Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

We're offering banner ads on our site from just $5!

1. Details HERE. 2. GDNet+ Subscriptions HERE. 3. Ad upload HERE.


Industrial revolution strategy (post mortem and ideas)


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
59 replies to this topic

#1 Acharis   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 3897

Like
5Likes
Like

Posted 26 November 2013 - 05:58 PM

This topic is about my prototype of a turn based strategy game that was simulating industrial revolution. I posted here a post mortem, but I also would like to get your ideas how to redo/fix it, since I like this project. So any comments are highly welcomed smile.png

 

 

Overview

The prototype was a turn based, very small and cozy strategy game of industrial revolution period. You had 16 provinces (an island), no enemies, no combat, just economy/infrastructure/trade.

 

The core mechanic was factories and resources transformation. For example you first built coal mine and iron mine, then foundry to make steel ((5  coal + 5 iron = 5 steel )* numer of foundries), then you could use steel to produce other things. There were many other formulas like this (wood to planks OR paper; wood to textiles; clay to bricks).

 

Each province had population, it was providing labour to factories and consumed food (they key was to improve agriculture via fertilizers and machines so you could free farmers and convert them to labourers and to get a population boom).

 

 

What went wrong

1) The biggest fail was province level factories/mines. You were building factories in provinces, but the resources were country wide. I made 2 reasons to make province selection important. First, was the transport cost, the resources were to be transported (invisible to the player! another not so great idea) to other provinces (so you wanted to build a foundry in a provice that had coal and iron mine). The second reason was wages; the wages paid to labourers were based on unemplyment/overhours, so you wanted to spread your factories more or less evenly.

 

But... as a player I noticed I really wanted the information how many coal mines I have GLOBALLY compared to my iron mines GLOBALLY and foundries GLOBALLY. So when building inside a province I was always looking to the country global stats. I even dispalyed two numbers next to each mine/factory how many of these I have locally (in province) and how many in the whole country. It sux, big smile.png

 

2) Next problem was the provinces identification, I could not get to rememebr what I have where smile.png But, that's maybe there was no map yet, just a dropdown list with province names.

 

3) Next one was pointless localization of provinces. Yes, this was this (hidden) auto transport of goods thing, but other than that it made no difference where each province was located (neighbours).

 

4) The last mistake, I think, was the cleanliness of resource system. I insisted on fixed 1 coal + 1 iron = 1 steel (s the player can instantly calculate how many mines he needs to build to assure flawless enonomy). Which made all improvements like efficiency technologies impossible (other than by big steps) and what worse all factories always had the same efficiency no matter the labourers (labourers availability only affected the wages costs - if there was a shortage of workers you simply paide much more). I also insisted on no fraction of resources (like 0.95 coal) which probably was a mistake...

 

 

What went right

The theme was great, I really liked it. The resource system (coal+iron=steel), even through had flaws in implementation, was very nice, it felt like an industrial era.

 

 

How would I do it now

First, I would make it less clean and take away from the player some control. There is no need for a player to be able to calculate everything precisely, approximation is all right. Maybe even some randomness (in mines capacity for example) or delays in production, generally, a bit less predictability how many units of toilet paper your industry will make next turn smile.png Just a clear understanding of general direction is sufficient (this would also cut down on boring micromanagement).

 

Next I would discard the artificial systems that were supposed to give some significance to provinves localization, like transport of resources. It was complex, messy, hidden from the player and generally did more harm than good. Instead I probably would make some factory slots in provinces or other purely local stuff.

 

And above all, I would much earlier implement a map, like that one smile.png And I would allow putting some tokens on provinces (on the main map, not from inside the province). These things simply look tasty smile.png

 

mapofprovinces2_zpsddb569bb.png

(it's just a draft of a map, don't try to find a logic why each province has different icons, I was just testing what icons/font sizes would look best)

 


Europe1300.eu - Historical Realistic Medieval Sim (RELEASED!)


Sponsor:

#2 swiftcoder   Senior Moderators   -  Reputation: 10242

Like
3Likes
Like

Posted 26 November 2013 - 10:38 PM


I insisted on fixed 1 coal + 1 iron = 1 steel (s the player can instantly calculate how many mines he needs to build to assure flawless enonomy). Which made all improvements like efficiency technologies impossible (other than by big steps) and what worse all factories always had the same efficiency no matter the labourers (labourers availability only affected the wages costs - if there was a shortage of workers you simply paide much more). I also insisted on no fraction of resources (like 0.95 coal) which probably was a mistake...

The easy way round this seems to be to vary the time it takes to produce a single resource. For example, if a fully staffed mine produces one unit of coal every 10 seconds, then an understaffed mine could produce only one unit of coal every 15 seconds.

 

This allows you to avoid fractional resources, while still providing concrete production benefits to hiring additional workers.


Tristam MacDonald - Software Engineer @Amazon - [swiftcoding]


#3 Acharis   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 3897

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 26 November 2013 - 10:59 PM


The easy way round this seems to be to vary the time it takes to produce a single resource. For example, if a fully staffed mine produces one unit of coal every 10 seconds, then an understaffed mine could produce only one unit of coal every 15 seconds.
It's turn based strategy. There are no seconds :)

Europe1300.eu - Historical Realistic Medieval Sim (RELEASED!)


#4 TechnoGoth   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2788

Like
3Likes
Like

Posted 27 November 2013 - 12:45 AM

Its probably a little different then you intended but I'm thinking of my new favorite board game 7 wonders, specifically that you don't produce resources but resources buildings determine how many resources you have access to on a give turn.  So if I build a lumber mill which generates 1 wood then on any given turn I can spend up to 1 wood not spending that wood does nothing and it doesn't carry over to be two wood next turn. If I want to build something that costs 2 wood I need to build a second wood generating building or buy it from a neighbor.

 

What if you did the same?  If I build a coal mine, iron mine, and a steel mill then on a given turn I can either spend 1 coal and 1 iron, or 1 steel.  If I want to build something that costs 1 steel and 1 iron I can't until I build a second iron mine. 

 

When it comes to capacity you could limit that by food.  Let say initially all provinces can support only 1 production building. Building a farm as the production building generates 1 food each point of food allows you to open another production slot in a province.  So If I build a farm in the light green province on your map then I could open a second production slot there or 1 in any adjacent  province.  Which means I could use that to open a coal mine and an iron mine in yellow and a steel mill in brown.  Technology could be used to provide increases in production or global improvements.  Fertilizer for instance might mean each farm generates two food instead of 1.

 

As for transport what transport technology could do is determine how far resources can travel. Initially only adjacent provinces can share resources. But unlocking new technology could increase that. Roads might let provinces use resource 2 spaces away while railroads mean they can be used anywhere on the map. In this way planning where to build your resources buildings is as important as what you build.  Building a steel mill in pink is useless if there isn't a coal and iron mine in purple or brown. Likewise I can only ever use that steel in one of those three places.



#5 LorenzoGatti   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2739

Like
4Likes
Like

Posted 27 November 2013 - 05:03 AM

The easy way round this seems to be to vary the time it takes to produce a single resource. For example, if a fully staffed mine produces one unit of coal every 10 seconds, then an understaffed mine could produce only one unit of coal every 15 seconds.

It's turn based strategy. There are no seconds :)
It doesn't matter, you are simply measuring mine output in coal units per turn rather than coal units per second.

The same 2/3 ratio between the production rate of a fully staffed mine and an understaffed mine can be realized as 1 coal every turn vs skipping production every third turn, 1 coal every 6 turns vs 1 coal every 9 turns, 15 coal per turn vs 10 coal per turn, etc.
Produci, consuma, crepa

#6 Acharis   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 3897

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 27 November 2013 - 05:05 AM

Primarily, I wonder how to do some "unit/markers/tokens placement on the map". I mean, the map I drawn has these (utterly cute and tasty to me :D) square piles of tokens (green ones and red ones). I would love to find use for them.

 


Its probably a little different then you intended but I'm thinking of my new favorite board game 7 wonders, specifically that you don't produce resources but resources buildings determine how many resources you have access to on a give turn.
Generally and principally, I'm against blindly borrowing from boardgames. 7Wonders mechanic is very good and makes a lot of sense for a boardgame (I even used it in one of my cardgames). But the core purpose of this mechanic is reduction of downtime (counting resources); with computers, well, the computer can do all the dirty calculation :) I think for a computer game "real" resources that "physically exist" are better in most cases...

