How about this...
Maybe in future Kapilands could implement different ways to produce certain products.
For example, building and using different types of Power plants...the greener, environmentally sustainable ones like wind, solar, nuclear etc. or the option of the bigger polluting ones...coal, oil, gas.
Maybe making the cleaner power production methods slightly more expensive, but knowing that it's cleaner.
Maybe the introduction of points, the more cleaner, and less environmental impacts the better, the more points you get. This would be a good incentive for many players to opt for the cleaner, greener methods of any production.
another idea would be for the research into different greener technologies.
companies could research cleaner alternatives.
I was thinking about it, now that it's arguably one of the biggest issues in the news currently, it might be able to provide a better picture of what companies in the real world have to (or would have to) sacrifice to ensure a cleaner, greener future.
The possibiliteis are endless.
let me know you thoughts.
regards,
AIMHIGHs,
Sell: Steel Q3 -134c, Chemicals Q0-3 -25c*1Q , Gas Q3 -10c, Oil Q3 - 30c
GREEN PRODUCTION--GREENER = BETTER FUTURE??!
Moderator: moderators
-
Guest
I like it, And how about the more points you get towards 'green' The gouverment would send you money each year witch we would have to have a ''kapi time'' also implemented and say your in congo you would get lesss money then germany witch would have the insensive to build in other then green for stuf like that.
-
Guest
A couple years ago McDonalds and their management program (did you know McDonalds even had a management program?) implemented a large-scale multiplayer economics simulation for all their middle executives to take part in. It immediately got good feedback, with a lot of executives saying it helped them understand how to make key decisions faster.
Then they chose to expand it, encompassing some of the more dire environmental predictions around today. [And no I will not debate the assumptions, I'm merely passing on what they did.] Basically the model now said that a long-term focus on heavy use of beef would eventually be disastrous for everyone in the game. It might take as many as 150 years, but eventually everyone would be affected and the company would be bankrupt.
From the report:
Then they chose to expand it, encompassing some of the more dire environmental predictions around today. [And no I will not debate the assumptions, I'm merely passing on what they did.] Basically the model now said that a long-term focus on heavy use of beef would eventually be disastrous for everyone in the game. It might take as many as 150 years, but eventually everyone would be affected and the company would be bankrupt.
From the report:
I find this fascinating not from a science perspective (too many assumptions) but from a psychological one. Even knowing for a fact what would happen, people put their short-term goals ahead of their long-term ones.We tried to tell the players to do fewer of the things that were leading to calamity - to reduce emissions, stop cutting forests, etc. But they didn't. Even if they knew what was going to happen, they invariably ended up playing to win. They might hold out for a while - but as soon as one took off towards greater profits, the rest did as well, so as not to be left behind and lose the game. What fun would that be?
-
Guest
so what you're saying is that this idea wouldn't work if it were to be implemented?! I honestly think it could, and overall, during the last 2 years energy sources and environment has consistently been at the centre of the news and media
It is interesting to see the people in the mcdonald's expt. were motivated to win and bringing home the bucks and din't care about the consequences to environment/health etc.
I was just thinking that the incentive of points, government iniatives to the companies wanting to invest in a cleaner and greener business environment .(receiving some economic help).
It would be interesting to see the value of certain products, and I would be willing to bet that the "dirty, pollutant products" would in the long run reduce in value, as the kapiland governments paved the way forward to help comapanies go cleaner.
Contests and competitions could be held...who can be the cleanest company consistently.
and other ideas along those lines
It is interesting to see the people in the mcdonald's expt. were motivated to win and bringing home the bucks and din't care about the consequences to environment/health etc.
I was just thinking that the incentive of points, government iniatives to the companies wanting to invest in a cleaner and greener business environment .(receiving some economic help).
It would be interesting to see the value of certain products, and I would be willing to bet that the "dirty, pollutant products" would in the long run reduce in value, as the kapiland governments paved the way forward to help comapanies go cleaner.
Contests and competitions could be held...who can be the cleanest company consistently.
and other ideas along those lines
-
Guest
Well, one of the problems with their model, and with what you're describing, is that it completely ignores the foundation of business - the customers. You can direct behavior through a "government", but where ultimately does that line of thinking lead?
Were that the case, players would be tempted to move toward "cleaner" products over time because that's what people want. You get a focus on green products from an organic, capitalistic basis. This sounds appealing to me.
Of course it's a huge change, practically a different game, so don't expect that magnitude of change out of Kapilands any time soon. But I do think you could incorporate environmental concerns without resorting to the blunt club of government regulations.
- From the makers of Kapilands, it's
Kommulands!
Enter company name _ Lush Valley Industries _
No! Your name is now "People's Paradise Company 002415"!
We have determined that you will mine minerals. Do you wish to mine minerals?
YES ᧠
NO √
Game Over. Restart?
Were that the case, players would be tempted to move toward "cleaner" products over time because that's what people want. You get a focus on green products from an organic, capitalistic basis. This sounds appealing to me.
Of course it's a huge change, practically a different game, so don't expect that magnitude of change out of Kapilands any time soon. But I do think you could incorporate environmental concerns without resorting to the blunt club of government regulations.
-
Guest
yes you're right. that's what I was thinking.
I knew it could effect the game quite drastically, but slight modifications and implementations, and over time, no doubt more and more customers will be swayed by a number of factors...
e.g. power produced from wind turbines - 0.21c per unit, very clean
power produced from coal power plant - 0.08c per unit, very dirty
I guess to start off, especially most of the smaller companies would opt for cheaper is better option, but little-by-little with whatever incentives (contests, competitions, prizes, economic incentives) majority of customers will tend towards cleaner products.
Also, how about different research...not only the quality of the product, but in some cases changing what is needed to make the product. Maybe a type of factory/mine is more efficient than others and doesn't need as much of a product...e.g.
Congo, factory - for steel: 5.5kg coal, 2.5kg ironore, 1kg chemicals
Germany, factory - for steel: 4.5kg coal, 2kg ironore, 0.75kg chemicals...
some more ideas that might be worth looking into to broaden the game.
I knew it could effect the game quite drastically, but slight modifications and implementations, and over time, no doubt more and more customers will be swayed by a number of factors...
e.g. power produced from wind turbines - 0.21c per unit, very clean
power produced from coal power plant - 0.08c per unit, very dirty
I guess to start off, especially most of the smaller companies would opt for cheaper is better option, but little-by-little with whatever incentives (contests, competitions, prizes, economic incentives) majority of customers will tend towards cleaner products.
Also, how about different research...not only the quality of the product, but in some cases changing what is needed to make the product. Maybe a type of factory/mine is more efficient than others and doesn't need as much of a product...e.g.
Congo, factory - for steel: 5.5kg coal, 2.5kg ironore, 1kg chemicals
Germany, factory - for steel: 4.5kg coal, 2kg ironore, 0.75kg chemicals...
some more ideas that might be worth looking into to broaden the game.
-
Guest
I can totally see that. Just like at first players want to get into the business, but then they start improving quality. Then when quality starts getting proportionally more difficult to create, it would make sense to move into quality.
This is alos interesting, but I'm trying to think how it will balance in the long-run. Presumably there would be a higher build cost and production cost for the one with lower inputs for some balance. But I wonder if it would just completely swing one way or the other - one would be mathematically better and therefore everyone would buy it. I think it's more interesting if you can find a tradeoff where players have to make a tough decision as to which is better.Congo, factory - for steel: 5.5kg coal, 2.5kg ironore, 1kg chemicals
Germany, factory - for steel: 4.5kg coal, 2kg ironore, 0.75kg chemicals...
-
Guest
-
Guest
that's a good point,
without complicating things too much, maybe the idea of "waste/rubbish/by-products" can be implemented. Obviously cleaner products which were produced more efficieintly won't create as much rubbish/refuse.
Again, even though it may be cheaper to produce in dirty conditions, maybe with the impact of having to deal with rubbish removal - going to a landfill, recycling plant, incinerator, or even a waste-to-energy incinerator.
you're right if something like this was introduced it shouldn't just boil down to which is the mathematically & long term economically better solution, but involve the ethical dilemna as well as drawing from a "cost-benefit analysis"
Potentially it could add a whole new dimension, and again it would be very interesting to see how players react, both the sellers and buyers.
There should way to introduce some (if not all) of this into the game, without complicating it or making it overkill and tedious with these new many factors.
without complicating things too much, maybe the idea of "waste/rubbish/by-products" can be implemented. Obviously cleaner products which were produced more efficieintly won't create as much rubbish/refuse.
Again, even though it may be cheaper to produce in dirty conditions, maybe with the impact of having to deal with rubbish removal - going to a landfill, recycling plant, incinerator, or even a waste-to-energy incinerator.
you're right if something like this was introduced it shouldn't just boil down to which is the mathematically & long term economically better solution, but involve the ethical dilemna as well as drawing from a "cost-benefit analysis"
Potentially it could add a whole new dimension, and again it would be very interesting to see how players react, both the sellers and buyers.
There should way to introduce some (if not all) of this into the game, without complicating it or making it overkill and tedious with these new many factors.
-
Guest
Very simple, yet interesting idea Ganman.
And the implementation of trash is a whole new concept. In a macro-economics sense, it is treatable as a product with a negative value. Just thinking out loud here:
What if "trash" is produced as a byproduct of production as you said. And there are two buildings players can create: Landfill or Recycling Center. Both take up one of your building slots.
Recycling Center can process trash, and make it disapper (or possibly turn into something useful) but it is slow and possibly expensive. Expanding the building makes it process further.
Landfill just takes the trash off your hands and stores it indefinitely. It holds a lot, but once you fill it up you have to expand the landfill before it can hold more. And the building doesn't actually produce anything.
Now this wreak's havoc on the game infrastructure. There has to be some real reason for not just letting "trash" sit in the warehouse forever. (Or dumping it on the market, or placing it in a never-to-be-filled contract, etc). You can't have the "delete item" feature available, and you certainly can't sell a full landfill back to the system.
But conceptually it is a whole new dynamic. It gives players a whole new axis for playing around. Everyone could build their own treatment centers, or someone could specialize and people would pay him to take their trash. I'm intrigued by what is possible at least in the abstract.
And the implementation of trash is a whole new concept. In a macro-economics sense, it is treatable as a product with a negative value. Just thinking out loud here:
What if "trash" is produced as a byproduct of production as you said. And there are two buildings players can create: Landfill or Recycling Center. Both take up one of your building slots.
Recycling Center can process trash, and make it disapper (or possibly turn into something useful) but it is slow and possibly expensive. Expanding the building makes it process further.
Landfill just takes the trash off your hands and stores it indefinitely. It holds a lot, but once you fill it up you have to expand the landfill before it can hold more. And the building doesn't actually produce anything.
Now this wreak's havoc on the game infrastructure. There has to be some real reason for not just letting "trash" sit in the warehouse forever. (Or dumping it on the market, or placing it in a never-to-be-filled contract, etc). You can't have the "delete item" feature available, and you certainly can't sell a full landfill back to the system.
But conceptually it is a whole new dynamic. It gives players a whole new axis for playing around. Everyone could build their own treatment centers, or someone could specialize and people would pay him to take their trash. I'm intrigued by what is possible at least in the abstract.
-
Guest
definitely, this could open up a whole new dynamic to the game, and may make some companies think twice about just simply mass producing and making profit.
maybe with waste-to-energy incinerators, those that build them could produce some power as well. maybe at slightly higher production costs than normal, but considering other companies would pay them to remove their waste?!
an idea for the waste, would be that as it is a by-product and un-deleteable maybe it stays in the warehouse until the player disposes of it either, landfill, recycling, incinerator etc. and the longer the waste stays in the warehouse, maybe the quality of certain products decrease over time.
e.g. 250 units of waste rubber whilst producing tyres. and every 24 hrs. whilst in the warehouse it lowers the quality by -1 of rubber and tyres that are already in the warehouse?!
it's a thought?!
FEEL FREE TO POST A REPLY TO WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THIS TOPIC, I SEE THAT OFTEN THERE ARE LOTS OF VIEWED TOPICS, BUT LITTLE FEEDBACK...
regards,
AIMHIGHs
maybe with waste-to-energy incinerators, those that build them could produce some power as well. maybe at slightly higher production costs than normal, but considering other companies would pay them to remove their waste?!
an idea for the waste, would be that as it is a by-product and un-deleteable maybe it stays in the warehouse until the player disposes of it either, landfill, recycling, incinerator etc. and the longer the waste stays in the warehouse, maybe the quality of certain products decrease over time.
e.g. 250 units of waste rubber whilst producing tyres. and every 24 hrs. whilst in the warehouse it lowers the quality by -1 of rubber and tyres that are already in the warehouse?!
it's a thought?!
FEEL FREE TO POST A REPLY TO WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THIS TOPIC, I SEE THAT OFTEN THERE ARE LOTS OF VIEWED TOPICS, BUT LITTLE FEEDBACK...
regards,
AIMHIGHs
-
Guest
-
Guest
Now that's an idea. I like the warehouse degradation too, but this benefits from simplicity. Of course I started out by saying I don't care for government-caused incentives, but disincentives are slightly more appealing.ganman wrote:Or even a tax law, If you have 250 waste you have to pay 100c or in that area, It would then be better to get rid of it to other companys
It still needs an extra focus to avoid cheats. It would have to be "trash in your warehouse, or on the market by you, or in a contract from you not yet accepted."
You guys have me thinking though.
-
Guest
again, i think a certain direction is being born, like the government disincentives, does sound good, indirectly and "gently" moving people/companies over to more efficient and cleaner production methods.
Maybe each company has to research a certain amount of recycling.
e.g. recycling research Q0 = 5% of whatever waste can be recycled,
recycling research Q3 = 15% of waste can be recycled.
and the more recycled waste the less the government fine/disincentive!?
let's keep these ideas flowing though, this is good...join in everyone and feel free to contribute...
Maybe each company has to research a certain amount of recycling.
e.g. recycling research Q0 = 5% of whatever waste can be recycled,
recycling research Q3 = 15% of waste can be recycled.
and the more recycled waste the less the government fine/disincentive!?
let's keep these ideas flowing though, this is good...join in everyone and feel free to contribute...
-
Guest
Simple, You cant:Knolls wrote:Now that's an idea. I like the warehouse degradation too, but this benefits from simplicity. Of course I started out by saying I don't care for government-caused incentives, but disincentives are slightly more appealing.ganman wrote:Or even a tax law, If you have 250 waste you have to pay 100c or in that area, It would then be better to get rid of it to other companys
It still needs an extra focus to avoid cheats. It would have to be "trash in your warehouse, or on the market by you, or in a contract from you not yet accepted."
You guys have me thinking though.
1) put it on the market
2) either you cant deleted it all together or if you deleted it you have to pay a huge fine to dump it somewere
Also at the start we would need a npc to accepte trash incase their is no other company doing it. But to recicle you would have to use power.
And what would recicling give you? Well you could chose, say plastic peletes that cpu companies could use for a bit cheaper then regulare plastic but you make it harder to get it to higher Q