Population Control proposed Fix

[Maha]

like stan i suggested before that population should be based on imported or produced goods.
this allow for boycots and other non aggresive hostile actions

but i understand that ship count is a kind of benchmark in the game.

a way to ease the pain for the coming reduction is a cash for population. i think that phoenix scale is about that.
nations see some -one time- compensation for the loss of population. that gives a momentairy spike in cash, but helps to swallow the pill

[Vane]

The whole point here is to reduce the insane amounts of gc being generated within the game. Where is the logic in granting mass cash grants to all nations loosing their populations then?

As CJ has said a few times now, anything a nation or group has invested into a port has been returned through tax income already. Ie: each group is in the green.

[Poppy]

non of them is vane. CJ doesnt know and you dont either

[Vane]

I do, as for TI'S "used" the return has been dealt.

The only investment not returned would be Merc's in their largely prepped stack of cards on hand. They have not been used and over stocking was poor foresight especially since you yourself said a change to mechanics was anticipated.

Sounds like the Merc argument is solely based on their own interests and not what's best for the game

[Dmanwuzhere]

Any value of something bought being altered to decrease in value is and of itself wrong. When you mention poor foresight the same argument could be applied to the mechanics of the game. However, CJ is taking steps to remedy the problem that he sees for the game. So to argue poor foresight to further acceptance of what another sees as a loss is in poor form unless CJ allows his poor foresight to continue on.
That being said everyone is entitled to feel as they will. The bad thing here is everyone is right. But something had to change in order for CJ to be happy in the direction his game is going.
There is a loss and there is a change needed.
I do not agree with the change entirely and have my own arguments for and against, but at the end of the day like all things, changes come. Some will bear the brunt more than others but that does not mean it can not be noted so it can be remedied at a later date or used as leverage the next time loss comes around.
Evolution and survival always come with a price for someone and I think that sucks. That's where reality and game collide.

[Most Lee Harmless]

I have put a lot of effort, time and some funds into my wonderful Brooklyn Bridge Purchase Investment Scheme : but alas, no buyer willing to meet my most reasonable expenses, costs and extremely modest profit margin has been found : my accountant now tells me my scheme is worthless : surely some mistake has been made and I deserve some measure of compensation. After all, I did plan to make an enormous profit so I cant see any reason why I shouldn't have one given to me!
I feel its vitally important this matter gets settled in my favor as this could severely impair my forthcoming New York Subway Time-Share Purchase Venture!

[Dmanwuzhere]

Show me your bill of sale by the appropriate people and I will offer you my lawyer pro bono. Without one I would suggest holding off on the subway venture.

[Most Lee Harmless]

Pro Bono ? They like U2 ? Mmmmm... maybe you need to change your lawyer...

[Poppy]

I do, as for TI'S "used" the return has been dealt.

The only investment not returned would be Merc's in their largely prepped stack of cards on hand. They have not been used and over stocking was poor foresight especially since you yourself said a change to mechanics was anticipated.

Sounds like the Merc argument is solely based on their own interests and not what's best for the game

I have no problem losing the credits. but we didn't get paid for all the TIs we used. We have a 18 weeks contract we wont be able to fulfill due to intervention. so big lose even if we disregard the cards on hand.

Anyways we wont be the ones paying the expenses. for the pop contract we gave up on other, more lucrative operations and we will go back doing them.

[Shadowood]

I do, as for TI'S "used" the return has been dealt.

The only investment not returned would be Merc's in their largely prepped stack of cards on hand. They have not been used and over stocking was poor foresight especially since you yourself said a change to mechanics was anticipated.

Sounds like the Merc argument is solely based on their own interests and not what's best for the game

I have no problem losing the credits. but we didn't get paid for all the TIs we used. We have a 18 weeks contract we wont be able to fulfill due to intervention. so big lose even if we disregard the cards on hand.

Anyways we wont be the ones paying the expenses. for the pop contract we gave up on other, more lucrative operations and we will go back doing them.

Your business model still works, it just take twice as long now with the monies halved. Do you have to abandoned it?