Print

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

[Jimmmmm]

I agree with stated concerns and have changed my mind.

Vote: No on Rule 338

[Jimmmmm]

Proposal fails 4-5 if I'm right.

It is now Jimmmmm's turn.

Ooh, that's me! Not sure what I'm thinking yet.

[Jimmmmm]

Draft Proposal 339

At the end of a player's turn, they must pay an upkeep cost for any units they currently have on the World Map.

The upkeep cost for n units, in Nomic Dollars, is equal to ten times the sum of all integers from 1 to n.

If the player's personal quantity of Nomic Dollars is sufficient to cover the upkeep cost, it is deducted automatically at the end of their turn. Otherwise, all of their units are paralysed until the end of their next turn.

A player may not give any commands, or receive any benefits from a paralysed unit.

[Jack Rudd]

Looks good. (That expression works out as 5n² + 5n, doesn't it?)

[liopoil]

Looks good. (That expression works out as 5n² + 5n, doesn't it?)

It does work out to that, but I would not accept this proposal because I currently have a unit which I don't need to pay for, and most other people don't.

[sudgy]

We need to make a way to get money very quickly if this passes (which I'm okay with).

Also, lio, everybody will make a unit theiy're next turn, and have to pay upkeep, so it wouldn't be unfair.

[liopoil]

making a unit isn't mandatory - I know I wouldn't make a unit if I knew I was going to have to pay $10 a turn for it.

Also, currently it is impossible to have multiple units, yes?

[Jack Rudd]

Also, currently it is impossible to have multiple units, yes?

There's no game mechanic that allows you to increase your unit count above 1 at the moment, yes.

[Jimmmmm]

We need to make a way to get money very quickly if this passes (which I'm okay with).

Most of us have N$1000, so if we have one unit each, that's 100 rounds to sort it out, which is 1100 turns.

[Jimmmmm]

making a unit isn't mandatory - I know I wouldn't make a unit if I knew I was going to have to pay $10 a turn for it.

Would you suggest making it optional to freeze or remove your units if you don't want to pay for them, even if you can?

[liopoil]

making a unit isn't mandatory - I know I wouldn't make a unit if I knew I was going to have to pay $10 a turn for it.

Would you suggest making it optional to freeze or remove your units if you don't want to pay for them, even if you can?

Yes, that would probably be enough to get my vote.

[Jimmmmm]

making a unit isn't mandatory - I know I wouldn't make a unit if I knew I was going to have to pay $10 a turn for it.

What exactly do you need your money for?

[liopoil]

something eventually... and seeing as I can make a unit any time, and the unit isn't worth anything yet...

[Jimmmmm]

something eventually... and seeing as I can make a unit any time, and the unit isn't worth anything yet...

How likely do you think it is that it will still be worth nothing by the time your turn comes around?

[liopoil]

probably less than a .5 chance, but not an insignificant chance. And in any case, I can still make a unit for just 1 IP and still have 3 IP left.

[Jimmmmm]

Anyone else have thoughts on whether it should be a mandatory payment, whether your units should be removed or just unusable if you can't or don't pay etc?

[sudgy]

Actually, you could replace the "paralyzing" effect just with saying that you may pay for your units, and if not, they are inactive.

You also need to say that you can't get to negative Nomic Dollars with this rule.

[Jimmmmm]

Actually, you could replace the "paralyzing" effect just with saying that you may pay for your units, and if not, they are inactive.

Yeah, that works.

You also need to say that you can't get to negative Nomic Dollars with this rule.

Doesn't the third paragraph cover that? If you can afford to, you lose the money, otherwise (you don't and) you lose your guys for a round.

[Jimmmmm]

Would it be okay to include a "Players may spend 1 IP to remove a unit" clause? I feel like this might belong in a separate rule, but I'm not sure.

[florrat]

Would it be okay to include a "Players may spend 1 IP to remove a unit" clause? I feel like this might belong in a separate rule, but I'm not sure.

No way! Do we want to be able to teleport units for 2 IP?

I really don't see the fuzz about paying less than N$1 per turn. After 100 turns, you have only lost a fraction of your money due to unit upkeep, and probably we're in 2015 by then...

[Jimmmmm]

Would it be okay to include a "Players may spend 1 IP to remove a unit" clause? I feel like this might belong in a separate rule, but I'm not sure.

No way! Do we want to be able to teleport units for 2 IP?

Good point, good point.

Actually, that's a really good point. Is there a good alternative to simply being stuck with a unit forever once you've created it?

[heron]

We could make another rule that you are only allowed to create units at certain locations. Maybe a player can spend 1 IP to create a 'base' at a square if they do not already have one, and a player may only create units at their 'base.'

[mail-mi]

If I have to pay money, why would I make a unit when it doesn't do anything and only sucks away my money?

I think we need to have a purpose for the units before we make a rule to pay for them.

[Jimmmmm]

If I have to pay money, why would I make a unit when it doesn't do anything and only sucks away my money?

I think we need to have a purpose for the units before we make a rule to pay for them.

I think it's more important to make money valuable than to give us a way of making it.

[mail-mi]

If I have to pay money, why would I make a unit when it doesn't do anything and only sucks away my money?

I think we need to have a purpose for the units before we make a rule to pay for them.

I think it's more important to make money valuable than to give us a way of making it.

um I think you're misunderstanding my post. Yes we need a way to make money valuable, but why would I make a unit just to spend money on it?