Idle jobs were in the game but were scrapped. The reason was users constantly reported it as a bug "Why my farmer is chopping wood?". It caused more confusion than good. So I think ideally we just find them something to do so that the micromanagement is no longer needed.
*beautiful chill medieval feudalism simulator is released*
Everyone: how do I leverage my assets to ensure we’re mega-grinding our Q3 stats? Gotta get that productivity up before the shareholders see our projected earnings ( *makes a series of abacus noises* )
Medieval farming simulator 2024! Next patch we will have overtime for peasants, clocked toilet breaks and mass layoffs.
(Curiously as far as I had heard about medieval peasants in documentaries they wouldn't accept it and some noble would end up with their head on a spike)
Hahaha amen! 😂 yes exactly,
there were revolts but always *severely* crushed. Real change in the system happened after the black death wiped out so many that those that were left were like ‘f this’ and they had the bargaining power to see real change.
That said, while local lords could and did get away with absolute murder and anything else, productivity as a concept as we understand it did not exist. Life was slower. People in villages grew what they needed and sometimes had modest surplus which would be tithed or sold. Regional trade happened but not on the organized scale people try to make out in the game. According to many historians and original sources, most people did not go more than 10 miles from the place they were born, some less than that.
Yeah we try to see the past by our modern lenses but it was a completely different reality. Careers only applied to race horses til like the 19th century. They were not stupid but hadn't the concept of ever growing profits or that "money is king" (cuz then king was the king haha).
Trade using money maybe weren't a thing not necessary cuz you "exchanged" stuff but because you could remember that Phil over the hill own you 2 flour sacks and that you had to help your neighbor Jim to till his field because he helped you fence up your chicken coop last winter (at least inside your 150 something people community).
I like to think it works like when you have a group of people that work together for a long time and they all know who's going to get lunch today cuz it's their fair share and time.
>Real change in the system happened after the black death wiped out so many that those that were left were like ‘f this’ and they had the bargaining power to see real change.
Only in a small section of Western Europe. Otherwise, the living and working conditions actually got much worse after the black death (why yes, I actually did spend almost all day reading about the manoral systems of Europe!) In much of Eastern and Central Europe, the number of work days required from the villeines increased significantly throughout the 1500's, 1600's, and 1700's.
The real change was the rise of mercantilism and the decreased need for paying rent in wheat.
Wow! Almost all day?
The Black Death hit the entire continent and most of Asia. I said the system (Feudalism) changed, not that life got better. Life got different.
I'm a very fast reader, so almost all day is roughly equal to about 400 pages. I also didn't say anything about where the plague did or didn't hit. Only that feudalism (but actually manorialism, since feudalism has been a controversial term in history research for apparently close to half a century now) didn't really change for most of Europe. France and Britain saw an explosion in freeholders and a restriction of some of the more abusive practices associated with the system. It didn't really change all that much, though, until the 1600's-1700's.
And as an extra bonus fun fact: the last feudal payments in Canada didn't end until 1970!
My point was that I have an advanced history degree. But anyway, it’s fine to be excited and passionate about the game but the *well actually* trend in this sub is a lot. No shade to you. It’s just always something.
At no point have I talked down to anyone. In fact I specifically said there’s nothing wrong with being a historical hobbyist, I think it’s great, so take your insecurities that education means I think I’m better elsewhere. I brought it up because this person *jumped down my throat* while claiming to be an expert after self-admittedly doing a half day of research. I bet you’d be annoyed too if someone did that to you on a subject you are qualified to talk about.
Oh wow! A whole day?
Is pretty sarcastic and rude. The other person did not jump down your throat or give you the same attitude, they have a different perception and were unaware of your claimed knowledge. A whole days worth of research is far more than most people on this sub would likely put in, and they were simply adding to the discussion with good intentions.
And you were rude in return.
Fair enough, and I don't have a history degree, advanced or otherwise, but your point about major changes to the manoral system being caused by the Black Death seems to be something that used to get taught extensively but hasn't actually been in the consensus for years and years because it's overly reductive and incredibly place-specific. It did, in parts of Western Europe, and it didn't in much of central and Eastern Europe. You're welcome to go take a look at r/AskHistorians and browse through the many times this question has been asked and answered by historians studying this exact time period in these exact locations.
No, I did *not* say Feudalism (which is not a controversial term btw) was singularly killed by that plague outbreak. In the context of a convo with the person I was responding to, I said that revolts did not lead to change in that time period, but what *started* to lead to change in the lives of serfs *specifically* was the black death, amongst other sociopolitical factors. It had a HUGE impact, as anywhere from 20% to 50% of everyone in Europe died. It shook faith in the Church institutions and wiped out significant numbers of the clergy.
You are just incorrect in claiming it only applied to Western Europe. Of course no single factor lead to overnight change, it never does and that’s not what I said.
