[(DAC)Syzygy]

Problem right now: Nations purchase land via "diameter increases", so basically each diameter increase of 1 mile contains more squaremiles then the last, because of the formula for circular area. Thats why nations pay more cash per mile when having lots of land and wanting to buy more. Perfectly understandable.

Unfortunately, when selling land (diameter), this system is "fixed" at $100 (or $300 if you have rubber). There are two major flaws in that system:
A) it is unrealistic, because when selling (diameter)miles while having lots of land, you also lose MORE squaremiles then if you had only very low land amounts. The price you get should reflect that.

Example:
Formula for circular area: pi*(diameter/2)²
Circle of 4,000 miles diameter contains 3.14*(4000/2)² = 3.14*(2000)² = 3.14*4,000,000 = 12,566,370.61 miles²
If i sell 20 miles of diameter, i have 3,980 left: 3.14*(3980/2)² = 3.14*(1990)² = 3.14*3,960,100 = 12,441,021.07 miles²
I lost 12,566,370.61 - 12,441,021.07 = 125,349.54 miles²

Circle of 200 miles diameter contains 3.14*(200/2)² = 3.14*(100)² = 3.14*10,000 = 31,415.93 miles²
If i sell 20 miles of diameter, i have 180 left: 3.14*(180/2)2 = 3.14*(90)² = 3.14*8,100 = 25,446.90 miles²
I lost 31,415.93 - 25,446.90 = 5,969.03 miles²

It should be obvious, that i should get more cash for selling 125,000miles² then for selling 6,000miles². I do pay more for such a purchase as well.

B) the fixed value of $100/$300 is THAT low, selling land serves absolutely no purpose. The biggest nations in the game have a bit above 10,000 miles diameter. These would get 3 Million Cash for selling a land bigger then the United States. For these 3M they can basically buy *nothing*. Its not even enough to pay 1 days of their bills or buy a noticable amount of infra. And that for selling the largest amounts of land available in the game with maximum value-modifiers. The "worth" of land must be increased dramatically to make land-selling a option worth considering when being in desperate need of cash. Right now, the whole option of selling land is totally useless (out-of-the-game), because nobody uses it.

Suggestion:
A) Base Sell Value of Land should be 25% the value you could buy it for. So if you can buy 20 miles for $100,000, you could sell 20miles for $50,000.

B) Right now most of the land-increasing benefits of resources are useless, especially the natural-growth bonus of furs. The only purpose land has, is incrasing the defense bonus in battle/spy operations, but the impact is almost not noticable. Give those resources an additional "+land value" modifier. So if you have for example Resources which modify your land value by 20%, then you could sell it for 50%*1.2 = 60% of its current purchase value. Limit these modifiers in a way, that you can of course never sell land for more cash then you buy it for, even if you have all of those modifiers (max all modifiers together at +40% (90% total) or such).

Benefits:
- added realism
- selling land would be a considerable option when being in instant need for some cash
- conquered land could be sold to pay off for the efforts if the ruler thinks he prefers cash over increaesed land size
- giving some right now useless resource modifiers a purpose

Drawbacks:
- none that i know of

This post has been edited by (DAC)Syzygy: 06 December 2007 - 06:54 PM

[Jacob the Malignant]

So many numbers...I am frightened.

(Yes, btw)

[Seerow]

I'd honestly just prefer that land was changed so that it was actually square miles rather than diameter.

Currently population density makes NO sense in the system. I mean, if I have 50,000 citizens in a country the size of a smaller state (say 500 miles across), my population density is too high and they're unhappy. Or I have a nation the size of Colombia with only 60,000 citizens.

Seriously, we're dealing with population sizes on the scale of cities, and land sizes on the scale of nations. There's a big discrepancy there that needs to be fixed.

And if that meant getting rid of the scaling cost of land for realism? Well, most people probably -still- wouldn't buy much of it, so I'm not too fussed. But I'd personally leave the scaling in just because.




Seriously, before fussing too much over land costs and the like, make Land something useful. Currently it's involved in defense and a minor boost that's so insignificant most people are ignorant of even existing. I see little reason to improve the sell price if it's not worth anything.



Actually, I just thought, this is ESPECIALLY true given how much land you can steal via raiding. I mean, that makes raids instantly more profitable when you can nab 150 land a day from a good raid target. Which raises your sell price, you sell that off at the higher price, and just made maybe an extra mil or two from a raid.

[(DAC)Syzygy]

Seerow, on Dec 4 2007, 02:37 AM, said:

I'd honestly just prefer that land was changed so that it was actually square miles rather than diameter.

Currently population density makes NO sense in the system. I mean, if I have 50,000 citizens in a country the size of a smaller state (say 500 miles across), my population density is too high and they're unhappy. Or I have a nation the size of Colombia with only 60,000 citizens.

Seriously, we're dealing with population sizes on the scale of cities, and land sizes on the scale of nations. There's a big discrepancy there that needs to be fixed.

And if that meant getting rid of the scaling cost of land for realism? Well, most people probably -still- wouldn't buy much of it, so I'm not too fussed. But I'd personally leave the scaling in just because.




Seriously, before fussing too much over land costs and the like, make Land something useful. Currently it's involved in defense and a minor boost that's so insignificant most people are ignorant of even existing. I see little reason to improve the sell price if it's not worth anything.



Actually, I just thought, this is ESPECIALLY true given how much land you can steal via raiding. I mean, that makes raids instantly more profitable when you can nab 150 land a day from a good raid target. Which raises your sell price, you sell that off at the higher price, and just made maybe an extra mil or two from a raid.

while i agree with all of your points, all these are different suggestions. changing to a squaremile system has been suggested several times now, also changing the impact of land.

the idea behind my suggestion is: you can implement it within less then 1 hour of coding + it increases the options a nation ruler has. drawbacks compared to the currently used system: none.

nothing more is the purpose, please feel free to discuss or suggest a *complete* overhaul of the land system in a different suggestion.

[vine]

that makes a lot of sense, you sell more you get more. good suggestion.

[Statalyzer]

Quote

while i agree with all of your points, all these are different suggestions. changing to a squaremile system has been suggested several times now

And why hasn't it been implemented? It's much more logical and realistic.

[Sir Wellington]

While I agree that land should be in square miles... having the value worth more will simply encourage raiders if you push that number too high. I know that personally when I look for a raid target... I LOOK FOR LAND! Tech is always a 5 hit, but land is really variable.

I dont really see the point though about worrying about the cost of selling land. How many people actually sell land? How many rulers EVER give up land? NEVER! My land cost is over 50k per mile, but I get $300 for selling it.

I just think this isnt something that needs to be worried about.

For what its worth... IMO.... land should be much stronger for defense than it is now. Think about it... Napoleon in Russia... the land is what defeated him.

[lXenn]

Seerow, on Dec 3 2007, 05:37 PM, said:

I'd honestly just prefer that land was changed so that it was actually square miles rather than diameter.

Currently population density makes NO sense in the system. I mean, if I have 50,000 citizens in a country the size of a smaller state (say 500 miles across), my population density is too high and they're unhappy. Or I have a nation the size of Colombia with only 60,000 citizens.

If you want the numbers to make sense, multiply them all by 1000, and consider each day a year, then things seem somewhat more realistic.

However if land stays the way it is now, i support this idea.

This post has been edited by Xenn: 04 December 2007 - 05:24 AM

[Ejayrazz]

I like.

[Bob Janova]

Sensible ... although land should be reformed a lot more strongly than this (particularly making it actually be square miles), if that isn't going to happen then this would at least make selling it useful.

[Seerow]

Xenn, on Dec 4 2007, 06:20 AM, said:

If you want the numbers to make sense, multiply them all by 1000, and consider each day a year, then things seem somewhat more realistic.

However if land stays the way it is now, i support this idea.

Or I can change land to be square miles, and call it a city-state rather than a Nation. Which is more realistic

[(DAC)Syzygy]

i agree with that and would actually even support a suggestion which would try to convince the admin to change the system from diameter to squaremiles (or even better km² - its international).

[killerterrier]

Well the country doesn't have to be a city-state. However it would be a small nation either way in this game.

I am refering to the purpose square mile system which I support.
Anyways DAC this is a great suggestion.

[GondorKnightofNarnia]

(DAC)Syzygy, on Dec 3 2007, 06:26 PM, said:

*insert lots of numbers and snazzy idea here*

I skipped the numbers but yes I like the idea

[diskord]

Seerow, on Dec 3 2007, 05:37 PM, said:

Seriously, we're dealing with population sizes on the scale of cities, and land sizes on the scale of nations. There's a big discrepancy there that needs to be fixed.

Speak for yourself...

/me points at the continents he owns.

[sparta]

im not really feeling for it. heres why,

you know how like in a game or somthing for example you but this sword for $5000, but then the time you wanna sell it, its like $1670 or lower. or another great example is that when you buy a car, you got the keys, your in the car, and the sec you drive, the car is noted not new, i don't why but it is. and when you try to sell it when you bought it for $10,000, you sell it for like $3,400.

but i have a better idea, why not the selling price of land be determined by population happyness and tax rate. the more happyness, the more land value you sell, the lower the tax rate, the better the value of land when you sell, now many of you think, but then a nation can just switch the tax rate in a snap.

well then when a nation changes his tax rate, you can't change it for 2 days.

[(DAC)Syzygy]

your argumentation is weird.

In my proposal already a 50% penalty is included. So i dont know what you want to tell me with your car-examples. You buy some land, if you sell it later you only get 50% of the price you purchased it for. Thats exactly what you said.

What i mainly suggest is, that if you sell 1000miles² you should get more cash then for selling 10miles², which is not only logical, but also would make land selling an option which offers at least some usefulness. Right now, you get $100/$300, which takes the whole option out of the game (=rendering it useless).

[Statalyzer]

Quote

How many rulers EVER give up land? NEVER!

That's probably only because land is worthless to sell. And because nobody has any excess land since the game punishes you for not have a high-density nation.

This post has been edited by Statalyzer: 06 December 2007 - 10:50 AM

[XRCatD]

(DAC)Syzygy, on Dec 3 2007, 08:26 PM, said:

Problem right now: Nations purchase land via "diameter increases", so basically each diameter increase of 1 mile contains more squaremiles then the last, because of the formula for circular area. Thats why nations pay more cash per mile when having lots of land and wanting to buy more. Perfectly understandable.

Unfortunately, when selling land (diameter), this system is "fixed" at $100 (or $300 if you have rubber). There are two major flaws in that system:
A) it is unrealistic, because when selling (diameter)miles while having lots of land, you also lose MORE squaremiles then if you had only very low land amounts. The price you get should reflect that.

Example:
Formula for circular area: pi*(diameter/2)²
Circle of 4,000 miles diameter contains 3.14*(4000/2)² = 3.14*(2000)² = 3.14*4,000,000 = 12,566,370.61 miles²
If i sell 20 miles of diameter, i have 3,980 left: 3.14*(3980/2)² = 3.14*(1990)² = 3.14*3,960,100 = 12,441,021.07 miles²
I lost 12,566,370.61 - 12,441,021.07 = 125,349.54 miles²

Circle of 200 miles diameter contains 3.14*(200/2)² = 3.14*(100)² = 3.14*10,000 = 31,415.93 miles²
If i sell 20 miles of diameter, i have 180 left: 3.14*(180/2)2 = 3.14*(90)² = 3.14*8,100 = 25,446.90 miles²
I lost 31,415.93 - 25,446.90 = 5,969.03 miles²

It should be obvious, that i should get more cash for selling 125,000miles² then for selling 6,000miles². I do pay more for such a purchase as well.

B) the fixed value of $100/$300 is THAT low, selling land serves absolutely no purpose. The biggest nations in the game have a bit above 10,000 miles diameter. These would get 3 Million Cash for selling a land bigger then the United States. For these 3M they can basically buy *nothing*. Its not even enough to pay 1 days of their bills or buy a noticable amount of infra. And that for selling the largest amounts of land available in the game with maximum value-modifiers. The "worth" of land must be increased dramatically to make land-selling a option worth considering when being in desperate need of cash. Right now, the whole option of selling land is totally useless (out-of-the-game), because nobody uses it.

Suggestion:
A) Base Sell Value of Land should be 50% the value you could buy it for. So if you can buy 20 miles for $100,000, you could sell 20miles for $50,000.

B) Right now most of the land-increasing benefits of resources are useless, especially the natural-growth bonus of furs. The only purpose land has, is incrasing the defense bonus in battle/spy operations, but the impact is almost not noticable. Give those resources an additional "+land value" modifier. So if you have for example Resources which modify your land value by 20%, then you could sell it for 50%*1.2 = 60% of its current purchase value. Limit these modifiers in a way, that you can of course never sell land for more cash then you buy it for, even if you have all of those modifiers (max all modifiers together at +40% (90% total) or such).

Benefits:
- added realism
- selling land would be a considerable option when being in instant need for some cash
- conquered land could be sold to pay off for the efforts if the ruler thinks he prefers cash over increaesed land size
- giving some right now useless resource modifiers a purpose

Drawbacks:
- none that i know of

Just a quick comment:
The reason land costs more as current land increases is mainly because it's further away and costs more to explore, not because it's a higher circumference on the outside. The fact that the unit of land is linear makes this very complicated, because one factor is that it's far away from the capital, and therefore costing more to explore, and the other factor is that the circumference is bigger, making it more area to explore. Basically, if it was square miles, it'd still be costing more the more land you have since it costs more to send an exploration team further. So another suggestion is to change the unit to Square miles, but keeping the same increases in cost of land. This way it'd be more realistic.

Overall, I agree with your idea.

[Fistandantilus]

Good idea.