I've also mentioned in another thread about maybe restricting the 100m2 store tenders to smaller companies. What possible reason would there be for a company with billions of dollars in assets to have such a tiny store?
Even if it were just the black label companies who could not enter, at least it would keep the interest up for the rest of the companies in the game. As ccm_tsang mentioned above, without at least some chance of winning players will lose interest in the tenders. Lost interest = lost players.
I don't really agree with stores for tenders having to be open for a while, only the rich companies with high qualifications would be able to have stores in most cities. I do disagree with the practice of building a new 100,000m2 store then selling the tender item for one day before closing the store. Maybe if the tender winner had to be in the top sellers list for 1-2 days before the tender is counted.
I'd really like to see a condition put in place that meant the store used for a tender had to stay with the same configuration for at least a week after the tender. If you use a 100,000m2 store, it has to stay as a 100,000m2 store.
This would keep the qualification requirements up for a week making it more difficult to do the same thing with other tenders. Hopefully this could open the game up for more potential winners and bring the tenders closer to being part of the game.
As it is now you can either play the game or play for tenders. The two have become almost independant from each other.
I know this would would mean getting the VIRTs from tenders a week later. It would also likely be very difficult to implement, so I know there is virtually no chance of it happening. But I'd still like to see it... |