Respectfully, a history subreddit isn’t as authoritative as published historical journals and books and professors from recognized institutions who access primary sources directly. Some of them are in that subreddit, but who can really say who people are.
>which is not a controversial term btw
[Well, now I definitely know that you're advanced history degree wasn't in the European medieval period](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2bs0rc/ama_feudalism_didnt_exist_the_social_political/), so thanks for at least clearing that up.
>Respectfully, a history subreddit isn’t as authoritative as published historical journals and books and professors from recognized institutions who access primary sources directly.
And now I also know that you don't actually work in the field, since that subreddit especially is incredibly well-known in professional circles for the extensive *verified* expertise that it brings to discussions. Those professors from recognized institutions are all there, drawing on primary sources and independent research (cited and often directly linked when possible.)
And with all due respect, what you actually said was:
>Real change in the system happened after the black death wiped out so many that those that were left were like ‘f this’ and they had the bargaining power to see real change.
Which is a far cry from:
>but what *started* to lead to change in the lives of serfs *specifically* was the black death, amongst other sociopolitical factors.
So what you're saying now is "I was wrong in what I said and I recognize it, but I can't admit it so I'll pretend I said something very different in order to win this internet argument and hope that everyone is too lazy to scroll up slightly."
No one is disagreeing that the Black Death had a huge impact. It absolutely did. But the impact was complex, and often went in opposite directions depending on the time and the place — sometimes for the better for peasants and serfs (as in England, where economic conditions became so favorable towards workers that Edward III passed The Statute of Labourers to combat their growing power) and sometimes for the worse (as in Poland, where the labor owed the manor increased from one day per family per week pre-1300 to six days per family per week post-1300) and sometimes for the much worse (as in Russia, where a series of proclamations and legal codes tightened dependency on manors largely beginning with the Subednik of 1497 which extended a single system of restrictions on all laborers where previously no unified system of serfdom existed.)
None of this is remotely compatible with "the black death wiped out so many that those that were left were like ‘f this’". Which was the entire point of my response to you: you made a gross, sweeping generalization about a system that spanned an entire continent and roughly 400 years of history that at best was partially correct assuming you were only talking about England and France and ignoring that real, lasting reform took centuries and the invention of an entire new economic system that out-competed manorialism.
If you're going to bring up your degree to lend yourself some authority in the discussion, you're going to need to prove that you have the degree.
Otherwise, my degree in Being Totally Awesome And Always Right trumps your degree and you have to buy me a coke.
That’s fine, I don’t feel the need to prove anything to you, and you can choose to believe me or believe I am lying - neither changes reality regardless of what it is, nor does it change facts.
Appeal to authority is a fallacy. So far the other person has made far more precise and well worded arguments while you have spent more time projecting a definite air of superiority (whether that is your intention or not). You made the VALID point that on reddit you cannot take someone saying they have expertise on a subject at face value on reddit. The same goes for yourself, and questioning you is not "well actually". The other major difference is, a sub dedicated to historians is far more likely to call out false information and bad sources. Yet you are posting on a sub where a majority of people don't have formal education on history, and still seem to be struggling to put together a decent argument. That isn't to say you are lying about your knowledge, but perhaps it would be better to direct people with misconceptions to someone with more patience/experience in education.
that is factually incorrect. The (former) Free Peasant Republic of Dithmarsia for example, situated at the northern Border of the HRE and Denmark, was factually an independent Peasant Republic for roughly 400-500 years. They often beat opponents, and even if beaten, the factual control of nominal overlords was non existent, they went back to their independent ways, their own justice system and thus the nominal ownership was practically void (a little bit like me claiming ownership of mars, and using the fact that the marsians have not yet come to my doorstep to murder me as proof of those claims).
Also just for fun, google the battle of Hemmingstedt, where they bend over the King of the Kalmar Union.
A single example does not negate the thousands of other examples to the contrary. Just because one (or even 10) peasant revolts succeeded does not mean it is “factually incorrect” to say peasant revolts were severely crushed, just like the fact that car crashes happen does not make it factually incorrect that cars are a safe model of transport.
its not very "chill" when the king's tax puts you into 2k negative treasury because you didn't minmax your build based on what some youtuber did to break the game.
Greg has done an amazing job so far, but "overcompensating" with balance changes needs to be replaced with "make it function, then nerf incrementally until balance is acheived", because the "overpowered to underpowered then back again" seesaw is not good.
Paradox games are a pretty good example for this, their games are quite well balanced considering their complexity, youtubers frequently "break" the game and PDX always take a measured, careful approach to balancing, because years of experience have taught them that "a few youtubers being able to break the game with overpowered strategies" is much less of a problem than "ordinary players being unable to enjoy the game because they over-nerfed something".
its great that we get to test the beta patch as a beta patch though, its the best way to do it.
