[Suggestion/Question] Currency talk, why only one coin for 'both sides?'

Who set the standards for weight and purity?

Kyogre let us t*itter-phobes know that the devs have been told that "... Elemental should have a custom name for its currency, with fancy symbol and everything."

This leaves me immediately curious about how the game world might explain a single currency acceptable to all factions, or whether the devs have already considered the question and dismissed alternatives as 'un-fun' complexity. I'm ready to ignore the oddity as a player, but it does seem a little odd that a post-cataclysmic world filled with factions who fall into two major (firmly opposing?) camps would somehow have a single, universal currency.

I'm sure very few folks would want to see each sovereign minting their own coins with different weights and purities. But shouldn't there at least be a kingdoms coin and an empires coin? (And maybe some decoration-only options so sovereigns can see their own faces on standard-assay coins?)

7,896 views 12 replies
Reply #1 Top

Well, we already know from the beta that we are finding bags of coins in the world around us... So possibly the world before the cataclysm had a single currency and the post-cataclysm factions are just using those coins as a basis. I mean with as vague as money always is in these 4x games, this is as good an explanation as any imo.

Reply #2 Top

Cosmetic naming for the coins of each civilization would be cool but they should the same or have iron trade bars system or similar for trading.

Reply #3 Top

Quoting RisingLegend, reply 1
Well, we already know from the beta that we are finding bags of coins in the world around us... So possibly the world before the cataclysm had a single currency and the post-cataclysm factions are just using those coins as a basis. I mean with as vague as money always is in these 4x games, this is as good an explanation as any imo.
End of RisingLegend's quote

I guess I've been thinking of nearly all the beta 1 UI text as an extremely rough draft, right along with the underlying functional questions like 'how many of these things should be magic items vs. gold?' Re how vague money has traditionally been in TBS games, well, is it that wrong to hope for Elemental to make a big step forward?

@Wintersong: I was thinking of your personal avatar factory when I mentioned sovereign faces on coins, but now that you mention pure-text decoration, I can't easily imagine when I'd want to see a detailed image of a coin in the Elemental GUI. Maybe if the Treasury gets its own full-screen (or at least decently-large) interface, a faction's Coin of the Realm might be a good design element...

Reply #4 Top

Well i think i would be cool to have an option of multuple types of coin for the realms.That way you could counterfit to undermine your enemys encomany.

Reply #5 Top

It would be interesting to have economic sabotage beyond just blowing up buildings. Flooding cities with goods and counterfeiting to cause inflation in your enemy's cities could be an interesting passive-aggressive way to attack somebody.

Reply #6 Top

Re how vague money has traditionally been in TBS games, well, is it that wrong to hope for Elemental to make a big step forward?
End of quote

I don't think it is wrong to hope. In fact, I had very high hopes for the economy back when the "internal debates made external" thread came about... Mostly I just think, from as far as i can tell, that the devs are streamlining the economy to appeal to the simplistic crowd. While i do think the idea of multiple currencies would be awesome, for reasons mentioned above by valhur and ratya, i just think it would be even more complicated than "camp 1" to implement.

Reply #7 Top

Although it doesn't make a terrible amount of sense, they could just have all the different currencies be 1:1 equivalent........... in the real world that is highly unlikely, but so is using the same currency all over the continent.......

Reply #8 Top

Well Europe has the Euro,

America has been rumoured to be getting the "Amero"

So .... Elemeno?! With the Elemental "E" with two vertical bars thru it for the symbol, and in the GUI it could say you have

"100 Elemeno p(ieces)" :erk: :grin:

other possibilities....

The Boogiebuck

The Fiat (only if using paper currency, not hard money)

the rollad or rallod

 

 

 

Reply #9 Top

While i do think the idea of multiple currencies would be awesome, for reasons mentioned above by valhur and ratya, i just think it would be even more complicated than "camp 1" to implement.
End of quote

I'm not at all seriously expecting to see a true multipolar currency market in a TBS any time soon. But the kindgoms-empires context in Elemental does seem like an opportunity to try some very basic stuff with two currencies, e.g. recruiting a major Death-oriented power (say a Lich Lord) might be impossible without empire coin or vice versa.

Although it doesn't make a terrible amount of sense, they could just have all the different currencies be 1:1 equivalent...
End of quote

That's basically the cosmetic approach, which I think would be more fun than 'nothing' without adding that big a task item for the art devs. It could even work into flavor text for quests and such, where the type of coins in a dead assassin's pouch are a clue that might mean Faction A is behind the attempt or an unknown faction wanted to implicate Faction A.

Reply #10 Top

Well, I say currency should be the weight of a commodity that has a relatively fixed value.  Think of, for instance, salt.  In Elemental, it could be mana crystals or some such thing.  Or perhaps, more interestingly, you could have multiple commodities that represent currency and that change value based on abundance (these commodities could be useable too).  Salt, grain, gold, mana crystals, head of cattle. 

Reply #11 Top

Or perhaps, more interestingly, you could have multiple commodities that represent currency and that change value based on abundance (these commodities could be useable too).  Salt, grain, gold, mana crystals, head of cattle.
End of quote

This is actually what i would prefer. So in one game, iron might be very rare and thus worth so much more throughout that game, and in another it might be a different resource thats rare. So that money actually means something, because you would be spending it to actually get other resources that will actually build you things. In games like these, money and the economy always takes a back seat which wouldn't be the case when running a nation. It would be one of the most important things. I'd like to be able to evaluate every game which is the best nation to buy salt from if i need salt? I don't have any iron, is there any nation i can buy iron ore cheaply? Where should i try to get a trade treaty signed? These questions would make every decision count and increase the games re-playability i think 

As far as I can tell, based on the betas, resources will be amassed (or produced) and not unlimited (like it was in the civ) from resource ownership. So there could be a world market where i could buy a certain amount of wood by giving a certain amount of iron. They would each have a value in gold (based on abundance like demiansky said). So if wood is common in the world, it will have a relatively low price, and iron would probably have a higher price. Or maybe you could have it be based on a nations abundance of a certain resource, so you could have a certain resource be cheaper in one nation than it is in another?

This way its kind of like having different currencies, but really its just based on how important a certain resource is to that nation at that point in time

Reply #12 Top

This is actually what i would prefer. So in one game, iron might be very rare and thus worth so much more throughout that game, and in another it might be a different resource thats rare. So that money actually means something, because you would be spending it to actually get other resources that will actually build you things. In games like these, money and the economy always takes a back seat which wouldn't be the case when running a nation. It would be one of the most important things. I'd like to be able to evaluate every game which is the best nation to buy salt from if i need salt? I don't have any iron, is there any nation i can buy iron ore cheaply? Where should i try to get a trade treaty signed? These questions would make every decision count and increase the games re-playability i think
End of quote

Right, this was exactly what I was thinking.  It would have to be streamlined, though, to prevent it from getting too complicated.  I think if these resources were compiled, but remained fluid, it would be simple enough to implement.  In otherwords, the resources aren't given a stockpile number in a specific place. but instead have an overall number from all of your cities.  That's not to say they can't be stolen.  When an opponent attacks your city successfully (or you theirs) you could raid the city, take all of its recources, and leave it standing.  In this case, the computer would run an algorithm that would decide what exactly was stolen, based on prestige, economy, and the resource extraction of that city.  The player being raided would be notified of what was stolen, and the amount subtracted from their treasury.