Crash Course Economics

Right, so a pivotal component of the Strategy Mode is the economy. The economy in strategy mode acts very much like the body and systems of an organism from the earlier stages. Factories act like mitochondria, capital cities like the nuclei or the brain, and trade routes like the bloodstream. As has been mentioned before, we need to maintain a certain consistency between the stages of the game to provide for smooth transitions, but also to make it possible to have fewer systems and models cover more ground. Like Seregon noticed, and Roadkillguy before him, and maybe several others I don't know, one can simply make a compound system to apply for the entire game instead of one for each stage. Well hopefully with the conclusions and work we achieve on this thread, we can help better shape the economic model to fit in with the rest of the evolutionary cycle. Keep that in the back of your mind as we go on for the next series of posts, and it will make things a whole lot easier.

So, I know economics may not be as interesting as, say, combat, or diplomacy, or research, but it is vital nonetheless (and after this we will get to the other fields too!). Now, I haven't taken any courses or degrees on economics, just a measly course on business in Grade 10 which was more about running a company than the economics of nations. Therefore, don't expect that you will need to be highly qualified to help out. All you really need is a basic and sound grasp of mathematics, and to know a thing or two about how trade goes on between nations.

So, as a last note, this thread will be divided into Episodes. In each Episode I will present a new concept or model or topic or issue, give some description, the current concept on it, and some visuals, and then we will discuss it and work on it collectively until we are happy with what we have. So, without further ado, let's begin.

----------------------------

Episode I: Compounds for the Strategy Mode


So first we need to cover what the things being traded and exchanged are in the first place. This thread is for brainstorming what resources, or "compounds", as Seregon's system calls them, are significant for the Strategy Mode. Before you keep reading, you might want to first familiarize yourself with Seregon's compound system here and here. So far, his work has been on implementing it for the Microbe Stage, since that is the stage currently in development. However, it doesn't only apply to Microbe Stage, it applies to all. We will undertake the task of applying it to the Strategy Mode, which is basically all stages after sentience.

A key element of any compound system is that the different compounds can combine to create more complex compounds, hence the term "compounds". That means that wood is ultimately just a composition of various simpler compounds, which in turn are composed of simpler compounds. Therefore, all compounds will be able to be traced back to a small number of base compounds (which I guess makes them elements, but we will just call them compounds). I made a chart here of what this looks like simply tracing back from the compounds present in the Microbe Stage.



Now bear in mind that this does not include the relationships for the compounds of any stages other than the Microbe Stage.

TASK #1: These tasks will become a recurring theme throughout the episodes. They will be points at which a job to do is identified, and if someone wants to do it then they say so in a post below. To take on a task, just include somewhere in your post the number of the task that you are going to tackle. These tasks are not mandatory, but if people do them it helps A LOT! Please post the results of any tasks you do on this thread. So for this task, please try to make a chart, like the one above, outlining the relationships between the different compounds in the Strategy Mode. Don't worry about tracing it back to all the previous stages. The program I used to make that chart can be found here, it is very useful.

So, using the thread I linked earlier (here), which was more of a brainstorming rough draft thread, let's come up with a good copy list of compounds for the Strategy Mode. Now keep in mind we are not simulating every Belgiuming element and compound in the universe, so we need to only include what is significant for the game. Additionally, every compound that we add to the list, we need to identify its significant properties. Now again, we are not simulating every Belgiuming propriety in the universe, so don't give me the melting, boiling, freezing, and every other point for compounds where it is not even relevant. We need to identify relevant and significant properties. Some significant properties are:

Combustible, for coal.
Combustible, for wood.
Conductive, for copper.

Lastly, one property that you HAVE to mention for ALL the compounds is construction value. Construction value in a nutshell means how much work/energy/effort/tools is necessary to build something out of that compound. A high construction value means that it takes more effort to build something out of that compounds. A low value means less effort. To give some perspective on construction values, note that Wood's is 50, and Stone's is 125. A useful thread for learning more about construction value can be found here (ignore the fact that the construction value of wood is different in that thread).