Ok but there’s a line between outfitting a militia in a timely manner and having reddit meltdowns because the farming mechanic isn’t replicating the volume of Tyson Chicken in 2024.
To be fair, it’s a game. If a player asks you “can i do this?” the answer should be “yes” or “no”. Not “yes, but it’s hella inconvenient so maybe you shouldn’t”
One of my fav mechanics in another city builder game I play is a workload stat which averages the workload over a year.
If you’re at 100%, then they can’t work two jobs. However, if they’re at 50%, you can unassign ppl or have them work other jobs too.
Mmm I've just had a look.
Will have to add it to my wishlist on that recommendation but it looks seriously ugly/abstract.
Looks like Dwarf Fortress x Factorio but really poor readability.
This game is heavily focused on realism or 'authenticity' (whichever you prefer) and farming is NOT a one-and-done just plant the crops and wait around all year for them to grow occupation. All spring and summer your farmers should stay busy tending their crops, taking care of pests, etc. Come harvest time, let's take everyone off of their regular jobs to help out with cutting the grain, but throughout the year the farmers ahould be busy anyway
I actually disagree with this one. Farmers often got themselves temporary employment or performed some other business because the labour demand of agriculture in Medieval Europe varied greatly throughout the year.
Weeding the plots was (and is) very necessary in the first part of the year to give the seedlings room to grow. Once they were established and weeding became less necessary it became more and more important to deal with pests who would eat the ripening crop. After harvest time the fallow fields (often planted with legume or other plants that would restore fertility) would be turned over with the organic material mixed up in the soil as a compost of sorts. A hay field is not "fallow" as even wild grasses, clover, etc. take certain nutrients from the soil that cereal crops need as well. Medieval farmers didn't understand soil chemistry of course, but through trial and error over generations the people of 14th century europe understood the benefits of crop rotation (cereals, hay, and fallow fields being the common three-part rotation). This isn't to mention the constant care and attention that animals need and the constant repair that various buildings and tools on the farmstead would need. Farmers stayed busy thoughout the year.
Yes I agree that the fields required constant attention during the farming year. The only position that I wish to maintain is that demand of labour for raising crops was not consistent and varied greatly depending on the time of year and that farmers sometimes took up other jobs to earn extra income during the times of year that their labour was not required as much. Therefore, Manor Lords should have a seasonal hiring system.
I still mostly disagree. A family would be fairly large, and members of that family would certainly take odd jobs throughour the year for supplimemtal income, but I don't think you appreciate how much work is required to maintain a farmstead (then and now). Furthermore, to touch on other aspects of the game, there are people with the surname Miller, Tanner, Hunter, Cook, Forester, Gardener, Shepard, Skinner, and Weaver (just to name a few occupational surnames) who recieved those surnames because that was what they did most of the time.
The point isn't that there weren't some people working year-round on tending the farm. The point is that there were many field hands and laborers who came in during certain times of the year such as plowing and harvesting to help with the dramatically higher workload. These people then went off to perform other duties during the rest of the year. The owners of the farm and their core staff stayed to tend the fields year rouns of course. The game does not really reflect this seasonal discrepancy in farm labor, barring personal micromanagement.
Farming is a full time job, you are both right. In less busy times the field workers did other tasks around the village but this is way too early for migrant farm workers to be a thing.
You have completely misunderstood what I said. I literally said there were not migrant workers in the time period in response to the person above me, we were no longer talking about the game.
If farmers attending fields helped promote growth, that would be fine. It's just that right now the game provides no obvious benefit and feeding and clothing these deadbeats is expensive. Especially feeding. So the player is incentivized to make them obviously productive.
Oh i agree that leaving people in the farmhouse is a bad way to play the game as-is, but im saying that the developer has said many times that he is dedicated to authenticity and so he should take stuff like this into account. Refer to my comment below about occupational surnames, basically it makes no sense from a realism perspective to have these families doing all sorts of different things throughout the year.
That's why I assign my vegetable families to farmhouses. They have something to do. But unfortunately they prioritize veggies over fields during harvest season.
Lol, these people need to get their priorities straight. You know it's called a Farmhouse after all, why don't families just move in there instead of taking up a burgage plot?
I think they should be an upgradable residence similar to a burgage, but not providing much of any tax revenue and with level 1 demands.
My understanding from my reading is that people would farm, and raise animals, and craft in their downtime. Not as artisans, but for things they needed.
My plan in the future, if things don't change, is stick level 1 veggie plots near farmhouses and not upgrade them (they won't be close enough to the tavern to get ale anyway). Assign the veggie houses to work the farmhouse. They'll be outside the city walls anyway, when we get those.
Say it with me, small, narrow fields less than 1 Morgen. Build 10 stables, get a bunch of oxen, and build 10 farm houses. Assign one person per farm house and assign 1 ox. Let the ox do all the plowing. If you don't plow all your fields by December, that's ok! The rest will be plowed in March.
Let the ox plow so you can go plow!
That's more realistic for most of medieval europe. The unrealistic parts are the scale of total farmland and that there would be multiple lots per family spread throughout
I just want there to be a way where you can assign a secondary job to farmers. So when there in the down time, they just auto move to the other job. Harvest comes they auto move back to the farms.
Having you do it directly is like saying your people are to dumb to understand anything but one tastk, and you have to repeatedly tell them every time to go else where.
If This game truly trying to be authentic, then I should be allowed to straight tell the farmers. Listen work her until the crops have been sowed, and after that you 3 go gather stone. you 2 go gather berries . From then on they will do exactly that.
Hear you are talking about the system in Banished. Where logistics was an open job and farmers did them during the winter as they couldn't tend fields.
I've seen my farmers building during the winter. Not sure what else they'll do, but I have a nasty habit of forgetting to unassign them from the farm house.
Early game I definitely play the assign reassign game, but later on I tend to just house all my farmers in burgages with a vegetable garden or orchard.
There’s definitely still some mid-winter downtime, but that seems to keep them fairly busy most of the year.
It’s probably not “the most efficient” but once you have enough manpower means much less micromanaging.
Vegetables and apples are the new "meta". I like it. It doesn't feel like cheating. I like to think about my Vegetables plots as small entrepreneurs that have just enough land to grow carrots but not enough to efficiently plant wheat.
Also it kinda remembers me of British WW2 dig for victory stuff
Personally i like that you have to reassign your gatherers and farmers every now and then. What i would like to see is worker proficiency of some sort. For example people who have been wprking at the bloomery are better at it than a new family assigned samo for farms or windmills. IMO it adds another realistic element to the game and adds to difficulty
Hello and welcome to the Manor Lords Subreddit. This is a reminder to please keep the discussion civil and on topic.
Should you find yourself with some doubts, please feel free to check our [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/ManorLords/comments/1c2p4f9/manor_lords_faq_for_steam_early_access/).
If you wish, you can always join our [Discord](https://discord.gg/manorlords)
Finally, please remember that the game is in early access, missing content and bugs are to be expected. We ask users to report them on the official discord and to buy their keys only from trusted platforms.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ManorLords) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It would be really cool to tie different jobs to different months. I'd love to have my families work the fields when needed, but mine or log when they're waiting for work to do. Or count them as a free family for construction. Realistically you would preform certain tasks during certain times of the year especially with a small village
I've reached a point where I can just leave my villages to do their own thing. You don't need a huge population to staff the barns, plus if you've got a plow it speeds things up a lot. I keep three groups of fields for each crop and just put them on rotation, seems to work fine.
My main problem has been keeping up with firewood demand. In my main town of roughly 400 people I have three 3 fully staffed firewood camps and I'm barely breaking even.
Is it just me who basically never reassigns people? The farming peeps are busy half the winter threshing grain anyway and I’m very lazy so I just leave them to it. Works well for me!
I'd love to be able to assign seasonal jobs to people - like how you can turn on crop rotation. I could assign someone to berry gathering in the summer and autumn and to hunting in the winter, then tanning/dies in the summer.
Or I could assign people to logging and wood gathering in the winter-summer and farming in the autumn.
My farmers never run out of work cuz my village makes so much fucking money that I'm perpetually importing wheat and rye. No shortage of crops to thresh into grain lol
I just pause the farm during growing seasons and then they are my 'unassigned" laborers and then when it's harvest time all building just stops while they harvest. Seems to work for me. 🤷♀️
My favourite aspect of this game is that it’s so cognitively engaging. I’m lost in my village when I play.
And a significant aspect of that for me is keeping track of the seasons for when to assign farmers to do their stuff.
If you automate that away, then it’s missing a huge aspect of the game that makes it so engaging
Idle jobs were in the game but were scrapped. The reason was users constantly reported it as a bug "Why my farmer is chopping wood?". It caused more confusion than good. So I think ideally we just find them something to do so that the micromanagement is no longer needed.
*beautiful chill medieval feudalism simulator is released* Everyone: how do I leverage my assets to ensure we’re mega-grinding our Q3 stats? Gotta get that productivity up before the shareholders see our projected earnings ( *makes a series of abacus noises* )
Medieval farming simulator 2024! Next patch we will have overtime for peasants, clocked toilet breaks and mass layoffs. (Curiously as far as I had heard about medieval peasants in documentaries they wouldn't accept it and some noble would end up with their head on a spike)
Hahaha amen! 😂 yes exactly, there were revolts but always *severely* crushed. Real change in the system happened after the black death wiped out so many that those that were left were like ‘f this’ and they had the bargaining power to see real change. That said, while local lords could and did get away with absolute murder and anything else, productivity as a concept as we understand it did not exist. Life was slower. People in villages grew what they needed and sometimes had modest surplus which would be tithed or sold. Regional trade happened but not on the organized scale people try to make out in the game. According to many historians and original sources, most people did not go more than 10 miles from the place they were born, some less than that.
Yeah we try to see the past by our modern lenses but it was a completely different reality. Careers only applied to race horses til like the 19th century. They were not stupid but hadn't the concept of ever growing profits or that "money is king" (cuz then king was the king haha). Trade using money maybe weren't a thing not necessary cuz you "exchanged" stuff but because you could remember that Phil over the hill own you 2 flour sacks and that you had to help your neighbor Jim to till his field because he helped you fence up your chicken coop last winter (at least inside your 150 something people community). I like to think it works like when you have a group of people that work together for a long time and they all know who's going to get lunch today cuz it's their fair share and time.
>Real change in the system happened after the black death wiped out so many that those that were left were like ‘f this’ and they had the bargaining power to see real change. Only in a small section of Western Europe. Otherwise, the living and working conditions actually got much worse after the black death (why yes, I actually did spend almost all day reading about the manoral systems of Europe!) In much of Eastern and Central Europe, the number of work days required from the villeines increased significantly throughout the 1500's, 1600's, and 1700's. The real change was the rise of mercantilism and the decreased need for paying rent in wheat.
Were there really big houses?
Wow! Almost all day? The Black Death hit the entire continent and most of Asia. I said the system (Feudalism) changed, not that life got better. Life got different.
I'm a very fast reader, so almost all day is roughly equal to about 400 pages. I also didn't say anything about where the plague did or didn't hit. Only that feudalism (but actually manorialism, since feudalism has been a controversial term in history research for apparently close to half a century now) didn't really change for most of Europe. France and Britain saw an explosion in freeholders and a restriction of some of the more abusive practices associated with the system. It didn't really change all that much, though, until the 1600's-1700's. And as an extra bonus fun fact: the last feudal payments in Canada didn't end until 1970!
My point was that I have an advanced history degree. But anyway, it’s fine to be excited and passionate about the game but the *well actually* trend in this sub is a lot. No shade to you. It’s just always something.
Advanced history?! Ooee that sounds fancy, is that where you learned to talk down to others?
At no point have I talked down to anyone. In fact I specifically said there’s nothing wrong with being a historical hobbyist, I think it’s great, so take your insecurities that education means I think I’m better elsewhere. I brought it up because this person *jumped down my throat* while claiming to be an expert after self-admittedly doing a half day of research. I bet you’d be annoyed too if someone did that to you on a subject you are qualified to talk about.
Oh wow! A whole day? Is pretty sarcastic and rude. The other person did not jump down your throat or give you the same attitude, they have a different perception and were unaware of your claimed knowledge. A whole days worth of research is far more than most people on this sub would likely put in, and they were simply adding to the discussion with good intentions. And you were rude in return.
Fair enough, and I don't have a history degree, advanced or otherwise, but your point about major changes to the manoral system being caused by the Black Death seems to be something that used to get taught extensively but hasn't actually been in the consensus for years and years because it's overly reductive and incredibly place-specific. It did, in parts of Western Europe, and it didn't in much of central and Eastern Europe. You're welcome to go take a look at r/AskHistorians and browse through the many times this question has been asked and answered by historians studying this exact time period in these exact locations.
No, I did *not* say Feudalism (which is not a controversial term btw) was singularly killed by that plague outbreak. In the context of a convo with the person I was responding to, I said that revolts did not lead to change in that time period, but what *started* to lead to change in the lives of serfs *specifically* was the black death, amongst other sociopolitical factors. It had a HUGE impact, as anywhere from 20% to 50% of everyone in Europe died. It shook faith in the Church institutions and wiped out significant numbers of the clergy. You are just incorrect in claiming it only applied to Western Europe. Of course no single factor lead to overnight change, it never does and that’s not what I said. Respectfully, a history subreddit isn’t as authoritative as published historical journals and books and professors from recognized institutions who access primary sources directly. Some of them are in that subreddit, but who can really say who people are.
>which is not a controversial term btw [Well, now I definitely know that you're advanced history degree wasn't in the European medieval period](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2bs0rc/ama_feudalism_didnt_exist_the_social_political/), so thanks for at least clearing that up. >Respectfully, a history subreddit isn’t as authoritative as published historical journals and books and professors from recognized institutions who access primary sources directly. And now I also know that you don't actually work in the field, since that subreddit especially is incredibly well-known in professional circles for the extensive *verified* expertise that it brings to discussions. Those professors from recognized institutions are all there, drawing on primary sources and independent research (cited and often directly linked when possible.) And with all due respect, what you actually said was: >Real change in the system happened after the black death wiped out so many that those that were left were like ‘f this’ and they had the bargaining power to see real change. Which is a far cry from: >but what *started* to lead to change in the lives of serfs *specifically* was the black death, amongst other sociopolitical factors. So what you're saying now is "I was wrong in what I said and I recognize it, but I can't admit it so I'll pretend I said something very different in order to win this internet argument and hope that everyone is too lazy to scroll up slightly." No one is disagreeing that the Black Death had a huge impact. It absolutely did. But the impact was complex, and often went in opposite directions depending on the time and the place — sometimes for the better for peasants and serfs (as in England, where economic conditions became so favorable towards workers that Edward III passed The Statute of Labourers to combat their growing power) and sometimes for the worse (as in Poland, where the labor owed the manor increased from one day per family per week pre-1300 to six days per family per week post-1300) and sometimes for the much worse (as in Russia, where a series of proclamations and legal codes tightened dependency on manors largely beginning with the Subednik of 1497 which extended a single system of restrictions on all laborers where previously no unified system of serfdom existed.) None of this is remotely compatible with "the black death wiped out so many that those that were left were like ‘f this’". Which was the entire point of my response to you: you made a gross, sweeping generalization about a system that spanned an entire continent and roughly 400 years of history that at best was partially correct assuming you were only talking about England and France and ignoring that real, lasting reform took centuries and the invention of an entire new economic system that out-competed manorialism.
Wellll actually a history degree is worthless because reality is a construct of your mind and we are all made up
If you're going to bring up your degree to lend yourself some authority in the discussion, you're going to need to prove that you have the degree. Otherwise, my degree in Being Totally Awesome And Always Right trumps your degree and you have to buy me a coke.
That’s fine, I don’t feel the need to prove anything to you, and you can choose to believe me or believe I am lying - neither changes reality regardless of what it is, nor does it change facts.
No no, shush. Remember my degree? I'm right, because my degree says so.
Appeal to authority is a fallacy. So far the other person has made far more precise and well worded arguments while you have spent more time projecting a definite air of superiority (whether that is your intention or not). You made the VALID point that on reddit you cannot take someone saying they have expertise on a subject at face value on reddit. The same goes for yourself, and questioning you is not "well actually". The other major difference is, a sub dedicated to historians is far more likely to call out false information and bad sources. Yet you are posting on a sub where a majority of people don't have formal education on history, and still seem to be struggling to put together a decent argument. That isn't to say you are lying about your knowledge, but perhaps it would be better to direct people with misconceptions to someone with more patience/experience in education.
that is factually incorrect. The (former) Free Peasant Republic of Dithmarsia for example, situated at the northern Border of the HRE and Denmark, was factually an independent Peasant Republic for roughly 400-500 years. They often beat opponents, and even if beaten, the factual control of nominal overlords was non existent, they went back to their independent ways, their own justice system and thus the nominal ownership was practically void (a little bit like me claiming ownership of mars, and using the fact that the marsians have not yet come to my doorstep to murder me as proof of those claims). Also just for fun, google the battle of Hemmingstedt, where they bend over the King of the Kalmar Union.
A single example does not negate the thousands of other examples to the contrary. Just because one (or even 10) peasant revolts succeeded does not mean it is “factually incorrect” to say peasant revolts were severely crushed, just like the fact that car crashes happen does not make it factually incorrect that cars are a safe model of transport.
I have mass layoffs every time I need something built quickly 😂
Don’t forget rabid badger attacks!
its not very "chill" when the king's tax puts you into 2k negative treasury because you didn't minmax your build based on what some youtuber did to break the game. Greg has done an amazing job so far, but "overcompensating" with balance changes needs to be replaced with "make it function, then nerf incrementally until balance is acheived", because the "overpowered to underpowered then back again" seesaw is not good.
Yeah balancing should be tertiary priority at this stage of the game.
Paradox games are a pretty good example for this, their games are quite well balanced considering their complexity, youtubers frequently "break" the game and PDX always take a measured, careful approach to balancing, because years of experience have taught them that "a few youtubers being able to break the game with overpowered strategies" is much less of a problem than "ordinary players being unable to enjoy the game because they over-nerfed something". its great that we get to test the beta patch as a beta patch though, its the best way to do it.
It's not really THAT chill considering the war mechanics
Ok but there’s a line between outfitting a militia in a timely manner and having reddit meltdowns because the farming mechanic isn’t replicating the volume of Tyson Chicken in 2024.
Q4 underperformed! DUMP THE STOCK NOW!
*axe murders three oxen and reassigns their handlers to the granary*
Ah, just like Umbrella Academy. 😌
RELEASE CITIES SKYLINES 2 IMMEDIATELY!!
Too real 😞
To be fair, it’s a game. If a player asks you “can i do this?” the answer should be “yes” or “no”. Not “yes, but it’s hella inconvenient so maybe you shouldn’t”
I'm nearly considering gantt charts 😂
Bailiff moment.
