Alright, lets try this one more time.
It's just a friendly debate, don't let it frustrate you for I do not hold you ill regard. Ultimately I think we're both looking for similar results, but just disagree as to how to best achieve those results.
the point is to recognize that this person is really in first place. You know it's a big value because other people were willing to pay that much. You know it's that valuable because over the course of the game it will more than pay for itself.
Agreed, due to the potential production that an additional plot (especially earlier in the game) offers there is great potential value in having that additional plot.
The reason the player that spent 972 on a plot in the first round moves to fourth place is due to the 472 loss generated from the difference of the 972 spent and the 500 land value. The problem typically generated by this first round action is that it becomes rather easy for that player to ride out the first half of the game in fourth place reaping the fourth place bid and land grant benefits, and the eventual <8 mule benefit. Fourth has the advantage of being first in buying/selling, and of winning the plot they want in the land grant phase. Odds are in favor that this player will eventually end up with some good crystite plots by end game. It's may also lend them an advantage to the first big smithore dump that is common to most games. If timed and executed well mule dumping during the <8 mule round can prove to be a very lethal weapon for fourth place to employ.
I believe you would like to see that plot's potential added into the value of the plot by valuing it at a price relatively close to, if not, the price that it was purchased as a means to eliminate the aforementioned. Correct?
While inflating the land value will keep that person out of fourth place; I feel that it would eventually do more harm than good. In my perspective it removes a lot of the risk in buying a plot of land, especially in later rounds when the auction plots could go for up to 3000 (and sometime even more) because most players are willing to pay that much for the additional plot.
IMO to value an auctioned plot at ~3000 would unbalance the game tremendously. A player that obtained the average 11 plots in game during land grant without having purchased one would have a land value of 5500. While a player that did the same and paid a little over 3000 for an extra plot valued at 3000, finished with 12 plots valued at 8500,rather than 6000. That's a huge difference for others to compete against, plus don't forget, it's compounded on top of the production potential value that the plot provided to the player.
I see this as adding an advantage on top of an advantage. I think it would eliminate the chances for the players not as fortunate in acquiring land (9 or 10 plots total) to win.
It's one thing to compete against the extra 500s and the extra production that other players with better land advantage have, but one skillful enough at playing the market (possibly playing off of an event such as a late store fire) still has the potential to win the game.
I think that if you remove the equality of land in this manner you'll end up placing the greater landholders further out of reach from the lesser landholders, thus making it nearly impossible for them to win.
And as far a removing risk, there have been games where I've witnessed players buying their defeat by overextending themselves in late auction rounds. They spend too much for the piece of land, and end up not being able to rebound the loss. Probably because they didn't have the time to develop it for a few rounds. If the value of the plot were overinflated to roughly the purchased price it wouldn't matter, because there would be very little loss, if any. Do you disagree?
If your goal is to give them an automatic "benefit" sufficient to bring them into the first place curse, then it becomes really valuable to buy yourself into rich trouble.
In fact, if you are going to give them a bonus, then it becomes possible to spend more than 972, and still get a mule down.
First, player events only occur from rounds 2-11, thus the latter statement would not be true for round 1.
Secondly, my goal is not to hurtle the player that bought a plot in the first round into first place (although receiving a free plot on round 2 could end up putting them in first on round 3). I just want it to be more difficult for them to ride along in fourth for the first half of the game while the whole time snagging all of the best crystite plots during each land grant.
I think the early monetary awards are generally around 50-150 for rounds 1-4, while the 2 bars a smithore award would most likely have a steadily increasing value of 50 up to 230. The food and energy package would also have it's small added value. In general the awards are a small and temporary added value, with the free plot being of greatest value in the early rounds.
In many of the Planet Mule games I've played it at appears to me that second and third tend to get more early round bonuses than fourth. Seems like fourth more often doesn't get awards until the later rounds when they tend to be more superfluous It's my opinion that fourth should be the one getting the awards in the early rounds over second and third.
I believe that an early award to fourth (especially on round 2) will help nudge (or persuade) them out of fourth. A small money award would nip away at that 472 deficit that helped a player into fourth, and it would add incentive to get the plot developed, thus causing the player to make back that purchasing loss through productivity.
I think this would help deter the low rider tactics that I see a lot players, including myself sometimes, administering during the early game to purposefully sit in fourth for the land grant perks (granted lag can affect this as its no surprise to occasionally see the host win out over another player).
However this shouldn't unbalance the game as the player events are already a part of the game. I would just like to see fourth get them more in the early rounds as opposed to the later rounds, when they have a little more impact on the player.
Thanks,
Poll
