Just enough for what?
To last some while, before everything falls apart?
This game is like the Richter scale.
There is no top level.
There are only the current levels we have seen so far.
There are no limits to what Crate could add.
That would be great, especially if you’re having the experience I’m having with traveling merchants. They don’t want to by what I have to sell in the majority of their visits, nor do they have anything I need or want to buy. I have years when I have the lot of merchants visit (this has been true on Tier 3 and is now true on Tier 4) when there just has not been any reason for them to have shown up at all. We’re promised, when we get to Tier 3, “more and better merchants.” Well, there’s more of them, but they are anything but better. A means whereby we could order what we need would be a great improvement over this situation.
Yep, that’s exactly what happens with your own surplus goods… I don’t actually mind waiting till they want to buy it. If you’re relying on selling, then you need to balance your game so you’re not. In most cases with me it’s just a temporary thing, because the resource can’t be used until later in the game, eg honey. You need the wax to make soap but can’t use the honey yet. When buying, it usually is available somewhere on the map, but haven’t found it yet. It’s only when you are using difficult terrain maps where some resources are not available at all. The good news is "
Just enough = you have just enough to supply your basic requirements per population for 1 game year.
Yes, this game is in development and subject to change, it reminds you every time you hit that play button. 
1 Like
I like this idea; and I think you wouldn’t even need an additional facility/building for that. Only a function would have to be integrated into the trading window, which makes it possible to pre-order from a retailer. This could be designed in such a way that the retailer makes a price suggestion and specifies a certain quantity “from - to”. You pay the selected amount in advance, i.e. immediately, just as it would work in reality. The retailer then appears again within a certain time frame and delivers the ordered and pre-paid goods. This also enables personal time and financial planning.
1 Like
Pretty much what they have in mind.
1 Like
Sounds like this game is going to be brilliant once they have laid out all the aspects. I can’t wait. 
I’ve waited five or more game-years for the merchant to have anything I need. They have nothing of what I need, year after year after year. I’m playing in pacifist mode, and all the merchants want to sell me axes and armor. As for selling, I have thousands and thousands of sellable goods that have accumulated because for year after year after year, the merchants don’t want to buy them. Good heavens, one would think that there’s got to be some year when they want to sell me what I need and buy what I have.
Not relying on selling so much as wanting to get accumulated goods sold so I’ll have room in my warehouses and won’t have to build eight or ten of them! I have gold mines and foundries, market squares and manors (with some luxury goods), so I have a good surplus in my finances.
Ah, good old capitalism! When the customer is desperate, jack up the price! 
I don’t suppose the trading center is so sophisticated it takes that into account.
Pacifist mode is an alien concept to me, I play on Vanquisher level… I like the challenge, otherwise it gets boring rather fast. I remember a while back when the Walking Dead was current, they did a survey to see if you would survive a zombie apocalypse… I gained ‘the last person standing’ award. 
Yep, but if you have a gold mine,… what’s the problem?
Well, I’m beyond liking challenges. The past several years IRL have been challenging enough, so I play to relax. I like the city-building, trying to balance all the elements and keep the town thriving. Zombie apocalypse . . . Congratulations. I’m too old to survive that.
What I said was just a general comment.
1 Like
Just some observations on good ole capitalism, so it’s one less thing you fret over… we wouldn’t exist without it, it’s not man made and it’s very ancient. It’s how nature operates on pretty much all forms of life, in that all forms of life capitalise off of another form of life in order to exist. Shocking I know, but there we have it. 
Not to hijack the thread or anything, but read The Dawn of Everything by David Wengrow and David Graeber: an anthropologist and an archeologist who contend that the evidence shows that capitalism and competition are not in fact ‘very ancient’ and not how human nature operates in the majority of early societies/cultures.
On the other hand, the game is set much, much later when grubby (or better: ‘grabby’) capitalism and competition are much more common, so we should and will have to deal with it!
1 Like
All living organisms compete against each other and all capitalise off of each other, it’s a very complex symbiotic relationship. Eg, the relationship between the plant and animal kingdom, animals wouldn’t exist without plants excreting oxygen and vice versa, plants would not exist without animals excreting carbon dioxide, both are capitalising off of each other, the carbon cycle.
