Preamble
We can assume that if your reading this your either curious about the title or (less likely) generally interested in the contents. The following is small thesis on the use and distribution of resources in Minecraft, and how they would play out in a game specifically (Herocraft). I may make some references to cities and states from the original Sanctum map.
The discussion will begin with a cursory examination of methods of gathering (the egress of material into the state) the method of distribution (state welfare/projects) and the value and consequence of both decisions. After that we'll examine extra-state markets and market value of material, individual market values for resources. Toward the end we'll begin to examine the goals that both individuals and states will have to acquire to make sense of their resource acclimation.
On the Organization of the State (Or: The Terms of the Discussion)
For this thesis, the state is said to be the valid authority by which a township is governed. Mechanically it is the Mayor/King and the SIC, although ideally it is any recognized authority in the town. Either voted in, despotic, or communistic the state has six essential powers that it must make decisions on. These can also be regarded as set of state "obligations" by which they are defined as a working authority.
· Distribution of Land - How is the essential township resource of space distributed? Who gets the best bits of the territory closest to the bank/citadel? Obligation: To protect a citizens right to land holding or resource gathering from a particular area.
· Distribution of Authority - Is there an army, police department, tax collector, architect, resource manager, build quality inspector... the list goes on. Who does what and can say what to others? Obligation: To settle issues arising between towns or citizens, and to reign in those citizens which act against town policy.
· Distribution of Resources - Who gets what? or better yet, for what purposes does who get what, for how long, for what reason? Obligation: To appropriate budgets to those functions which are necessary to engage in responsible governing.
· Collection of Resources - Think taxes. How much do you take from your citizens to support the state? Do you take and not give back? Obligation: To collect the necessary resources to fund budgets for various functions.
· Declaration of War/Peace - Essentially the ability to protect the interests of your own against active aggression, and the protection of the people against foreign attack. Obligation: To protect citizens from foreign invasion and to maintain sovereignty within your borders or claimed outlying lands.
· Orchestration of Public Works - City walls, wells, dams, banks, castles, barracks... what are the essential services that make collective living together worthwhile? Obligation: To preform those services and works which constitute the benefit and efficiency of communal living.
These powers may all at some time get their own treatment, but we are mainly interested in the interlocking dynamics of the distribution and collection of resources and their relationship with the individual and the state.
Gathering Resources and Property Rights
We begin with the subject of the distribution of collectively gathered resources. In order to discuss distribution we have to discuss gathering. How does the state gather its resources? Well as the state is a collective of individuals we'd have to know the disposition of the individual in relation to the state. We can understand the process in three ways, the same ways that we understand property rights. A person either has no, some, or total property rights to what they gather. Specifically:
· A person with no property rights returns all materials gathered to the state, including those objects needed for protection or resource gathering.
· A person with some property rights can either keep some or no resources gathered, but retain some or all of the objects needed for gathering/protection.
· A person with total property rights can keep all materials gathered, tools used to gather it, with total discretion in returning material to the state.
A state with no property rights can be called a true socialist state, either with a command/anarchic structure. This means that the state will either collect or force the collection of all materials and expel any dissent from the proscribed policy, or accepts donations freely without recourse to policy or compulsion. In both cases the state either exercises total power, or no power whatsoever.
A state with some property rights, which currently is what most towns run under, functions by proscribing a set of edicts that citizens observe in relation to resources. A state under this category will have a wide variety of options available to them, but mostly exists with limited state goals, preferring for limited power and increased individual agency. Typically the policies of a town with some property rights organize them for either abundance or scarcity in town resources. It becomes a numbers game where policies attempt to either reduce expenditures or expand resource gathering to maintain a net or even resource gain.
A state with total property rights especially abdicates centrally controlled resource expenditure in favor of either dispursed responsibility management, where individual citizens maintain their own budgets for building projects, or else opt out of government all together in favor it anarchic community. In either sense the state either functionally ceases to exist, or is made powerless in favor of other options. As a consequence the lack of power contributes to uneven resource distribution, where one citizen is either abundant or scarce in resources.
Total Property Rights and the Non-State
A common occurrence with many towns is to disregard citizenry and let them do as they please while the leadership use the town status to protect their own private projects. They don't collect resources, don't offer resources, build minimal required structures for resident benefit, but otherwise largely use the status to focus on grand design structures or to play the role of mayor on the wider stage.
These towns are effectively non-entities. The lack of cooperative mechanics between citizen and mayor make the effectiveness of the state almost impotent compared to cooperative ventures.
A mayor capable of fielding an army can dictate land distribution or the consequences of resource gathering away from home turf. Unless the small cabal at the center of these non-states are of exceptional fighting quality, they rarely can stand for long against larger numbers.
