[Poll] Competition on secondary industries

[Andreas]

someone stealing food/goods/... on city builder games can stop you completely till you are able to build a new network to compensate for the sudden drop.

[Hint] build a factory and food processing plant inside your protected area [/Hint]

[A.M.Sandulescu]

After discussing with Beul , I understand that this is a step we must consider. Players must decide (again due to critics since the last time when we held a vote...a year ago) if they want competition on n-ice servers or they want to change this.

This is not a matter of YES competition and NO competitin

I bet that there are only a few players that do not want competition
The far more bigger majority plays here due to competition (and for other facts that make n-ice a quality server)
I also chose to play here for competition and other things that i enumerated in my other post.

But in my opinion the "new rule" could look something like this :
1. At least an advantage for the guy that brings raw materials in to secondary industries 
2. Primary founded industries should stay with full competition
3. Founded cities should be private because of:

- The high price (that can be felt hard in the early stages)
                                                                           
- That feeling, when you see your founded city grow in any design and shape you make it.( you will say that there is city builder for this...but there, you can not build a desired design of infrastructure and then found the city, there you must concentrate fully on the supply network.)

[alex879ro]

A.M. Sandulescu, I can understand what you are saying, but you must consider that the first step is a battle between those 2 groups. Altough you may not believe it, there are a lot of players that support competition. This isn`t our first vote on the matter and so far the first group (keeping competition) won each time.
Therefore the first problem is to see how many of our players want competition and how many of our players want a form of owning a industry( partial ownage, delivering cargo in order to take goods , advantages for the first player....there are a lot of possible desires but they all are in the group of people that want a change and do not want to keep the old rule)

After figuring out which is the majority (for the current rule or wanting to change it) , we can start debating all the possibilities that can be implemented.
As I said, this is important for the admins too because when implementing server proposals or introducing a new point system, we are taking into consideration what the players want.

This vote isn`t for nothing, but this rule was made a long time ago when N-ice community wasn`t what it is today. This is why more people consider that it is not good anymore. But in order to change it, we must have patience and take the right decisions (wait for the present poll to finish to give chances to more people to vote , starting to think and discussing the ideas that can be implemented, introducing a new poll to decide how the rule will be changed after  the ideas have been discussed and finally implementing the change- those are examples of possible future steps altough Beul is the one who had the idea so I guess he already has a plan and some proposals)

I can understand that some players want partial competition but this will all be discussed and we will find the best solution. So far the main goal is to understand if we need to change the rule or the majority of players is still there and want the rule unchanged.

[A.M.Sandulescu]

I agree, you make a good point of view.

Well, my guess is that the vote will be won by "leave it as it is"

[Knogle]

I would say, if you don't like competition, play offline

[alex879ro]

Even if it is won by them , the numbers still matter. Cause if it is something like 51 vs 49 , it will still give us a lot to think about it. So any result that comes up will be taken into consideration. The only idea right now is just to express the votes so we can understand how many players are in each category. We might be considering even starting a special server if there few players who want change of the rule but the poll is for keeping the rule.

All options are opened. Including this vote in our strategy of adapting our servers as time passes is crucial.

So the poll is different since last when we advertised it a lot and said "ok...the biggest group wins"

[A.M.Sandulescu]

I would say, if you don't like competition, play offline

I would say, if you don't read carefully someones opinion, do not comment about it.
I play here for competition.

[Knogle]

I would say, if you don't like competition, play offline

I would say, if you don't read carefully someones opinion, do not comment about it.
I play here for competition.

Oh, I'm sorry.. this was just a general statement.. it was not meant for you personally.. I was just giving my opinion on the whole subject.

[A.M.Sandulescu]

I see, false interpretation on my side then

[aditsu]

The purpose of this pole is also to understand how big are the 2 groups (those that want competition and those who do not want competition).
[...]
Unfortunately ....those who do not want competition are split into more then 1 group. (Beul understood this and changed the poll).

Therefore the first problem is to see how many of our players want competition and how many of our players want a form of owning a industry( partial ownage, delivering cargo in order to take goods , advantages for the first player....there are a lot of possible desires but they all are in the group of people that want a change and do not want to keep the old rule)

After figuring out which is the majority (for the current rule or wanting to change it) , we can start debating all the possibilities that can be implemented.
[...]
So far the main goal is to understand if we need to change the rule or the majority of players is still there and want the rule unchanged.

I see a small problem here. The current poll doesn't look to me like it's asking if people want to change the competition rule or keep it the same. It looks more like it's asking if people prefer a very specific change (no competition on funded secondary industries) or the current rule. From that point of view, I think the original poll was better. This poll doesn't consolidate all the "change" options into one, it keeps one "change" option and throws away all the other ones. And that's also why I couldn't choose either of the first 2 options but took the 3rd one (I have another idea that I will post here).

I can imagine there are people who want to change the rule, but find the current rule better than the 2nd option (no competition on funded secondary industries).

[alex879ro]

You`re the first one that says that ^^ . The most popular idea from the previous poll was placed here...and also, the topic explains it...

If you`re not happy with the 2 options, you can vote for the 3rd as you did and post your idea...and it will be taken into account:)

[Andreas]

I see a small problem here. The current poll doesn't look to me like it's asking if people want to change the competition rule or keep it the same. It looks more like it's asking if people prefer a very specific change (no competition on funded secondary industries) or the current rule. From that point of view, I think the original poll was better. This poll doesn't consolidate all the "change" options into one, it keeps one "change" option and throws away all the other ones. And that's also why I couldn't choose either of the first 2 options but took the 3rd one (I have another idea that I will post here).

I can imagine there are people who want to change the rule, but find the current rule better than the 2nd option (no competition on funded secondary industries).

I very well understand your point, and I have thought about it as well. I also recognize that you can't put all players that want change into one group. That was the reason I suggested a change that I thought would suit some of the wishes of players that want change without being too drastic.
I also admit I threw out the other 2 possibilities, because I do not consider them realistic atm. Offering options that have very little chance of being implemented would not make the outcome more useful IMO. Suppose the 3 change options got a majority: then 1 had to be chosen. which one? And then people would say: hey that option had only 30% of the votes! (which is understandable). If you have any suggestions you consider workable (for both the poll and about the rule) please share! Cause I started the poll, and I really would like a change for the better, but I am running out of ideas.

[aditsu]

Thanks for your responses.

You`re the first one that says that ^^ .

Yes, I mainly wanted to raise the issue since nobody else mentioned it. I'm not saying the poll is useless.

I also admit I threw out the other 2 possibilities, because I do not consider them realistic atm. Offering options that have very little chance of being implemented would not make the outcome more useful IMO. Suppose the 3 change options got a majority: then 1 had to be chosen. which one? And then people would say: hey that option had only 30% of the votes! (which is understandable).

Yes that's a concern. For "which one" I'd say the one with more votes, but an even better way to do the poll would be to give a score to each option.

If you have any suggestions you consider workable (for both the poll and about the rule) please share! Cause I started the poll, and I really would like a change for the better, but I am running out of ideas.

For the poll, other than the suggestion above (which I think is too late to implement), I think the 2nd option could be rephrased as "Yes, restrict competition on some industries (most likely to be implemented: no competition on funded secondary industries)".
For the rule, I already shared my suggestions on the previous page.

[Cossack]

ok, well theres a lot of reading to be done here, too much for me at least, so i'd be grateful for a couple of short answers before I cast my vote.

Is this literally only for industries that we buy ourselves?
what about power stations? they don't produce anything but if one is funded will other players still be able to use them?
will the 50% rule still apply to funded industries?

[imus]

Is this literally only for industries that we buy ourselves?
=> yes, for this poll it is.

what about power stations? they don't produce anything but if one is funded will other players still be able to use them?
=> the problem is "stealing" goods, so I doubt anyone would complain about power stations. How often would you fund one?

will the 50% rule still apply to funded industries?
=> if fully owned, it doesn't really matter anymore, but we need to make sure not to confuse anyone. I think it will work out the same way as owning cities in CB games. You own it, you can do whatever you want in that small area around it. So in my opinion, no it does not