Some easy telecom dev suggestions - to make them interesting

[GnoSiS]

Now I realise that I write this for an age-old dlc.. but after some games I'd really like to see a few changes to make them more dynamic and deep.

Yes, I read the other threads that speak about adding connection types and bandwidth stuff, but it looks like too much work for the devs and too much detail to be worth it.
So here's the problems I have with the system right now:

1. telecom always pays maintenance for built capacity.
2. No way to reduce your capacity
3. product/service not differentiated between providers
4. competition is only based on price.
5. you can't save an AI or player firm that built too much capacity from going bankrupt. (only by selling/dismantling the telecom firm)
6. impossible to sway consumers easily from competitors - you feel like it will take forever!

Consider these changes that require minimal UI and AI changes:

1. Add advertising to the telecoms - with the existing ad system (link ad firm, and slider for budget)
2. Reduce capacity mainenance by 50%, instead, you need to be always adding capacity - if the slider is below a mid threshold based on the 50% cost discount you got for the existing capacity, your capacity will be reduced! The whole absolute step value of the slider is based on your current capacity - so as you add capacity it becomes more expensive and vice versa.
3. bandwidth quality is determined by over/udner capacity: if your capacity is 100k and you have 100k subscribers, then quality is 1. If you have 100k subscribers but 50k capacity, then quality is 0.5 (ah those cheap dsl providers with overbooked datacenters). If capacity is 200k and you have 100k subscribers then quality is 2.
4. customer switching providers is determined by service value, which is a composite of service brand, service quality and price, like it is with all products! (reuse UI to show it in the telecom!) - Also, is this the case for the service companies added with the new upcoming service dlc?

[David]

2. Reduce capacity mainenance by 50%, instead, you need to be always adding capacity - if the slider is below a mid threshold based on the 50% cost discount you got for the existing capacity, your capacity will be reduced! The whole absolute step value of the slider is based on your current capacity - so as you add capacity it becomes more expensive and vice versa.

Thanks for the suggestion. The above concept is a bit difficult to understand. What does "The whole absolute step value of the slider" mean? Any examples?

If you could provide the exact text to be displayed in the game for explaining this to users clearly, it will help us evaluate the feasibility of this improvement.

[GnoSiS]

Example:

lets say you had 100k capacity and you paid 10M per month in maintenance.

Under my proposal, with the slider at the neutral position (+0% or 50%) you still pay 10M in maintenance, but now the slider can go to +10M at the max far right position (+50% or 100%).
This means an agressive expansion of capacity at an Extra 10M of budget each month, 20M total. This means that the range of the slider depends on your network size and this is needed because under this proposal capacity is also quality, so you need to compete with others on quality as well.

In the opposite side, with the slider at the far left position (-50% or 0%) you pay 5M inmaintenance, but each month, your capacity (and by extension quality) shrinks by a decay factor (I'm leaving this to you!). This simulates infrastructure decay and the prioritization of your repair crews to keep up as much capacity as possible with a limited budget.

I.e. in a recession this is life saving since: 1. people might not have the money to pay for the same level of service, 2. the corporation will need to cut back on the quality and size of infrastructure due to costs.
By also adding branding, the capacity and quality will also affect brand loyalty and rating as it is with other products.

So under this system, in subsequent months, because capacity is always changing, the range of the slider (max or min) is redefined using the new current capacity as it indicates a relative % based of the size of the network. This means that effectively the "invisible maintenance" cost (that you only see in the financial report) is brought in the firm panel on the capacity slider. Since this means having short of an an exponential factor to the costs (or savings) across time, the user may set it to an extreme setting for a few months/years and then pull it back towards neutral as the desired capacity/quality is reached.

As for UI text, This can be described as either "Aggresive Expansion on capacity and quality" when the slider is on the right of the base value, or as "Defensive Cost savings and cutbacks" if it's on the left of it.

[David]

Thanks for the details. I will forward them to the dev team.