Can we keep this?

[Eternal Hebron]

Perhaps restricting shareholding to only one account per player?

And monitoring that how? Email addresses? IPs? Nope and nope.

Create a corporation like the World Assembly...

[Great Nepal]

Perhaps restricting shareholding to only one account per player?

No, that will be too much work and messing with gameplay.
Just assume everyone will be ethical with it. Just like current RP works: puppet wanking is perfectly possible but no good RPer does that.
And, I doubt shares will catch on as RP currency cos it ignores economic strength. It will most likely just be for fun.

[New Hayesalia]

And monitoring that how? Email addresses? IPs? Nope and nope.

Why nope on IPs? How the deuce do you think the WA works?

Two people who share a computer can deal with not having WA access. If they're both users of the site, then only one can use shares.

[Yohannes]

No.

[New Hayesalia]

No.

I feel justified.

[New Hayesalia]

From how I see it, it won't work for RP but maybe for gameplay. So if the Gameplay folks want it, they can have it, but RPers have to ensure that shares aren't seen as a form of in-game currency.

[Laerod]

Perhaps restricting shareholding to only one account per player?

And monitoring that how? Email addresses? IPs? Nope and nope.

They already have a system for World Assembly nations. It wouldn't be a stretch to have the WA include shares or to have a separate entity for that.
Furthermore, the punishment for share-wanking would be much more severe than for multi-ing in the WA, seeing as shares are linked to population, so getting a nation kicked out and having to start with a new one would be really painful.

[Great Nepal]

From how I see it, it won't work for RP but maybe for gameplay. So if the Gameplay folks want it, they can have it, but RPers have to ensure that shares aren't seen as a form of in-game currency.

I am quite sure it wont.
A bankrupt nation with 400 trillion population will have less money than a booming nation with 100 million population for instance.

[Mike the Progressive]

From how I see it, it won't work for RP but maybe for gameplay. So if the Gameplay folks want it, they can have it, but RPers have to ensure that shares aren't seen as a form of in-game currency.

I'm not even talking about role-play or gameplay. It's a social currency. People who make flags, maps, logos could charge others and deliver on payment. People who post attractive legal pictures of themselves can do so on payment. You don't really need the mods to make an RP or gameplay currency, that would be stupid and so NS2. Just let people have something to trade between themselves.

[Jenlom]

I like it, but I'd prefer it if it were linked to something like the size of your economy. My nation has a relatively small population to the relatively large size of the economy, and we miss out on shares because of it.

[New Hayesalia]

If this happens, I'm gonna have to ask Paddy for my shares back...

[Yohannes]

but RPers have to ensure that shares aren't seen as a form of in-game currency.

That was my main worry. As we've seen with many new roleplayers, they tend to mix up the fact that NationStates calculators are in fact not an integral part of roleplaying, and thus assume that they are "compulsory" right off the bat. Though I doubt that the same case will apply to this in-game currency anywho... as I see no way one can somehow integrate and amalgamate this feature, which are fully gameplay by nature, into that of a roleplaying setting.

However, I am still, as it stand, afraid that somehow the new players will readily assume that this proposed in-game currency feature by Mike can somehow affect their roleplaying capacity in any ways at all. (I mean, such may always be a possibility, and if it does happen, then it'll be corrosive to the roleplaying community and its largely creative nature).

In general, I believe that this should simply be a fun and free-from-competition April's fool one timer feature, and not that of a permanent addition to NationStates, unless the present mechanics are altered slightly so as to somehow limit its competitive aspect (which will surely kill the fun bit, without a doubt).

Then again, this is simply my opinion, and thus may be wrong, or others may disagree with me and thus I acknowledge that surely, and will fully respect others' opinions and/or disagreement towards what I've just said.

[Yohannes]

I like it, but I'd prefer it if it were linked to something like the size of your economy. My nation has a relatively small population to the relatively large size of the economy, and we miss out on shares because of it.

See, there's already one example of my biggest worry, just as I've expected.

[Laerod]

I like it, but I'd prefer it if it were linked to something like the size of your economy. My nation has a relatively small population to the relatively large size of the economy, and we miss out on shares because of it.

You'd just have to work to get more shares. Provide some reason for others to give you something and you'll prosper.

[Mike the Progressive]

I like it, but I'd prefer it if it were linked to something like the size of your economy. My nation has a relatively small population to the relatively large size of the economy, and we miss out on shares because of it.

See, there's already one example of my biggest worry, just as I've expected.

Yeah, but who cares? No system is fair. Just don't do what he advised.

[Timurid Empire]

I concur good sir! This feature should indeed be kept! nnnnyes.

[Laerod]

Hey, in fact, if we reset it, why not make it based on nothing at all? Give a fixed amount to every nation (preferably one nation per person that applied to the "nationstates stock exchange") and let whomever has something to offer rake in more.

[Mike the Progressive]

Hey, in fact, if we reset it, why not make it based on nothing at all? Give a fixed amount to every nation (preferably one nation per person that applied to the "nationstates stock exchange") and let whomever has something to offer rake in more.

I concur.

The problem is I really don't think that they will. Mods only adopt ideas mods create

[Ynys Golau]

It would make absolutely no sense keeping this feature. The only way would be if there would really be an economic system implemented - away with the RP system where you have what you want to have, but instead make a realistic economic and political simulation, like a online strategy-game. Then an economic system would make sense.

[Great Nepal]

I like it, but I'd prefer it if it were linked to something like the size of your economy. My nation has a relatively small population to the relatively large size of the economy, and we miss out on shares because of it.

See, there's already one example of my biggest worry, just as I've expected.

Yes, but as most wont take it - new players will understand that soon enough.
Just like RP accord are learned.

[Great Nepal]

It would make absolutely no sense keeping this feature. The only way would be if there would really be an economic system implemented - away with the RP system where you have what you want to have, but instead make a realistic economic and political simulation, like a online strategy-game. Then an economic system would make sense.

It is for fun...
Is today more fun than usual NS?

[Mike the Progressive]

It would make absolutely no sense keeping this feature. The only way would be if there would really be an economic system implemented - away with the RP system where you have what you want to have, but instead make a realistic economic and political simulation, like a online strategy-game. Then an economic system would make sense.

No, it really wouldn't. It would be like the failed NS2. If you watched this forum for the last few hours, you'd know you don't need any real centralized planning in the market place. People found a product and sold it -that's kinda how currency in real life works.

[Neo Nibu]

Speaking as someone clinging to 25th place, I would very much love to keep this share thing going. Finally get to be one of the fat cats.

I'll play the 1%, and laugh at the 99% who just gave everything away for free.

Speaking of which, you guys should totally pool me your shares!

[Yohannes]

It would make absolutely no sense keeping this feature. The only way would be if there would really be an economic system implemented - away with the RP system where you have what you want to have, but instead make a realistic economic and political simulation, like a online strategy-game. Then an economic system would make sense.

If such a mixed-up system of implemented, then individuals with acknowledged storefronts such as I myself (link in signature) will reap the benefit of such a setting. We will be able to, as Mike has stated previously, reap the benefit whilst saying "No systems are fair" to the others that are not as lucky as us, and there's nothing that they can do about it, because such an integrated economic system has been implemented.

Would you want that to happen..?

but instead make a realistic economic and political simulation, like a online strategy-game. Then an economic system would make sense.

This is what I meant. Admittedly, I can say "Yes I want it hell yeah man I am the one who will massively benefit by the fact that I own in-game roleplaying storefronts and integrated features which offer lucrative service, which in turn is a by-product of a gameplay-roleplay mix setting", which are in turn may be exploited to reinforce my geopolitical standing over others less lucky than I myself.

So, no, I would prefer it that there's no "away with the RP system where you have what you want to have, but instead make a realistic economic and political simulation, like a online strategy-game. Then an economic system would make sense".

But yeah, this is just speculation on my part, acting as it is in my capacity to oversee the best future interest of the roleplaying community (for the roleplayers in NationStates).

Also, at Mike, this is just me speculating, so please don't be offended by the fact that I voice my disagreement with your idea mate.

[Tergnitz]

Ditto what Yohannes has said basically; and I should have clarified earlier.

Its a cool system and a fair bit of fun, but it should be kept strictly separate from the RP sphere. The threat of players inter-mixing the two, along with the inevitable hoarding and the potential for puppet number-boosting are all very serious problems and each is enough on its own to quash this idea, unfortunately.

If it where to be kept, it should be put in the same category as other 'gameplay' features as Issues, and the Raiding/Defending mechanic. But even then, I think things are becoming too complicated.