| Saturday, October 23, 2004 - 12:21 pm |
I agree with William, we should think of some tangible difference for quality differences.
Karma, about the higher quality of weapons, I didn't find anything like that in the documentation. it just tells you the probability of a hit and the extent of damage in case of a hit (or did they change that?).
I think the probability of a hit should increase with higher quality launchers (the batteries, the tanks, the helis, etc) and the damage increase with higher quality ammunition (the missiles, shells, etc). Is this the case now?
And about your getting higher quality products by using higher quality inputs, I have noticed my products have a higher quality than can simply be associated to my upgrades, so is that why? but wouldn't it be stupid to be getting higher quality products because i use a higher quality fuel for my machines?? I guess two different things should be affected by quality inputs according to the nature of the inputs: higher quality services, energy, telephone, books, etc, should result in using less of them since there higher quality mean you achieve the same results with less quantity, while higher quality steel, iron, books (yes, many products will give both effects), etc, should result in higher quality of the product they are involved in producing. I guess it's quite logical but I would be happy to give examples if anyone wishes so.
About what William was explaining of logic, it is indeed very important for Presidents and CEOs to know how the costs of production are distributed not only salaries vs. materials, but also within materials. And we should be given the option of prefering cost or time (ie. quality vs availability) since sometimes a corporation keeps on buying expensive high quality products while I already have stocks available and would rather target lower cost materials. On the other hand, even though I can see the importance of stating the "standard quality price" or we wouldn't be able to compare anything, I agree to the need of knowing exactly how much we are paying.
Another most important thing is to know how much I gain out of quality upgrades, which cannot be known without knowing the effect of quality over price. And what if I want to base my quality on my upgrades rather than production inputs? I guess I should be given the choice. This has strategy implications since upgrades are more stable but slower than procurement of high quality supplies.
This one for poor Jonni who has to bear with all our greedy needs:
One REALLY GOOD SUGGESTION would be to be able to construct our own formulae; be given a list of all variables to be able to build our own indicators: if I was in a phase of investing mainly in building my army, I would like for instance to make a formula linking between the financial index, defense index, and possibly some employment data to create my own index that will help me find out how good i am progressing.
Finally, for William: before we have futures, we need to have sanctions against suppliers who do not deliver their contracted products, or what good will be futures if you cannot enfrce their use?