| Friday, March 18, 2005 - 06:50 am |
I've had corps newly built get blasted away by rebels and civil mobs. I hate this crap, it's like I rule Iraq.
Iraq is occupied by a foreign power.
I am in favor of the direction this change is moving in, although it needs more work.
The idea is to find a way to make CEOs want to live in player countries, and to make players want CEOs as well.
the sheik mentions one motivating factor - time. with 700 corporations to manage, wouldnt it all be easier if CEOs did the work for him? Is it worth something, ingame, to him to have others take care of his economy for him?
BK, your exploitation scenarios are legitimate. Simple fixes (to start with) include preventing anyone owning CEO corporations in countries they own as well, and removing the workaround which permits infinite corporation transfers.
I would suggest moderate additions to these changes:
1. default tax rates in C3s should be raised to at least 50%.
2. The upgrade limits should be altered to permit at least equal profit for high tax/state corporations and moderate(competitiv) tax/private corporations.
3. making privae corporations somewhat more resistant to rebellion would go a long way. Just a little would be fine.
4. inactive (2 weeks? 3?) CEO corporations should be able to be nationalized immediately, without any numberical limit. Alternatively, the number of corporations that can be nationalized at once should be a function of the total poopulation of a country - 50M pop countries might be able to natoinalize 10 at a pop, while 5M might only be able to purchase 1 at a time.
This would fix the inactive/poor CEO management the sheik fears.
Giving presidents control is not satisfactory (in this paradigm) as it removes everything a CEO can do, and makes them have no place in the game. While I personally have no problem with their removal, that is not the intent of these changes nor can it be called remotely realistic.
5. Public corporations need additional benefits to be attractive. I suggest permitting them to grow very large indeed - a kind of size upgrade, perhaps, which increases production and workorce used.
regarding lost revenues - oh , please, stop whining. How hard is it to make hundreds of B profit per month in SC?
how hard is it in the real world?
if incomes were a thrd of what they are now, it would still be possible to maintain high levels of infrastructure and large (and a bit more realistic...) armies.
people who want to maximze profit would need CEOs. Those who despise CEO influence could do without them and be quite competitive as well - likely as efficient or moreso than the CEO-only countries due to the all-but-certain disparity in tax rates