Brad Wardell's site for talking about the customization of Windows.
Published on November 8, 2008 By Frogboy In Elemental Dev Journals

One of the things in Elemental we've been thinking hard on is how the economic system in the game should work.  Elemental is, first and foremost, about building a civilization that happens to exist in a world filled with magic.

So when it comes to building things, we are trying to get away from the classic "N production units".  There are, for instance, no factories in Elemental. We want players to really understand just how big of a deal it is for a civilization to be able to produce mounted warriors who have metal armor and metal weapons. It's not just knowing how to build such a unit, it's being able to put together the infrastructure to produce such a unit.

Players don't research types of units, they research technologies. Players then design their own units and those designs require certain resources.  A basic soldier with a club is pretty easy. You take a guy, arm him with a big stick. A better soldier might involve same guy, armed with same stick but trained. Now he's much much better but it will obviously take longer to get that unit. It's not about production then, it's about time. 

A still better soldier might be equipped a bronze sword instead of the stick. But that bronze sword didn't just come out of nowhere. The metal had to be mined and then forged and then delivered.  Of course, the challenge from a game-design point of view is that you don't want players to be forced to micro-manage such things. It's supposed to be a strategy game, not an inventory management game.  And so, you make that issue something for your civilization to deal with - not the player.

A given land tile may have a metal resource on it. The player builds a mine on it. That mine then produces N units of metal per turn. That metal then flows to the keep's inventory (in the city). When the keep's inventory gets filled, it then starts getting sent out to other cities (little caravans start appearing on the map delivering this stuff). All of this is automated but evidence of a growing civilization. Players can build warehouses to store more inventory of a resource. A player can also build an armory which produces weapons which flow again into the keep's inventory and then into warehouses if built and then out to the country side to other cities.  Players can build roads to increase the speed in which these resources make it (and incidentally, these caravans only go out sporadically so the map isn't going to be full of these units running around and they're not true units, they'll be almost like decoration except when attacked).

So when I go to build a unit, the amount of time it takes to build that unit is going to be based on decisions I made -- what am I equipping him with. How much training am I giving him? And of course, since populations of "cities" range from 100 to 1 million or so, one of the resources units require are people. A village of 100 people obviously can't conjure up a legion no matter how much money and resources you have.

How will all this actually be implemented? That's where the open beta will come into play. Our development tools allow us to quickly implement many different concepts and UI's. that's where a lot of our work has gone into so that we can make changes like this.  Players saw hints of this in Galactic Civilizations where we could make dramatic changes to the game based on player feedback but it's nothing compared to what we've built for Elemental.

So for instance, do players want to prioritize where these caravans go? How much control do players want of this kind of thing? Would it be more fun to actually have technology branches dedicated to having governors (not AI, just bonuses to supply) that "manage" this.  These are some of the many things that players will be involved in.

The main thing I wanted to get across is that we are not going to have the traditional "N units of production".  Players will be able to design their units, design how much training (a small squad of elite soldiers or a huge mob of untrained brutes or somewhere in between?), decide how well equipped you want them to be and so on.  It's not about sending out a knight. There is no "knight" unit unless you choose to call a unit you designed that has a horse, a soldier who has been trained, plate mail, sword, helmet, etc. a knight when you save it.  How long would this knight take to create? Possibly very little time at all if you have the plate mail, sword, helmet, and horse ready to go. Then it's just a matter of the training time.  Otherwise, it could take quite a long time (the game will estimate the time based on arriving supplies). 

Hopefully this gives you a glimpse at the strategic depth we want to provide players. The choices for players in how they want to play this game are endless.


Comments (Page 4)
10 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5 6  Last
on Nov 09, 2008

ZubaZ hopes Elder Brother Wu (the money lender) is around.  Otherwise I'm in a world of hurt.

on Nov 09, 2008

Interesting, Brad.  I've been hoping somebody would find some way to tweak the 4x production model beyond just "If you have Iron, you can build Swordsmen instead of Militia" (which was a very nice tweak in its own right)!