Now, if you've read this far, congratulations. Also, you may be wondering what this has to do with economics, or maybe you weren't wondering but you are now since I reminded you. Either way, compounds are the very things being exchanged in your economy in the first place. Before we can establish the interactions between the compounds we must establish the compounds themselves. All other aspects of the economy are built off of this essential model.

---------------

Strategy Mode Compounds

Compound - tags,

Wood - combustible (15 MJ/Kg),
Iron -
Coal - combustible (24 MJ/Kg),
Copper - conductive
Textiles -
Steel -
Oil - combustible (40 MJ/Kg),
Salt -
Charcoal - combustible
Dye -
Glass -
Gold - conductive
Bronze -
Silver - conductive
Ivory -
Aluminum -
Sand -
Tin -
Hides -
Fur -


---------------

tl;dr

Spoiler:

So, to recap, we need someone to do the task, and preferably not Seregon because he has already made many such charts and has a lot on his hands right now. Also, we need to use that thread I linked earlier (here) to come up with a final list of compounds for the Strategy Mode. And lastly, we need to identify the significant properties of the compounds and the relationships between them, as in what combines together to make what. Discuss all of that below, and also feel free to ask any questions you may have.

Note: I will update the list of compounds on this post as we go along.

Ok, just two things. Why are you making a diferentiation between flamable and combustible? They are the same. And a property about flamable/combustible materials is how much heat/energy they can output. That will be necessary when getting to energy.

Also, why steel? It is a compound between iron and coal, and iron is way more usefull (especially because with iron you can get easily to steel, but it is hard the other way around). I suppose both will be added.

Oh right, I hadn't noticed that inconsistency. In regards to setting a value for the energy/heat value, I was thinking that we set wood as the default as 1.00, and as we come up with the values of the other combustible compounds we use the 1.00 for perspective. Also we could specify what percent becomes heat and what percent becomes light and/or anything else. I'llneed help with that however since I'm not exactly that knowledgeable regarding combustion rates.

Daniferrito wrote:

Also, why steel? It is a compound between iron and coal, and iron is way more usefull (especially because with iron you can get easily to steel, but it is hard the other way around). I suppose both will be added.

Both will be added, as well as coal.

NickTheNick wrote:

In regards to setting a value for the energy/heat value, I was thinking that we set wood as the default as 1.00, and as we come up with the values of the other combustible compounds we use the 1.00 for perspective.

I would prefer using real values, as that will mean we can use real scale values, and make everything more real. It also helps as we dont need to guess conversion rates, we can just look them up. And that way we can present the user with a scale they can recognize, instead of an arbitrary scale. I think everyone agrees using the SI. For energy we can use Watts per second or joules (they are exactly the same)

With that, it is really easy to look this up:

• Wood: about 15 megajoules per Kg
  
• Oil: 40 megajoules per Kg
  
• Coal: 24 megajoules per Kg

Here is a good link of energy output of various materials

NickTheNick wrote:

Also we could specify what percent becomes heat and what percent becomes light and/or anything else. I'llneed help with that however since I'm not exactly that knowledgeable regarding combustion rates.

If we are using fuel to light up something, we usually dont care how much heat does it produce, and if we are using it to heat up, all unnecessary energy generated eventually converts into heat anyway, so i dont think it matters.

NickTheNick wrote:

Both will be added, as well as coal.

Ok, just making sure.

I've started working on Task #1. Is this the sort of thing you need?

@Daniferrito: Awesome, I didn't even know such a scale existed! That's perfect for measuring the combustion rates of any compounds tagged as "combustible". I would prefer using megajoules instead of watts per second.

Regarding the percentages, I guess that isn't necessary then.

@Holomanga: That's perfect! Great work. That is very nice and organized. I think you could even draw an arrow from "Vegetation in Environment" to "Oil", since oil is just decayed plant matter. Also, another source of textiles could be animal hair, such as sheep wool or beaver fur. Nonetheless, amazing job, and see if you can keep working on it.

Ok guys so can you contribute some more compounds and their respective tags? I'll add some myself as well.

