[Suggestion] Buildings with upkeep

[colinljx]

[Suggestion] Buildings with upkeep -updated

After reading this thread don't you think EU genre go into wrong direction? about the imperfect implementation of our current magistrate based building system in DW, I firmly believe the building system should/need to have an upkeep system such as 0.1 ducat per month for each building in a province. Whether or not should magistrates be used for construction is not the major topic here, but my believe is that magistrates should be intended only for beneficial province decisions once the suggested building upkeep is implemented. Also, this suggestion does not mean the current building system in DW is completely broken, but rather it needs changes to bring itself closer to perfection. You can see the buildings in DW as either the actual building or bureaucratic improvement, but this suggestion is about upkeep.

Now, lets take a look at the in-game effects of this suggestion: (using 0.1 ducat per month)
With the proposed 0.1 monthly maintenance fee for each building at each province, a province with 5 buildings (assuming all tier 1) will cost 0.5 per month, which is about the amount of upkeep for a small army. In other words, in order for some/all of your provinces fully upgraded before tier 2 buildings become available, you will have to accept a smaller standing army/navy. You/we will have to choose between having many profitable/useful buildings such as constable or fort and having a large standing army. You can choose to be anywhere between a warmonger/horde with undeveloped lands but strong military and a trader/colonizer with well developed cities but weak military, though most will probably falls somewhere in the middle.

Now, lets take a look at the historicity/balance issues this suggestion may deal with/bring about:
Whether the building/construction represents an actual place or government improvement, both the initial cost and upkeep is there throughout history and can be well-displayed by this suggestion. With a decision to make on having buildings or armies, it is no longer a no-brainer/possible to have the largest army possible while being the most developed country in the world(unless you already conquered the world, in which case you should start a new game), which is historical.

Answers for some of the questions you might ask:
Yes, buildings of all tiers should be allowed to destroy as part of the suggestion.
Yes, the AI should be programmed so that they do not destroy a building unless they have to.
Yes, the AI should only build a building when its budget actually allows.
Yes, the AI should make its decision depends on the power of its neighbors/rivals.
Yes, 0.1 ducat per month may be too much and around 0.05 or so might be better.
Yes, there are many other reasonings/benefits that I haven't mentioned due to my laziness in typing...

Some after thoughts:
It might be a good thing to allow the construction of buildings of all tiers since 1399, though the price of higher tier will be extremely expensive (say 0.5 compares to 0.1) until unlocked at certain tech level. Of course, this is just intended to add some flavor and varieties for the joy of players, AIs probably should never do this.
Like I said earlier, under this new system, magistrates probably should no longer be required for buildings, though it's kinda arguable. Of course, no magistrates on buildings means bringing back the province decisions, many short-term and not overpowered decision that is.

Patch or expansion?
Well, since I am not extensively familiar (yes, I can mod) with the core programs of EU3, I estimate the amount of work required (suggestion plus afterthoughts) for this shall equal the size of a large patch, but I am willing to pay $5 for it unless some serious coding/rework is required or can be justified.
However, since DW has been more disappointing rather than satisfying so far, I suppose it is understandable that veterans of EU3 like me want this to be a patch of DW. (since I doubt the Factions and Horde will get any rework at all...)

For whoever read this:
Feel free to comment, support, discuss, or come on with better idea/numbers, but do make sure you have read through the main points.

Plus (added):
It might be a good idea to have the AI programmed to prioritize building constructions rather than recruiting troops during peace time, so that their army size will be more historically accurate. Also, allowing upkeep to be lowered as tech progresses should be appropriate.
Just came up with the idea that perhaps capital province and provinces under national focus should require little to no upkeep as a compensation to minor/small nations.

Recently added:
Apparently the first two person did not read... No big deal, just make your own mind.. Also, tell me or discuss what number will be appropriate for the upkeep,(0.01~0.1 or more or less) but don't just say "expensive" or "cheap" and sit on it. The word "expensive" is just as worthless as the word "good" because they are not detailed/clear enough.

 

[Valiant_Hogers]

This would suck as if you have 4x5 = 2.0 ducats and then 6x0.1 = 2.6 for a fully build province.
Even if it is 0.05, is still 1.3 and would cause buildings to be less build.

 

[herrhals]

Too expensive for many small countries to stay competitive.
Tl/dnr

No.

 

[colinljx]

This would suck as if you have 4x5 = 2.0 ducats and then 6x0.1 = 2.6 for a fully build province.
Even if it is 0.05, is still 1.3 and would cause buildings to be less build.

Yes and no, the purpose is for you to have less troops or less buildings. Besides, it wouldn't matter if the building upkeep is too low.
Also, I am not quite sure what your calculations are supposed to mean. For a truly "fully" developed province it should be 0.1(or whatever cost the dev decide)*6*6 = 3.6, but I guess it doesn't matter.
Not to mention you will have massive income by the time you CAN fully develop a province currently. Thanks for the confusing feedback...

