游戏邦在:
杂志专栏:
gamerboom.com订阅到鲜果订阅到抓虾google reader订阅到有道订阅到QQ邮箱订阅到帮看

解析《CityVille》更新后的房屋经济学原理(4)

发布时间:2012-01-05 17:05:34 Tags:,,,

之前我发表的《CityVille》经济学原理博文,分析了房屋建造装饰物金币产出等元素。在这4个月的时间里,Zynga更新了某些房屋建造选择,所以我认为需要重新审查下自己的策略。我现在的等级是63级,算是高等级玩家,所以已经足以测试和验证建筑占用空间等内容。

cityville housing(from ashkir.com)

cityville housing(from ashkir.com)

Zynga显然已发现,人口密度是决定房屋价值的最关键元素。当然,某些房屋的外观比较漂亮。而且,有些房屋的盈利确实较高。但是,最终问题的关键都在于,在有限的空间内放入足够的人口。最初可选择的房屋每栋可居住150人,但是现在我们有了其他房屋选项,每栋房屋可容纳1300人!

为何人口密度如此重要呢?Zynga已经尝试了多种不同的城市扩张模型。“扩张”可以让城市增加144格空间。普通建筑每个需要6或9格空间,所以每个扩展最多允许用户新建16栋建筑。实际操作中,可新建建筑物数量为9-10栋。数个月以来,扩张一直都很“便宜”,只需要些许金币和少许从好友处获得的“扩张许可证”即可。每次扩张所需的许可证数量呈线性增加。

现在,Zynga将扩张成本设定为40个扩张许可证,同时增加了获得许可证的方式。该公司向玩家传达的规则是:获得新空间要付出相当昂贵的代价。正是在这种条件下,房屋的人口密度才变得特别重要。

增加金币产出

当然,当你只有少数房屋,人口在200以内时,密度并非你需要优先考虑的事情。在游戏早期,依然需要考虑到成本问题。但是,如果你看过我之前的分析博文(游戏邦注:这些内容对1到20级的玩家依然有效),就会明白将收入最大化是件相当简单的事情。收入来源于房屋和商店。从某种程度上来说,商店的盈利性比房屋更好,但这两者都需要布置合适的装饰物,才能使金币产出达到最大化。我认可的方法是,专一建造3格宽的最高效房屋和商店并将其排成列,在这些建筑物间穿插装饰物,这样可以使金币产出率最大化。

Zynga的改变主要对那些拥有数百万金币的玩家产生影响,如果你仍处在游戏的初期阶段,可以先收藏这篇文章以便以后阅读。

房屋建设

现在,房屋租金仍然占我的城市收入的半数左右。商店也只占收入的半数,因为获得商店盈利需要多个能量:消耗1点能量收获作物,再消耗1点能量领取商店盈利。如果你的商店需要大量货物,而你所栽种植物的产出较少,那么可能需要投入3到4点能量来获得盈利。

玩游戏的频率也是另一个需要考虑的事情。我每天登录游戏4次,所以我偏爱循环时间为4-12个小时的东西。如果建造租金收取循环时间为1小时的房屋,那么我每天只能收取4次租金,这并非高效的玩法。

所以,在房屋建设方面我需要评估以下3个因素:

1、人口密度

2、租金更新期为4-12个小时

3、良好的租金回报

还有个可选的考虑事项,那就是收集奖励能产生的作用。所有房屋都会随机提供奖励道具,收集成套道具可以兑换奖励。这些奖励有可能是些小装饰物(游戏邦注:除了外表美观外,几乎无用),也有可能是微量的经验值和金币奖励(游戏邦注:如若能多次兑换可视为大笔奖励)。在旧系统中,我最喜欢的房屋是Terraced Brownstone,它能够提供“城市生活”收藏道具,成套道具可以换得3点经验值和50金币。因为我建了许多Terraced Brownstone,每天收取3次租金,这让我获得了数百套收藏道具,数个月后奖励经验值累计逾1800点。这完全可以算是可观的收获。

房屋分析

那么,我需要如何改变来应对房屋选项的改变呢?我们先看下这个图表:

houses(from strangedesign)

houses(from strangedesign)

涉及更新的房屋有Spring Bungalow、TV Terrace、Bay Point Duplex、Timeshare Tower、Skyscraper Condos、Beachfront Condo、Midtown Apartments、Glass Condos、Atrium Lofts、Parkside Villa和Garden Cottage。这些的容纳人口数都超过100。

