[Stage 1 Completed] I'm looking for data from companies that have non-100% effective employees.
The data i'm collecting is
- Employee stats - Position - Company efficiency - Number of trains got
Hopefully also some company willing to test some cases trying to increase efficiency/trains
Please consider that i'm talking only about efficiency, not profit. I'm aiming to optimize efficiency to increase stars of a company without fully staffing with 150% employees.
[Stage 2] Hello again! Thanks to data provided I was able to create a small testing spreadsheet about company efficiency. I'm now looking for testing companies (hopefully with 1-5 stars, no more than that) that have non-100% effective employees (hopefully more than 50% of the employees) for data-testing the spreadsheet.
The info needed is:
Director: If it completed BUS2300, BUS2600 and BUS2110 or not Company: Number of stars, number of trainings per day, efficiency Employee: Stats, position, efficiency
Min. required participation: 3 days
After each day, i will relay a report and suggestion about positions for each employee to improve the company efficiency. You're free to take the advice or not, the data of the 3 days is still relevant to me even if it doesn't take my suggestions.
Anyone willing to participate just drop me a PM
UPDATE: Today's patchnotes are... unsettling, will double check data. So far I already have 2 testing companies, only will take 1 more.
Should faction allow a custom permission to let members (from certain rank) to retrieve their own funds from the faction vault? Most factions has bankers to do such move, but it's riskier than it needs to be.
Why not just allow members to retrieve their own funds?
Thanks, there is any info on what stuff can be filtered? Can I get for example Xanax taken between two dates (or Xanax total at certain date, so i can calculate)? I tried with personalstats but it always shows the current
The leveling targets should get you to Lv15 really fast (search for Baldr's guide). I found easier to store money long term in stock blocks (LSC->TCHS->SYM, etc) while you're growing you networth, then items like Xanax or resell plushies/flowers (buy them on the item market when those are cheaper than your trader's pricelist) and liquidate with your trader when you need some cash (I always recommend Abir because of his prices and online schedule). The daily money can be easily managed because for most traveling you need 10k-100k, so getting mugged is no concern other than time wasted on the hospital. If you need some more info just drop me a message
1.- Why do you assume I use faction vault and/or don't have other ways to store cash? I stopped using faction vault because I wanted to store the money in some other ways that didn't rely on other people (aka Bankers) to have it when I needed it.
2.- If faction vault isn't intended as personal bank, why keep track of personal "donations"? Shouldn't we remove that completly then and force factions that want to use it as members bank to keep their own record?
3.- That something is stated as "not a personal bank" doesn't mean shit. The real use 99% of the time is as a personal bank. That's just an easy argument that doesn't reflect reality of the game. It's like saying that bloodbags are intended for healing only, while we all know it's most used as self hospitalization tool.
4.-We all agree that each way to store money has it's drawbacks, either the liquidity, risk, limit, accessibility, etc. Faction Vault doesn't have most of those just because of the "banker" figure. I'm proposing a change that's aimed at removing it, making faction vault more in line with other ways of storing money while also making more attractive the acquisition of PI vaults (wich right now are not even encouraged to new players because the vault is worse in every way without it, renting is more attractive even as a long term).
Finally, for those who can't think of any argument other than "learn to store your money"/"get your own vault", you need to learn how to have an argument without having to attack the other party due to a poor cognitive process that doesn't allow you to separate person and subject of the argument. FWIW I could be an 1 day old player, a remake or whatever and the argument doesn't have to do with my own personal view on the matter.
Currently there is no incentive to get a personal vault because it's worse than faction vault+banker.
The change i'm proposing will make the banker position less desirable on most situations, just because there will be the "do it yourself and take the risk" option.
People preffer the faction vault over private island vault because of the banker being able to transfer funds overseas and having to do it because they can't be blamed for "not withdrawing before flying"
Being able to withdraw personal funds should make it on par with other ways of storing money, meaning there would be more people withdrawing funds and getting mugged, instead of letting someone else withdraws the funds for you when you're ready to spend/store it.
Probably more people would be flying with cash on hand (from their faction vault) instead of flying without cash and using a faction banker.
Also, as stated above, most traders already use faction bank as their personal bank, either from buying a faction or by being well known and having priviledges to use it.
Should faction allow a custom permission to let members (from certain rank) to retrieve their own funds from the faction vault? Most factions has bankers to do such move, but it's riskier than it needs to be.
Why not just allow members to retrieve their own funds?
AN Balance is not in the stats or the specials, but on the company itself. EDVD and the HJ attract new players or players with low battlestats (and low workstats) but only for as long as they need it. That means that the worker rotation is higher than other companies because of the nature of the company itself.
Would you work on it if you have 200m+ battlestats and 50k+ work stats? You can probably get a better pay on other companies or specials that help you grow faster once you're capping on HJ.
Yes, big companies have 20 employees, and efficiency at 100% (wich i agree, can go way higher on those companies) means that 20 employees at 100% efficiency means it's 20 x 100 = 2000 (wich now i realize it's a typo, it's 2k, not 20k, making the difference 0.01 and not 0.001). Considering that the brain icon appears at 17~20 (depending on perks) as other forum post suggest, that's a safe point where eveyone is getting the notification of "you should care". And yes, for smaller companies, it's a big drawback, that's why it should make new players more aware of their balance between stats and drug intake, making them effectively choose between one of the other.
I believe what the OP tried to say about your current account (if is a restart) age, is related too with the number of Xanax you take, which is lower than 1/day even being not a multiple year account, so does not have, in theory, knowledge about how fast addiction climbs.
