Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
I just wanted to mention one point you made.
When you said having more than 50% is not worthy, you said that less share holders is less people to handle certain aspects, and you mentioned accident rate, production etc.
Shareholders dont handle this. By the point you made there i assume you might not have understood how that part works (i saw in the past others do the same, and i also took some time to understand it).
What shareholders do is like "vote" on which one of those different aspects are developed by the CEO.
This means that if you have a company with multiple shareholders and they chose different aspects, the one chosen by majority will be first do be developed by the CEO.
If you have 100% of the company, what you chose will be the one that the CEO will focus on.
So it doesnt change that much if you have 1, 2, 5 or 10 shareholders (in this matter). Obviously, if you have majority, you will have more "responsibility" for whatever happens in more matters related to the company, since you have the whole control.
again, im only focusing on this point because i still didnt formulate an opinion on the others, since i prefer to wait for the finished product before giving my final opinion on the matter, as i said.
about the shareholder thing. the trick I find, was to "keep" those board members who are 5 star loyalty, while buyout shares from those who aren't. then by the time you have 51% share, essentially they just do whatever you want (and with their "bonuses" in each "functional" board thing.
the micromanage thing - indeed when it was expanded to all states, even I had a tough time dealing with all the companies strikes. I sure hope eventually there is a "quick click" function, that just apply the same/similar "approach", and let the minions/assistants to handle.
moreover, it's true that when you merge two companies (assuming you have 51+% shareholding), you can easily "generate" lots of revenue by doubling the share values. yet one wish I have, is the ability to split shares.
As for suggestions;
1) We should be able to manually clear defaulted loans from the ledger. Wasting agents on small sums is not practical, but their red ledger entries doesn't go away unless I make a collection with an agent. You can imagine how cluttered player's ledger do become after a certain period.
2) There is also a bug with the loans. After a certain period, bunch of loan ambitions pop up with only 1k requirement. It can't be coincidence that %20 percent of people who wants a loan only requires exactly $1000.
3) What's up with the horses? Everybody wants horses, but nobody sells any, and they are extremely expensive. There is an unbalance with the Buy/Sell ratio in terms of people's luxury ambitions. Everybody wants to buy antiques, but I can't find anyone who is willing to sell.
Also the game seems to revolve around negotiation. I wish we could also be able to negotiate luxuries instead of a fixed price while fulfilling ambitions. Maybe even search for an item using filters and go negotiate with people to buy from them, just like we do with business shares.