Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

An economic idea for RvR incentivization


Recommended Posts

Followers of my forum canon are well aware that I've been beating the drum for some type of strategic rationale for port capture. Currently, we have a RvR game of mere denial of localized resources, in which too few people are reliant enough on any one given port to essentially care if it is taken. The stakes are simply not high enough, as is.

 

I realize that the developers may have another layer in mind, to be introduced later. Blackjack Morgan has outlined a fantastic idea in which regional capitals become hubs for SOL building, and economic/capture ramifications radiate outwards from there. I fully endorse something such as that, however I still believe that even if we had such a system, players not engaged in SOL crafting or buying must still feel some connection to the wartime progress of their nation.

 

One of the challenges of any incentivization system is avoiding the "spiral loop of despair" for factions that begin a streak of losing. If factions are incentivized by greater rewards for taking more ports, those factions who are victorious initially will become exponentially stronger as they are rewarded, making it increasingly difficult for "losing" factions to even-out the course of the war.

 

My idea, outlined below, avoids the "spiral of despair", while providing a strong RvR-backed incentive to all players, regardless of play style or individual goals. In short, everyone will feel that they have a stake in the course of the war, as the economic impacts of capture and defense will be felt by every player.

 

 

War Bonds

Otherwise known as Consols, the earliest historical issuance of war bonds was by the Bank of England in 1751 at the behest of the British government, to help pay for war debts. While some may think of war bonds as exclusively a 20th century security, their issuance during the Age of Sail and subsequent Napoleonic period give them immediate credentials within the historical scope of this game.

 

For those unfamiliar with bonds, the way it works is that a buyer purchases a bond with a fixed lifespan and a fixed interest rate. At the end of the bond's lifespan, the buyer receives their initial payment back, plus interest accumulated.

 

 

Here's how it works in Naval Action:

 

1) Any player, at any time, may purchase a war bond of a fixed amount from their nation. Bonds may come in increments such as 5k, 20k, 100k, 500k, etc.

2) During the life of the bond, you cannot spend the money you've purchased the bond with. That money is essentially tied up in the bond.

3) Remember, the value in owning a bond is that after a pre-set period of time, you get your principal amount back, plus interest. Players will do this, as it's free money.

4) The interest rate is determined by RvR victory progress conditions at the time of bond purchase.

 

Whatever the "victory" metric for factions may be (be it regional capitals owned, overall number of ports owned, or whatever the devs decide), this is what will directly influence the interest rate. Nations with favorable victory progress will receive a higher interest rate, and nations with poor victory progress will receive a lower rate.

 

 

Why does this make sense for the game? Twofold:

 

1) A higher interest rate is a nice reward for successful national RvR that all players can feel the benefits of. The Dutch have taken most of the Spanish main? Every Dutch player will be able to purchase bonds with a higher interest rate than players of most other nations. This is a nice source of national pride, and profit: at a high rate of 25% interest, a 500k bond will yield the player 125k when the bond expires. That's 125k in free money. A player on a more hapless faction may only be offered a 3% interest rate, making them less likely to invest

 

2) This one is important. Remember, if you have 600k to your character's name, and you buy a 500k bond, you are down to only 100k until that bond expires. So while you receive free money (in interest) at the end of bond ownership, until the bond expires you have limited your spending power. This acts as a natural cap on nations becoming gradually too strong to defeat. Nations that are winning the map, and have higher interest rates, will likely have more players begin to invest their money, taking it out of circulation as a means to buy ships, for a duration of time. Conversely, nations that begin "losing" will be offered such low interest rates that their players will be more likely to pour all available money into ships, crafting, etc. This creates a form of balance, whereas weaker nations are more likely to strengthen their fleets at the same time as stronger nations are remaining stagnant, waiting for their bonds to mature. The end state is less chance of a runaway superpower, strengthened to no end by their RvR rewards.

 

 

Fine tuning

Obviously, the value of interest rates (from highest possible to lowest possible) can be changed at any time by the devs, to suit what they believe is best. The same goes for the bond ownership duration.

  • I would recommend a bond ownership duration of 7 real life days, although only a day when you log into the game will count as a "day" towards your bond maturing.
  • I would recommend a rate range of 1% (lowest) to 25% (highest), depending on victory conditions for a nation being met. I do not know yet what those victory conditions will be, but I do hope it has something to do with control of key regional capitals and trade routes.

 

Additional layers

An important thought for me is always: does this make sense within the "real" universe of the game? In other words, is it realistic to imagine that Age of Sail nations would use bonds during wartime in such a way?

