Realistic economy

Zangi wrote: Does it not make the game more complicated then it needs to be?

Robertum wrote: Zangi wrote: Or we can say that there is already corruption calculated into the tax income and we don't have to change a thing. Everyone wins. Not exactly. What I'm suggesting is: if you have a city that needs 1000 troops to have 0% corruption and send away 500 of them then corruption will rise to, let's say, 10% which means 10% less basic goods production and 10% less taxes. This in turn will have a large impact on food and gold mainly. Thus you can imagine corruption as the cost you pay to maintain a campaign. Large armies always had a problem with their supplies, so mainly plundered their way when far from home. So this way adding corruption will make the game more realistic. Regards

So you want to 'realistically' add extra expenses without adding any extra income to make up for it?  Doing it either way, just only adding the extra expenses or also adding in extra side income...
Does it not make the game more complicated then it needs to be?  In a very useless manner I might opinionate.

As I said, leave it abstracted.

Robertum wrote: bartimeus wrote: I dont like games that make it seam as if corruption was unavoidable. It depends on so much factors that I'd rather we leave it out of the game. It's unavoidable because even for a supercomputer you need enforcement controls (this is where the army comes in) and cultural controls where people are more conscientious (this is where the buildings come in). Corruption is intrinsic to any forms of organisation since "entropy" always tries to disorganise a system (in the case of computers this happens through failures). Especially when a system is based on people corruption is worst because people are by nature selfish and easily correupted by money. As an added bonus large cities won't be able to move large armies for a long time out of their territory because of resource shortage. So this makes the game more realistic and interesting. Regards

Or we can say that there is already corruption calculated into the tax income and we don't have to change a thing.

Everyone wins.

bartimeus wrote: I dont like games that make it seam as if corruption was unavoidable. It depends on so much factors that I'd rather we leave it out of the game.

It's unavoidable because even for a supercomputer you need enforcement controls (this is where the army comes in) and cultural controls where people are more conscientious (this is where the buildings come in).
Corruption is intrinsic to any forms of organisation since "entropy" always tries to disorganise a system (in the case of computers this happens through failures). Especially when a system is based on people corruption is worst because people are by nature selfish and easily correupted by money.
As an added bonus large cities won't be able to move large armies for a long time out of their territory because of resource shortage. So this makes the game more realistic and interesting.
Regards

The value of goods is arbitrary and gold has little buying power because it isn't the most useful good in the game. So I suggest the creation of a central  commodities exchange (prices are the same throughout Illyriad) for the basic goods (wood, iron, clay, food, stone) or many regional exchanges (prices vary depending on the local market). The exchange itself can be implemented as protected special exchange towns spread around the map where everyone can send caravans with the commodities he wants to sell and get the ones he bought. A more realistic  option would be to build an exchange in your city has more than let's say 10000 population. This way gold will gain value and commodities will have a specific value and hence all goods will have a value in gold.
The marketplace should show only the offers in the local exchange town and of other local exchange towns in which a caravan or scout was send within the last 24 hours.
Another option that is more medieval realistic is the 'pieds poudre' principle (a natural development after caravanserai) where caravans travelled through towns organising fairs, like a travelling exchange that can be created by players that researched this technology and travel to towns that have a marketplace of at least lets say lvl10.
The addition of corruption would also make the economy more realistic. It was a nice feature of Sid Meier's classics. Corruption should rise as you approach 100% production and tax collection and as population increases, and reduced by keeping army into town and by upgrading cultural buildings. Corruption itself is implemented as a percentage loss of basic goods and taxes.


Edited by Robertum - 29 Oct 2010 at 10:14