Bay 12 Games Forum
Dwarf Fortress => DF Dwarf Mode Discussion => Topic started by: DrTank09 on December 28, 2016, 12:52:09 am
-
So I'm making an embark and I was thinking, how do I make it realistic that my dwarves are here and it came to me. they have to have money from me somehow and I can't be able to take it from them. I offer goods to pay for each dwarf on a yearly basis through the caravan on credit. I have 7 dwarves? well they come work with me and get paid a rate that is determined by their skills, proficiency, and what they are allowed to be made to do. Hazard pay? you cost an extra 200 dwarfbucks. You are a legendary miner? you cost an extra 50 dwarf bucks? You are an expert negotiator? you cost an extra 10% to the nearest 10 dwarf bucks.
any thoughts? I could use help balancing this and setting out the rates.
-
How would you pay them? With rooms, offices, ect. or giving them items?
-
Payment would be through goods sold to the traders at the "Offer tribute" value
If I owe my dwarves 6000 Dwarfbucks, I offer it as a tribute to the caravan.
Not having a room costs so much
having a nice room reduces my cost by so much etc.
the only people I don't have to pay for are the ones that are nobles, because they own the land.
-
get paid a rate that is determined by their skills, proficiency, and what they are allowed to be made to do.
(http://i.imgur.com/wFpfa1f.png)
-
interesting concept.
there was a dwarven economy, however it was removed due to it being REALLY problematic, so now dwarves basically live as the ultimate communists.
i like the idea of actually having to pay your dwarves as if they came from somewhere else and are now sending their money to their families back home
but what would they do with a <<+*gold crown*+>>? perhaps coins (which have no functional use due to said economy being off) could be used to pay your dwarves.
oh, or maybe if a dwarves family all lives at your fort you could dump the gold into a vault in their home and then forbid it (that way others couldent take it) so they could have this huge room filled with gold coins and gems like every dwarf wants
-
Lets not forget "who pays the money printers".
How much is worth smelting a stack of gold coins? The value of the coins minus the raw material? And then paying for raw material...
Thus, you can't actually pay people what they're worth if you want to function. You can't even pay them half of what they're worth.
And of course, raw material based jobs tend to kinda shaft miners as they generate less than ⛭ per job.
Perhaps accounting is most difficult part of this, though.
But instead of dwarfbucks...Perhaps things that make them happy and satisfy their needs? i.e. your most productive mason shouldn't suffer under a lack of abstract thinking.
-
Lets not forget "who pays the money printers".
How much is worth smelting a stack of gold coins? The value of the coins minus the raw material? And then paying for raw material...
Thus, you can't actually pay people what they're worth if you want to function. You can't even pay them half of what they're worth.
And of course, raw material based jobs tend to kinda shaft miners as they generate less than ⛭ per job.
Perhaps accounting is most difficult part of this, though.
But instead of dwarfbucks...Perhaps things that make them happy and satisfy their needs? i.e. your most productive mason shouldn't suffer under a lack of abstract thinking.
the american economy is based on debt, banks give out loans by magically assigning worth to pieces of cotton paper, people use that money to make stuff which they sell for more money, and give the money back to the bank.
thus with this system, theres always somebody in debt, and its the people in debt that make the world go round.
really, to make a realistic economy in DF would require the overseer to basically be commander data or some other advanced intelligence who is capable of balancing debt across the entire world to ensure it works right, thats why the dwarven economy didnt work, because it was so fragile because it was realistic, and a single mind who is trying to keep track of many things just cant handle it.
IRL we have many minds who are dedicated to making the economy work, as well as the individuals who are careful with how they spend, and thus it is able to function (most of the time)
in DF communism works because everybody works as hard as they can despite everybody getting "paid" "equally" and thus the industry works wonderfully instead of everything going into depression because everybody is too lazy to do their job right because "why should i care if i make 5lbs of plump helmets or 500lbs of plump helmets if im gonna get paid the same?"
i do like the idea of dwarves getting paid for their work, but how do you introduce an economy to a fort?
when a fort is settled everyone is working together to build a place to live, of course they are going to pool all their resources together for their own survival, but what about once everything is set up? how do you divide all the resources fairly? how do you make it so that people get paid for their work? what value does the currency have? WHY does the currency have value?
im just sitting here trying to think about how this could work, because i really want it to, but im absolutely stumped.
it would be really nice if there by chance happened to be somebody with a degree in whatever analyzing economies is called was on these forums, then we could just ask them
-
Interesting. Perhaps if you didn't want to throw away all the wealth you'd be producing, you could give each dwarf a vault, outside his/her bedroom/dining quarters' boundaries, but near enough that one could roleplay it as part of their room? And when they die, it all gets passed along to their tomb (maybe by bridge), sealed away forever. When someone is appointed to certain positions, or becomes an innkeeper, you could roleplay it as having purchased that position, taking away some of their trove in exchange for ownership of the inn/library/temple/etc., and that being the dwarf's sole duty. Payments could be made by stockpile links, although it could potentially take some time; maybe by some insane minecart mechanism instead.
Just idle suggestions rather than any real advice :P Although a legendary miner has got to be worth more than 50 dwarfbucks, especially if you're literally sitting on a gold mine, as my forts several times have been. Perhaps the pay should be as percentage of fort GDP?
Keeping all the items hoarded should also (I think?) hurry your fort to prominence within your civ and infamy among your enemies.
-
Percentage of fort's GDP does run into the issue of artifacts, designed buildings and artifacts in designed buildings (Up to 24*120*item value*material value....).
Kinda weird motivation issues there to keep wealth low, to not mention "we can't afford to link this mechanism to that bridge".
-
I remember reading about the dwarven economy, how dwarves would generate cash based on their assigned/skilled job, would be 'taxed' on their living quarters, would hoard coins along with their other belongings, would be jailed for not having enough coin to pay for their lodging, and then your whole fort:
- Starves because that was the only farmer
- Dies of infection because that was your doctor
- Stops working because that was your brewer
- Something Something Tantrum Spiral
- ? ? ? ?
- Profit! (For the accountant)
Not sure if want...
-
Woah, you guys went way deeper than I expected, I enjoy all the enthusiasm. Maybe I should be a bit clearer on how the economy I was thinking of worked.
We cam lump all non skill labors like hauling and construction into one group. The cost of this labor is the base for every dwarf, lets say it is 10df. The dwarves come to the fort seeking labor, if we give them a different job, that cost includes this one.
so now we add other things to the mix and we can go as deep or as shallow as we want to.
Mining pay equals base (*/+) skill (*/+/-) any premium we decide to add (Such as if the dwarf is a high or low negotiator compared to our noble, hazard pay, dreams?
Mining base pay is going to be an additional 15 base with the miner being a skill of 10 so he is worth 150df at this point (miner base*skill) and we have decided that hazard pay is going to be 50 to top it off.
This miner costs 200
Lets look at a gem cutter that we hired
She is a gem cutter that we didn't really need, but because her dream was to create a work of art and we are letting her do that, she gets a negative premium.