 

 


As for transport what transport technology could do is determine how far resources can travel. Initially only adjacent provinces can share resources. But unlocking new technology could increase that. Roads might let provinces use resource 2 spaces away while railroads mean they can be used anywhere on the map. In this way planning where to build your resources buildings is as important as what you build. Building a steel mill in pink is useless if there isn't a coal and iron mine in purple or brown. Likewise I can only ever use that steel in one of those three places.
The biggest problem with transport of resources is that's it's hidden from the player. How he/she can know that resources travel this way (other than reading manual)? If I try to portrait it on the interface somehow it would be bloody messy I suppose...

 

This brings me to the old designer's mantra, "do not design/implement things the player won't see". So I wonder about the transport of resources system in the first place, I'm not sure if it wasn't a mistake.

 

What if I ignore transport of resources completely? Like, everything is automaticly transported to central stockpile and then used up as needed?

I can still use railroad network for 2 things: it increases population migration between provinces (which is important) and each factory/mine need to pay transport fee upon *production* (not use) of resource of any kind (railroad level in a province would reduce that cost.

OR

Let's make it very simplified, first a province uses up it's *own* production and then sends the rest to the central stockpile, which then is redistributed. This would be more intuitive to the player, since if you build a lumber camp and lumber mill in a province it might suggest that you wanted the lumber camp to provide logs to the lumber mil, not to some paper mill in different province.

 

What you think?


Europe1300.eu - Historical Realistic Medieval Sim (RELEASED!)


#7 LorenzoGatti   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2739

Like
2Likes
Like

Posted 27 November 2013 - 06:03 AM

The central stockpile can be entirely virtual, a mere abstraction for manual and automated management purposes. Actual resource movement can be done between actual places and on the actual road, rail and channel network with explicit trains, ships etc. and automated in the guise of minimum cost network flow problems (given resource producers, consumers and stockpiles, minimize the cost of moving them to the appropriate destinations along the edges of a graph representing places and transport between them). This kind of automation can remove the tedium of ordering transport of materials, collect statistics (how much does it cost to transport a certain resource, on average? Which long or expensive routes are contributing?) and signal to the player that a certain road, rail trunk, channel, river etc. is saturated (rejecting transport of low-priority goods). Details of a certain road etc. can show what travels on it and between what places. There should be a place for both global resource decisions (e.g. I built all possible mines but I need more Iron quickly for warships: buy it from abroad or recycle old ships?) and local transport decisions (e.g. Paris needs so much fish that it has to arrive fresh from Marseille: which railroads should I build in the middle of France?); what's important is making them interesting, nontrivial decisions and cutting the boring or useless details.
Produci, consuma, crepa

#8 TechnoGoth   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2788

Like
3Likes
Like

Posted 27 November 2013 - 07:44 AM

I mentioned the 7 wonders style approach is for two reasons one it is a very simple mechanic that is easy to pick up plus has a lot of depth. The second reason is that it is very easy to visualize on your map.  You have tokens that represent iron, wood, coal and then from a simple glance I can see that a province provides two wood. Just because its a strategy game doesn't mean you have to bury the player in spreadsheets.

 

I guess the things about transport routes is how critical resources movement and stockpiling is to the game. Is it like Transport Tycoon? Do I need to concern myself with maximizing the output of a steal mill by transporting coal and iron from half a dozen different provinces and ensuring that those transports aren't going back empty? Can I just build anything anywhere and have access to it?  If so does that make the map a bit irrelevant since there is effectively only one province instead of several?



#9 Unduli   Members   -  Reputation: 986

Like
3Likes
Like

Posted 27 November 2013 - 08:30 AM

I am with involving transportation and revealing its cost clearly to player. It doesn't have to be super micromanaged but something like

 

- Province transportation

Road : cost 100

If you upgrade to Railroad its 20% less etc.

 

Or you can simply set a fixed cost X number of provinces.

 

And for  1 coal + 1 iron = 1 steel , I think using decimal is good but you could do 1+1=2 steel as Railroad Tycoon does.

 

Btw, if I am not mistaken, at early industrialism labor was extremely abundant, so doubt any overhour applies, but ofc classic demand-supply rules does.



#10 Acharis   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 3897

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 27 November 2013 - 08:48 AM


You have tokens that represent iron, wood, coal and then from a simple glance I can see that a province provides two wood.
Too many resources, it won't fit on the map. There are also things I didn't mentioned like spice consumed by population and several dozens other resources. It would mean like 10-20 icons per province...

