / - Total Posts: 183 Karma: 58 Joined: Apr 9, 2012 |
Posted on May 14, 2012 I vote B1. Any kind of time limit or player level thing just penalizes new players for not playing optimally (ie, accidentally bumping their level over the "new player" cutoff before spending their cash on upgrades). It also gives people room to experiment a bit before they expand fully into something. Finding that the fruit industry is overcrowded? Smash your buildings and expand into something else - you lose 10% of your money, but at least you don't have to wait several days to see the new results. Being limited to 500 means they would still have to spend time expanding once they got serious on it. Being able to have a bit of a boost fixing public companies that have been ransacked would be nice too. |
|
Josh Millard RJ: Tex Corman CO: J. Quaff Arabica Post Rating: 1 + / - Total Posts: 167 Karma: 231 Joined: Apr 3, 2012 |
Posted on May 14, 2012 B1. (B) because making it newbie only is a nice idea in theory but in practice it's producing an incentive for folks to cheat around the limit with spare accounts. If you want to put the time an effort into policing alt account behavior or have a foolproof system for automatically preventing/rectifying that, okay; otherwise, get rid of the incentive. (B1) because keeping the limit low means it's most meaningful for newer players, who have the most ground to cover; it's still enough for established players to quickly bootstrap a basic new line of work or facility type; and it's low enough that "bootstrapping" doesn't become a ridiculous sort of instant-gratification thing. This way it's a nice quick bump from literally small potatoes to a decent little facility. That seems like a good balance, and the difference in strategic and logistical position between new vs. established players means the new players will get MORE VALUE out of the same functionality, which is ideal since established players are already holding every other sort of advantage and have already decided to stick with the game. You get too easily to a point where your factories spend more time expanding than producing, which i find ridiculous. This is a good problem to have; you don't have to deal with that unless you are a big company with a lot of established square footage already. If you want to have less downtime per facility, duplicate facilities and do rolling upgrades. If you have too many facility types to make that workable, buy more real estate. If you've bought it all or are priced out of the remaining lots, establish a new company and split off part of your manufacturing line to that one instead and rework your facilities accordingly with duplication. Running a huge business means planning and logistics and downtime. It means solving "I want to massively expand my holdings" by finding solutions other than asking to be allowed to just always instantly build stuff. |
|
Timothy Martin RJ: Empty Inc CO: Empty Post Rating: 0 + / - Total Posts: 29 Karma: 10 Joined: Apr 23, 2012 |
Posted on May 14, 2012 Why not just limit instabuild to the actual owner of a company?Or make hiring only possible after the instabuild networth limit? That would be more elegant solutions. |
|
Nwabudike Morgan RJ: CEO Nwabudike Morgan CO: CEO Nwabudike Morgan Post Rating: 17 + / - Total Posts: 108 Karma: 344 Joined: Apr 4, 2012 |
Posted on May 14, 2012 I am in favor of B1. As it is now, a newbie who games his available wealth can take far, far greater advantage of the instant construction than one who does not. A small cap on the maximum size, less than a week's worth, ensures that established companies maintain a large advantage over newcomers.
|
|
Scott (Admin) RJ: Ratan Joyce CO: Ratan Joyce Post Rating: 1 + / - Total Posts: 1175 Karma: 5083 Joined: Jan 13, 2012 |
Posted on May 14, 2012 In general I'm seeing B1 more, so B1 it is.There are reasons for not doing the owner check: 1A. Hire a newbie, sell stocks, make newbie chairman, insta-build, buy shares back OR 1B. Let a newbie insta-build and take the company public, takeover the company. 2. Public companies thus gain an unfair advantage over private companies. @David Thanks for the suggestions, I'll correct them. |
|
Innocent Bystander RJ: Matthew Matician Post Rating: 0 + / - Total Posts: 76 Karma: 54 Joined: Apr 2, 2012 |
Posted on May 14, 2012 I'd be in favor of B1 provided it's implemented hand-in-hand with a mechanism to limit the number of companies that one individual can run (owner & ceo combined) to a number in the mid single digits. If someone can found/takeover a bunch of companies and get almost a week's worth of build time for no time cost, the more businesses they run, the more advantage they have--and the more trivial one or two week's worth of building upgrades becomes.Instead of having one number for every building (such as 500 sqft), it might be wise to make it depend on how fast that particular building can be constructed: most factories go up at a rate of 1 sqft per 5 minutes, but high-end factories (air, water, auto, others?) go up at a rate of 1 sqft per 15 minutes. Should 5-minute-factories get 1500 sqft instabuilds to make them equivalent in 'free build time'? |
|
James Grey RJ: Dairy Aire CO: Dairy Aire Post Rating: 0 + / - Total Posts: 26 Karma: 21 Joined: Apr 17, 2012 |
Posted on May 14, 2012 B1 however there should be an additional limit of 2500m^2 overall.
|
|
Samuel Turgeon RJ: Ilikor Yutori CO: Post Rating: 0 + / - Total Posts: 2 Karma: 10 Joined: Apr 23, 2012 |
Posted on May 14, 2012 A1
|
You need to register or login to post a reply.