I love the notion of limited resources and transportation abilities creating bottlenecks for what you can produce when and where.  A few thoughts/suggestions:

  1. I hope you're able to tweak the system so towns have a limited supply of resources they can ship (in the above example, as soon as Trinos can build plate mail, it can supply it to the whole empire, and the only bottleneck is how far you are from Trinos).
  2. I wonder if there's a way you can do it so towns who export lots of goods get some kind of benefits (those Trinos blacksmiths work hard, you know!) from the trade, even as strains on infrastructure limit how many goods can be pushed abroad?
  3. The economic model you're building strikes me as something very similar to what was in the old Imperialism and Imperialism 2 titles, in certain respects.
  4. I've always wished a 4x game could capture the way real economies evolve, where expertise in a certain area is built over time, and different disciplines in the same region combine to form valuable new synergies.  I understand why 4x games abstractualize this, but it always seemed kind of lame to me that, as soon as I built a Smith, I could churn out just as much pig iron as any other town with a Smith, and I could upgrade him to an "Armorer" right away with enough build points.  I've often wondered whether there wasn't a way to build town populations w/certain "skill sets", but I suspect this would be a micromanagement nightmare.
  5. There might be too much micromanagement here, but I think there should be some kind of "attrition" effect on goods produced when they have to be shipped, w/perhaps worse attrition rates if they go further.
  6. As others have said, figuring out how to prioritize would be hard, but I'm okay if the system doesn't offer players perfect control--even in the modern day, government doesn't have perfect control over the flow of products.  The trick is to create a dynamic where it doesn't turn into a supply-chain-management nightmare.
on Nov 10, 2008

@FarAway Galciv - Most excellent points to address directly to be honest. I assumed they would already be accounted for in the system outlined. This assumption is based on my experience with Entrepreneur. However that was some time ago and we should never really assume anything.

on Nov 10, 2008

Except I want the option to micro everything. To me micro is part of the immersion effect for the game.

I'm not against allowing people to micro. I'm against forcing them to. If you have to devise one unit per city to make the most out of their training/construction time, then you're forcing micro through bad interface. If you abstract training a little, then you can get the same effect without forcing to micro.

You'll still have a lot of opportunity at micromanagement with Brad's system anyway, since some units will be trained, others not, and you'll want to keep track of that, group them how you like, etc.

on Nov 10, 2008

LDiCesare

I'm not against allowing people to micro. I'm against forcing them to. If you have to devise one unit per city to make the most out of their training/construction time, then you're forcing micro through bad interface. If you abstract training a little, then you can get the same effect without forcing to micro.

You'll still have a lot of opportunity at micromanagement with Brad's system anyway, since some units will be trained, others not, and you'll want to keep track of that, group them how you like, etc.

I too am for a dual system as I have pointed out in several threads already. With the computing power available for this title having both either in a single or dual GUI should not be an issue methinks.

on Nov 10, 2008

For each ressource, we should have a list of priority.

Cities at the top if each list are producing that ressources. The fellowing cities have top priority to get the produced ressource and so on with at the bottom the cities which will be the least supplied. Each list can be re-ordered but ressources producing cities are always on the top for the ressources they produces.

on Nov 10, 2008

Frogboy
When I click on a city and want to see how long it will take for my squad of Paladins to be made it will still say "9 turns" but that 9 turns will be now based on:


0 weeks for horses because they're available in town.
8 weeks for training.
2 weeks for supply of plate mail to arrive from Trinos
9 weeks for supply of enchanted long swords to arrive from Kaplar.

I'm unclear if this is already your intent but I'd like to petition that you don't "hide" those extra factors too deeply. If the main city screen says "9 turns" to build a unit, a tooltip or other second-level screen should make the various components of that time visible so that I can consider taking any action to improve the situation (e.g., changing a caravan route or researching a technology that improves plate mail forging speed, etc.).

- Ash

on Nov 10, 2008

Can I attack the caravan from Kaplar and steal the enchanted long swords?

Sammual

on Nov 10, 2008

Cities at the top if each list are producing that ressources. The fellowing cities have top priority to get the produced ressource and so on with at the bottom the cities which will be the least supplied. Each list can be re-ordered but ressources producing cities are always on the top for the ressources they produces.

Why do producing cities need to be at the top of the list if other cities need the resource more badly? I'd prefer a true priority queue, where each city's need is filled in that order, regardless of whether they produce or not.

 

Can I attack the caravan from Kaplar and steal the enchanted long swords?

 

I think you would be able to, but I'm not sure what the mechanics for the theft should be. If a hero attacks a convoy without any support, who's going to run it? You should also get the option to ruin the bulk of the resources in a convoy if you know you can't get away with the convoy in tow, leaving only a fraction of the shipment for the enemy to recover.

on Nov 10, 2008

Brad, can you tell us if we will be able to give minor powers to our troops?

For example, if I wanted a unit of Paladins, could I take the knight example and give them magic resistance and healing ... ?

on Nov 10, 2008

That's a good question and one I have a feeling may need a lot of debate. If magical powers were the sole domain of heroes, it'd make them feel even more special, but it would put an undue emphasis on magic using heroes. I would like to see magic using units, but with very high training times and requirements, such as a magic academy that is expensive and takes a fair bit of avatar mana, so that magic using units have great capabilities but are generally in small units and are rare, so they cover a middle ground between heroes and more normal troops.

on Nov 10, 2008

Asharak

I'm unclear if this is already your intent but I'd like to petition that you don't "hide" those extra factors too deeply. If the main city screen says "9 turns" to build a unit, a tooltip or other second-level screen should make the various components of that time visible so that I can consider taking any action to improve the situation (e.g., changing a caravan route or researching a technology that improves plate mail forging speed, etc.).

- Ash

 

I agree with Ash. If I can somehow lower the amount of training time necessary by either constantly importing the goods needed or by using a closer city to cut caravan times in half, then I'd like to be able to view that relevant information to make a decision. Other than that, I think this is a fantastic way of changing how production is done in 4x games (or at least, a reasonable way of explaining why it takes x amount of time to produce a unit of knights).

on Nov 10, 2008

GoodGame
  No substitute for time?  I think you mean,

'There's no substitute for POWER'.     Ummm.....pOWer.

(work per unit time).

Need to do crazy research "Magic to Matter"

xthetenth

Why do producing cities need to be at the top of the list if other cities need the resource more badly? I'd prefer a true priority queue, where each city's need is filled in that order, regardless of whether they produce or not.

Cities who don't have access to a ressource they produce should have an increase of unrest being dispoiled of their labor

Just how much owned people in Ukraine feeled when they had to send their wheat to Russia even if didn't have enough to feed themselves. (That was back in the Soviet time).

on Nov 10, 2008

McCracken76



Quoting Asharak,
reply 2

I'm unclear if this is already your intent but I'd like to petition that you don't "hide" those extra factors too deeply. If the main city screen says "9 turns" to build a unit, a tooltip or other second-level screen should make the various components of that time visible so that I can consider taking any action to improve the situation (e.g., changing a caravan route or researching a technology that improves plate mail forging speed, etc.).

- Ash


 

I agree with Ash. If I can somehow lower the amount of training time necessary by either constantly importing the goods needed or by using a closer city to cut caravan times in half, then I'd like to be able to view that relevant information to make a decision. Other than that, I think this is a fantastic way of changing how production is done in 4x games (or at least, a reasonable way of explaining why it takes x amount of time to produce a unit of knights).

 

I agree as well.  I know I often want to figure out how these things are set up, so I understand the game mechanics much better (so I know what I am doing)  It would be great if the build length is explained in a not so difficult place to find.

I think I will actually pre-order this game when I get home so I can be on the beta.  I am as interested as I was with GalCiv 2, but this time I am not dirt poor.

on Nov 10, 2008

Just how much owned people in Ukraine feeled when they had to send their wheat to Russia even if didn't have enough to feed themselves. (That was back in the Soviet time).

 

This is true, but why should a smithing town have priority on swords if they produce them over the city you have cranking out tons of troops, or why should a mining town have priority on iron if they don't have any smithies? Cities should deal with their own resource needs first and then try to export any surplus in the case of essential resources, while the emphasis should be on the priorities you assigned to the production in the case of non-essential resources.

 

I, too, want to be able to view the various factors behind production, like just be able to mouse over the expected production time and see an icon and number for each required component so I know what the breakdown is and how to increase production.

10 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5 6  Last