grävling touches on some of my other ideas about job mechanics... so I'll unleash them here
The way I see it, there are a number of dimensions along which the job mechanism could be modified, trading off realism, complexity of game play, and complexity of implementation (Corey has to write the code, and the app and game state have to fit in memory).
If I imagine that I'm a Connector, I picture myself looking at the screen of my computer. I see a list of jobs that need doing. In walks a Cyber Knight who says, "got any work for me?"
So, I offer the Knight the first job on my list, and quote a price.
The Knight says, "sorry, not interested in that one.... hey, got any work for me?"
What do I do?
Right now, I offer him the same job again, with a completely random deadline. Maybe much longer than the last time, maybe much shorter. We've already covered this. It would make more sense if the deadline were the same.
It would also make sense if the deadline were different, but if the payment changed too.... if the deadline is shorter, I pay more, and if the deadline is extended, the payment goes down. This feels complicated to implement realistically, complicated to manage as a player, and doesn't improve the gaming experience enough to make up for that complexity, in my opinion.
This is dimension #1. In reality, deadlines are tied to real world constraints, time pressure affects how much people are willing to pay, and in some cases, the deadline isn't hard: it has to be there by next Tuesday, but Saturday would be better, so I'll pay more to have it there by Saturday.
I clearly have other jobs that need doing, because I'll hand them out if the Knight takes this one, even if he cancels it. Right now, the number of jobs I have at my disposal is essentially infinite, and I'm only willing to hand them out sequentially.
That the jobs are unlimited is unrealistic. There are many ways to implement a limit to how many jobs I've actually got available, and whichever one gets implemented, I think it will add depth to the game experience.
That I'm only willing to hand them out sequentially is disconcerting. Imagining that I'm a Connector, and looking at these five jobs I need done, why wouldn't I offer the Knight a different job? One reason is that the second job is contingent on the first job getting done. If that's the case, then the Knight should have to do the first job before I'll pay him for the second job. Maybe I don't even offer the second one until he successfully completes the first. Maybe I offer him the second, but if he cancels, fails, or misses the deadline on the first, the second one is automatically canceled. If he does them out of order, he doesn't get paid for the second until he completes both. (Probably too complicated to implement and describe on small phones, but it's a realistic option).
Another reason I might not offer the Knight a different job is that it is more important and I want the Knight to prove himself first. Again, he should have to do it, not just say he'll do it, and then the next job should be better, and also, this is what Rep is for so I don't see it as a useful game mechanism.
If I (the Connector I'm imagining myself to be) really have five jobs to get done, I'd probably want to have this Knight do whichever jobs he's willing to take, and hope I get some other Knight to do the rest before time runs out.
The mechanism I'd really like to see is that when I (as a Knight) go in and talk to a Connector, he's got some small number of jobs, say, in the two to six range. If I decline a job, he'll offer the next one, and so on until we've gone through them all. Then he'll start offering them each to me a second time, either with the same deadline, or, if you want to get really fancy, perhaps with a modified deadline but a different price. Regardless of how many of them I take, if I leave and come back a short while later, the same jobs will be there.
Let's say I leave and come back tomorrow. Any job that needed to have been done already should be gone. Are there any new jobs available? Maybe. Over time, new jobs will be added. Maybe one a day, maybe less frequently than that. Whatever jobs the Connector has at the time, he'll cycle through them. I can take any or all of them, or I can go away. If I come back next week, there will be different jobs to choose from.
This scheme requires a lot more saved state. There is another mechanism which is, in my opinion, almost as good that requires far less saved state. In this model, the Connector will only offer you a particular job once. If a particular Connector has 5 jobs ready and I ask for a job, he'll offer me one. If I take it, or if I reject it, he's got 4 more jobs right now. I can hunt for one I like better, but eventually he'll run out. Over time, the number of jobs he's got will slowly go back up. This is closer in implementation to how it's done now, in that you never need to store more than one job per Connector. You should only need to store a small number (how many jobs he's got left) and possibly a time stamp.
In summary: any way to prevent the same job from being re-offered with a wildly different deadline would enhance the game experience. Any way to add realism to the order in which Connectors give out jobs would enhance the game experience. Any way to limit the number of jobs any one Connector can hand out in a short time frame would enhance the game experience. Yay, enhanced game experience!
-w
