I always saw it as an abstraction of expanding your Overall mining operations, and to implement mechanically how an empire, over time, goes from having only a few elite soldiers/champions clad in iron armor, to having many troops clad in iron armor

On a similar vein of thought, having "specialty weapons" (like Katana +1, although in this case it would be Katana +3...) should cost significantly more Iron.

This could be tweaked by balanced, but lets say a regular Katana of 6 attack costs 5 iron, while a prized Katana +3 (9 attack) uses 10 iron, and a master work 12 attack Katana could require 20 iron.

To represent the extra time it takes to forge such weapons, as well as the more metal (although perhaps not *as much* more) required for the process of multiple refoldings.

A theoretical Hittori Hanzo Katana would require a special Quest-gained technology, have 24 attack, and would require 50 iron.

Now, the numbers could be tweaked ... even to the point of a 1:1 ratio if Swarm tactics prove more effective than giving an awesome super weapon to a leveled Champion (although I would hope this were not the case).

Additionally, perhaps training a soldier with such a specialized weapon would add extra turns to the "training time" although it would probably be better to store this extra time as a necessary material for item creation. Abstract perhaps, yet if you were forging a Hittori Hanzo blade for your Soveriegn, it would still take say 5 turns (or so) for the weapon to be created (as opposed to immediately).

Perhaps an additional requirement of the Hittori Hanzo blade (placeholder name for a buildable, mass producible, super weapon that is found via questing) could be that only one such blade could be under production at a single time (within a city). This could be facilitated by having the blade require a special building be present within the city. My preference would be that the building would be a national wonder ... meaning any given faction can only build one such building at any one time. Therefore, you can only build one Hanzo blade at any one time, and only in one city, and only after you build the special building. If its just blue-prints for a one-time legendary weapon, however, then it doesn't need any such restrictions because you would need to obtain a very rare material for creation.

Below lies the Heartblade

Personally I would like to see a Weapon (or armor) blueprint that has under required materials a Dragon's Heart. (Heartblade) ... then, for any given Heartblade (at the time of creation) you can make it more powerful by adding more gold and magic crystals (like a slider system for price/utility). Then, there would be several optional *specialty* materials (can only choose one specialty material) ... like a Sapphire Orb, Talisman of Souls, or Obsidian Mirror. Depending on the specialty material used, the Heartblade takes a different form with different special powers (in addition to the already potent Attack skills of the weapon).

For instance, the Heartblade without any specialty materials could have a high attack (17), with a 33% chance of a "heart strike" which automatically deals 5 damage regardless of attack role (except vs large creatures) and adds +10 to the attack role. The 5 damage would not stack with sucessive damage dealt by the attack role, so if the attack of 27 dealt 5 points of damage (after initial 5) then it wouldnt ... as in only 5 points of damage would be dealt. However if the attack of 27 dealt 10 points of damage, then 5 additional points of damage would be dealt.

Vorpal Heartblade (Talisman of Souls) would give +1 death damage for each strike, as well as slowly draining the morale of nearby opponents.

Pristine Heartblade (Obsidian Mirror) would have a 25% chance of reflecting damage that would of been recieved, and instead inflicting it on the attacker. This works for magical attacks too. Pristine Heartblade also grants the wearer immunity to fear, poison, and disease.

Glimmering Heartblade (Sapphire Orb) doubles the attack speed of the wielder. Extra speed (over 10) is translated into increased attack. 20% chance to evade physical attacks, 10% resistance to magical attacks. Immunity to fatigue and time spells, as well as a 33% evasion chance for single target magical attacks.

Eaglet Heartblade (Silver Goblet) doubles movement speed and allows flight. Immunity to Air magic, and 75% resistance to ranged physical attacks.

Carnal Heartblade (Female Champion/Princess"death"- or - Ruby of Desire) +2 attack speed, +4 strength, 50% of damage dealt is absorbed back into the wielder (for a temporary max of 150% total HP, meaning a 60 HP champion could hold 90 HP during a battle, after absorbing 30 HP). 20% resistance to physical damage, 50% resistance to fire damage. 20% weakness to ice damage.

Adamantine Heartblade (Adamantium Ore (rare) + Crystal of Resonance (moderate/uncommon)) wielder is 80% resistant to physical damage, and 50% resistant to magical damage

Golden Heartblade (Heart of Midas) each kill turns into gold (+50 gold for a human, +200 gold for medium sized monster, +500 gold for large monster, +1000 or so gold for gigantic monster kill). In addition, 80% chance to evade any lethal attack ... if Golden Heartblade user has 4 HP, and an attack deals 5 damage, the user has an 80% chance to completely dodge the attack.

Silver Heartblade (Tooth of the Silverine)- ignore 50% of the defender's defense rating. (alternatively, ignore non-magical equipment based defense)

Mystic Heartblade (Statue of Jade)- ignore status affecting magical attacks, ignore opponents magical defenses (vs damage or status affects), 50% resistance to magical damage

Static Heartblade (Jewel of Zeus)- +5 electric damage with each attack, 85% resistant to electrical damage

All Heartblades (or other unique/extremely rare weapons for that matter) drop onto the battlefield after the wielder has been slain. Such weapons appear as loot for the victor of the battle.

Seeing that either "common sense" nor "reality" have to be strictly adhered to in these types of cases, as in if 1 Mine at max production provides materials enough to run 1 Foundry at max production, then 2 foundries fed by the same mine would divide the resources in 1/2 thus 1 mine would run 2 foundries each at 50%.

A second foundary would be counterproductive, unless you knew a second mine was forthcoming shortly.

But this is a fantasy game after all so as I noted, both "reality" and "common sense" are rather flexible. The flex part should be made so that it matches up as best as can be had to actual "costs" of those things that are a by product of the Mine/Foundry combination. That being steel stuff.

If that is not bad enough, this brings us back to "Balance". Are we ready to balance yet? I do not believe so.

I would although agree that if building Foundries increased output significantly, without added resource pools (mines) then abuse of said model is sure to follow. OK, I know for a fact that if something is abusable, it will be abused.

Abuse is bad...

If a Mine produces 4 Iron Oren each turn and a Foundry transforms 1 Iron Ore into Processed Iron (or whatever), having more than one Foundry....

Wait. This is about Kingdoms and Empires! Take your Foundries to another thread!!!

j/k  

Good point Winter. And duly noted.

Seeing that Heartblades require the use of a Dragon's Heart (see reply #151), possessing even one is a rare accomplishment. The added bonus of forging a heartblade with a specialty item may well be worth the wait, as far as looking for such special items.

That's not bad, not bad at all I think. Contemplate this though...

Have the first 3 Foundries be Multiplicative. 1 foundry gets you 2 income (out o 10 MAX). The 2nd foundry moves you to 4. The 3rd foundry moves you to 6 (alright not bad). The 4th foundry how-ever...(wth, it only gave me 1 point?), now you're at 7. Now, 8, 9, and 10, will come from adding 1 new foundry a piece, to reach Max income of Ore for that city, being 10.

It can be explained this way....

That Ore deposit is only So big. It's finite. The first 3 foundries you built were built on the optimal extraction sites. The last ones that were built can only handle the scraps and what's left over that the first foundries bring up but don't have time to process themselves because they're bringing so much up out of the ground. Hence the last ones built don't have the income of the ones with optimal placement.

Makes sense to me. Perhaps Primary Foundries and Secondary Foundries should be separated by name (and quantitative function ofc), while being of the same cost and roughly the same appearance.

On a different note, however, lets assume building the initial Mine gives you only 1 Iron per turn. This represents simply having the initial backbone of the mining shafts.

Then later, you can build an expanded mine which increases the base output to 2 per turn.

Finally, (with engineering or some such) you can build a deep-shafted mine, which increases base output to 4 per turn.

