03-05-1999 00:29									#1
	Proposed Economic System - No "Buildings" Suffering from ads?

I'd like to hear peoples' thoughts on this. The whole document on the proposed econ system is at http://people.mw.mediaone.net/markeverson/econ_dev.htm . It's too long to duplicate here, so I will just reproduce the intro here. There has already been some extensive discussion of the proposal at the old BB.

-Mark

The economic progress of civilizations is a critical aspect in Clash. It is perhaps the most important factor in the modern era. The most important things I'm trying to implement in Clash are:

1) Reduce Micro-Management by the Player - Allow the player to handle the economy in the game with as few actions aspossible. Implementing an economic strategy should Never require the player's attention at the level of a single map square. Most Civilization-type games also require too much attention at the city or provincial level. This typically involves the player commissioning the construction of a variety of "buildings" that affect the economy in various ways. Clash won't have explicit buildings, except in the graphics. Infrastructure for the economy will be handled in a continuous fashion in a way
that is relatively hands-off for the player. Various levels of micro-management of the economy should be Available to the player If He or She Desires Them.

2) Get the correct flavor of growth rate and innovation effects of economies operating under the influences of Market,Traditional, and Command forces (either Government Command like communist/totalitarian, or regulation)

3) Have a distinction between public and private sector; the government can influence private sector economic behavior but does not control it (having the public sector control itself will also reduce micro-management)

4) Use relatively realistic consumption patterns and growth rates for ancient and modern economies

5) Simulate the effects of rare or important goods and products - e.g. that of coal in the industrial revolution (special goods give the player new possibilities for cooperation and competition with other civs: enabling important trade pacts, struggles for trade dominance, and embargos in Clash)

6) Capture the importance of trade in stimulating economic growth. Clash will use quasi-market treatment of pricing. This supports relatively realistic functioning of merchant activities. Merchants will be agents that "make a living" buying
commodities where they are priced cheaply and selling them or they are worth more. Merchants will be intelligent agents, and not under player control. Players can influence merchant activity thru taxation of trade.

That's the intro... read the whole thing at the site given above.

	16-05-1999 00:18									#2
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Regarding #1, have you ever seen Pax Emperia? The game bombed, but the "buildings" were represented by 4 basic structures affecting economy, security, technological progress, & construction capability. The computer came with a "order to build" list that could be manipulated by the player. Most of the time the player didn't even have to check on what was being built, the computer did it for you, and once a "structure" was "built", it went on to the next one.

	16-05-1999 19:50									#3
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Theben:

Nope, never saw PE. From your description the Clash economic infrastructure will be somewhat similar. Although with the big distinctions of what's in points 2,3,5, and 6. Also micro-management on a fairly fine level Can be done... just not Must be done.

-Mark

	17-05-1999 09:51									#4
	Put an end to popups!

Mark,
I think I have something to handle special, strategic resources namely, without adding micro-management for the player.
The idea is to have a model for the main productions including what they are built with. Also, the energy consumption would be traced. So, at any point of the game the model knows which resources are used where, for what and in what amount. As long as there is no shortfall an any resource/energy, the player is not involved at all. But as soon as there is a shortfall (or a forcated shortfall), the player will receive a notification abou that. Then, it is his repsponsibility, as the leader of the civ, to find a STATEGIC way tohandle this shortfall. Let's take the case of the steel used to build ships. Let's say there is a lack of iron which is needed to make steel; a notification comes to the player that there is no mean to extract stell at a better rate, and that there is thus a shortfall. Strategic decision of the player could be : A. find a diplomatic/economic agreement with another civ to buy steel or iron; B. Attack another civ to take hand on important iron sources; C. Reshape its navy, fe use more modern units in a smaller number...
At no point the player is involved in micro-management of resources, since he will not be notified if there is no particular problem. When succh a problem arises, he is involved, but only on the strategic level (which is HIS level of play...)
Thus, you could have real resources like iron, oil, coal, gold, timber.... The economic/industrial(production) may be more complicated, but since it will be hidden for the player, it wont touch the gameplay. Only it will offer more strategic axes, and allow for the simulation of very particular situations (as the 1973 economic crisis due to a violent rise in oil prices).

Cya

	16-05-1999 22:42									#5
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Manu:

Yes, that's a good idea. One problem I have with the general concept of required materials is that ship production shouldn't "shut off" when no iron/steel imports are available. First, small production amounts of iron/steel that were previously used locally can be nationalized to keep the docks busy durint a war. Also, iron that is already in the economy as stoves, pots, and machinery for instance, can be scavenged. So instead of prohibiting shipbuilding, a lack of iron inputs might do something like double the cost.

Mark

	16-05-1999 22:55									#6
	Put an end to popups!

You're right, Mark. There shoulmd not be so brutal effects. First, in your economic system, at a given time there is a given production capacity. So what would happen is you try to product more than u can. You should product only what u can (not stop producing att all) or find new sources of resources. Second there is (or there should be) the problem of depleting resources. This should be handled before the depletion. So in no case there could be a sudden stop in production (u could also manage stocks for special resources. In case of war, they would become strategic targets. I think I've read this somewhere on the forum)

	27-05-1999 09:20									#7
	Increase the size of your Attachments

I'm not really sure if we generally want to handle stockpiles of strategic resources. That might get too complicated. Maybe if we did it on the civ level it wouldn't be too bad. Anyway issues like that are not too hard to change once we start to see what the system plays like.

	26-05-1999 23:00									#8
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I don't like to wrestling with different kind of resources, like in Imperialism. I think this possibility needs to be optional. If you wants to control the resources you can get a little advantage compare with somebody who just play the game default resources to build the units and to improve his/her imperium.

Blade Runner

	31-10-1999 06:18									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I can't go to the page and actually look at any of the models(It keeps saying "You are not authorized to view this page").
But on the resourse topic, I think it should be included. It will definately add some complexity but it would be worth it. For instance, civ A is at war with civ B and neither is on the same continent. Navy becomes very important and so too do the resources. You would have to manage iron to continue to build ships, Which is both realistic and , I think, fun and challenging.
As far as it being optional, I don't think that is necessary. If we keep it like manurein suggested, only if the resources are depleted should it become a problem for the player. Do you realize that some mines would take a very long time to deplete (realisticlly).

	31-10-1999 06:39									#10
	Support Apolyton

Toubabo_Koomi:

The main web site is offline till the end of the month. I'm over my BW limit I made a post in the forum about it, but I guess you didn't see it...

The new temp site is at:
http://www1.50megs.com/markeverson/clash_m.htm

If a link from a thread doesn't work, replace
http://people.mw.mediaone.net/

with
http://www1.50megs.com/

Everything after that is the same...

So in this case hit:
http://www1.50megs.com/markeverson/econ_dev.htm .

Sorry for the inconvenience...

Mark

	31-10-1999 14:05									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I personally would have to say I don't like the idea of resources being limited, except in special situations like in colonization where there was a small chance of a silver mine being partially depleted.

One thing thwat could be done is make the resources depleting an option.

	31-10-1999 14:34									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Hi all:

I just realized that this is the older of 2 threads that discuss the econ model. The more recent one is here.

Any further comments should probably go there, since it has the bulk of the discussion in it.

Thanks,

Mark