Hm, those are some good ideas. Perhaps we should also repeal Arcadian Action 5 to encourage using the more volatile Alternating Land Types system. Maybe we need to also add more Arcadian Actions that flip the ALT switch.
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018, 12:44 Corona <liliumalbum.ag...@gmail.com> wrote: > Well, the thing that comes to mind first is to incentivize small groups, > which would in general make the board more lively, e.g. by: > > -movement (to same color would cost 2 apples, to different 1 apple) > -making facilities produce less for every other facility in the same-color > "group" (or it could be a bonus to isolated facilities, same thing) > -making the (immune to transfiguration) central square completely gray, so > that it doesn't support/encourage the 2 large groups > > > ~Corona > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 8:10 PM, Reuben Staley <reuben.sta...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Excuse me, but have you seen how big the groups of contiguous land units > > are? Capturing any unit except ATMunn's lone white unit would be nearly > > impossible. And it's not like it's gonna stop being that way any time > soon. > > It only costs one more apple to make a land unit that you can choose the > > color of than one that you can't. I can only forsee these groups getting > > bigger and bigger and harder to capture as a result. Your idea is nice, > but > > it ignores a larger problem. > > > > > > On 06/12/2018 12:03 PM, Corona wrote: > > > >> Well, what would you think about reviving my suggestion to incentivize > >> "capturing" land units with a healthy financial reward? > >> > >> ~Corona > >> > >> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 7:55 PM, Reuben Staley <reuben.sta...@gmail.com > > > >> wrote: > >> > >> In compliance with rule 2004, I run land auctions (almost) every Agoran > >>> Week. However, I am not to run them if the number of Units of Private > >>> Land > >>> is less than one half the total number of Units of Land. And with five > >>> land > >>> units auctioned off each week, we are rapidly approaching that ratio. > >>> This > >>> is obviously a problem, since once we reach it, there will be no more > >>> land > >>> auctions, and with barely any rules in place to ensure a continuous > >>> recycling of land units back to Agora, the ownership of land will > >>> basically > >>> freeze. > >>> > >>> I believe the way to fix this lies in a system that automatically > >>> transfers the least useful LUs from their owners back to Agora every > week > >>> if the number of Units of Private Land is greater than one half the > total > >>> number of Units of Land. This would keep the number of Units of Private > >>> Land at a nice equilibrium, hovering around one half ownership. > >>> > >>> The problem is that I have no idea how such a system would choose land > >>> units to give back to Agora. Okay, I actually have one idea, but it > would > >>> require lots of calculation. For the sake of discussion, I'll describe > it > >>> here. > >>> > >>> Each Unit has a land value which is calculated each week based on a > >>> number > >>> of factors. The value would increase for each level the facility build > on > >>> it had, for each adjacent land unit of the same color, etc.. The value > >>> would decrease if the person that owned it was no longer a player, or > if > >>> no > >>> change had occured for some set time. Each unit with a value of > whatever > >>> the minimum of the set of land unit values is, is transferred to Agora > >>> for > >>> auctioning. > >>> > >>> Like I said, that would be a crazy amount of calculation, so I'm not > sure > >>> how practical it really is. > >>> > >>> Please leave suggestions. We need to fix this before we reach that one > >>> half mark. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Trigon > >>> > >>> > > -- > > Trigon > > >