Holomanga, how is the chart going?

Also, any discussion or questions on the episode?

Pretty well. I've added a few compounds. (spoilered due to page stretch)

Spoiler:

Also, I do like the episode style. It gave me quite a good understanding of how the resources system works, which I didn't have before.

Also, the resistance of conductive materials should be added, which could affect the efficiency of circuitry function parts. Iron (1.0×10^−7 Ωm) and steel (1.43×10^−7 Ωm) also should have conductive tags.

Actually, i dont think we need to ressistance of conductive materials. Copper is the second best conductive metal, with gold silver being a tiny bit ahead (I really through it was gold). Copper is 1.68×10−8 agains silver, which is 1.59×10−8. Copper is so Belgium cheap and easy to extract (fist metal for humans) that there is nearly no need to use anything else. Superconductors are the only upgrade, but they are not usefull (at least for now) in electronics.

What does all the arrows going into copper ore mean? All the rock types have to meet, or can it be found in any of the rock types?

Edit: I dont think cinnabar nor mercury should be added, unless you got a use for them.

Daniferrito wrote:

Actually, i dont think we need to ressistance of conductive materials. Copper is the second best conductive metal, with gold silver being a tiny bit ahead (I really through it was gold). Copper is 1.68×10−8 agains silver, which is 1.59×10−8. Copper is so Belgium cheap and easy to extract (fist metal for humans) that there is nearly no need to use anything else. Superconductors are the only upgrade, but they are not usefull (at least for now) in electronics.

What does all the arrows going into copper ore mean? All the rock types have to meet, or can it be found in any of the rock types?

Edit: I dont think cinnabar nor mercury should be added, unless you got a use for them.

gold is used in electronics because it is less reactive than silver, even though silver is more conductive. Also, copper isn't cheap at all anymore because of it's high conductivity.

@Holomanga: Wow, that looks great. I suggest you colour code them. One colour of boxes be the compounds themselves. One colour be the boxes that are certain settings, states, or environments, such as "vegetation in the environment", and lastly a colour for things like sedimentary rock, or igneous rock, things that aren't compounds themselves.

EDIT: I think "Tin Bronze" is meant to be "Bronze"

@Daniferrito: I agree resistance doesn't seem really necessary at the moment. Nonetheless conductivity as a tag is still important.

Ah, ok boolean tags meaning they are conductive. That if fine on my part.

Ok so I got some ideas for new compounds, and I would like to see what you guys think. Which ones are significant enough to be included, which ones aren't.

Aluminum, since it is used in cars, planes, and boats.
Sand, since it is necessary for making glass.
Tin, since it is necessary for making Bronze (with copper).
Hides, since animal skin is common for making clothes.
Fur, since it adds diversity to clothe-making. Adding diversity to what can be made into clothes is necessary for the game to simulate trade incentives such as the silk trade and the fur trade. However, how would we distinguish whether a hairy animal yields wool or fur? That's the problem.

Those are my ideas for now.

EDIT: Also, should we include ore counterparts for every metal? For example, iron, and iron ore, as two different compounds. I was thinking it would be a good idea, but I want to hear your suggestions.

Aluminum, since it is used in cars, planes, and boats. Good material, particularly for planes, from to what I know of it and planes.
Sand, since it is necessary for making glass. I suggested this a few days ago in the brainstorming thread (actually, you might already know that…). It can also be used in structural materials like cement and concrete, making it pretty important.
Tin, since it is necessary for making Bronze (with copper). Not especially useful, but we wouldn't be able to make bronze without it, so this should be included.
Hides, since animal skin is common for making clothes. Yup.
Fur, since it adds diversity to clothe-making. Adding diversity to what can be made into clothes is necessary for the game to simulate trade incentives such as the silk trade and the fur trade. However, how would we distinguish whether a hairy animal yields wool or fur? That's the problem. A different gene in the share code (was that the term?) would do the trick, unless I'm missing something.

On the last two, calling them compounds seems a bit odd, since they can't really be made from anything else, or be made into anything else - they don't seem to fit into the compounds system. However, we don't really have any terminology to describe them. Perhaps organic compounds? Not really a problem, though.

Oh, and I have a suggestion - the other main useful organic compound-thing: Bone (including hooves, and possibly exoskeletal material?)

NickTheNick wrote:

EDIT: Also, should we include ore counterparts for every metal? For example, iron, and iron ore, as two different compounds. I was thinking it would be a good idea, but I want to hear your suggestions.

It will add another area of technology to develop, and prevent earlier (cavemen) sapience-level organisms from getting as much metal from an area as an advanced civilisation. I think this is a good idea. Though, we shouldn't have ores for every metal, only naturally occurring ones: for example, no bronze ore. I assume that's what you meant to say.

I was thinking that concrete be made out of clay, stone, and water, but I guess clay, sand, and water would also work. Which combination would you think is more accurate?

Could you explain what you mean by the share code?

Basically compounds is just referring to any resource or trade good, so some ones that may not sound like compounds are technically compounds.

Yeah, bone is already covered as ivory. I forgot to add that, I'll do so now.

Yes of course, just for naturally occurring ones.

@Everyone: So guys, basically I'll wrap up this episode once we have created a definitive list of compounds for the Strategy Mode with their respective significant tags, or we are drained on the topic. If discussion dries up, I will revive this is a later episode, because this is something we NEED to nail down for anything after sentience to even be possible. The next episodes are goings to be about The Processing of Compounds in the Strategy Mode, and how that relates to things the player creates in the Tech Editor, and about creating a Supply and Demand system for all the compounds and TO's in the game, based off of what was achieved in an earlier Supply-Demand Thread.

If we want the most accurate method of making concrete, Wikipedia says aggregate (crushed stone, gravel, sand, etc.), cement (i.e. limestone & clay), and water. Basically, sand and (lime)stone are both used, though crushed stone can be used in the place of sand. Having multiple methods of making is is an interesting idea, but might overcomplicate things. I think sand, stone (or limestone specifically if we include it), clay, and water would be the most accurate combination.



Apparently share code isn't a well known term, so I'll add it to the TAD. Actually, maybe TAD should be added to the TAD, too.

Anyway:
__________________________

Share code - A string of text which can be read by the game to create an organism, or anything else made in the game's editors*. To a person reading it, it will ideally be fairly clear which sections represent what part of the organism/object. The name ‘share code’ refers to its use as a way of sharing an in-game object in a way that can be easily copied and pasted via a forum or similar website from one game to another, as well as, of course, its code-like appearance.

An possible layout of a section of the code, a second arm with a grasper of type 3 positioned on it:
appendage[type:1,instance:2](15,6,120){grasper[type:3,instance:1](40,6,9)}
__________________________

That's the sort of thing I'm referring to. So wool could just be a different type of pelage to fur which produces a different compound, or something like that.

Well for the purposes of the game, crushed stone, gravel, and limestone are all stone. Then there is clay, sand, and water. However, four components is a lot, so I was thinking we narrow it down to three. So should we cut out sand, or stone? That's why I propose either

Clay+Stone+Water
or
Clay+Sand+Water

Or should we keep it as needing four components to make it more of a later game compound, because the player won't be able to supply all four of those components so easily in the earlier stages of the strategy mode. As a thesis to support this, you could even go on to say that the reason the Romans discovered concrete was because they had sufficient access to all four components due to their large empire. I have just convinced myself of it. I think we should have all four components, so it would look like:

Clay+Sand+Stone+Water

Also, to reiterate my previous edit:
"So guys, basically I'll wrap up this episode once we have created a definitive list of compounds for the Strategy Mode with their respective significant tags, or we are drained on the topic. If discussion dries up, I will revive this is a later episode, because this is something we NEED to nail down for anything after sentience to even be possible. The next episodes are goings to be about The Processing of Compounds in the Strategy Mode, and how that relates to things the player creates in the Tech Editor, and about creating a Supply and Demand system for all the compounds and TO's in the game, based off of what was achieved in an earlier Supply-Demand Thread."