Yup, that's what he's trying to use to "prove me wrong" but, it's not about me or my "feeling" about the situation. It's about how it really affects companies from 1* to 10* and users either be an 10 years old SSL user or a 1 year old 4-xanax-a-day user. The change must be made taking in consideration all the companies and all the range of players, not just "let's keep pushing xanax".
No, I'm just tired of trolls is all. And I don't like restarts or anyone else bending the rules.
You're assuming i'm trolling you, i'm a restart or i'm breaking the rules. Sorry, but i'm none of those.
What do you feel warrants a response in your post? Humour me, because I can't find anything that made much sense in it.
None, only the part where I actively asked if anyone feels that it's going to make any difference and people will say "Oh my gawd! I'm gonna help my director and stop taking drugs!", wich you ignored, didn't reply and also tried to mock on my age as if it would make my point invalid.
Your first point stated an obvious fact and I'm not even sure what your quote was based on, because you took 1 sentence so far out of context that I couldn't even recognise it as my own.
Because it's not yours, not everything in this conversation revolves around you. There are other people talking too and making points and arguments. In this particular case, was this post from Zachjuv: https://www.torn.com/forums.php#/p=threads&f=2&t=16187283&b=0&a=0&start=100&to=20818098 The full quote is:
So if you really want to punish drug users that's ok, but you do have to both acknowledge and accept that it means everyone who is trying to "do everything right".
Wich is just a falacy, you can't do everything right, period.
Your second point is moot, since I'm not advocating pro-drugs or against non-druggies. You put it to me that having choices is good. But not if you're a director, because then you should only choose semi-active employees or active non-druggies. I like variety too.
Yes you are, that's why your whole post revolves around "Remove or limit drug addiction for active staff" and not about how drugs should affect work stat efficiency or if it should or not affect the profit of the company. And yes, as director you have choices: You can hire a good a employee, either because he doesn't take drugs or because he controls his addiction going to rehab regularly. You can choose a medium employee that either goes inactive often so his drug intake doesn't really matter or even an old semiactive one that logins a few times a week but has great work stats to compensate. The fact is that not all the choices are pleasant to you doesn't mean there are no choices. There should be good and bad choices and for the heck of variety, even several "maybe good" choices that help diverse the market.
Your third point can be referred back to the OP. There is a big, red disclaimer that acts as a tl;dr.
That's why the point says "Directors care" and not "It's been always this way". You're trying to establish as a fact that directors will start to fire all their employees because their addiction. Yet here we are, 1 week later and the hiring market stay the same, noone pays SSL users more and noone is geting fired because of addiction.
Your fourth point takes everything out of context and deliberately misinterpret my previous suggestions. It would be easy to boost non-druggies without boosting Tourists. And I've already said, in many previous posts, that I'm positive towards a change that would add a boost to non-druggies to directly compensates for a removal of drug efficiency penalties. I am also advocating against the system that made "money printers" successful; none of those companies hired active players. You're twisting my words, which is why I can't take you seriously. Well, being a restart didn't help your case either.
Out of context?
Just give a huge boost to the select few who still cling on to SSL as if it is the holy grail and last hope for their salvation. Heck, give them a permanent +25 point boost for all I care.
You're asking to boost non-druggies instead of penalizing drug users. I'm not "deliberately misinterpret" your suggestions. I'm saying that non-druggies also include inactive accounts, semi-inactive accounts and multiaccounts used for money-making companies. Even worse, you're making those appeal more to a company director because an active SSL user is worth less than any of those options. And again, i'm not a restart. Just a brand new player, 60 days old, that appearently can think outside of the box of things that only affect me.
Your fifth point makes no sense at all. Every position has its own value unrelated to the other ones. If you have as much knowledge of this company system as you claim you do (which we have no way of knowing, since your current incognito account is merely 2 months old) you would already know that a single -20 point drop in efficiency for a key position can make a huge difference. Sure, there are companies where it may not matter. Especially cheap company types with little or no competition for ranks. I agree that a vigilant director should be able to figure this out and make the necessary changes (= remove druggies from key positions). But that is besides the point here.
Not an incognito account, I'm just new, but in just 2 months I got all the math working for my company optimizator spreadsheet that uses the hungarian algorithm to solve the "optimal position for each company employee" while also taking in consideration the optimal managers and optimal trainers, growth curve and several other info that apparently noone cared to research. As you said, -20 points drop in efficiency in a key position can make a huge difference, that's why the director should put his best employee in a key position and do some quality HR work there. Also you're failing to point out that those -20 points are in companies where almost all (or all) the employees have over the 100% stat cap and mostly over the 150% threshold too, so those -20 points in overall efficiency are even more meaningless. And no, in "cheap" companies it matters the most, because they have less employees and probably more unqualified staff, that makes any swing in efficiency to make a change in the company efficiency. This just proves how disconnected from the reality you are. For every 9-10* companies, there are a whole world of <7* companies adjusting, hiring and evolving.
The paradox I'm referring to has already been explained many times in this thread. You can check Zachjuv's more recent replies, they are short and to the point. Much more accessible than mine.
And still doesn't make it a paradox. We can't say what Ched and his staff wants for this game, neither there are only "active druggies" and "non-druggie tourists" to try to balance out how companies work around those two stereotypes.
Your last sentence is what made me ignore you in the first place. Since you asked.
Noone asked, but i guess it touched some nerve there. Good luck with the HR management, hope you find better employees or do the HR work required to get that 10th star.