Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[counting]

But I don't agree with the implication that medieval Europe wasn't a market economy.

... not until ships went to the new world and started coming back with huge amount of treasure did property rights emerge. These rights emerged because nobles and such didn't want to risk lots of money on a venture if they were not certain  that they could keep the bounty of that venture.

The right of property are far ancient as well as modern. The idea of a person can own a property dates way back. It's the legal system that protect the property without issuing violence or wars, makes it true for general public (late till 18th century), and only after when the personal rights for every man are established, than it has the effect. But this is NOT new, the ancient laws survived like the Code of Hammurabi, says if slaves are returning to their masters, the finder will be paid with certain amount of money (early commodity money - silver), also define the punishment of robbery, or if someone's farm is damaged what should be paid by the perpetrator. Since then, the natural right of ownership is part of the custom laws. And the nobles and lords were often in debts, and loaned money from merchants. The richest of the new world didn't make Spanish wealthy, but increased its appetite for more wars. Hence the spoiled of war only brings more wars.

The result of discovering new world in the 15th century and its affect are so huge, it's not a easy task to describe or discuss it. But in the view of developing capitalism, the process had already begun in the later 12th century. It is the rediscovery of the "old world", makes long term trading becoming vibrate, and gave rise to the needs of new markets and redeveloping economy. A combination effect of growth in population, the downfall of Rome Catholic authority, new naval technology because of wars, the rise of city states, the advanced of Islamic worlds (brings wars as well), but also brings new opportunity, since wars cost money, a lot more, rising the status of merchants and debtors. Also those kingdoms need more and more professional soldiers, beyond feudal system can provide, and these mercenaries also want riches and wealth. Crusaders since became more like merchants than soldiers at the end.

If dwarf fortress were thought of in feudal terms I think it could address the issues of money creation and the like that plagued the previous economic implementation.
...
Like I said, it isn't fleshed out. I see how it could be a lot of fun but I also see a lot of potential problems.

I am now writing a story to tell a possible way in DF world economy. It maybe difference as any real world system. But I'll try to make it as close to the feelings of medieval era (actually more toward late period and Renaissance), I will post it in my thread, and post the link here if someone is interested.

[Truean]

*sigh*

Dude, this isn't about waxing philosophical.... Yeah, I've got an honors degree in economics and a law degree, I can fill volumes too. No one would read it though.... You're making this wayyyyy too complex.

Theories:
I know what price is and you can explain it as a ratio or a number or whatever. I get it. I'm saying that isn't how people choose. Name brand is $1 more than store brand but somehow people buy the brand name and it's the same damn thing.... I'm saying those graphs don't equate to the real world well and thinking they do is why we're screwed up now. None of it leaves room for perception, rather than actual value. I suspect we aren't going to agree here. Pet Rock....

As applied to dwarf fortress:
The game doesn't do supply and demand and it can't really. Are you kidding me? This thing already maxes out CPU capacity and achieves stack overflow with ease. FPS death is the number one killer of forts.... The game can't handle it.

Aside from not having the capacity to track items and calculate supply/demand, the game's structure doesn't favor the traditional capitalistic model. Historically it's set in the 14th century and leans toward a medieval feel. The idea of nobility holding people to oaths and assigning roles is pretty much what we have now. Mandates, prison terms/beatings, export bans, etc, these are all things more in line with feudalism than capitalism.

In summation, I get economics, I don't agree with a lot of the theories behind it, and the game doesn't support it. The game does support feudalism and arguably, that is what the game is now.

[counting]

*sigh*

Dude, this isn't about waxing philosophical.... Yeah, I've got an honors degree in economics and a law degree, I can fill volumes too. No one would read it though.... You're making this wayyyyy too complex.

Theories:
I know what price is and you can explain it as a ratio or a number or whatever. I get it. I'm saying that isn't how people choose. Name brand is $1 more than store brand but somehow people buy the brand name and it's the same damn thing.... I'm saying those graphs don't equate to the real world well and thinking they do is why we're screwed up now. None of it leaves room for perception, rather than actual value. I suspect we aren't going to agree here. Pet Rock....

As applied to dwarf fortress:
The game doesn't do supply and demand and it can't really. Are you kidding me? This thing already maxes out CPU capacity and achieves stack overflow with ease. FPS death is the number one killer of forts.... The game can't handle it.

Aside from not having the capacity to track items and calculate supply/demand, the game's structure doesn't favor the traditional capitalistic model. Historically it's set in the 14th century and leans toward a medieval feel. The idea of nobility holding people to oaths and assigning roles is pretty much what we have now. Mandates, prison terms/beatings, export bans, etc, these are all things more in line with feudalism than capitalism.

In summation, I get economics, I don't agree with a lot of the theories behind it, and the game doesn't support it. The game does support feudalism and arguably, that is what the game is now.

