Economy 2.0, part 2

[Knight Hospitaller]

Feels like at least the marketing/community team is doing their job now. "Someone" may have step down from these trainwreck of communication that were.

The clear info makes me hopeful. But I'm a naive gamer that pre-ordered and stopped playing still early in the year. Let's hope this patch kindles the fire of many, or if it is just propaganda.

[Major Kudos™]

Originally posted by Knight Hospitaller:

Feels like at least the marketing/community team is doing their job now. "Someone" may have step down from these trainwreck of communication that were.

The clear info makes me hopeful. But I'm a naive gamer that pre-ordered and stopped playing still early in the year. Let's hope this patch kindles the fire of many, or if it is just propaganda.

I think (expect) this patch to be the great equalizer.

After reading the notes over and over again it seems to me the game economy is having the slate completely wiped. Which will require us all to begin again.

That is probably a good thing as it will have the effect of putting everyone back to the starting line. I don't expect very many favorite saves to survive it at any at all that rely on mods.

[icedude94]

It sounds like they're just repeating what the pre-release dev diaries said about the economy and cim life cycles.

Some things are going to either make the game easier or are going to break it. By switching the cost of upkeep for a building to be equally divided between the renters and removing the landlord part of the equation, that means rent will fluctuate even more based on occupancy.

A lot of things can go wrong with that when you have varying education/income levels occupying the same high density residential building. It creates a domino effect when those with low incomes start leaving and it causes those with slightly higher income to be unable to afford rent and so on.

With higher level buildings requiring more upkeep, I see the problem getting worse as buildings level up.

We're in big trouble if they were focused on just removing the high rent notifications which only really appear on low density residential because the game was coded to only show the icon if more than 70% of the tenant households have trouble paying rent.

Their change to make cims prioritize paying rent before they consider budgeting for resources was unnecessary if they just fixed the consumption scaling bug. That's the amount of resources cims desire increasing exponentially PER cim as the city's total population increases which itself was probably a fix for how buggy the whole logistics system gets if demand for goods doesn't massively exceed supply.

[mikelleh63]

Originally posted by icedude94:

It sounds like they're just repeating what the pre-release dev diaries said about the economy and cim life cycles.

Some things are going to either make the game easier or are going to break it. By switching the cost of upkeep for a building to be equally divided between the renters and removing the landlord part of the equation, that means rent will fluctuate even more based on occupancy.

A lot of things can go wrong with that when you have varying education/income levels occupying the same high density residential building. It creates a domino effect when those with low incomes start leaving and it causes those with slightly higher income to be unable to afford rent and so on.

With higher level buildings requiring more upkeep, I see the problem getting worse as buildings level up.

We're in big trouble if they were focused on just removing the high rent notifications which only really appear on low density residential because the game was coded to only show the icon if more than 70% of the tenant households have trouble paying rent.

Their change to make cims prioritize paying rent before they consider budgeting for resources was unnecessary if they just fixed the consumption scaling bug. That's the amount of resources cims desire increasing exponentially PER cim as the city's total population increases which itself was probably a fix for how buggy the whole logistics system gets if demand for goods doesn't massively exceed supply.

That will be intriguing. Hoping it improves things. Last patch was a step in right direction, see if they keep momentum.

[icedude94]

The ultimate thing is that many of the fixes of the past created more bugs. The game is just layered in fixes that became bugs. It gives me the opinion that there's a progressive economic ideology that is being pushed in the game and the desire to have that ideology presented in the game is what is motivating the lack of UI information and details into how things really work.

Some of those elements I see are:
- Fixation on taxing profits instead of revenue.
- No property ownership.
- Collective funding of building upkeep and services.
- State ownership and management of public services and utilities with subsidy funding from outside the city if the city can't pay for it along with free service vehicles from outside the city.
- Focus on employing cims in office jobs while relying on imports of material goods from outside the city.
- Low rent dense residential.

The list just goes on...

[tycoonmike]

You'd think people could come up with more convincing bait...

But, we'll only know once the rubber hits the road. If things work the way they want people to believe they'll work, then it sounds like we may finally be on the right path after a year of floundering.

[CoioTe]

this economy patch is not up yet, right?

[tycoonmike]

Originally posted by CoioTe:

this economy patch is not up yet, right?

Not yet, no. They're aiming for release by this time next week, but only time will tell.

[mackster]

I liked the changes, I am worried about the new building levelling mechanic tho. They are adding something in new to what is still a broken, well at least mismanaged, background sim.

I am not sure I like the idea of a building to get poorer and deteriorate, eventually collapsing. Its adding unnecessary complexity which I worry will affect the gameplay and perhaps even the economy they are trying to fix. I don't really want more micromanagement, I just want to be able to control the micromanagement that the game already has in-built.

I hope it works, anyway and we dont really notice that change. I really want this game to mature into something it should be.

[cpspok]

when does this release ?

[icedude94]

I wonder if the welfare building will still be providing universal basic income to your cims out of thin air at the fixed cost to the city of just maintaining the building.

If we want to actually subsidize our cims, we can do that through the tax panel by education level.

If cims can't find housing they can afford and will just move out of the city in order to remove the high rent notifications, then what triggers them to become criminals?

What is going to be the new mechanic that drives seniors to move out of the city if not high rent?

If you mod the game to increase illness chances of seniors and lower rents which keeps them from moving out so they die in the city, your healthcare and death care services get completely overwhelmed. Un-modded, unless you are really bad at not placing residential downwind of air pollution and you're giving your cims poo water, most of your healthcare and death care goes unused.

[Noel]

Originally posted by icedude94:

It sounds like they're just repeating what the pre-release dev diaries said about the economy and cim life cycles.

Some things are going to either make the game easier or are going to break it. By switching the cost of upkeep for a building to be equally divided between the renters and removing the landlord part of the equation, that means rent will fluctuate even more based on occupancy.

A lot of things can go wrong with that when you have varying education/income levels occupying the same high density residential building. It creates a domino effect when those with low incomes start leaving and it causes those with slightly higher income to be unable to afford rent and so on.

With higher level buildings requiring more upkeep, I see the problem getting worse as buildings level up.

We're in big trouble if they were focused on just removing the high rent notifications which only really appear on low density residential because the game was coded to only show the icon if more than 70% of the tenant households have trouble paying rent.

Their change to make cims prioritize paying rent before they consider budgeting for resources was unnecessary if they just fixed the consumption scaling bug. That's the amount of resources cims desire increasing exponentially PER cim as the city's total population increases which itself was probably a fix for how buggy the whole logistics system gets if demand for goods doesn't massively exceed supply.

You may have missed the "not" operator. The code (in v1.1.2f or previous) shows that if more than 70% of the housholds can afford it, the icon will be removed. On the contrary, if it exceeds 30% of them cannot afford , the icon will appear.

[icedude94]

Originally posted by Noel:

Originally posted by icedude94:

It sounds like they're just repeating what the pre-release dev diaries said about the economy and cim life cycles.

Some things are going to either make the game easier or are going to break it. By switching the cost of upkeep for a building to be equally divided between the renters and removing the landlord part of the equation, that means rent will fluctuate even more based on occupancy.

A lot of things can go wrong with that when you have varying education/income levels occupying the same high density residential building. It creates a domino effect when those with low incomes start leaving and it causes those with slightly higher income to be unable to afford rent and so on.

With higher level buildings requiring more upkeep, I see the problem getting worse as buildings level up.

We're in big trouble if they were focused on just removing the high rent notifications which only really appear on low density residential because the game was coded to only show the icon if more than 70% of the tenant households have trouble paying rent.

Their change to make cims prioritize paying rent before they consider budgeting for resources was unnecessary if they just fixed the consumption scaling bug. That's the amount of resources cims desire increasing exponentially PER cim as the city's total population increases which itself was probably a fix for how buggy the whole logistics system gets if demand for goods doesn't massively exceed supply.

You may have missed the "not" operator. The code shows that if more than 70% of the housholds can afford it, the icon will be removed. On the contrary, if it exceeds 30% of them cannot afford , the icon will appear.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3136728513

[gano101]

i'm keeping it real, calling economy 2-0 is repeating corporate propaganda, we all know these are much needed patches to being it up to a 1.0 standard. I want this game to be good as much as the next guy, for that to happen the devs need to hear facts from the players, not an endless stream of brown-nosers

[Zero, Dark Knight]

I don't know if this economy change will 'fix' the game, it'll make it more "difficult" for sure. and more annoying to put stuff down.

but will it fix the 'city painter' element?

They'd have to really carefully manage the wages vs rent and if they get the balancing wrong. they can't wait to fix it with a big patch 4-5-6 weeks from the previous one.

I just don't trust CO to throw out lots of small quick fixes / hotfixes to issues.

We'll have to see where it goes, but that's my immediate concern.