 

The answer, as I've thought about it, is yes. You can imagine your purchase in a war bond going towards your nation's military, for protecting and expanding the empire. The more territory your nation owns, the greater the risk that it will incur territorial losses. To entice investors into these riskier bonds, they must offer a higher interest rate. It's quite a logical way to think about why an expanding nation would offer a higher interest rate, and a smaller nation would offer a lower rate.

 

On that very topic of risk, as any investor knows, there is another side of bonds which I have not mentioned, and that is the chance of default. If your bond provider claims bankruptcy, you may forfeit both your principal and any unrealized interest. If this system were to be truly detailed within Naval Action, we could have bonds whose possible default is tied to the loss of certain key ports. For example, if my nation has captured the far off enemy regional capital of Basse-Terre, I would be able to buy a "Basse-Terre Defense Bond", with a very high interest rate. However, if Basse-Terre were to fall back to the enemy before my bond matures, I lose the entire amount. This would encourage port defense on a level not yet seen, as players would be highly incentivized to keep their investments secure.

 

 

Final thoughts

I do not see War Bonds as the final RvR incentivization mechanic, but rather a useful piece of the puzzle. The puzzle is: how do we get players to care about the progress of the war, and feel like it directly impacts their game experience, other than simply counting who owns the most ports when you press 'M'? 

 

Given that War Bonds carry a unique balancing mechanic within their reward structure, it seems prudent to consider them as one of the many elements that will (hopefully) make Naval Action's RvR strategically appealing, thus ensuring we have a wide, active, and interested player base once this game launches.

Edited by 'Sharpe
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like this idea very much. It adds depth to the game and it creates diversity.

Yet i do have a few critical notes, which, when overcome, would make this a solid proposal.

 

''A higher interest rate is a nice reward for successful national RvR that all players can feel the benefits of. The Dutch have taken most of the Spanish main? Every Dutch player will be able to purchase bonds with a higher interest rate than players of most other nations. This is a nice source of national pride, and profit: at a high rate of 25% interest, a 500k bond will yield the player 125k when the bond expires. That's 125k in free money. A player on a more hapless faction may only be offered a 3% interest rate, making them less likely to invest''

 

This in my eyes does only partly make sense. In the case of government (financial/militairy) stability, the interest rate would decrease, not increase. For the nation to get the much needed funding, they would increase the % rate to get a risk-reward balance for the investors. When you change the concept of war bond to an investment/share (similar to the ROI in the DEIC) it would make sense that a higher dividend is payed out.

 

But, and this is the interesting part, if you are capable of financing the war bonds of other nations, you get a different kind of risk-reward. If one sees that the Spanish AI fleets are destroyed across the seas and the ports are being raided and captured, the interest % would go through the roof. As a (neutral) third party that would be prime investment, yet highly risky.

 

Furthermore, in your second point you adres the cash flow restraint it would put on larger/stronger nation to prevent them from dominating the globe. This however is only partially covered.

When the interest rate is, according to my statement above, linked to the financial stability of the nation, interest rates in strong nation would be low. Therefore it would force them to either accept very low interest %, or invest capital in order nations. Which in turn would result in them recovering from their poor condition.

 

Note, i am only expressing this in order to improve the idea. I simply love it, i want to help make it happen.

With that said, it's nearly 5 in the morning, so ill have a second look later on today :)

Edited by SteelSandwich
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good critique Sandwich, 

 

You're correct that it seems somewhat backwards that a nation that is "doing well" would receive high interest rates. However from a game mechanic standpoint I included it that way so that it serves as a reward for players of a nation that is succeeding in RvR. Providing these players with lower interest rates would seem to undercut the premise of incentivizing success in RvR.

 

I think the disconnect is assuming stability vs. risk. Your initial thought, which is very macroeconomically astute by the way, is that nations successful in RvR would be more stable, lowering interest rates. However my "historical" logic behind higher rates for successful nations is that large empires would likely finance inherently riskier ventures, since they have so much territory to defend and their rate of expansion so great.

 

I could see either side having merit, which is problematic, because any game mechanic in an historical game should feel clearly representatives of the actors of the time.

 

---------------------------------

 

Therefore, I started to think more about this concept of risk, and how it was almost completely absent from my original proposal, but, when harnessed, can actually provide a better game mechanic than the one I originally outlined.

 

First, the historical context. When territory was captured, there would be a certain need for investments to flood into that territory. From new military installations for defense to replace the ones that were destroyed, to infrastructure that can accommodate the new captors and their equipment, to even property/land that was abandoned by the previous owners and now is available for purchase by the nobility of the invading nation.

 

Conquest Bonds

Here's how it would work in Naval Action:

 

1) When a port is taken, any player within the conquering nation has the ability to invest in the new territory. These investments can be called Conquest Bonds, Consols, or simply as such, investments - I will call them Conquest Bonds henceforth, but the name can be changed.

 

2) There are two classes of conquest bonds: defense bonds, and property bonds. Each bond type has two types: 7 days, and 14 days.

 

3) When you buy a conquest bond in a certain class, if your nation holds that port for the amount of time (7 or 14 days), you get your initial investment back, plus interest. If the port is recaptured or captured by any other nation before that time, you lose your initial investment and do not earn the interest.

 

4) After 14 days of continual port ownership, you can no longer buy Conquest Bonds for that port - the port has now been owned long enough that all new investment opportunities have been taken.

 

Essentially what this means is that -- once your nation takes a new port -- you are placing an informed wager on whether or not your country will be able to hold that port in the near future.

 

The gameplay benefits are voluminous:

 

-A reward for players of a conquesting nation. The interest rates will be high, and a good opportunity to earn free money. Taking ports has more meaning when there is clear monetary incentive.

 

-Will encourage the defense of ports where players have invested in conquest bonds. Nobody wants to lose a port they just took, but once they additionally each have 500k on the line earning them potentially 50% interest...you will really start to see defenders in numbers.

 

-A natural counterbalance against chain port flipping, and zerg conquest. Conquest flags are expensive, and at some point the aggressors will reach an interesting choice: continue to expand, or focus on holding the new port for a week, two weeks, while investing enough in conquest bonds for that port to fund the next wave of conquest flags.

 

-A natural counterbalance against exponential national dominance. Once ports are captured, the temptation will be high for captains of the "winning" nations to invest in Conquest Bonds, thus taking their money out of circulation for one or two weeks. This lowers their cashflow and gives some chance for the nations suffering port losses to outspend them on ships for the time being.

 

-A fascinating "cat and mouse" game, on a national level. The losing nation will want to counter-attack and regain the ports they lost, but they will especially want to regain ports that enemy captains have purchased Conquest Bonds in, for that means the bond money is completely lost for enemy Captains. This will be completely blind to both sides of course - defenders/counter-attackers will need to take their best guess as to which ports the enemy has invested in defending, and the aggressor nation will need to hide whether or not they've invested, through their actions.

 

-An ideal national player-only equivalent to Pirates' port raiding income. Remember, Pirates will have an income source (raiding) that national players do not have. There was much concern over this, and I believe Conquest Bonds provide that income equivalent, provided they are not available to Pirates (historically they should not be).

 

 

More detail on bond types and classes

Earlier I alluded to Conquest Bonds of the "Defense" and "Property" classes, and of 7 and 14 day types.

 

Owning a Defense Bond for a certain port would allow you to teleport without ship to any defensive port battle during the time of your bond ownership, where you would be able to man a small gunboat or fort gun during the battle. (You can also of course participate with your ship like a regular participant if you are able to be present for the battle). This bond class type allows you to feel some type of ownership in the defense of the port since you will always be able to participate in the defensive port battles for it, but for this privilege this bond comes with a lower interest rate.

 

Owning a Property Bond for a certain port is simply the 18th century equivalent of investing in an estate in the new territory. You don't have teleport privileges to participate in defensive port battles, and therefore this class carries the highest possible interest rate. (You can of course participate in defensive port battles if you happen to already be present).

 

7 Day Conquest Bonds versus 14 Day Conquest Bonds obviously has to do with the magnitude of the risk. 14 day bonds will carry a higher interest rate, since they are riskier; more of a chance of your nation losing that port before your bond matures.

 

I would recommend something like the following:

 

Defense Bond - 7 Days - 20% Interest

Property Bond - 7 Days - 25% Interest

 

Defense Bond - 14 Days - 45% Interest

Property Bond - 14 Days - 50% Interest

 

These values can obviously be tweaked to meet supply/demand, and in an ideal world would be relative to the risk of the newly-taken port. A captured port that is far from an already owned regional capital will be substantially more risky, and thus the interest rates even higher.

 

--

 

Overall I believe that Conquest Bonds simplify the situation a bit from my initial post, while still providing an economic/strategic layer that the game really seems to need. It does so in a way that rewards the victors of port battles while also working towards slowing the pace of expansion & creating more incentive for strategic, measured RvR instead of zerg sprawl.

Edited by 'Sharpe
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...