 


I guess the things about transport routes is how critical resources movement and stockpiling is to the game. Is it like Transport Tycoon? Do I need to concern myself with maximizing the output of a steal mill by transporting coal and iron from half a dozen different provinces and ensuring that those transports aren't going back empty? Can I just build anything anywhere and have access to it? If so does that make the map a bit irrelevant since there is effectively only one province instead of several?
No, it's not like Railroad Tycoon at all. The main reason for railroad is that it is very in theme, so I wanted railroads somewhere. But I don't really like (find it fun) the whole resources transportation.

 

As you said this could make the map irrelevant (and that's why I tried to do the trasportation in the first place) but I feel it was a mistake... Instead the map should have other purposes like social, ideology, people migration, rebelions, demonstrations, spread of culture, education.

 


Btw, if I am not mistaken, at early industrialism labor was extremely abundant, so doubt any overhour applies, but ofc classic demand-supply rules does.
Well, yes, but not preciselly. An important part of industrialization was a huge improvement in agrarian technology, it allowed to free hordes of farmers (1 could tend the fields now where 10 were needed before) and let them convert to labourers.

Anyway, it's not that important to stick so close to historical accuracy :) If overhours are desired for the game mechanics I can use them.

 


Or you can simply set a fixed cost X number of provinces.
What you mean exactly? I'm not sure I fully understood that part.

Europe1300.eu - Historical Realistic Medieval Sim (RELEASED!)


#11 Unduli   Members   -  Reputation: 986

Like
2Likes
Like

Posted 27 November 2013 - 09:14 AM

Well, I mean it can be pretty straight forward (or not so pretty)

 

transportation cost is 100 for one province, 200 for 2 province ....

 

or

 

you set three province type (50 for flat (?) , 100 for normal , 200 for mountainous)

 

I mean you put a fixed cost not a function of population or industrial activity.



#12 TechnoGoth   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2788

Like
4Likes
Like

Posted 27 November 2013 - 03:17 PM

Well if you have transportation then you could create hubs that act as gathering places for resources and people.  With low per turn transport times then people have to live near manufacturing centres and resources can take several turns to travel long distances.  But if you build rail roads or cannals then people can live further from the centre and create new hubs in much the same way that the rail road transformed London and allowed people to live outside of london and still work in london. 

 

Hubs also could give you a nice clean way of visualizing supply chains and their connections, much like the one below:

 

PUMA-supply-chain_DL-v2.png



#13 Acharis   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 3897

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 05 December 2013 - 08:36 AM

I think I will ignore transport completely, maybe make something extremely simple like Unduli said. Transporting stuff is simply not what's the core fun of that game.

 

 

The main difference between provinces could be the natural resources.

Factories is one thing, you can build these anywhere (as long as there is enough labour available) but each province will have a different set of ores (coal, iron, tin, copper), forests (wood), pits (clay). Also farming, but that's a separate can of worms.

 

I think resource deposits should have 2 parameters: richness (how much stuff one mine can dig here; forest should not have this variable?) and size of ore deposits (how many mines you can build in that province). You would have a (limited) option to send prospectors which can discover more deposits (+X to max number of mines), and some technological advances (deep mining tech) would allow more mines. Forests can not be enlarged, so only trade is an option here in a long run.

 

Next land, that one is more complicated. I want a separation of agriculture, it's special. Every province has ALL unused land assigned as wheat farms from the start. You can increase efficiency of farming by technology, but over time the farming are should be reduced by cities and factories. So, you don't build "farms", by default everything minus number of factories & mines & houses is a farm.

 

Now the problem, what about sheep? There need to be wool, absolutely. So, there must be some option to assign some part of the land for sheep instead of wheat. How to do it? In addition, in reality (not that it needs to be done realisticly, it's just an example) sheep were shephered in areas where farming was not possible (mountains, hills). Not sure how to appoach this...

 

 

Labour

Right now it's quite simple, each building/factory requires X workers, based on shortage/abundance of labour the wages are set (the premise is they work overhours if needed and that the factory always run at identical efficiency), when the shortage exceeds x3 the option to build more factories is disabled (they can't work harder, at that point you have to bring more workers).

 

The population migrate between provinced based on wages in the province.

