| Thursday, January 20, 2005 - 02:30 am |
The solutions are ancient.
The first , you dislike: remove ceos, since the 1) game models them accurately enough to show that private investment hurts centrally managed countries, 2) they are redundant, and 3) They cause nothing but strife and unrealistic/bad-gameplay abuse.
But there are many others:
1) reintroduce and expand the material value market penalty, so that CEOS make more money in 80% tax rates with good corps than in 30% ones. They will then want to be in player countries.
combine this with any or all of the following:
resistance/immunity of CEO corps to rebellion
increased profitibility of CEO corproations
increased effectivenss of CEO corporations
restricted credit for countries building new corporations (might need to entice private investment)
special privileges for CEO public corps (increasing in size, to a certain limit, for example; or the abililty to move money in as well)
doubling the asset value of CEO corps for score value (hey, some people care and would do it)
reinstitute the penalties, but base them on either 1) corporation size, or 2) corporation profit (overall, assuming 0 tax), and then give CEOs lower penalties. This would simulate the presumably real reduced efficiency of large cooperative ventures (like state corporations) compared to private for-profit organizations.
etc etc etc no time now
at the moment, xavier, it is impossible for a CEO to do anything but hurt their host country if their host is an active country.
let me repeat that to be crystal clear:
it is IMPOSSIBLE for a CEO to do anything but hurt their host country if their host is an active country and the CEO wants to maximise their personal advantage - CEOs and Presidents have different and mutually exclusive goals...just like they should, in theory, have in the real world