Any plans to add coins?

[galadon3]

It would really help with traders when you have stuff you want to get rid of but the trader doesn't have anything you want, also it would make gold and silver actually usefull.
Mean yea you can make weapons and armor from it but as far as I can tell they are (correctly) inferior to their steel counterparts.

[Krieger]

aren't gold n silver sort of coins anyway?, i always bought up any gold n silver they had for my stock n used it to trade if need be later

[Dennis]

Context. Setting. Theme.

Reread the intro page when you start a settlement. I may be wrong, but my understanding of the setting for this game is the breakdown of Civilization? Who exactly is minting these coins? i.e has a Treasury to guarantee the value of those coins?

[galadon3]

Originally posted by Bobisme:

aren't gold n silver sort of coins anyway?, i always bought up any gold n silver they had for my stock n used it to trade if need be later

They can be used that way but one problem is that the trading partners seem to have them very seldom, a certain scarecity of money would make sense though but if the game did handle gold and silver as currency most settlements should have at least a small stockpile of it every now and then.
Also you basically loose value with each trade. Have a look at the price when you buy the gold and when you sell it, most likely you'll loose about half the value. Making it pretty horrible as money.

Originally posted by NCE Dynnys:

Context. Setting. Theme.

Reread the intro page when you start a settlement. I may be wrong, but my understanding of the setting for this game is the breakdown of Civilization? Who exactly is minting these coins? i.e has a Treasury to guarantee the value of those coins?

Its a medieval setting, so coins are well known and contrary to todays currency gold coins don't actually need a treasury to gurantee their value as long as people think GOLD has a value, wich they clearly do.
As for who is minting them, well you'd do as well as the other settlements. Its not that you need a horribly sophisticated workshop for that, medieval minting isn't really complicated.

[Wantoomany]

Its a post apocalyptic medieval setting. People can't eat gold or use it to fight off invaders. It's usefulness and value is extremely limited when people are just trying to survive and rebuild.

[galadon3]

Originally posted by Wantoomany:

Its a post apocalyptic medieval setting. People can't eat gold or use it to fight off invaders. It's usefulness and value is extremely limited when people are just trying to survive and rebuild.

You got a point?
Gold is highly valued ingame as indicated by the price in trades.
The fact that it indeed has no use ingame other then being a more expensive bad iron is pretty much why putting money in the game could make sense, so it would have a use.

[Kaelroth]

The game certainly has a medieval setting, but it only has a post apocalypse setting if you decide to roleplay it that way. There's nothing actually in-game to suggest that.

People can't eat or fight with candles, yet you can make them. Compared to torches and braziers, candles have a limited usefulness, yet we have them. Coins are just as valid in that case.

Personally, I could take or leave coinage. At this time, I only find traders of minor use to get rid of a small amount of my excessive surplus of limestone. I don't see that changing unless there's a significant alteration to the current trade/reputation system.

[Dennis]

I get that coins would be easier. Candles are safer and easier to use indoors than a torch and slightly more mobile than a Brazier. It fills a need. They make our time after dusk more valuable. And are much much easier to make than coins.....

There is no basis for coinage in our current timeline.

Please reread the loading screen.
" A New Life. The Plague had ravaged the British isles, leaving a trail of destruction in it's wake. Untold Millions went to an early grave. And those left standing were plunged into poverty, brutally scarred by the horrors they had witnessed. Nothing would ever be the same again"

Sounds rather apocalyptic to me.

In this setting if some random merchant showed up and declared the Silver Coins he has are worth "XX"......... why?? Why are they worth that?

1) The reason Coins work is that they are trusted. A $5 Gold coin is only worth $5 if someone is willing to pay you the $5 in goods/services for it. That trust is started by the Minter guaranteeing that they will give $5 of goods if you want to return their coins. Some Rando shows up with a round piece of flattened Gold/Silver with symbols on it and insists it's worth twice what it's weight is? Not a chance.

2) Trust. Who minted it? Is it pure? Is it a scam? I'll take a 'loss' of a few Barter points over taking some overpriced worked metal that no one else needs and of dubious value.

3) Time and effort. People are starving and suffering to the point that barely dressed and armed homeless people continually bonzai thru a hailstorm of arrows to bounce off of walls and iron doors. Who has the economy to devote resources to minting? We can't make Catapults, but you want a Minting Press? Powered by?

4) Amy idea how many coins you would need to mint so you have enough to be useful? We are talking about common coins, not treasures?