 

So far so good (OK, maybe the identical efficiency of factories regardless of workforce is a bit lame), but I have a problem with farmers. Farms are fixed, they require X farmers, everyone above is automaticly converted to labourers. Farmers are NOT effected by wages and you never pay them anything, they are FREE (it's to simulate the traditional agriar society, they are easy to please, require nothing and so on, and you want to make them convert to labourers). But it does not work so well with the wages system of labourers...

 

 

 

How to solve/approach those?


Europe1300.eu - Historical Realistic Medieval Sim (RELEASED!)


#14 TechnoGoth   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2788

Like
4Likes
Like

Posted 05 December 2013 - 11:39 AM

If population migrate based on wages then won't everyone leave the farming provinces to the place that has too many factories?  I would have thought there would be advantages to specialization of provinces, and historically job migration only happened in times are extreme hardship and not for a small wage increase.

 

I'm not sure about just building factories even if I don't have enough people for them.  Why is everyone willing to work triple overtime?  Would you work  18+ hours a day just because there are jobs available? During the industrial revolution people worked unpaid overtime because there were not enough jobs to go around rather than there being too many.  It makes more sense that efficiency or output drops at the factories.  If I build 3 factories but can only support 1 should get triple the goods at a slightly higher cost I should get a third from each. 

 

Land I think is easiest done with plots.  Each province has a fixed number of plots initially undeveloped.  There could be different base types of plots some suitable for farming others for mining or forestry.  Building a mine might require 1 plot, like wise a village might take 1 plot, but town might be 5 or a city 12.  Unused land is available for farming.  Each farmer can only work 1 plot and produce 2 food but as technology improves you can increase the number of plots a farmer can work and the amount of food they can produce per plot. So food production would be based on farm plots and farmers. 

 

You could always just make everyone who doesn't have a job in a mine or factory a farmer.    Or you could even have tradition bonuses, maybe people level up in a province for doing a job for long enough.



#15 Unduli   Members   -  Reputation: 986

Like
2Likes
Like

Posted 05 December 2013 - 12:41 PM

I think I will ignore transport completely, maybe make something extremely simple like Unduli said. Transporting stuff is simply not what's the core fun of that game.

 

 

The main difference between provinces could be the natural resources.

Factories is one thing, you can build these anywhere (as long as there is enough labour available) but each province will have a different set of ores (coal, iron, tin, copper), forests (wood), pits (clay). Also farming, but that's a separate can of worms.

 

I think resource deposits should have 2 parameters: richness (how much stuff one mine can dig here; forest should not have this variable?) and size of ore deposits (how many mines you can build in that province). You would have a (limited) option to send prospectors which can discover more deposits (+X to max number of mines), and some technological advances (deep mining tech) would allow more mines. Forests can not be enlarged, so only trade is an option here in a long run.

 

Next land, that one is more complicated. I want a separation of agriculture, it's special. Every province has ALL unused land assigned as wheat farms from the start. You can increase efficiency of farming by technology, but over time the farming are should be reduced by cities and factories. So, you don't build "farms", by default everything minus number of factories & mines & houses is a farm.

 

Now the problem, what about sheep? There need to be wool, absolutely. So, there must be some option to assign some part of the land for sheep instead of wheat. How to do it? In addition, in reality (not that it needs to be done realisticly, it's just an example) sheep were shephered in areas where farming was not possible (mountains, hills). Not sure how to appoach this...

 

 

Labour

Right now it's quite simple, each building/factory requires X workers, based on shortage/abundance of labour the wages are set (the premise is they work overhours if needed and that the factory always run at identical efficiency), when the shortage exceeds x3 the option to build more factories is disabled (they can't work harder, at that point you have to bring more workers).

 

The population migrate between provinced based on wages in the province.

 

So far so good (OK, maybe the identical efficiency of factories regardless of workforce is a bit lame), but I have a problem with farmers. Farms are fixed, they require X farmers, everyone above is automaticly converted to labourers. Farmers are NOT effected by wages and you never pay them anything, they are FREE (it's to simulate the traditional agriar society, they are easy to please, require nothing and so on, and you want to make them convert to labourers). But it does not work so well with the wages system of labourers...

 

 

 

How to solve/approach those?

