Erfworld Thread IX: By the Flower and Gray Skull

[NEO|Phyte]

Idea!

What if the key thing that makes war sustainable isn't so much the razing bonus for cities, but an as-yet-unspecified bonus for wiping out a side? I.e. -- the razing bonus for the last capital site of a side is significantly higher than normal.

It's probably less about the razing and more being able to seize a side's treasury when you claim the capitol.

[Anteros]

The system doesn't even really make any sense. We've been told that sides can't make a profit or be self sufficient without taking money from other sides. Where does money come from in the first place then? Will everyone just stop making new units forever once they've mined out their natural resources?

In real life money doesn't just disappear when you spend it like it does in Erf. The system is not sustainable unless natural resources re-pop over time or something else happens that we haven't been told.

[Officer Joy]

The system is not sustainable unless natural resources re-pop over time ...

I think that's exactely what happens. But as you said we haven't been told so we can't know for sure.

[DataNinja]

I think that's exactely what happens. But as you said we haven't been told so we can't know for sure.

If I remember correctly, Ferals pop randomly, and very rarely a Barbarian Warlord or something, so it's not entirely out of the question to extend that to resources.

On the other hand, mining seems to not be an infinite venture. So, it is very possible that Erfworld has a finite lifespan.

[JavaScribe]

The system doesn't even really make any sense. We've been told that sides can't make a profit or be self sufficient without taking money from other sides.

Yeah, it's weird that war apparently produces net schmuckers. My best guess is that how much money you get from razing is dependent not only on city level but on how many enemy units you croaked taking it. My second best guess is that you aren't supposed to think about it.

In real life money doesn't just disappear when you spend it like it does in Erf. The system is not sustainable unless natural resources re-pop over time or something else happens that we haven't been told.

Never been mentioned in comic, but someone on the Erfworld forums claims he heard from Balder that yes, hexes eventually return to their original state over time.

[Razade]

It's possible that, like in some games, having cities nets resources that count as money. Gems already can be turned into Schmuckers and back. Rations are a thing, one could very well sell them or use them as barter.

[Grim Portent]

Don't the first few cities a side controls provide enough money to support it while it's small? I thought it was only after you had a few cities under your control that they stopped producing enough money to support everyone you needed to keep them safe and maintain the side, which is why they occasionally mention the diminishing schmucker return on conquering more territory.

[Razade]

Don't the first few cities a side controls provide enough money to support it while it's small? I thought it was only after you had a few cities under your control that they stopped producing enough money to support everyone you needed to keep them safe and maintain the side, which is why they occasionally mention the diminishing schmucker return on conquering more territory.

That does appear to be so. The higher the level of the city the more they produce as well. The more cities a side has, the less each city produces.

[Anteros]

I dunno about that. Ansom called a self sustaining kingdom completely impossible in book one, and even Faq had to do mercenary work to sustain themselves. Large kingdoms seem to compound the problems, but even small ones have to fight to sustain themselves.

Has there been another example of an side that was actually self sufficient I'm missing?

[Lizard Lord]

I thought I remember Parson speculating on how he might make a self-sustaining side work, but I can't even remember if that was a text update or just a fan theory. Either way it wouldn't matter because that's not what Stanley would want.

[Zalabim]

Well, thinking about it, a city produces a certain amount of income based on its level, but doesn't it produce units of some kind constantly? Unless you can turn off production of units, their upkeep will eventually overwhelm your cities' income at some point. If you do stop growing your army, then you're easy pickings and profit for a side that does.

[Razade]

This is a world based around strategy games. The world requiring conflict to keep moving does fit with that theme rather heavily wouldn't we agree? That is the reason Parson is in Erfworld to begin with, to change that paradigm. Everything in Erfworld is designed around war. There aren't even Civilian units. Every unit directly effects the side and its ability to wage war with other sides, even non-combat units like Nobles. They have a function, they have stats. They give the side they're apart of some bonus. There are no peasants, there are no neutral units caught in the crossfire who would otherwise have lived peacefully and content if it weren't for those troublesome Sides doing their wars. Every unit popped is either a fully function unit used in direct or indirect overworld combat or they serve the side's city by helping production or rations or Schmuckers.

