A.I Diversity/R&D

[CromeNite]

Expanding on an Idea I saw on the forum, can't seem to find the original poster/thread

I like the idea of A.I focusing on one area (I.E stock). It adds a diversity to the game and improves our interaction with the A.I. The A.I should probably get a bonus in that area also (i.e production bonus - cost of freight reduced by x%). More on this in a bit.

If the A.I focused on one area (i.e retail w/bonus), that A.I should be able to get ahead of everyone one else in retailing. That A.I wouldn't make huge profits because they are limited, but at least from the players perspective they have another challenge to overcome. Having multiple A.I's receiving bonuses in various areas adds to the realism and challenge of the game, and of course there would still be A.I who want to manufacture and sell everything on their own.

Also if we had the ability to disable sea ports the production A.I would be more successful.

I find it too easy to increase the R&D of a product and out perform the competitors. If you throw a lot of money at anything in the game you will be successful at it. Makes the game less challenging when your earning huge profits. To make it more difficult the R&D level of a product could be affected by production experience (or another modifier - something already measurable in the game i guess would be preferred). For example if Company A has been manufacturing mobile phones for 5 years and has R&D level of 50, Company B shouldn't be able to mass R&D mobile phones up to level 50 and be at the same production quality as Company A.

[David]

I find it too easy to increase the R&D of a product and out perform the competitors. If you throw a lot of money at anything in the game you will be successful at it. Makes the game less challenging when your earning huge profits. To make it more difficult the R&D level of a product could be affected by production experience (or another modifier - something already measurable in the game i guess would be preferred). For example if Company A has been manufacturing mobile phones for 5 years and has R&D level of 50, Company B shouldn't be able to mass R&D mobile phones up to level 50 and be at the same production quality as Company A.

This is an interesting idea.

But what if you are a runner-up in an industry and trying to catch up with the leader? Would you find it frustrating that there is no effective way that you could catch up?

Would like to see how other players think about this as well.

[mwyeoh]

I find it too easy to increase the R&D of a product and out perform the competitors. If you throw a lot of money at anything in the game you will be successful at it. Makes the game less challenging when your earning huge profits. To make it more difficult the R&D level of a product could be affected by production experience (or another modifier - something already measurable in the game i guess would be preferred). For example if Company A has been manufacturing mobile phones for 5 years and has R&D level of 50, Company B shouldn't be able to mass R&D mobile phones up to level 50 and be at the same production quality as Company A.

This is an interesting idea.

But what if you are a runner-up in an industry and trying to catch up with the leader? Would you find it frustrating that there is no effective way that you could catch up?

Would like to see how other players think about this as well.

I think something along these lines (Something other than just R&D centers) would be a good idea as it makes sense, but at the same time I do share the same reservations that David has.
Perhaps something researchable that can decrease your rate of tech disruption?

[CromeNite]

But what if you are a runner-up in an industry and trying to catch up with the leader? Would you find it frustrating that there is no effective way that you could catch up?

.

I would imagine it would be frustrating, but it will add to the challenges and difficulties of the game. I'm not sure what formula is used to ultimately determine whether a customer purchases an item from you or a competitor but if you can't catch up because there is a experience gap, then the player can attempt to drop prices, increase advertising, improve the product chain (find higher quality resources), or simply but out the competitor. It would be up to the player to forecast sales and decide whether its worth it to challenge the market leader or focus on another product.

[Purifier]

I find it too easy to increase the R&D of a product and out perform the competitors. If you throw a lot of money at anything in the game you will be successful at it. Makes the game less challenging when your earning huge profits. To make it more difficult the R&D level of a product could be affected by production experience (or another modifier - something already measurable in the game i guess would be preferred). For example if Company A has been manufacturing mobile phones for 5 years and has R&D level of 50, Company B shouldn't be able to mass R&D mobile phones up to level 50 and be at the same production quality as Company A.

I dont agree with this idea. The game is called Capitalism, hence forth it is about being a capitalist. In a capitalists world with enough money you can buy everything. The same is true in the game. You say it yourself "If you throw a lot of money at anything in the game you will be successful at it." Your example isnt realy interesting since going from 16 (base tech at start of game) to 50 isnt hard to do. Its already more interesting when a company has over 100 in a product tech. It will take you a whole R&D center (9 units) to get to that from 16 in a reasonable amount of time. Even longer with less units. And what to think if a company has a tech of over 500 ? Also while you are trying to catch up, the leading company is expanding his tech lvl even further. Using a full R&D building on 1 product costs a very large sum of money.
A bit of calculation: going from tech 16 to lvl 100 with 9xlvl1 units will take about 3-4 years. With a cost of 400K a month for running those 9 units (no training included) that comes to between 14 and 19M. But most products consist of more semi-products (specialy the case with electronic products), if you want to be non-dependant and thus produce those yourself, you also want to have high techs in those which means another 1 or more R&D centers.
Ofc you can try to buy the tech. If your company is already earning huge profits it wont hurt you that much, but that the privilege of earning huge profits. Beside that there is already the thing that (specialy with newly researched products) the companies with the highest tech, most of the times, dont want to sell it. Which means you must take the longer road of getting there yourself.

So yea i agree with the fact that if you throw in a lot of money into anything you will be succesfull, but that is also one of the goals isnt it ? A capitalist wants to control the markets and it cost money to do so.