人口密度研究

Parkside Villa可容纳1300个人,似乎是这份表格中最有价值的房屋。但Garden Cottage事实上与之不相上下。Parkside Villa可容纳1300个人,需要16格空间,平均每格容纳81.25个人。Garden Cottage可容纳700个人,需要9格空间,平均每格容纳77.8个人。二者间的差距没你想象的那么大。

3X3建筑的效能看上去比4X4建筑要低,前者容纳的人口数几乎只有后者的一半。事实上,3X3房屋的整体情况要比4X4房屋好。人口数与空间比位居前十的房屋如下:

Parkside Villa – 81.25, Garden Cottage – 77.8, Midtown Apartments – 50, Beachfront Condo – 26.7, Glass Condos – 25, Atrium Lofts -20, Skyscraper Condos – 18.75, Timeshare Tower -15.6, Spring Bungalow & Breezy Cabin – 14.4, Bay Point Duplex – 14.3

如果你将3X3房屋与4X4房屋相比,就会发现前者比后者略好些。比如,Beachfront Condo和Glass Condos的对比。4X4建筑的优势只出现在列表最前端,也就是位居首位的Parkside Villa,而建设此建筑需要增加75%的成本来获得4%的盈利提升。

但是需要记住的是,如果不利用租金加成装饰的话,房屋的租金是非常低的,这意味着所选择的房屋需要有相同的尺寸。在我的城市中有4列3X3房屋和1列4X4房屋。建设4X4房屋是缘于我有时需要某种特定收集道具或商店,3X3房屋才是我的主要收入来源。多数商店也都是3X3的,这进一步导致4X4的大房屋成了非必要选项。

现在,我已经将目标锁定3X3房屋。就人口密度而言,可以考虑的选项有:Garden Cottage、Beachfront Condo、Timeshare Tower、Breezy Cabin、Spring Bungalow、Colonial Chalet、Tuscan Villa、Sylish Contemporary和Terraced Brownstone。我们可以考虑这9个选项。

租金收取间隔时间和每小时租金

我之前已经说过,要根据游戏习惯来寻求让每小时租金最大化的战略。现在,让我们先列举出9个房屋选项的租金收取间隔时间和每小时回报(游戏邦注:假设能够做到在规定时间到后马上收取租金):

2小时:Spring Bungalow – 36/小时,Tuscan Villa – 40/小时

8小时:Terraced Brownstone – 18.75/小时,Colonial Challet – 19.75/小时,Garden Cottage – 24.4/小时

18小时:Beachfront Condo – 18/小时

24小时:Timeshare Tower – 9.5/小时

72小时:Stylish Contemporary – 3/小时,Breezy Cabin – 4/小时

我们可以看到,每小时租金和间隔时间存在一定联系。如果我们可以每天登录12次,那么每小时的租金回报将是最高的,但是谁能做得到呢?我们需要每天登录6次,这样建造间隔时间为2小时的房屋的收益才能超过8小时的房屋。24或72小时的选项显然只适宜那些隔数天玩次游戏的玩家。

根据上述数据,Garden Cottage是最佳选项。

在我之前的分析中,我说过玩家应当迅速积攒金币以便建造Terraced Brownstones,然后便专于建造这种房屋。但是现在我们有了3个可选项:Terraced Brownstone、Colonial Chalet和Garden Cottage。这3者的资金产出率相似,所以只能从人口密度上择优选取。因而,我的建议是在早期专注于购买建造Terraced Brownstone。拥有较多资金后,可以选择人口密度较高的Colonial Chalets,而Garden Cottages将是你的终极选择。

经过研究后我发现了某些有趣的现象,Parkside Villa无疑拥有最高的人口密度,但其租金回报确实很糟糕。在人口密度列表上位居第二的Garden Cottage是那些每天登录游戏少于6次的玩家的最佳选择。当然,如果你能够实现每天登录游戏12次,那么2小时间隔时间的房屋肯定是最佳选择。

有些人可能会认为,我的2号和3号房屋选项在之前的游戏就有了,那么我肯定会认为所有的更新房屋选项和调整完全没有必要。但事实上我认为,这些新的改变缩减了“较优房屋”和“较劣房屋”之间的差别。我喜欢Glass Condos的外观,但是此前因为其表现确实不佳所以并未建造。现在,这个选项似乎变得更为可接受,我会为了让城市更加美观而建造些许这种房屋。这才是游戏真正调整的地方——让注重美感的玩家把城市建设得更为繁荣。

游戏邦注:本文发稿于2011年4月26日,所涉时间、事件和数据均以此为准。(本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译,拒绝任何不保留版权的转载,如需转载请联系:游戏邦

Considering: CityVille economics Part 4

It’s been quite a while since I first posted about the economic underpinnings of CityVille, followed by an analysis of business and finally an analysis of energy conservation. Zynga has updated some of their housing options over the past 4 months, so I thought a bit of re-examination was in order. I’ve also risen to the highest ranks of players, so I’ve actually been able to test and verify things like the footprints for buildings which require that you be level 63.