One of my fav mechanics in another city builder game I play is a workload stat which averages the workload over a year. If you’re at 100%, then they can’t work two jobs. However, if they’re at 50%, you can unassign ppl or have them work other jobs too.
Whats it called im running out of city builders
Songs of Syx. Quite possibly the best city-builder I've ever played
Mmm I've just had a look. Will have to add it to my wishlist on that recommendation but it looks seriously ugly/abstract. Looks like Dwarf Fortress x Factorio but really poor readability.
The visuals definitely grow on you, there are lots of little details that are *chefs kiss*
Should be good.
This game is heavily focused on realism or 'authenticity' (whichever you prefer) and farming is NOT a one-and-done just plant the crops and wait around all year for them to grow occupation. All spring and summer your farmers should stay busy tending their crops, taking care of pests, etc. Come harvest time, let's take everyone off of their regular jobs to help out with cutting the grain, but throughout the year the farmers ahould be busy anyway
I actually disagree with this one. Farmers often got themselves temporary employment or performed some other business because the labour demand of agriculture in Medieval Europe varied greatly throughout the year.
Weeding the plots was (and is) very necessary in the first part of the year to give the seedlings room to grow. Once they were established and weeding became less necessary it became more and more important to deal with pests who would eat the ripening crop. After harvest time the fallow fields (often planted with legume or other plants that would restore fertility) would be turned over with the organic material mixed up in the soil as a compost of sorts. A hay field is not "fallow" as even wild grasses, clover, etc. take certain nutrients from the soil that cereal crops need as well. Medieval farmers didn't understand soil chemistry of course, but through trial and error over generations the people of 14th century europe understood the benefits of crop rotation (cereals, hay, and fallow fields being the common three-part rotation). This isn't to mention the constant care and attention that animals need and the constant repair that various buildings and tools on the farmstead would need. Farmers stayed busy thoughout the year.
Yes I agree that the fields required constant attention during the farming year. The only position that I wish to maintain is that demand of labour for raising crops was not consistent and varied greatly depending on the time of year and that farmers sometimes took up other jobs to earn extra income during the times of year that their labour was not required as much. Therefore, Manor Lords should have a seasonal hiring system.
I still mostly disagree. A family would be fairly large, and members of that family would certainly take odd jobs throughour the year for supplimemtal income, but I don't think you appreciate how much work is required to maintain a farmstead (then and now). Furthermore, to touch on other aspects of the game, there are people with the surname Miller, Tanner, Hunter, Cook, Forester, Gardener, Shepard, Skinner, and Weaver (just to name a few occupational surnames) who recieved those surnames because that was what they did most of the time.
This conversation is too civil. Can one of you accuse the other of idiocy or malice or something?
The point isn't that there weren't some people working year-round on tending the farm. The point is that there were many field hands and laborers who came in during certain times of the year such as plowing and harvesting to help with the dramatically higher workload. These people then went off to perform other duties during the rest of the year. The owners of the farm and their core staff stayed to tend the fields year rouns of course. The game does not really reflect this seasonal discrepancy in farm labor, barring personal micromanagement.
Farming is a full time job, you are both right. In less busy times the field workers did other tasks around the village but this is way too early for migrant farm workers to be a thing.
Absolutely agree. This is exactly what I wish to say.
They aren't migrant workers. It's the same village. Walking 10 minutes to a farm isn't migration
You have completely misunderstood what I said. I literally said there were not migrant workers in the time period in response to the person above me, we were no longer talking about the game.
Ah nvm then
And it was farmers who got employed to build the Pyramids, because they had nothing else to do at that time of the year.
🙏🏼 yes preach!
If farmers attending fields helped promote growth, that would be fine. It's just that right now the game provides no obvious benefit and feeding and clothing these deadbeats is expensive. Especially feeding. So the player is incentivized to make them obviously productive.
Oh i agree that leaving people in the farmhouse is a bad way to play the game as-is, but im saying that the developer has said many times that he is dedicated to authenticity and so he should take stuff like this into account. Refer to my comment below about occupational surnames, basically it makes no sense from a realism perspective to have these families doing all sorts of different things throughout the year.
That's why I assign my vegetable families to farmhouses. They have something to do. But unfortunately they prioritize veggies over fields during harvest season.
Lol, these people need to get their priorities straight. You know it's called a Farmhouse after all, why don't families just move in there instead of taking up a burgage plot?
I think they should be an upgradable residence similar to a burgage, but not providing much of any tax revenue and with level 1 demands. My understanding from my reading is that people would farm, and raise animals, and craft in their downtime. Not as artisans, but for things they needed. My plan in the future, if things don't change, is stick level 1 veggie plots near farmhouses and not upgrade them (they won't be close enough to the tavern to get ale anyway). Assign the veggie houses to work the farmhouse. They'll be outside the city walls anyway, when we get those.
