Re: Alliance Chat & Alliance Bank

by Manleva Wed Jan 05, 2011 1:11 am

I have rewritten this a few times and here’s what I have come up with.

Alliance Bank

Deposits are made to the bank via an Alliance Tax

UU - Between 0 to 2% of each members daily Raw UP
Kuwal - Between 0 to 2% of each member’s daily income

The percentage is set by Alliance leadership in 0.25% increments.

Withdrawals can be made at any time with approval by alliance leadership.
Withdrawals have the following restrictions

UU - Max 20% of the withdrawing members Total Army size
Kuwal - Max 20% of the withdrawing member’s daily income

Additionally there is a restriction of X days between each type of withdrawal

Alliance War Chest

Resources are added to the War Chest by Taxation with Rates from 0 to 1% and the Maximum that any member can donate is 20% of their total Military Forces. The percentage is again set by Alliance leadership in 0.05% steps

The War Chest contains Attack Soldiers, Defence Soldiers, Spies and Assassins.

AT and ST could also be kept in the War Chest. As daily production is fixed then the rate at which they are added to the War Chest would also be fixed and capped to prevent excessive storage (I'll wait for comments before making any suggestion on the actual figures)

Weapons can also be added to the War Chest but would be done via a donation method and restricted to both the donators Weapon Level and the amount of Attack and Defence units they have donated.

Resources from the War Chest are allocated by the Alliance Leadership and are capped so that the recipient can receive no more than a 20% increase in the unit type allocated over their current number of that unit type. Additionally they can receive no more than the 20% in the period that it will take for them to replace them. I.e. If 20% is allocated to someone on day one and the tax rate is 1% then they cannot be allocated another 20% until day 21. If the tax rate is 0.5 percent then it will be day 41.

AT & ST can be allocated but each individual member can receive no more that their own share all stored AT and ST are allocated.
I.e. If the War chest contains 1000 AT and there are 10 members in the alliance then when they are allocated each member receives 100 AT.

Weapons can be allocated but the recipient can only receive weapons up to their own weapons level. Additionally they can only be allocated when allocating Attack and Defence Soldiers and the number of weapons allocated cannot exceed the number of weapons allocated.
i.e. 100 Attack Soldiers and 10 Weapons can be allocated but not 10 Attack Soldiers and 100 weapons.

In both the Alliance Bank and the War Chest resources come from the production of the alliance members. There is no ability for additional resources to be added to either the Alliance Bank or the War Chest. I.e. you cannot buy directly from any of the Markets to increase either of these.

Activity and its effects.

To ensure that both of these are of benefit to Active members only and to stop feeding the following mechanisms are included.

A period of inactivity of more than 7 Days will see all transfers from the inactive account cease.
Inactive accounts will be dropped from alliances after 60 days.

Vacation mode - All transfers will be stop when members enter vacation mode and automatically restart when they exit.

PTR.

I can see no reason for any of these transfers to be subject to PTR.
Resources sent to the Alliance bank come from member’s normal resource production and those taken from the bank are used for account growth.
AT and ST sent to the War Chest come from normal production and as such have 0 costs. All other resources sent to the War Chest have been fully paid for and when withdrawn are merely being used.

I will admit that there is the possibility of withdrawing resources and then selling them on the markets but these sales would then be subject to PTR. I also do not see that there would really be any incentive to do this because the use is restricted to active players and active players are interested in building their own accounts not someone else’s.

As I said at the beginning I have had a few goes at this myself and I can still find some holes. To discourage reselling of UU on the market it could be a possibility that as part of the withdrawal process they have to be trained which would mean that there is both a Training cost and untraining cost before they could be sold on a market.

The intent is to create Alliance Resource pools that solely use resources generated by alliance members themselves for the benefit of the alliance and as such they are not markets. There is no ability to trade these resources directly with anyone else. Some one I am sure will think of trading between Alliances that are in the same Empire but as there is currently no coding for Empires this is a later discussion.

by Nomad Wed Jan 05, 2011 1:32 am

Manleva wrote:
Spoiler:

I love the thought and basic set up here, great work.

I personally dislike alot of things about it, but thats because it does not really solve my issues or meet my needs.

I'm not really interested in having trained men paid for and armed and not on my account. To me thats just like having a second def or strike standing already to have in a moments notice so I personally feel its a bad idea.

Secondly have resources for only the player who put them in is not a great idea in itself, its just an increased bank basicly.

I really want to see an alliance GM market so I do not have to be punished for selling resources to a friend or allie for the EXACT same prices as I am forced to sell to an enemy who then uses those resources against me. Thats what I want to see.

As for your restrictions, I love them. I think its great to limit accounts to a % of their own size, and to make it so you have to pay back before borrowing again. Thats how it should be, not allowing massive dumping onto 1 account, but acctually allowing alliance members to help and support one another.

by Manleva Wed Jan 05, 2011 2:14 am

Nomad wrote:
I love the thought and basic set up here, great work.

