IOT Organisational and Discussion Thread

[Thorvald of Lym]

Marmot Developer's Diary #3.14159

Oikonomia

The regression of post-IV installations into wargames has been theorized as due an economic system that doesn't really allow for anything else. We've decided to revolutionize state spending with the most holistic model yet! We know how frustrating it can be trying to allot _x cash to _y trucks to ship _z goods, and are happy to announce that the nitty-gritty has been streamlined, leaving the player to focus solely on the national budget. Each country has a rating on a nine-point scale for Food, Health, Housing, Employment, Personal Income, Consumer Goods, Public Services, Law & Order, Environment, Civil Rights, Education, and Emergency Preparedness. Combined with roleplay and responses to random events, these ratings inform Political Strength, Citizen Satisfaction, and Foreign Relations.

But these are merely your feedback! The actual budget is comprehensive and fully customizable: we give you your revenue, and you determine how it's spent! Remember, though, that everything's interconnected, and the strength of one sector can affect the performance of others. It'll be crucial to re-evaluate financial priorities as your population grows (or shrinks!)

Spoiler :

PRODUCTION
Agriculture - Food for the people
Manufacturing - Consumer goods
Construction - Urban development
Transportation - Roads, rails, &c.
Raw Materials - Resource extraction
Service - The intermediaries between everything
TRADE
Import - What you buy
Export - What you sell
MILITARY
Troops - The actual soldiers
Weapons - Their equipment
ECONOMIC AID
Clients - Direct investment into client states
Foreign Aid - General international aid
R&D
Civil - Domestic technologies
Military - Improving weapons and equipment
Space - Civilian space exploration and/or ballistic rockets, depending on other budget priorities
EMERGENCY
Emergency Funds - Reserve for responding to crises
GOVERNMENT
Admin/Bureau
Civ Police/Courts
Security Police
Health
Education
Environment
Public Works/Roads/Buildings
Unemployment/Pensions
Leisure/Entertainment

There's also a category for influence-pedalling that will be explained in detail in the Factions update.

So long for now!

 

[christos200]

Oikonomia

That's Greek.

 

[Sonereal]

This is a lot of effort for an April's Fool prank. Not as much as Youtube's, but still up there.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Never mind I think Terios already struck a pretty good economic model that allows focus on non-military pursuits while also not weighing down the player with tons of micromanagement.

 

[ilduce349]

Never mind I think Terios already struck a pretty good economic model that allows focus on non-military pursuits while also not weighing down the player with tons of micromanagement.

My biggest problem with it is it assumes government is solely responsible for infrastructure and education, but your right, its better then other simple economic systems (and even most complicated ones) that I have seen on this site.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Infrastructure pretty much is the domain of government. Governments almost always were the ones that raised money to build highways, dams, bridges, and railways, not private actors. This could change in the future given the practice of e-tolling making privatisation feasible but basic economics says that investment in infrastructure is definitely something the government should pursue.

Education tends to be governmental as well given that otherwise it's reserved for a very few people; public education grants it to the masses.

From a gameplay perspective it's basically the government subsidising these fields, not owning them. If left entirely private, healthcare (poor research), education (limited access) and infrastructure (poor roads) tend to eventually run into issues. The state can alleviate problems since it has more money than anybody else.

 

[ilduce349]

Spoiler Nitpicking about public vs Private :

Historically, until recently, none of them have been the subject of the federal government.

City infrastructure has, and always should be the responsibility of the municipal government, I'm a libertarian but I'm not going to deny that.

Highways were traditionally the responsibility of local governments as well, and historically they had tolls on them (required a fee to use) so they were actually profitable. Hence they could have been private.

dams are public and should be (but aren't) the responsibility of local governments.

Bridges have been both private and public in the past, and again, toll bridges are profitable.

Railways were initially private, but the government shortly after stepped in and crowded out the private sector.

I don't argue that the government shouldn't be involved in infrastructure, but larger infrastructure budget=better infrastructure is wrong. Government inefficiencies, intentional wasteful spending, and crowding out means that this wont always be the case.

I support charter schools, voucher programs and on the science front basic research grants. The private sector has historically failed in those 2 sectors, so public-private partnerships are ideal.

As for healthcare I would argue that private works a lot better then public, especially in the long run.
Wait times:

a 2010 Commonwealth survey found that 42% of Canadians waited 2 hours or more in the emergency room, vs. 29% in the U.S.; 43% waited 4 weeks or more to see a specialist, vs. 10% in the U.S.

Source: Wikipedia
Make sense as inefficient government policies typically lead to shortages, so it should be no surprise that Canada has longer wait times then America.

MRI Machines per 1 million people:

USA: 25.9
Canada: 5.7

Source: OECD Health Data, 2009.
By brother recently booked an MRI appointment, so I can say first hand that we have a shortage. He booked it in January, he gets his MRI May 30th and 3:40 am. Our MRI machines are on 24/7 and we still 4 month wait times. Again, government involvement typically leads to shortages.

As of 2007, 33% of pharmaceutical drugs used in Europe, where developed in the United States. Profit motive of developing drugs leads to more innovations in the pharmaceutical industry, so again not much of a surprise. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFWTCBjtZa0

However my main problem is:

Infrastructure - Investments here cover transfer payments, roads, factories, power grids, etc. and more or less determine the market capacity of your nation.

Factories and powergrids are normally private, and should always be private with no exception. Also transfer payments decrease market capacity (if your living off government benefits, your not producing anything, and I don't give me that BS about transfer payments increase aggregate demand, they decrease aggregate demand because of they take money out of the private sector to fund them.

I will fully admit that I am nitpicking here, but as I originally said

My biggest problem with it is it assumes government is solely responsible for infrastructure and education, but your right, its better then other simple economic systems (and even most complicated ones) that I have seen on this site.

 

[Tyo]

That said, putting in a "private sector" in IOT is unfeasible. It would be out of the player's direct control, and would more depend on the GM's arbitrary feelings on how the market should go in any country in any given turn.

Not to mention how much work that would be. And for a mechanic that is effectively random to the player yet can greatly influence their game.

Instituting a private sector is more trouble than it's worth and doesn't add any real fun to a game. That's why nobody bothers with it. At least, that's why I don't.

 

[Tee Kay]

This is a lot of effort for an April's Fool prank.

What prank?

 

[Kinich-Ahau]

That said, putting in a "private sector" in IOT is unfeasible. It would be out of the player's direct control, and would more depend on the GM's arbitrary feelings on how the market should go in any country in any given turn.

Not to mention how much work that would be. And for a mechanic that is effectively random to the player yet can greatly influence their game.

Instituting a private sector is more trouble than it's worth and doesn't add any real fun to a game. That's why nobody bothers with it. At least, that's why I don't.

I don't think it would be unfeasible; it can be crudely modelled by modifying the old GDP system.

 

[Tyo]

I don't mean it can't be done, I mean it isn't worth the trouble.

 

[ilduce349]

That said, putting in a "private sector" in IOT is unfeasible. It would be out of the player's direct control, and would more depend on the GM's arbitrary feelings on how the market should go in any country in any given turn.

One of my IOTs way back when had it. There was a market stability index. Above 50 and the country was in a boom increasing income, below 50 and the country was in a recession and would have decreasing income. I'd roll a D20 for every free market nation and subtract 10 from the dice. So if I rolled an 16, the MSI would increase by 6, rolled a 7, and the MSI would decrease by 3.

It wasn't perfect, but it was the most simple way of imitating a free market while not making it unbalanced.

 

[hoplitejoe]

Tyo is right, IOT is a game before it is a simulation. Random things that the player has no or little choice in affecting deciding the wealth of the nation may be realistic, but not fun.

 

[NedimNapoleon]

Well a capitalist market system would be fun, but if made correctly...Every IOT had de facto a command economy, where I order and command all segments of the economy. If a cold war game were to be made, it would be nice if one could choose between them, and that both have benefits and flaws.

 

[Double A]

It's a goddamn game. Play it or don't, just don't complain that it isn't realistic when it isn't trying to be.

 

[Sonereal]

It's a goddamn game. Play it or don't, just don't complain that it isn't realistic when it isn't trying to be.

Ilduce has a very strange uncanny valley range when it comes to economic mechanics. The more complex a game's economic mechanics, the more likely he is to hate it because a forum game's can never cross the valley to real until EVE Online becomes a forum game.

 

[ilduce349]

Ilduce has a very strange uncanny valley range when it comes to economic mechanics. The more complex a game's economic mechanics, the more likely he is to hate it because a forum game's can never cross the valley to real until EVE Online becomes a forum game.

Not necessarily, when its simple, I don't care about the economic system too much because its not trying to be realistic.

But generally when the economic system is complicated, solely because its trying to be more realistic then the simple ones, and it fails at that task, is when I start to hate it.

 

[Sonereal]

Not necessarily, when its simple, I don't care about the economic system too much because its not trying to be realistic.

But generally when the economic system is complicated, solely because its trying to be more realistic then the simple ones, and it fails at that task, is when I start to hate it.

Which it a problem of any economic ruleset, no? There hasn't been a realistic economic ruleset, many any of them approaching complexity are ones you hate and therefore are forced to use primitive systems no one on this board have touched in three years.

 

[ilduce349]

therefore are forced to use primitive systems no one on this board have touched in three years.

Which is why I haven't participated in an IOT for about that long

 

[Sonereal]

Which is why I haven't participated in an IOT for about that long

That's the problem. If the only economic mechanics acceptable to you are the embarrassing ones from three years ago and ultra-complex no-one-would-play rulesets, that doesn't give you a lot of middle ground. There's a reason we don't play games like those anymore.