Fwurg

[Azuma]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way I see it, currently the only way for a starting economy to earn a proper amount of income is to produce a combination of 6 goods. This means that there are very little possibilities to decide on your own strategy. Sure, it is possible later on, but I don't really look forward to spending the next 20 or so turns waiting for an opportunity to steer the economy in the way that I want to... To be honest this has also been holding me back in actually creating the economy for the Azarya.

Sure, I can always choose not to do this, but this leaves my Faction in such a weak economic state that I might as well not bother with creating the economy at all.

I don't know what other people think of this?

[Chriz]

The economics are based on creating tax sets of multiple products. More products means more tax. It is true that if you would focus on creating only sets of 3 you would start with an income of about 400 while with 6 products you can get 600 .

Although if you do start with a set of 3 products you can trade with others to get a set of 6 products in less then 10 turns.

For example my faction is producing on a very large scale. In less then 5 turns my faction will have about 200 , and available for trade.

If your faction would be focusing purely on , creating , and we could be great trading partners. This would mean that in no time you would have the income of 600 as well.

I am not the only one that is focusing his economy, others are doing this as well.

[Brend]

First off, it's nice to see more interest in the economic system.

As you say, creating a six-set for their tax income is a very solid starting strategy. From a historical development point of view, it's also rather logical to start out that way, as your economy developed on it's own (i.e. without intergalactic trading partners).

You are free to start out with other economic set-ups, the Union even helps out with this: the Union gifts each new economy a 10 000 grant, to help develop the economy in a direction you want. This means that for the first 10 , your income is increased by 1000 . This allows you to start out with a bit more leeway in your exact economic set-up.

Something to keep in mind if you want to start with a less independent set-up is the fact that you need trading partners to create larger tax-sets. If you do not want to start with a six-set set-up, then you will need trading partners. You should keep in mind that these partners have their own demand and supply, and they will have to take their trading partners into account as well.

Sure, I can always choose not to do this, but this leaves my Faction in such a weak economic state that I might as well not bother with creating the economy at all.

Don't get me wrong, but your faction is currently in an even weaker economic state: you don't even have an economy to compete on an inter-galactic scale.

As to the 20 issue: it is true that economies don't change direction overnight, but this game is about politics and economy. If everyone was capable of just making a one-eighty, the economic balance would be all over the board (which would decimate any political ties created through trade). However, the new zone refurbishment rule allows you to quickly adapt to a new situation.

There's probably some other players that have other ideas on this though, so post away!

[Mercury]

Something perhaps worth to note:

The economic system is designed in such a way that to produce the highest amount of goods, you should specialise as much as possible, while to earn the most money, you need as great a diversity of products as possible. These two opposing forces create a very balanced system that can stand a lot of abuse ^_^

The key (and admittedly it is somewhat difficult for new economies) is to find a balance between producing the good you are best at in large volumes and acquiring enough different products to make the money you need to grow. The best way to find this balance is by trading with other players as much as possible.

In fact, the amount of profit you can make on your own pales in comparison to the amount of profit you can make by trading, and this is a very deliberate design choice as it promotes player interaction and the establishment of political ties to get mutually favourable deals.

Does this make sense?

[Azuma]

Yes it makes sense, but you will then still need another starting player (who happens to be specialized in a material different from your own) or otherwise you will have to compete with settled players, which is also quite difficult. I don't think settled factions will have a reason to deal with other people than they already do unless you can offer them products for much less than other players, which impedes your won growth and makes it less feasable to do this.

As Brend already said:

Something to keep in mind if you want to start with a less independent set-up is the fact that you need trading partners to create larger tax-sets. If you do not want to start with a six-set set-up, then you will need trading partners. You should keep in mind that these partners have their own demand and supply, and they will have to take their trading partners into account as well.

By the way, Chriz, I was planning on specializing in , so I see possibilities there ^^

And I don't care about the fact that the economy thing is a slow-running game, That is rather natural with something like this. I just care about the fact that I don't feel like having to wait for 20 before I can steer my economy even slightly into the direction I want it to go to. I'd like my system to be 'my system' from the start (or at least most of it), and not to be forced into a specific starting strategy until I have apparently grown enough to actually do something. I don't want to be forced to make a 180 to head into the direction I would like to go with my faction.

Okay, Chriz here just happens to be an interesting partner for me (very interesting indeed XD), but I still have a feeling something is not right here...

[Brend]

Yes it makes sense, but you will then still need another starting player (who happens to be specialized in a material different from your own) or otherwise you will have to compete with settled players, which is also quite difficult. I don't think settled factions will have a reason to deal with other people than they already do unless you can offer them products for much less than other players, which impedes your won growth and makes it less feasable to do this.

But the funny thing is: maybe you can produce the product at less cost than the others. If you can produce -based products with great efficiency (e.g. you can get 200+ per zone even at system creation), you can easily out-compete a less metals-focussed economy, making you the prime candidate for trades.

And though it is true that established economies might not jump at your production immediately, if you have an excess of metal-based products, there is probably someone out there that can use them. For example, have a look at the Veolian economy (select the commonwealth from the dropdown, I can't link it for some reason), and pay special attention to the tax set composition (at the very bottom of the report).

Note the distinct lack of -based products in the smaller sets. You would probably be able to deal with the commonwealth, and receive (no promises!) for your or other metal-based products.


As to the waiting time between economic shifts: at the beginning of the game I tried to plot out an economic course for my faction, and tried to squeeze out every last drop of possible. This made me a very busy and stressed person. Since then, I've adopted the 'general direction' strategy, in which I only look at the general direction I want to go and just develop my economy as I go, mainly to support the Veolian culture and politics.

Maybe I'm very patient, maybe I'm just not so into it anymore, but I found that this way of running my economy offered me the largest enjoyment. I've since been willing to commit to steps of development that required commitments of longer than 20 .

[Freekjan]

I don't think settled factions will have a reason to deal with other people than they already do unless you can offer them products for much less than other players, which impedes your won growth and makes it less feasible to do this.

Even though I more or less ran into this. I don't think this is an issue. The amounts of trade I have arranged and the 10 k starting funds would have been sufficient to get even a specialized system started. With more players joining in this problem will also grow smaller and smaller. Just make sure you don't compete with a bigger system (e.g. don't do ) and you should be fine.

[Chriz]

Even though I more or less ran into this. I don't think this is an issue. The amounts of trade I have arranged and the 10 k(:tax) starting funds would have been sufficient to get even a specialized system started. With more players joining in this problem will also grow smaller and smaller. Just make sure you don't compete with a bigger system (e.g. don't do ) and you should be fine.

This is true. Currently we have large quantities of and as well due to multiple players with corporations in them.
There should still be more than enough room for starters in , and

[Azuma]

With more players joining in this problem will also grow smaller and smaller. Just make sure you don't compete with a bigger system (e.g. don't do ) and you should be fine.

But then, you will run into the fact that there is no more space to specialize if there are more and more systems though. Though I guess general demand will be higher as well then.

[Brend]

Well -- specialization can be taken further than the raw material stage. There's 12 products to choose from ^_^

[Mercury]

Comparative advantage allows even a new player to set up a trade with an established player that is beneficial to both the new player and the established player.

Suppose player A is an established player that produces 300 per zone or 200 per zone, while player B is a new player who produces 100 per zone or 150 per zone.

Suppose players A and B arrange a trade where player A trades 300 of his for 300 of player B's .

This is profitable for player A: his 1 zone produces 300 because of this trade, meaning they get 100 organics extra for the same zone investment. It is also profitable for player B however: their 2 zones produce 300 meaning they get an additional 100 metals.

In fact, the deal is so obviously profitable, they can change the price on the deal and still be profitable. For both players, the break even point is to trade 1.5 to 1, so as long as they get more than 200 goods for their 300 goods, they are running a profit.

Thus, the economy actually allows new players to compete on price with established players with large systems immediately or almost immediately despite the size difference.