in a recent topic about an option to harmlessly get rid of missiles, i was struck by the actual networth value of missiles -- which marshal informs us is $5000 nw - a figure apparently set in the time of myth when the god mehul created earth ...

can anyone shed light on how/why/if this is a "good" value for missiles?

my current thinking is that it should be much higher

if missiles were made sufficiently valuable for netters to pursue them, then we would get a game with a lot more missiles, which might lead to:
1) increased use of warefare tech to create valuable missiles
2) increased use of spys to defend valuable missiles
3) increased use of spys to destroy valuable missiles
4) greater use of missiles because there are so many more of them
5) increased use of sdi to protect against all these missiles
6) increased reluctance to use valuable missiles on low value targets
7) greater "dynamic range" of player networth during hostilities - implies faster changes in combat results and quicker movement toward humanitarian limits
8) more potential for frustration and diplomatic incidents to result in someone getting a face full of missiles
and so forth ...

if you like the idea generally, then what value might work for missile nw? $50k, $100k, $200k, even higher?
is there anything else that comes with high value missiles?

if you don't like the idea of raising missle nw value, can you help me understand why it needs to stay at $5k?

thanks!

(-¿-)
[bonus]

to make a real difference missile value should be 1m but netters investing on warfare even then is somewhat unlikely.

four.

zero

I still think missiles should be variable values and nw. 5k nw for startups but their nw value exponentially grows with your country with a ceiling of 200k nw.

As far as what it helps with exponentially growing nw/value for missiles the answer has nothing to do with a lottery aspect. Missiles have a limit with your land, if you max out warfare tech after 1000 turns you'd end up with 250 missiles(not possible). Exponential growth is anti-luck because you would have to invest in tech to see the missiles payoff for NW. You can't even raise nw value to 50k without screwing over any "lucky" netting start up unless you could sell that missile privately so you're not a target as soon as you are oop.

If we want to adjust missile value, would it not be appropriate to enact a missile upkeep expense? Nukes hold more value than cruise, but also cost more to maintain.

Missle options:

Settings on missile development type.
Black Market for missiles.
Target cruise missiles to building type.
Missile exchange between allies.
Increase DR for sabotage missiles.
Random failure of launched missiles.
Adding rocket attacks to Spy ops.
Sanctions against countries deemed to be missile farm ass hats.

drunck, i kind of like your suggestion of a missle value that varies, primarily because "big" values are being contemplated for missiles - the distortion effects of lucky $1m networth missiles in the early game could get crazy

and i can also see that "big" values like $1m nw / missile might be needed to get the attention of netters in the long games - short games like tourney might need a smaller incentive

but there must also be an upperbound where the game devolves into who can get and keep the most missiles ... drunck suggests a cap of $1m, and marshal used $1m ... would anyone want an even bigger number? and should the "cap" vary by server?

It can't be too high, FFA would be stupid with even 1m... When you can hold over 100 missiles/country. I forget the exact formua I agree that having it vary by server would be best however I fear too much for QZ to implement. Wars would get wacky too imo after the FS the attacking alliance would be behind in nw lmao

g0nz0, i like many of your missile options ... do we want a new thread to carry on with wide ranging missile talk? i'm not opposed to turnnng this thread into a compendium of missile proposals, but i started out thinking just about how low $5k was for missiles and if maybe that low value could be changed for the better ...

anywhere we go is good - and i do like your list

:)

1+
2 -
3 +
4 ----
5 ++++
6 - that's what SDI is, however sabotage missiles= misfire would be epic
7?
8 economic sanctions via market forum would be pretty badass

maybe we could just have missiles get more valuable with time, rather than with the size of the country that owns them. that would avoid the early game distortions of lucky missiles, keep the value of missiles uniform across players, and have the missile incentives "escalate" over the course of the set

perhaps something like a $5k value on day 1, increasing proportionately day by day until the cap is reached 2/3 of the way thru the set - that might limit distortions while providing all the incentives across the different servers -- might be easier to code as well

my current thinking on the cap size is that at least $100k nw will be needed to have much influence, but i think $250k nw would be plenty to nudge things enough to notice. i thought $500k would be "too big" - and i'm pretty certain $1m nw missiles would change tourney,

i thnk we'd want to try it on express a few times -- $200k nw might be a good test starting point for the cap