Her cost is going to be a base of 20 and a skill of 3 so 60df. Her premium is that she is terrible at negotiation and we don't need the gem cutter so she gets a minus 10 df and is now a 50df worker
Lets add the housing to it now.
really expensive dwarves may cost a pretty dwarfbuck, which is what we want because that means that they are doing a great job at whatever they are doing or some such. We can throw in negative deductions by adding in the type of housing they have?
this is auto calculated for us through room quality. Urist has a modest quarters, that has a numeric cost of 100df by the programing.
now Urist McMiner costs 100
We own everything in the fort, so by giving this to the mountainhome, we are actually removing our ownership of the item, which is the real reason why we don't see it. It is our pay to the dwarves so why should we be able to keep it? Any other items the dwarves take while we are working are bonuses that have been given to them for some reason or another, similar to the way that our own employers might have a bonus check or raffle which explains why then lisa got the golden tiara... that b!t$# she wins everything and doesn't even do half the work I do.. and yet she won the tv at the thanksgiving party?
In any case, if we can't afford the dwarf, they strike and we can't use them except for hauling. Similar to a lay-off when a company can't afford to pay for a hire. Those we have invested in, such as the ones with awesome homes, don't have to worry about loss of work.
everything can be managed by dt by making a custom profession for dwarves that we contract or by simply saying that we are allowing these labors on the dwarf no matter what.
-
Economy is planned to make a comeback eventually, right?
-
Yeah, TodayOne has mentioned it, but I don't remember when. Its usually talked about as such: "when TodayOne puts the economy back in"
-
What about military and entertainers? I may not value a great poet/speaker/negotiator more than an immigrant soaper, but from their perspective they're triple-great and lot more valuable than hauler peasant.
And military produces no goods.
In any case, if we can't afford the dwarf, they strike and we can't use them except for hauling. Similar to a lay-off when a company can't afford to pay for a hire. Those we have invested in, such as the ones with awesome homes, don't have to worry about loss of work.
If dwarf produces more than they are worth, not affording them isn't going to be likely.
Still, issue is that lot of jobs are going to be done only at setup, once, etc - you'll end up producing food, booze, trade goods (to pay, at least) and maybe clothes. So, going to pay the rest hauler pay, even if they're idling their days away?
Now, it means that stuff like every citizen getting royal rooms isn't possible...But what about fallbacks?
So what happens to the legendary miner who dug out the fortess on their own, including their royal room?
What happens to the legendary woodcutter who provided the materials for the fortress standing over landscape and wood for the forges beneath?
They can't pay, so...Move out? When they can simply make their own legendary rooms?
Which is why nobles jailed and hammered those, I suppose. Either way, feels like there's some injustice here.
-
Any other items the dwarves take while we are working are bonuses that have been given to them for some reason or another, similar to the way that our own employers might have a bonus check or raffle which explains why then lisa got the golden tiara... that b!t$# she wins everything and doesn't even do half the work I do.. and yet she won the tv at the thanksgiving party?
Yeah... damnit, Lisa!
-
Hello all, first time posting in the forum but long time forum follower and DF player. Steel Jackal posted it'd be great if someone with a degree in analysing economies was following this post and you could just ask him your questions... Well... I gotta phd in studying economies and such (aka, economics). Ask away!
As a general point, for there to be a realistic like economy, dwarves will need some realistic preferences, or wants. They also will have to value leisure and have a method of deciding if they want to work in order to get 'stuff' or not work and enjoy 'stuff'. There also has to be a more realistic scarcity of goods which would mean a much different method of production. After all, under the present version, one dwarf can easily produce enough food for a hundred and have left overs for trade. All this requires is a 20x20 tile room and time... And last, even if dwarvish thinking and working can be modeled more realistically, there is no guarantee an economy can be successfully built and 'work' consistently or reliably. After all, even in the real world, crazy things happen, like hyperinflation, that would easily ruin a fort in a bizarre way.
I would really love to see a realistic economy, but honestly that is asking a lot of Toady! If he succeeded, hed likely get next years Nobel prize in economics... That said, with player input in defining preferences, scarcity, etc., a simple flexible model could be pretty easily developed that would be a good mimic and fun...
-
I would put a dwarf's worth based on their skill levels, and use their personal room value as means of compensation.
We have a way to see if a dwarf has no skill, dabbling of legendary.
How should they be compensated for this?
We can also see room value, and use the properties of those.
Room size, smoothed natural vs constructed blocks. Building materials. Furniture quality. Amount of funiture.
You can even go further to match specific likes of individuals.
For military, skills on weapons, armor user skills can be used to determine material and quality via uniform and specified item.
Let's take a carpenter with +5 skills from embark.
Do you expect that carpenter to keep on going when he hits legendary skill level?
Can he afford to "retire" from carpentry after making 30 masterful beds? 50? 100?
If for this example, we use number of masterful beds, will apprentice carpenters only be allowed to make barrels and buckets until a certain level of carpentry?
As for miners, reaching legendary can give them the option to retire to full military training where they can receive better quality weapons / armors as a progression.
Doctors, Mechanics, and others upon reaching legendary can retire to scholarship where they just do not labor except ponder and perhaps write.
-
I always thought dwarves were paid with alcohol.
-
If dwarf produces more than they are worth, not affording them isn't going to be likely.
Still, issue is that lot of jobs are going to be done only at setup, once, etc - you'll end up producing food, booze, trade goods (to pay, at least) and maybe clothes. So, going to pay the rest hauler pay, even if they're idling their days away?
Now, it means that stuff like every citizen getting royal rooms isn't possible...But what about fallbacks?
So what happens to the legendary miner who dug out the fortess on their own, including their royal room?
What happens to the legendary woodcutter who provided the materials for the fortress standing over landscape and wood for the forges beneath?
They can't pay, so...Move out? When they can simply make their own legendary rooms?
Which is why nobles jailed and hammered those, I suppose. Either way, feels like there's some injustice here.
Here is the thing, if we treat the game as we are the company and the only stuff we can actually see is the stuff we own, then this system can work. The legendary housing we give to dwarves isn't just payment for a short period of time, it is like tenure. We are building this nice room for them to show that hey, no matter what, I'm going to put you to use, and if not you have earned this. It is an employee reward. Even if I'm not paying you anymore because you have done your job, this is your house and retirement. If you decide that you want to start over with a new skill because you are getting bored and even though I no longer need a legendary miner, I'll let you start over somewhere else.
If room value exceeds dwarf cost, then no offering to the mountainhome required.
So yes, we have dwarves idling their lives away because we don't need them. They are just like any other retail and manufacturing job if you have ever had one. When the work runs out, you cant just send your employees home they require money and they have entered into a contract with you and you have already paid their salary. So what do you do when your clients have no orders? you clean, you train them on new things, you have meetings and strategize.
So yes, there will be idling, but idling isn't just idling in this game, its baby making, relationship making, pondering, training, etc and this increases the value of the dwarf if you are going to say need that legendary wood cutter, but you are training him up as a stone smoother as well and so now if you want him to do both, you have to pay him for both jobs and each skill rate. otherwise, its just the one skill that is being paid for.
I'm not looking for a super realistic economy, just a simple employer employee economy. I make circuit boards for a living and regardless of whether I am making multimillion dollar panels with multiple thousand dollar boards on them, I get paid the same.
