Well, the book (Life in a Medieval City) I am reading from states that the "king of textiles is wool". While it may not be the most common it is the best money maker, according to these guys anyhow.
I'm familiar with the book. It's a fairly good book, but it tends to over generalize and not clearly define things as exclusive or rare instances. They made a TV series of it, I think, but it got rather poor reviews from historians, which may or may not reflect badly on the series.
Mare Nostrum has a whole pottery line from workers to buildings, but the one thing about pottery is that it is really common right? And its probably really really cheap? In my research I haven't come across any hype about the production of pottery so I just assumed it was common enough not to warrant mentioning. I would class it under Tools or Trade Goods. However, I do have one idea. Just like with having to research Cotton, you could have to research Porcelain and Porcelain would take the place of Pottery if we had a pottery production line.
I fear, dear Kailric, (he said in his best beadle) that you're thinking like a modern man in the age of consumerism. Truth be told, pottery is only cheap nowadays because we have natural gas and petroleum. Back in
ye olden days, they had to chop down half a forest to make a batch of pottery. One run of a kiln represented the full year's work of about 20 people and would require the unbroken vigilance of two or three skilled workers to keep the kiln fire at exactly the right level, usually the master potter would go for three or more days without sleep. Then they had to let it cool for a week.
It was a miserable process where anything done slightly wrong resulted in the whole contents of the kiln shattering and the effort being wasted. So I assure you, no, they didn't think of pottery as cheap or throw-away goods. They thought it was so precious that they would save the broken pots and use the shards to scratch out notes or receipts. Often repairing an item several times before they consigned the item to the dung heap.
I highly recommend you search for "Living Treasures of Japan" and "Secrets of the Samurai Sword" on YouTube, even though they're about Japan, the methods are nearly identical as those used in Europe during the medieval period. After viewing those, you'll have a better idea of how labor-intensive these things could be.
Also of high luster (IMHO) is "Secrets of the Viking Sword", also on YouTube.
For Example, on the tech tree you have a few Trade Tech Options say Cotton, Porcelain, and Silk. When researched each would replace another Yield in your cities, Linen, Pottery, and Wool respectively. Potters would then make Porcelain, Weavers make Fine Cloth, and Tailors could make Silk Robes. You could only choose one of the Trade Techs and depending on your environment you would choose the best one.
Right now there is like only 4 main Money Making trade productions that being Barley/Ale, Wool/Coats, Cotton/Cloth, Grapes/Wine so the game could stand a couple more perhaps. The rest are either weapons, armor, tools, material, or food stuff which are needed for your Realm.
Some suggestions:
-Add a Silversmith to make silver ornaments
-Hemp to make Rope (possibly required to build ships)
-Flax to make Course Cloth
-Indigo makes Dye
-Luxury Goods
-Incense
And another thing I have thought of is how in Civ4 if you had access to certain goods it makes your population happy. Some kind of system like that could be added where the more exotic or rare goods you have for sale at local markets it would add bonuses. Perhaps increase Immigration or Fealty.
I'm thinking indigo wasn't a big player during Medieval times in Europe (at least in a "grown in Europe and North Africa" context) - but I certainly think dyes were important luxury goods that fetched a high price at the market. I'm pretty sure that indigo is an east Asian commodity, but the game's economy and industry is "symbolic" not "factual" in its representation, so I'd be willing to go with the indigo as long as we called it "woad"
I am toally on board with the idea of a silversmith.
One thing to consider is:
Silver + Silversmith = Silverware
but:
Silver + Silversmith + Porcelain-making tech = Limoges-style enamelware
Which was a very high-end luxury good in medieval times.
Porcelain is pretty much nothing more than "china" made outside China, there's no great secret to the making of it, it is just fired clay and glaze after all. It is more a matter of having skilled craftsmen with artistic talent. The bisque-ware of Dresden fame is a different beast, but from the same genus. I'm fairly certain that I remember seeing some very fine things in the medieval collection at the Louvre, but like any slap-dash sort of tour, I can't remember a damned thing I saw.
The way I see the economic mechanics in M:C is that they are a little confused.
I think furs (a forest good) to coats, and the hides (gained from cattle) to leather makes more sense. Two things with two different uses. Furs are luxury goods, leather goods (unless armor) are (as you say) just common trade goods.
BUT Hides + Dye + Monastery = Illuminated Manuscipts! A huge money-maker in medieval times.
I am all for adding more yields, but adding yields does rather create the need to give them a purpose.
So I propose:
1 Fur : 1 Coats (Although I have to point out that furs were usually traded as a raw resource, like silver; finished goods of fur and silver were almost always locally manufactured on demand for a specific client, at least until the age of mass production)
1 Hides : 1 Leather Armor
1 Flax : 1 Linen/Coarse Cloth (sold at the market to 1 generate culture)
1 Wool : 1 Cloth
1 Indigo/Woad : 1 Dye
1 Dye + 1 Wool = 1 Tapestries (sold at the market to 9 generate culture)
1 Dye + 1 Cloth : 1 Luxury Cloth (sold at the market to generate 3 culture)
1 Luxury Cloth + 1 Coat : 1 Luxury Clothing (sold at the market to generate 9 culture)
1 Hemp : 1 Rope
1 Rope + 1 Cloth : 2 Sail cloth
1 Silver : 1 Silverware (sold at the market to generate 3 culture)
1 Clay + 10 Wood : 1 Porcelain (sold at the market to generate 9 culture)
1 Silverware + 1 Porcelain : 1 Luxury Silverware (sold at the market to generate 9 culture)
I suggest that there be a choke of some kind to keep the culture from exploding out of control, such as: a common peasant worker cannot manufacture luxury goods, and a specialized unit can only produce 3 per turn (not 6) of the luxury item.