 

[colinljx]

Too expensive for many small countries to stay competitive.
Tl/dnr

No.

I believe that OPMs are not supposed to be competitive against blobs or bigger nations. For medium ones to have a chance against bigger ones like some of them did historically, yes.
If you want your own OPM to be competitive, as a human it should be no problem for you. If you want an AI OPM to be competitive, the game is not designed this way. If you want just AIs to be competitive, trying modding the game and give them some magistrate decisions that reduce WE and inflation. If you want any AI to be competitive against human, please wait a few decades for EUXX or EUXXX.. If you want a better EU experience without mod or whatever, you have to tell the devs so that they don't make mistakes like they did with DW.

 

[Simberto]

I don't really see the point. The sole purpose of most buildings is bringing in money. Having them cost an upkeep just forces you to calculate whether they bring in more money then they cost each time you build a building. Which is rather tedious in my opinion. It also does the exact opposite of what magistrates do. Lvl 5 + 6 Trading buildings are better the larger you are, so instead of making a blob be less developed then a smaller state, it would be a no-brainer for the blob to just build Lvl6 trading in each province as soon as they have the money. While a smaller nation might not profit from building buildings at all, depending on the cut-off point.

It obviously also makes buildings in general less good, which might or might not be a good idea.

 

[colinljx]

It obviously also makes buildings in general less good, which might or might not be a good idea.

First, Thanks for the constructive criticism.

The sole purpose of most buildings is bringing in money

Not entirely true, as a matter of fact, only the production series actually bring in money, and the trade series is kinda arguable depends on play style. Most others are upgrades that you may or may not need for other purposes.

Having them cost an upkeep just forces you to calculate whether they bring in more money then they cost each time you build a building.

I realized after reading the magistrate argument thread that it should not be a no-brainer to building everything everywhere without any penalties. While limited magistrates is certainly a solution for balancing, it caused lots of decisions since it ain't perfect, and I personally prefer the way they were back in the HTTT.

instead of making a blob be less developed then a smaller state, it would be a no-brainer for the blob to just build Lvl6 trading in each province as soon as they have the money. While a smaller nation might not profit from building buildings at all, depending on the cut-off point.

if the upkeep is high enough, the blob will have trouble keeping all those lvl 6 trading while maintaining a large standing army, which will make life easier for the smaller rivals (economically or militarily). (Yes, the upkeep for higher tiers should be higher even after reaching the required level) Besides, there are benefits of being bigger.

 

[unmerged(202023)]

When I suggested upkeep in the thread I did not necessarily think of money as I don't believe that that would have any kind of anti-blobbing effect (as the additional provinces produce money). It would rather improve same culture and religion countries with rich provinces.
But how about buildings consuming .001 magistrates per month instead, except for government buildings which grant .001 magistrates per month instead? I know, it's a pretty controversial suggestion but it would a) have an actual anti-blobbing effect and b) make people think twice about where to build buildings. The way I see it magistrates represent a countries administrative capabilities - so why are they not needed to maintain the countries infrastructure?

 

[unmerged(187334)]

Onlu forts should require upkeep, for the historical reason that forts had to be updated constantly to keep up up with developments on warfare and for the gameplay reason that it would make players build them only in key provinces. However thischange would probably also require introducing concept of "supply chain" like you had in EU2 whereby provinces adjacent to a controlled province had a higher supply limit then provinces deeper inside enemy territory. This would make you siege an enemy country progressively (border provinces first), thus starting with the big forts.

 

[knul]

I think solutions like this are more suited for EU4. A lot of mechanisms could use a rework, for example naval and colonisation. Also, a lot of smaller issues like improved diplomacy, regional infamy and more intranational dynamics would be very welcome, but I think outside the scope of EU3. The magistrate system, although I like it, does indeed seems a bit like patchwork, adressing issues that might require a more fundamental rework.

 

[Falconnatic]

onlu forts should require upkeep, for the historical reason that forts had to be updated constantly to keep up up with developments on warfare and for the gameplay reason that it would make players build them only in key provinces. However thischange would probably also require introducing concept of "supply chain" like you had in eu2 whereby provinces adjacent to a controlled province had a higher supply limit then provinces deeper inside enemy territory. This would make you siege an enemy country progressively (border provinces first), thus starting with the big forts.

this

 

[colinljx]

When I suggested upkeep in the thread I did not necessarily think of money as I don't believe that that would have any kind of anti-blobbing effect (as the additional provinces produce money). It would rather improve same culture and religion countries with rich provinces.
But how about buildings consuming .001 magistrates per month instead, except for government buildings which grant .001 magistrates per month instead? I know, it's a pretty controversial suggestion but it would a) have an actual anti-blobbing effect and b) make people think twice about where to build buildings. The way I see it magistrates represent a countries administrative capabilities - so why are they not needed to maintain the countries infrastructure?

