Why are prices increasing this time?
Spend enough on this game already.
Details of the increases follow:
Phoenix Starbases from 2.10p to 2.25p
Special Action/Surface Explorations 1.70p to 1.80p
Outposts/Platforms from 60p to 70p
Politicals stay the same at 2.00/3.00/4.00
| QUOTE |
Well, this is more of an update than a Newsletter. This is because it's that dreaded time of year again when we meet with our accountant and decide if it's necessary to raise turn fees this year. I'm sorry to report that regrettably the turn fees will be raised slightly on the 1st November 2005. The rise will be small and it will be across the board. The only game which won't have a price increase will be Quest. Quest players won't see their turn fees raised until all the new magic system etc. has been implemented, which shouldn't be much longer now. The point has been raised that email players should not have to pay the same price as postal players, due to savings in postage, paper etc. The answer to this is simple. We have very few postal players left. Postal players in most games only represent approx. 2% of the players. Almost all players now play by email. So the price you are paying really is how much it costs to run your email turns covering all associated costs. The gradual savings made over the years in postage, paper etc has meant that only small and infrequent price increases were necessary. In fact before the rise in 2002, prices had been frozen for nearly six years, as increasing costs were absorbed by the change over from post to email. |
Outposts and platforms costing more, are changes being done to them as well, so they will be worth looking more at or just a way to force us into the updaged political, to £3 or 4?
I note with interest, that the demanding SA only raised £0.10 how come? starbase cost like 0.15 extra and its runned from a computer, so cant hardly take much GM time, which is what really cost?
Are we really paying to keep down the cost of the SA here?
You need to factor in costs of operating expenses, player numbers/monthly income from players, UK inflation rates, the no doubt increased costs of bandwidth for the sheer volume of emails KJC must send out, bandwidth for their websites/webhost (IE: The online editors for the various games) - hell, even annual pay rises for the employees at KJC. I'm sure it all mounts up, and I'm similarly certain the price increases aren't just so Kevin James Cropper can afford a new Ferrari.
The price change is not all that much and I'd rather see KJC not go the way of so many other game moderators.... Of course, you can always convert the smallish starbases to outposts if the price really is too high.
Anyway, some affiliations must just have problems managing their cash flow... I just tried to sell 10,000 stellars worth of metal to FGZ 4773 and they only had 4419 stellars in the bank.... If they want to sell off a good base, maybe I can help out in game and in real life (he he he).
Just teasing a little, please don't take it to heart... (I'm sure to regret that one but I can't help myself).
Goth
| QUOTE |
| You need to factor in costs of operating expenses, player numbers/monthly income from players, UK inflation rates, the no doubt increased costs of bandwidth for the sheer volume of emails KJC must send out, bandwidth for their websites/webhost (IE: The online editors for the various games) - hell, even annual pay rises for the employees at KJC. |
Yup, basic inflation and running costs, nothing more. It is a sad fact of life that everybody seems to want more for doing exactly the same as they did last year and the year before. The only two suckers that are the exception to the rule are David and myself.
Running a few starbases, a political, loads of outposts and umpteen ships is still a damn sight cheaper than a single night in the pub - and a lot more entertaining.
£2.50 for a pint of Stella lasting 20mins... 
I've never seen the point of anything more than the basic political, it being cheaper to get paid-for outpost updates when they are very infrequently needed... but have been up to 30+ ships, which would have been worth at least the next 'political' payment band up.
Boy, is this one going to get some flak...
TonyH
Also although i'd hate to actually have to pay for my ships there is defeniatly a problem for new players in that it's just easier for a current player to do whatever needs to be done with their own free ships than to involve the new person. Obvoisuly we all try to do so anyway but with so many people not staying past the first few messages it just means you have duplicate any 'missions' you give them.
Hopefully the prices scale so if we got enough new players the costs would go down, not that phoenix is in anyway a bad investment. Especially when you compare it to other games at £30 each which you get bored with after a few days.
Also the base policital is really important if just for the centralised cash and the weekly update, maybe kjc would be better off with having those for free with a limited number of ships, and the current £2 option giving or bands as tony said.
I just feel that new players really miss out until they start paying, and unless they know someone else that does it's unlikly they'll realise how much they miss.
Just a collection of random thoughts on the subject. Keep up the good work.
Gord
none of us enjoy having to stump up more, but the price rises are fairly small (less than £1 a week for me on average) and the development of the game even beyond the conversion has been impressive - even if we are an impatient lot waiting for infrastructure updates
Dan
That leads me to believe, that you want to keep SA prices down, even thought they should cost way more, so why are they so much cheaper?
| QUOTE (Mica Goldstone @ Sep 23 2005, 06:47 AM) |
| £2.50 for a pint of Stella lasting 20mins... |
!
£2.50 for a Stellar... £3.75 is more like it...
Where is this pub?
Doug
I'm happy to see that the cost of SAs is being kept down, keeping them an attractive option - seeing them decline would remove a lot of the flavour for a lot of players.
Mica and David should set up an Amazon Wish-List too...
But i will not pay for others to have cheaper SA´s, when i do SA´s i do so, because i feel i need to do one, not because i find that bit of the game fun.
You're not payig for others to have cheap SAs. Think you just made that ASSumption all on your own there. If money got really tight, people are more likely to drop a starbase than stop doing SAs, which, in my opinion is the better option for the richness of the game. One less starbase is not going to make a huge difference, but the detail and role-play that comes from SAs is invaluable.
take the old prices for bases and SA's, add (for example) 7.2% and round to the nearest 5p:
£2.10 --> £2.2512 (round down to £2.25)
£1.70 --> £1.8224 (round down to £1.80)
the outpost update is slightly different because there is the natural tendancy for people so switch to one of the upgraded politicals - if you do more than one update a week on average it pays to have the £3 political at least....
Dan
| QUOTE |
| You're not payig for others to have cheap SAs. |
Was fairly sure that comment was stating that one was not increased to protect the other.
Jeebus... I only said that I was perfectly happy with the price rise.
i think one reason that mica and kjc games keep the price down on the special actions is that foir that price people will run special actions, if they are to expencive people stop exploring planets and non basic actions with in the game.
if special actions went up considerably then players would stop doing them as they are a luxury not a necessity.
although starbases have gone up by 0.15 most players will still run the bases casue form wha others have said personaly it will only cost me 0.60 more each week which is nothing and these turns are a necessity.
the old not cutting the nose off to spit the face could be quoted here :-)
cheers
chris a
hlq-pd
Having been playing KJC games for some 15 years or so I must admit that I have seen very few price increases. Unlike electric, gas, telephone etc bloody etc. So I dont mind paying a little extra.
Of course we must all remember that Mica needs to eat at least once a week. hehe
Gareth
pay more money to run starbases, so people can do cheaper SA is annoying me.
Why not put prices on ships then as well, so that those with way more ships then me, also have to pay more on having those, because afterall a starbase i not much harder to run then a few ships anyway.
Anyway i will not say more on this.
| QUOTE (Garg @ Oct 2 2005, 02:51 PM) |
| <snip> but that i have to pay more money to run starbases, so people can do cheaper SA is annoying me. |
As I said before, it looks to me like KJC have applied an identical percentage increase to both and rounded to the nearest 5p. Depending on the exact percentage, it is more than likely that SA's got rounded up and starbases got rounded down - or even that both got rounded down. I don't believe that one is being deliberately favoured or penalised compared to the other.
| QUOTE |
Why not put prices on ships then as well, so that those with way more ships then me, also have to pay more on having those, because afterall a starbase i not much harder to run then a few ships anyway. |
The main reason given, was to prevent war by wallet. With my current ship holdings, I would not be able to afford to move them all. Also how would you charge? Per TU? Per block of 60 TU's? per week?
Fleets are naturally limited by your ability to maintain them and pay the crew's wages - if you can't afford to do either the fleet will slowly rot. So in effect you are not paying for a starbase with your £2.10 (soon to be £2.25) a week - you are paying for everything a starbase can do for you...including support the fleet you have. Compared with BSE, I'd say we are getting VERY good value for money here, and I for one would not like to see charges for ships(or GP's)
Dan
| QUOTE (Garg @ Oct 2 2005, 02:51 PM) |
| In case my money got tight, i would drop doing SAs, as i dont find them that important to do, but it looks like many others do, thats fine, but that i have to pay more money to run starbases, so people can do cheaper SA is annoying me. Why not put prices on ships then as well, so that those with way more ships then me, also have to pay more on having those, because afterall a starbase i not much harder to run then a few ships anyway. Anyway i will not say more on this. |
If you increase the costs of running starbases then you get an exstra income which can be calculated by multiplying it by the number of bases in the game
This income is constant and KJC can count on it every week.
SA income depends on how many people uses the feature. This income is variable.
Which feature would you (if you were running KJC) increase costs on?
Now if you were to require that everyone pay to play then you can kiss goodbye to all those players who only run ships. I don't know about other aff's but the FEL have several of those and I'd sure hate to see them go .... After all, they may end up running bases and doing sa's at a later date.
Gord