u/JakePT

Cross-posting from the Discord:

Every time there’s a rocky release somebody suggests an open beta, but I think this would be pointless 99% of the time. If 1.13 had an open beta nothing would be different today. The beta would have the same bugs and people would play 1.12 if they didn’t want to put up with them, just like they can today.

Not to mention the reaction to the fundamental design of the new systems has actually been quite positive, so it’s not like an open beta would’ve led to something completely different on that front. Some QoL and UX feedback would’ve been useful, but there was no risk of needing to start over.

An AI update is different. While there’s a lot of things about the AI that can be tested by a small team with observer mode, like GDP benchmarks, a huge amount of what makes an AI successful comes down to vibes. For an AI update to be received as a success players will need to feel like the AI is performing better, and making decisions that feel logical and realistic. How the AI behaves and how that behaviour is perceived is completely intangible, and I just don’t think you can effectively judge if AI changes are having the desired effects on that front without putting it in front of more players.

Internal testing will let the team know if AI is succeeding at the numbers games, but an open beta would allow the team to better assess whether it’s giving off the right vibes and iterate accordingly.

A release outside of the DLC cycle is the perfect opportunity to run an open beta, and depending on the timing it makes the July holidays less of a looming deadline. Instead of rushing to get an update out before the holidays and being unable to fix it over the break, a beta can be left open until the team returns.

Just sharing a realisation I've had after looking at this thread from the forums. The key takeaway is that when the game talks about the Shopkeepers Investment Pool contribution as being "How much of their profits Shopkeepers will invest", it's not telling the truth. This implies that Shopkeepers receive their share of dividends and then contribute 20% of those to the investment pool, reducing their dividends income accordingly. That's not what happens.

What actually happens is that a building receives its profits, calculates reinvestment based on ownership share so that 20% of the Shopkeepers' share of profits is reinvested, sends that reinvestment to the investment pool, and then distributes the remaining profit as dividends to the owners based on ownership share and regardless of their investment pool contribution.

As an example, a workforce-owned Fishing Wharves will have an ownership of 64% Laborers, 12% Machinists and 24% Shopkeepers. Since Laborers reinvest 0%, Machinists 10% and Shopkeepers 20%, the building will reinvest 6% of its profits. However, the remaining 94% of the profit will be distributed according to ownership share. This means a Shopkeeper receives 94% of their share of profit as income, not 80%.

Does this impact gameplay in any way? Probably not, and this might be old news to some, but I thought it was interesting because it's not how I thought it worked until now.

I filed this bug to address the inaccurate terminology used in the game.