A more ecnomy based game

[zombie0hour]

Would anyone play a game that was more based on gathering and production skills and a community effort?

[Khachaturian]

No.
well at least i wouldnt
The reason i play online games is to do stuff that wouldnt be possible in rea life

[shrig94]

yes, I love strategy games!

[Khachaturian]

I would go for the community effort though
but a succesful game encorporating that element would need a large user base

[Godlord]

@Bone:

> I would go for the community effort though
> but a succesful game encorporating that element would need a large user base

How larger the user base, how more it defines your game economy.

Regards,
  Goddie, the Irresistible.

[Anna Comnena]

I would like to see something like this. I want to do a similar thing in my game. I'm still working on script architecture concepts for many things, but I'd like to have such things as being able to found and start a new village, farm, mine, etc.

But yes, as Goddie pointed out, it can be hard to base such things with an Eclipse game, because there will be a limited player population. You almost have to design games as if they were single player; just with cooperative play in mind.

Also on a smaller scale, you can make a game more economically based simply by changing how your "monsters" are. Instead of just being there to kill and loot, make it so they drop raw resources; hunting and gathering is the original economic base, and if your creatures are killed more for hunting than simply killing, that should be a fairly large step toward a more "economic" game.

[Godlord]

> Also on a smaller scale, you can make a game more economically based simply by changing how your "monsters" are. Instead of just being there to kill and loot, make it so they drop raw resources; hunting and gathering is the original economic base, and if your creatures are killed more for hunting than simply killing, that should be a fairly large step toward a more "economic" game.

I never understood the fact of **monsters** dropping **gold** or even **money**. Why not meat or something?

Regards,
  Goddie, the Irresistible.

[xeross]

@Goddie:

> I never understood the fact of **monsters** dropping **gold** or even **money**. Why not meat or something?
>
> Regards,
>   Goddie, the Irresistible.

Haha lol me too xD.

Well if its put together very well i'd play.

[anasky]

How about a game where you can even have SHOPS, BUSSINESSES, MARKETING, SERVICES etc.
Now THAT would be a huge step towards game creation.

Some guy wanted to make a game like this earlier, but with the world map as world.
Well, that's not the odd part, but if there was a hurricane in Genua, and you had a shop there, you would be terrorised by it, IN-GAME! It would be really realistic, but people, for killing their opponents, want to have a hurricane in real-world then!

[Inception]

I love the whole idea of economy. Granted too much realism in a game can get boring, but in a lot of cases…it makes it so there is more to do. Makes the game more interesting and allows the players to actually interact in more ways. Afterall, a good economy usually entails a good community. Unless it goes overboard. Then my friends...you have an in-game depression state going on :P

- Inception.

[Khachaturian]

Thing is, many of these great ideas require a ton of source work / scripting, and many people dont want to put in the effort

[Inception]

Well, I personally stopped my games production until 3.0, because apparently some things I have been waiting for will be added. I don't need the migrane of getting 50 different converters for hard work just to use it again, so I am waiting. But once 3.0 is out (May take a long time but I am patient) I will start again and will put in dedication. I know a lot of people won't put in that hard work but…all I can say is it's their loss, no one else's.

- Inception.

[AdrianC]

I'm actually working on a realistic economy game. The problem is the lack of players of course.

For eg.  At first, all the cities will be tiny. Only like 1-2 houses each. But then, players can vote for a king (or mayor, or whatever) for that city, and he could decide to build another house. When he does this, the people can start selling wood or whatever to the king. He would get the money from taxes imposed on the stores in that city. The stores would also be player controled. Pretty much nothing would be NPC controlled. The problem with this is you need somebody to already own a store, before anybody starts playing. You need a king b4, etc.

I might start work on that game again, I had about 50 maps already.

[Inception]

@AdrianC:

> I'm actually working on a realistic economy game. The problem is the lack of players of course.
>
> For eg.  At first, all the cities will be tiny. Only like 1-2 houses each. But then, players can vote for a king (or mayor, or whatever) for that city, and he could decide to build another house. When he does this, the people can start selling wood or whatever to the king. He would get the money from taxes imposed on the stores in that city. The stores would also be player controled. Pretty much nothing would be NPC controlled. The problem with this is you need somebody to already own a store, before anybody starts playing. You need a king b4, etc.
>
> I might start work on that game again, I had about 50 maps already.

Sounds interesting. If anything keep it at a side project.

- Inception.

[ENIGMAX]

@Bone:

> No.
> well at least i wouldnt
> The reason i play online games is to do stuff that wouldnt be possible in rea life

    leave it to bone to be right to the point :)

    sounds like a Sims and if so the coding would be a bit*H

[zombie0hour]

I mean like something I had in mind would be… you take a ship with a large group of people to the new world to start a colony. Work together, build up the colony, try to survive! Something like that a community working together!

[ENIGMAX]

  humm .. i see where you are going with this and i like it

[zombie0hour]

Its just an idea. I do not have a project implementing this yet.

[Khachaturian]

@enigm@x™[한국어:

> link=topic=33131.msg303939#msg303939 date=1225337735]
>     leave it to bone to be right to the point :)

haha its true, theres been so many of these topics

But if the 'economy based game' is good enough, i will play it, i mean my 'rule isnt concrete

[Godlord]

@Bone:

> haha its true, theres been so many of these topics
>
> But if the 'economy based game' is good enough, i will play it, i mean my 'rule isnt concrete

There are a lot more factors which play a role.

Regards,
  Goddianicus.

[Celiru]

@Bone:

> No.
> well at least i wouldnt
> The reason i play online games is to do stuff that wouldnt be possible in rea life

QFT

[Khachaturian]

[QFT?](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_field_theory)

[AdrianC]

quoted for the truth

[Khachaturian]

Ah
Now i get it

[Skieth]

give each player 100 gp when they start.

make monsters drop items such as whool, bronze, iron, ect.

allow them to make their own clothes and sell them.

then make the shops sell better weps and armors.

make money non-tradable non-undroppable

make it so the higher your level, the better stuff you can make

gradually, over a long period of time, start to remove all but the most basic shops, and potion shops.

complete player based economy =D