Other > Survival Guides / Game Help

TC economy question

<< < (2/3) > >>

jonny rust:

--- Quote from: Daro on June 17, 2011, 11:13:22 am ---Cool story. Most of that visitor don’t have anything to sell and you are talking about trading incomes.
Complain about northern PK is another  bullshit. Most of TC cities are empty. It is really hard to meet single PK there. Area around NCR and SF is more dangerous that northern town.

--- End quote ---

Northern Cities are usually empty, thats my point, and while a know that a ghost town holds very little value for PK's I think I'm talking more about PvP's here. I have no problem with PvP, or PK for that matter. I consider one an important game aspect and the other a wasteland essential. However most people's perception of these unguarded ghost towns is that they will be shot on sight upon entry (which may be a stereotype, but stereotypes are stereotypes for a reason, right?).

with the amount of visitation these towns get (apart from perhaps Redding during good times) they should all be gone by this point from lack of traffic.

Don't forget my main issue with this is the possible impact that several thousand caps (and I expect the real number to be higher than I think) flowing daily from these towns for no real reason has on the economy when the little guys can't even withdraw 50 caps due to bank runs. Since there is no stock system I can only assume that these bank runs are caused by the rich-old-white-men who control the vast majority of the wastes capitol. 

perhaps with an impending wipe this is a moot point, but its still more of a question about the economy than an implication.

Gaizk:
Agree for the most part with TC, it does make a lot of sense to protect your town so its tourism bolsters its economy and thus giving you far more money. Still bad karma scenarios as explained before do occur and so you might just have a raider group sucking dry a town

As for what Crazy said, it got me thinking for a while and to this point I dont see that being a true case scenario... Sure you could rob the people that come into town but for how long is that going to work?. So it probably boils down to how attractive said town can be...

A poor town like modoc would surely be a raiders nest instead of a productive city, same for klamath and Den, thus those towns are better off being leeched rather than bolstered, however towns like Redding and Broken Hills should have a lot of potential, thus being attractive towns to ¨protect¨, with the protecting faction doing their best to publicize their towns to attract more costumers and so.

Lots of coding and lots of balancing behind this idea would probably make it never happen but still, its just wishful thinking  thats all..

jonny rust:

--- Quote from: Gaizk on June 18, 2011, 12:35:02 am ---Agree for the most part with TC, it does make a lot of sense to protect your town so its tourism bolsters its economy and thus giving you far more money. Still bad karma scenarios as explained before do occur and so you might just have a raider group sucking dry a town

As for what Crazy said, it got me thinking for a while and to this point I dont see that being a true case scenario... Sure you could rob the people that come into town but for how long is that going to work?. So it probably boils down to how attractive said town can be...

A poor town like modoc would surely be a raiders nest instead of a productive city, same for klamath and Den, thus those towns are better off being leeched rather than bolstered, however towns like Redding and Broken Hills should have a lot of potential, thus being attractive towns to ¨protect¨, with the protecting faction doing their best to publicize their towns to attract more costumers and so.

Lots of coding and lots of balancing behind this idea would probably make it never happen but still, its just wishful thinking  thats all..

--- End quote ---

I dont expect anything to change overnight, but if we are ever planning to get past the beta stage with this I believe it will need to change sometime.

However concerning leaching a town; any town that is simply leeched would not be continuously productive, instead there would be a steady decline in it's profit until it inevitably dies out all together. Perhaps there would be a cool down? a gang can squeeze a town for a period of time but eventually will need to relinquish (or nurture) that town until it becomes profitable again.

Crazy:

--- Quote from: jonny rust on June 18, 2011, 12:46:02 am ---Perhaps there would be a cool down? a gang can squeeze a town for a period of time but eventually will need to relinquish (or nurture) that town until it becomes profitable again.

--- End quote ---

Gangs aren't taking towns for money.

Kelin:
Agree, it costs a lot to take a town and buy militia. You would have to hold the town for more than several weeks to have a really good income, which is almost impossible (one hispanic gang from another timezone and town income is reset).

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page