Tests > Monument Tests > The Test Of Payola

The Test of Payola

General Idea:

A Project Manager picks up a project at the university of leadership. A project is worth a random number of points between 2000 and 20000 and a random cost (different materials even if you get the same project twice). The government is notoriously bad at building projects by itself, so its in its interest to open a bidding process for it. If the official builds it himself, he will get only 10% of the points and has to pay twice the cost.

Work Board:

A new building becomes available: The Work Board. It has functionality like a trading post (for secure trade even if one trading partner is offline). The Work Board lists all projects available on the market, their point value and their status (open for bidding, sold, not for sale, busted), the number of bids for that project and the bidder names. But it doesn't show the value of the bids until the project is sold. The board gives the option to chat a player (the seller or a bidder), to make a bid, to accept a bid, and to report a bribe. The Board shows your current uncompleted deals (for which you still have to pay or receive payment) and an option to cancel the deal (do we need a cancellation fee?).

The Work Board also shows a history of old projects, their seller, the buyer, the point value and the price, but not the bribe (like an open bidding process in a government procedure). All Work Boards work as access points to a central data storage, meaning they all show the same information and it doesn't matter which one is used for any operation.

Working the test:

All test participants start by getting a project from the university of leadership. They can then decide to build it themselves or to offer it for sale.

Any player can bid for a project that is offered for sale and build it. Since we do not have a currency, bids can be any materials agreed between seller and bidder. An honest project manager would give the project to the highest bidder, but thats up to the project seller. The seller can decide not to sell projects to his enemies or to people he suspects have already a high score, the bidders can decide not to bid against friends, etc.

A player can get only a single project per week from the university, but can bid for, purchase and build as many as she wants. Once a project is built, the project points are added to the builders score. Players who have passed the test cannot get new projects from the university, but can continue to bid (not bribe), buy and build them.

Once a project is sold and has changed hands, it cannot be sold again. Though you can denounce multiple bribing buyers to get the bribe and sell to another person.

Bribing:

A bid can also contain a bribe, in the form of a percentage of the points. A bribe has an interesting side-effect: it doubles the point value of a project purchased with a bribe.

Bribing is "illegal" though, so there is a risk. Either player involved in a bribe can denounce the other one to the authorities. If the briber denounces the project owner, he doesn't have to pay the bribe and gets the project for free while the project owner has to pay 20000 points penalty. If the bribed person denounces the briber he can keep the bribe and sell the project to someone else (or accept another bribe) while the bribing person pays 20000 points penalty. If both denounce each other, both have to pay 10000 points penalty and the project is lost (that means negative scores are possible).

Since the authorities are pretty good in sniffing out illegal activities you cannot bribe the same person twice or be bribed by the same person twice. If you do, you are going to be found out and the project is lost. Players who have passed the test are considered expert bribers and therefore cannot ever offer a bribe again.

Making a Deal:

The project manager picks up a new project and opens the project for bids, at this time it becomes visible in all trading posts.

Buyers bid and bribe if they choose to.

The project manager picks which seller to sell to. At this point the ability to denounce becomes available to both seller and buyer.

The buyer drops off the payment. (This makes sure that buyers don't make ridiculous bids they never intend to pay, while it still leaves the option for the buyer and seller to agree on a later return of the good if they so choose.)

The buyer gets one last chance to denounce the seller, just prior to picking up the project. Once the project is accepted the ability to denounce is closed to both parties. As the buyer attempts to pick up the project is when the denouncing is resolved, as follows:

• If the briber has denounced the project manager, the briber gets their payment back, as well as the project for free. The project manager has to pay 20000 points penalty. No bribe percentage is awarded once the project is completed.
• If the project manager has denounced the briber, project manager retains ownership of the project and immediately gets their bribe percentage awarded, the briber can take back their payment. The buyer/bribing person pays 20000 points penalty. The seller for the same project can receive multiple denounced bribe percentage awards if they denounce multiple bribers in a row, before the project is eventually sold. They would also receive the final real bribe percentage award once the project is actually built.
• If both denounce each other, both have to pay 10000 points penalty and the project is lost. The briber gets their payment back. No bribe percentage is awarded, since the project is lost and will never be completed.