Of course, all that creates the need for new buildings:
An ENAMELLER'S HOUSE to make Enamelware/Luxury Silverware
A FULLERY to make Luxury Cloth
A HECKLING SHOP to make Linen
A KILN (requiring a Master Potter) to make Porcelain
A ROPEWALK to make Rope
A RUGMAKER'S HOUSE to make Tapestries
A TAILOR'S HOUSE to make Luxury Clothing
A SAIL-MAKER'S HOUSE to make Sail Cloth
A SILVERSMITH'S HOUSE to make Silverware
The city screen is already approaching maximum density, so let's discuss how we can avoid having it becoming overly confusing. I don't have a strong belief in the usefulness of democracy in instances like this. A two-tiered resource bar would solve a fraction of the problem, but the real issue is the fixed positions of the building icons in the city screen.
So, if it is doable, I'm suggesting that certain buildings only be available in certain types of city and that each city type have its own specific city-screen.
So let's theorize that luxury goods can only be produced in the capital city, so that makes these items all "late game" items. Which may be a good thing.
Do you have a source to that claim or is it unionist propaganda?
*** begin performance ***
Sir, he said with mock sincerity, you injure me... me? A Unionist? Never! My people are descended from Hywel Dda! We Vycchani have a long, honorable history of being contrary to English ideas. Although, I must confess that my line is tainted by relation to that great liar Geoffrey of Monmouth. Oh, the shame...
***end performance***
Actually I have two sources that I use for most medieval period religious topics:
The Barbarian Conversion: From Paganism to Christianity (pub. 1997) by Richard Fletcher and
The Catholic Encyclopedia (pub. 1907-1912) by divers hands. If those sources fail me, I reach for
Who's Who of World Religions (pub. 1991) by John R. Hinnells (ed.). But when I really want to get an argument going, I reach for
The Marriage of Likeness: Same-Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe (pub. 1994) by John Boswell or
James the Brother of Jesus: The Key to Unlocking the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls (pub. 1997) by Robert H. Eisenman. Oh, the hours of misery I have caused my religious-minded friends....
You are talking about the elite. I'm talking about the common man working the field. Those are two entirely different people and history books are about the elite. It's rare that we have information about the non-elite, but we do know that there can be a mismatch. For instance once Norway turned to Christianity, in history books everybody turned christian. However we do have one source, which tells of a problem the army had. They were ordered to ensure people had turned christian and they had. That's what they could see. However they noticed they had a problem. They were in town A, which were christian, but town B was not. They went to B and it was christian when they arrived, but then A was no longer christian. This made them go back and arrived at christian A, but then B was no longer christian. It's something like that and it really shows that the minds of who wrote the history books at the time had a great mismatch with the minds of the people.
You're totally right, or course. The early church didn't concern itself with the peasants. In fact--although I have never seen an offical document stating it--I am convinced that in early times the Church held that peasants, like all livestock, did not have souls. I recommend
A History of Heaven (pub. 1998) by Jeffrey Burton Russell if you're really interested in how the early Church viewed Heaven and who would be going there.
There were several forces that changed the policies of the Church regarding peasantry, one of the biggest being Millennialism. Starting about 900, there was a sort of panic that began to spread as a number of "signs" seemed to indicate the "end times" were starting. The Muslim expansion into Europe, the Vikings, and more. It built to a fevered pitch that resulted in the unofficial schism of the Catholic Church into a "high church"--which concerned itself with kings (corrected from
kinds in edit) and the like--and a "low church"--which was run by crack-pot lay preachers that roamed the land like a pestilence of locust stirring up the peasants causing all manner of mischief (including the so-called "Albigensian Heresy"). Aggravated by things like the failure of the Crusades, the Anni Pluvii (1201-1203) and the Black Death (1348-50), it results in all sorts of weirdness, like the Inquisition, witch hunts,
Malleus Maleficarum, and numerous other crimes agains humanity....
You don't need a debug version of windows, just a debug version of the crashing application, or in this case the crashing dll. If you follow
the Modwiki guide you can get a debugger running and see where it crashes. If you install visual c++ 2010, you can just use the project file at git and you only need to do step 1 and you don't even need the makefile in that step. Step 6 tells how to get it to tell you what happened when it crashed.
The only thing in git, which will not work out of the box is the makefile. At the top of the file it has
Code:
TOOLKIT=C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual C++ Toolkit 2003
PSDK=C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft SDKs\Windows\v7.0A
Correct the path, which is presumably removing (x86)
If you run the game with the debugger attached, it will tell you what went wrong when it goes wrong.
The problem is that the version of Microsoft Visual C++ Express Edition that is currently available is the 2012 version, not the 2003, 2005, 2008 or 2010 version... and it's a 3.4 GB download >_<
So I am hesitant to install it as it
may be incompatible with the 2003 Toolkit.
I will be offline for a few days and that will explain a lack of answers in the near future. However somebody else might answer in the meantime
I can wait... I have a year to burn....