The difference between myself and the dwarves is three-fold.
1. They are salaried and can not be paid as wage labor, which requires a contract of responsibilities and demands from the employee and employer.
2. Their employer compensates them with room and board based on a number of factors.
3. They can not be fired. If the company runs out of one type of work or can't pay the cost of a dwarf's skillset, then they must function without that dwarf's skill.
Hello all, first time posting in the forum but long time forum follower and DF player. Steel Jackal posted it'd be great if someone with a degree in analysing economies was following this post and you could just ask him your questions... Well... I gotta phd in studying economies and such (aka, economics). Ask away!
As a general point, for there to be a realistic like economy, dwarves will need some realistic preferences, or wants. They also will have to value leisure and have a method of deciding if they want to work in order to get 'stuff' or not work and enjoy 'stuff'. There also has to be a more realistic scarcity of goods which would mean a much different method of production. After all, under the present version, one dwarf can easily produce enough food for a hundred and have left overs for trade. All this requires is a 20x20 tile room and time... And last, even if dwarvish thinking and working can be modeled more realistically, there is no guarantee an economy can be successfully built and 'work' consistently or reliably. After all, even in the real world, crazy things happen, like hyperinflation, that would easily ruin a fort in a bizarre way.
I would really love to see a realistic economy, but honestly that is asking a lot of Toady! If he succeeded, hed likely get next years Nobel prize in economics... That said, with player input in defining preferences, scarcity, etc., a simple flexible model could be pretty easily developed that would be a good mimic and fun...
The last bit of that quote is what I am attempting to achieve. A mock economy that is controlled through player input. We set the rules for ourselves, we can tweak them. This game is all about challenging yourself to see how things go any way, right?
The thing is I was trying to figure out was a realistic cost for dwarves. I already know the system I want to use but wanted input on costs. quality jobs require a higher compensation because they have a higher pay output on average.
Should I just average the costs of every item that could be produced by a dwarf with this skill set and allow a dwarf with a medium skill in the profession to ply his trade to see the number of crafts made over the course of a month, multiply that by a fraction for royalties, then multiply that by 12 to get a yearly salary?
one fairly cut gem could be worth 2-60db. The dwarf doesn't care because it is not his property. He was hired to do a job and that was cutting gems. the goods produced doesn't matter to him because there is no way to see what the global economy outside of the embark is. We have to assume that he came to us, plying his trade and that his guild requires proper compensation at a set rate.
So, because the difference in goods produced could be as much as 2-25db for a bloodstone or 60-240db for a green diamond, a scale needs to be put in place for every dwarf. Gems are very valuable, but they are not always abundant, it would be up to the player to decide whether or not they want to wait for their rough gem stocks to fill up before hiring a cutter. Maybe they hire the him as a gem setter instead while he waits for gems to pile up?
The only compensation we can really give them is a room, armor, pets, time to form relationships, or a job they want to learn, or a craft they want to make. If I don't need to sell something to pay for the dwarves, I can either stockpile it or think of it as a bonus for a dwarf I like.
Let's take a carpenter with +5 skills from embark.
Do you expect that carpenter to keep on going when he hits legendary skill level?
Can he afford to "retire" from carpentry after making 30 masterful beds? 50? 100?
If for this example, we use number of masterful beds, will apprentice carpenters only be allowed to make barrels and buckets until a certain level of carpentry?
As for miners, reaching legendary can give them the option to retire to full military training where they can receive better quality weapons / armors as a progression.
Doctors, Mechanics, and others upon reaching legendary can retire to scholarship where they just do not labor except ponder and perhaps write.
The dwarves never retire, but if I don't need them, they get reassigned to a different department. Either that or we can say that once they hit a certain age limit, or a certain amount of time working for us, they are then allowed to do something else. maybe my miner wanted to create a great work of art someday. He's been working with me for 50 years, its time for him to retire. He loves malachite and earrings. I'll let him make malachite earrings until he has, and then once he is legendary there, maybe I'll retrain him, or I'll give him time to find a wife.
-
I always thought dwarves were paid with alcohol.
Dwarves aren't paid with alcohol, alcohol is a basic dwarven right.
-
I always thought dwarves were paid with alcohol.
Dwarves aren't paid with alcohol, alcohol is a basic dwarven right.
Dwarves have rights? I wish I knew that before the whole, flooded stockpile incident involving the ice.
But from what I am seeing, the solution you are looking at being a good boss and rewarding effort. In reguard to the economic principles, you first have to look at economics in a more historical sense. Even then, it is complex due to the fantasy nature of the game. Even in an academic setting, economics are known as a very "soft" study. No offense to economists, to do such an undertaking is respectable. But programming something of such volatile and variable nature would be a tremendous undertaking, requiring not only an economist, but a few historians. Proper economic behavior will likely only occur properly after DF produces sentience.
-
The last bit of that quote is what I am attempting to achieve. A mock economy that is controlled through player input. We set the rules for ourselves, we can tweak them. This game is all about challenging yourself to see how things go any way, right?
The thing is I was trying to figure out was a realistic cost for dwarves. I already know the system I want to use but wanted input on costs. quality jobs require a higher compensation because they have a higher pay output on average.
Should I just average the costs of every item that could be produced by a dwarf with this skill set and allow a dwarf with a medium skill in the profession to ply his trade to see the number of crafts made over the course of a month, multiply that by a fraction for royalties, then multiply that by 12 to get a yearly salary?
DrTank09, I agree that a mock economy would be a great goal. As for input on costs, as the wage isn't be determined by supply and demand, it is really arbitrary and based on whatever someone thinks is realistic. The 'weighted scale approach' is one method that I think a lot of the posters on the forum like, such as haulers earn one times the minimum wage rate, gem cutters earn 1.5 times the minimum wage rate, etc. The scales can then be aggregated (1 for each hauler, 1.5 for each gem cutter, etc. all added together); this gives the total adjusted number of workers. If you want a situation where every dwarfbuck is paid back to the workers, you could then divide the total production in a year by the adjusted number of workers and this gives you the minimum wage. This could be adjusted each year as total production will change. You could also through in a markup for the nobles (10% of production?) or for the horde. As for accumulating wealth, why not private stockpiles filled with items of the appropriate value? Crafts have a low value so they are easily divisable, stack well in bins, and quick to produce. How to get the right number in each stockpile would be a challenge but this would be in my opinion a cool method for wages.
But from what I am seeing, the solution you are looking at being a good boss and rewarding effort. In reguard to the economic principles, you first have to look at economics in a more historical sense. Even then, it is complex due to the fantasy nature of the game. Even in an academic setting, economics are known as a very "soft" study. No offense to economists, to do such an undertaking is respectable. But programming something of such volatile and variable nature would be a tremendous undertaking, requiring not only an economist, but a few historians. Proper economic behavior will likely only occur properly after DF produces sentience.