Assuming that neither party denounced each other, the seller can pick up their payment anytime after the buyer has picked up the plans. Once the project was actually built, the seller would receive the bribe percentage award.

Passing the test:

You get points for every project you build. An eligible player passes every 21 projects built. Points don't decay. You must build at least 3 projects to become eligible to pass. (Preferably, quit, expired are not eligible to pass, but Teppy might veto that rule.) Once passed, you can't pass again, even if you continue to build projects for your own use.

A project that is purchased but not built does not give any points. However, projects don't expire, so there is no urgency to build after making a purchase.

Notes:

• Building cost should be low enough to not make this an architecture test. The focus is on the bidding/bribing, not the building.
• The buildings should have a real value, not just aesthetic like cartouche buildings. An example could be more efficient versions of existing buildings, like a smelting pot 10 times larger than the normal one. The benefit of the building is for the owner only, it cannot be guilded or made public. If that is the way buildings are offered, then the building cost would be in the same relation (10 times larger than the cost of a normal smelting pot), just somewhat randomized.
• As the tale progresses, the available buildings would need to change to make sure there is always the "oooh, I want that"-effect for both new and established players.
• Players who don't want to participate in leadership test can simply not offer their project for sale, build it themselves and get the benefits of the buildings.
• Finished buildings display "Built by player as a project from player", listing both the builder and the person who sold the project.

Comments

• One thing that I like about this test is that it SHOULD involve people that would otherwise care less about Leadership tests. All savvy players will see the advantage of getting "FREE" materials by starting projects and selling them to leaders, or building them for themselves if the building meets their personal needs. ~Harere
• Since a player can only get a single project per week from the university, can they have more than one uncompleted project or unsold project? I think that a seller should be allowed to have multiple outstanding uncompleted projects. ~Harere
  • Yes, since you can buy multiple projects you can have several of them until you get around to build them. ~Hatnofret
• Can a passed player still sell any uncompleted project that they picked up prior to passing? ~Harere
  • Yes, they just can't get new ones. Reason for the rule is to keep the market of available buildings small enough to make bidding and bribing important and interesting. ~Hatnofret
• It would be interesting if there were instructions/"blueprints" that the builder would actually need in inventory to build the project and then collect the points. The twist here is that this might result in a third party market or black market for projects, with the initial buyers trading or reselling projects to others. If this is the case, finished building could display "Built by PlayerX. Plans sold to PlayerY as a project from PlayerZ." PlayerX would get the points for building. PlayerY would get whatever they traded the project to PlayerX for (this trade would be done outside the mechanic of the trading post-like building, mentioned below). PlayerZ would get the materials that PlayerY had bid, plus their bribe percentage awarded once the project was actually built. PlayerY would NOT be required to tell PlayerX about the bribe and PlayerX might discover after the fact they were shorted points due to a bribe. This would NOT prevent the original buyer from getting the plans back and building and collecting the points. If a project does make a round trip and is resold back to the original Project Manager who picked up the project and they build it they would still get only 10% of the points and would need to pay twice the cost. ~Harere
  • The instructions/"blueprints" should be readable and list who the seller and the initial buyer as well as what it builds and the building costs and the number of points the project is worth. BUT, would make no mention of bribes made. ~Harere
  • My intention was that projects cannot be re-sold to another player. As a leadership test I want it to be a test of judging character to decide if taking a risk for a bribe is worth it or not. I don't want to make the trading any more important than it already is. If the material requirements to build a project require a template, then the person I buy the template from is not participating in the test. ~Hatnofret
• A separate building like the trading post would be good for the bidder to deposit the payment once the bid is accepted and to pick up the instructions/"blueprints" and for the seller to collect their payment. This would only be used for the initial sale of a project, not for any Black Market sales. ~Harere
  • Yes, thats true. We don't want people to bid a gazillion bricks on a project and never deliver. To get the project you should at least have to show that you can pay the price, if there is an agreement between buyer and seller to return the mats later on thats up to them. ~Hatnofret
• What is the window of opportunity to denounce each other? How do they both denounce each other, without one player reacting to just being denounce by the other? ~Harere
  • I liked your proposal below. ~Hatnofret
• Possible Mechanic for the procedure and denouncing timing, this would work best if there is trading post-like building. ~Harere
  • Agreed. ~Hatnofret

