Announcement

**Darkstar** · June 21, 2001, 22:51

By the way...

Please DON'T be too offended with me. When I first start considering a programming project, I tend to need to be sold on why one approach over another. It's how I just do things. No offense is meant. But until I understand, I tend to question everything... and why is it that way, and why you think it's better that way... I do accept "just cause" though.

**VetLegion** · June 22, 2001, 09:35

We are making it all to "stand the test of time". Perhaps not all models are going to be best possible(*), but they should be consistent with each other, and offer a good overall game. So you are more then wellcome to point out any holes in any model you see, so we may patch them together

Ok... too many calculations... You might want to look at cellular automata for handling supply, demand and the movement between. If you are not already using it already. It's good and quick, as I understand it.

no we are not using it (cellular a.). The economy model is best understood by amjayee and Joker who worked on it in the first place. It looks complex at this phase, but it is not done yet. The goal is to have a realistic and yet fun/simple for the player system.
The thing is that the more "simple" economic rules we put in (realistic supply and demand, realistic earnings, realistic taxation, etc) more complex the system gets. A simple supply and demand system depends on a lot of things to work properly.

If City PepperWitch produces Black Pepper and Salt, (A luxury good and a basic good), PepperWitch will have a LOW price for both. The further you move away, the higher the price

I agree. That is one of the basic economic laws we try to simulate.

Machines only came along to help replace laborers when the need for work was greater then the available work pool.

or they were less expensive then a worker. I agree that we should have slave labour in, and machine labour in.

Where is the population model? That's going to drive all other models... disease, economy, etc... Your people model is the key to all the following...

I dont know where it is, but it has been discussed

Yes, it is the key to everything. We have nailed it down... but there are some issues left that need to be solved, related to number of tiles.

At WHAT point in history are their "merchants" as a profession? In ancient times, the peaceful nomads tended to be the cities links in merchandising, didn't they?

no, not really

But not to get in a historical discussion, I think merchants have a good gameplay reason. Trade is going to be very important in the game, so the merchant class will fit in well.
There are some classes which have simmilarily low percentage in pop, like priests, who we also plan to have in.

Maybe this isn't the level of detail you guys wanted to be at, but I'm curious HOW you see this fitting into your model. Horses and animals are long standing goods in history.

as you will notice, the level of detail tends to be pretty high around here

about horses I havent thought, but maybe someone else can answer it, or just go ahaid and say what you would like to see done about it.

* as said before, there are much more sophisticated war games (Military model), economic games (Economy model), urban planner games (Region model) and so on, then we want to make. Instead we try for a grand scale strategy like civ, plus provide more realism and entertainment then civ. Sometimes we will have to go to great detail for this but hopefully we can pull it out without boring the hell out of players

**Darkstar** · June 22, 2001, 15:16

Vet... Cool. The only thing I see at this point, PLAYWISE, is the player getting bored during turn resolutions. The computer does all the scut work of calculations. And more sand will just mean it calculates that much faster (in other words, it just means you need a decent processor).

Thanks for taking the time to answer.

**TempLeland** · June 24, 2001, 19:56

I haven't read the model myself (and I've been around for half a year now... shame on me!:rolleyes), but I think that from players point of view, economy should mean two things:

Prices are not constant. Some goods can be produced cheaper than others, based on available resources and competition.
Player doesn't have full control over economy like in most civ-games. Private sector exists.

Other than that, I have not given too much thought to economy. But I do like your approach, and I don't think anyone here will be offended by constructive criticism.

Keep pointing the errors in our wicked ways, and perhaps our designs will evolve to something more robust.

**The Joker** · July 10, 2001, 17:41

Can't believe i haven't seen this thread untill now.

As always you are making some very valid points. And to some extend I agree with you. I have made the econ model overcomplicated in some areas, and it will be updated when I am ready for it. The thing is that although it will be simplified in the next version I am still starting at university september 1st, studying - you guessed it - economy. And I am certain I will learn a whole lot of things that will mean making the next econ model much easier. Plus I will know what I should focus on, and what I shouldn't.

The big dilemma regarding economy is that although it should not get too complicated, it still has to be considerably more complex than most other games (Civ2, Imp2 etc), since our pop model is, and should be, much more complex.

In other words, when we use a real population, and when they live and die depending on whether they get the food they need, then we can not have an economy model where having access to iron lets you build tanks, without more complexity there.

We need supply/demand. We need prices of some sort, and we need money. Plus we need things like productivity, raw materials etc etc.

This all very soon makes the model very complex. And I don't mind complexity. As long as it does not take the computer more than 2 seconds to make all the calculations.

Actually my two top priorities for the economy model is that it is as realistic as possible (meaning that when something happens the effects throughout the system are realistic) and that the player feels involved in the model (so he can do things, like getting control of raw materials, raise the tarriffs or make trade embargos and SEE results, which could be slightly more extreme than they would be in reality).

I think I am going to present a ressource kinda model (the basics of an economy model) with a region sort of model within the next few days (tomorrow I'm going surfing all day, so it will propably not be untill thursday). Not anything final, more of a thing we can discuss.

**S. Kroeze** · July 11, 2001, 09:09

Originally posted by The Joker

The big dilemma regarding economy is that although it should not get too complicated, it still has to be considerably more complex than most other games (Civ2, Imp2 etc), since our pop model is, and should be, much more complex.

In other words, when we use a real population, and when they live and die depending on whether they get the food they need, then we can not have an economy model where having access to iron lets you build tanks, without more complexity there.

We need supply/demand. We need prices of some sort, and we need money. Plus we need things like productivity, raw materials etc etc.

Actually my two top priorities for the economy model is that it is as realistic as possible (meaning that when something happens the effects throughout the system are realistic) and that the player feels involved in the model (so he can do things, like getting control of raw materials, raise the tarriffs or make trade embargos and SEE results, which could be slightly more extreme than they would be in reality).

I think I am going to present a ressource kinda model (the basics of an economy model) with a region sort of model within the next few days (tomorrow I'm going surfing all day, so it will propably not be untill thursday). Not anything final, more of a thing we can discuss.

Please Joker Do!

In my opinion the Economy part of GGS is at the moment most in need of improvement and development. I have followed the discussion in your previous thread and saw some development in it, yet many very fundamental issues haven't been discussed at all -to my knowledge at least!

Thus far it has not been decided which raw materials will be represented in the game. I suppose GGS will not copy the three types ot resources in CivII (i.e.food, production and trade), because that was totally ridiculous! After all, one can only trade when you produce something.
And it is not the building of a Cathedral that gives religion influence over the loyalty of your population. You need priests, religious ceremonies, sacrifices and a sanctuary, with or without some building on it. In the long run, feeding and paying your priesthood will cost many times more than the building of that prestigious Cathedral. Nor will only one 'holy place' suffice of course!

Something else most absurd in Civ was the total absence of any private sector. Actually all government types were completely Communistic with more control over the economy than that enjoyed by Stalin and Mao! In my opinion the Caravans -I know you hate them- were the only somewhat realistic element in the economics of the game. Yet logic in this case didn't extend far: without having access to Coal or Oil you could still industrialize.

In my opinion, Imperialism did a lot better in many respects. At least you needed raw materials to produce something and you could trade with the other states. And very important: Demand and Supply influenced prices! In Civ having enormous gold reserves were a source of strength. In reality it should harm the economy, because without a lubricant -money- trade will suffer.

I hope you do not mind when I do add some quotations on Agricultural Society:

'Man needs capital to trap energy. And still more capital to exploit obtained energy for productive purposes. Capital accumulation is a necssary condition for any society's survival and progress. And, conversely, any society's survival and progress is in a way a measure of that society's capacity to accumulate capital and use it efficiently.

There is definitely a correlation between capital and output. In a hunting economy, the capital needs are very limited: a few bones -used as tools or as weapons- and (in more developed cultures) bows, arrows, and stone implements. In an agricultural economy the capital needed is of quite a different quality and magnitude: stocks of seeds, fertilizers, ploughs and other implements, draught animals, silos, mills, boats, wagons, and so forth. In an industrial economy, capital needs are still more complex and much larger: machinery, railways, chemical and atomic plants, dams, research laboratories, and so forth. The greater the production, the greater the volume of capital needed. On the other hand, it is also true that the greater the production, the greater the possibility of capital formation.

Capital is made possible by saving. If resources are consumed they are obviously not available for capital cumulation. If you eat your cow today you cannot hope to have your milk tomorrow. Only by forgoing present consumption can a society cumulate capital. It is generally admitted that in any agricultural society, given the low per capita income, per capita saving is -in absolute terms- rather low. This circumstance is badly aggravated by the way saved resources are used. Temples, pyramids, mansions, jewellery, warfare, and so forth generally absorb a large quota of resources squeezed out of current income. Furthermore, pre-industrial societies are typically characterized by inadequate transport facilities. Mass transportation is generally non-existent and communications are costly and insecure. Consequently any pre-industrial society must keep inventories in much larger proportion to current production than any industrial society does. This is true for any type of commodity, but particularly so for basic necessities. Such inventories are a form of investment, i.e., of capital accumulation, but with a 'stabilizing' character. Generally investment of a 'developmental' character is very small in any agricultural society.'
(source: C.M.Cipolla:'The Economic History of World Population',1962)

If there is any information with which I could help you , please ask me about it! Economics are not my subject, but I am certainly able to look up reliable information about Economic History, especially of early modern times. Unfortunately for the older periods we do not possess many hard facts, though our knowledge is still increasing.

Sincere regards and good luck!

S.Kroeze

**The Joker** · July 12, 2001, 18:31

Ressources and goods

We need a list of goods that we are using. So I have looked at Amjayee's original list (which is really old) and made a new one, using the best from that list.

As with the terrain types this is by no means final. But I think that with a little discussion it could become so within a fairly limited amount of time. It's not hard, we just have to figure out what goods we want.

I think we all agree that somewhere between 30 and 100 goods is best.

Here are mine:

Raw materials (things found directly on the land):

Meat
Grain
Vegetables (I have decided to divide food into these to allow a more complex food system)
Wood
Stone
Iron ore
Cobber ore (Although tin is required to make bronze, which is something we should have, I still do not think that we should have it as a ressource, since the former is it's only use. In stead I believe we should just allow cobber to be refined into bronze)
Aluminium ore
Uranium ore
(Rare metals ore) (for use in industry)
Gold ore(including all precious metals)
Coffee
Tea
Spices
(Hides/Fur)
Wool
Silk
Cotton
Wine
(Water)
Oil
Coal

Things used in production:

Chemicals
(Timber) (I am not sure whether we should have this AND wood - perhabs it is not required)
Plastics
Cheramics
Electronics
Iron (again I am not sure if mining the metals should be seperated from refining them)
Gold
Steel
Bronze
Aluminium
Uranium
(Semiconductors) (perhabs it can just be put into electronics)
(Superconductors)
(Antimatter) (far future)
Machinery

Refined consumer goods:

Clothing
Housing
Computers
Automobiles
Consumer electronics (TV's, radios etc)
(Software)
Long lasting consumer goods (futniture, kitchen stuff etc)
Medicine

Services (should be divided into different services - services do represent a very large part of the GNP of modern countries)

What else should we have?

Can anyone find a list of what people spend their money on today, divided into sectors? Then we would be able to use them. To be included a good has to either be a considerable part of GNP at some point in history (like automobiles), or have a large importance through some special feature (like Uranium).

I think we should decide on the goods, plus the map and the terrain types some time soon, so we will at least have that covered. So tell me something, fellows!

**Nath** · July 13, 2001, 04:54

A few suggestions:

Vegetables

I suppose, but they'd have to be called something else. The word 'vegetables' sounds unprofessional. Some further subclassification might not hurt.

Cobber ore

Agreed. You mean copper, right?

(Rare metals ore)

I don't think they're necessary. You could, of course, classify Uranium and whatnot under them.

Wine

This should come under vegetables, perhaps?

(Timber)

As you said, timber is wood.

Cheramics

I'm not sure what they are, but they sound useful

.

Cotton

Perhaps 'fabrics' would be a better word. There are other plants, too, like jute.

**The Joker** · July 13, 2001, 11:35

Thanks for the responce.

Vegetables:
You are propably right. But do you agree with me in dividing food into a few (3, perhabs?) sorts?

CoPPER:
Yeah, I mean copper.

Rare metals:
You may very well be right. I think Uranium should be included, but Rare metals can be removed.

Wine:
Hmm. I think it is pretty much a luxury product, that qualifies to stand on it's own. But I am not sure if it is important enough...

Timber/Wood:
Right. Timber is wood.

Cheramics:
High tech material, used for the space shuttle and other advanced stuff. Again I am not sure if we should have it.

Cotton:
Yes, we could use fabrics in stead. But wont it make sence to have animal fabrics (Hides/Furs and Wool) and plant fabrics as two different types? Of cause the end result is pretty much the same, so I'm not sure.

Nothing else? Suggestions for new materials or services, perhabs?

**S. Kroeze** · July 13, 2001, 16:02

Re: Ressources and goods

Originally posted by The Joker
We need a list of goods that we are using. So I have looked at Amjayee's original list (which is really old) and made a new one, using the best from that list.

As with the terrain types this is by no means final. But I think that with a little discussion it could become so within a fairly limited amount of time. It's not hard, we just have to figure out what goods we want.

I think we all agree that somewhere between 30 and 100 goods is best.

Can anyone find a list of what people spend their money on today, divided into sectors? Then we would be able to use them. To be included a good has to either be a considerable part of GNP at some point in history (like automobiles), or have a large importance through some special feature (like Uranium).

I think we should decide on the goods, plus the map and the terrain types some time soon, so we will at least have that covered. So tell me something, fellows!

So far I have found a plan, classifying different economic groups:

0. Food and Live animals
Live animals
Meat and meat preparations (!)
Dairy products and eggs (!)
Fish and fish preparations (!)
Cereals and cereal preparations (!)
Fruit and vegetables (!)
Sugar, sugar preparations, honey
Coffee, tea, cocoa, spices
Feeding stuff for animals
Miscellaneous food preparations

1. Beverages and Tobacco
Beverages (!)
Tobacco and tobacco manufactures

2. Crude Materials, Inedible, except Fuels
Hides, skins and furskins, undressed
Oil seeds, oil nuts and oil kernels
Crude rubber (including synthetic and reclaimed)
Wood and cork (!)
Pulp and waste paper
Textile fibres and their waste
Crude fertilizers and crude minerals (excluding fuels)
Metalliferous ores and metal scrap (!)
Crude animal and vegetable materials, not elsewhere specified

3. Mineral Fuels, Lubricants and Related Materials
Coal, coke and briquettes
Petroleum and petroleum products (!)
Gas, natural and manufactured
Electric current

4. Animal and Vegetable Oils and Fats
Animal oils and fats
Vegetable oils and fats (!)
Processed oils and fats

5. Chemicals
Organic chemicals (!)
Inorganic chemicals
Dyeing, tanning and colouring materials
Medicinal and pharmaceutical products (!)
Essential oils and perfume; toilet and cleansing preparations (!)
Fertilizers, manufactured
Primary plastics (!)
Non-primary plastics (!)
Other chemical products (!)

6. Manufactured Goods Classified Chiefly by Material
Leather and dressed furs
Rubber (!)
Wood and cork (excluding furniture)
Paper, paperboard (!)
Textile yarn, fabrics (!)
Non-metallic mineral manufactures (!)
Iron and steel (!)
Non-ferrous metals (!)
Manufactures of metal, not elsewhere specified (!)

7. Machinery and Transport Equipment
Power generating machinery (!)
Machinery for particular industries (!)
Metal working machinery
General industrial machinery (!)
Office machinery (!)
Telecommunications and sound recording apparatus (!)
Electrical machinery (!)
Road vehicles (!!*)
Other transport equipment (!)

8. Miscellaneous Manufactured Articles
Prefabricated buildings, sanitary, plumbing, heating and lighting fixtures
Furniture
Travel goods, handbags and similar articles
Clothing (!)
Footwear
Scientific instruments (!)
Photographic apparatus, optical goods, clocks (!)
Miscellaneous manufactured articles, not elsewhere specified (!)

(source: 'The Statesman's Yearbook 1998-99', ed. B.Turner)

I wouldn't suggest to copy this list, yet it might help sorting out our economic goods. All goods that are important in the current British economy (imports/exports) I have marked with a !.
I might also point out that many of these goods weren't produced at all before industrilization. Some came into being still later. And the relative importance of most agricultural products declined, when industrialization got going.
Once the economic importance of Animals, Furniture, Sugar and/or Salt was huge!

