Re: work/recruit and balance

Rich Skrenta (
Fri, 24 Jul 1992 15:56 EDT

Greg Lindahl:
> > o FORM's dynamics should be similar to a one-man recruit.
> > For simplicity, FORM will take seven days.
> .... and gets cheaper. The effect on new players will probably be a
> wash, since they're short on money.

That's why I suggest giving newbies free & fast FORMs. We want them
to grow easier, and if we can give them 2,500 gold in a way that doesn't
jingle, they don't have to be quite so paranoid.

> Under the proposal a man can net around 15 gold per month, working
> full time. So if you are working to earn money to train, you can only
> train for about 5 days per month. Essentially, this removes work
> totally from the "useful ways to earn money" category, and puts it
> into the "how to avoid starvation category".

Steve and I have long felt that this *is* the purpose of the WORK command.
You shouldn't be able to get rich on it. You should be able to survive.

Under limits/competition, it is possible to not even earn enough to
survive with WORK.

> I had hoped that my work-2-weeks-per-month would avoid this, but...

You propose to double WORK's output to, say, 2 gold/day, but limit
units to working for only 2 weeks out of the month, enforcing this
with either a hard limit ("You can't work anymore.") or a loyalty drop.

No one has proposed a good story to explain this; the feel is crappy.
It could very well be a good idea, but I just don't know what all of the
effects it would have are. We can try it out at some point. I'd like to
see a negative analysis of this idea, showing me everything that can go wrong
with it. I've only heard a few "Yeah, I'd like to only have to work half the
time" sort of endorsements. I want to know how Prenola will pervert this to
double his income.

> One thing that does get strange under the new system is, say, combat
> training. The man now costs 200 gold... that's the equivalent of
> nearly 3 months of training. Changing the price of one fundamental
> thing in the game is really a revaluation of money: the price of
> training and equipment has fallen and the price of men has risen. The
> result will be that players will train fewer men to higher levels of
> skill.

Good. That's the result I want. Finally got it right this time.

> I, for one, wish that the limits on WORK remained. Other then
> warlording, the only player conflict I've seen happened more or less
> because of a conflict over limited WORK monies.

We can make lots of things to fight over. I believe there is a place for
a command which provides guaranteed sustenance, and little else.

Rich Skrenta <>  N2QAV

Main Index  |  Olympia  |  Arena  |  PBM FAQ  |  Links