Economics/Trade thread 1.2, hosted by: Harel

[Diodorus Sicilus]

Not only was the earliest trade pre-currency, but it (apparently- we're talking only archeological evidence here) was in commodities. Advantage here is with the higher civ, almost always: they traded high-value goods like oil, wine, decorated pottery for high bulk goods (relatively) like tin, copper (required for Bronze), amber (early jewelry) or raw materials for medicines and luxury goods ('resins', spices, etc). Barbarians or less advanced civs having little use for tin, copper, etc, they usually gave more than they got.
This could be worked into the game by relating value of the commodities to tech: trading for tin or copper with a civ that had bronze-working would cost you lots of timber, hides, amber, spices, oil, resin, etc, while barbarians (who really, really should be a source of trading partners) who don't know about bronze yet lets you 'slicker' them - trading a small amount of wine, oil, or other 'exotic' goods for lots of tin or copper.
Money allowed both more flexibility in trade and the individual to accumulate portable wealth - it leads apparently inevitably to capitalism or at least individual entrepreneurs as opposed to state trading, and to serious inequities of income between the traders (getting rich fast) and the producers (farmers whose products don't appreciate in value). The Market improvement is a good indicator of this individual trading, but there should be an increase in Unhappiness associated with it: we have fairly good records of ancient Athens, and they nearly had a civil war over the economic inequities introduced by going to a mercantile (trading) economy.

[Theben]

How about Barter tech; a starting tech like irrigation, mining, and roads?

[ember]

Not quite sure where this goes:

Resources are a funny concept in civ.
A shield can represent either a resource or labour depending on what is in you city.
Maybe this should be split up.
Resources come from the terrain. Wood from forests, metals from hills/mountains, oil and coal from resource squares in desserts/swamps the ocean or wherever. More advanced mines/lumberyards give more per turn. Depending on play balnce issues this could be just one abstract type, or subdivided into the different classes of materials.

Labour comes from your population.
Each pop. point produces a certain amount of labour, modified by government, tech and improvments (like factories). Pop points not devoded to gathering produce double or more labour.

Resources are freely shiped throughout you empire (or within a region), and can be shiped between regions on trade routes of some type. Resources are stored for when they are needed, but reserves decay over time, maybe ~5% a turn. Resources can be sold to other empires or abstractly like capitalization. Resources can also be bought abstractly at a hefty premium, or from other civs.

Labour cannot be moved from it's city/region, and cannot be saved.
All units/structures require a certain amount of each component.
Ancient units tend to require a higher ratio of resorces/labour than modern units.
( a legion and a musketter unit might have the same amount of iron in tehm, but much more workmanship is required to make the muskets)
Infantry are less resource intensive than other unit types. Ships are the most resource intensive.
This, combined with the regional sharing of resouces will allow people to develop production centers seperate from the mining areas.
Food from agricultural cities (all pop devoted to resource gathering) is sent to the bigger cities to support industry (only the best squares are gathered, or could have lots of overlap with the resource gathering centers, most pop is devoted to labour) and mining comunities (all pop devoted to resource gathering, but in forested/hilled areas) Production from the industrail centers is used to build infrastructure for all areas, and military units.

This could lead to different war strategies, such as a civ with only one major mountain and hill chain. Attampt to capture their resource producing area and force them to devote lots of their money to try and aquaire resouces from elsewhere.
Or siexe their oil cities and dissalow them from building tanks and ships cheaply.

In Canada, for example, most mining is in the north, on the shield and norhtern alberta, but the bulk of the industrial production is in southern ontario, which is basically grassland. The bulk food production is in the plains, and some in southern ontario/quebec.



------------------
"Any technology, sufficiently advanced,
is indistinguishable from magic"
-Arthur C. Clark

[Harel]

Yeah Ember, it sure does belong here.
Great idea!
It's even more suiting to show the modern age: when most cities hardly produce minerals, but can have tons of labors. Sometime, I don't understand just why a mine allows me to build a plane faster

[Theben]

I'll 3rd the motion. It's an excellent concept! If I was you, ember, I'd post it on other threads to increase your chances of it getting to Firaxis, and maybe to other people who don't read Economics/Trade.

[Gregurabi]

I saw ember's idea in the REGIONAL MENU & CITY MENU IDEAS thread earlier, and responded there. This response is basically the same.

The separation of resources from labor, and the differentiation of resources into types (wood and metal), was present in Colonization. In that game, you needed Lumberjacks to harvest wood, and Carpenters to convert it into an intermediate form (hammers). You needed Miners to harvest ore, and Blacksmiths to convert it into an intermediate form (picks, I believe). The "hammers" and "picks" were used to produce city improvements and guns. If you had a stockpile of wood, but not enough Carpenters, you could tell your Lumberjack to do something else (act like a Carpenter, for example) for a little while. (Since Colonization had differentiated specialists, rather than just "people", the Lumberjack wouldn't be nearly as efficient at carpentry as a Carpenter.)

I do like the concept of differentiating resources (and separating resources from labor). And I add this idea: like CTP's public works, let resources and food be put into a national pool. If the mines of City A produce 9 units of iron per turn, and a cannon requires 3 units of iron and 30 units of labor (just to make up some numbers), then the mines of City A would supply enough raw material to produce 3 cannons per turn in the factories of Cities B, C and D -- if I can supply the labor. Meanwhile, the farms of Cities E and F can produce, say, 25 units of food per turn, which might be enough to feed all of my empire (Cities A through F). Of course, Cities A, E and F might also be building things with their own labor even as they supply food and resources to Cities B-D, depending on how closely we continue to follow the Civ1/Civ2 city model.

This would change how food is handled. Instead of having a local food surplus, the nation's food would be averaged out over all cities. This would generally eliminate starvation in all cities (but in the event of global disaster such as global warming, could mean your whole empire starves). In terms of game-play, this seems desirable, and in later years (after discovering refrigeration, railroads) it makes great sense. In earlier years, it may be slightly unrealistic -- food handling and storage and transportation technologies are inadequate and would mean some food would rot before getting to its destination. But this could be rationalized in game terms by giving a bonus upon the discovery of certain techs (e.g., refrigeration) -- similar to what Civ2 does.

On a related note, I don't believe that the birth rate (or better, population growth rate) should be a function of excess food. The United States produces more food than we need to feed ourselves, but we don't have a skyrocketing population. The excess food is either sold to other countries or goes to waste. The population growth rate should be determined by health factors (contraception or the lack thereof, longevity due to medical care), social factors (overcrowding, women's rights, religious tenets), economic factors, etc. But this touches on the whole concept of "population points" which the Civ games rely on so heavily, and which may require an overhaul. That needs to go in another post, possibly in a different thread...?

[Scooter]

Hold on, guys. I liked where this thread was going right up until we started discussing lumberjacks to cut wood to make hammer handles and miners to get ore to make hammer heads to eventually make hammers to pound ore to make spearheads to make a spear. Ack! I do not like this idea. I've said this before in other threads. While it is feasable to do this early in the game to make spears, how will you handle tanks? Will we need schematics to an M1A1 and figure out how many bolts we need? And how much ore we need to make the tools to put in the bolts? Please no. This is not a manufacturing sim. This is not an industrial sim. This is Civ. I am god. I say make a tank. It happens. I have underlings to figure out the nuts and bolts. I just want a freaking tank!

Imperialism was another game that separated resorces and labor, so did Lords of the Realm II. This works for these games because the have a time/technology span that is relatively limited compared to Civ. Civ is a more general game by design and by necessity. Design because that's what Sid envisioned, and necessity because the mechanics of building a tank are much too much micromanagement.

Don't get me wrong, I like micromanaging my civ. What to build, who works where, that sort of thing. But I don't like the idea of having to micromanage down to the raw material of whatever I make. Spears and arrows are easy, tanks and fighters are not. That's why it works for some games and not for others. This will not work for Civ, IMHO.

------------------
"BEEFCAKE, BEEFCAKE!!!

-E. Cartman

[ember]

I'm not proposing to have to figure out stuff like
1 tank division:
10,000 t iron ore
5,000 t coal
1,000 t nitrates
1,000 t cotton, etc
all i'm proposing is a seperation of the resources (all those things in the list, but abstracted as 'shields') and the labour needed to make something usefull out of it.
You get your minerals in mining town, and a production centre ( high population, little resource gathering) uses these minerals (from a national pool) to make your tank.

