Variable bank payments

[Zeita]

Hi All!

Currently, bank payments can be set up to reoccur on a daily/weekly/monthly etc basis. However, for guilds, such as the Crown, that partially funds the Reeves (as an example) I'd like to see the establishment of a few variable codes to the bank system.

My primary example is for a payment based on the number of active members said guild has. It would work as follows:

gpay Reeves 25A weekly

This would set them up for a weekly payment of 25 silver weekly for every member of the guild that is active at the weekly turnover. I think this would allow for better systems to account for the up-and-down nature of activity.

Some potential tags:

A - Active members
V - Active visible members
T - Total members
M - An amount based on the status of a certain metric (for example, Court gets paid more for a higher infrastructure metric. I could see incentivising my guild members into boosting this metric by onpaying the guild members a percentage of the metric's rating.)

What do others think? Any other suggestions for tags?

[Applesauce]

There are definitely improvements that could be made to the banking system. Couple of questions though for clarity:

A/T: Payments already don't go through if you're inactive, are you saying that with T it would go to all guild members regardless of activity? Or what does total mean in this case?
V: What are visible members? Is that like online time, whois status, seek public?

And a more general statement:
M: I like this for sure. Since the metrics have ten "steps" or whatever, maybe you get the full amount if it's maxed, and 10% less for each step down?

[Zeita]

Happy to expand on this. I'll stick with my Court to Reeve example as I've already used it above... We'll assume that the Reeves have a guildlist of 10 people.
T = Total membership = 10 (This is everyone that shows on their guildlist when an internal guildleader checks)
V = Visbile in this case counts as anyone on that seek public/external guildlist view.
A = Active members is of course determined by the usual activity flags (1 hour or RP within the 7 days prior to the payment.)

These tags could be applied to individuals as a flat amount, to determine if said person gets a payment in general (T), for being a visible member of the guild (V) or for just being active (A). It could also be a multiplier applied to payments between guilds. So if as Court, I'm paying the Reeves for their Visible members, I'd set up as 'gpay Reeves 25V weekly'. They would thus receive 25 silver per visible member that week.

[Applesauce]

How would the flags work if the guild doesn't have enough money to cover everyone? Whole payment fails, I guess? Otherwise some people will still get paid which could be weird unless you can also determine the priority order as GL.

And again, just for clarity you're also suggesting a way for inactive people to get paid? Because right now there would be no difference between A and T since only active people actually get paid. Not saying that's good or bad, just saying.

As for other flags, just throwing this out there but maybe RP requirements beyond binary activity? Like you could have an "A" payment of 30s, a "2 hours" payment of 30s, and a "5 hours" payment of 30s, and if someone reached 5 hours then they would receive all three that week for 90s.

[Temi]

How would the flags work if the guild doesn't have enough money to cover everyone? Whole payment fails, I guess? Otherwise some people will still get paid which could be weird unless you can also determine the priority order as GL.

And again, just for clarity you're also suggesting a way for inactive people to get paid? Because right now there would be no difference between A and T since only active people actually get paid. Not saying that's good or bad, just saying.

As for other flags, just throwing this out there but maybe RP requirements beyond binary activity? Like you could have an "A" payment of 30s, a "2 hours" payment of 30s, and a "5 hours" payment of 30s, and if someone reached 5 hours then they would receive all three that week for 90s.

I assumed this was for payments to guilds, and the guild's payment would change based on the number of members, active or existing. Then the guild could decide what to do with it.

[Applesauce]

I assumed this was for payments to guilds, and the guild's payment would change based on the number of members, active or existing. Then the guild could decide what to do with it.

Ah gotcha, then I just totally misread/misunderstood the original post. I thought it was for guilds paying ITS members based on activity without having to split into a dozen different payments.

Carry on, ignore me, etc

[Zeita]

Well... both really. To guilds and to players. I'd want anything new set up to be versatile enough to be from/to any person or organisation.

It is useful to be able to count # of active/inactive players when generating payments.

Also, it can be good to set up payments for inactive players (for example, if I'm paying back a loan.)

[Kinaed]

Banking already seems too convenient and modern to me for OOC ease of use and management reasons. I feel cautious and awkward about extending it much further.