Project Manager picks up a new project and opens the project for bids.
Buyers bid and bribe if they choose to.
Project Manager picks which seller to sell to. At this point the ability to denounce is available to both seller and buyer.
The Buyer drops off the payment.
The Buyer gets one last chance to denounce the seller, JUST prior to picking up the instructions/"blueprints". Once the instructions/"blueprints" are accepted the ability to denounce is closed to both parties. As the buyer attempts to pick up the instructions/"blueprints" is when the denouncing is resolved, as follows...
... * If the briber had denounced the project owner, the briber gets their payment back, as well as the project for free. The project owner has to pay 20000 points penalty. No bribe percentage is awarded once the project is completed.
... * If the project owner had denounced the briber, project owner retains ownership of the project and immediately gets their bribe percentage awarded, the briber can take back their payment. The buyer/bribing person pays 20000 points penalty. The seller for the same project can receive multiple denounced bribe percentage awards if they denounce multiple bribers in a row, before the project is eventually sold. They would also receive the final real bribe percentage award once the project is actually completed.
... * If both denounce each other, both have to pay 10000 points penalty and the project is lost. The briber gets their payment. No bribe percentage is awarded, since the project is lost and will never be completed.
Assuming that neither party denounced each other, the seller can pick up their payment anytime after the buyer has picked up the plans. Once the project was actually built, the seller would receive the bribe percentage award.
To assure that the Mechanic of the bribing/payment/building/penalty/pointing works there does need to be a limited window to denounce each other. ~Harere

