Has Standard Price Increased?

[TrilobyteMan]

Hey TM. I don't believe that this debate has anything to do with valuing pixels over community, since we are talking about inter-alliance, not intra-alliance, tech deals. A seller from Alliance A has absolutely no responsibility to further the interests of Alliance B. For me personally, I will never again do any tech deals with members of other alliances. When I used to sell to outside nations, it was only with members of our allies. But given that I saw tech I sold to "allies" used against us in the Karma war, I will never make the same mistake again.

I meant the CN and intra-alliance communities. My comment was based on the arguments being said throughout the thread, which I couldn't be bothered to reply because they were a) just so ridiculous that nothing needed to be said or b) blatantly obvious that all the person cares about is their own nation and not the progress of the game. I guess it takes time for people to realise that your NS/infra/tech/whatever doesn't matter, it's how you contribute to the game. Selling tech at ridiculous prices hurts it.

And yes I agree, buying outside your alliance is not a smart thing to do. I think I'd rather get my tech cheaply and reliably than be supplying the enemy, and in some cases, being scammed out of an aid slot.

[Steel Panther]

As a tech seller, I can understand buyers being dubious about paying 3/50, but the reality is that in the beginning of CN

there weren't what you'd call "mega-nations", or very few. It's all about supply and demand.

I'm not going to sell my tech cheaply when I know that a huge nation is getting it for a bargain. For most large nations, I'm told, it

would cost much more that 3 million to buy 50 tech.

I wouldn't call the new batch of tech sellers greedy, just eager to meet the market.

People are buying it at that price, so I don't forsee a problem with this price in the forseeable future.

Cheers

[Viluin]

What sellers forget is that it works both ways. You may be selling at $3m/50 now for max profit, but in the future you'll have to buy at that price too. These $3m/50 deals are accelerating the baby steps of every new nation, but when they grow it will come back to haunt them.

Edited January 17, 2010 by Viluin

[HHAYD]

What sellers forget is that it works both ways. You may be selling at $3m/50 now for max profit, but in the future you'll have to buy at that price too. These $3m/50 deals are accelerating the baby steps of every new nation, but when they grow it will come back to haunt them.

This.

The ever increasing price of tech would cause tech sellers to accelerate out of their tech selling stage into the tech buying stage at a faster rate. However, since the amount of tech sellers are even more limited and that tech is even more expensive, it really adds up over time and harms you in the long run. You would have to shell out $90 million just for 1,500 tech while in the past you can shell out $90 million and get 3,000 tech at a 33% or higher faster rate. That is assuming if the price of tech doesn't inflate anymore. Eventually those costs would far exceed the amount you made when you were a tech seller.

Those wasted money could have been added into purchasing infra, land, wonders, military, etc. I am not saying that tech sellers should lose profits while selling tech, but they should keep in mind that the more they charge now, the more they will have to pay in the future when future tech sellers go, "Oh, if it is okay for me to charge $15 million for 50 tech, then maybe I should up that into $18 million for 50 tech, hey, that sounds like a good idea..."

Edited January 17, 2010 by HHAYD

[Steel Panther]

What sellers forget is that it works both ways. You may be selling at $3m/50 now for max profit, but in the future you'll have to buy at that price too. These $3m/50 deals are accelerating the baby steps of every new nation, but when they grow it will come back to haunt them.

Maybe so. But as it stands, tech, at that price, is still an affordable commodity for the large nations. Inflaion is a way of life, and I dare

say that by the time I am at the tech buying stage, the price will have gone up again.

The fact is, these nations are still buying tech for cheaper than they could acquire it themselves.

[Viluin]

Maybe so. But as it stands, tech, at that price, is still an affordable commodity for the large nations. Inflaion is a way of life, and I dare

say that by the time I am at the tech buying stage, the price will have gone up again.

The fact is, these nations are still buying tech for cheaper than they could acquire it themselves.

If the price goes up to $6m/50 I will make it my personal jihad to destroy any tech seller daring to sell at that price. $3m/50 is where I draw the damn line, no way I'm gonna use multiple slots for cash, especially not with the high tech seller deletion rate. Tech sellers benefit just as much if not more from a tech deal than the buyers. Remember, without tech selling you'd be growing the old skool way, and it'd probably take a year to reach 5000 infra. All the tech sellers seem to act like they're providing a service and are thus in a position to make demands, and sadly the buyers are playing along, but people seem to be forgetting it's a mutually beneficial deal. You need us just as much as we need you.

