Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Reply to this topicStart new topic
> M&T 3.0 开发日志 #12 - 建筑, M&T 3.0 Dev Diary #12 - Buildings
2020-03-18, 09:48
Post #1

Yet another gamer
Group Icon

Group: Avatar
Posts: 90
Joined: 2014-11-27
Member No.: 61855

## M&T 3.0 Dev Diary #12 - Buildings

### **M&T 3.0 开发日志 #12 - 建筑**

**FireKahuna, Mar 17, 2020**

A wise man once said that buildings are nothing more than glorified modifiers. Glorified modifiers they may be, they are nevertheless the main method of investing wealth into the economy. This diary will go into how we tried to improve upon that by fitting it into the 3.0 systems, created as a collab of myself but mainly KJH. Enjoy.


Let’s start from the basics. At its core, buildings serve two main functions. One is to be a place where the state can dump money into, and the other is to provide some return as a result of that investment. In that sense, key changes of 3.0 can be summarized into, first, making clear distinction between two types of buildable objects, and second, adding 2 new functions on top of the old ones. Let’s start from the first one, two types of buildable objects.


During the development of 3.0, one of the things that we wanted to add was a representation of property, meaning things like arable lands, forestry's, fisheries, etc. Their role would be to decide who gets what share of the economic surplus that was generated by the industries, as well as putting a tangible cap on industrial development. It shouldn’t be possible to feed the world from some small remote island, even if that island has all the workers it needs to do so.

在3.0的开发过程中,我们想要加入的特色之一就是**资产 Property**的表示,比如农业用地、森林资源、渔业资源等等。谁能获得多少产业剩余经济就是由资产决定的,它也可以为产业发展提供一个有形的上限。就算劳动力充足,一个鸟不拉屎的小岛也不可能喂饱整个世界。

At first, we didn’t consider those properties to be tied to construction and building. We gave a purely political property share to each class, and made property size be something that is set in stone based on provincial stats. Property size was not supposed to change over the course of the game.


This, however, quickly led to many issues. The first problem was that we had no idea how to model change in property share in a way that is fun and engaging. We attempted tying it to the total wealth share of a class, but since it’s not possible to interact with class wealth in a direct and immediate way, it wasn’t very understandable or enjoyable. We also faced issues in regions like the Ukraine, where there is an abundance of arable land compared to its starting population, making them super wealthy without the effort of investment or construction. All in all, such an abstract model of property didn’t really work in practice.


To remedy these problems, we made key conceptual changes to property. First, we decided on a clear distinction between current property size and maximum property size. Maximum property size represents physical, spatial limitations of how much property can be built for a given type, while current property size represents how much of that is actually constructed/developed and in use. This fixed the Ukraine problem, representing its potential while also restricting its initial, current size.


Attached Image

*New Property in Lisboa, representing the presence of both multiple rural and urban types. Mines in this context is for sea salt, while Commercial is the domain of the Burghers.*


In the end we made Property work as fixed ‘units’. Ownership is per 1 unit, for example the state can own 2 farmlands and 5 fisheries. One unit represents the same size in all provinces, with smaller provinces simply having a lower maximum. Each unit in Property is a buildable object that the state pays ducats to build, which is then used to purchase input materials and acquire labor for construction. When the project is done, the built units become owned by the state, existing as state property. The state is responsible for paying maintenance for the units of Property they own, but can also gain income if it’s profitable. Property is the first type of ‘buildings’ in 3.0, focused on supply and demand.


Attached Image

*Property in Guangdong, note that Peasants can own property, as can the State. This is how Crown Land is represented, providing feudal realms with a major source of revenue.*

*广东的资产情况。注意,农民阶层也和国家一样可以拥有资产。皇冠领地Crown Land就是用这种方式表现的,这是封建国家的主要收入来源。*

Classes gain wealth from property through its fundamental role in the economy. Property provides space for industry to expand onto. If an industry has the labour and goods to expand, almost all industries need property to achieve full output and thus actual expansion. Industry as such is upheld by property. Given the importance of property in industry, it also forms the basis of profit and wealth distribution. All income and losses are distributed to property holders based on their share of the property in question (say the Peasantry’s share of Farmland). If the yearly revenue is income, additionally all labour receives 10% of all profit, with the other 90% of income distributed to property holders. All loss is absorbed entirely by property holders. Classes use their revenue and gain on average to decide whether to expand or shrink their holdings and thus space for industry, providing them with an essential role in economic growth.

