Author: marcelbuter
In the past two weeks I have tried to give an alternative for the slump in which the trade of the Federation is in at the moment. A short summary is that the cities be joined together into countries so that the amount of active traders per city/country will be enough to create competition and adequate trade for all players. What I would like to offer in this third article however is the most important part, and that is the test and acceptance criteria, based on which we can actually decide if the change is a good thing for Miniconomy. A good example is that it has always been known that turnover limits are not good for the game and have not reached what the intention was, but it was never decided to rollback since that was not discussed in advance.
1. Benefits for change
What do we gain from this on a concrete level, why do I think that the changes are needed. Below is a list of possible gains that will show why the change is necessary in my opinion:
– Extra sales of premium goods, adding variation to trade
– Competition, leading to lower prices and better availability of products for all players
– Better balance of trade, not dependent on where you live
– More contact with other players since monopoly positions are less likely
– Return to glory for the position of Mayor, who actually has to plan things again
– Better chances for new players
– Investments last longer
2. Test criteria
How do we test if the benefits above are reached, do we need specific testing or will normal play combined with data that the Federals can see deliver the needed proof that this idea has been tested thoroughly?
– Is the amount of trade consisting of the basic products (iron, wood, bricks) lower in ratio to that of previous rounds?
o This data might need to be corrected for extra investments in shop/warehouse size, total of exports, and total of auctions
– Are average prices of products lower than in previous rounds.
– Is there more interest in the Mayor position per city?
o More applicants for Mayor in total
– Does it feel like players are investing for a longer period of time
o Ratio per week of total sales compared to total exports/auctions/tourist sales
3. Acceptance/Regression criteria
It is also important that things that we don’t want to change are not affected, and it will be need to be looked at if the change does not harm the game in general.
– Is the interest in national politics unaffected?
o Total amount of voters / Total amount of applicants for national politics positions
– Is the ability to get a job such as officer / lawyer / teacher unaffected?
– Is secondary trade such as transport or criminal activities unaffected?
So with the above things we have figured out what we are intending to change and have identified all the things that we want to see affected in a positive way, and the things we want to see unaffected. With this knowledge we can then design an implementation plan so that it is clear for everyone what the plan of action is. This way we can easily define when the plan is a success or when a rollback might be needed since it is just not working as we wanted.
I am happy to have been granted the ability to share this plan with the readers since it seems like it has been a way to increase discussion about a matter as compared to having to ask people personally for their opinion because I cannot reach everyone that way. Hopefully other people will be aware of what can improve and either in the club Miniconomy Ideas or by writing in the paper so that ideas are voiced. Only with the help of player’s ideas can we get an honest view of what players want. Who knows your idea might be the next to be implemented into Miniconomy.