Edited January 18, 2010 by Viluin

[DavidRossJones]

If the price goes up to $6m/50 I will make it my personal jihad to destroy any tech seller daring to sell at that price. $3m/50 is where I draw the damn line, no way I'm gonna use multiple slots for cash, especially not with the high tech seller deletion rate. Tech sellers benefit just as much if not more from a tech deal than the buyers. Remember, without tech selling you'd be growing the old skool way, and it'd probably take a year to reach 5000 infra. All the tech sellers seem to act like they're providing a service and are thus in a position to make demands, and sadly the buyers are playing along, but people seem to be forgetting it's a mutually beneficial deal. You need us just as much as we need you.

1. We are providing a service. What else would you call it?

2. If the market price goes up to 6 mil/50t, then go for it and declare a jihad. It'll be you, after all, who starts to lag behind other nations.

3. Buyers actually benefit much more than sellers. Ask some 80k NS nations how much 50 tech would cost them, and then try and tell me sellers benefit more financially (I say this assuming you are not 80k NS or higher. If you are, then might I suggest you buy your own tech, if it's so much better).

4. It seems you're implying that sellers are the ones complaining here, but look at all the posts. I'm sure you'll find the "whining" ones are buyers, not sellers, this thread was started by a buyer, and buyers are the only ones trying to change the price for their own benefit. Buyers are the ones who are not happy and who think sellers owe them something, when they do not.

Edited January 19, 2010 by DavidRossJones

[Joland]

There are just few very new nations. So 100 tech for 3 m means to by tech much lower than 30 000 per 1 tech, which is very hard... unless you are few days old.

3m for 50 tech is the only kind of deal done in the last 2 months... and probably is the new standard forever from now on

[Sande]

I am still doing 3 mil for 100 tech deals.

Also, saying that large nations should buy their tech like small nations do is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. You can't be serious when you are throwing such argument into the ring.

If this continues, the nations in this game will eventually be VERY weak in tech and the ones who currently have tech will stay to be stronger than them because they bought their tech when it was cheap and available to buy. Thanks for ruining the economy!

If all buyers first offer the sellers a 3 mil for 100 tech price and they accept, it would make the economy more stable, letting us have more sellers and producing more tech.

Call it whining but that's how it will be - we will just bite the arm that's feeding us. No more tech thanks to the new price.

[DavidRossJones]

I am still doing 3 mil for 100 tech deals.

Also, saying that large nations should buy their tech like small nations do is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. You can't be serious when you are throwing such argument into the ring.

If this continues, the nations in this game will eventually be VERY weak in tech and the ones who currently have tech will stay to be stronger than them because they bought their tech when it was cheap and available to buy. Thanks for ruining the economy!

If all buyers first offer the sellers a 3 mil for 100 tech price and they accept, it would make the economy more stable, letting us have more sellers and producing more tech.

Call it whining but that's how it will be - we will just bite the arm that's feeding us. No more tech thanks to the new price.

Sorry but you didn't read what I said properly. I said if buyers really think that they're so hard done-by at buying tech for 3mil/50t, then they should buy their own and deal with it. Clearly, this isn't a feasible option, which is why I said what I said; I was trying to make a point.

Your prediction of doom and gloom isn't a valid one. If the price goes too high, and people don't buy, then sellers will naturally lower the price. Creating a cartel isn't feasible, and ruins the fluidity of the game. Prices go up because there is more money in circulation and more demand. If you really think the price is going to remain the same, then you're living in a dream economy. I assure you, if I could not find buyers at a 3mil/50t level, then I would sell for 100t. But, I never wait more than a day to find a buyer. Sometimes, I'm inundated with requests. This can not be because these people are stupid or overly generous. It's because they're adapting to the economy.

If CN had a sudden surge of active nations, a new update was introduced which lowered all tax revenue drastically or if buyers suddenly stopped buying en masse, then I'm sure you'd see many more 3/100 deals. As I do not see any of those happening, I see the price steadily rising over time. If you have no problem finding 3/100 deals, then fantastic, good on you. But, prices change, and no argument you throw into the pot will change that.

[Joland]

saying that large nations should buy their tech like small nations do is the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

In a serious good game, it should NEVER be needed to do tech deals.