The headline is – Zynga realized that population density was the most critical factor for determining the value of a house. Sure, some of the houses look cooler than others. And yes, some are much more profitable – different houses especially in certain phases of the game. But eventually all that matters is being able to physically pack enough population into your limited space. The original housing options ended at 150 population per building, but now we have gargantuan housing choices which can hold 1300(!) population each.

Why does density matter so much? Well Zynga has been playing with a few different models for pricing expansions. (“expansions” each add 144 spaces to your city. Buildings typically take 9 or 6 spaces, so each expansion allows for a maximum of 16 new buildings. In practice it’s more like 9-10) For several months expansions were “cheap” – a few coins, and a few “zoning permits” which you could get from friends. The number of permits required for each successive expansion increased linerally. But for some reason, the cash price of expansions was set at $10. One trial subscription to Netflix could earn your $250, so there was a lot of cash purchasing in the ranks of high-level players.

But now Zynga has set the cost of an expansion at 40 zoning permits – but added a few extra ways to earn them. So they have finally settled on the rule that “new land is expensive.” With this fundamental limitation set, housing becomes all about density.

You Need Money

Of course, density isn’t your first concern when you have just a couple homes and a population limit of 200 or so. In the early days of the game, things are driven by cost. However, if you read my original analysis (which still holds true for low levels – say 1-20) you will see that maximizing your income is actually a relatively simple process. Income is generated by housing and businesses. Businesses are somewhat more profitable than housing (though not as much as you migh think!), but both require efficient decoration placements to maximize their bonuses. I believe that focusing on a single 3-space-wide row with your most efficient housing & business structures, surrounded by decorations will get you all the money you need for most of the game.

Since these changes mostly affect people who have a few million coins to sling around, you can safely bookmark this page to read later if you still need to work yourself up to that point.

The Case for Housing

So, having said that density is the most important consideration, let me amend myself and say that I still like to see housing in my city which generates a high revenue value. Housing provides about half of my income, still. Businesses only provide about half of the income you think they do, because they require multiple energy to produce that return – 1 click for the crop(s), and 1 click to collect the profits. If your business requires lots of goods, or you grow crops which produce few goods/click, that ratio can become 3-to-1 or even 4-to-1 very quickly.

The other consideration is play frequency. I log in about 4 times a day, so I like things with 4-12 hour cycle times. Houses with a 1-hour cycle time are only going to get clicked on 4 times a day – so they end up being pretty inefficient.

So the three factors I like to evaluate in housing are:

1 – Population Density

2 – Refresh Interval of 4-12 hours.

3 – Good $/hour return.

A bonus consideration is “how useful is the collection bonus?” All houses provide occasional bonus items, and each “set” of items can be cashed in for some reward. These rewards might be small decorations (useless, except for aesthetic reasons) or small XP/coin rewards (handy in large numbers.) My favorite housing option from the old system was the Terraced Brownstone, and it provides the “City Life” collection – which can be traded in for 3 XP and 50 coins. Since I have dozens of Terraced Brownstones, which I collect from 3 times a day, I’ve been able to turn in hundreds of these collections – giving me 1800+ XP over the past few months. Not too shabby.

Housing Analysis

So how have the new housing options changed my original advice? Let’s start with a chart:

So the big changes are the Spring Bungalow, TV Terrace, Bay Point Duplex, Timeshare Tower, Skyscraper Condos, Beachfront Condo, Midtown Apartments, Glass Condos, Atrium Lofts, Parkside Villa, and Garden Cottage. All of these have populations over 100.

Let’s look at: Population Density

Well the Parkside Villa, with 1300 population, looks like the clear winner for sheer # of people. But the Garden Cottage is actually a very *very* close second. Parkside Villa has 1300 people in 16 spaces, or 81.25 population per space. The Garden Cottage has 700 people in 9 spaces, which is 77.8 population per space. Much closer than you might think!

