C2C - Housing

@Hydro,
But it's right there in the description. Which to me means it's in the "coding".

I don't think the "actual" is always correct, such as with the case of the Berry Bushes and Mushrooms.

However in the code I put in I do not put in -:food: (which I could do) I only put in :yuck:.

With Disease and Pollution isolated and individually identified, I think we need to start looking at unhealth very clearly. It should simply mean Mortality Rate. Nothing more, nothing less.

So the unhealth from a common cold is actually probably not accurate. Rather, it should be an unhappiness (causes folks to be less capable and willing to work). But unhealth from stoning (the public kind ;) ) would be quite logical as it would indicate some added mortality rate.

However, the unhappiness from stoning is questionable. I think most people that attended the events found them entertaining... I suppose the family and friends of the criminal would be pretty upset with the authorities though...

1. A cold can still cause death. Especially with conditions are poor for recovery.

2. The unhappy is more about being fear of being stoned or put on the cross.
 
The unhappy is more about being fear of being stoned or put on the cross.
People don't generally refuse to go to work because they are afraid of their government. Quite the opposite really. Not saying that there shouldn't be a DOWN side from that fear, like perhaps revolutionary sentiment I suppose, but unhappiness results in protest and people are more reluctant to protest if they are afraid of the results of so doing.
 
People don't generally refuse to go to work because they are afraid of their government. Quite the opposite really. Not saying that there shouldn't be a DOWN side from that fear, like perhaps revolutionary sentiment I suppose, but unhappiness results in protest and people are more reluctant to protest if they are afraid of the results of so doing.

And revolutionary sentiment is supressed much the same way. Especially with cruzifiction. It was reserved for a few capital crimes and revolutionaries. Most others simply ended up rowing a galley. Was mostly a death sentence as well, but much more usefull for the navy ;)

Since views seem to differ quite a lot about that..maybe we should leave those buildings as they are :D A good a compromise as any, and less work.
 
@Hydromancerx

I noticed that houses provides gold. You decided to add them based on sim like game.

In every sim like game (ex Pahraoh) houses dont give gold before you build Tax Office

So we should remove gold from houses until you discover taxation and build tax office.

It is realistic, based on sim like games and resolve some part of too much gold problem in early game.

I understand that now it can be impossible to add bonuses to houses depending if city have tax office or not
so for now make :gold: bonuses depending of Taxation tech will be ok.

I think that entire bonuses from houses should be tech/other buildings dependent.
It will make city management more realistic. (the goal of housing existance)

EX

houses give unhealthy until discovery of sanitation and modern sanitation
 
@Hydromancerx

I noticed that houses provides gold. You decided to add them based on sim like game.

In every sim like game (ex Pahraoh) houses dont give gold before you build Tax Office

So we should remove gold from houses until you discover taxation and build tax office.

It is realistic, based on sim like games and resolve some part of too much gold problem in early game.

I understand that now it can be impossible to add bonuses to houses depending if city have tax office or not
so for now make :gold: bonuses depending of Taxation tech will be ok.

I think that entire bonuses from houses should be tech/other buildings dependent.
It will make city management more realistic. (the goal of housing existance)

EX

houses give unhealthy until discovery of sanitation and modern sanitation

I'm sure Joseph will have a view also, but my observation is that the too much gold problem isn't rally an early game problem anyway - it's much more a mid-game (classical->renaissance) problem, so I don't think this is really a justification that can be used for such a change.
 
@Koshlig

It is possible now add some bonuses to building dependent on others buildings in city? (something similar that we have now - additional bonuses from building depending on available techs )

Real reson is not gold problem but realism and city managemant.
 
@Hydromancerx

I noticed that houses provides gold. You decided to add them based on sim like game.

In every sim like game (ex Pahraoh) houses dont give gold before you build Tax Office

So we should remove gold from houses until you discover taxation and build tax office.

It is realistic, based on sim like games and resolve some part of too much gold problem in early game.

I understand that now it can be impossible to add bonuses to houses depending if city have tax office or not
so for now make :gold: bonuses depending of Taxation tech will be ok.

I think that entire bonuses from houses should be tech/other buildings dependent.
It will make city management more realistic. (the goal of housing existance)

EX

houses give unhealthy until discovery of sanitation and modern sanitation

The problem with that is then different houses would be exactly the same if the gold was taken away. I would rather leave them as they are. Think them more like Sim City 4 than Pharaoh.
 