Ironfang, economics is considered a soft science, not a soft study. Its called a soft science as we very rarely can conduct experiments in the traditional sense, like in chemistry or biology, as our 'test subjects' are people (we are social scientists after all). Instead, we have to rely on assumptions, like in some branches of physics, and then conduct our hypothesis testing using a highly developed and complex method of statistical analysis called econometrics. This is what is meant by 'soft.' Also, there are plenty of models that don't require sentience, just a decision formula, preferences, and goods is the minimum. These can be complex or simple. Last, there is a branch of economics called economic history and there is a lot of work done on explaining and modeling medieval economies as well as economic thought during that period of time. In fact, my specialty is economic history and do see the value of a historical view. Further, dwarves in my opinion are horders, so the fantasy element could easily work into the preferences. Dwarves like stuff... lots of shiny stuff... Elves (which I always have in my fort) don't like to work and don't care about stuff. Preferences! All we need is a labor leisure decision formula and all would be well.
-
The last bit of that quote is what I am attempting to achieve. A mock economy that is controlled through player input. We set the rules for ourselves, we can tweak them. This game is all about challenging yourself to see how things go any way, right?
The thing is I was trying to figure out was a realistic cost for dwarves. I already know the system I want to use but wanted input on costs. quality jobs require a higher compensation because they have a higher pay output on average.
Should I just average the costs of every item that could be produced by a dwarf with this skill set and allow a dwarf with a medium skill in the profession to ply his trade to see the number of crafts made over the course of a month, multiply that by a fraction for royalties, then multiply that by 12 to get a yearly salary?
DrTank09, I agree that a mock economy would be a great goal. As for input on costs, as the wage isn't be determined by supply and demand, it is really arbitrary and based on whatever someone thinks is realistic. The 'weighted scale approach' is one method that I think a lot of the posters on the forum like, such as haulers earn one times the minimum wage rate, gem cutters earn 1.5 times the minimum wage rate, etc. The scales can then be aggregated (1 for each hauler, 1.5 for each gem cutter, etc. all added together); this gives the total adjusted number of workers. If you want a situation where every dwarfbuck is paid back to the workers, you could then divide the total production in a year by the adjusted number of workers and this gives you the minimum wage. This could be adjusted each year as total production will change. You could also through in a markup for the nobles (10% of production?) or for the horde. As for accumulating wealth, why not private stockpiles filled with items of the appropriate value? Crafts have a low value so they are easily divisable, stack well in bins, and quick to produce. How to get the right number in each stockpile would be a challenge but this would be in my opinion a cool method for wages.
But from what I am seeing, the solution you are looking at being a good boss and rewarding effort. In reguard to the economic principles, you first have to look at economics in a more historical sense. Even then, it is complex due to the fantasy nature of the game. Even in an academic setting, economics are known as a very "soft" study. No offense to economists, to do such an undertaking is respectable. But programming something of such volatile and variable nature would be a tremendous undertaking, requiring not only an economist, but a few historians. Proper economic behavior will likely only occur properly after DF produces sentience.
Ironfang, economics is considered a soft science, not a soft study. Its called a soft science as we very rarely can conduct experiments in the traditional sense, like in chemistry or biology, as our 'test subjects' are people (we are social scientists after all). Instead, we have to rely on assumptions, like in some branches of physics, and then conduct our hypothesis testing using a highly developed and complex method of statistical analysis called econometrics. This is what is meant by 'soft.' Also, there are plenty of models that don't require sentience, just a decision formula, preferences, and goods is the minimum. These can be complex or simple. Last, there is a branch of economics called economic history and there is a lot of work done on explaining and modeling medieval economies as well as economic thought during that period of time. In fact, my specialty is economic history and do see the value of a historical view. Further, dwarves in my opinion are horders, so the fantasy element could easily work into the preferences. Dwarves like stuff... lots of shiny stuff... Elves (which I always have in my fort) don't like to work and don't care about stuff. Preferences! All we need is a labor leisure decision formula and all would be well.
Oh, your study is economic history? Why didn't you say so? By all means, your expertise is appropriate here. And thank you for your correction on study vs science.
But for a system that would be simple to implement, why not use the system of moods and happy thoughts dwarves already have? If a dwarf does not get their pay, say yearly, they work far less efficiently. The more each one is paid, the happier they are, and better they work. That makes the player pay their best workers more. So if you want your legendary carpenter to make beds of higher quality faster, you give them more pay. That way, it is balanced by the player.
-
Happiness doesn't affect effectiveness to my knowledge; needs do - and I don't think syndromes can target those.
That aside, making their praying and leisure needs red would help simulate going on strike.
-
Needs can work, same principle. I just forgot the terminology relevant to it. I did not want to say "the focusing things".
-
you want a situation where every dwarfbuck is paid back to the workers, you could then divide the total production in a year by the adjusted number of workers and this gives you the minimum wage. This could be adjusted each year as total production will change. You could also through in a markup for the nobles (10% of production?) or for the horde. As for accumulating wealth, why not private stockpiles filled with items of the appropriate value? Crafts have a low value so they are easily divisable, stack well in bins, and quick to produce. How to get the right number in each stockpile would be a challenge but this would be in my opinion a cool method for wages.
I'd love to be able to do this, but I think the one thing we are missing for this to work properly, is a stockpile value cap. We can set what type of goods, what quality, what material, but we can't set how much value each good could be worth or what the total stockpile could hold. I think this is what we need for this sort of system to work. I hope that this capability is added later on, if not through vanilla, then through dfhack but for right now, I am looking for options that we can create quickly through our available means.
One issue I am seeing with the thought that we pay all dwarvebucks out evenly, is that this doesn't leave room for dwarves that don't get paid. Even if we have the system in where we can divide up all the loot appropriately without sending it back to the mountainhome, we still need to find a monetary value that each dwarf is worth. If we do go with the system of variable cost (i.e. 1x, 1.5x, 2x where x is the base cost) then what is a reasonable number that we can successfully increase based off of skill so that there is not such a huge difference between my hauler and my blacksmith?
-
Oh, your study is economic history? Why didn't you say so? By all means, your expertise is appropriate here. And thank you for your correction on study vs science.
But for a system that would be simple to implement, why not use the system of moods and happy thoughts dwarves already have? If a dwarf does not get their pay, say yearly, they work far less efficiently. The more each one is paid, the happier they are, and better they work. That makes the player pay their best workers more. So if you want your legendary carpenter to make beds of higher quality faster, you give them more pay. That way, it is balanced by the player.
Ironfang, my pleasure. Using the present happy thoughts makes sense (not sure on moods which seem pretty random). Happy workers tend to be productive workers; pay though isn't what I think makes a worker happy. Rather, it is what they can get with the pay; plus, what makes it interesting is that work does the exact opposite than make a worker happy (aka, the labor leisure tradeoff). Time off work to enjoy things purchased with the pay generates the happy thoughts, not having those makes them stressed. In economics, we have a theoretical construct measure of happiness called a 'util.' The more utils a person has, the happier they are. Does the 'good thoughts' mechanism work in a similar manner? That is, are happier thoughts cumulative (and can they be negative)? I have never used the dwarf therapist and am unsure. If they do, the dwarf is likely already set up as a rational economic person.