Very interesting idea. Not exactly where I was going but certainly another way to solve the balancing issue, but 0.01 seems a little bit too low from the 1399 start (decrease over time/tech maybe?)

 

[colinljx]

Onlu forts should require upkeep, for the historical reason that forts had to be updated constantly to keep up up with developments on warfare and for the gameplay reason that it would make players build them only in key provinces.

That's not really true. Church, dock, and all other buildings/constructions requires constant maintenance to be able to fully function. Even if you see buildings as administrations over the province, the upkeep can still be seen as the fee to maintenance to keep the government influence/authority active. Perhaps forts can be twice expensive in upkeep, but most people would probably see it as inadequate.

 

[Arizal]

I would have been satisfied by a total scrap of magistrates, but the idea to place upkeep cost and transforming the magistrates into repairers for damaged infrastructure is good. I would also like that if a country could be truly interesting in its internal policies (meaning you don't just convert, crush rebels and switch sliders).

 

[unmerged(202023)]

Very interesting idea. Not exactly where I was going but certainly another way to solve the balancing issue, but 0.01 seems a little bit too low from the 1399 start (decrease over time/tech maybe?)

Thought a bit more about it and I think 0.01 (not the 0.001 I suggested at first, how did that happen?) seems about right to me, but you'd have to try that in a game of course. I also like the incentive to build government buildings to somewhat offset the loss as that makes another buildings line viable and even makes sense in a way, what with government and administration being somewhat related.
I was about to make some elaborate playtesting suggestions for implementation but eh, it's not ever gonna happen anyway.

 

[Arizal]

Just an idea like that... I think it would be feasable to make a mod about this. You just remove the magistrates in the construction of all buildings and you add some decisions about repairing buildings (which is already in MEIOU, for what I know). I don't think it's so hard to add a budget bracket about upkeep, but I might be in error. The main problem would certainly be AI behavior, though.

 

[unmerged(202023)]

Just an idea like that... I think it would be feasable to make a mod about this. You just remove the magistrates in the construction of all buildings and you add some decisions about repairing buildings (which is already in MEIOU, for what I know). I don't think it's so hard to add a budget bracket about upkeep, but I might be in error. The main problem would certainly be AI behavior, though.

What do you mean by "repairing buildings" btw.?

 

[Simberto]

if the upkeep is high enough, the blob will have trouble keeping all those lvl 6 trading while maintaining a large standing army, which will make life easier for the smaller rivals (economically or militarily). (Yes, the upkeep for higher tiers should be higher even after reaching the required level) Besides, there are benefits of being bigger.

Well, yes. But High level trade buildings, usually bring in by far the most money if you are of any decent size. Also, they are more effective the more you have and the larger you are. Thus, if the upkeep is so high that they are not worth the money for a blob, they are just money-sinks without any use for a smaller nation. Also, trade buildings for a blob bring in far more money than the production line, so if upkeep on them was so prohibiting that they yield negative results, this also means that production buildings would be completely useless.

Of course, there is some point where you can build buildings to enhance tech at the cost of actual money before they are cost-effective where one might still choose to build them.

But generally speaking, this would, in my opinion, not result in what you think it would. You seem to assume that the money for the building would come from the army. This is not the case. The whole production and trade line are about making money, and thus they would either make less money, in which case sure, everyone would have an army which is a bit smaller, but it is still not exactly a choice between army and buildings. But you still build them to get more money. Or they are below the cut-off point where they bring in less money then they cost, and why would you build them in that case?

The situation is a bit different for the other building lines, but they only exist to address specific needs(manpower, spy protection, fort protection) anyways, so again the monetary cut-off where you think those specific needs are worth the money they cost would be driven a bit up since the costs increase, but nothing fundamentally changes.

So, as i see it, you would not get more variety in the style of countries. Everyone will just have a proportionally smaller army, which does not change anything in the comparison of countries. And everything that scales nonlinearly, (trade 5+6) will be even better (in comparision) for larger countries if it costs a flat amount monthly.

 

[1alexey]

The DW magistrates system brings you a limited amound of buildings, a quest to increase the amound of magistrates, and as such forses you to make choises wether to annex wassals, or leave tham improvements of provinces you`re not exactly interested in, and makes SIO have more sence. But in general it forses you to have a builing strategy, since you cant have everything, unless you`re small enought, but that is allso a choise you make.

The proposed system only makes things worse. You build building if you net a profit, otherwize you don`t.
A simple, NO-BRAINER, min-max-gradient aproach, requiring nothing but micro-management.

I fail to see how such system brings any improvement at all.
Rather the opposite.

 

[colinljx]

Update

@Simberto & 1alexey:
I added last night that nations will pay little or no upkeep on any building at capital & national focus, so small and medium nations will stay competitive easily while large nations (especially for players) will have to choose between having more building with less troops or a more customized building strategy with more troops. Any thoughts?