Gold itself doesn't make much sense prior to coinage. Therefore, it makes sense this abstraction is employed for housing all throughout the eras anyhow.
 
Gold itself doesn't make much sense prior to coinage. Therefore, it makes sense this abstraction is employed for housing all throughout the eras anyhow.

Are you saying that nothing had worth before coins? I always though that gold represented the wealth of something. Not necessarily gold coins. Thus before coinage it could be value items such as beads or shells or just valuable belongings.
 
I'm saying nothing had 'objective' worth that could be measured in an overall volume as a currency system (in whatever form it is, be it shells, salt, coins, etc...) allows. Thus a National Treasury could not have been possible to equate to any relative values.
 
I wasn't referring to the Treasury building but the ability for a civilization to even have a trackable amount of gold before the invention of currency. It's just a fundamental issue in the game. No ability to keep a national debt either. It all makes Civ economy quite difficult to match to Real world simulation.
 
I wasn't referring to the Treasury building but the ability for a civilization to even have a trackable amount of gold before the invention of currency. It's just a fundamental issue in the game. No ability to keep a national debt either. It all makes Civ economy quite difficult to match to Real world simulation.
Real world economics are non trivial and often misunderstood.

Let me ask you a question:
You are a nation on a remote continent with only the animal spawns for company. You have just researched currency.
What does the gold in your treasury represent?
What is the meaning that you research at 100% and the gold in your treasury gets reduced?
 
Real world economics are non trivial and often misunderstood.

Let me ask you a question:
You are a nation on a remote continent with only the animal spawns for company. You have just researched currency.
What does the gold in your treasury represent?
What is the meaning that you research at 100% and the gold in your treasury gets reduced?

Although I am by no means an exptert in economics:
But even without contact with any other nation, you can have a currency and a measure of what something is worth.. A civ with 3 cities of alet´s say size 5-10 represents already quitea few people. And those can agree on certain standarts. Doesn´t matter what the currency standart is. Gold,coins, other metals, paper money, shells,gems. The important bit is the notion of having something that equals to the worth of things,without realy being worth anything in itself. You can have that even the measure of somethings worth without currency. But then things get complicated for the customers.
I mean: If you trade a sheep for 3 chicken, then both gain something: wool, eggs, and maybe meat. Same goes for services, tools, a house... but what good is a small piece of metal in itself? Especially gold and silver. With iron or copper coins you might at least matke something usefull with them.
It is only worth something as a acknowleged medium of trade, a currency.
Only then you can simply pay some coins for the chickens, and your trade partner can buy a sheep with it. And even better: you can sell a cow and use the money to buy your chicken and sheep in different places instead of having to find someone who got both to sell. Also more buying 7 chickens for your cow and then trying to get someone to buy 4 of them, because you don´t need more but only had a cow to trade in.
I agree that the concept of gold ingame is a bit flawed in a pre currency and by that, barter society. But I don´t see any alternative.
 
Although I am by no means an exptert in economics:
But even without contact with any other nation, you can have a currency and a measure of what something is worth.. A civ with 3 cities of alet´s say size 5-10 represents already quitea few people. And those can agree on certain standarts. Doesn´t matter what the currency standart is. Gold,coins, other metals, paper money, shells,gems. The important bit is the notion of having something that equals to the worth of things,without realy being worth anything in itself. You can have that even the measure of somethings worth without currency. But then things get complicated for the customers.
I mean: If you trade a sheep for 3 chicken, then both gain something: wool, eggs, and maybe meat. Same goes for services, tools, a house... but what good is a small piece of metal in itself? Especially gold and silver. With iron or copper coins you might at least matke something usefull with them.
It is only worth something as a acknowleged medium of trade, a currency.
Only then you can simply pay some coins for the chickens, and your trade partner can buy a sheep with it. And even better: you can sell a cow and use the money to buy your chicken and sheep in different places instead of having to find someone who got both to sell. Also more buying 7 chickens for your cow and then trying to get someone to buy 4 of them, because you don´t need more but only had a cow to trade in.
I agree that the concept of gold ingame is a bit flawed in a pre currency and by that, barter society. But I don´t see any alternative.
That is why I used a post currency example.
Yes, a currency makes trade between people considerably easier. But what does the gold in your treasury mean and what about its connection to research?
 
What does the gold in your treasury represent?
As we've researched currency, it does still depend on whether we would be using the civic or anything above it I'd envision. The currency itself can be established as anything at this point. Often, early currencies were simply some of the most in-demand resources around, like salt, and to some extent often still is where gold reserve still backs printed money (though that is a system beyond mere 'currency' itself really...)

