Also, it's very clear the thread has moved on. You should too.
Not quite, because twice now I've felt insulted, however passive-agressive and politely.
There was no "rational" debate. A civil argument, maybe, but not a debate. We weren't weighing pros and cons of adding this thing or that, but were arguing like a collective trio of morons over what were possible future additions and what was currently here, based on a combination of past, present, and possible future content, along with first-hand observations in-game, and possibly in addition to political interpretations.
I personally remained civil for the most part, and even in a debate one can at least try to see the reasoning the other party has. From what I saw, your reasoning about things stemmed largely from "this is how the game is because this is how the currently game is," "it's been x years since this dev statement or that," and "If they wanted to make a feudal society they'd have done that from the get go," discounting the fact that in it's earlier form, the game was hideously complex and broken in many areas, and it was a nightmare just getting enough food to not die of mass starvation come winter, and once the economy activated, you had to near-scramble to make sure everyone had enough work as time went on so they could pay their rent and afford food.
In the present state however, you'll only want for sustenance if you deliberately settled in a desolate place with no seeds, making even caravan visits for anything other provoking enemies to come for your wealth and importing metal and rarer cut gems pointless.
You also decided on using countries that have no tangible relation to the argument at hand being pulled up as examples (a fear/forced indoctrination-based police state, and a broken Federal Republic - neither one of which have anything to do with anything here other than the former being on paper, a communist state - and a horrifically corrupt and inhumane one at that.
You would prefer the hang on every word of the devs like it were sacred writ rather than think
We aren't hanging onto it as "sacred writ." We're tangibly showing you precisely why we have reasons to interpret implied connections of a particular nature in addition to what we can perceive due to the titles, nature of how they're acquired, and what role and purpose these nobles would serve beyond being annoying (at present, they serve no purpose other than a benchmark of your productivity, so why keep them in at all if not for a reason further down the line?) Even if that's
not how the game works right specifically now.
However, I also conceded that while this is what I'm guessing
may be (a simplified feudal system wherein you may at least in part be dependant on surrounding communities that are built post-foundation for both necessities and a source of recruits, while they depend on you to protect them from threats that don't warrant the General's attention,) it may not necessarily be what
will be. But until Toady makes a statement to otherwise, his own word is the most relevant reason to make certain assumptions at all.
Additionally, because these titles
imply feudal nobility, from that alone one can make a reasonable assumption about the future economic and possible political nature of dwarven civs much later in the game's development, irrespective of what is currently in place. If they aren't intended to imply such a connection, they'd be renamed to something else (Councillors, Governors, or something like that,) that more closely resembles the current communist mostly-egalitarian confederacy set up at present.
I could also say you just insulted both me and Ribs, for the second time at least, even if exceptionally politely (which is better than what people elsewhere would have done.)
The purpose of a SUGGESTIONS forum is to add new ideas into the system
How was what you were arguing for (the current nature of the game, which is partly due to various things being in need of massive overhauls that are not even on the Dev's immediate radar right now, due to Taverns, scholars, and such being the current focus,) contributing anything either? Suggestions are about things for the future of the game. Feudalism lite seems to be what the future entails for the game, based on dev statements, first-hand observations, and guesswork based upon all sources available, in code and in content - past, present, and possible future. I've gone back through the thread, and you have not taken into account past or future, only present.
I at least did have some ideas regarding handling debtors, possible forced replacement of site leaders that are "incompetent," the payment of taxes to the monarch by way of a value of goods you select yourself, from the stocks, or hell, even just giving a few stacks of gold or silver coins to meet the value (if you owe 7500 money in tax, just set a single full stack of gold coins to pay, since each coin is worth 15 money,) the use of sliders - however flawed that idea would be - to set taxation of areas you control (possibly using a similar system to how you place orders with caravans?) And how militarized they are.
All I've actually seen from you, is in regards to how we'd collect any taxes - sending someone out with a wagon or pack animal to collect the goods. Which I think is a great idea that none of the rest of us had mentioned, and the code could be partly reused for sending trainers out with shipments of equipment when you want to raise a group of soldiers off-site.
Instead, you've largely argued things don't exist because they don't exist at present (as in, like things we have now - moving groups, active world, actual values for civilizations and individuals,) the code did not exist before the current version. YOu also argued that certain bugs - like lazy nobles not being lazy, aren't bugs, but unimplemented features as of v34+. They
were lazy before, and now they aren't, and they aren't supposed to be active members of the workforce. However it hasn't been addressed because unlike the size bug for example, it isn't a gamebreaker bug.
As I've said, the game's civs as a whole more heavily resemble
right now, a bunch of egalitarian confederacies of autonomous sites that have no use for eachother in any capacity. However, based on implied connections, dev statements, and stuff that was dummied out or in need of repair because it was just frustrating, had some kind of conflict in the code with something else, or severely hurt the game's ability to function, we can assume we won't
always have it like that.
Why have hillocks surround the fortresses, made out of dirt, with virtually no protection beyond a token handful of poorly equipped soldiers, if not to have them serve some other function later on? Why have nobles at all when Mayors can do everything? Why have soldiers if we can kill everything with traps? Why keep coins as something we can make, if the economy isn't going to return in a more functional form? Why can't we interpret the game's future as being more semi-feudal than communistic(I say semi, because we as players still need to have some degree of autonomy and agency over our forts,) and instead
must believe it will always be red sickle and star flags and commie hats mas you at least seem to think it will be?
I can say the same for current features. Why would we have fruit trees if we can just grow plump helmets and live off nothing but those? Why are some dwarves suddenly more willing to stand and fight or ignore things that they would have run away from no matter what before? Why have a Fortress Guard and Hammerer if it's only purpose is destructive to the fortress (even though they also detain violent non-child tantrum-throwers and can now reliably bash vampire brains in?) Why have dwarves tantrum at all? Why have a CMD to oversee the hospital when any old shlub can patch someone up and call it a day?
Granted I keep taking your bait, but I've also seen you as needlessly arrogant in your own right (as have others I've linked the thread to in an effort to figure out which side seemed more unfailingly fucked,) overly aggressive, and arguing for the sake of arguing, as well as finding fault in seemingly everything I, Ribs, and at points StagnantSoul as well, have said. While there's nothing wrong with that in itself, you do nothing to make us think your outlook is any better or more valid. Instead, you've fuelled a fire we have most assuredly been getting laughed at over, going so far as to passive-aggressively insult us: Calling me arrogant when I have quite clearly made testaments denouncing what I say in part, because I am by my own admission both not an expert and at least in part talking out of my ass like the ignorant plebeian I am, implying we don't think, and assuming we don't know the definition of things - even if we didn't, all it takes is a trip to wikipedia, or an online dictionary to become enlightened on a definition of something. However in spite of that, you are a very eloquent (for the most part) individual, which I do respect. Most people who do similar things are way, waaaaaaaaaay less polite and grammatically correct about things.
I also at least admit I'm no expert and guessing at shit, and Ribs goes as far as bringing forward justifiable reasons to make those assumptions with a degree of certainty on the future of the game. You, meanwhile, have only your modding and possibly playing adventure mode more fully than I ever have to back you up, without any evidence to support it beyond that or anything else to give us reason to think you may be right on one or more points, falling back mainly on "You're guess is wrong because it is," without taking into account, again: Past, present, and possible future content, as well as influences on the game, and that the game is largely going to turn into a generic western European fantasy world generator with a certain set of internal consistencies. Such settings like that will typically be operating with either an at-times confusing dark/middle ages mercantile semi-feudal system (possibly dwarves and humans,) absolute monarchies (elves,) autocracies of varying benevolence (goblins,) or freakishly powerful plutocratic monarchies (again, possibly humans and dwarves.) And these may never fully resemble their counterparts IRL for a simple reason.
Instead of being rigidly locked into it in its entirety though liekw e would be in say, Stronghold or Crusader Kings II, we'll get to fuck around in that with some degree of freedom so we can have fun, be it in building mighty fortresses that may have a few thousand people living off-site under our influence, or going on murder sprees in a city because we felt like it, manually finding people wanting to settle in unclaimed lands to segue into building a fort with a crew of your own choosing, or even just being a deranged naked dude poking everyone he comes across with a sharp metal stick to determine their friendliness. We can be heroes and bastions of safety and splendor that hardly involve themselves at all with thier surrounding towns, wretched fucks who murder and steal when needed and wretched hives that tax the surrounding lands to painful levels that simply slaughter attacking rebels, or complete fucking lunatics killing everyone they meet and a series of dirty pits subsisting on mushrooms in no better shape than the people we're supposed to influence because everyone keeps dying to werebeasts and wildlife.
All for the sake of us getting to have our own fun, we're given that freedom, rather than locked completely and unerringly into place. Now I'm sure wou'll continue, refuting things as being based on perception, or whatever, and granted some of the stuff discussed and argued requires code not yet here, but it's been said that it will come, in some fashion, by the developer. And while you can keep insulting me for trusting the word of the guy making the damn game over yours, I'm going to trust his word over yours over the future of the game because he's the one making the fucking game.
With that all said, the fire further stoked, and my ire at a slow-build, I'm going to take my holly-jolly uneducated and unthinking self and go kill plants with a weed whacker and pretend the ants and beetles fear the towering sky titan and his whirring deathblade on a stick.
Author
Topic: Alternative Dwarven Economy: Revolts, Schools, Taxes, and Industry. (Long) (Read 25112 times)