There are also many examples in the natural world of parasites, where one attempts to take over to the detriment of all else. Most ancient primitive human tribes do in fact show evidence of having a hierarchy, which is evident throughout the animal kingdom with primary females and primary males leading their packs. I would suggest the archeologist/anthropologist looks again with better eyes.
Or just give us option in world settings to set what resources we want to spawn or something. Most of the maps are lacking what I want. I want more customization in world settings to adjust world spawners as the way I want to play.
You are confusing natural with cultural. There is copious evidence that Human societies - not organisms or paramecium - were far more cooperative than antagonistic or competitive, going back to at least the Neolithic and less evidence of even earlier cooperative cultural norms. Their argument was precisely in answer to your contention, that ‘natural selection’ and everything that goes with it also applies to human cultural groups, and they spent 700+ pages detailing the evidence that it does not.
Just for a tangible examples, the massive stone monuments at Gobekli Tepe were erected by hunter-gatherer groups between 9600 - 8500 BCE. There is simply no conceivable way those groups could have freed up the labor for that project if they were also busy fighting each other for resources. - And there is no evidence anywhere of such groups ‘conquering’ each other and incorporating another group into theirs - the technology available to gather and store food simply wouldn’t allow larger concentrated groups.
A second example are the copious commentaries on European competitive, heirarchial societies made by Native Americans - which the authors can quote because they were made to literate European observers like Jesuit missionaries and were written down and published in Europe. Uniformly, they compare their own cooperative, ‘egalitarian’ societies with the hierarchial, competitive Europeans, to the latter’s detriment.
I do not agree with all their arguments or conclusions, but I do agree that the blanket “everything competes” argument is valid when talking about organisms in isolation, but not wen referring to human cultures because it is simply not supported by physical or historical evidence.
The evidence you mention of primitive heirarchy is, in fact, evidence of the opposite: the heirarchial hunter-gatherer leader (from the historical evidence of the Native American groups) leads by consensus only - he cannot compel anybody to follow his orders. The Jesuits (no strangers to heirarchy!) noted this point continuously: the Americans were all surpassingly good rhetorical orators, because they had to constantly persuade people to follow them, they could not assume it by any structural hierarchial institutions. It has also been observed in these cultures that the cultures themselves can compel behavior through mechanisms like ridicule, shaming, and in extremes ostracism or exile - a cultural ‘death sentence’ - on people who attempted to use heirarchial compulsion or threat to achieve their ends.
All of which is completely aside from the game, which assumes no heirarchy in our villages/towns at all: no church or religious structure other than a small monumental shrine, no government of any kind - not even a sergeant to lead the small military forces either for the town or the raiders. In this respect, at least, FF is Pure Fantasy in assuming a Medieval European background for the settlement without any signs of heirarchy: the culture represented was inherently heirarchial and had been for several thousand years!
3 Likes
You can already do that when you start a game. Go into the advanced settings when you start a new game, you can even type in the code of your favourite map, or select what ever terrain you want. You can also set resources, wildlife and raid ferocity levels to easy/medium/hard.
Do you think humans and human culture is not nature? Humans are a predator pack animal like wolves, and exactly the same we cooperate with members of our pack to get things done.
As for Gobekli Tepe, we know nothing what so ever about the people who built the complex, we have no clue if they were a hunter-gather group, that is pure speculation. Don’t confuse imaginative explanations with facts, we have next to no fact at all.
You are the undisputed king/queen of your kingdom in FF.
It’s a bit closer to say that you are the undisputed Totalitarian Dictator of your community, and frankly, it is amusing to see people ask for even more control, like being able to direct every individual in every individual task. This would be handy for the Omnipotent Gamer, but another dive into the realm of complete Fantasy. I think part of the game (for me, anyway) is to deal with the apparently idiotic, individual, uncontrolled actions of the villagers. It needs to be tweaked, because it lurches over into the Too Stupid To Live category, but I think it is much more interesting than complete control all the time would be - but everyone will have a different degree of control that they enjoy most and some degree they find only a source of frustration.
1 Like