Population & Labor Distribution System

**Cuthulhu** · August 04, 2012, 02:01 PM

Hey guys, posted this over at the total war forums.
Heres the link, let me know what you think.

http://forums.totalwar.com/showthrea...040#post372040

**DarthRuanek** · August 04, 2012, 04:24 PM

Originally Posted by Cuthulhu

Hey guys, posted this over at the total war forums.
Heres the link, let me know what you think.

http://forums.totalwar.com/showthrea...040#post372040

That's well thought out. I would definitely welcome some historical complexity that added new features to the game.

**lazerBAR** · August 04, 2012, 09:45 PM

This guy knows whats up.

**Ichon** · August 04, 2012, 10:30 PM

Good topic though I wouldn't want technology being that important or increasing building speeds and the other things especially not to impact resource gathering of manpower(income and manpower would be enough resources in TW for me ).

I would rather be have sliders to affect building times(more money can speed up building, less money lengthens building) and manpower affects number of concurrent ongoing building slots instead of technology or income.

**Rorarii** · August 04, 2012, 10:56 PM

I LIKE IT! .. rep for you!

Although i want the tech tree replaced all together. you say research the Arch before being allowed to build larger buildings .. BUT the arch, and the formulae for cement for that matter, was learnt / taken with contact with Carthage.

And elite units should ONLY come from battle experience, not through a ultimate gaol tech advance.

Plus don't forget, Rome under the republic had a militia for a army, each individual soldier had to provide his own arms. it was just a matter of "assembling" them.

plus you talk about populations as if there is only one ? In fact you have, in most ancient societies, Aristocrats, merchants / farmers, labours/poor, slaves, non-citizens (foreigners). You seem to be talking about the Labours ? The rich could be stung with taxes to pay for buildings etc, which the Labours / slaves build. If slaves do the work then it is done cheaply, making the tax-payers happy and the Labours very angry (historically correct)

And more importantly, Those labours doing your work and fighting your wars ONLY do so if you give them some form of political power (power sharing) - Republic - democracy etc They won't be treated like cattle willingly. i suppose you could set up an extreme form of monarchy / dictatorship where a ruling class ARE the army, controlling a peasant / slaves under class that does all the work ?

R

**Cuthulhu** · August 05, 2012, 08:36 AM

Originally Posted by Rorarii

I LIKE IT! .. rep for you!

Although i want the tech tree replaced all together. you say research the Arch before being allowed to build larger buildings .. BUT the arch, and the formulae for cement for that matter, was learnt / taken with contact with Carthage.

And elite units should ONLY come from battle experience, not through a ultimate gaol tech advance.

Plus don't forget, Rome under the republic had a militia for a army, each individual soldier had to provide his own arms. it was just a matter of "assembling" them.

plus you talk about populations as if there is only one ? In fact you have, in most ancient societies, Aristocrats, merchants / farmers, labours/poor, slaves, non-citizens (foreigners). You seem to be talking about the Labours ? The rich could be stung with taxes to pay for buildings etc, which the Labours / slaves build. If slaves do the work then it is done cheaply, making the tax-payers happy and the Labours very angry (historically correct)

And more importantly, Those labours doing your work and fighting your wars ONLY do so if you give them some form of political power (power sharing) - Republic - democracy etc They won't be treated like cattle willingly. i suppose you could set up an extreme form of monarchy / dictatorship where a ruling class ARE the army, controlling a peasant / slaves under class that does all the work ?

R

Thanks for the support in these ideas.

The real object with these ideas were to add depth to the campaign map. I've always thought it has always been way way to simplistic. I wanted the system to represent how interconnected society actually is. A system to show that empires, although incredably important, run on more than just expendature of gold.

I also wanted the system to have the ability to support other ideas i've seen on the forums that I've really liked. An example is the supply system for troops. Sure it could be done without adding in an actually "grain or food" resource but it would just be another system as abstract and non interconnected as all the other existing ones.

As far as technology goes it was just my way of providing CA with an ability to restrict certain units to later in the game like they tend to do. Personally i don't care if i had access right away to all troops.

With regards to the population i'd agree with you 100% that it should definatly be devided with different population growths and different recruitment abilities. I tried to simplfy it due to alot of comments i see from people arguing against game complexity. But that being said im all for as much complexity as possible and I'd love to see the population divided like that with different happiness levels and recruitment units. Might add an ability for the romans with different types of revolts.

Obviously what i've suggested is in no way perfect. It is just a premise that can be expanded on and altered based on testing. The basics of the system however i thought were in depth enough to allways for the implementation of other people more interesting ideas.

CuT

**Rorarii** · August 07, 2012, 03:58 PM

Originally Posted by Cuthulhu

Thanks for the support in these ideas.

The real object with these ideas were to add depth to the campaign map. I've always thought it has always been way way to simplistic. I wanted the system to represent how interconnected society actually is. A system to show that empires, although incredably important, run on more than just expendature of gold.

I also wanted the system to have the ability to support other ideas i've seen on the forums that I've really liked. An example is the supply system for troops. Sure it could be done without adding in an actually "grain or food" resource but it would just be another system as abstract and non interconnected as all the other existing ones.

As far as technology goes it was just my way of providing CA with an ability to restrict certain units to later in the game like they tend to do. Personally i don't care if i had access right away to all troops.

With regards to the population i'd agree with you 100% that it should definatly be devided with different population growths and different recruitment abilities. I tried to simplfy it due to alot of comments i see from people arguing against game complexity. But that being said im all for as much complexity as possible and I'd love to see the population divided like that with different happiness levels and recruitment units. Might add an ability for the romans with different types of revolts.

Obviously what i've suggested is in no way perfect. It is just a premise that can be expanded on and altered based on testing. The basics of the system however i thought were in depth enough to allways for the implementation of other people more interesting ideas.

CuT

Cuth, I've tried to put some of your ideas into a Settlement window I've designed, it uses graphic interface to simplify adjustments to allocations of population sections etc.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

What do you think ?

R

**Lord Baal** · August 05, 2012, 08:52 AM

After reading a couple times your post I would like to say a lot of things... but I can think only in one: Wow.... those are terrific ideas.

You and me my friend! I think this is the beginning of a long friendship! If you feel like it, read my wall of doom. It has some resembling ideas.

**Lord Baal** · August 07, 2012, 05:05 PM

I think it's a real nice try Rorarii. Sometimes a image is worth a thousand words!

**Maizel** · August 07, 2012, 05:09 PM

Good post. I don;t doubt you put alot of time and tought into it, and I kind of like it.

I wouldn't expect anything like it in the game though.

**username1903** · August 07, 2012, 05:37 PM

These are some wonderful ideas, but one has to be wary of making the game overly complex with micromanaging ect. The more complex the gameplay the more they tend to be niche and or flops. Master of Orion 3 is a good example.

I doubt they will add all, but if they add just a few elements that should please all crowds =)

**Ichon** · August 07, 2012, 05:43 PM

I like the topic but please no borrowing from Master of Orion 2 interface. It would be better to abstract it further in my opinion. If there is a certain amount of manpower it allows a certain amount of projects. Craftsmen might be the most productive class so 1,000 craftsmen might give 1 build point per turn while it takes 3,000 slaves to equal 1 point and nobles contribute hardly anything. So a city with many slaves could still outproduce a city with fewer population but less efficiently as the slaves require food etc while a Gaul city with half the size but more craftsmen might not be outproduced by much. Larger cities could have more building projects at the same time but it should be relatively abstract with a simple group of buildings where first in the queue is built more quickly with buildings after that receiving less portion of the population so players could drag and drop the buildings where they want but not speed up construction past a certain point.

**Rorarii** · August 07, 2012, 06:05 PM

Never played Master Of Orion but have played Master of Magic, I vaguely remember them coming from that same stable.

No matter the origin, better a quality system than original crap!