 

 

Actually, I think transportation adds depth but its up to you. Transportation let you decide optimal place to put factory (proximity to market and supply)

 

For mining, you might also consider mining deeper with more cost as it may become viable in time (like it was in peak in oil prices)

 

For farming, you may consider adding pollution (urban and factory related) affecting farm output. And for default farm , it is not realistic if there won't be enough people to sustain them. If I were you, I'd rather introduce "meadow" for sheep as well and make it default instead of farm.

 

And for labour, farm output ie wheat is a commodity as well and a survival one, so you simply can't convert population to all workers, as wage is a function of "wheat" in this era.

 

 

Btw, better take a look at Harris - Todaro model (glad I had enough thanks to getting "Development Economics" 4 times :) ) , it gives you some ideas

 

Actually why not read an entire "Development Economics" book :) , I unintentionally got many for my game project.



#16 Acharis   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 3897

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 05 December 2013 - 01:01 PM

"During the industrial revolution people worked unpaid overtime because there were not enough jobs to go around rather than there being too many." - I think unemployment was more of a XX century thing. Plus, a society that makes 4 year old children work 14 hours a day does not sound like one with too much spare workforce...

Anyway, the gameplay dictates that the player has a shortage of workers and needs to struggle to allocate them as best as possible. Unemplyment would not be playable.

 

"If I build 3 factories but can only support 1 should get triple the goods at a slightly higher cost I should get a third from each." - But then the gameplay would degenerate. You have 3 workers, you bulit 3 factories and then... you can't do anything beside waiting for population growth to give you +1 worker. I don't see it being playable...

 

"You could always just make everyone who doesn't have a job in a mine or factory a farmer." - Well, that's almost how it works now, but the opposite. Everyone who can't have a farmer job becomes a labourer. That's assuming fixed ratio (1 farmer per 1 plot of land). But I wonder if it wouldn't be better to have it non linear (5 farmers per 5 plots = 5 grain, 2 farmers per 5 plots = 4 grain), it would allow gradual conversion of farmers to labourers...

 

 

My general point is that there are 2 classes of people, villagers and citizens. Villagers (farmers) live in villages, you don't need to provide houses for them (they have these already) nor food and very low amount of consumer goods. Citizens (labourers) live in cities, you have to provide them housing, city infrastructure, food, heating during winter, a lot of consumer goods. Villagers are self sustainable (they produce what they need, they go to a nearby forest to gather wood they need and so on), citizens require a lot of effort, logistics and preparations.

 

I feel that maybe villagers/countrymen should be a separate clas of some sort. Then, if the labourers are far better of than they, they would start converting to labourers?

 

And that's before we think about educated people (like teachers). With the current system, when you build a university it will use up X labourers... One day they were working in mines and suddenly today they teach quantum physics :D It does not feel all right to me at all...


Europe1300.eu - Historical Realistic Medieval Sim (RELEASED!)


#17 swiftcoder   Senior Moderators   -  Reputation: 10242

Like
2Likes
Like

Posted 05 December 2013 - 01:22 PM

a society that makes 4 year old children work 14 hours a day does not sound like one with too much spare workforce...

And that's before we think about educated people (like teachers). With the current system, when you build a university it will use up X labourers... One day they were working in mines and suddenly today they teach quantum physics biggrin.png It does not feel all right to me at all...

It doesn't feel right, because I'm pretty sure it isn't right - though you may well decide to stick with it for gameplay reasons.
 
There have been very few civilisations with a significant labour shortage, and all of those are do to environmental factors that heavily limit maximum population (i.e. shortages of food during harsh winters or on small islands). For a society well on their way into an industrial revolution, such a shortage would be laughable.

Industrial revolutions even tend to vastly increase the available workforce, given that manufacturing previously performed by skilled craftsmen can now be handled by unskilled labour.


Tristam MacDonald - Software Engineer @Amazon - [swiftcoding]


#18 TechnoGoth   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2788

Like
2Likes
Like

Posted 05 December 2013 - 01:24 PM

I remember playing tropico several times and often a worker shortage was just that you're buildings stopped working efficiently and all you could do was turn off buildings or wait for your work force to grow in size.   You might also need to either hire expensive foreign workers or wait for your people to become educated enough to work at some buildings.  Since something like hospital required a university educated worker and you might not have any in your population so your hospital does nothing but waste money until someone graduates from university. 



#19 Acharis   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 3897

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 06 December 2013 - 01:54 AM


And for labour, farm output ie wheat is a commodity as well and a survival one, so you simply can't convert population to all workers, as wage is a function of "wheat" in this era.
Exactly. Food is critical and you need it first, so the player can't just go around depleting farms workforce. Maybe make farmers traditional like stubborn pops that stick to farming in excessive quantity, so the player want to convince/force them to switch the job but never will face shortage of them? I don't know...

 


Industrial revolutions even tend to vastly increase the available workforce, given that manufacturing previously performed by skilled craftsmen can now be handled by unskilled labour.
Yes... I like the concept of converting already existing population... But how exactly handle it?

 


I remember playing tropico several times and often a worker shortage was just that you're buildings stopped working efficiently and all you could do was turn off buildings or wait for your work force to grow in size.
I was thinking about Tropico model for a while as well. But there are 2 major incompatible characteristic.

First, in Tropico there is this INSANELY high pop growth rate, all this immigration and an option to order experts from abroad. You start at 50 pops and end up with 500. such huge growth would be very unrealistic for the industrial revolution era game.

Second, it's realtime, so if they worker has not reached the factory yet you don't sweat and just wait a bit longer. Now imagine turn based, you built a factory and the worker has not reached it yet next turn, you would start to sweat, think you did something wrong... Such system would not work that well in turen based game.

 

I can think of 3 solution for population:

1) Allow the player to "produce" population. In Imperialism you could produce infinite number of workers (by pressing a button) by spending 1 canned food + cloth + furniture. Althrough in practice you were capped by food available.

2) Give the player a lot of unused or not optimaly used population reserves (like farmers, craftsmen) that can be converted to desired workforce.

3) Make workers shortages non devastating, like make the factory efficiency formula non linear (1000 workers = 100% output, 500 workers = 80% output)


Europe1300.eu - Historical Realistic Medieval Sim (RELEASED!)


#20 Acharis   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 3897

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 16 December 2013 - 05:46 AM

Population & factories

 

I was thinking about it, tell me if it makes sense/if you have a better idea/if it should be altered. Also there are some questions.

BTW, I know it sounds like a communistic planned economy since the state pays all the wages and everything, but I concluded I want the player to have a lot of control, so I was willing to sacriface that part of realism.

 

 

Make everything (factories, mines, farms) "production structures". Instead to creating classes of population (labourers, miners, farmers) on province level let the population occupy a certain production structure and then those who are inside farm are farmers, inside factory labourers. Instead of wages calculated on province level make them separate for each production structure, those that have not enough workers will auto set high wages and those with a lot low wages (plus, the wage will depend in the player selected priorities, like "give more wages to coal miners" option would increase wages in all coal mines everywhere).

 

There would be a special category "unemployed", all new born in a province start here and then quickly start to find some job (there is no "delay" or "resistance to change occupation" for unemployed class, they all will try to find any job (inside a province) immediatelly).

 

Population would first migrate between provinces (based on the average wages in all production structures inside a province plus housing in a province) and the migrate inisde a province between production structures (much faster than changing a province).

 

Consumption

The money earned by population is spent on food and consumer goods (that you as government sell). I guees, if there is not enough/too expensive food it should reduce the population? But from which production structure? And there should be some "morale/happiness" (but for the whole nation, for a province or for each production structure separately)?

 

Farmers as a bit special category

Since I try to simulate the shift from agrarian to industrial society I think farmers should behave a bit different. Like, they need no housing (they use their own countryhouses, they don't need to rely on player build houses inside cities). Also they have low consumption of consumer goods (the assumption is they can do a lot for themselves in their villages or simply don't need a lot since they love to lead simple life). Therefore, farmers would be the least demanding class (they have always perfect housing, and halved consumer needs (except food) and are content with rather low wages).

 

Education?

I'm not sure how to fit literacy here. I plan 4 education levels (illiterate, basic, advanced, expert), you can increase these by building schools and universities. But how to relate this to population? I mean, farmers should be iliterate (no problem) but factory workers should be at least basic literate also there should be some advanced/expert engineers that supervise a factory (so 90% basic and 8% advanced, 2% expert would be optimal for example)? But how to do it? Add literacy levels to each "production structure"? Quite messy since there are migrations and changing jobs...


Europe1300.eu - Historical Realistic Medieval Sim (RELEASED!)





Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS