Hi all,

Our general policy is to unveil future planning gradually. This is one more of these chapters which we put to public discussion so we can evolve the idea and get its final shape.

Population currently affects:
-Available workers for hire (ships and goldsmith).
-Specific Voodoo cards (commonly called party cards, Details here)
-Tax income for nations (Through NPC citizens Tax Law)
-Port Production (however, currently, production is de-activated)

Population grows:
-By donating to the port.
-With Transport Immigrants card.
-By firing crew/workers at a port.

Population drops:
-By hiring crew/workers to ships/Goldsmiths.
-By using Black Death card.

As we have said in other posts, one of our objectives is to move resource production entirely to players.

With fishing, we allow the players to produce food, which is one of the seven basic resources we use.

Food, currently is used in three ways:
-To support workforce in Goldsmiths.
-Potato Party card uses it.
-It is a trading resource.

For years we have pictured population groth, artificially given by the game. Now, with markets storing all food they get, party cards AND food production directly from players, we are closer to this.

Population growth, could be factored by the following factors
-Basic negative growth - A standard growth that will be relevant to population number. The bigger the population, the higher this negative exponential growth will be.
-Basic positive growth - This will be based on ships in fleets that the controlling nation has. The more ships, the higher this positive linear growth will be.
-Food, there should be enough in the port market to sustain the population. There will be a daily consumption to define this, relative to population: x crates per ctizen. If the port market fails to meet this, the population growth will become negative. The larger the shortage, the larger the deline.
-Rum and Tobacco will affect Population Mood which in turn will affect Population growth.
-Laws could play a role to this as well.
-Of course, party cards will be taken in account, as well as local economy (another chapter which will be factored in later, let's not dwell much on this now).

Population Mood will be a whole chapter on its own, as beside population growth, it could affect other areas as well, such as: hiring costs, influence and tax incomes (NPC tax law).

Since Food is going to be a critical element to maintain population, we even intend to use a different price model for food than the rest of the ports. In fact, we intend to let the Governors of the port to choose this price. After all, they should be mostly interested to keep population high at their port, therefore they should be allowed to adjust the price as they see fit. Not to mention that we need to start to give them duties relevant to their place. The price will be adjustable to a predefined range, perhaps 5 to 14.

All players will have access to a new page, called Ports Population Analysis (perhaps) which will list all relative details of all ports (similar to active ports page), such as current population, current growth, food reserves, food in player warehouses, daily consumption, daily food trade (chart), current food price and whatever else we deem important.

I believe these are enough for an entry approach to the issue. 8-)

References:
Growth Rate
Automatic Natural Disaster: Plague
Population Control Fix

Captain Jack wrote:Since Food is going to be a critical element to maintain population, we even intend to use a different price model for food than the rest of the ports. In fact, we intend to let the Governors of the port to choose this price. After all, they should be mostly interested to keep population high at their port, therefore they should be allowed to adjust the price as they see fit. Not to mention that we need to start to give them duties relevant to their place. The price will be adjustable to a predefined range, perhaps 5 to 14.

i think that this might be spammed or whatever the word is for cheating that way people might change the price to 14 and have their trading through that port
but maybe soon port markets would be run by the nations and the nation treasury would be used to actually buy from players in the market but i think that is still not good


on a general note i really like all of the above and well put more thoughts into this i might end up thinking of something useful

A very good point, Moh : whilst its good that a Governor can act to encourage population growth and improve a port that way, if it becomes an opportunity to game the system for personal profit it will backfire.

Aside from that, the current system of moving governors according to population and influence changes would mean any work they have done gets left behind and they have to pick up at their new port and start again. That might need changing to encourage a governor to see it as 'their' port so worth the time and trouble to improve it.

Also, some bigger nations hit the problem of inactive players still holding large influence and duke positions 'blocking' chairs ; add in the 'only here for the bonus' brigade and a nation may find itself unable to fill its ports with active eager governors willing to do the work. Maybe we need to move towards putting Governor slots in the gift of the King, still chosen from the Council, but allocated a specific port as a separate function.

So, I would prefer a dynamic system that works off the population itself : supply and demand should govern prices and thus attract or repel trade and that will then act on population growth. Where I do see some room for action is for a governor to be able to cap prices as part of restricting population growth : For why? Well, shortages and high prices will cause civil unrest, declining tax revenues, etc ; a high population will increase demand for housing, etc and thus for other resources which should increase their prices too. High unemployment rates should also act negatively : public health has an impact ( maybe some port building fit in here like doctors, public baths, water and sewage works, etc). So yes, high population means high tax income, but also big social issues too which will suppress tax income.

Other thoughts would be 'Migration' : maybe tools for a nation to positively attract population from other unhappier ports : population mood shouldn't just mean a population drops in a port in isolation ; it should leave and go somewhere else with better prospects : perhaps an 'immigration campaign', funded by the nation, to draw in such huddled masses, yearning to be free, will catch their eye. The mirror to that is 'Transportation' : packing off your problematic lumpenproletariat to distant lands, easing social pressures in your own port.

It's a big topic and full of potential and pitfalls : but I do think Governors should be able have more impact on their ports beyond dropping the occasional coin or cards to keep their aristocratic rear in the chair.

Once again, as much as I hate it, I must agree with Danik on a point. It would be good if the Governor could be chosen by the King from the Council, even if it has to be voted on by the Council. The role of Governor is easily abandoned and should be replaced when necessary. It should have some duties instead of just a title for ego sake.

On the other items discussed. Quite frankly, I am overwhelmed. Maybe I am not smart enough to play the game as you envision it for the future, or maybe I just don't care for "sim" games. From what i am reading, it almost has a sims type feel to it. But, maybe that is what it will take to get the younger people playing this game in droves. What do I know? I am an old man with limited imagination who is surely way out of the targeted demographics anyway. I am however, in favor of anything that will make the game grow. I and others like me will simply adjust in the manner in which we play as the game changes.

Well, if one nation makes some or a few other nations mad, they could stop selling food to a port, and that would cause shortages. Players would need to brush up on diplomacy to prevent this. or, a certain nation could declare a blockade and lay siege to a port and attack anyone that continues trading with that port. just some thoughts.
Another thought, it wouldnt be too sim-like if a nation only chooses to control one or two ports i think. and we need some more bonuses for a nation to control a port, to encourage trading at that port, plus some natural disasters here and there to drive prices up and down so that everyone doesnt just set there prices to the highest mark. trade will drive the game! and pirates, ofcourse, can have there glory by hasling merchants. also, governors should have th eoption to not buy looted cargo, then this way pirates would be more likely to want to take a port, where no questions are asked. there should also be an option where a governor can outlaw a player, then outlaws would be open to attack on the spot with out gaining danger points, because you are doing your nation a favor. this would make things more interesting for pirates, because then they would actually have to pllay as pirates. but then it would also be up to the nations to decide if he is an outlaw to them. get what im saying? like if im the governor of whatever, and old blackbeard keeps attacking traders around my port, i can outlaw him and he is free game for players in my country, and also for other countries that see that person as a pirate/menace to society. then that pewrson would not be able to trade at my port, but trade at ports where pirates call the shots, or where another governor dont care if he trades there as long as he behaves around that port. anyone follow? im sure this needs some good editing, but im to tired right now, just staying up longer than i should. but i think, as i see it and if you follow see it, this woiuld be cool. i am not reading over this, even though i should, because i need to stop. but thank you if you read through, i really appreciate it and hope you have some comments for me. thank you.

There is a way allready for the King to choose a gouvernor. The King just needs to make sure the recents gouvernor influence is high enough. No need for change here.

Redjack02 wrote:There is a way allready for the King to choose a gouvernor. The King just needs to make sure the recents gouvernor influence is high enough. No need for change here.

A King may propose pay-outs from the Treasury to citizens with the intention they use them to increase their influence and gain a Dukes position : after that, its not in their control : the port you get to be Governor of is dependent on your ranking as a Duke, that's your influence relative to the other Dukes, active or not; after that, the ranking of the nations ports also decides which you sit in : that's done by population : so, Duke #1, for influence, has no port, because they are the King : so, port #1 for population gets Duke #2 as Governor, and so on until you run out of ports or Dukes. If the populations change, either due to good news, coin or TI's cast.. or bad news, rats at work... then the Governors change too. If a Governor adds significant influence and moves up a slot or two, the Governors below them in that ranking also get moved down a slot or two, so the port you govern changes as well.

Over a period when I was in Spain, I changed ports just about every day for weeks on end as a rat campaign against us raged and our TI's and coin repaired the damage : looking at top population on the demo page of late, I'd guess a similar thing is happening now as well.

As the point of the changes discussed in the OP is to make Governors more active in the port they sit in, and to give them the tools to improve that port : my point was that the current system can, and does, play musical chairs with Governors, particularly in times of conflict : so, even with the new port control measures to improve things, Governor L doing good work in Port A gets moved to port B, which lazy-arse Governor D has done bugger all to improve : lazy arse Governor D moves to port A and does bugger all there and undoes all the good work. Meanwhile, Governor Z, who hasnt logged in for 8 weeks, sits in Port C, doing, yep, bugger all : new Duke K, who is eager to get stuck in, sits on the council, saving their coins to spend on influence and hoping one day to jump the buggins-turn queue. The King can do bugger all about that too, apart from invest vast sums of the Nation Treasury in pay-outs thus pushing the useful citizens up the lists : coin better spent defending and improving the Realm rather than squeezing out the immortal deadwood.

Given that, why is any half-intelligent Governor going to spend the time and effort improving a port when the next update can, and often enough does, move them elsewhere? Thus my offered solution ; that the King, with the Councils advice and blessing, appoints governors from the Dukes list to specific ports, where they stay until the King and council decide otherwise.

I agree with Danik on this one, the governorship being based on influence means that external influences can change the governor by manipulating influence. The king should be the one choosing the governor. Now, should a current governor's influence be dropped enough to remove the Duke title from a player, then that player would have to be removed from office and replaced. So it would be wise for a king to avoid choosing the least influential of dukes to be governor. This is especially important if governors are going to have some real power.

Might be interesting to connect to lower ranked officers to specific ports allso then.
But i feel its tricky for the developers to leave out influence

But to be a duke you must have one of the 10 highest influences in your nation. So influence IS involved.