Coins are a luxury item. A Civilization needs to have evolved to have the spare time/resources to start minting. That does allow the economy to grow faster, but it's a cart before the horse thing. There needs to be a trusted entity doing the minting. Backed by a treasury.

Edit - Sorry, this was meant to be a dialogue of just my opinion of why coinage doesn't fit the theme/setting of this game/timeline. Didn't mean to come across as the Snobbish Authority on the matter.

[galadon3]

Thats a very longwinded way to write nonsense, nonsense that also is completely besides the point of me just asking about an actual ingame sense of having gold and silver in the game.

But since you clearly have not the slightest idea of what you are talking about, I promise to keep it short:

1&2 are the same issue and guess what, thats what medieval traders and even more commoners (if they had actual contact with money, most dealings on that level were done money-less) had to work with every day, not only was there a multitude of different ppl minting coins in medieval europe the amount of precious metal could also vary with the year the coin was minted. That in a time when information about what was 1 or 2 days walk away from your hometown was scarce at best.
Guess what, during the middle ages coins were still used.

3. Medieval coins are usually beaten by putting them between two stamps and hammering on them, that is done by a single worker, your "BIG EFFORT" isnt necessary,
Minting presses are a thing of about the 16th century, so minmum 200 years after the games divergent timeline is set.

4. Yes fast and easy: about 100 to 150 years after the timeline Jakob Fugger manged to buy the election of Charles V to emperor of the holy roman empire for 500 000 Gulden (standard gold-coins of the time), an empire with over 10 million inhabitants, we deal with settlements of about 20 settlers and there is no far off trade with exotic goods, so the answer is: Not that many.

If that is too short for you I suggest reading up on medieval coinage and economy, there are some nice works out there, especially for the northern european hansa there is quite some source material to form an idea of what money is worth in comparison to wares or work.

[Kaelroth]

Originally posted by NCE Dynnys:

I get that coins would be easier. Candles are safer and easier to use indoors than a torch and slightly more mobile than a Brazier. It fills a need. They make our time after dusk more valuable. And are much much easier to make than coins.....

There is no basis for coinage in our current timeline.

Please reread the loading screen.
" A New Life. The Plague had ravaged the British isles, leaving a trail of destruction in it's wake. Untold Millions went to an early grave. And those left standing were plunged into poverty, brutally scarred by the horrors they had witnessed. Nothing would ever be the same again"

Sounds rather apocalyptic to me.

You are aware your description of why candles are valid is ridiculous right? Candles are for decoration, braziers and torches (to a much lesser extent) are for heat; a slightly more poignant real-life concern and the only one that matters in the game. Providing settlers with illumination is ironically unimportant.

Candles fill a 'want' not a 'need.' There is a big difference between the two. There is no mechanic for increased settler happiness if you have a candelabra constructed in your settlement. On the other hand, if they are cold, they clearly show their displeasure (when not unconscious). "Candles make our time more valuable?" Umm....... what? Your argument is nonsensically hyperbolic or just plain nonsensical, take your pick.

And as to the notion of apocalypses, I'll grant you that the game devs put a little bit of story (emphasis on little) into their default scenario (one I promptly ignored since it has no actual bearing on gameplay). Yet surely you're not suggesting that this brief description has any actual effect on the game do you? At best it's a dubious reason explaining why the devs showcased that their colony sim game has a cannibalism mechanic by trying to introduce a sense of settler desperation. The moment anyone creates a different scenario to roleplay, it's no longer post-apocalyptic, just 'Medieval' and of course, 'Going.'

[Dennis]

I'm sorry to have upset you guys so much with my reasoning and opinions. I was interested in an exchange of ideas, not insults. Did I state that any other opinions were 'ridiculous' or 'longwinded nonsense'? I'm sorry if you inferred any insults in my words. That was not my intent. I will try to be more careful in my simple disagreements. I tend to overexplain my position to avoid miscommunication.

Thank you for the actual informational part (I will read up on Jakob Fuggar). I am now curious to find an historical record of when a Village issued it's own coinage and what the pop/economy parameters were that created the opportunity.

But I'm not interested in a flame war where part of the point is mocking the other persons thoughts and ideas. Disagree with me and explain why. When you have to add insults to make your point more 'forceful', it makes it too easy to stop reading and discount your offered help in expanding my knowledge base.

I added this edit less 2 minutes after I posted the previous -

"Edit - Sorry, this was meant to be a dialogue of just my opinion of why coinage doesn't fit the theme/setting of this game/timeline. Didn't mean to come across as the Snobbish Authority on the matter."