• I like the Jobs Board/Trading Post-like new building idea and the above mentioned procedure. It allows both the seller and the buyer an opportunity to denounce each other, while assuring that payments and bribes are actually made and recorded and that after a project is either picked up by the buyer OR the bribe revealed that the proper players get what they should have coming to them, payments/bribes/plans. This will also force the buyers to actually have what they are paying with rather than a pre-arranged large bid that is being made for show purposes, that never actually occurs. ~ Balthazarr
  • I would like to add one thing to the proposed procedure, that at any time prior to the buyer trying to actually pick up the plans that either player, the seller or the buyer can back out of the deal. This would allow a seller to pick a new buyer if the currently selected buyer takes too long to pay. This would allow a buyer to withdraw a bid if they think they have overpaid or if the buyer is taking to long to accept their bid. It also allows both people get cool feet and not go through with the deal at all. One possible alternative would be if the buyer had to post a "bond" and actually deposit the payment prior to being selected as the buyer. This would assure the seller that the buyer actually has the payment, rather than buyers bidding on things they cannot afford. ~ Balthazarr
    • Yes, I think we need that also in the case that one party just never shows up again after almost finalizing a deal. ~Hatnofret
• A new separate building like a trading post could be a regional project, with projects only being posted at only one location, but with multiple posting locations through out Egypt. Sellers would need to decide which post is the most lucrative to post at. Buyers could travel around to different posts/regions to shop around for better deals/projects. This would also reduce the number of projects listed at any one location, as this list will get longer and longer as the tale continues. I would like a player to be able to get a list of all post locations. To preserving the record of all transactions, I would also like if the posting locations could NOT be torn down. ~ Balthazarr
  • Regional or private would be fine to me, but I don't like the idea of multiple separate posting places. The population of active players is too small for that. ~Hatnofret
• For simplicity of the bidding process and the listing of old projects and the cost they were bought for, I think that the bids should be limited to a single resource for any one bid. The bidder should be required to have ONE of the item that they are using to bid with in inventory when they place their bid (or the entire bid amount deposited if the "bond" idea is adopted), this will make coding easier and will allow the devs to not constantly update the list of available "currency". One player might bid 5000 wood, another 200 iron, a third one huge diamond, another a 10K Goodscrip Note, still another a named hatchet (quality should be viewable by anyone able to see any other bidding/purchase information), the seller will need to determine what he values more and pick that buyer. I am a making these suggestions, so that the old projects list is not crazy long with long-winded potluck menagerie of junk bids. ~ Balthazarr
  • The list of old projects would only show accepted bids, so it would not be too bad. I thought about this too, but I thought it would be too restrictive. If the developers say this makes the difference between a 6 month tale and a 30 month tale, I'd be willing to accept it :) ~Hatnofret
  • Note: Long-winded potluck menagerie of junk bids like my long-winded potluck menagerie of test suggestions here. ;-) ~ Balthazarr
• The pool of possible buildings should be enlarged as newer buildings become available in game, this expanded pool could be linked to the transition between ages, with many or all of all prior ages buildings being available for improvement. ~ Balthazarr
  • Agreed. A constant flow of new buildings or even upgrades to existing buildings would keep interest up. ~Hatnofret
  • It has been leaked in several locations that T4 will have ages like some other games, like Civilization and Age of Empires, Stone Age, Bronze Age, Iron Age, etc. What the ages actually will be called and how many there will be I do not know. ~ Balthazarr
• The base cost of the project should reflect the real building that is being built, using the example, "like a smelting pot 10 times larger than the normal one" should cost at least 10 times the cost of a regular smelting pot, possibly using a percentage more like 10 times the capacity, but 15 times the cost to build (aka cost overruns), PLUS some oddball, random bits and pieces to make it interesting (aka bureaucratic mismanagement). This way no one can get a SUPER building that only costs 21 bricks and will make the cost of the projects more realistic and reflect what you are actually building. ~ Balthazarr
  • Makes sense. ~Hatnofret
  • My thoughts on the oddball, random bits and pieces are that as the tale progresses, that the oddball, random bits and pieces random list evolves, to include more items that are available in the game. For example... In the early part of the tale, naturally occurring things like herbs or palm fronds would be possible as well as normal resources. As the tale progressed, cut gems, gearboxes, treated boards, metal salts, coal, tinctures could be added to the list. Towards the end of the tale more exotic items like treated metals, explosives, essential compounds and new strange items. This revising of the oddball, random bits and pieces could be linked to the transition between ages. ~ Balthazarr
• I like the idea that "you cannot bribe the same person twice or be bribed by the same person twice." It will help reduce the amount of "gamed" bribes to pump up scores since each person can only get the double pointing with each friend ONCE. I also think there should be NO warning if you double bribe the same person twice and they accept, instant busting by the authorities, "Game Over", when the seller tries to pick up the plans. NOTE: If passed players can still sell any outstanding project that they have, they should NOT be able to accept a bribe again as well. ~ Balthazarr
  • Yes, this rule was added to avoid gaming. We want our leaders to show that they can judge the character of their trading partners correctly and that they are able to talk to new people even about difficult subjects like a bribe, not just that they have a good friend. The instant bust on a repeated bribe would be okay to me as long as the user interface makes it hard enough for you to not accidentally click bribe and be busted for a wrong mouseclick. ~Hatnofret
• Passed players should not be eligible to pass a second time, and would only be bidding, buying and building them for their own person use, OR reselling them in the case of the Black Market mentioned above. Quits and expires are only really apt to pass if participation drops very low if the tale drags on too long. I would expect that passed players would continue to look for bargains of the buildings that they find useful. Selling to passed players would be 100% safe to the sellers, but they would only get materials and NO bribery points. ~ Balthazarr