What I am thinking in terms of a labor leisure model is that a dwarf makes 'a decision' on how many hours to work and then how many hours to not work. If they work more hours, they get more pay but they have less leisure. Ideally, a model would allow each dwarf to make a decision using such a model in that pay allows more goods to enjoy during leisure time but more pay (and thus goods) means less leisure. The dwarf chooses the balance based on an assigned wage, assigned cost of goods, and preferences on leisure (and goods) that makes him/her happiest. The actual decision model could really be a simple heuristic to begin with (have to think on that some more).
I'd love to be able to do this, but I think the one thing we are missing for this to work properly, is a stockpile value cap. We can set what type of goods, what quality, what material, but we can't set how much value each good could be worth or what the total stockpile could hold. I think this is what we need for this sort of system to work. I hope that this capability is added later on, if not through vanilla, then through dfhack but for right now, I am looking for options that we can create quickly through our available means.
DrTank09, we are missing a value cap and that would be an interesting addition. Simple one too I'd think. How about this as a method. I had my stonecrafter make a bunch of orthoclase crafts. A standard craft costs 10 dwarf bucks (saw this looking at the craft); each quality increase increases the cost by 10 dwarf bucks (not counting masterpiece, which is 120 dwarf bucks). Lets now assume we have a hauler dwarf, and his wage for the year is 100 dwarf bucks. He has a bedroom and his own personal horde, which is a stockpile with bins activated but it will only take from links. When the year ends, there is another stockpile that is set to receiving only rock crafts (no economic stones so all are same value). It is 10 tiles in size, and it only excepts standard quality crafts. It does not allow bins. It should fill up with ten standard value crafts, worth 10 dwarf bucks a piece and a total of 100 dwarf bucks. Then, the stockpile is set to accept from links only with no links (it therefore should not get any more crafts added). It is then linked to the dwarfs personnel horde and the crafts go into the dwarfs bin. Once this happens, the stockpile with 10 tiles is removed. Repeat for all dwarves... Of note, for higher quality crafts, the number of tiles could be decreased so that values match up. Would this work?
One issue I am seeing with the thought that we pay all dwarvebucks out evenly, is that this doesn't leave room for dwarves that don't get paid. Even if we have the system in where we can divide up all the loot appropriately without sending it back to the mountainhome, we still need to find a monetary value that each dwarf is worth. If we do go with the system of variable cost (i.e. 1x, 1.5x, 2x where x is the base cost) then what is a reasonable number that we can successfully increase based off of skill so that there is not such a huge difference between my hauler and my blacksmith?
Yah, all dwarves would be paid something unless their base was set to zero. My thinking that zero base would only apply to elves...
As for monetary value that each dwarf is worth, if all their goods are in a bin, one could theoretically move the bin to the depot during a trade and see the accumulated value (each has a number). The problem would be getting it back into the personal horde. Or one could just be a tally of yearly pay for each dwarf in excel or something.
As for skill, I see this as a fun question and I think it depends on how much wage gap you want in your fort. In medieval days, wage gaps were enormous between the highly skilled 'professions' and the laborers, journeymen, etc. (the unskilled). Serfs and peasants virtually owned nothing and had no pay. In DF, they'd have food, booz, and place to sleep. This was about 95% of the population. I see these as the farmers, haulers, animal and fishing dwarfs, non-lord soldiers (most soldiers received little more than food, drink and lodging as wages), bards, performers, miners, wood choppers, dyers, wood burners, furnace operators, scholars, scribes (after all, monks weren't supposed to own anything), and all elves (no matter what skill level or job, unless king, which case yikes). These guys would have something like a 0.2 base and no matter there skill level they still make the same. The rest are the skilled labor (except the nobles who are 'special'). In medieval times, guild masters got all the money (just look at the old Dutch paintings of these guys). These dwarves make 0.2 base until expert, when they increase 0.2 or 0.3 per skill level increase (I am not sure how many levels there are); nonetheless, the max (legendary) should be a base 2. That means they make 10 times the amount as the unskilled. That leaves the 'lords' of the army and the nobles. Well trained soldiers I think should be seen as something like a knight, which did have more than the unskilled but nowhere close as the rich burghers (guild masters). I'd put them at 0.5 on reaching lord status. Last, the nobles. Militia commander, the general, should get base 1. Captain of the guards (likely the most corrupt guy in the fort...) base 1.5. Militia captains 0.8, same as hammerer and champion (who I see as an old retired soldier on a good pension). Broker 1.0, manager 1.0, medical dwarf 1.0, accountant 1.1 (takes off the top but not enough to be caught...). Mayor should be 2.0 like the guild masters (typically they would always come from the guild masters). Last and certainly least, the 'real' nobility. First of all, they shouldn't work. As for how much they take, I'd max it out to be about half of the yearly production minus the cost of the army. This would make it population dependent...
-
DrTank09, we are missing a value cap and that would be an interesting addition. Simple one too I'd think. How about this as a method. I had my stonecrafter make a bunch of orthoclase crafts. A standard craft costs 10 dwarf bucks (saw this looking at the craft); each quality increase increases the cost by 10 dwarf bucks (not counting masterpiece, which is 120 dwarf bucks). Lets now assume we have a hauler dwarf, and his wage for the year is 100 dwarf bucks. He has a bedroom and his own personal horde, which is a stockpile with bins activated but it will only take from links. When the year ends, there is another stockpile that is set to receiving only rock crafts (no economic stones so all are same value). It is 10 tiles in size, and it only excepts standard quality crafts. It does not allow bins. It should fill up with ten standard value crafts, worth 10 dwarf bucks a piece and a total of 100 dwarf bucks. Then, the stockpile is set to accept from links only with no links (it therefore should not get any more crafts added). It is then linked to the dwarfs personnel horde and the crafts go into the dwarfs bin. Once this happens, the stockpile with 10 tiles is removed. Repeat for all dwarves... Of note, for higher quality crafts, the number of tiles could be decreased so that values match up. Would this work?
This would work, but the micromanagement leaves for so many errors that I would quickly loose correct count. The craft may be of standard quality, but how much orthoclase are we going to use to make those crafts. Eventually the worker would become so skilled that we no longer have standard quality crafts unless we pull another worker from another area to take over.
Coins would be the ultimate value standard, but the problem lies in that stack can not be broken up except for during trade and those broken up stacks must be sent with the caravan for them to stay as stacks. This makes it so that division of a base unit.. say 1 stack of gold coins which may be 500, can not be reduced to the .2 and .3 amounts that you speak of below.
Yah, all dwarves would be paid something unless their base was set to zero. My thinking that zero base would only apply to elves...
As for monetary value that each dwarf is worth, if all their goods are in a bin, one could theoretically move the bin to the depot during a trade and see the accumulated value (each has a number). The problem would be getting it back into the personal horde. Or one could just be a tally of yearly pay for each dwarf in excel or something.