Do we really want Rob to sit down and explain market theory in this world when so many here think he can't even handle a fairly paint by numbers Chosen One story?

[-D-]

Do we really want Rob to sit down and explain market theory in this world when so many here think he can't even handle a fairly paint by numbers Chosen One story?

Yes.

It'll be hilarious. But the gist is - because war is more profitable than peace, Erfworld is in war.

[guttering flame]

I'd guess you gain more by killing stabbers than by growing an equivalent amount of chickens? Gaining levels shown to work that way. Killing stabbers for a few turns give you new level it would take thousands of turns of (peacetime) training to gain the same.

[Anteros]

This is a world based around strategy games. The world requiring conflict to keep moving does fit with that theme rather heavily wouldn't we agree? That is the reason Parson is in Erfworld to begin with, to change that paradigm. Everything in Erfworld is designed around war. There aren't even Civilian units. Every unit directly effects the side and its ability to wage war with other sides, even non-combat units like Nobles. They have a function, they have stats. They give the side they're apart of some bonus. There are no peasants, there are no neutral units caught in the crossfire who would otherwise have lived peacefully and content if it weren't for those troublesome Sides doing their wars. Every unit popped is either a fully function unit used in direct or indirect overworld combat or they serve the side's city by helping production or rations or Schmuckers.

Do we really want Rob to sit down and explain market theory in this world when so many here think he can't even handle a fairly paint by numbers Chosen One story?

No, I don't want him to try to explain market strategy. It's just something to speculate on.

He will have to address it at some point though if he wants it to make sense when Parson ends wars on erf.

[SZbNAhL]

Has there been another example of an side that was actually self sufficient I'm missing?

Do we count the backer stories? Because if so there's the So-be-it Union.

[DigoDragon]

I'd guess you gain more by killing stabbers than by growing an equivalent amount of chickens? Gaining levels shown to work that way. Killing stabbers for a few turns give you new level it would take thousands of turns of (peacetime) training to gain the same.

Especially if you train chickens to be stabbers. But wow would no one see that coming. :3

[HandofShadows]

Especially if you train chickens to be stabbers. But wow would no one see that coming. :3

If they played a Zelda game they would.

[-D-]

And since thousand turns would probably make you unimportant to your side or Fate, your Signamancy would decay. Wanda looks nice because Fate has need of her. Charlie doesn't, because he is fighting his Fate.

[DigoDragon]

And since thousand turns would probably make you unimportant to your side or Fate, your Signamancy would decay. Wanda looks nice because Fate has need of her. Charlie doesn't, because he is fighting his Fate.

Maggie has improved a little in the Signamancy department too as she has become more important to Fate. Though, that could also be due to the change of artists over time as well, but it could be both.

[DataNinja]

Maggie has improved a little in the Signamancy department too as she has become more important to Fate. Though, that could also be due to the change of artists over time as well, but it could be both.

If I remember correctly, Parson notes in one of the text updates that her Signamancy had gotten softer. So it's in-universe as well.

[aurilee]

Maggie has improved a little in the Signamancy department too as she has become more important to Fate. Though, that could also be due to the change of artists over time as well, but it could be both.

Maggie softened because of her personality shift as well (and becoming unlinked), so it's more than just the Fate thing.

Also, Wanda didn't always look so great (like when she first met Jillian). Having good Signamancy goes beyond being important to Fate.

[Jasdoif]

The system doesn't even really make any sense. We've been told that sides can't make a profit or be self sufficient without taking money from other sides. Where does money come from in the first place then? Will everyone just stop making new units forever once they've mined out their natural resources?

I think it's a combination of a side's city-shmucker production being diminished past a certain point, unit upkeep, and the general violent nature of neighbors.

Old Faq only had three cities, but had an array of casters to support; Haffaton had a lot of cities, but maintained minimal garrisons for most of them. Traditional sides maintain armies to fend off and take over their neighbor's; Faq avoided conflict by having Jack hide entire cities from scouting parties, while IIRC Haffaton's general defense strategy involved leaving poisoned rations in their cities for invaders to eat, so hopefully they didn't live long enough to threaten a small recapture party.

I've seen it theorized that sides split off satellite/colony sides for the express purpose of avoiding the diminishing returns point, since two "half-sized" sides would outproduce a single "full-sized" side above a certain point.


Parson considered the viability of using unit harvesting to produce enough rations to offset upkeep, potentially leading to a self-stable side, and of course Decrypted have no upkeep.

[JavaScribe]

Well, thinking about it, a city produces a certain amount of income based on its level, but doesn't it produce units of some kind constantly? Unless you can turn off production of units, their upkeep will eventually overwhelm your cities' income at some point. If you do stop growing your army, then you're easy pickings and profit for a side that does.

That was what I originally assumed, but Parson said that if every side in the world was forced to make peace, Erfworld's total population would be decimated. It's annoying that he didn't say why.

[-D-]

Also, Wanda didn't always look so great (like when she first met Jillian). Having good Signamancy goes beyond being important to Fate.

Yeah, that was Wanda repaying a Karmic debt to Fate. Brought upon her by both her opposition to Fate and her need to back up her Number.

Wanda has tremendous value in Erfworld score system. According to Mathamancers, the number is repaid, in deaths.

[lord_khaine]

That was what I originally assumed, but Parson said that if every side in the world was forced to make peace, Erfworld's total population would be decimated. It's annoying that he didn't say why.

I agree, its unusually annoying. Not the least because it dont make any sense.
War is expensive, you constantly has to let your cities work to produde soldiers, you need to maintain as big an army as you possibly can. And cant let those soldiers do anything but guard/fight.

And so it simply dont make sense that a sudden peace is going to break that.

[guttering flame]

The world is built with semi-artificial rules. If there's a rule: Slaying an enemy stabber gives you 100 schmakers while creating and maintaining stabbers costs 3 schmakers, war and fighting are the big money makers.

[Douglas]

The world is built with semi-artificial rules. If there's a rule: Slaying an enemy stabber gives you 100 schmakers while creating and maintaining stabbers costs 3 schmakers, war and fighting are the big money makers.

Yes, but no such mechanic has yet been revealed. It's been implied that war is necessary to sustain most sides, but there's no official explanation for why.

The best guess I have right now is a combination of "everyone does it" and Signamancy decay - a side that doesn't actively make war gets beaten by its neighbors who do, and in the mean time deteriorates into fat, complacent, incompetent slobs who are easy pickings to whoever finds them.

Then again, that bit about Parson analyzing the ration-harvesting mechanic for making a self sustaining side makes me think there has to be an economic component - that war somehow produces net positive resources - which would pretty much have to have an artificial mechanic such as you suggest.

[Welf]

The Magic Kingdom is an island in the middle of an undisclosed ocean. It has apparently never been approached by sea.

Based on the fact that moneyless casters go to the shore to die, spending their last turn looking at the sun set over the ocean it seems like bodies not depopping is the sort of thing that should have been verified easily, unless no one ever bothers to go there and say goodbye and notice the mountain of corpses left behind by bodies not going away over the past few thousand turns. If those bodies are still there it'd be an army of hundreds or thousands of decrypted casters, which seems unlikely.

Maybe the dwindling resources are the death clock for Erfworld? The net income is negative, and only mining gems puts in new money in the system, but that will run out some day too, and becomes more and more difficult. Small sides may have slight surplus, but have to defend themselves against bigger ones, so they waste that money on units and war and try to become bigger so they can steal from smaller sides themselves.

[eschmenk]

Then again, that bit about Parson analyzing the ration-harvesting mechanic for making a self sustaining side makes me think there has to be an economic component - that war somehow produces net positive resources - which would pretty much have to have an artificial mechanic such as you suggest.

Right. That mechanic is razing cities. It's apparently a big money maker for some aggressive sides. There are apparently other ways, though. When it was stronger, TV made a bunch of money through extortion and kidnapping. I don't know how many other sides depend on that.

The Digdug story made it seem as if the economics are in dispute. One side believed in building up cities and maximizing production; the other believed in building up the military and attacking and razing other people's cities. I don't think the story resolved which side was right.