Now, somewhere in the Civilization Housing Techs ... you get the tech for slums. This also unlocks Mining Camps. A Mining Camp has roughly the same stats as a Slums (though perhaps less housing/more cost?), and can only be built adjacent to the mine. The mining Camp doubles the output of the Mine because it fills the mine with labor, where before the mine was working with largely a skeleton crew of the few, the proud, the brave volunteers.

This means Mine without Mining Camp -> 1 ore, 2 ore, 4 ore (w/ tech)

Mine WITH Mining Camp -> 2 ore, 4 ore, 8 ore (w/ tech).

NOW you have a much more realistic background of increasing Ore output where you can add a diminishing returns Foundry system.

Example: Foundry one *doubles* ore production (deep-shaft + Camp + Foundry = 16).

The next foundry additively increases output by 50% (deep-shaft + Camp + 2 Foundries = 20)

The third and fourth foundries would also increase output by 50% (additively) ... for a total of 28 ore.

// the 2nd, 3rd, 4th were all 50% for the case of simplicity as opposed to a descending staircase

Three more Foundries (6th, 7th, 8th) can now be built (if at size 5?) at an additive 25% increase ... for a max total of 34 ore.

Now then ... if there are TWO mines (both with mining camps) in a city, then this doubles the effectiveness of foundries (but doesn't increase total foundries allowed).

If two deep-shaft mines + mining camps ... then that is 16 total base Iron ore. First two foundries each additively add 100% Iron (32 -> 48) ... while the other 6 can additively add 50% (56->62->70->78->84->92)

If there are three mines within a city, then three foundries can additively add 100%.

Alternatively, you could choose the (1 mine) style for any number of mines, with only one foundry allowing for 100% increase. It have the benefit of providing a more linear Ore output per city, as opposed to giving the great advantage to two mine cities and three mine cities (I feel a two mine or three mine city would be able to mine more efficiently, as well as indicate a richer area of ore in general ... everyone knows how to mine in the city, so there is more applied effor).

//What do you think?

Still not really with it. Why is the second foundry better then the first one? What is it doing differently, and when I start building foundries in another city why can't I apply that to what the first one is doing?  (edit - Although you didn't mention mine income, so if your first foundry is adding 2 instead of setting the total to 2 then it makes perfect sense.)

To achieve the same starting and final numbers you did, I'd do it like this:

Mine = 2 ore

Foundry 1 = 2 ore (4 total)

Foundry 2 = 2 ore (6 total)

Foundry 3 = 1 ore (7 total)

Foundry 4 = 1 ore (8 total)

Foundry 5 = 1 ore (9 total)

Foundry 6 = 1 ore (10 total)

This way we wind up with the same final number and the same effect you wanted, without the weirdness of foundry 2 being better then foundry 1.  There's still a reason to build foundries 3-6 if you want a mining powerhouse city, but they're not really essential and you can make a choice there. The first two are really worth it.

Hey Tridus, did you read my reply #157?

Im sorry, but I don't see a simple mine with 5 miners ... which could expand into a large complex with a hundred miners or so ... reach a grand total of only 10 iron.

I did, and I think your numbers get too high for one mine. Just a point of disagreement.

You could handle mining camps as a flat production bonus and a foundry as a % bonus, or something. Ie:

A mine puts out 2, base. Each labor camp increases that by 5. Each foundry increases the overall output by 25% (additively).

A mine and a camp is 7. A mine, a camp, and 4 foundries is 14. Add another camp, and it goes to 24. etc. There's really any number of ways to do it depending on how many upgrades you want.

https://forums.elementalgame.com/382223

Could you move your latest idea (or any future ideas) on the topic of Mines, camps and foundries ... to this new thread?

I would like for such discussion (about the Metals production mechanics) to this more centralized thread, and away from an Empires Lore dev thread.

Tridus, did you finish reading my reply, my friend? I explain that in the second paragraph they are doing differently...

Copy/Paste

That Ore deposit is only So big. It's finite. The first 3 foundries you built were built on the optimal extraction sites. The last ones that were built can only handle the scraps and what's left over that the first foundries bring up but don't have time to process themselves because they're bringing so much up out of the ground. Hence the last ones built don't have the income of the ones with optimal placement.

Call them Loan Sharks!!

I did. That explains why the third one is bigger then the fourth, not why the second is bigger then the first.

lol ok, you got me there. Wait a minute, the first, second, and third all give 2 (because of optimal placement). The second one is the same as the first and third. All three of the first ones built, give 2 Ore a piece. The last 4 to to equal 10 (6+4) only give 1 a piece. Foundries 1, 2, and 3, are all the same.

Oh ok. The way it was worded, I wasn't sure if that was the case, or if the first one was giving 1 because the mine itself gives 1. In that case we're pretty much on the same page.

And I think your habit of giving mines low output is going to make anyone using iron extremely rare (which might be a good thing) ... but certainly never any legions with iron anything will be made.

So I guess its just a balance idea, and an idea of personal preference. Only time will tell, I suppose.

Well, that's a good question. With access to one mine, how many turns should it take to get enough iron to outfit 1000 troops with standard quality equipment?

My answer is likely higher then yours. A higher number also places a greater importance on capturing and holding more mines (or trading with someone else who has iron). Get the number low enough, and the limiting factor starts becoming population instead of iron, as you replenish ore supplies faster then people supplies.

See, yea, I can see how are Reasonings are vastly different.

My reasoning is that the higher your tech, the FAR better your use of even one mine is. Therefore, high tech nations should be able to equip a legion with basic gear in 20 turns ... while a low tech nation could do the same in 200 turns.

I think the title of the Empire's finance dude needs to reflect the social structure of the Empire more than the gold making aspect, specifically.  I don't think the Empires care for money, especially - just resources.  I would use Guildmaster (Doge?), Overseer, Legate, and so on.

Or maybe just tend to the overblown and arrogant, as would fit such massive social-darwinists. Grandee? Lord? Domina?

You could also aim for consistency with the simple descriptive titles already cited (like Enforcer and Guardian.) Manager might be the most straightforward. Or Overseer again.

Overseer works. Or Magistrate.

Magistrate I would like to reserve for the magical-research unit, however.

Ya know, THE EMPIRES is beginning to remind me more and more of the Imperium of Man.

You have the Imperial Guardsmen (grunts without any experience gain) ... you have the Space Marines (SuperSoldiers bred for the part)

and then you have the Psychers, Adeptus Mechanicus, and other such people *specially born* for such roles, or in other ways fit for their duties due to ancestry.

Then there are the Champions/Family members (or Primarchs) which can grow much more powerful (through levels) being the only ones that can gain experience.

while of course there are exceptions ... it seems that Imperium of Man 40k is certainly more Empire than Kingdom. Perhaps that will help to identify Empire mentality?

Meanwhile, the Kingdoms are less Grimm-Dark or Utilitarian, and are based upon more light-hearted Fantasy RPGs. In fact, the Kingdom seems to represent lighthearted RPG fantasy where all it takes is hard work to rise from any beginnings into becoming a great warrior. As such, a unit of peasant archers could eventually rise to the fame of Robin Hood's archers, with as much skill as any Archer of Sherwood (or Loxeley)

I like your way of interpreting this, if this is the case Stardock and its team sure are thinking way outside the box, can't wait for the game. I am so ready to see all the surprises it has in store for us, not since NWN1 was being developed have I been so hopeful and exited at the same time over one game. This game has the potential of being Huge with table top rpg game fans. "attention all dungeon masters keep an eye on this game it might turn out to be everything we ever wished for from Wizards of the coast online tools". They have/are trying, but they are publishers not game developers it takes the expertise of Stardock and there business model which allows players to be involved to have the synergy needed to finally get something out to the public that is fun and works

What about Exploiters? Or about Overseers? Profiteers? I like profiteers... that's easy to understand and has a negative connotation to it.

Aye, profiteers was one of my favorites. As well as Viziers.