So by not engaging in resource collection/distribution or the engagement of ANY of the obligations of statehood, these states fail to obtain anything and thus can be considered irrelevant to any further discussion or consideration.
The Town Coffers (Or the State of The Budget Address)
So a town decides to maintain an internal resource collection to address the needs and obligations they have undertaken. So the question is, for what and how does the town manage these resources. And how best to collect them? It would be best to address the why over the how at first.
As it stands a state generally has two types of expenditures that they must decide on which effect the why of resource collection. These two states are the MUST of statehood, the other is the CANS, the things which they can do but not necessarily have to.
A state MUST spend money to maintain its city status per Kainzo's township rules.
A state MUST provide those structures necessary to maintain their current town level.
A state CAN levy an army
A state CAN provide for citizenry (Welfare)
A state CAN promote public construction (Walls, Castle, Bank)
A state CAN promote its influence abroad (Invasion, Patrols)
A state CAN promote a service culture (Enchanting, Smithing)
Additionally there are some things that should be considered OUGHTS, or things a town may never do but ought to do in order to be consider more worthy then other towns.
A state OUGHT to be beautiful (Cathedrals, Mosques, Libraries, Gardens)
A state OUGHT to be active (Teamwork, Continuous Activity)
A state OUGHT to larger populations (Continually Expanding, Popular Meeting Places)
A state OUGHT to be enjoyable to play in.
Given these objects and their statuses in relation to one another, we can now -finally- examine resource collection. A town has options when it collects resources, some more popular then others. As it stands I see towns operating through one of these systems (Each system graded on consistency of generation, availability of mass resources, and access for citizens from 1 (Abysmal) to 10 (Excellent)):
· The Tax State: The state collects a preset gold coin or valuable resource tax, or assigns quotas per citizen to maintain citizenship. Failure to pay equates to reduced status or exile. Taxes fall to the mayor or similar authority to distribute to needed projects. (Consistency: 7 Availability: 5 Access: 3)
· The Communal Chest: The state sets aside chests of various security qualities which citizens access more or less freely for communal use. Some chests may best set aside for individual projects or budgets. Historically Egress of material is poorly managed or else not indicated, donate as you feel you can. Projects expand as material becomes available. (Consistency: 8 Availability: 3 Access: 10)
· The Job Assignment: Each citizen is given a job to perform and is either awarded gold or continued citizenship based on various collections from the job. Historically practiced by my old town Neverast on Sanctum. Tended to be inconsistent in ability to maintain resource availability, as well as poorly accessible if centrally managed. (Consistency: 4 Availability: 6 Access: 4)
· The Exchange Economy: Where a set exchange rate of gold or other material is given for all resources, where they tend to go below market but are guaranteed for citizens. Centrally or distributed management can allow for greater access. Access is lacking, because the resources become the property of the state once purchased. Although tends to produce best consistency and availability. (Consistency: 9 Availability: 8 Access: 2)
· The Market Purchase: The only resource collected is coins, and the tax produces surpluses used to purchase bulk items needed from either citizens at market value or else abroad from other towns or individuals. Highly susceptible to embargoing. (Consistency: 7 Availability: 5 Access: 2)
The above systems provide a baseline which we can use to describe, at least in part, almost any state sponsored system, and their respective benefits. One major decision most towns make is whether or hide or freely exchange town resources. The benefits or freely available stocks are obvious to most towns. You get the materials for your project when you need them, as you need them. But pretty much any one hit wonder of a new player can run in, stock up, then never log in again, producing a heavy burden on the state. If a state hides or subdivides availability of resources, it may be difficult to get those resources most effectively to those who are indeed working for the state's best interests. The question becomes one of inefficiencies vs wastes where:
Under a hypothetical example, lets say you've just decided to levy an army to wage a war and armor is needed in abundance to fight it properly. By producing in mass with relatively free exchange of resources you maximize your efficiency nearly double what it would be if each person were to do it individually. So if the armor is produced in six man hours at double efficiency we get:
But nearly a third of the armor is lost to new players who waste it, we're left with:
Compare that to the efficiency of individual effort where each person makes their own armor but total man hours still reach six hours but with no efficiency. Additionally if no armor is lost:
Conclusion
With enough data, we could potentially put coefficients on the decisions of a state to produce a number comparable with waste and efficiency. For example, the decision to use communal chests could give us a 40% increase in efficiency but without tiered access 60% waste. In a game like Herocraft we can actually deduce the eventual success of a town dependent on which policies they enact, along with the competence of those doing the enacting.
In future editions of this paper, I may add sections on abundance and pricing problems with certain objects, freak economic occurrences, and frustrations with preconceptions that many mayors have and act on.
We can assume that if your reading this your either curious about the title or (less likely) generally interested in the contents. The following is small thesis on the use and distribution of resources in Minecraft, and how they would play out in a game specifically (Herocraft). I may make some references to cities and states from the original Sanctum map.
The discussion will begin with a cursory examination of methods of gathering (the egress of material into the state) the method of distribution (state welfare/projects) and the value and consequence of both decisions. After that we'll examine extra-state markets and market value of material, individual market values for resources. Toward the end we'll begin to examine the goals that both individuals and states will have to acquire to make sense of their resource acclimation.
On the Organization of the State (Or: The Terms of the Discussion)
For this thesis, the state is said to be the valid authority by which a township is governed. Mechanically it is the Mayor/King and the SIC, although ideally it is any recognized authority in the town. Either voted in, despotic, or communistic the state has six essential powers that it must make decisions on. These can also be regarded as set of state "obligations" by which they are defined as a working authority.
· Distribution of Land - How is the essential township resource of space distributed? Who gets the best bits of the territory closest to the bank/citadel? Obligation: To protect a citizens right to land holding or resource gathering from a particular area.
· Distribution of Authority - Is there an army, police department, tax collector, architect, resource manager, build quality inspector... the list goes on. Who does what and can say what to others? Obligation: To settle issues arising between towns or citizens, and to reign in those citizens which act against town policy.
· Distribution of Resources - Who gets what? or better yet, for what purposes does who get what, for how long, for what reason? Obligation: To appropriate budgets to those functions which are necessary to engage in responsible governing.
· Collection of Resources - Think taxes. How much do you take from your citizens to support the state? Do you take and not give back? Obligation: To collect the necessary resources to fund budgets for various functions.
· Declaration of War/Peace - Essentially the ability to protect the interests of your own against active aggression, and the protection of the people against foreign attack. Obligation: To protect citizens from foreign invasion and to maintain sovereignty within your borders or claimed outlying lands.
· Orchestration of Public Works - City walls, wells, dams, banks, castles, barracks... what are the essential services that make collective living together worthwhile? Obligation: To preform those services and works which constitute the benefit and efficiency of communal living.
These powers may all at some time get their own treatment, but we are mainly interested in the interlocking dynamics of the distribution and collection of resources and their relationship with the individual and the state.
Gathering Resources and Property Rights
We begin with the subject of the distribution of collectively gathered resources. In order to discuss distribution we have to discuss gathering. How does the state gather its resources? Well as the state is a collective of individuals we'd have to know the disposition of the individual in relation to the state. We can understand the process in three ways, the same ways that we understand property rights. A person either has no, some, or total property rights to what they gather. Specifically:
· A person with no property rights returns all materials gathered to the state, including those objects needed for protection or resource gathering.
· A person with some property rights can either keep some or no resources gathered, but retain some or all of the objects needed for gathering/protection.
· A person with total property rights can keep all materials gathered, tools used to gather it, with total discretion in returning material to the state.
A state with no property rights can be called a true socialist state, either with a command/anarchic structure. This means that the state will either collect or force the collection of all materials and expel any dissent from the proscribed policy, or accepts donations freely without recourse to policy or compulsion. In both cases the state either exercises total power, or no power whatsoever.
A state with some property rights, which currently is what most towns run under, functions by proscribing a set of edicts that citizens observe in relation to resources. A state under this category will have a wide variety of options available to them, but mostly exists with limited state goals, preferring for limited power and increased individual agency. Typically the policies of a town with some property rights organize them for either abundance or scarcity in town resources. It becomes a numbers game where policies attempt to either reduce expenditures or expand resource gathering to maintain a net or even resource gain.
A state with total property rights especially abdicates centrally controlled resource expenditure in favor of either dispursed responsibility management, where individual citizens maintain their own budgets for building projects, or else opt out of government all together in favor it anarchic community. In either sense the state either functionally ceases to exist, or is made powerless in favor of other options. As a consequence the lack of power contributes to uneven resource distribution, where one citizen is either abundant or scarce in resources.
Total Property Rights and the Non-State
A common occurrence with many towns is to disregard citizenry and let them do as they please while the leadership use the town status to protect their own private projects. They don't collect resources, don't offer resources, build minimal required structures for resident benefit, but otherwise largely use the status to focus on grand design structures or to play the role of mayor on the wider stage.
These towns are effectively non-entities. The lack of cooperative mechanics between citizen and mayor make the effectiveness of the state almost impotent compared to cooperative ventures.
A mayor capable of fielding an army can dictate land distribution or the consequences of resource gathering away from home turf. Unless the small cabal at the center of these non-states are of exceptional fighting quality, they rarely can stand for long against larger numbers.
So by not engaging in resource collection/distribution or the engagement of ANY of the obligations of statehood, these states fail to obtain anything and thus can be considered irrelevant to any further discussion or consideration.
The Town Coffers (Or the State of The Budget Address)
So a town decides to maintain an internal resource collection to address the needs and obligations they have undertaken. So the question is, for what and how does the town manage these resources. And how best to collect them? It would be best to address the why over the how at first.
As it stands a state generally has two types of expenditures that they must decide on which effect the why of resource collection. These two states are the MUST of statehood, the other is the CANS, the things which they can do but not necessarily have to.
A state MUST spend money to maintain its city status per Kainzo's township rules.
A state MUST provide those structures necessary to maintain their current town level.
A state CAN levy an army
A state CAN provide for citizenry (Welfare)
A state CAN promote public construction (Walls, Castle, Bank)
A state CAN promote its influence abroad (Invasion, Patrols)
A state CAN promote a service culture (Enchanting, Smithing)
Additionally there are some things that should be considered OUGHTS, or things a town may never do but ought to do in order to be consider more worthy then other towns.
A state OUGHT to be beautiful (Cathedrals, Mosques, Libraries, Gardens)
A state OUGHT to be active (Teamwork, Continuous Activity)
A state OUGHT to larger populations (Continually Expanding, Popular Meeting Places)
A state OUGHT to be enjoyable to play in.
Given these objects and their statuses in relation to one another, we can now -finally- examine resource collection. A town has options when it collects resources, some more popular then others. As it stands I see towns operating through one of these systems (Each system graded on consistency of generation, availability of mass resources, and access for citizens from 1 (Abysmal) to 10 (Excellent)):
· The Tax State: The state collects a preset gold coin or valuable resource tax, or assigns quotas per citizen to maintain citizenship. Failure to pay equates to reduced status or exile. Taxes fall to the mayor or similar authority to distribute to needed projects. (Consistency: 7 Availability: 5 Access: 3)
· The Communal Chest: The state sets aside chests of various security qualities which citizens access more or less freely for communal use. Some chests may best set aside for individual projects or budgets. Historically Egress of material is poorly managed or else not indicated, donate as you feel you can. Projects expand as material becomes available. (Consistency: 8 Availability: 3 Access: 10)
· The Job Assignment: Each citizen is given a job to perform and is either awarded gold or continued citizenship based on various collections from the job. Historically practiced by my old town Neverast on Sanctum. Tended to be inconsistent in ability to maintain resource availability, as well as poorly accessible if centrally managed. (Consistency: 4 Availability: 6 Access: 4)
· The Exchange Economy: Where a set exchange rate of gold or other material is given for all resources, where they tend to go below market but are guaranteed for citizens. Centrally or distributed management can allow for greater access. Access is lacking, because the resources become the property of the state once purchased. Although tends to produce best consistency and availability. (Consistency: 9 Availability: 8 Access: 2)
· The Market Purchase: The only resource collected is coins, and the tax produces surpluses used to purchase bulk items needed from either citizens at market value or else abroad from other towns or individuals. Highly susceptible to embargoing. (Consistency: 7 Availability: 5 Access: 2)
The above systems provide a baseline which we can use to describe, at least in part, almost any state sponsored system, and their respective benefits. One major decision most towns make is whether or hide or freely exchange town resources. The benefits or freely available stocks are obvious to most towns. You get the materials for your project when you need them, as you need them. But pretty much any one hit wonder of a new player can run in, stock up, then never log in again, producing a heavy burden on the state. If a state hides or subdivides availability of resources, it may be difficult to get those resources most effectively to those who are indeed working for the state's best interests. The question becomes one of inefficiencies vs wastes where:
Production = (Effort*Efficiency)
Output = (Production - Waste*Production)
Under a hypothetical example, lets say you've just decided to levy an army to wage a war and armor is needed in abundance to fight it properly. By producing in mass with relatively free exchange of resources you maximize your efficiency nearly double what it would be if each person were to do it individually. So if the armor is produced in six man hours at double efficiency we get:
12 = (6*2)
But nearly a third of the armor is lost to new players who waste it, we're left with:
8 = (12 - (1/3)*12
Compare that to the efficiency of individual effort where each person makes their own armor but total man hours still reach six hours but with no efficiency. Additionally if no armor is lost:
6 = (6*1)
6 = (6 - 0)
So total production is increased despite loss due to gains in efficiency, so that the state which successfully manages the least waste with the greatest efficiency produces the most in relation to the needs and oughts of what they do together as a state.Conclusion
With enough data, we could potentially put coefficients on the decisions of a state to produce a number comparable with waste and efficiency. For example, the decision to use communal chests could give us a 40% increase in efficiency but without tiered access 60% waste. In a game like Herocraft we can actually deduce the eventual success of a town dependent on which policies they enact, along with the competence of those doing the enacting.
In future editions of this paper, I may add sections on abundance and pricing problems with certain objects, freak economic occurrences, and frustrations with preconceptions that many mayors have and act on.