I think there is a little confusion about regions, the details are in that thread, but basically i think that things should be built on a regional scale, and then placed locally, so you choose where the temple that was just finished goes. This allows you to build temples, and supermarkets in your farming comunity with no resources around.

------------------
"Any technology, sufficiently advanced,
is indistinguishable from magic"
-Arthur C. Clark

[Scooter]

Portable temples?

I'm kidding. I understand what you are saying, but I think the realism people would get all over you for building portable temples, and they may have a point. Let's take your temple in a farming community idea for an example, it's a good one. In "real" life (as if there is such a thing) the temple would be phisically built in that town, not moved there from a production center. The farming communuty would import materials, but not people. While the temple was being built, the food production would decrease. I suppose in modern times a construction company would come in and do it, but for Civ purposes the labor comes from the town receiving the building. So of all you are asking for is a way to transfer raw materials from one city to another, there are simpler ways to do it that to have "production centers" and "resource regions". Off the top of my head, you could have a transportation screen where you could say "City A has X amount of surplus resource M, how much of this surplus would you like to send to city B?" or something to that effect. Of course the amounts you could send would vary greatly with your technology level (roads, railroad, etc.). Kind of like the caravan helping to build wonders idea. If you city is lagging building a bank because of lack of resources, send them some. But eventually, they could have built it on their own.

We'll call it resource sharing, or something equally cheezy.

------------------
"BEEFCAKE, BEEFCAKE!!!

-E. Cartman

[Diodorus Sicilus]

Labor and Resources as separate components: Somebody give that man a medal!
In addition to the current Tech Advances related to producing more resources, the whole history of production can be related to requiring a lower and lower ratio of labor to resources. Tech Advances like the Factory System, Machine Tools, Water or Steam Power, etc, would all allow the same amount of labor (% of population?) to utilize and manipulate more resources.
In extremis, the super-modern Robotic (AI?) Factory allows the minimum of labor to produce the maximum of product from resources.
Some Improvements would also improve Labor: Public Schools providing an educated (literate) Workforce, for instance, increases their ability to learn and use higher tech machinery.
Labor does move, in that population is attracted to cities or regions for various reasons: jobs available being a big one. A capital, a city with a lot of trade routes, a 'factory town' will all attract labor from regions/cities without a market for labor.
The mobility of labor also changes dramatically with tech advances: railroads, steam ships, automobile, airports and air transport, etc.
Labor could even be mobile between civs: a civ without the resource/tech combo to keep its population (labor) employed would see them migrate to another civ! Either institute Totalitarian closed borders (with attendant Unhappiness and other problems) or see a net loss of population.
The gaining civ, in turn, might see his new labor pool coming with associated problems of assimilation and Unhappiness.
The icons showing population/happiness, etc as in Civ II could have faces specific to civs, and as you assimilate foreign labor the faces on your city display would slowly change...
Gad! This concept has me bouncing from thought to thought. I'm going to back off and think some more before I post on it again...

[Theben]

I saw ember's idea as more basic: shields from resources & shields from labor, that are combined in the city menu as production.

Resource shields are as civ2 standard; Labor shields are a multiple of the # of citizens in the city/region, which would be modified by technology & city improvements.

I don't see why labor "shields" can't be imported/exported from city to city, as the fruits of their labor=finished goods. Also resource storing is a good idea, but no reserve decay, or only at higher difficulty levels.

The shipping of resources from city to city would be treated as "trade" routes, but they don't need to be built, and don't count against any maximum the city can have. Time it takes to arrive is automatically calculated by the computer based on distance, tech. See my 7/5 post.

Also I suggested before to change the quick-buy to something similar to MOO1: you drop down x# of $$ and you get extra production for a number of turns until the money is used up. This could be solved with the labor production: you pay your laborers $$ and their standard production rate is increased by (??). You can pay more to allow the extra production to roll over to later turns. This makes larger cities more important, and doesn't allow players to quick-buy tanks from scratch in size 1 cities (also since larger cities will likely have more labor-inhancing buildings, the bonus will be even higher yet! ).

3 options for production:

1) The civ2 method. Specific resources are not considered in unit/building construction.

2) Specific resources are on the map; if they are in your borders you may use them in all your cities & can allow other civs access for a fee. Must be connected to your cities by some means (roads or port city). Units, structures will have the name of the specific resources needed to build them; if you don't have then either cannot build or face a penalty to build (as A.1. economical concepts at top). Shields are still treated as shields, so as long as you have 1 of a resource in 1 city you are considered to have access to it in all cities. Trade &/or conquest has some priority.

3) Shields are broken down into specific resources, and units/buildings have # of each resource needed to build next to it. Shields in City Menu are replaced with specific-resource icons. Otherwise as #2 above. Trade/conquest even more important, but micromanaging could be frustrating.

Personally I prefer #2; it allows some importance to resources while not overwhelming the player with micromanaging details. But all 3 could be included in Game Options, it Firaxis has enough time to devote to this concept.

[Ekmek]

A lot of great ideas here. I'm totally for a consumable resources idea as compared to the shields. The shields was too simplistic. There should be like said above, about 10 raw resources and 10 commercial commodities. The raw resources should be required to build units and city improvements (like in Age of Empires) and the commodities you trade for cash. This way you can model Mercantilism and colonial economies a lot better. And being an economic power with monopolies, etc would have more meaning.

I do think that having some AI corporations (later in the game) as proposed in the General Suggestions should exist, so when you sell improvements (or trade routes) a private owner will own them as opposed to city improvement just disappearing. (or make it like CTP's franchises but for barbarians if its easier)

Also it was seen in some scenarios and somewhat in CTP but if you raid a trade route or a caravan you should be able to take the resources this would be a good model for piracy and for Barbarians and their nomadic/raid based economy.

------------------
"All great things must first wear terrifying and monstrous masks in order to inscribe themselves on the hearts of humanity."
- Nietzche

[Flavor Dave]

I like the idea of separating labor and resources. Why?

1. It's realistic
2. It opens up the game. You know how when you're in an area filled with grasslands, and no hills? Well, you are stuck then--you're going to be a science/gold powerhouse, not a military powerhouse. With this idea, your geography would be less important. As you add techs, your ability to use your labor will increase.

Cautions
1. Don't make the Pyramids or "we Love" too powerful
2. KISS (keep it simple, stupid)

[Zorloc]

Sorry I have been silent for so long, but:

Ditto to everything Diodorus Sicilus has said. He has been an excellent advocate for everything that I support.

One note to add. For resources and manufactured good: there should be at least two levels of manufactured goods. For Example:

Copper + Tin (L0 goods)--> Bronze (L1 good)
Bronze --> Bronze weapons/armor (L2 good)

And the higher the level the more the item is worth. As long as there is not a glut, the L2 good should sell for more than the cost of the L0 resources.

--Zorloc

[ember]

Divorcing growth from food.

Growth should depend on happiness, government, tech, infrastructure and location.

Food has a strong influence on happiness.
All food is pooled and distributed to a nuetral happiness level automatically. (losses to to bad transport can happen)

The happiness neutral level of food corresponds to current slow groth, maybe 2.2 food / person.
Having more than this much food slightly increases happines and hence growth.
having less decreases happines. At a certain level (~1.5 food/ person) starvation begins. Happiness penalties are SEVERE and pop losses are inevitable.

Inventions like contraception will slow growth rate slightly, but they will also allow you to slow it dramatically where popultion has started to outstrip food supply.

This idea allows the modern phenomina of overcrowding. The population will grow well past the point of sustinablility and then begin to collapse, but with riots and probably revolts in long term starving cities.

Aquatducts/ hospitals increase growth
Cities near oceans and on rivers have bosted growth.
cities by mountains and desserts are reduced.

Other ideas:

Surplus food (over 2 / person) is stored in the grannary. The number of turns of spare food gives the happines bonus (and the minimum time for a full siege) Food decays at a rate of 10-20% a turn, to prevent near infanite stores. Modern refrigiration techs/ canning might slow this.

------------------
"Any technology, sufficiently advanced,
is indistinguishable from magic"
-Arthur C. Clark