Here is a list of important goods in the current economy of the USA:
Corn
Meat and preparations
Soybeans
Vegetables and fruit
Wheat

ADP equipment, office machinery (!)
Airplanes
Airplane parts
Chemicals - organic
Chemicals - plastics
Chemicals - other
Clothing
Electrical machinery (!)
Footwear
Furniture and parts
General industrial machinery
Iron and steel mill products
Metal manufactures
Paper and paperboard
Power generating machinery
Scientific instruments
Specialized industrial machinery
Telecommunications equipment
Textile yarn, fabric
Toys/games/sporting goods
Vehicles/new cars (!)
Vehicles/trucks
Vehicles/parts

Crude oil (!)
Petroleum preparations

Fish and fish preparations
Cork, wood, lumber
Cigarettes
(source: 'The Statesman's Yearbook 1998-99', ed. B.Turner)

Here are some goods that in my opinion should definitely be added to 'our' list:
Water, a basic physiological need
Electricity
Oil
Gas
Coal
Firewood

Slaves
Women

The Major Five Domestic Animals:
1. Sheep
2. Goat
3. Cow, ox, cattle
4. Pig
5. Horse

Vehicles
Ships

Bricks (essential building material)
Salt (important for preserving food)
Weaponry
Writing

I like the introduction of Wine. It is a luxury article indeed, like Silk!

Per cent composition of private consumption in selected countries, 1950



____________________          U.S.     France

Food                            22.1     38.4

Alcoholic beverages              1.4       9.4

Tobacco                          1.5       1.2

Clothing and household textiles 13.7      11.3

Housing                          3.7        4.6

Fuel, light, and water           6.4        3.0

Household goods                 15.4        7.8

Household and personal services  2.6        2.8

Transport equipment and service 15.2       4.8

Communications services          1.1       0.4

Recreation and entertainment     5.4       8.0

Health                           3.4       4.7

Education                        2.6       3.1

Miscellaneous                    5.5       0.6

(source: C.M.Cipolla:'The Economic History of World Population',1962)

Finally a note about C(h?)eramics. In my vocabulary it is identical to Pottery, a rather ancient product, not without importance for storage of food!

Best wishes!

S.Kroeze

**The Joker** · July 14, 2001, 12:42

Thanks for your input, S. Kroeze! This is very useful.

So refining the list:

Since some goods have a lot of different uses I have divided the goods into groups depending on how they are made:

Goods found on the ground

(Live animals) (I am not sure if I want this to be a trade good - for simplicity I think there should rather just be a "present" or "not present" for each animal on each hex (or area/region, whatever))

Meat

Cereals (I hope this means grain products, and not, well, Corn Flakes...

)

Fruit and vegetables (yeah, but could we find a better word for it?)

Sugar (perhabs?)

Coffee

Tea

Cocoa

Spices

Tobacco

Hides

(Crude rubber)

Wood

Pulp and waste paper (hmm... is this used for anything?)

(Olives)

Slaves (Although this has to be handled differently from the othe goods, since it involves, well, people - it can be compared with Machinery)

(Women)

Goods found in the ground

Gold ore

Iron ore

Copper ore

Aluminium ore

Uranium ore

Coal

(Gas)

(Salt)

Oil

Goods produced from other goods, or on their own

(Beverages) (is beer and Coke important enough to be a good?)

Petroleum

Electricity

(Animal oils) (not really that important, is it?)

(Vegetable oils) (ditto)

Chemicals

Medicine

(Consumer chemicals)

(Fertilizers)

Plastics

(Paper)

Iron

Gold

Aluminium

Uranium

Steel

Machinery (different types? I think I have a fairly good idea on how to handle these in the econ model)

Cars

Computers

Electronics

Consumer electronics

Housing

Clothing

Long lasting consumer goods (including furniture)

(Airplanes)

(Ships)

(Scientific instruments)

Household goods? (what does this mean, really?)

Pottery/Ceramics (there is in fact a huge difference between the two - pottery is ancient, ceramics is a hightech material used in space shuttles etc)

(Weapons) (for private use)

Services

Education

Medical services

Security services

Smaller consumer services

(Accounting and business services)

How does this work? I hope we can decide on some goods soon.

**VetLegion** · July 14, 2001, 13:03

(Women?)

I guess they will be pretty important for any civ

...but after I laughed my ass off

I seriousely think women should not be a trade good or a resource or anything. They simply consist population (which we should not differentiate by gender - WARNING, do not reply to differentiation of population here - it is not the topic of this discussion!

)

**The Joker** · July 14, 2001, 15:34

I can't say I do anything but agree with VetLegion here. Honestly, women can't be considered a trade good. It is just too far out. Pretty entertaining concept, though.

**ElmoTheElk** · July 14, 2001, 18:07

Originally posted by The Joker
(Women)

Man would they be expensive all the time!

Announcement

Economy Model

Economy Model

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment