This is also something I want to tell my military units directly. Would hate to lose a hearthling just because I dont have a mayor.
1 Like
You can already pick whether each citizen does their job (crafting for crafters, cutting trees for workers, etc.), hauls, builds, and/or mines in the citizen menu. There’s no prioritization - and I’m glad there’s no hulking menu system for that like Rimworld - but you definitely can limit Hearthlings to specific types of tasks.
Combat is another thing entirely. Archers definitely need better AI, but they should use walls better regardless of having a leader. And you already have some control over your combat Hearthlings.
Im so glad all of you are debating about this topic, it really livens up the community.
1 Like
I am not in favour of a mayor as I pointed out earlier, but I wanted to make a bit of a summary of this discussion as there are some awesome ideas and improvements buried in all this text 
This threads discussion is split into 2 sides, for and against a mayor class.
Basically all this has come down to is people want cleverer AI’s for there hearthlings. Some want them unrealistically clever where as others would just like to see more control over certain aspects of the AI. And in general people would like a slightly more forced personal role playing experience.
As @AaronD and @Hyrule_Symbol have already said and justified the class would just be redundant. Unless it was a Mayor diplomat as @YetiChow suggested, or an aesthetic class. Maybe we could have an option during the game setup menus for having a mayor/leader.
As development of Stonehearth has progressed I have noticed that Radient quite often take the “If I don’t need it, I won’t have it approach”.
So what we should take away from this is the changes to the AI and the extra controls that people want:
Some of these are observations from the posts above.
-
To be able to set military patrol routes (there is a mod somewhere for this)
-
Stockpile flow system
-
Taxes of some sort (problem is your hearthlings work for the greater good and do not earn a living to tax)
-
Complex ordering of items in crafting queues, e.g putting a vault in a blacksmiths queue will queue up all the other ingredients that need crafting first, a bit like how it works with placing a building and everything needed to build it gets queued.
-
Automation of gathering berries, silkweed, flowers and slaughtering livestock, trees are more complicated but could possibly be done if the system replants the tree whenever it is chopped down (providing you have saplings)
-
Better combat AI for wounded hearthlings (stop them suiciding)
-
Make archers understand that they can shoot out of windows and from roves down onto enemies.
-
A more advanced tutorial for intense micromanagement of every hearthling.
-
This may take some explaining, but currently the engine doesn’t handle well with players changing there minds. A system needs implementing that tells the player all the tasks they have given to there workers and assign a priority to each task, the player could then move the tasks up and down the list and hearthlings will focus what is at the top. Using the mine, haul, build filters each task could have different hearthlings assigned to it.
I hope that helps anyone just coming to this debate
2 Likes
Ooh now there’s a good one, when you reach town status not only do you need a Mayor but you also need a Guard Captain, a combat hearthling who has certain “luxury” needs like the Mayor, and then unlocks more complex behaviors like Freedom mentioned such as patrol routes.
I completely agree that there are rudimentary gameplay aspects that should be available to the player at any time. However like any good city building game, more complex mechanics should be introduced as the game progresses. The idea of gating gameplay elements behind promoting a Mayor is no different to gating them behind a certain timed event, progress tree or resource cost. I don’t doubt there’s many players like msyelf who would like more “self sufficiency” gameplay features as your town grows, so the game becomes more of a traditional city builder with less micro management.
I also love the idea of a role like the Mayor being completely optional. So having one has certain demands for the player such as providing a nice office and sacrificing a labourer, but for arguments sake unlocks automated harvesting, production queuing etc. NOT having one isn’t the end of the world either, as the player can still perform those tasks but manually.
Given the dev team has stated they want our towns to end up analogous to RPG towns I would be surprised if we DON’T end up with some leadership character, as the mayor/chieftain/whatever is usually the major quest giver in those towns!
1 Like
I dont know any building game that gates control behind a jobclass. Take RTS games for example: You can control all your units and you can decide which buildings you want to place where. You can also decide which buildings should be build first all the time. There is no building or unit that gives the player more control. The same applies for any other game I know.
Gameplay elements ≠ control elements
Unlocking new buildings, new ressources and new products is one thing and is needed to provide a good feeling of progress. But not having full control over your city until mid- and late-game would just be annoying. I want to tell my military units right from the start how they should behave. And the same goes for building priority.
Some seem to forget that the player is the mayor in this game. He is the hidden/invisible hearthling that tells all the other hearthlings “you do that and you over there should do this”. I think it would reduce the immersion when other hearthlings do the “control” job.
Like I said earlier: I’m totally for a completely aesthetic mayor, which you can create right before you start a game (you can change his appearance to your liking) and this mayor doesn’t waste a hearthling. He will represent YOU, but not have any direct influence. He will walk around, chat with idle hearthlings and hold speeches at the campfire, when all hearthlings gather. Completely cosmetic and cute, making your village more lively.
This is a reply to @nt_a_typ_o, I messed that part up.
It is ok to quote my superlong post, 
but please actually quote it.
I suggested this one, but mainly as an example of a system that fit in the criterium I mentioned above it. I Thought other players than me woukd like this extra feature (in addition to the current). However as replacement of how we do it now, I would be against. I like the current system.
This is easy, just have it in the options, so someone who wants it can have it but someone who doesn’t doesn’t have to have it.
You do not need an extra class to have a gameplay section of the options menu 
For most games there are progression systems, BUT, Here’s the difference
In many good builder games, the player doesn’t ‘unlock’ systems and mechanics, they unlock variety in the in-game tech, such as advanced resources and crafters, the Real reason for having a progression that ‘unlocks’ a mechanic or systems is as a Tutorial, it may not seem like it, but tutorials have now grown to be more than the first chunk of the game that explains all the mechanics at the player, it has grown to be a more streamline play experience that seems like normal play, but is unlocking and pacing the systems so the player has time and comfort to understand one before they continue to the next, and this is why many players don’t like games(or have a gripe on) that force the player to go through the tutotial everytime they start a new game, for a new player, all the mechanics are new, and fresh, but after you play the game fully, the limiting experience of the tutorial is just extremely frustrating, and by not letting them skip it, they are making the player go through the most unengaging part of the game
This does not mean a tutorial id always a bad part of the game, Look at Portal, did you Really have a tutorial session that you went through?, well, then, when did it end? Did it ever? Or did it ever start? The portal’s tutorial is a marvel in that the entire session(if any) feels like a normal situation, and a good game, GlaDos’s voice acts as a narator, but most of the tutotial is done by making the player try things, ‘this pad will launche you into the air in high velocity, the calibrations may be a little off, so be carefull, now figure out the rest’
is the trust and a cleaver tutorial, i’d play that several times and still feel good
But for StoneHearth, it’s different, because in Portal, if you don’t have a jump-pad or laser-cube, it’s that you haven’t reached that point of the game, you’re just not at the stage that has those, but in SH You don’t have it, it’s that the player laks effort and time spent to have them, in this game, if a function is unlocked via class of structure, you own the function, you gained it and have acces to it, and thus Where in Portal if you start a new game you have to reach the function, in SH you need to earn it, which will feel different than the former
2 Likes
So much info in this thread, and not enough time to read, I hope I’m not saying the same crap anyone else is saying, lol.
I think a Mayor is a great idea, although I would like to use the term “King” (Or Queen 
)
I think the whole idea of them having a job to do is irrelevant as long as they exist in the system. provide some happiness to the population, perhaps.
Think about real life kings & queens. Most of them just sit on their asses and get tended on, doing very little to effect society. So regards to that working in Stone hearth, I can see it not causing too much of a fuss to implement. It’s basically a worker, who doesn’t work, who sits in a designated chair all day.
(My other thoughts on this would be the only good role I can see as having this unit in the game, if it was ever implemented, would be if you could use the king/queen/mayor (Titles being irrelevant here) to walk around your world in a first person mode.)
all in all, I think little things like this gives a game richness. The Devil is, after all, in the details.