I literally apologized for if it came across poorly.

I couldn't care less if coins actually enter the game. No significant change to gameplay for me. Saving that 0.1 to 5'ish value in the rare times I do trade (for seeds) is a rounding error. My thoughts were simply on if they were reasonable considering the timeline and population count the Dev's chose to use. I had no idea that one of the main debate points would be that the Game Theme is moot. When I specifically stated I was discussing how it fit in the Game Theme.

I disagree that Candles are purely cosmetic. You seem to be arguing the point purely from the current in-game mechanics stand point. I was clearly not. I even stated so in my edit. Candles are very easy to make. Children can do it. Replacing spitting messy torches in your home with safe candles so you can function after dusk is a significant safety measure. I was comparing the usefulness/need/effort to make in RL between Coins and Candles. You moved the goalposts to in-game only and then called my thoughts nonsense. Why? If your true goal was to explain where my reasoning was wrong, why tack on the insult afterword's?

Finally - If you are going to "Quote" me. Please do so honestly.

" "Candles make our time more valuable?" Umm....... what? Your argument is nonsensically hyperbolic or just plain nonsensical, take your pick."

Removing words out of the middle of a quote is highly disingenuous. Especially when they remove context. 'After dusk' . Feel free to disagree with my opinions. But please don't change them to fit your narrative.

My point was it is safer and easier to be mobile and work after dusk with a candle than a torch. Which means I get more done. Which makes my time more valuable. What is hyperbolic or nonsensical about that? Perhaps I am misunderstand your use of the word?

[galadon3]

Why do I even bother...

Ok you win, got the thread thorougly derailed and now I leave this "I AM OFFENDED" drama fest and save myself the hassle. Promise I'd not post any idea in this forum again... it may offend somebodies mood-sense of his imagined medieval post apocalypse.

If your idea of starting a dialogue is to repeatedly tell ppl "GO READ THE GAME INTRO", then you should practice on that.

Bye

[Wantoomany]

If you wanted this topic to be a suggestion, you probably shouldn't have asked it as a question. Especially considering no one here can read the devs minds and provide a solid answer to the question. When the only response left to us is speculation, it really shouldn't of been all that surprising that the topic drifted into pure opinion.

[Kaelroth]

My apologies to galadon3 for my part in sidetracking the thread. When a person responds to a post I make, I feel compelled to respond, especially if it is an ill-conceived argument.

To [NCE] Dynnys, I responded to your post that it was nonsense because you were trying to explain why something in-game was necessary by providing real life comparisons that don't compare properly because the rules for real life and a game are obviously not the same.

You complained that I didn't quote you properly. Incorrect. The entirety of your comments that pertained to the question of candles being useful in-game was quoted at the top of my post. I edited out the rest of your post because it was long and immaterial to my point. I singled out your "Candles make our time more valuable" comment because IN-GAME candles are used in a decorative feature and nothing else. This is a rather crucial point you seem to be ignoring. Even worse, keeping this purely decorative feature active requires that a settler waste time providing fuel to keep it lit, proving that it actually takes up time better served for tasks that aid in settler survival; in essence, wasting valuable time. Whether or not it is after dusk is also immaterial to my contention that candelabras are just decorative feature in-game.

Honestly, you can't call an argument that compares apples and oranges, or in this case in-game mechanics and real life situations to be valid. Even if we did, coins were a thing in Medieval Times so saying they shouldn't be in-game goes against the entire premise you're trying to make.

And finally, I have changed my opinion about coinage in-game. Honestly coins would just be a smaller version of gold and silver ingots taking up space on a stockpile. From a game perspective, they would be potentially useful, but really not necessary. It would just be another element of decoration for a player who wanted to build a treasure vault. Still it's something that would very likely be added to the game through mods if/when the devs add modding tools for the game.

[Krieger]

i could see maybe one of the settlements still trying to use coins, like they're loyal to the 'old ways' but it would be based on it's gold/silver weight. and every now n then a raider would have a coin on him.

It's not like money vanished overnight, you could throw many currencies into it.

and yeah as someone else has said, and i've had the argument before, you can't eat gold, an apple would have more value, someone could demand their prior value all they wanted doesn't make a lick of dif to me.

considering the amount of produce i pump out i just buy gold and silver regardless of price, the trade system still needs work gold coin or not, so it may still be introduced.

..have a trader rock up with a fortune in just gold..