Elements the Game Forum - Free Online Fantasy Card Game
Other Topics => World of Elements => Forum Archive => WoE Archive => Topic started by: Scaredgirl on July 01, 2010, 10:37:55 am
-
Economics:
Money and revenue
Just like the game itself, WoE will use electrum as currency.
What can I do with electrum in WoE?
You can buy new cards. Each card costs the same (not different prices like Elements has). Rare cards cannot be bought.
You can upgrade cards. This can be only done in major cities and other "special places".
You can use electrum for fast travel between different parts of the map.
The richest players can even buy their own land (hexagon) and build a castle on it. They can choose the look, name, and appoint an army to protect it.
Those were just examples. There will be other ways to use money as well.
How to obtain electrum in WoE?
Each hexagon produces 1-3 electrum per turn (depending on the value on that hexagon) to the element that controls that hexagon. All that money will be divided by all the players in that element. This means that if an element controls 10 hexagons with a combined revenue of 20 electrum, and if that element has 10 players, each player will receive 2 electrum that turn.
You can obtain money by fighting and defeating enemies. When you win a battle, you salvage 10% of the electrum that player had in his/her possession (rounded up).
Some quests will give you electrum as a reward.
etc.
Post more idea here please.
-
quests are divided into difficulties and given coins
easy - 5
not very easy - 7
medium - 10
medium hard - 12
hard -15
wtf impossible - 20
And also maybe each element could gain electrum in a diffrent way, IE earth has to be control of a mountain to mine and they get +1 elctrum per turn. IDK
-
And also maybe each element could gain electrum in a diffrent way, IE earth has to be control of a mountain to mine and they get +1 elctrum per turn. IDK
I don't think money should be restricted by having to own an exact type of land, but maybe that they get a +1 bonus if they own land that correlates with their element. We could do this with 3, 4, 6, or 12 different kinds of lands.
-
quests are divided into difficulties and given coins
easy - 5
not very easy - 7
medium - 10
medium hard - 12
hard -15
wtf impossible - 20
And also maybe each element could gain electrum in a diffrent way, IE earth has to be control of a mountain to mine and they get +1 elctrum per turn. IDK
Quest rewards will most likely be determined on a case by case basis, as some of them give cards etc. as rewards, not only cash.
That second idea is pretty interesting. We could pick one "home terrain" for each element, and that element would get double cash from those terrains. Good idea, I'll have to think about it.
Downside is of course that it makes revenue counting more complex.
-
:D ok but things like a river would give water more, lave - fire ext ext and that sounds awesome winning cards from quests :D
-
Yes, I like the idea of winning cards from quest, the difficult and impossible ones could be rewarded with rare cards, as you can't buy them with the electrum.
I like the idea of a homeland too.
How about the possibility to sell your resources in the cities, for even more electrum?
-
Yes, I like the idea of winning cards from quest, the difficult and impossible ones could be rewarded with rare cards, as you can't buy them with the electrum.
Yep, that's the plan. I will write something in the "Quest" topic.
I like the idea of a homeland too.
How about the possibility to sell your resources in the cities, for even more electrum?
Yes, some kind of trading system is needed. Only problem is of course that it's most likely going to complicate things a LOT. That's why it needs to be very simple to be implemented.
I'm a bit worried that this event becomes too big. In the end it should be about Elements, not a kind of entirely new game where playing Elements is just 5% of total action.
-
I see problem with the "home terrain", because aether - supposedly- is another dimension, so, they would be untargetable in their home terrain and still make more money?
-
Hmmm... how about if you could capture creatures and sell them in cities and other "special" places?
-
Hmmm... how about if you could capture creatures and sell them in cities and other "special" places?
Then why not kidnap players as well and make their element ransom them (if they want them back)
I think we should have to hire mercenary cards, which would be other cards/nymphs/markcards (?), for a fixed number of turns instead of being able to buy them.
-
I got one. Once you capture a city you can enforce "taxes" You get more E on this space.
-
I see problem with the "home terrain", because aether - supposedly- is another dimension, so, they would be untargetable in their home terrain and still make more money?
I discarded the idea of using another dimension for :aether. It would have been super complex. One map is better. But another dimension might come later, who knows.
Hmmm... how about if you could capture creatures and sell them in cities and other "special" places?
We will have salvaging.
Then why not kidnap players as well and make their element ransom them (if they want them back)
I think we should have to hire mercenary cards, which would be other cards/nymphs/markcards (?), for a fixed number of turns instead of being able to buy them.
I don't know.. that would potentially remove a player from the game for a long time. It would work better with NPC's or something.
I got one. Once you capture a city you can enforce "taxes" You get more E on this space.
Taxes is a pretty cool idea. I have to think about that.
-
How about "markets"? I mean, you could buy a card and instead of selling it when you don't need it any more, you could post it up for auction. That way, you could get more electrum back and buy cards for less of it!
-
How about "markets"? I mean, you could buy a card and instead of selling it when you don't need it any more, you could post it up for auction. That way, you could get more electrum back and buy cards for less of it!
Yes, we will have a forum auction system of sorts.
-
What is left to decide on here?
-
What is left to decide on here?
Could you please not ask the same thing in over 10 different threads? I get that you're interested in tthe event, but you could just create a thread elsewhere to ask about it.
-
I did ask, nobody answered. So I did this.
-
I did ask, nobody answered. So I did this.
The fact that nobody answered to you doesn't mean you can ignore forum rules and start spamming like crazy.
Many things are still undecided. Tomorrow I will post details on what kind of organization we will have run this thing. And when we find all those people, the project will move forward much faster.
-
Erm... How 'bout a manager (marketing organizer)?
-
Erm... How 'bout a manager (marketing organizer)?
What would this person do? I think you are trying to say something other than "marketing". :)
-
Sorry for commenting in such an old thread, but IDK if you've actually thought about this...
What if a player has to go on holidays, so he stays in an allied city, then he would be getting revenue, and thus reducing the amount of revenue for other players... Imagine that when he comes back, he is brainwashed/stops playing/gets bored.
I say that if you're inactive for more than X time (without advice), your character will be deleted/lose reputation/stop getting money/lose money each round and give it to your team. Then, if you say "I'll stop playing for X reason and stay in a city", you won't get revenue, but won't be penalised.
This is in case some people stop playing for any reason and can't or don't want to delete/freeze their characters.
Hope I'm not annoying you.
-
Sorry for commenting in such an old thread, but IDK if you've actually thought about this...
What if a player has to go on holidays, so he stays in an allied city, then he would be getting revenue, and thus reducing the amount of revenue for other players... Imagine that when he comes back, he is brainwashed/stops playing/gets bored.
I say that if you're inactive for more than X time (without advice), your character will be deleted/lose reputation/stop getting money/lose money each round and give it to your team. Then, if you say "I'll stop playing for X reason and stay in a city", you won't get revenue, but won't be penalised.
This is in case some people stop playing for any reason and can't or don't want to delete/freeze their characters.
Hope I'm not annoying you.
We will have some kind of system where inactive players get put on a "coma" where they receive no revenue and cannot be attacked. Players that are in a "coma" for a long time, get removed from the event.
-
Each hexagon produces 1-3 electrum per turn (depending on the value on that hexagon) to the element that controls that hexagon. All that money will be divided by all the players in that element. This means that if an element controls 10 hexagons with a combined revenue of 20 electrum, and if that element has 10 players, each player will receive 2 electrum that turn.
It doesn't seem like a bad idea that revenue is split among players of an element. This way, assuming total revenue is the same for two elements, the one with more players will not necessarily have an advantage.
However, when every element has more players, the amount that every player gets will be less.
My suggestion is that the "1-3 electrum per turn" is based on a fixed number of total players, say, 100. If there are more or less players, the electrum gain is scaled proportionately. So if there are 200 players total, hexes would produce 2-6 electrum instead, but this would be compensated for by having twice as many players to split it amongst.
-
Each hexagon produces 1-3 electrum per turn (depending on the value on that hexagon) to the element that controls that hexagon. All that money will be divided by all the players in that element. This means that if an element controls 10 hexagons with a combined revenue of 20 electrum, and if that element has 10 players, each player will receive 2 electrum that turn.
It doesn't seem like a bad idea that revenue is split among players of an element. This way, assuming total revenue is the same for two elements, the one with more players will not necessarily have an advantage.
However, when every element has more players, the amount that every player gets will be less.
My suggestion is that the "1-3 electrum per turn" is based on a fixed number of total players, say, 100. If there are more or less players, the electrum gain is scaled proportionately. So if there are 200 players total, hexes would produce 2-6 electrum instead, but this would be compensated for by having twice as many players to split it amongst.
indeed, if you only control, say, 20 hexes, thats 60 :electrum at max. If you have 100 players, each player will get about 2/3 :electrum. That's rather impossible, and rounding up would be generating 1/3 :electrum from absolutely nowhere, which is unfair to other teams IMO. so if you have 100 players, and the formula krahhl suggested above, each player would get 1.2 :electrum per turn, rounded up that's 2 :electrum per turn, rounded down (more likely to happen) would just be 1 :electrum per turn.
-
If we're giving revenue every 3 turns instead, as has been suggested, numbers would be easier to work with. But I think all revenue should just be increased overall; a single card costs 100 electrum, making 1 electrum per turn seem rather pointless.
-
If we're giving revenue every 3 turns instead, as has been suggested, numbers would be easier to work with. But I think all revenue should just be increased overall; a single card costs 100 electrum, making 1 electrum per turn seem rather pointless.
perhaps increase the current revenue system we have threefold and go from there?
-
Are we sure there will be 100 players for each element? (I mean, if you were speaking true numbers) Because that would actually make 1-3 electrum per hexe (and round) too low, as you said...
Fortunately, that can be easily solved, hopefully in beta version :D
-
100 was just a random number when I said it, but I don't doubt we will have at least that many. Wars have over 100 people, and space is limited. There are then many who want to join but can't. In WoE, everyone would be able to participate.
The main point of my suggestion is to make revenue based on the number of total players, rather than just a fixed value of 1-3 per hex. I don't mean it shouldn't be based on hexes controlled as well, but as I said, the base number determined from hexes should be scaled proportionately to the number of people. This way each person gets the same amount of revenue if there are 500 people as if there are 50 people, rather than 10 times less.
As for revenue simply being too low to begin with, that's probably something that can be figured out when it is actually implemented and tested. Right now, 2 electrum per round doesn't sound too appealing to me.
-
Ok then, I got confused when you said 1-2 electrum per round and that stuff :D
As far as I know, there will be sort of an "imbalance limit" between teams (i.e. when an Element has too many players it's closed until the whole thing is fixed), so the revenue per hex should be determined based on the TOTAL number of players, not in each element. Also remember that cities and towns (foretresses?) also give you electrum per round, and that we'll have time to fix that in beta version.
But I agree that 1-2 electrum per round would suck :-\
-
the revenue per hex should be determined based on the TOTAL number of players, not in each element.
make revenue based on the number of total players
That's what I said .-.
But yeah, I guess everything will be worked out in due time. I'm just tossing out my thoughts beforehand.
-
Huh, my bad, it was TimerClock's idea :D
-
I've been thinking about this revenue system for the past few days. Like Krahhl said earlier, round revenue must be related to number of players, otherwise players who joined WoE early, would get tons of revenue, while players who join later, would get peanuts.
We should have a total revenue generated based on number of players in WoE, for example 50 :electrum generated per player. This total revenue would then be divided into 410 shares.
12 x Cities: 6 shares
24 x Towns: 3 shares
122 x Others: 1 share
----------------------------
TOTAL SHARES: 410
There are 158 hexes that can be controlled (Outlaw City and Omnitron are always neutral). Each hex generates revenue based on whether or not it has a city or town on it. Cities take 6 shares, towns take 3 and all other hexes take 1 share.
Example: There are 100 players in WoE. Total revenue generated is 5000 :electum . This would mean that one share is roughly 12.2 :electrum , which would mean that hexes generate revenue as follows:
City hex: 73 :electrum
Town hex: 37 :electrum
Other hexes: 12 :electrum
While this might sound very complex, it's actually very simple because we use Google Docs spreadsheets which can do all this boring math automatically. We should also be able to do a script that distributes revenue to character sheets automatically.
All this is still subject to change of course, especially that 50 :electrum per player, which is just a random number I took from thin air.
Post any comments or ideas. Thanks.
-
...that sounds hugely complicated, in an event which is rapidly becoming too complicated to play even though it's missing half its features.
My philosophy on simplicity in game design is that it's not just required to keep the maths easy - it also makes rules more parsimonous and harmonious, and therefore easier to understand and consider as a holistic set.
Most game design theory suggests that there are different sorts of reactions to complicated rulesets, but a really important thing to remember is that many people do not like them and will be put off a game because of them; in contrast people who actively enjoy complicated rules are less likely to be put off because they can deal with the emergent complexity instead.
I'm also concerned about google docs creep, but I believe I noted that elsewhere so it's probably a good idea to keep all the discussion in the same place.
-
@ SG,
As I've understood your system, it can be made MUCH more simpler than you explained it.
Just skip the mathematical part and make it like this:
Each City produces 0.72 :electrum per Player.
Each Town produces 0.36 :electrum per Player.
Each Other produces 0.12 :electrum per Player.
Simple as that.
Well, the number popped up like this, because of your random 50 :electrum per player. Can of course be changed into anything.
So for 100 Players you get your:
City hex: 72 :electrum
Town hex: 36 :electrum
Other hexes: 12 :electrum
With a little rounding fail.
-
I think you guys misunderstood how it would work in reality.
When using spreadsheet formulas, what I suggested couldn't be any more simple. It doesn't matter how complex the formula is because it's all automatic (counted by Google Docs). Players don't have to count anything, they just get the revenue handed to them.
All players need to know really is that towns produce 3 times, and cities 6 times, the revenue a regular hex produces.
-
You are right that a simple excell chart is plenty to make any complicated mathematical formula into a simple: add a number, take out result.
But why would you want to make the idea somewhat complicated, so you need a spreadsheet, when you can keep it simple enough for every participant to calculate it him/herself?
Many folks may like to know how much money they will get in the next round for planning ahead, without having to ask a mod / using spreadsheet each time.
I like the idea and it looks like you've put quite some thought into it. But sadly not everyone is with mathematical skill gifted. So IMO going down to the basics is the best option, especially since the resault is exactly the same.
-
You are right that a simple excell chart is plenty to make any complicated mathematical formula into a simple: add a number, take out result.
But why would you want to make the idea somewhat complicated, so you need a spreadsheet, when you can keep it simple enough for every participant to calculate it him/herself?
Many folks may like to know how much money they will get in the next round for planning ahead, without having to ask a mod / using spreadsheet each time.
I like the idea and it looks like you've put quite some thought into it. But sadly not everyone is with mathematical skill gifted. So IMO going down to the basics is the best option, especially since the resault is exactly the same.
Add a number, take out the result seems pretty simple to me. And that would also take out the human factor of it (i.e. miscalculations).
I guess having to look in a spreadsheet to know how much money you'll get next round is too little drawback to be worth the human mistakes it prevent.
blarg: