when i talk about increasing huc value and pump & dump mentality, i don't say that to you, but i reply to a general mood i've sniffed in this thread where people complain, rightly, about their (at the moment) failed investment and what i wanted to state is that for the good of the game, it's better to think in long term then in short term, it's a matter of trust for players.
perhaps my english didn't helped me and i haven't understood
np, yes i agree
People with big money can over take map
? they can now and have
1. moreover, now someone could invest in hucs since its value is so low, then use bought hucs to overtake the map when hucs value will increase, causing a game over.
They can do this now, exactly the same except with no risk at all. Disaster adds random risk, increasing cost increases risk more.
so you are admitting that the planned change would not change this aspect
this is what i wanted to point out, some changes maybe don't give benefit respect current state
in anything related to money, those with the most can have the most.. when mining bitcoin, those with the most money can buy the biggest rigs.
but - what the change does, is limit those by making the game only profitable with a limited amount of generals.
Atm, they can have infinite hunters with almost zero risk.
with the change, (increase in price), they need to loot as many coins as the cost of the generals (see table for "sort of an idea").
Together with random disaster, there is only a finite amount of generals that can be used on the map without actually losing money - a risk.
What limits humans in the game now vs bots, is humans can only control X amount of generals, bots can control many. The change maybe/should limit slightly how many humans can control -- (not much, because it was limited by the human mind/ and interface)... yet, the change should limit the amount of generals bot masters can control considerably.
here comes the main different point of view we have.
I think that this is a game, that has a benefit of giving you a chance to earn money.
This is not a job or something more then a game because at the moment huntercoin isn't useful except to play and trade, because there are no service available in hucs, no goods bound to it, etc... so, at the moment, this is just a game and an innovative (technologically speaking) cryptocurrency.
considered this, supposing huc value = 0.0001, comparing to current btc (price is so low actually and very unpredictable that would be easy to jump in no time to higher values) this mean that to play with 20 hunters on the map, you spend (in $) ~ 57$ (and consider even that new players are noobs about the game and could loose easily all in no time, so you will not have that user back) and i think that not much players could afford that, and if you narrow the catchment area the coin value decrease to the bottom.
If you talk about fair distribution, you have to think to "poor players" too.
yep, all the things like purchasing goods with hucs etc will come, but only after the game is being played (properly).
Originally the game was supposed to be cheap as possible to play, and it still will be - for now.. if it' becomes very expensive, we can lower the cost. Domob has made a change that should allow tweaking of general costs much easier in future.
Consider at the start, the value went to 2.7$/HUC .. people were playing.
the problem is, if the cost is too cheap then the map will be overrun. If the cost is cheaper, we need disaster/expiry to happen much more often.
4 if an hunter costs so much and without a safe area, a casual player will easily lost it's hunters when he log off, while bots could survive easily
?? if there isn't a safe area, bots will die as well, whether playing or not.
sure... but while an human disconnected hunter stand still, a bot could easily move away from enemies...
yep, but is not much can do at this time (domob has 50 A4 sheets of paper to go through for huntercon yet lol).. at least they keep spending fees
they won't be able to avoid disaster though
If the value of huc was 1 BTC, i think Huntercoin would be extremely popular.
as i already said, i don't think so and this goes against a fair distribution, except if a general at that point costs a fraction of 1 huc of course
That's just the way it is.. at the start of any crypto (PoW), it's normally easy at the start and harder later on.
It would be great if there was some way of distributing coins all the time to the poor people (like me and you
)... i think huntercoin is sort of the closest we can get to that though. In the original chronokings thread, i state that expensive hardware isn't required to mine it.. it still won't be, but it will have to cost something.
i agree that no one knows the future, but i know that, personally, with current rates I'll play less, even because i think that major problem now aren't bot (that i can handle pretty easily with my client) but blockchain size/speed, because new players can't join and if the game isn't accessible by many players, you can do any changes you want in mechanics, but you'll keep to have few players (of course this is my thought)
having said that, I respect choices you'll take, but i keep my doubt, in the hope that they are dispelled
i think main problem is bots controlling 80% of the spice flow... also blockchain etc - everything being worked on from multiple angles.
not sure why you would play less, but I think i'd play more if there was a fraction the amount of people on the map, each general u kill will give 20 coins.. atm, it's not safe to go into the central areas.. Also, i think your client will be the ultimate tool for the change
note: seems the bots are tidying / packing up? maybe they are giving in.
Extra: as pointed out by someone - after the minimum 3 days are up (after the last disaster), anyone who creates a general after that point is at risk of randomly dying, the map may actually become more scarce - more coins on the map, but higher risk to get them.. i think this will help.
I'm also wondering if the minimum of 3 days after a disaster should be reduced to 1 day.
p.s. personally, i think it should be 50HUCs per general
, but 20 may be a start and so there isn't a rebellion on the streets
If it's too much we'll adjust.