 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
vondrack
|
 |
Praha, Czech Republic
Jan 2002
time: 06:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Flight
i was just clarifying so ppl like vond wouldnt get confused  |
Well, I really had troubles understanding the original question...
Let me see... my last Regent game ended up in an awesome situation. I had a big continent all for myself, full of really BIG cities. Here is a couple of numbers...
Memphis, 34 citizens, population of 5,976,000
Beijing, 31 citizens, pop 4,975,000
Bizen, 30 citizens, pop 4,680,000
Toyama, 30 citizens, pop 4,680,000
Ise, 29 citizens, pop 4,392,000
Fukushima, 27 citizens, pop 3,812,000
Satsuma, 27 citizens, pop 3,806,000
Kagoshima, 26 citizens, pop 3,540,000
Hyderabad, 26 citizens, pop 3,520,000
Asyut, 26 citizens, pop 3,558,000
Hakodate, 25 citizens, pop 3,300,000
Nagoya, 25 citizens, pop 3,271,000
Xinjian, 24 citizens, pop 3,031,000
Abydos, 24 citizens, pop 3,025,000
Nagasaki, 24 citizens, pop 3,024,000
Nara, 24 citizens, pop 3,013,000
Thebes, 24 citizens, pop 3,002,000
Yokohama, 23 citizens, pop 2,790,000
Kyoto, 23 citizens, pop 2,760,000
Shimonoseki, 23 citizens, pop 2,785,000
Pi-Ramesses, 23 citizens, pop 2,778,000
Izumo, 22 citizens, pop 2,565,000
Edo, 22 citizens, pop 2,554,000
Matsuyama, 21citizens, pop 2,354,000
Tsingtao, 21 citizens, 2,312,000
Tokyo, 21 citizens, pop 2,310,000
Elephantine, 20 citizens, pop 2,112,000
Karachi, 19 citizens, pop 1,959,000
Jaipur, 19 citizens, pop 1,959,000
Bangalore, 19 citizens, pop 1,946,000
Shanghai, 19 citizens, pop 1,929,000
Sapporo, 17 citizens, pop 1,575,000
El-Amarna, 17 citizens, pop 1,572,000
Osaka, 17 citizens, pop 1,560,000
Calcutta, 16 citizens, pop 1,408,000
Delhi, 14 citizens, pop 1,109,000
Bombay, 14 citizens, pop 1,102,000
Byblos, 14 citizens, pop 1,100,000
Alexandria, 14 citizens, pop 1,074,000
Suo, 14 citizens, pop 1,070,000
Heliopolis, 14 citizens, pop 1,050,000
Hieraconpolis, 12 citizens, pop 800,000
Oops... sorry for the long list, I was sorta thinking aloud, sorting things out for myself... it seems that every new citizen represents a certain extra percentage of population, something like 10-15% of the previous threshold level maybe... looking at the top part of the list, I would say that a 7,000,000 city would have 36 or 37 citizens...
Have something else to do right now, but I will try some number crunching later this night or tomorrow, if time permits... to see if there is an exact formula...
BTW, I would be surprised if there was nobody figuring the formula before, although I can't remember seeing it anywhere... can someone save me (and teturkhan) from unnecessary number crunching?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DRoseDARs
|
 |
"My god, it's full of peas..."
Jul 2002
time: 21:21
|
|
Population Box # = Population
Note : The "actual" population sometimes varies in relation to a given Population Box # by a few thousand citizens. Example: 1 = 48,000 & 2 = 40,000. Additionally, it may fluctuate each time you load a particular savegame. I do not know why that is, but I do know that it is annoying...
1 ~ 48,000
2 ~ 40,000
3 ~ 71,000
4 ~ 112,000
5 ~ 160,000
6 ~ 222,000
7 ~ 290,000
8 ~ 370,000
9 ~ 469,000
10 ~ 589,000
11 ~ 680,000
12 ~ 808,000
13 ~ 938,000
14 ~ 1,090,000
15 ~ 1,220,000
16 ~ 1,390,000
17 ~ 1,576,000
18 ~ 1,756,000
19 ~ 1,930,000
20 ~ 2,146,000
21 ~ 2,350,000
22 ~ 2,584,000
23 ~ 2,799,000
24 ~ 3,040,000
25 ~ 3,280,000
26 ~ 3,530,000
27 ~ 3,822,000
28 ~ 4,098,000
29 ~ 4,389,000
30 ~ 4,690,000
31 ~ 5,000,000
32 ~ 5,310,000
33 ~ 5,648,000
34 ~ 5,990,000
35 ~ 6,338,000
36 ~ 6,706,000
37 ~ 7,070,000
38 ~ 7,440,000
39 ~ 7,819,000
40 ~ 8,237,000
41 ~ 8,652,000
42 ~ 9,054,000
43 ~ 9,511,000
44 ~ 9,951,000
45 ~ 10,372,000
46 ~ 10,830,000
47 ~ 11,300,000
48 ~ 11,800,000
49 ~ 12,290,000
50 ~ 12,800,000
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
JohnM2433
|
|
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Jul 2002
time: 21:21
|
|
The Off-Topic forum.
I'm good with numbers, as well as knowing a lot of abstract mathematical concepts, so if you have any questions, maybe I could help. 
Thanks for giving us that formula, Provost!
Personally, I think the way population growth is set up in the game is silly. In reality, the amount of people required to do a job (work a tile) tends to decrease as time goes on, due to improving technology, while at the same time population grows exponentiallly until it starts to run into negative-feedback effects. At the very least, a citizen should always cost the same amount of food to produce -- larger cities grow faster, not slower, in absolute terms. Maybe this can be modified in the Editor, which I haven't really looked at much.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Maquiladora
|
|
To be fair, i think the guy at CFC is asking for a link to this thread. Not simply a quote plucked from here. Although it doesnt sound like he even looked at the formula...
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
teturkhan
|
 |
Edmonton, Alberta
Nov 2001
time: 05:21
|
|
Teturkhan,
unfortunately you have a recurring problem of throwing out information that you scrape up from other threads as if it were the gospel truth.
************
I never claim that all information I post is the gospel truth, I merely throw it out there to promote discussion, in the hopes that it leads to something positive.
It loses its context with original discussion.
Posting a link back to this thread and then quoting the excerpt that was really valuable is what you should have done in the first place.
************
If the threads was significantly different in content I would have done that, however most of the information on both is pretty much the same. Think about it, why would I bother starting a new thread on both forums? It would be much easier to just give the link – but people asked for it the other way, saying they prefer one forum over the other so I complied.
Sometimes it is so hard to figure out what you are actually trying to accomplish, it just gets frustrating when you begin to add up all the scattershooting posts.
***********
The "Scattershooting" posts you accuse me of, is merely my attempts to juggle information back and forth. I think it’s important that as many people are exposed to the topic matter, more heads are better than a few.
Whining and posting deliberately disparaging comments about other users in separate message threads would be cause for banning if you continue to drift in that direction.
***********
I really don’t like the way you come across Cracker. The more you keep talking, the more miserable of a person you seem to me. Every time you post it becomes very obvious that you think you know the game far better than the rest of us. You are incredibly cynical and overly critical, and seem to be bent on discouraging people from putting forth ideas, concepts, maps etc. Just because you don't deem those things important doesn't give you the right to discredit others. You should change your alias to “Red Tape” because you got miles of it. Now regarding this talk about my posts justifying CAUSE FOR BANNING? Why? Cause I gave people an opportunity to read both threads? See what you wrote??? Man you crack me up Cracker, instead of realizing your way too aggressive in your posts and easing it up, you come in here and threaten to BAN ME, cause I linked this thread to the other! Truth of the matter is you’re a Forum Bully, and I’m exposing you as such, you don’t like it cause then people might get together and ban you 
You did acknowledge that you got the information from others. That wasn't the issue. The issue was just extracting the part of the conversation that you felt was gospel without leading people to the information source so they could review the context and determine the validity of the concepts for themselves.
***********
As I said both posts were pretty much the same in content.
The only reason for questioning Harrison's formula as the gospel was that it included no reference to the food factors which have been demonstrated. No question that Harrison's formula was a good approximation.
**********
LOL LOL LOL, this is what I call a classic case of "damage control" (I have a better phrase for it, but under the threat of banning I will keep quiet). Everyone can see both threads, you were not missing critical information, you simply jumped the gun and once again came down hard on an idea/concept that someone else put forth, before really considering it with an open mind.
When you discuss someone in a way that you think is behind their back, remember that all information is public. The quality of the content of your past postings does far more to record your profile than any number of posts whining about the way someone else may be trying to figure out what great social issue you may be trying to uncover in the next round or musings.
**********
I am blinded by Red Tape!!! Arggg!!! I don’t talk behind your back Cracker, as a matter of fact I lay it out right where you post. I merely provided the link to the others in this thread, so Harrison and others here could have a chance to defend their formulas – stats against your zealous and premature dismissal.
If you had mentioned that you duplicated the posting over on POLY and then were getting these feedback items there would have been no reason to question the source because we could have put it in perspective
*********
Once again, the info is pretty much the same in both threads, you talk as if you read something in this thread that was considerably different than the other, but this is not the case. I think you lack people skills, and you would be wise to change your approach when you try to convey your thoughts and opinions to others. Pointing something out in a constructive manner is one thing but assuming you know what is better for everyone, and that your opinion is the only right one is something different.
You are the guy after all who claims to know what 99.9% of people want, think etc. That statement in itself is indicative of your personality.
Last edited by teturkhan on 19-08-2002 at 03:24
|
|
| |
|
|
|
vondrack
|
|
Praha, Czech Republic
Jan 2002
time: 06:21
|
|
Cracker, I can't really see your point...
Was it that difficult to ask for a link, if you were so interested in learning how the formula was created?
Also, I have noticed that it is rather rare that people post crosslinks between Poly and CivFanatics (even though it would be very logical to do so pretty often). I think there is a good reason behind... these two sites are sort of competiton, even if not fierce. Advertising one using the other is perhaps not 100% kosher.
Reading through this thread, you would also find out that the formula P.H. posted was apparently not a result of the discussion (or am I just slow in noticing things?). It was thrown here "as a gospel", as the data collected in the earlier part of the thread were very scarce and far from detailed. Provost actually knew the formula and as it did not interfere with the example data collected, we accepted it as a matter of fact.
So, I guess, you might wish to say "OK, I was little too fast to pull the gun out..." now and forget the whole thing. I can't see why should people be restricted in the way they post information in the forums, irrespective if it is here or at CivFanatics. If the info is incorrect, prove it and submit a correction. Tons of Civ3 related information have been discovered by progressively precising interim findings.
P.S.: BTW, Provost, where did the formula come from?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21.
Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
17-08-2002 21:33
|