Posted By Hludowig at 07:00 AM - Fri May 19 2017
I would like to discuss if the economy will really take benefits.
I don't remember saying it was good for the economy. I just remember saying it wasn't bad for it.
First, we don't know how will the NPCs, which live in the county, react if it is in a state of constant turmoil. Perhaps there is a "happiness" parameter that could make then emigrate or prepare a rebellion.
That is fair....for NPCs. My counter argument to this is that players would want to be where the action is. I know I do. Nothing is more interesting than conflict.
Second, War is costly. Remember that the equipment, provisions, everything is finite. In a long war you will have an absurd increment of the public expenditure in order to re-equip and feed your troops.
Costly...for the State. The people who they BUY supplies from, not so much.
Also, if the war is a "total war", a conflict in which you attack civilian buildings and citizens, the cost will be even higher. You will have to reconstruct houses, production buildings... if you add to the mix full loot the cost is... pretty high.
I am 99% sure that in Kingdoms allowing for internal wars, like Vornair, they have a set of laws for the wars. Meaning, no unnecessary destruction of civilian targets and the like.
You will, probably, need to borrow money from other parties. Of course, you will return the credit with interests.
It is a possibility. I don't expect County vs. County wars or even Duchy vs. Duchy wars to last very long though, so I think it is unlikely. If war in this game works close to any other game, it is far more likely that there will be a few big battles, maybe some skirmishes, and its essentially over. My expectation is more constant, short lived squabbles (fairly cheap) than total warfare (incredibly expensive).
Another cost will be the citizens. In this game you can die more than one time, but in a context of constant conflict, your working population could decrease dramatically.
Possibly. But from the look of things, alot of Nobles are adopting more professional, standing armies, so I think the actual strain on the working population won't be that high.
In addition, i don't think that the traders will feel secure traveling in a war zone. The commerce will decrease. The ones that will benefit are the moneylenders of the belligerents territories and the companies dedicated to produce tools for the military.
You underestimate traders. As I said, if my experience with all other games is any indication, players will want to be where the action is. Including the traders.
Finally, the prices will surely go up, so you will have a problem of inflation.
I mean, prices will only be inflating due to high demand. So again, I don't really see that as necessarily "bad" indicator for the economy. (This is also why the Traders would be there)
Generally speaking, the cost is too high, and in a game like this it could be the same.
I have a fairly high degree of confidence War won't be near as terrible as it is in real life.
Perhaps a Kingdom with this philosophy should create a couple of internal "War Laws" in order to minimize the cost that a total war could produce.
War Laws to ensure that you maximize the benefits and minimize the costs.
As I said earlier, 99% sure Kingdoms who allow internal wars have already done this. I am also like 60% sure Kingdoms will establish the rules of engagement before beating the crap out of each other as well.