As for skill, I see this as a fun question and I think it depends on how much wage gap you want in your fort. In medieval days, wage gaps were enormous between the highly skilled 'professions' and the laborers, journeymen, etc. (the unskilled). Serfs and peasants virtually owned nothing and had no pay. In DF, they'd have food, booz, and place to sleep. This was about 95% of the population. I see these as the farmers, haulers, animal and fishing dwarfs, non-lord soldiers (most soldiers received little more than food, drink and lodging as wages), bards, performers, miners, wood choppers, dyers, wood burners, furnace operators, scholars, scribes (after all, monks weren't supposed to own anything), and all elves (no matter what skill level or job, unless king, which case yikes). These guys would have something like a 0.2 base and no matter there skill level they still make the same. The rest are the skilled labor (except the nobles who are 'special'). In medieval times, guild masters got all the money (just look at the old Dutch paintings of these guys). These dwarves make 0.2 base until expert, when they increase 0.2 or 0.3 per skill level increase (I am not sure how many levels there are); nonetheless, the max (legendary) should be a base 2. That means they make 10 times the amount as the unskilled. That leaves the 'lords' of the army and the nobles. Well trained soldiers I think should be seen as something like a knight, which did have more than the unskilled but nowhere close as the rich burghers (guild masters). I'd put them at 0.5 on reaching lord status. Last, the nobles. Militia commander, the general, should get base 1. Captain of the guards (likely the most corrupt guy in the fort...) base 1.5. Militia captains 0.8, same as hammerer and champion (who I see as an old retired soldier on a good pension). Broker 1.0, manager 1.0, medical dwarf 1.0, accountant 1.1 (takes off the top but not enough to be caught...). Mayor should be 2.0 like the guild masters (typically they would always come from the guild masters). Last and certainly least, the 'real' nobility. First of all, they shouldn't work. As for how much they take, I'd max it out to be about half of the yearly production minus the cost of the army. This would make it population dependent...
I really like where this is going and where your through process went. Thank you for your historical information. Now lies the problem of finding our variable of base cost.
lets say that food, basic lodging, safety, and a basic tomb is equal to .5
all the non-skilled non-lords will be under this .5 limit and thus no longer require being paid.
Artisans below level 10 work for the guilds and earn 1 while paying half of that to the guild until level 10 as they are only apprentices and are paying for their training.
Artisans earn 2 having completed their training at level 10, increasing by 1 each level which puts them at 7 by legendary status. (I like the number seven)
I was thinking that soldiers should have longer contracts than regular people in order to pay for their arms and armor. They earn only .5 for the first 30 years, after that they can continue to work as honor positions for a pay of 2 or they can retire and live freely meaning that if they decide to do any other work, they earn the .5 on top of whatever else they do.. even if it is just hauling. The armor and weapons are theirs and go with them to their tomb. Unretired soldiers live in a barracks, retired and honored soldiers get their own rooms. All soldiers get a fair quality tomb and include their arms and armor.
Guild masters make the .5 off of every member in their profession.
Militia commander gets a base of 5 (Director of Defense has a salary of 205k)
Militia captain gets a base of 2 and may only be chosen from those that have mastered the art of their weapon or have worked for the 30 year period and have decided to stay.
Captain of the guard gets 4 (director of FBI has a salary of 170k)
Mayor is 10
Manager, broker, bookkeeper, etc. they all get 2.
This is all the private money going out. So since the wealth of the nobility is owned by the state, they don't have to be paid, they just get to choose how the state wealth is used for bartering and such.. hence the mandates.
how does that look?
-
For a more modern thought, one idea for a modding credit card of sort: Use something like Druid exp, as that skill isn't used by the game currently. Or perhaps Alchemist if one wants to know how rich a dwarf is v-g?
@Nilbert: Small note for the first section above: a dwarf can receive both happy and unhappy thoughts indeed - but being busy, doing work and creating nice things all make dwarf more focused and happier.
Though I suppose dfhack already includes a hook for job completion, so could perhaps just decrease dwarf happiness on every completed job, forcing the overseer to balance leisure with work for that dwarf.
However, stress stays around for 2 years iirc, while migrants and visitors are plentiful, giving an interesting viewpoint.
@DrTank09:
Can just ignore quality if you want when it comes to craft, or not split coin stacks. I.e. have 500 coins = 0,1.
Another interesting token might be blocks, as they're infinite with glass and clay and obsidian and wood, and also lack a quality level. Though I expect a dwarf would want royal rooms decorated with things they like rather than a stockpile full of blocks, coins or goblets :P, so there should be a fair possibility of using this to buy what they desire.
-
I'll apologise upfront because I haven't had time to read the entire thread. Feel free to ignore me if I am ot or redundant.
Having said that, from my perspective, the biggest problem with modelling the economy without aids in the game is going to be accounting. You'll spend your life doing data entry if you calculate everything by hand. So, I would organise the economy around things that are already being accounted for in the game. Pretty much that means book keeping and appraisal.
At the moment there are calculations for created wealth, imported wealth and exported wealth. The created wealth is handily broken down. So you can account for held/worn objects (essentially objects owned by dwarfs). I might be tempted to issue stock for the rest of the wealth. That would be fairly easy to do with a spreadsheet and only requires that you type in all the names once. Then you can issue stock once a year, for instance, and keep a running total. Nobles can be issued more stock than others. You could then issue stock bonuses for creating an artifact, or saving the fortress from certain doom, etc.
I would not account for architecture or other things in the fortress. Instead use it as a perk. In other words, instead of rewarding a dwarf with stock, you can upgrade their living conditions. Otherwise the book keeping is going to get out of hand.
Again, to keep things simple, I would not do any accounting until profit is realised. Wealth inside the fortress is not realised wealth. The goods are still being used for whatever purpose. When you trade, you realise the wealth. You can use the difference in the exported wealth to determine the actual realised wealth. In reality, we always trade at a loss, so you could also factor that in if you want, but I'm not sure I would bother (though it would give a reason for having a good broker).
Finally, when you have calculated the realised wealth, you can pay a dividend based on the number of stocks that the dwarfs hold. I'd pay something like 5%, but really the amount is arbitrary. You can keep that owed money on the books, but I would be tempted to mint coins equal to the amount that you pay and keep it in a bank. You can then RP dwarfs spending their money to get exclusive use of artifacts, or to upgrade their quarters, or to demand certain foods being stockpiled.
If you want to get super tricky, you can even track inheritance in the event of death -- with or without a tax.
Actually, this sounds like fun... I may have to try it...
-
This would work, but the micromanagement leaves for so many errors that I would quickly loose correct count. The craft may be of standard quality, but how much orthoclase are we going to use to make those crafts. Eventually the worker would become so skilled that we no longer have standard quality crafts unless we pull another worker from another area to take over.
Coins would be the ultimate value standard, but the problem lies in that stack can not be broken up except for during trade and those broken up stacks must be sent with the caravan for them to stay as stacks. This makes it so that division of a base unit.. say 1 stack of gold coins which may be 500, can not be reduced to the .2 and .3 amounts that you speak of below.
Micromanagement would be an issue for sure. Coins would be much easier but as you point out, there is no way to break up the stacks. As for quality, it would improve making the 'low denomination' rock craft less abundant. I suppose it would really depend on how much a dwarf is really earning. If it divides out that they are making thousands of dwarf bucks, rounding to the nearest 50 or 100 dwarf buck may not be much of an issue. One could also add gold and silver crafts as the larger denominations. Micromanagement though... Maybe payment every five years as if they signed a long term contract for a particular job...
