What's on YOUR Wish List?

[seelindarun]

I think it's a reference to double-dipping when you have playables as employees.  They get paid when the business is played by the owner, and a second time when the employee's household is played.  That second payment isn't deducted from the employer (unless you fixed it lately and I haven't noticed it yet).

The third time they're paid is when a playable customer visits the business, but I don't think of that as unfair payment, since the business owner is generating income from that visit also.

[Mmmary]

1. Woohoo available on single beds, with an animation of its own.

2. Being able to take different sized & shaped snapshots like in TS1. I haven't stopped missing it even though I can't remember what good it was.

3. For some kind soul to fix the OFB bug where assigning uniforms makes the employees' faces lose all custom content and revert to a different face template.

[Gwenke]

...why shouldn't they get money if the employer is paying them?

Because they will be paid anyway when their own household is played. Like seelindarun said: to eliminate double-dipping.

[J. M. Pescado]

I don't really see the double-dipping issue offhand. Clearly, they are being paid from "remote" income. Just as the business owner receives "remote income" from a business, the employees get paid out of that income. "Live" revenues are paid to both employees and business owners simultaneously, "remote" incomes are paid when you play the relevant fambly.

[talysman]

Double-dipping isn't much of a problem. Being your own employee, on the other hand...

I had a Fortune sim with a floral shop who hired his son-in-law, then later sold the show to the son-in-law. When playing the new owner, he is able to visit his business, hire employees, and phone his manager as expected. However, he also still has the entry-level shop clerk job -- clearly double-dipping of the worst sort. He had to stay home from work to care for a baby one day and got the message that he missed work and should be careful about his job performance.

Naturally I'm investigating this by refusing to let him go to work, to see if he gets fired... and if so, what happens. If there's no other effect on the business, no biggie. But if something weird happens, I may be coming back to ask for a bug fix.

[seelindarun]

I don't really see the double-dipping issue offhand. Clearly, they are being paid from "remote" income. Just as the business owner receives "remote income" from a business, the employees get paid out of that income. "Live" revenues are paid to both employees and business owners simultaneously, "remote" incomes are paid when you play the relevant fambly.

It's a question of how you choose to play TS2 economics.  Remote income from owned businesses can be controlled by the player.  Choose not to hire managers, and your town doesn't get the benefit of remote income.  As an employee of an owned business however, remote income isn't controllable.

Once, I experimented with not sending my playable employee to work, and after a few days, he was indeed fired.  I've since stopped paying such close attention to capital flow, but I do avoid hiring any playables until I'm ready to have the owner do the remote income exploit.

[Pyromaniac]

3. For some kind soul to fix the OFB bug where assigning uniforms makes the employees' faces lose all custom content and revert to a different face template.

I second this wish.

[J. M. Pescado]

That is hardcoded as far as I can tell. Due to how poorly the uniform assigner works in general, I don't use it much.

[Gwenke]

I don't really see the double-dipping issue offhand. Clearly, they are being paid from "remote" income. Just as the business owner receives "remote income" from a business, the employees get paid out of that income. "Live" revenues are paid to both employees and business owners simultaneously, "remote" incomes are paid when you play the relevant fambly.

I have quite a few home businesses, partly because it takes so long to load community lots, even when tiny, and partly because there is no other way to correctly handle craftables and produce. Here the owner gets no remote income, but the employees do.
Also, work done by playables for one another is also handled this way, such as gardening, cleaning. Here the employees only come for a few hours a day to work, and are paid accordingly when the owner is played. When I play their household, however, they get remote income as if they worked full time.

[J. M. Pescado]

You know, I can probably put a cure for that in place easily enough...

[Gwenke]

You mean we could tell the employees when to go to work and how many hours to work, and they would be paid accordingly? That would be more than a wish - a dream come true. 
Even double-dipping would not be a problem- we could just halve the hourly wage.
OK now I'll be checking back here every minute

[Zazazu]

Dang, I would love that. I've been avoiding putting playables as employees as my businesses all have strict hours, and none of them are 8am-5pm M-F (or whatever the default is). They'd never get paid right.

[seelindarun]

I have quite a few home businesses, partly because it takes so long to load community lots, even when tiny, and partly because there is no other way to correctly handle craftables and produce.

What's the problem with craftables and produce?  I purposely run these as off-site businesses so that the playables can buy only as much as needed.  I don't think I've noticed any problem, as long as I have the playable customer wait until the staff has restocked everything they chose to buy.

[notovny]

I have quite a few home businesses, partly because it takes so long to load community lots, even when tiny, and partly because there is no other way to correctly handle craftables and produce.

What's the problem with craftables and produce?  I purposely run these as off-site businesses so that the playables can buy only as much as needed.  I don't think I've noticed any problem, as long as I have the playable customer wait until the staff has restocked everything they chose to buy.

You don't even have to do that. Just leave the community lot as soon as you're done buying. When you're sending a Sim to visit a community lot owned by another household, the lot always restores to its last-saved state...which was the state it was when you played a member of the owner's household on that lot. Want to buy twelve Snapdragons, but the owner only has four for sale and none in his inventory? Buy four, then leave for another community lot. Select the neighborhood, but not a destination in that neighborhood. When the neighborhood screen loads, repick the lot you just left.  Buy another four snapdragons.  Repeat a third time. Or more, if you want.

There's no reason to wait around for the staff to restock the item, unless you want to buy more than what is currently set for sale, and the owner has enough in his inventory to successfully restock the item. Or if you want to deplete the owner's inventory in a roundabout fashion.

[sloppyhousewife]

On top of my current wish list is a hack that stops normal downtownies from acting as social townies. I have none of the latter in my game thanks to clean templates, and now I get the "ZOMG you're so cool, have a free 3,5k television" while talking with a downtownie on the phone. I fucking hate this free sample bullshit .

[Gwenke]

I have quite a few home businesses, partly because it takes so long to load community lots, even when tiny, and partly because there is no other way to correctly handle craftables and produce.

What's the problem with craftables and produce?  I purposely run these as off-site businesses so that the playables can buy only as much as needed.  I don't think I've noticed any problem, as long as I have the playable customer wait until the staff has restocked everything they chose to buy.

The problem is that playables can buy more than the owner actually has, exactly for the reason described by notovny. I try to keep a consistent economy.

[Nepheris]

I want a way to make your own .reia files. You know, the files that make the EAXIS neighbourhoods have a cool fly-over movie, while our custom neighbourhoods are doomed to a sad, stationary picture.

Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like anyone has a clue on how to do this 

[Emma]

You can name your custom hoods the same as the EAxis ones, but only if you do not have the original hoods still installed. It does the neighbourhood flyover then.

[seelindarun]

The problem is that playables can buy more than the owner actually has, exactly for the reason described by notovny. I try to keep a consistent economy.

But notovny himself confirmed in that post that you can just wait until the owner has restocked, and this will properly deplete his inventory.

There's no reason to wait around for the staff to restock the item, unless you want to... deplete the owner's inventory in a roundabout fashion.

Edit is mine, for clarity.

[Nepheris]

Renaming the hood does indeed do the flyover when you actually start up the hood itself, but I meant making your own .reia file, which replaces the stationary picture in the startup screen with a video of the flyover of your hood.

Even though you get the flyover in hood-view when renaming, your picture in the startup screen stays the same. (e.a. non-moving) At least, it does for me, so if I'm doing something wrong here, please tell me.

[jsalemi]

No, you're not doing anything wrong; the static picture is a snapshot.  If you update the custom hood with a lot of new lots, you can take a neighborhood snapshot, size it down to 128 x 128, and replace the neighborhood snapshot with the new one.  Then the static shot will at least show the current (or more recent) state of your hood.

[Emma]

Renaming the hood does indeed do the flyover when you actually start up the hood itself, but I meant making your own .reia file, which replaces the stationary picture in the startup screen with a video of the flyover of your hood.

Even though you get the flyover in hood-view when renaming, your picture in the startup screen stays the same. (e.a. non-moving) At least, it does for me, so if I'm doing something wrong here, please tell me.

Oh, right, on the actual 'hood menu. Sorry, I don't know how to change that to a moving file.

[J. M. Pescado]

I wish Emma would DIE.

[Faizah]

You know what I would love to see? Better facial feature combining. Perhaps get one random feature from the mother, another from the father, and make the rest a blend, rather than an arbitrary A or B decision.

For instance, the child might have their mother's nose, their father's chin, the rest in between. A sibling might get the mother's brows, and the father's cheeks, but the blended features could still make them look related to their sibling. Existing 'dominance' stuff could certainly be taken into account. (A random 'more extreme' - bigger, smaller, whatever, just different from either parent's features - thing could be neat, but, knowing EAxis, it would occur every damned birth, on over half of the features, and be far too extreme.)

[Emma]

I wish Emma would DIE.

I will do one day...but you'll DIE first. Then I will P&L and have a party.