Publier en Venezuela - Analyses financières - 02 Dec 2024 08:37 - 3
The economic module of eDominacy should be the foundation for a vibrant and interactive economy. However, the reality is that it discourages collaboration among players and stifles economic growth. In this article, I will address what I believe to be the main issues, expose the consequences of the current model, and propose changes for a more sustainable system.
A Clear Example of the Problem
Imagine a Q5 tank factory in a country with a 100% weapons bonus:
To buy a package of 1000 Q5 tanks, which costs 15 gold, it would take 9 days of work. This is an excessive effort to acquire the minimum necessary to actively fight in the game.
One of the main issues is the distribution of workers by the admin. Instead of allowing a free and dynamic labor market, where companies compete for employees and offer better wages, the current system encourages a mentality of self-sufficiency. This, in turn, leads to several problems:
My Proposal for a Better System:
The current economic module is harming the game's dynamics and stifling its economy. With low wages, the distribution of workers, and incentives for self-sufficiency, the system is doomed to reduce economic movement and demotivate players.
And you, what do you think?
Am I out of my mind? Does the current system encourage a collective or individualistic game? Do you agree that changes are needed? I want to hear your opinion.
In the end, just an article for you to vote on and complete your mission!
* I want to apologize, as I used a translator and gross mistakes may appear.
A Clear Example of the Problem
Imagine a Q5 tank factory in a country with a 100% weapons bonus:
- To produce 1000 tanks, the following would be needed:
- Two factories with 5 workers and a manager.
- One factory with 4 workers and a manager.
- Selling 1000 tanks for 15 gold would result in:
- 0.015 gold per tank.
- Each worker produces 60 tanks (with maximum bonus), which means:
- 60 × 0.015 = 0.9 gold per workday.
- Working twice per day, the worker would accumulate 1.8 gold per day.
To buy a package of 1000 Q5 tanks, which costs 15 gold, it would take 9 days of work. This is an excessive effort to acquire the minimum necessary to actively fight in the game.
One of the main issues is the distribution of workers by the admin. Instead of allowing a free and dynamic labor market, where companies compete for employees and offer better wages, the current system encourages a mentality of self-sufficiency. This, in turn, leads to several problems:
- Reduction in Economic Movement:
When players choose to produce everything they need, they stop participating in the market as both buyers and sellers. This drastically reduces the circulation of goods and currency, suffocating the in-game economy. - Discouraging Specialization:
A healthy system should encourage collaboration, where players specialize in different areas (production, trade, combat) and rely on each other. Self-sufficiency eliminates this dynamic, making the game less interactive and strategic. - Concentration of Resources:
Players with the ability to invest in multiple factories become practically independent, dominating entire sectors and limiting opportunities for new players or small entrepreneurs.
My Proposal for a Better System:
- Increase Production per Worker: Adjusting productivity so that companies can pay better wages without compromising their profitability.
- End the Distribution of Workers: Remove the automatic distribution of workers by the admin. This practice discourages competition between companies, as everyone receives labor without effort. If this distribution were eliminated, companies would have to compete to attract and retain good workers by offering better wages.
- Benefits for Specialization: Create incentives for players to specialize, such as bonuses for those who focus on a specific area (production, trade, or combat), promoting interdependence and strengthening the game's economy. Alternatively, offer production bonuses for those who choose to produce specific goods.
- Stimulate Trade: Implement mechanisms to discourage self-sufficiency, such as additional costs for maintaining many factories or for owning factories of different types (Weapons, Ships, Food, Houses, and RAWs), or offer bonuses for transactions in the market.
The current economic module is harming the game's dynamics and stifling its economy. With low wages, the distribution of workers, and incentives for self-sufficiency, the system is doomed to reduce economic movement and demotivate players.
And you, what do you think?
Am I out of my mind? Does the current system encourage a collective or individualistic game? Do you agree that changes are needed? I want to hear your opinion.
In the end, just an article for you to vote on and complete your mission!
* I want to apologize, as I used a translator and gross mistakes may appear.
Donner
BornaXSmiljancOSHiCommentaires (3)
Like the idea of benefits for specialization but removing distribution of workers is not possible because of this battle system. You have a battle every 5 minutes in this game and there would be enough wep for that cause there are not enough players to work
It's open market. This prise dictate market.
Agree with specialization, but in my own interest can't agree with tolls on have diverse production 
Removing a lot of free workers gifts can be interesting, but will also flood the raw market due to excess goods
Removing a lot of free workers gifts can be interesting, but will also flood the raw market due to excess goods