The tech should not be SO expensive, and should not be sold and bought.

And in aids, should be allowed more than just 3 milions and 50 tech maximum.

These limits are really RUINING the economy.

Edited January 19, 2010 by Joland

[Viluin]

I don't think we were ever intended to do tech deals and have so much tech (judging from the insane tech price after a few thousand), but it's a little late to fix it.

Edited January 19, 2010 by Viluin

[Viluin]

1. We are providing a service. What else would you call it?

2. If the market price goes up to 6 mil/50t, then go for it and declare a jihad. It'll be you, after all, who starts to lag behind other nations.

3. Buyers actually benefit much more than sellers. Ask some 80k NS nations how much 50 tech would cost them, and then try and tell me sellers benefit more financially (I say this assuming you are not 80k NS or higher. If you are, then might I suggest you buy your own tech, if it's so much better).

4. It seems you're implying that sellers are the ones complaining here, but look at all the posts. I'm sure you'll find the "whining" ones are buyers, not sellers, this thread was started by a buyer, and buyers are the only ones trying to change the price for their own benefit. Buyers are the ones who are not happy and who think sellers owe them something, when they do not.

Buyers are providing a "service" in the same sense, we provide you with way more money than you'd otherwise be making, for pretty much no work. And of course a tech deal benefits you more, 50 tech doesn't make much of a difference to a large nation but the money you get is a huge boost. Especially in your early days 5 tech deals will put your nation in a position that would normally take months to reach. You get that on day 1. It sounds like you don't realize just how much tech dealing helps you, ask any old nation how fast they grew before there even were any tech buyers.

EDIT: Sorry for the double post, I forgot about it.

Edited January 19, 2010 by Viluin

[Lord n00b II]

Here's the deal. I realize that buyers are trying to get the best price to get tech, and obviously they would prefer getting 100 tech for 3 mil rather than 50. But at the same time, why shouldn't the sellers try to get the best price as well?

You as buyers are more than willing to offer to buy tech at a rate of 3 million for 100 tech. And you very well might have business (right now, due partly to my lack of an alliance, I am selling at that price currently). But don't complain about the game being ruined if you can't get tech deals because enough buyers are more than willing to buy at 3 million for 50 tech.

As brought up before, it's all supply and demand. If more buyers want to buy tech, then price will rise because there aren't enough sellers to compensate. If more sellers join and want to sell tech, then price will go down. Further, if you buyers want to "form a cartel" and only offer at 3 million/100 tech, that's fine. But if I were a buyer and I saw that happening, I'd say, "Screw that, I'm still making profit at 3 mil/50 tech and if I buy at that rate, I know I'll always be getting tech rather than fighting the crowd." Trust me, it would happen.

EDIT: Grammar fail.

Edited January 19, 2010 by Lord n00b II

[Sande]

I'm not complaining that I can't get tech deals. I'm complaining about the macromanagement. I do not care about individual nations and wether they grow their nations faster or slower. I want that the game would have a better buyer-seller balance in the future. Giving the sellers 33% more would just unbalance it.

Yeah, supply and demand rule here but that is also the main problem that unbalances things. If you start doing 3 mil for 50 tech deals now, you will end up doing 6 mil for 50 tech deals in the future. If everyone continues pushing 3 mil for 100 tech deals now, you can get 3 mil for 100 tech deals in the future aswell. And the nations that did these tech deals now will get them in the future too.

Supply and demand inevitably ends with nearly everyone in the demand zone in this game. The faster we get to that point, the less tech the game produces. I am not talking about one small nation and it's benefits or large nation and it's losses. I'm talking about the whole game.

Think outside your nation's needs and save the economy.

(It's the same thing you have to do to get out of the RL economic mess - spend more free money on stuff so the economy would be able to regain it's strength. If all people don't buy new TVs because they think they will lose their jobs really soon, the TV companies will not sell anything and go bankrupt. People will lose their jobs because of that. And the same thing happens to the people who still have their jobs - if no-one buys from their company, they have to close down. Think about the big plan and try to improve the situation.)

[IronicMaster]

I'm not complaining that I can't get tech deals. I'm complaining about the macromanagement. I do not care about individual nations and wether they grow their nations faster or slower. I want that the game would have a better buyer-seller balance in the future. Giving the sellers 33% more would just unbalance it.

Yeah, supply and demand rule here but that is also the main problem that unbalances things. If you start doing 3 mil for 50 tech deals now, you will end up doing 6 mil for 50 tech deals in the future. If everyone continues pushing 3 mil for 100 tech deals now, you can get 3 mil for 100 tech deals in the future aswell. And the nations that did these tech deals now will get them in the future too.

Supply and demand inevitably ends with nearly everyone in the demand zone in this game. The faster we get to that point, the less tech the game produces. I am not talking about one small nation and it's benefits or large nation and it's losses. I'm talking about the whole game.

Think outside your nation's needs and save the economy.

(It's the same thing you have to do to get out of the RL economic mess - spend more free money on stuff so the economy would be able to regain it's strength. If all people don't buy new TVs because they think they will lose their jobs really soon, the TV companies will not sell anything and go bankrupt. People will lose their jobs because of that. And the same thing happens to the people who still have their jobs - if no-one buys from their company, they have to close down. Think about the big plan and try to improve the situation.)

doing 3m/100 deals makes tech-selling sensefull till I reach a border of about 2k Infra.

doing 3m/50 deals makes it sensefull till about 4k Infra.

compare how much nations you find under the one or the other border and guess what inbalances the buyer seller ratio.

doing 3/100 deals will need about 8 cycles to reach 2k Infra Border. 8* 100 = 800 tech outgoing.

reaching 4k with 3m/50 would probably take more then 50 cycles ( 200 days just a guess) 50*50 = 2500 tech sent out( More in the very most cases).

I conclude that the 3m/50 deal would grant a better buyer/seller ratio AND more tech.

Edited January 19, 2010 by IronicMaster

[Itsuki Koizumi]

I conclude that the 3m/50 deal would grant a better buyer/seller ratio AND more tech.

Explain that little bit a little more thoroughly please. If I could get more tech within a shorter time, by all means, enlighten me on how to do this as I surely will convert to this price.

Edited January 19, 2010 by Itsuki Koizumi

[Viluin]

doing 3m/100 deals makes tech-selling sensefull till I reach a border of about 2k Infra.

doing 3m/50 deals makes it sensefull till about 4k Infra.

compare how much nations you find under the one or the other border and guess what inbalances the buyer seller ratio.

doing 3/100 deals will need about 8 cycles to reach 2k Infra Border. 8* 100 = 800 tech outgoing.

reaching 4k with 3m/50 would probably take more then 50 cycles ( 200 days just a guess) 50*50 = 2500 tech sent out( More in the very most cases).

I conclude that the 3m/50 deal would grant a better buyer/seller ratio AND more tech.

Eh, those figures are way off. You should be able to reach 4k infra in about 3 months with a proper trade set and guidance, even with just $3m/100 deals. That's ~1500 tech shipped (500 per month). With $3m/50 deals you'll reach that target sooner (say, 2 months, after all your nation would be making more than twice as much money from tech deals) and the average tech output every 10 days is lowered by 25%. The total tech shipped would only be ~750. You'll only ship half as much tech until you'll enter the market as a buyer and demand a lot more(!) than 750 tech, it's a neverending cycle. Supply will only get worse because of this whereas the demand will only increase faster, driving up the prices and starting the whole thing over again. Who's really getting screwed? You. Because the big nations got their tech already.. you'll never catch up if you have to buy at $6m/50, good luck.

Also, tech dealing makes sense until you're at 5k infra, then you should buy tech and get a Manhattan Project. You can stop selling sooner, but buying tech below 5k uses a considerable amount of your income and it's not like you'll have the weapons or the warchest to actually fight a war anyway.

If we're lucky, tech selling will die a painful death due to an excessive amount of slots dedicated to money, and everyone will hand out free aid again. Then, after about half a year of covering up all evidence of tech deals, we can make the ignorant newbs sell at $3m/150 again.

Edited January 19, 2010 by Viluin

[Sande]

As Viluin said, your figures are way off.

Also, the selling limit is usually 4k infra for both 50 and 100 tech sellers. From then on, you have to start thinking militarily and get nukes. OK, maybe it's 5k infra in some alliances. Either way, up to that point, you should be selling tech.

Does extra 700k really benefit you so much that you could do 3 mil for 50 tech deals for twice as long? Come on!

Also, this coming from a nation that is barely a month old... (Off-topic: Are you a re-roll of someone old enough or just a newbie?)