3×3 buildings “hide” their efficiency in the fact that they are almost half the size of 4×4 buildings. In fact, 3×3 houses work out to be overall better than 4×4 houses in almost every respect. The best population/space houses are, in order:

Parkside Villa – 81.25, Garden Cottage – 77.8, Midtown Apartments – 50, Beachfront Condo – 26.7, Glass Condos – 25, Atrium Lofts -20, Skyscraper Condos – 18.75, Timeshare Tower -15.6, Spring Bungalow & Breezy Cabin – 14.4, Bay Point Duplex – 14.3

If you highlight the 3×3 and the 4×4 options, you’ll see a distinctive patter emerge – they occur in pairs, with the 3×3 building generally coming out slightly ahead in efficiency. Beachfront Condo vs Glass Condos, for example. Or Breezy Cabin vs Bay Point Duplex. Only at the very top level – with the Parkside Villa, does the 4×4 option come out ahead. And that 4% gain in efficiency comes at a 75% increase in cost!

But remember – housing money isn’t even worth collecting unless you have maximized your bonus payouts – and that means using all housing of the same dimension. In my city, I have 4 rows of 3×3 houses, and 1 row of 4x4s. The 4x4s are mostly there because I sometimes need a certain collection, or business type. But the 3x3s are my income-workhorses. Most businesses are 3×3 as well, which is just one more nail in the coffin for widespread adoption of the larger houses.

Hopefully I’ve made my case for focusing on 3×3 houses exclusively, so let’s look at the best options in terms of population densidy one last time: Garden Cottage, Beachfront Condo, Timeshare Tower, Breezy Cabin, Spring Bungalow, Colonial Chalet, Tuscan Villa, Sylish Contemporary, Terraced Brownstone. We have 9 options to seriously consider!

Let’s look at: Refresh Intervals and $/hour

I’ve made arguments before about getting the right refresh interval – “maximum $/hour” means nothing if your play habits don’t let you get anything close to that maximum! So let’s list the refresh intervals of our 9 housing options, along with their raw $/hour if you collected them as frequently as possible.

2 hour refresh: Spring Bungalow – $36/hour, Tuscan Villa – $40/hour

8 hour refresh: Terraced Brownstone – $18.75/hour, Colonial Challet – 19.75/hour, Garden Cottage – 24.4/hour.

18 hour refresh: Beachfront Condo – 18/hour

24 hour refresh: Timeshare Tower – 9.5/hour

72 hour refresh: Stylish Contemporary – 3/hour, Breezy Cabin – 4/hour

As you can see, there is a very strong corellation between $/hour and refresh interval. We can get huge $/hour if we log in 12 times a day – but who can go without that much sleep? We have to log in at least 6 times a day (at 2-hour intervals) before those options start to really beat the $/hour of our 8 hour options. And the 24 or 72-hour options are clearly only worthwhile for folks who play only every couple days.

And on top of that, the Garden Cottage is our #1 pick for density.

And the winner is…

In my original analysis, I said that players should rush to the point where they could afford to build Terraced Brownstones, and then stick with them. But now we have 3 viable options: Terraced Brownstone, Colonial Chalet, and Garden Cottage. They all have very similar payout/$, so the only reason to prefer one over the other is population density. Thus, my original advice holds for the early game – BUY TERRACED BROWNSTONES! As you begin to fill up, Colonial Chalets can become higher-density options, and eventually Garden Cottages become your ultimate housing option.

I think it’s very interesting, and very telling, that the best overall housing choices are so close to the absolute best choices in each criteria. Parkside Villa is the absolute highest population density building, but it has an abysmal collection return. The #2 best house in terms of density is the Garden Cottage – which also happens to be the best earning house for people who log in less than 6 times a day. (Midtown apartmens are the abosulte best, if you can log in 12 times a day without fail.)

So there you have it. Some folks might think that since my #2 and #3 choices have been in the game since the beginning – I might be of the opinion that all these new housing options (and adjustments) have been a waste of time. But actually, the new changes have made the difference between “optimal housing” and “horrible housing” much smoother. I love the look of the Glass Condos – but they used to be a horrendous option. Now that things are more equitable, I might build a few for aesthetic reasons. That’s the real adjustment here – allowing aesthetic players to flourish. (Source: Strange Design)


上一篇:

下一篇: