Economics 101 Thread

Users who are viewing this thread

On the topic of economy, I find it remiss if I don't mention smithing and the lost opportunity it could have provided instead to custom troops. Also, it bears discussing the silliness of being able to hire a fully equipped soldier for a fraction of his gear value.

On the first, a blacksmith ought to be able to craft armor. Further, having designed custom weapons and armor, we ought to be able to field house troops with those equipment. That would really bring out an optimal use for smithing. In its current form, it's really just a gold generator and a boring one at that.

With regard to the second, gear prices are just ridiculously high whereas recruiting costs are so low and recruits are so plentiful. This means that as long as we win some battles, there's really no downside to losing. It's just a simple matter of running around and hiring recruits again.

Also, the high cost leads to smithing as a viable (albeit boring) means of gold generation. The other alternative would be to constantly fight but that gets dull too.

Considering that it would be pointless investing so much into an economy simulator if the game was merely designed to be a medieval FPS, I'd like to think that's not the plan (i.e. TW doesn't want it to be merely an FPS) in which I'd like to ask, well then why's diplomacy so crap? Why is there nothing else to do but fight?

As for the time value of money, it should not have as big an impact on Calradia as it does our world since their currency is not fiat. The gold standard is more stable and I really don't think it adds any value to introduce inflation. Unless of course we're talking about being able to loan money. That would be really nice.


Adding this in, here rather than in a new thread or report, as @SadShogun has looked in on this and knows the topic well.

Caravan discrepancy: mid-game, town notables' caravans are up to 50 troop count. player-made caravans are fixed at 30.

Towns do not rationalize the Meat/Hides price with what Livestock prices are, and should. Because...

A player can, without simply wanting the materials created and often at great added value, purchase local Livestock and render that down, reselling the Meat and/or Hides. Costing no time or money other than the Livestock price. If the player can do that, the Town should. It's almost embarrassing to see Pravend with 2 Tanneries, over a 100 Hogs on the market at 30-ish, and be demanding Meat in the high 30's and Hides near 3 figures.

related issue: created materials (Charcoal from Wood) (Hides and Meat from rendering) bear no "value price" for purposes of gaining Trade Skill xp. Those almost certainly should be assigned such based on ratio of production and current market value of the feedstock.
yet more:
Almost certainly, the excessively low price of needed-to-consume goods that attracts the caravan locust horde to ruin a town can be managed by an adjustment to the basis for Sell Price setting. In that, if an item is called by the town for consumption each day cycle, that quantity in some small multiple should be deducted from the current market quantity of that item *in the calculation of how Sell Price is set*. No, not sequestered as that would add a process to the day cycle. (AFAIK that's only for workshops currently) But the selling price that the market would start each trading day at a value some amount higher, proportional to coming demand, to act as a marginal dissuader to buyers.
If you want to get fancy, this is where you put in the "some goods keep longer than others" effect, as shorter storage life could justify a lower multiple of the deducted quantity.
Simple Saying of Same: If a town will call for 28 units of grain per game day, then a 4x multiple for such a vital and storeable foodstuff is used and the town will set the current Sell Price for grain based on the (current market quantity of grain in units - 4x28 units). If the town actually had 200 grain, the Buy Price would remain as is calculated. The Sell Price would be based on as if the quantity was only 88 ( = 200 - 4x28 ) and be pushed higher than it is now.
Flaw in this idea: if the current market calculations only seeks a "current price basis" and then applies a surcharge and deduction to get Buy and Sell prices, then it would take one more line of calculation to implement the above.


yet more:
Whoever informed @MArdA TaleWorlds in the process of addressing the linked ticket regarding "intentionally" not reconciling produced materials prices for purposes of Trade Skill xp was, I am sad to say, unjustified in that approach. It's flawed at a fundamental economic level to not address such. Even within the game as is, the sale of a produced good *is* influenced by the Trade Skill of the seller as a decrement to the Sell Price Penalty, and the feedstock item is conversely benefited by a decreased Buy Price Penalty in the case of a player manually reconciling the local market balance.
Whether the process -should- bear Trade xp is a game choice as to what behaviour to reward. I can say that's a mistake and you can disagree. But... Whether the process should happen, by every market town, every day cycle? That's what is needed. And doing so sets market value difference between the pieced-out value of the produced item based on the local buy price of the feedstock item. And if you do that, and it happens to reward a player with a profitable trade -even after the market has reconciled recently- ? Then sure, give them xp too.

link to said Ticket, here:
Top Bottom