I am just trying to clearing the terms, so we can agree or disagree more clearly. And others may learn from it. (I admit that I am in the fey mood of writing thesis, so can't help typing a lot. and always disprove or making a stand XD)

About the theory
I think I do agree with you that theories are just theories, and as you said: "I'm saying those graphs don't equate to the real world well", is exactly what I am saying, so you agree with me as well. The model/theory we used don't represent the system we were at. And I don't recall capitalism is a theory, but rather it's the name we gave to the phenomena we observed. And those math and model are constructed to explain why. Since then (from 18th century), we have built theories after theories to explain "capitalism". I also agree a lot of them are bad, even confusing at best, and not helping to explain what we saw. And sadly people tend to serve themselves, especially someone who are in critical positions, decided to enforce laws, policies, regulations, decisions using these theories only when that suits their benefits. Afterward, they will stay out of the way, and let others' thought it's the fault of the system. (Although sometimes they become victims themselves, like the famous John Law) That's what I believe is what screwing up, not because of the tools, but those who used them.

About perceptions and the implication in DF
I don't know if you are tracking the newer development in the field of ACE (Agent-Based Computational Economics), its the offshoot about using autonomous agents (human or not) each guided with limited information in it's own way, most of the time just some simple rules, and try to find the emergence of micro-meso-macro phenomena. It will not rely on heavy mathematical models, or not even searching a equilibrium in the system, rather trying to experiment in a "Petri dish". And we do crossfield study such as the psychological factors observed, and see if it can be modeled into agents. Although, most of the "blue print" of the meso macro structure are mostly composited with traditional models in order to fill in blank, until we can build it from ground up. Also I am honored to listened prof. Reinhard Selten about his idea of bounded rationality in game theory to build the next step in experimental economics. So even the main stream economics studies now, are not like what we read on textbooks or in classrooms anymore. Don't you agree that DF is essentially a "Petri dish" world with multi-entities, and suitable for experiments? I am not talking about adding equations or statistical functions in it. But rather simple action-reaction sets within the entities (mostly dwarfs), and with thousands of people playing it, we may actually see some results with what maybe and what could be. And probably finding some basic principle about economics from it. Shouldn't we be excited about it rather than limited our imaginations?

About feudalism
I don't even think its toward feudalism yet. Where are the fief, the knights, the structure of a layer on top another layer. No household units, No landlords claim taxes over people, and serve as backbones in the courts of nobility. It's more like despotism with a lot of slaves. And the tyrant (the player) can not even be touched. Maybe at lest these dwarfs can not be compelled to do what they don't plan to to (most of the time), and keeps that little bit free will. And No, I don't think implementing economic system into it will crash or immobilized DF. Our experimental models although using a cloud-computing framework to process, but we simulated millions of agents. (10^6), but DF only has at best 10^4. And it only require 10^3 of entities to make a valid economic system as history of economics tells us.

[jseah]

I haven't fleshed it out and it might alter the game enough to be either A) another mode or B) just something we wouldn't want.

I want it.  I won't consider any economic simulation complete until I can send my fort into a deflationary spiral for FUN. 
Sorry in advance to any Japanese. 

[RabidAnubis]

I was thinking of guilds as the economy.  He already is putting in guilds if you look at the development page. 

Anyways, feudalism is too easily managed.  We want the game to be impossible so it can be dwarf like. 

[counting]

I was thinking of guilds as the economy.  He already is putting in guilds if you look at the development page. 

Anyways, feudalism is too easily managed.  We want the game to be impossible so it can be dwarf like.

Let's have a no currency, everybody doing exactly what they want economy, the ULTIMATE futuristic Star Trek economy! Wait. Don't we have that already

[Truean]

I was thinking of guilds as the economy.  He already is putting in guilds if you look at the development page. 

Anyways, feudalism is too easily managed.  We want the game to be impossible so it can be dwarf like.

Let's have a no currency, everybody doing exactly what they want economy, the ULTIMATE futuristic Star Trek economy! Wait. Don't we have that already

With the right reactions you could argue replicators exist.

[counting]

I was thinking of guilds as the economy.  He already is putting in guilds if you look at the development page. 

Anyways, feudalism is too easily managed.  We want the game to be impossible so it can be dwarf like.

The idea of guilds makes me have this idea. Hey, it may even work. At least a lot fun. And it will be very dwarfy.

[Montague]

Great glaciers. I might be intruding here by just posting without reading these text-wall economic treatises... but

Economics the DF seem to follow either a "company store" model, where everyone works for, is paid by and purchases goods from, the same for-profit company. It could also resemble idealized communism, where everyone works hard as hard as possible and everyone gets the same exact reimbursement and entitlements  for their labor, regardless of the value produced. Except the military and nobles, perhaps, but thats realistic in a real-world communistic economy where the party members and military don't really produce anything but receive a greater share of the goods produced.

In this vein, feudalism is similar to communism, in that all labor is done by the lower strata for the benefit of a dictator, state, or lord. Pretty much every economic system in real life can be thought of as "swordsmen and slaves" depending on your philosophical leanings.

That said, I'd hate to see a true capitalist system implemented in DF, as it would be difficult to track every individual's wealth and impossible for an individual dorf to spend it freely. A legendary might want to carve out an enormous palace for himself or buy up weapons to arm soldiers for some personal cause, which doesn't vibe well with gameplay if every individual is out for themselves and not what you command them to do.