资产是经济的基石,各大阶层以此从资产中获取财富。资产为**产业 Industry**提供发展空间。就算一门产业有足以扩大规模的劳动力和货物,它也需要资产来达到最大产能,并藉此实现真正的扩张。几乎所有的产业都是如此。因此,产业是依托于资产的。资产对产业而言的重要性于是也决定了盈利与财富分配的基础。所有的收入和亏损都被资产的拥有者按照各自的份额进行分配;比方说,农民拥有的农业用地份额。如果年度收益为正,那么所有的劳动力人口将会获得总盈利的10%,剩下的90%则会在资产拥有者中进行分配。而亏损则全部由资产拥有者承担。各阶层根据其收益及平均收入来决定是扩张还是缩减他们的份额,而产业发展空间也因此改变,令其在经济增长中发挥核心作用。

Attached Image

*The Ukraine problem solved, with great potential, yet largely untapped in 1356.*


The second type, infrastructure, is something more traditional, akin to roads and ports in 2.52, yet expanded beyond a communications efficiency role. While Property is closely tied to the economic systems and the role they serve within it, infrastructure is more focused on existing as an option the state can spend money on for a concrete, definitive benefit. Infrastructure in its effects is represented as a series of ‘ranks’, where increasing from Rank 1 -> 2 for example has a definitive gain. However underneath a rank is a number of units representing size, which is different between provinces. A large province may require 20 units of roads to achieve rank 2, while a small province gets rank 2 at just 4 units.

第二类建筑是更加传统的**基础设施 infrastructure**。它们与2.52中的道路和港口类似,但其功能则不止于单纯的通讯效率改良。资产更贴近经济系统,并为之服务;基础设施这个投资选项则为国家提供了更为稳健,更具有决定性的好处。基础设施的效果被分为多个「级别」,而提升其等级,比如说从1级到2级,可以带来确实的效益。在等级之下蕴含着若干个规模单位,而每个省份所需求的规模都各不相同。一个大省份可能需要20个单位的道路来达到2级,而一个小省份则只需要4个单位。

Attached Image

*Amenities, representing the primary way to grow urban settlements, providing room for natural growth outside migration. Note UI and localisation is still WIP. Guangdong supports up to 200k in prime conditions, and could support 800k at Rank 5.*

*便利设施 Amenities是扩大城市聚居地的主要手段,为人口流动和自然增长提供空间。注意:UI和文本都亟待施工。广东在初始状况下可以容纳20万(城市)人口,而到5级便利设施可以容纳80万。*

When constructing, the UI directly facilitates a simple method of constructing to a certain rank. Since units of infrastructure require a fixed amount of upkeep to maintain, a large province with 20 units for rank 2 has higher maintenance cost than a small one with 4 units for rank 2. Unlike property, each individual infrastructure unit isn’t owned by anyone, and doesn't have an innate effect. Only a collection of units does something, when enough of them exist to raise the rank of the infrastructure in a province.


Attached Image

*Capitol infrastructure, returning Regional Capitals from 2.5 in a more integrated way. Its effects are similar, yet its maintenance and construction is based on the new model. Also new varying effects exist depending on whether its a State or Regional Capital.*

*政府机构 Capitol基础设施,整合得更彻底的2.5版本地方首府。它的效果和旧版本差不多,但现在基于新模型来决定维护费和建设费用。以及,它在首都和地方上的效果也有不同。*

What makes infrastructure and property much more interesting than plain old buildings are two special functions that we added. First, they require goods and labor for both initial construction and ongoing maintenance. This means that the money provided for a construction project does not get removed from the economy, instead simply changing hands to the industries selling goods and classes providing labor. And this economic stimulation through increased wages and additional consumption will persist over time, as upkeep needs to be afforded continuously.


Second, classes can invest into infrastructure and property. They can build any property should they have the wealth and will to do so, and Elites (Nobles, Burghers and Clergy) can invest into the province's infrastructure fund which maintains and builds a bunch of infrastructure units. This means that provincial economies persist and improve on their own even without direct state involvement. Especially Elites will increase their wealth by constructing new property units, from which they gain wealth and thus power.


Based on those two functions, infrastructure and property becomes heavily tied into politics and the economy. This leads to many interesting scenarios, such as a focus on disempowering elites and expropriating their property (and thus wealth base), leaving elites unable to fund infrastructure, resulting in underfunding and falling into decay, which reduces jobs devoted to maintaining them, forcing the state to either accept economic decline or increase state spending to fill in the vacancy, which can be extremely costly. It can also lead to a scenario where you rely on powerful elites to finance your provincial infrastructure, focusing state wealth on other ventures.


Fundamentally, the benefits of properties such as farmlands or fisheries are economic. Their benefits may be more difficult to measure on the surface, yet they are the key to economic expansion and political balance. Infrastructure is more akin to the buildings of 2.5, and the primary means of provincial development. Their construction provides concrete benefits, improving the province and industry within. While Buildings may be modifiers in 2.5, they are something else entirely in 3.0.


That’s about it for today. Also dropping a kinda mystery screenshot, but more of a reveal. Peace.


Attached Image



- 广州那两张图里,中华地区的宗教名称是Shendao,对你没看错,这个词来自于道教/民俗信仰中的「神道设教」。然而总归不妥当,制作组内也有一定争议,且作为占位符看待。大家如果对「中华民俗信仰」有什么命名建议,欢迎向我提出,我会负责传达给M&T制作组。

This post has been edited by Trihex: 2020-03-19, 00:45
Fast ReplyReply to this topicStart new topic

Time is now: 2020-03-30, 04:54