Taking a poll on the Auction system. Please vote.

[Mt-Wampus]

   The old auction system you could run up the prices and drop off screen. The new system you cant anymore. What do you like better.

[piete]

With "old auction" I refer to the original Atari/C64 auction regarding speed of time and bidding.

[Blitzen]

By old I also mean exactly what Piete said, c64 atari style through and through please.

You should be explicit in the poll options, ex:

- c64/atari style
- pm 1.2.8 style
- pm 1.3.0 style

I really don't see the value in counting useless votes separately, so a final option like

- i don't care / I am sick of hearing about it... i am a moonpie

Would suffice wouldn't it? 

PS Please also realize that multiple free accounts can really mess up these kinds of things, take things people say with a grain of salt.

[data2008]

Note: I adjusted the options accordingly and allowed for a revote.

[Rhodan]

If this is a vote for what we will end up with we need another choice.

The movement speed increase in auctions in this version compared to C64/Atari was actually overall a good change without affecting the game play or tactics of the original C64 version.

It added the feel of quicker movement and average higher commodity prices between players. IE More excitement to the game. Its a lot more satisfying to deny a opponent food, energy or land that is offering $500 then $200 or earn that amount. Human nature I suppose    But the supply/demand and ruthless cutthroat game play of the original game was preserved with this change.
I don't see anyone complaining about using this speed change to hike energy or food then backing out.
Only the land which is a double standard and its purely physiological. You can loose the game if you don't get food or energy. You can loose the game if you don't get more land then your opponents.

Boohoo, I wanted it  but he wouldn't let me have it, whine, cry, I hate you, I could of won if you had let me buy that plot!

Savvy players know the value of land (this value can vary greatly between players depending on that player's situation, number of plots, type of plots he owns, early or late auction, etc) but players had the strategic option of blocking or raising the price to keep a plot from being sold.  With the change this option is gone.
Now, the plot that is worth 4k to one player and only worth 2k to the others will get that plot every time for the win.  You may ask how is a plot worth more to different players? Its the production bonuses. If buying a plot allows you to develop 6, 9 or 12 stite or ore then you will produce on average 20 or more units then you would have with 5,8, or 11 plots per round for the rest of the game.

Yet if you fool with the timer or movement speed you will loose this improvement or you will have two completely different feel/speeds between the land auction and the commodity auction which I think is bad.
 
So we need a voting option that preserves this change but leaves us the strategic option of raising the price of land high enough and still back out or down.

[piete]

The movement speed increase in auctions in this version compared to C64/Atari was actually overall a good change without affecting the game play or tactics of the original C64 version.

It added the feel of quicker movement and average higher commodity prices between players. IE More excitement to the game. Its a lot more satisfying to deny a opponent food, energy or land that is offering $500 then $200 or earn that amount. Human nature I suppose    But the supply/demand and ruthless cutthroat game play of the original game was preserved with this change.

I disagree here in the sense that I often unfortunately leave myself at the mercy of my rivals and now have to bid $700+ to get the food/energy from my greedy rival who sells me at the end of time whereas on C64 I could get it for "only" $250... 

[Blitzen]

In the original game, being in last helped you win every auction... EXCEPT the land auctions.  It was always random who would be considered at the line first for land.  Species had no effect either.

As a result, even if you weren't the current cash king you only had a 1 in 4 shot of winning the property a lot of the time.

Here is where time and step value come in: so long as you had the start price + ~1000 you were a contender.  This meant that plots became generally more expensive as time went on but in a gradual manner that usually shadowed the colony's general wealth.  Prices couldn't jump by anywhere near the amount they can still currently. So now you have a situation where the cash king always wins the first land and sets the price.  Before the cash king usually got the second plot if he was lucky and paid another 1k for it if the competition was heavy.

Sorry for posting this twice but I don't know how Rhodan can say it hasn't affected mechanics... consider this:

1) a player has a need for food
2) a player has food to sell
3) 2 other players want to make player 1 pay the max

On c64
4) Just before time runs out they let player 1 buy for 200 - 400 $

On planetmule
4)  Just before time finally runs out they player 1 buy for 1 - 2k

HOW HASNT THIS MODIFIED GAME MECHANICS???

And for the record what the fuck is all this "free market" shit, remake Mule then go make Mule II - Moonpie Edition for the love of everything good and holy. 

[Blitzen]

This is for whoever voted/votes they are sick of hearing about it:

http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Falsifiability.pdf

Take a gander at that and then tell me you honestly prefer real deep issues.

 

[C64 nostalgia]

This is for whoever voted/votes they are sick of hearing about it:

http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Falsifiability.pdf

Take a gander at that and then tell me you honestly prefer real deep issues.

 

Hey Blitzen, you can't give us just a link. Adding the opening quote is so much better :

“Each individual possesses a conscience which to a greater or lesser degree serves to restrain the unimpeded flow of impulses destructive to others. But when he merges his person into an organizational structure, a new creature replaces autonomous man, unhindered by the limitations of individual morality, freed of humane inhibition, mindful only of the sanctions of authority.” Milgram, S.


And well... here is the conclusion; so as not to mislead you:

Many of these criticisms of the NIST report could fairly be dismissed if subsequent reviews had provided explanations of apparent contradictions and thus had produced a testable hypothesis that coincided with the real-world data. This has not occurred. Despite possession of all the resources available in the $20M study, NIST adheres to an explanation for the collapses which is basically circular and fails at critical points. It is unable to produce forensic evidence for the required high temperatures; the test results contradict its claims; it is internally inconsistent; it ignores many lines of contrary evidence; and it makes no attempt to search for an alternative explanation.

NIST has resisted attempts to have the report corrected, thus publicly implying that the HICT does not need revision. It is therefore clear that further investigation is urgently required and that it must be independent of the bodies involved in the previous studies.

[Blitzen]

Thanks for reading it!!!

And just to clear the second part up to the innocent 3rd parties - HICT is "heat induced collapse theory" and it is being discussed with respect to the World Trader Center Towers 1, 2 and 7 as it was the basis for the entire official explanation of collapse...

[Rhodan]

1) a player has a need for food
2) a player has food to sell
3) 2 other players want to make player 1 pay the max

On c64
4) Just before time runs out they let player 1 buy for 200 - 400 $

On planetmule
4)  Just before time finally runs out they player 1 buy for 1 - 2k

HOW HASNT THIS MODIFIED GAME MECHANICS???
(

No change to mechanics just a change to the maximum value one can raise prices to.
The mechanic of buying, selling or price hiking is the same. IE You still run up to buy or run until timer expires or seller drops down. In atari version the max amount you could raise price before the timer expired for food or energy was about $175.
So if the store buy price was 215 you could get the price up to near 400 before the timer ran out. This was rarely higher then the player who needed food would pay where as now you can get the price higher then anyone may be willing to pay (1k or higher) to starve someone. But I have seen food sell for this price and the buyer has gone on to win. So mechanics are the same but the frequency of being able to completely starve a player by price hiking has increased.

[C64 nostalgia]

1) a player has a need for food
2) a player has food to sell
3) 2 other players want to make player 1 pay the max

On c64
4) Just before time runs out they let player 1 buy for 200 - 400 $

On planetmule
4)  Just before time finally runs out they player 1 buy for 1 - 2k

HOW HASNT THIS MODIFIED GAME MECHANICS???

No change to mechanics just a change to the maximum value one can raise prices to.
The mechanic of buying, selling or price hiking is the same. IE You still run up to buy or run until timer expires or seller drops down. In atari version the max amount you could raise price before the timer expired for food or energy was about $175.
So if the store buy price was 215 you could get the price up to near 400 before the timer ran out. This was rarely higher then the player who needed food would pay where as now you can get the price higher then anyone may be willing to pay (1k or higher) to starve someone. But I have seen food sell for this price and the buyer has gone on to win. So mechanics are the same but the frequency of being able to completely starve a player by price hiking has increased.

I agree with Blitzen. A change in the maximum sell price of goods or land changes mechanics because other values have stayed the same. For example: top store prices for goods, price of mules, awards or penalties from player events, gambling, scorecard value of a land plot... While my examples can change, their range is based on assumed (much lower) price caps for goods and land. Some things can be worth much more. So their relative values have changed. Thus, the game mechanics have changed.

[rodz]

the new system is working ok i vote we leave it in.
 changing speed and other rubbish like that will confuse new players and even some of the old ones too lol

[C64 nostalgia]

the new system is working ok i vote we leave it in.
 changing speed and other rubbish like that will confuse new players and even some of the old ones too lol

lol... The chief reason I hate the new land auction is it confuses me. It makes little sense to me compared to the other auctions. If I'm an "old one" being confused, I don't know how a new player has any reasonable chance to understand it.

[dynadan]

This poll is phrased very poorly in my opinion.  Most everyone that posts here grew up playing M.U.L.E. when they were kids.  We all (Including me) have romanticized the original game.  So putting C64/Atari style as a choice it is going to win every time on any issue.  Instead all choices should be what could realistically be done.  

There seems to me to be major issues with trying to get auctions like the original.  And it is going to make the game less fun to play.  25 years ago when we were huddled around around a TV playing this game the auction system wasn't exactly fair but it was fun.  Mainly because you could punch your buddy in the arm because he randomly won the plot you were going for.  For those that don't remember auctions worked like this:  1.auction starts   2. everyone presses up 3. time runs outs 4. some random person wins plot.  Occasionally if land was high priced you would get to do the auction dance (up, down, up, down)  Now Planet Mule has given us the ability to play with our buddies around the world, but that means we all have different pings.  So if you tried to get back to original this is how auction would work: 1. auction starts 2. everyone presses up  3. lowest ping wins land.   And currently dance bidding is considered poor sportmanship because the host is the only one that gets accurate graphical information.  Even if we changed to server based hosting someone is going to have a lower ping than others.  I think everyone can agree that losing because of ping on anything is no fun.  And to be honest that is what this game is about....FUN.  

The recent land auction change has made the game more fun.  I have asked everyone i have played with and almost everybody seems to like it.  Lots of people talk about keeping the game the same as it used to be.  But you know what?  If we don't do everything we can to make this game more fun it will die.  Right now i have been waiting for 90 minutes for a game to start.  We all know playing against AI's is no fun, so I approve of any change that makes the game more fun because it will attract more players.  I find it funny that most of the people that want to have it be just like the old Atari/C64 version are people that don't play (I'm talking to you Blitzen).  The developers have done a fantastic job with this game so far and seem to be still trying to improve it.  Bravo to them!! You can't please everyone and some people are always going to not want change.  But please people at least give them constructive input on realistic stuff they can do to make the game better (more fun).