Suggestion to promote cooperation

[Pieter de Groote]

I can't imagine this is an original idea. But, in the current strive for cooperation, I think this might be worth discussing: a positive stimulus for cooperation for a change.

Make projects more effective if more people participate.

Just for the idea, other rates might be better:
- One person digging salt can gather 250 grams per day.
- Two persons digging salt on the same project, gather 600 grams per day.
- Three persons digging salt on the same project, gather 1000 grams per day.

[Mykey]

It is very a pity to me, I can help nothing to you. But it is assured, that you will find the correct decision. Do not despair.

[T-shirt]

Good suggestion. I really like this idea. Not that I have too many characters that work in teams, but if this idea is accepted they might try to look for people to share the work with (and share the products).

[Jos Elkink]

That's actually a bit annoying to implement, just because of the way it's programmed right now ... (Not impossible, of course.)

I could imagine some kind of parabolic relation - more people is faster, even more people is slower. That's a basic, standard economic law ...

[SekoETC]

I read from a science magazine that when two people work together, it's only a sum of what they'd reach when working alone. But when three people work together, it's already better than the sum of scores by three best test subjects put together, from when they were working alone. But then it starts lowering again, I'm not sure of the limit but it may have been 7. Then they start stepping on each others' toes.

[Mykey]

I think, that you are not right. I am assured. I suggest it to discuss.

[Piscator]

I don´t like that idea in that form. I just can´t imagine where the bonus shall come from.
But how about this, just use the highest skill level of one of the workers for everyone working on that project. So as if the most experienced worker is leading the others. Except the unlikely case that all workers have the same skill this should also result in an increase of effectiveness.

[Mykey]

What necessary words... super, an excellent phrase

[Pieter de Groote]

I don't think a scientific basis is needed for this. My only reason for suggesting this is that it helps promote cooperation, without making Cantr less attractive for it's players.

Even if it was totally against real world logic, this might be good for Cantr.

To slow down projects when the project team gets too big will hinder cooperation and should not be considered.

[Mykey]

It has touched it! It has reached it!

[wichita]

I understand the reasoning behind it, and it might work, but I think that it will just end up being another unutilized game mechanic. It seems to me that people don't cooperate because it is more fun to be your own boss and fulfill your own sense of independence.

[Mykey]

Completely I share your opinion. In it something is also idea excellent, agree with you.

[wichita]

Not losing all hope, just extrapolating my observations. Every once in a while there comes along a new character that is into the whole cooperation thing and there is a new faint glimmer of hope filtering through the trees.

[T-shirt]

If it is as easy as this: when I farm potatoes alone I farm 800 grams a day, but if we farm together we farm 1760 grams a day (a 10% bonus), I will have my characters suggest to work together with strangers.

"Hello mister farmer. I do not know you, but if I help you on your project you'll get more. Would you give me halve the results then?"

I would suggest the number of participants minus one multiplied by 10% as a bonus.

So two people work 10% better, three 20%, etcetera, untill the maximum number of participants is reached.

[Piscator]

Almost defeats the purpose of skills alltogether...

Why?

It could make skills even more important, because it enables helping. You want to manufacture something and your skill sucks, get a guy who is better in it to help you. You even could learn the skill faster by doing so. This would enable masters and aprentices, too.