Technically, there are more nations at 0-2000 infra than 2000-4000 infra. But most of them will be deleted within 25 days.

8 cycles of 3 mil for 100 tech to reach 2k infra? You kidding me? It takes less than 90 days but you have to start the 3rd cycle. You collect a lot of money from inactivity cycles that help you boost your nation's growth. You're not entirely building your nation on tech deal money, you know. There are some really nifty tricks you can do if you're smart enough.

[IronicMaster]

Eh, those figures are way off. You should be able to reach 4k infra in about 3 months with a proper trade set and guidance, even with just $3m/100 deals. That's ~1500 tech shipped (500 per month). With $3m/50 deals you'll reach that target sooner (say, 2 months, after all your nation would be making more than twice as much money from tech deals) and the average tech output every 10 days is lowered by 25%. The total tech shipped would only be ~750. You'll only ship half as much tech until you'll enter the market as a buyer and demand a lot more(!) than 750 tech, it's a neverending cycle. Supply will only get worse because of this whereas the demand will only increase faster, driving up the prices and starting the whole thing over again. Who's really getting screwed? You. Because the big nations got their tech already.. you'll never catch up if you have to buy at $6m/50, good luck.

Also, tech dealing makes sense until you're at 5k infra, then you should buy tech and get a Manhattan Project. You can stop selling sooner, but buying tech below 5k uses a considerable amount of your income and it's not like you'll have the weapons or the warchest to actually fight a war anyway.

If we're lucky, tech selling will die a painful death due to an excessive amount of slots dedicated to money, and everyone will hand out free aid again. Then, after about half a year of covering up all evidence of tech deals, we can make the ignorant newbs sell at $3m/150 again.

You can't set the same border for both deals... 3m/100 dealing makes a revenue of 200k per day.

That becomes much too low when your Collection-Amount raises.

[Sande]

1) You are not doing inactivity cycles. fail. Why do you want more tech deal money when you obviously don't use it right?

2) You can't really view tech deals as revenue xxx per day. You can use some of the tech money to finish inactivity cycles, buy some more infra and finish the inactivity cycle with a huge collection. The game allows you to play around a bit.

3) Increased tech level gives a really low happiness bonus. From 50 to 200 it gives about +3 max, iirc. So, tech deals, no matter what price, will pay off really well up to 4k infra.

And your 3 mil for 100 tech border is set too low.

Yes, you can set the same border for both deals. At some point you have to start buying tech to become militarily more powerful. And that happens to be 4k infra. Otherwise you could just keep doing tech deals and hope you don't get dragged into wars.

[IronicMaster]

As Viluin said, your figures are way off.

Also, the selling limit is usually 4k infra for both 50 and 100 tech sellers. From then on, you have to start thinking militarily and get nukes. OK, maybe it's 5k infra in some alliances. Either way, up to that point, you should be selling tech.

Does extra 700k really benefit you so much that you could do 3 mil for 50 tech deals for twice as long? Come on!

Also, this coming from a nation that is barely a month old... (Off-topic: Are you a re-roll of someone old enough or just a newbie?)

Technically, there are more nations at 0-2000 infra than 2000-4000 infra. But most of them will be deleted within 25 days.

8 cycles of 3 mil for 100 tech to reach 2k infra? You kidding me? It takes less than 90 days but you have to start the 3rd cycle. You collect a lot of money from inactivity cycles that help you boost your nation's growth. You're not entirely building your nation on tech deal money, you know. There are some really nifty tricks you can do if you're smart enough.

You can't do inactivity cycles without saving the money for the bills first. You CAN'T recollect with laborcamps unless your collection is high enough. Perhaps you're just too old to know what it's like to play a young nation.

8 cycles/5 slots = ca. 60 days.

You didn't get the calculation did you?

its not just the 700k difference buying 100 tech instead of 50. You block an aid slot for a deal that lasts 10 days longer.

In the same time you could do 2* 3/100 with a revenue of 2,8M

or 3* 3/50 with a revenue of 6,3M with the same slot.

(Off-topic: Did you build up your account? or has it been a birthday-present? AND Do you really think that this could be more important than the arguments?)

[DavidRossJones]

Buyers are providing a "service" in the same sense, we provide you with way more money than you'd otherwise be making, for pretty much no work. And of course a tech deal benefits you more, 50 tech doesn't make much of a difference to a large nation but the money you get is a huge boost. Especially in your early days 5 tech deals will put your nation in a position that would normally take months to reach. You get that on day 1. It sounds like you don't realize just how much tech dealing helps you, ask any old nation how fast they grew before there even were any tech buyers.

EDIT: Sorry for the double post, I forgot about it.

1. That's a bit of a red herring, because large nations save a lot of money by buying technology through deals. If you bought a car for $50, instead of $5,000, would you say that the seller benefited, simply because the car wasn't the newest model? I suppose this point is more about perspective, but in this sense, buyers make more.

2. I never said tech deals didn't benefit me. Of course they do, and I love doing them, but then, I'm not the one complaining, am I?

3. I think the calculations posted here are pointless. It's really very simple. 3mil/50t will always make more profit for sellers than 3mil/100 deals.

[Viluin]

You can't set the same border for both deals... 3m/100 dealing makes a revenue of 200k per day.

That becomes much too low when your Collection-Amount raises.

Profit is profit. You shouldn't stop selling due to the relatively low profit, you should stop selling for military reasons and those reasons don't change regardless of the deals.

1. That's a bit of a red herring, because large nations save a lot of money by buying technology through deals. If you bought a car for $50, instead of $5,000, would you say that the seller benefited, simply because the car wasn't the newest model? I suppose this point is more about perspective, but in this sense, buyers make more.

No, but I'm not buying your car here. I'm giving you money to buy a car for me. You lose nothing in the deal, you're essentially getting free money.

3. I think the calculations posted here are pointless. It's really very simple. 3mil/50t will always make more profit for sellers than 3mil/100 deals.

Yeah, until the tech market implodes due to higher prices, lower supply, even higher prices etc. You are correct that this benefits new nations, but it's a very short-term benefit. When they're bigger they will have a very hard time getting technology, which will cripple them forever considering the millions of tech that were pumped into older nations at very low prices.

Edited January 20, 2010 by Viluin

[Sande]

You can't do inactivity cycles without saving the money for the bills first. You CAN'T recollect with laborcamps unless your collection is high enough. Perhaps you're just too old to know what it's like to play a young nation.

8 cycles/5 slots = ca. 60 days.

You didn't get the calculation did you?

its not just the 700k difference buying 100 tech instead of 50. You block an aid slot for a deal that lasts 10 days longer.

In the same time you could do 2* 3/100 with a revenue of 2,8M

or 3* 3/50 with a revenue of 6,3M with the same slot.

(Off-topic: Did you build up your account? or has it been a birthday-present? AND Do you really think that this could be more important than the arguments?)

You don't have to have labour camps to do inactivity cycles when your nation is small.

What you do is:

Get all the money from tech deals, do not spend any of it unless you have to send out tech.

When you are 20 days inactive, you pay your bills and spend most of the money on infra. Then you collect taxes.

Now, over 20 days, how much did you pay in bills and how much did you collect?

You paid 20 days worth of bills for the low infra you had 20 days ago. And you collected 20 days worth of taxes for the new high infra you have there.

This boost is remarkable for small nations. Anyone can buy 200 infra to get a foreign ministry and a harbour, get a trade circle and pay 6-10k bills every day. When he buys lots of infra and collects taxes, he basically doubles it's collection over these 20 days compared to buying a little infra every day.

You are counting one cycle as a tech deal? Usually people say 10 days = 1 cycle.

Also, why 8 cycles? You can get a foreign ministry really soon and get 10 cycles from day 1.

Another thing:

As I said, I don't care what benefit it is to small nations. I want the economy not to blow up because small nations want to grow faster.

I could do calculations of what it would take if small nations just received free aid and didn't have to do tech deals and you would still think it's a good idea to give small nations free money because that would just be more beneficial to your nation. I don't really care how much it can benefit YOU. It does not benefit the economy if everyone did 3 mil for 50 tech deals.

The point is that you will grow about 33% faster in the short run and in the long run (300 days) your nations are maybe 2000 infra apart from each other.

This game is like a corporation that is promoting every member every month regardless of what they have done the last month. Once you promote everyone from the low ranks, there is no-one to do the dirty jobs. What good do we have from the corporation heads that don't do anything? They basically live on the low rank workers.

(I did build up my nation. Could have been more efficient though. Wars in between killed me a bit.)