I really like where this is going and where your through process went. Thank you for your historical information. Now lies the problem of finding our variable of base cost.
lets say that food, basic lodging, safety, and a basic tomb is equal to .5
all the non-skilled non-lords will be under this .5 limit and thus no longer require being paid.
Artisans below level 10 work for the guilds and earn 1 while paying half of that to the guild until level 10 as they are only apprentices and are paying for their training.
Artisans earn 2 having completed their training at level 10, increasing by 1 each level which puts them at 7 by legendary status. (I like the number seven)
I was thinking that soldiers should have longer contracts than regular people in order to pay for their arms and armor. They earn only .5 for the first 30 years, after that they can continue to work as honor positions for a pay of 2 or they can retire and live freely meaning that if they decide to do any other work, they earn the .5 on top of whatever else they do.. even if it is just hauling. The armor and weapons are theirs and go with them to their tomb. Unretired soldiers live in a barracks, retired and honored soldiers get their own rooms. All soldiers get a fair quality tomb and include their arms and armor.
Guild masters make the .5 off of every member in their profession.
Militia commander gets a base of 5 (Director of Defense has a salary of 205k)
Militia captain gets a base of 2 and may only be chosen from those that have mastered the art of their weapon or have worked for the 30 year period and have decided to stay.
Captain of the guard gets 4 (director of FBI has a salary of 170k)
Mayor is 10
Manager, broker, bookkeeper, etc. they all get 2.
This is all the private money going out. So since the wealth of the nobility is owned by the state, they don't have to be paid, they just get to choose how the state wealth is used for bartering and such.. hence the mandates.
how does that look?
I like this. A thought I had after my last post on division of all wealth was that some of the created wealth would be in furniture and the like which couldn't be divided easily. Under this setup, there is a built in rent that accounts for this wealth with the 'real' benefactor as the noble. I also like the 'purchase of armor' implied debt on the soldiers. One could also think of it as soldiers having a choice of quality of armor and weapons and how long they are in debt paying them off. Masterpiece armor takes 30 years, while the rickety old goblinite junk can be paid off in a year or two. Would give the soldiers who put in the time and are true professionals the better quality stuff and the cannon fodder, well, they may just not hope for a war... Are you thinking each profession grouping (stone masons, metal workers, gem cutters, etc.) is a single guild with a single guild master? I have built forts that way with a clan per guild and the 'master' being hereditary. I didn't attempt accumulating individual wealth under that system, but that sounds fun. I'd think the poor legendary journeymen could end up being stuck paying the fee no matter what (unless there is an unfortunate accident of course).
As for the break down in salaries, I like it. Peasants stay at subsistence... that'd make the micromanagement easier as they'd never really have anything outside the basics. Could also think of the guild members of signing long term agreements. Apprentice for twenty years, journeymen for twenty years, etc. with payout at the end of each contract. This would mean in terms of setting up the stockpiles that it doesn't happen very often. Also gives an opportunity for guild masters to kick out those they don't like or see as competition... Arbitrary abuse of power over wealth? Sounds rather dwarfy...
For a more modern thought, one idea for a modding credit card of sort: Use something like Druid exp, as that skill isn't used by the game currently. Or perhaps Alchemist if one wants to know how rich a dwarf is v-g?
@Nilbert: Small note for the first section above: a dwarf can receive both happy and unhappy thoughts indeed - but being busy, doing work and creating nice things all make dwarf more focused and happier.
Though I suppose dfhack already includes a hook for job completion, so could perhaps just decrease dwarf happiness on every completed job, forcing the overseer to balance leisure with work for that dwarf.
However, stress stays around for 2 years iirc, while migrants and visitors are plentiful, giving an interesting viewpoint.
@DrTank09:
Can just ignore quality if you want when it comes to craft, or not split coin stacks. I.e. have 500 coins = 0,1.
Another interesting token might be blocks, as they're infinite with glass and clay and obsidian and wood, and also lack a quality level. Though I expect a dwarf would want royal rooms decorated with things they like rather than a stockpile full of blocks, coins or goblets :P, so there should be a fair possibility of using this to buy what they desire.
Thanks Fleeting Frames for the info! I like the idea of feeling down with completing a task. Will need to think on this a bit more. I also thought about blocks, or rocks or clay, as they are pretty much infinite and are really low value. Pennies of the dwarf world. They don't stack well without a quantum stockpile, which I am not sure how one would manage more than one of those and a dump. Goblets and mugs instead of crafts... Hmmm... German beer hall anyone? I've never used the druid or alchemist skills (or DF Hack for that matter).
-
I'll apologise upfront because I haven't had time to read the entire thread. Feel free to ignore me if I am ot or redundant.
Having said that, from my perspective, the biggest problem with modelling the economy without aids in the game is going to be accounting. You'll spend your life doing data entry if you calculate everything by hand. So, I would organise the economy around things that are already being accounted for in the game. Pretty much that means book keeping and appraisal.
At the moment there are calculations for created wealth, imported wealth and exported wealth. The created wealth is handily broken down. So you can account for held/worn objects (essentially objects owned by dwarfs). I might be tempted to issue stock for the rest of the wealth. That would be fairly easy to do with a spreadsheet and only requires that you type in all the names once. Then you can issue stock once a year, for instance, and keep a running total. Nobles can be issued more stock than others. You could then issue stock bonuses for creating an artifact, or saving the fortress from certain doom, etc.
I would not account for architecture or other things in the fortress. Instead use it as a perk. In other words, instead of rewarding a dwarf with stock, you can upgrade their living conditions. Otherwise the book keeping is going to get out of hand.
Again, to keep things simple, I would not do any accounting until profit is realised. Wealth inside the fortress is not realised wealth. The goods are still being used for whatever purpose. When you trade, you realise the wealth. You can use the difference in the exported wealth to determine the actual realised wealth. In reality, we always trade at a loss, so you could also factor that in if you want, but I'm not sure I would bother (though it would give a reason for having a good broker).
Finally, when you have calculated the realised wealth, you can pay a dividend based on the number of stocks that the dwarfs hold. I'd pay something like 5%, but really the amount is arbitrary. You can keep that owed money on the books, but I would be tempted to mint coins equal to the amount that you pay and keep it in a bank. You can then RP dwarfs spending their money to get exclusive use of artifacts, or to upgrade their quarters, or to demand certain foods being stockpiled.
If you want to get super tricky, you can even track inheritance in the event of death -- with or without a tax.
Actually, this sounds like fun... I may have to try it...
This sounds fun too! Micromanagement is an issue for sure, but then again, isn't DF all about micromanagement? After all, I just finished building individualized gold tombs complete with statues commemorating great feats and memorial slabs for 45 dwarves...
From what you describe, it sounds like an 'Adventurers Corporation" from 17th-19th century England, France, and the Netherlands. A group of merchant-adventurers would band together, pool funds, and establish a trading or production facility in a foreign location. Each would have a share of the profits according to their investment and of course participation. There were a number of very famous of these... East India Tea Company, Hudson Bay Company, Jamestown, Plymouth...