Without meaning to be difficult, sand + stone + clay + water does not make concrete. As mentioned above, concrete is sand/stone + cement + water, the sand and stone serve the same purpose, though they are generally mixed so that you have finer sand with coarser crushed stone.

Cement in turn is made by cooking limestone in a kiln (possibly with other materials) to make quicklime. If anything, limestone needs to be treated differently to other rocks, as it is a raw material in quite a few interesting production chains, including cement, fertilisers, iron smelting, and the production of calcium (ussually for a food additive).

Yes, but I was intending to eliminate cement, since I only know of it as being a component of concrete, and thus not a very useful compound for our already burgeoning list. If it is necessary then we can add it as the middleman between the raw materials and the final product of concrete. So would it be safe to say that cement is made of limestone/stone, clay, and sand? And then, cement plus water equals concrete.

However, on the topic of limestone, which is why I put limestone slash stone above, I don't feel that it is significant enough be distinguished from stone. Are there any other processes where it specifically, instead of just stone in general, is necessary? Because although it is accurate to make it so that limestone is a component of cement, and I know I asked for accuracy, but what I forgot to mention was simplicity. I just feel like having stone cover the role of limestone is a large enough benefit to the simplification of the compound list to compensate for the smaller sacrifice to scientific accuracy. Please, point me out if I you disagree or there is something I am missing here. Also, separating stone from limestone would also start to bring in to question whether further types of stone should be distinguished as well, such as granite or sandstone. Moreover, that would mean we would have quite a few different types of stone, which I think is too deep in detail for the level of detail we are going for.

Off the topic of stone, cement, and concrete, I got some more contributions.

Incense -
Rubber -
Plastic -
Grain - Too Terra-Centric?
Gems -
Herbs - A precursor to medicine. Consumed by apothecaries to produce health, and possibly some other things. Basically just derived from plants with a certain trait, or "Share Code".
Bricks -
Medicine - Now this is a tough one. I was thinking that we make it a compound, which is then consumed by hospitals and other medical buildings to product health. Also, it would be made of several possible combinations of ingredients. Has there already been concept on this? What do you think?
Paper - This and the next one I'm unsure about. If we add them it adds some significance to the Printing Press Function Part. Books create something for Library buildings/TO's to consume to produce their science and culture.
Books - Look above.

Please, tell me what you think.

Sand isn't used to make cement, it's just limestone and clay. It is used to hold materials together, and is used primarily to make concrete and mortar (info: mainly known for holding bricks together; made with sand, cement, and water, like concrete). Mortar seems like something we should include. Cement seems to be simply an intermediate compound. However, it has been historically used on a large scale by the Roman Empire as a construction material.

Also, something to consider: heating limestone to form quicklime in the making of cement produces CO₂.

NickTheNick wrote:

Incense - Has it really got any use?
Rubber - Good
Plastic - This wasn't already planned‽
Grain - Too Terra-Centric? Perhaps. Whatever types of plant matter are in the OE should get compound versions.
Gems - Maybe.
Herbs - A precursor to medicine. Consumed by apothecaries to produce health, and possibly some other things. Basically just derived from plants with a certain trait, or "Share Code". A share code is a textual equivalent of DNA, not individual genes. As for herbs… This seems rather detailed for industrial onwards. Awakening and society, perhaps. Just my opinion, though, and it would add realism.
Bricks - This shouldn't be a compound. If we have bricks, they should be an object/skin in the Tech Editor, and the cost of ingredient materials should be charged for every structure made from them. There's no need to be able to stockpile bricks.
Medicine - Now this is a tough one. I was thinking that we make it a compound, which is then consumed by hospitals and other medical buildings to product health. Also, it would be made of several possible combinations of ingredients. Has there already been concept on this? What do you think? I am not aware of a concept for medicine. See my response to herbs. Even games focusing entirely on civilisations don't worry about medicine (from the few games of that genre I have played, I may be wrong).
Paper - This and the next one I'm unsure about. If we add them it adds some significance to the Printing Press Function Part. Books create something for Library buildings/TO's to consume to produce their science and culture. Again, like with bricks, stockpiling paper seems a bit odd. Books could just be made directly from the materials. On the subject of the printing press, I think that could just be a research which gives a boost - a function part wont really add much to gameplay, it will just add to the already vast amount of FPs.
Books - Look above. Perhaps, but the idea of books being consumed by libraries is a bit weird - what if the building gets demolished? There should be a way of getting those books back. Libraries also aren't the sole location of books. I would suggest library stay separate from books, or perhaps give books a bonus, while a stockpile of books provides bonuses over time. Every building destroyed then takes a few books along with it, and libraries take a larger amount.

Regarding cement being an intermediate product, and not useful for anything else, that's questionable, but then cement and concrete cover largely the same roles. I have a few examples of such intermediaries in the compound system for cell stage (pyruvate being a good example), and my solution to these 'useless' compounds is to include them in diagrams for clarity, mark them as intermediates, and ignore them in reactions. Therefore, concrete would be made from (limestone + clay + heat = cement) + water + aggregate (sand/crushed stone), so overall concrete = limestone + clay + water + aggregate + heat.

I do think it's worth seperating out different rock types (e.g.: limestone, various ores, coal). It may or may not be feasible to do so once we actually start creating the later stages, but I think it adds a lot of interesting challenges for the player. Most notably the geographical distribution of resources, which means that not every city/nation would have a ready supply of each material, hopefully stimulating trade. However, for simplicity, I would be content not to seperate these out, I simply think it's worthwhile for playability.

@The Uteen: Oh, then if cement itself can be used for construction I think we should add it in.
Incense has use as a compound that higher class populations would want, as well as something that temples and houses of worship consume in their production of culture and happiness.
Ahh ok, I see how bricks work.
The reason I want herbs and medicine for apothecaries and hospitals to intake is because I was thinking it would be more realistic if it was that way. I am not entirely sure of this, however, and am up for discussion.
Paper, yeah I see what you mean.
Nah, now that I think about it I don't think Books are necessary anymore, ore at least in the manner I was presenting them.

@Seregon: So I've changed my mind I think cement should be added. Nonetheless I think aggregate is a bit minor for our scope. What do you think? I was think we have the reaction look like:

Cement + Water + Sand + Stone(Whichever stone is crushed to make aggregate)

Or, if we are to include aggregate:

Cement + Water + Aggregate

The reason I didn't include heat is because the Function Part that undergoes this reaction (think of it like an organelle undergoing reactions in Microbe Stage and an organ in later stages) would be assumed to be producing the heat anyways. On that note, what Function Part should be involved in creating concrete, and what for cement? The current list of Function Parts and the reactions they are involved in is:



And lastly, on the topic of stone, I would be fine with diversifying stone into Limestone and others for those purposes. Obviously ores and coal were going to be separate from stone either way. However, now the question is what types of stone should we include?

I didn't intend aggregate to be a new compound, rather a collection of other compounds which serve the same purpose, i.e.: either crushed stone or sand could be used in making concrete. In effect we have two different reactions for concrete, one with stone, one with sand.

Heat isn't actually involved in the concrete reaction, but for cooking the limestone when making cement. The functional parts involved (I think) would be a kiln for cement and a mixer for concrete?

For other stone types, I'm not sure there are that many we need. Perhaps marble for a more luxurious building material, flint for early tools, limestone as mentioned, and possibly slate? Most other stones are used in fairly similair ways, these are the only ones I could think of which are really different.

Ahh ok, that's a good idea. So two reactions for concrete then. What is the type of stone crushed to form aggregate?

Ok, so kiln as a new Function Part. It can also be used to heat clay for construction and pottery, and serve as a general oven for cooking, such as baking bread.

Ok, so flint, limestone, and marble? Should the fourth be slate, granite, sandstone, or another stone?

Crushed stone could be any stone (i.e.: not one of the 'special' stones mentioned above). I'm not sure what other stones would be worth having, we'll have to think about that. I'd consider granite and sandstone to be 'normal', they're generally just used for building, even if they are obviously very different from eachother.