I personally dislike alot of things about it, but thats because it does not really solve my issues or meet my needs.

I'm not really interested in having trained men paid for and armed and not on my account. To me thats just like having a second def or strike standing already to have in a moments notice so I personally feel its a bad idea.

Personally I am not in favor of the War Chest either but I included it because it is something that some appear to want as well.

Secondly have resources for only the player who put them in is not a great idea in itself, its just an increased bank basicly.

Where did that come from ? The intent is for the resources to be available for any player to use as you can borrow 20% more than you are depositing.

I really want to see an alliance GM market so I do not have to be punished for selling resources to a friend or allie for the EXACT same prices as I am forced to sell to an enemy who then uses those resources against me. Thats what I want to see.

It's not a Market it's a Bank therefore you are not selling anything. What you deposit can be borrowed by other members who then pay it back.
A large player with a large UP will deposit considerable UU that can be used by smaller players at no cost. They are restricted in the amount that they can borrow and they pay it back. I.e. No selling, no trading, no PTR, restricted to alliance members only.

As for your restrictions, I love them. I think its great to limit accounts to a % of their own size, and to make it so you have to pay back before borrowing again. Thats how it should be, not allowing massive dumping onto 1 account, but acctually allowing alliance members to help and support one another.

by ghyogod Sun Feb 13, 2011 11:56 pm

:-? how about rethinking this completely.

a great empire should have a few good generals, and an outstanding one.
why bother with all of those limitations? are u afraind someone will do the better math?

Admin, see into this idea. we can organise alliances in democratic factions. indeed the inactives should be thrown after a few weeks (to my recollection WR has a bunch of inactives ► why should they even still be in an alliance?! the overall power is not a real asset due to that misfortune.)

if a group of people wants to buy a snack, in real life, and they individually don't have the necessary cash, they can raise the funds togheter. it is not illegal to buy a snack.
also if a group of people wanted to support Caesar, no senate in the world could restrict them from feeding Caesar whatever they wanted.

so hear this. let them do anything they wish with their funds. they will organise themselves.
lets say an alliance offeres u security.
but growth also. as u guys stated above the resources could be used for raising techs and so on.
alliances should be able to control the tax they want to percep from their members, and everything they wish. it is tru that economy may run wild in this perspective, but things will be much more captivating.

another idea is that alliances could have an army controlled by democratic will, or else. this could lead to a huge deal of new war tactics (divide et impera, or big giant army, or else).

i speak of change.

by Nomad Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:05 am

I still just want to be able to trade with a friend for the exact same price as an enemy, and not be openly punished for it.

by Kenzu Mon Feb 14, 2011 8:00 am

Nomad wrote:
Admin wrote:
Mystake wrote:although i still fail to see how an alliance economic improvement plan is classified as feeding. It all stays within the alliance. Either 1 person gets it, or 10 do. But it's still in play.
The problem isn't with the legit programs

and nomad sorry but the whole point of a "fair" or somewhat reliable trading which does not have to fall under total scrutiny and where "traders" can make their PTR-ignorant profit is that you have little control about your trade partner, the only thing that matters are the profitsss

I'm sorry, Thats not what I meant because you are right. But give us something, such as GM legit trades with NO PTR interferance. If we make a inner alliance trade at GM prices there should be NO % cost it allows us to trade to our own for the same price as to an enemy, not punishing you for trading with a friend over an enemy. Thats what sucks

I suggest this:

0% deposit fee
max 10% tax

all kuwal that a player pays into alliance bank lowers his PTR (automatic tax + deposits)
all kuwal that a player receives to alliance bank increases his PTR

AND

ALLIANCE BANK TRADING

(only for SS players)
there should be a possibility to trade with the alliance bank, where it will work like this:
there will be an alliance bank page, where people can make deposits, ask for withdrawals, see who deposited how much
(I want the alliance bank to be transparent for every member so that they can see who was the beneficiary)
but most importantly, the alliance bank will show fair prices (which are also calculated for the GM).
It will for example say:

1 AT = 27.125.831
1 UU = 234.824

leaders and 2nd in command can select if the alliance bank is allowed to trade automatically, or if leader or 2nd in command must always approve a trading request.
(deactivating automatic trading might be helpful during war so that some vital resources are not depleted through trading)

And this is how it will work for a member. (2 options, one should be used)

OPTION 1

A member fills out how much resource he wants to pay, for example 10.000.000.000 kuwal and then choses what resource he wants to get.
For example he wants UU. Buy chosing UU the fair price will be automatically filled out and he can make the trade, which will wait there until approved by leader or 2nd in command (or done automatically if bank trading is set on automatic.)

OPTION 2

A member fills out how much resource he wants to pay, for example 10.000.000.000 kuwal and then choses what resource he wants to get.
For example he wants UU. Buy chosing UU the fair price will be automatically filled BUT he can change the price to any price he wants (which has to be between half and double of the fair price) and a number will appear, which will show how many resources will effect his PTR.

If he pays 10 billion, to buy UU at 200k, but fair price is 250K, he will get 50.000 uu instead of only 40.000.
This means that the following notice will appear before he makes the trade:

You buy for a price cheaper than fair price. The alliance donates you 10.000 untrained with this trade.

after the trade completes there where you see who received how much from the alliance, it will increase by the value of 10.000 untrained for the beneficiary.
In other words, it will be in practice the same like making a trade for 250k AND asking for 10k uu from the alliance, however it can be done in one step.

One disadvantage: setting at automatic trades will become dangerous as it will de facto allow members to withdraw cash from alliance.

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

ALLIANCE BANK LOANS

Here another thing I suggest (for all players including Non-SS):

Players should be allowed to take a loan from the alliance bank (only kuwal loans). Again two options:
(again leaders and 2nd in command can decide if loans are granted automatically or approved by them)

OPTION A:
By taking a loan the alliance bank can never have less than 0 kuwal

OPTION B:
By taking a loan the alliance bank can never have less than - one day alliance income
AND
The total loan you will have may NOT exceed 1 day of your own income AND 10 billion kuwal
(If a player earns 15 billion per day, he can have a loan of 15 billion, but if his income is only 1 billion, he can have a loan of 10 billion)

end of options.

Players who take a loan pay additionally 1% of the loans sum each day to the bank, which is considered servicing a debt. If they repay a part of the loan, the payment will decrease proportionally (because they pay only 1% of the remaining loan). This will be especially helpful for new players if they need help for increasing their UP, as the loan can provide them with a 10% or even 30% return on investment per day. At the same time the loan would be available to all players, including those who DON'T have SS.

If easy to implement it would be good if leaders could set also a different interest rate. Namely an interest rate anywhere between 1% and 2%.

(Which could theoretically be also allowed if the alliance bank is empty, but there )

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

The alliance bank with the features of alliance trading and alliance loans would catapult Aderan Wars alliance bank system into one of the most progressive systems compared to all other games.

by seaborgium Mon Feb 14, 2011 9:30 am

Its a bit early for me to be thinking about what I just read. But option B of the Bank loans, 1 days income +10b only really helps the larger players and even then is still kinda useless as about 25% of the server that won't pay for much.

by Manleva Mon Feb 14, 2011 10:01 am

Some nice ideas there Kenzu, but heres a few thoughts

I fail to see why we would need Admin to code another Trading market for Alliance Bank Trading.

Personally I think we have enough ways of trading between players. What is missing is simply the ability to Trade between Alliance Members at an acceptable rate that is better than what we would want to trade with non alliance members.

To be able to do this I would suggest a modification to the Private Broker page. The page could display the current PTR rates for resources traded between any player but could also show an Alliance Rate for In Alliance Trades. This Alliance rate would be a discounted amount of the PTR value with the discount set a a value that Admin deems suitable.

The Alliance Bank idea appears to be fine as you have made it available to all players, both SS and Non-SS. As there are limits on the size of loans and repayments appear to be automatic and include interest there should be no need to apply PTR to them. I would suggest that the Loan details should also be made public for all alliance members to see.

The one thing missing is around the duration of the loan and the possibility of multiple loans. Do you envisage that a player can only have one loan at a time or can they take out an additional smaller loan while still repaying the first loan.

eg The player has a 15 mil income and by your mechanics can borrow 25 Mil. Does the whole loan need to be repaid before another can be taken out or can the player take out another 5 mil if they have reduced the loan balance to 20 Mil.

by Kenzu Tue Feb 15, 2011 9:35 am

The alliance trading I suggested Is not really a market per se, it more of a withdrawal and deposit with one click.

Now lets have a look at the PTR discount you suggested:

THERE IS NO WAY THERE CAN BE A PTR DISCOUNT!!!
The PTR exists for a reason.
Have you not heard what admin said? There won't be loopholes made for the PTR.

Discounting PTR values means that NO ONE would be trading with regular PTR influence, as everyone who would be interested in a bigger transaction would do it within an alliance OR create an alliance for that purpose.

Regarding loans
PTR must consider all transactions, without an exception.

It's already questionable if GM trading should remain not influencing PTR.

Loan details visible for everyone to see would be a nice thing to have. Increases transparency.

"The one thing missing is around the duration of the loan and the possibility of multiple loans. Do you envisage that a player can only have one loan at a time or can they take out an additional smaller loan while still repaying the first loan."

It doesnt matter how many loans they have. I am interested only in 2 things: All loans together may not exceed certain value, and player must be able to pay 2% interest on it from his income.