But provided that's the case for these questions, I'd say that the 'gold' in the treasury represents a volume of the currency in circulation held by the central state. I understand that the volume of overall currency in the economy is subjective and may cause the value of our currency to vary (inflation) but I still see the held 'coin' as being what the state owns as opposed to what's held by private citizens. Thus the value of the actual currency itself is fairly subjective and the treasury is always a representation of its relative value rather than any kind of direct count.

When you research at 100%, you're spending your taxation income on your research efforts. Pay going back into your society via research grants/subsidies, hiring thinktank teams and in general facilitating the thinkers in your society, that does not always pan out into something profitable for society as a whole, thus you cannot count on that money going back into the coffers via taxation down the road, and at least for now, that taxation has been applied and is now used up by the state.

However, I'd think under a good strong economic setup, we'd see increasing overall economy values (deflation) from use of the other sliders such as research, culture, and espionage. Use of these should create an improved economic 'health' in your community (which we don't bother to measure right now in any way outside of using inflation/deflation to create better GAME balance) which could indeed create increased tax revenue over time.

So collecting 100% gold from your taxation and sitting on it, just allowing it to build up in your treasury, should create a rather quick decline in the overall health of the economy and lead to long term reductions in tax revenues. But if you're sliders are not 'taxing' per se, then any gold in the treasury isn't exactly harming the economy, its a result of a powerful and expansive economy that was so capable and productive that nobody really notices this portion of its overall efforts is being sat on by the state.

In fact, under this view, spending gold to 'hurry', or allocating taxation to purchasing all available labor sources in a city for a given project, should actually improve the economy overall, leading to DEflation rather than INflation. Again, the state is pouring money into its own economy here and thus employment and job values go up thus the state gains back much of it in taxes... this is basically 'the New Deal' effect.

Now, when we adopted a Central Reserve Banking system we adopted the capacity to be in-debt to a private lender. In fact, we pay interest on all money borrowed, and we start with a base of zero so we're betting on our economic growth to pay for this interest because all money IN the system HAS been borrowed! Its kinda nuts really but it works well to provide us with an ability to 'super-invest' without going into international debt (not to say that isn't another source of lending and borrowing also taking place - which sadly, civ doesn't have any function for. Between civs, gold is always gift or demand or tithe.) I see this as being poorly represented in Civ since it really represents the ability for a nation to go into the negative on gold, which we in the US are greatly in the negative to the point that pretty much all national income tax is doing nothing more than paying the interest rate on our economic debt to the Federal Reserve. The rest of what our government spends is stemming from sales, corporate and property taxation (and a number of other sources of revenue...)

We also allow our own people to purchase bonds which is another way of gradually borrowing against the economy itself, allowing the people as a whole to potentially benefit from positive economic growth. While they are hedged against loss since the interest rate is fixed, our state could end up profiting or losing out on these bonds depending on how the economy goes from the point of purchase.
 
But provided that's the case for these questions, I'd say that the 'gold' in the treasury represents a volume of the currency in circulation held by the central state.
So you hold it. And what you hold can't be in circulation. But research is equal when you are hoarding 100.000 gold compared to when you have an empty treasury if the slider is set to the same.

Looking at money can give you fast insights, but can also be a blindfold. What does the real economy consist of? Working people and streams of goods.
 
So you hold it. And what you hold can't be in circulation. But research is equal when you are hoarding 100.000 gold compared to when you have an empty treasury if the slider is set to the same.
Right. But that's because the sliders only represent allocation from this turn's taxations. (Truth be told, I think sliders should be allowed to go beyond 100% but that would just mean that we should just do away with 'commerce' or 'gold' and make all of one simply be the other.) So basically the game limits how much you can spend on science in a given turn.

Looking at money can give you fast insights, but can also be a blindfold. What does the real economy consist of? Working people and streams of goods.
I agree, thus the sliders represent how you're funneling taxation income streams.
 
Right. But that's because the sliders only represent allocation from this turn's taxations. (Truth be told, I think sliders should be allowed to go beyond 100% but that would just mean that we should just do away with 'commerce' or 'gold' and make all of one simply be the other.) So basically the game limits how much you can spend on science in a given turn.
It does, but science means real work/occupation by people, gold doesn't.

In general, national economies can't save (in a meaningful way). All work for the current progress of projects and research has to be done now, not 10 turns earlier or later.
 
Back
Top Bottom