John Gresham (White Giant)
| Saturday, April 02, 2005 - 02:50 am |
CEOs aren't supposed to be aggressive toward presidents. Being "immune" from them should be irrelevant. That it is not shows a problem in the game mechanics; this problem is easy to spot-- the ridiculousness of being forced to give up ownership of a corporation simply because someone placed a bid for it is wrong on its face. Nationalization, on the other hand, is just a cost of doing business. Presidents have the power of force. CEO's do not. That is the price you pay for starting at 0 cash/debt and having no governmental expenses.