You can take out as many loans as you want until the limit is reached. That's how I would do it.

by Nomad Tue Feb 15, 2011 12:48 pm

If a player is held to the standard GM prices, then why are they forced to pay 2% in taxes/interest? It would make more sense to simply trade on the GM market.

Why are we dead set on punishing people who want nothing more then to know who they trade with? I just do not get it.

As for an alliance bank/loan,, again if a player is paying back more then they owe already due to the PTR regulations, then why are we charging them even more on top of that? It makes more sense to borrow from an outsider or enemy so you have less to pay back?

Simply put
Allow inner alliance trading at ONLY the exact rate which yields a 0% change in PTR which is decided by the GM. This means you are forced to pay the same price to a friend or allie that you pay to an enemy or unknown.

As for loans, limit the loans to a set % of your account value in total. You have to pay off a loan to get another. The longer you keep it the more you pay back due to PTR. The longer you keep it the longer it is before your alliance mates can use it. Use the alliance bank as a 3rd part or entity. This way your PTR is directly effected by it. You send funds to it, its just like you sending them to another player. You take funds from it its just like taking funds from another player. Your PTR acts accordingly

All you need is some limitations and trackers. how much you can borrw, and how much you can donate(if need be). PTR already sets your interest rate on loans so there is no need. Then all you need is a banker system of some kind to regulate who can withdraw.

I would hope the bank would be a benifit of long term alliance membership, such as 30 days or more in the alliance.

it could be set up as direct draft into the alliance fund, or manual donations, but i do agree it should be transparent so everyone knows how much they have in it, how much they owe it, and everyone can see who is in the green and in the red.

I still say that all I really want is to just be able to trade to a person/player I know for the same price as one I do not know. I do not think I should be punished for not wanting to hand my enemy resources to use against me.

by Steveanaya Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:03 pm

When is this getting added?

by Keinutnai Wed Jul 06, 2011 6:03 pm

Good question!

by Steveanaya Wed Jul 06, 2011 6:55 pm

If I learn how to code, can I code it?

by kingkongfan1 Wed Jul 06, 2011 8:04 pm

for some reason Kong was under the Idea that all this had been scrapped...

admin made it perfectly clear in another thread that he wasn't going to set up a system where a player could trade with a friend or ally in the exact manner as the gm so as to have little or no effect on players ptr's, same as the current gm system setup...

also there is a chatbox on AW forums (1) that gets very little if any use, TM has a chatbox in our forums (2) & then there is the Ajax chat (3) (kong thinks that this is the one talked about in this thread). Kong sees little use for another chatbox...

either way... Kong no really know what is going on...

by Steveanaya Wed Jul 06, 2011 9:12 pm

Chat for alliance members only & an alliance bank to save funds for wars or projects.

I just started playing sguwars and the alliance bank system is BEAST!

it allows for much more diversity In things people can do to pass the time

by seaborgium Wed Jul 06, 2011 9:18 pm

Is it teh same as it was in dune where the leaders have to buy the increases using the money in the bank?

by Steveanaya Thu Jul 07, 2011 12:38 am

yeah think so. im no leader there though so i cant be sure:)

by Kingofshinobis1 Thu Jul 07, 2011 4:10 am

i like their system but not everyone can put in and still reap the benefits though. stacked alliances gain a real advantage that way

by Steveanaya Thu Jul 07, 2011 5:04 am

what do u mean?

by Nomad Thu Jul 07, 2011 11:39 am

Yes explain so we know the exploit/faults of the system.

by seaborgium Thu Jul 07, 2011 1:13 pm

Allinaces could over time build a bank big enough for brand new players to get every upgrade.

Every person in the allinace could put money into the bank and 1 player could then buy an upgrade with out having to put much effort into getting the funds themselfs.

by Kingofshinobis1 Thu Jul 07, 2011 1:50 pm

sea got it. this means that new players who join a bigger more powerful alliance will have a great advantage over those who dont and decide to make their own. it promotes no new alliances whatsoever

by Steveanaya Thu Jul 07, 2011 3:16 pm

What do u suggest will promote the creation of new alliances?

by Kingofshinobis1 Thu Jul 07, 2011 3:36 pm

what will have to happen is the smaller the player is the less he can take out within a certain amount of time or something to that effect. perhaps it can effect ptr in some sort of way. where if you take more than you put in, then ptr is effected.

by Steveanaya Thu Jul 07, 2011 4:17 pm

I agree

If we deposit, our ptr goes negative, whereas if we withdraw, it goes positive.

That way ppl with huge positive ptr's can deposit a bunch of kuwal to the alliance bank to get it back to normal as well as contribute to the alliance.

It goes the other way too for people like dune that need the kuwal to get a 0% ptr

by Sponsored content