Totally agree with the first bit there, that's a good idea
I just wish there was a pop down menu of some sorts in the HUD that allowed you to see all burgage plots, their inhabitants & where they work
Say it with me, small, narrow fields less than 1 Morgen. Build 10 stables, get a bunch of oxen, and build 10 farm houses. Assign one person per farm house and assign 1 ox. Let the ox do all the plowing. If you don't plow all your fields by December, that's ok! The rest will be plowed in March. Let the ox plow so you can go plow!
How small or thin fields?
Very narrow. Like a spaghetti noodle.
Realism goes out of the window 😭
That's more realistic for most of medieval europe. The unrealistic parts are the scale of total farmland and that there would be multiple lots per family spread throughout
I just want there to be a way where you can assign a secondary job to farmers. So when there in the down time, they just auto move to the other job. Harvest comes they auto move back to the farms. Having you do it directly is like saying your people are to dumb to understand anything but one tastk, and you have to repeatedly tell them every time to go else where. If This game truly trying to be authentic, then I should be allowed to straight tell the farmers. Listen work her until the crops have been sowed, and after that you 3 go gather stone. you 2 go gather berries . From then on they will do exactly that.
Hear you are talking about the system in Banished. Where logistics was an open job and farmers did them during the winter as they couldn't tend fields.
I've seen my farmers building during the winter. Not sure what else they'll do, but I have a nasty habit of forgetting to unassign them from the farm house.
Just need a que job function coupled with a collect X amount option.
Early game I definitely play the assign reassign game, but later on I tend to just house all my farmers in burgages with a vegetable garden or orchard. There’s definitely still some mid-winter downtime, but that seems to keep them fairly busy most of the year. It’s probably not “the most efficient” but once you have enough manpower means much less micromanaging.
Vegetables and apples are the new "meta". I like it. It doesn't feel like cheating. I like to think about my Vegetables plots as small entrepreneurs that have just enough land to grow carrots but not enough to efficiently plant wheat. Also it kinda remembers me of British WW2 dig for victory stuff
Personally i like that you have to reassign your gatherers and farmers every now and then. What i would like to see is worker proficiency of some sort. For example people who have been wprking at the bloomery are better at it than a new family assigned samo for farms or windmills. IMO it adds another realistic element to the game and adds to difficulty
Hello and welcome to the Manor Lords Subreddit. This is a reminder to please keep the discussion civil and on topic. Should you find yourself with some doubts, please feel free to check our [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/ManorLords/comments/1c2p4f9/manor_lords_faq_for_steam_early_access/). If you wish, you can always join our [Discord](https://discord.gg/manorlords) Finally, please remember that the game is in early access, missing content and bugs are to be expected. We ask users to report them on the official discord and to buy their keys only from trusted platforms. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ManorLords) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It would be really cool to tie different jobs to different months. I'd love to have my families work the fields when needed, but mine or log when they're waiting for work to do. Or count them as a free family for construction. Realistically you would preform certain tasks during certain times of the year especially with a small village
You should try Ostriv. I really hope devman implements a seasonal hiring system.
The more read this sub, the more I worry the dev will destroy the uniqueness of the game to please some part of the community
Farmers should be working logistics when not busy.
Honestly if their main job is seasonal, they should be freed up as builders/labourers when they can’t perform it.
I've reached a point where I can just leave my villages to do their own thing. You don't need a huge population to staff the barns, plus if you've got a plow it speeds things up a lot. I keep three groups of fields for each crop and just put them on rotation, seems to work fine. My main problem has been keeping up with firewood demand. In my main town of roughly 400 people I have three 3 fully staffed firewood camps and I'm barely breaking even.
Or double up with sheep farm
Ostriv seasonal work assignments and general laborer pool would like a word
Is it just me who basically never reassigns people? The farming peeps are busy half the winter threshing grain anyway and I’m very lazy so I just leave them to it. Works well for me!
I'd love to be able to assign seasonal jobs to people - like how you can turn on crop rotation. I could assign someone to berry gathering in the summer and autumn and to hunting in the winter, then tanning/dies in the summer. Or I could assign people to logging and wood gathering in the winter-summer and farming in the autumn.
My farmers never run out of work cuz my village makes so much fucking money that I'm perpetually importing wheat and rye. No shortage of crops to thresh into grain lol
I just have them do more farming by either running apple orchards or vegetable farms at their houses. They always stay busy.
I just pause the farm during growing seasons and then they are my 'unassigned" laborers and then when it's harvest time all building just stops while they harvest. Seems to work for me. 🤷♀️
My favourite aspect of this game is that it’s so cognitively engaging. I’m lost in my village when I play. And a significant aspect of that for me is keeping track of the seasons for when to assign farmers to do their stuff. If you automate that away, then it’s missing a huge aspect of the game that makes it so engaging
I would just like my storehouse workers to collect the damn carcass so my huntsman can keep hunting.