I'd have a bit of a different spin on it, but just my thoughts... what you propose sounds fun!
The always trading at a loss is an interesting point. I think that is part of DF to reflect the merchant's grand ability at bargaining. That said, as an economist, it is rather mercantilist thinking (aka, trade equates with one side winning and one side losing). I like to think of it as the cost with transferring goods ("transaction cost" using economics jargon) going to a merchant (aka, it costs them 20% to 40% to move goods from one place to another and they need to add a margin for that). Under that notion, trading is transferring some goods (aka, 1000 lead goblets) for something more useful (aka, 10 bags of gypsum powder) plus a cost for trading. This totally ignores the concept of specialization, which is why trade is such a good thing, but I will offer an elf in sacrifice to the economics gods for forgiveness. Therefore, trading actually means losing profit. The value of exports minus value of imports equals transaction cost, which is a reduction in profit. I guess this can make sense in that perhaps the DF has to order 'essential' goods from the mountainhome in order to survive. In doing so, they have to pay a lot!
Wealth then would be some grouping of the other reported numbers minus the initial wealth (what was brought with at embarking) and minus the transaction cost. I agree architecture shouldn't count, nor probably furniture. Non-portable and totally cant be easily buried in the backyard. That leaves weapons, armor and garb, other objects, displayed, held/worn. I have no idea what displayed is. Held/worn is stuff being used to generate a profit. Does weapons or armor/garb get double counted with held/worn? If not, maybe one of those two could be used as the 'profit' good? Instead of tobacco like Jamestown as the 'profit' good, the DF makes battleaxes? As a result, profit is realized when the value of battleaxes exceeds transaction costs and initial investment...
One could totally have fun with shares too, especially with children. Oldest gets inheritance while younger ones must be indentured servants or drafted into the military? Hmmm... many, many possibilities...
-
For stacking blocks, you could give each dwarf their own minecart qsp for it. Then, when it is time for payment, you make a stockpile for blocks and let it fill. Once it is filled, you make it take from links only with no links, and then make the qsp route take from the stockpile, then delete the link/stockpile once all blocks have been qsped.
Not really automatic though, I suppose. You could automate measuring if you store things in minecart instead of dumping straight out and use that to trip a pressure plate by weight or to move cart when X% full, for instance. The latter doesn't really have large degree of pay variance, but has the bonus that once you've set it up you only need to order things through manager to pay all the workers what they should receive, with no extra buildings outside the stops and minecarts - have a grace period for returning to start long enough that all monetary tokens are handed out by the time the carts are reset to start.
-
For stacking blocks, you could give each dwarf their own minecart qsp for it. Then, when it is time for payment, you make a stockpile for blocks and let it fill. Once it is filled, you make it take from links only with no links, and then make the qsp route take from the stockpile, then delete the link/stockpile once all blocks have been qsped.
Not really automatic though, I suppose. You could automate measuring if you store things in minecart instead of dumping straight out and use that to trip a pressure plate by weight or to move cart when X% full, for instance. The latter doesn't really have large degree of pay variance, but has the bonus that once you've set it up you only need to order things through manager to pay all the workers what they should receive, with no extra buildings outside the stops and minecarts - have a grace period for returning to start long enough that all monetary tokens are handed out by the time the carts are reset to start.
I was honestly thinking that a qsp might be the best method for those owning wealth. In order to automate it, I'd make the qsp, minecart, and pay collection stockpile all at once but separate them using a forbidden door. This might be an interesting mechanic for a strike system. If you leave that stockpile all year long and they only get paid once a year, then all of the sudden when pay time comes and someone didn't get paid, they may say that they won't work until they are paid their just dues.
Does anyone know if there is a way to split coins outside the depot? Maybe through a danger room that we think of as a coin minter?
-
Splitting stacks...You could do it as adventurer, or you could mod in reaction that splits coins, or a ranged weapon that shoots coins.
-
We had an experiment of a multi-player-ish dwarven economy in The City (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155674.0)
The idea was to break down the entire embark 4x4 into 16 1x1 districts, separated by roads.
Whatever unrevealed underground resources are unknown, and the info available initially are visible in the surface.
So right at the start, you can tell where the lakes are (fish, food); trees (specific fruit trees, or lumber); dug hills (stones and ores) from the embark until some migrant waves.
The initial resources are finite when the players interested needed to choose:
citizens for their district, and what they plan to provide, produce, or trade for the other districts.
It was a mess trying to communicate as we try to formulate rules for trading, offers, count offers.
It also became interesting when tools and equipment is scarce initially.
2 picks were available. Who wants a pick, and how much are they willing to pay for it.
-
Glancing at it - interesting thread by TimelessBob, Sanctume. A daring attempt; I wouldn't dare to try something like that without some way to synchronize or copy-paste the districts (which would also help deal with FPS). Even fortplan + speed:0 dorfs wouldn't work too well for copying 20 weeks of playtime quickly.
Warmist's HTML'd DF via DFHack (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=139553.msg7293811#msg7293811) could be one way to look for to get multiple simultaneous players on a single embark - could be rather cool when combined with labor-manager/autolabor and DF together.
Ah, but I digress - in that situation, the value of pick would depend strongly on the availability of surface fire clay. Doesn't look like there was any present, so without a pick one was consigned to aboveground farming, socializing and training with wooden weapons, with small house built from the smattering of trees on 1x1 plot, for at least until caravan would arrive.
It'd have been more interesting if dwarves one chooses were also up for bartering and there was fire clay - in that case, one might be willing to accept renting instead of buying if they also get a legendary carpenter, for instance. As it was, district R paid 45% purchase discount for 3 years to hire a miner to mine 67 tiles in soil.
As for mid-developing player economies I'd imagine the value of leather, books, instruments and masterwork steel gear would be relatively higher in comparison to other goods than what is offered to caravan, and masterwork versus non-masterwork weapon values would be even more extreme. However, ultimately any fortress will be able to obtain what it needs on mass-producible goods, making the truly interesting trade items artifacts, really.
-
So I recently started looking into raws and stuff while trying to make my dwarves all male for an embark to make lineage easier to track and I got to thinking about a modified workshop called "Vault".
Basically the workshop would have three reactions. "Take coins" with a sub menu for material and quantity up to 100, "split coins"- which is used to split stacks of coins so that they can be dispersed, and "take item"- with a specific menu so as to receive payment for things through material rather than currency.
Make two workshops, one inside a vault with a linked qsp for currency and another for items that isn't a qsp to make it fell like the size of the vault matters. One vault is for incoming horded material, another is for outgoing payments linked to more stockpiles.
Another reaction could be "Make stacks" in order to reduce counting, but it isn't necessary.
Have all incoming and outgoing stockpiles linked to take from links only and activate or deactivate based on what payments are being done. So long as the workshops are properly connected, specific items are all that will be shown in any 'd'etails menu. I don't know if I'll be able to figure out how to make this, but it seems like a simple solution.
-
Mod is created, but this one seemed to kind of die off when people gave up on the idea of how the economy could work, so I moved it over to here http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=162234.msg7320635#msg7320635 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=162234.msg7320635#msg7320635)