Port Population Consumption & Growth Rate (Small)

[Captain Jack]

Ports need to start consuming products.

SUGGESTION PART
========================================

• Population Consumption is set at 0.0025 crates per citizen/day (for each resource)
• Population growth is relative to port population and ability to meet the consumption.
• Population consumes goods stored at the market warehouse of each port.
• Population cannot consume the port's production resource if the reserves drop below 100M

Formula used for growth:

Code: Select all

Population Growth = ( -0.1% * (((Port Population/1000000) * 6 / 950) + 1/19) + 0.2% * (Availability/Consumption)  ) / TM

TM = Temporal Modifier = 7
Temporal Modifier will be revised alongside with Black Death and Transport Immigrants Revisions.

The suggestion serves the following purposes:
-We add a realistic port consumption mechanism, relative to the port population.
-We add a growth rate, relative to the population.
-We keep all other metrics nearly the same, at large.
-Ports under 300M will get positive growth with this feature up to 0.7%
-Ports over 300M will get negative growth with this feature, up to 0.7%


Explanation part
The consumption is a very hard task to define. Normally, we need a long discussion before coming up with the final suggestion. We will try to speed things up in light of the general demand to proceed faster with implementations.

Read at your expense, the post is long and explains a lot of the issues at hands but it is not as important. If you feel like participating and the figures seem wrong to you, I am afraid you will need to read most of it.


==============================================BLA BLA part=============================================

The best formula we came up in the past, was regarding production and it worked quite good.

The formula we used was (Total Hired Crew - 30000) * 1.5
Even nowdays, where the total hired crew has skyrocketed (and without taking in mind goldsmiths, only ships) the formula still produces a relatively good number. Total hired crew is 3.5M. So, this is about 5.25M per port or 110M production (daily). This figure seems to be a little less than the actual number of traded goods, daily.

However, we currently already have a consumption formula and we need to include it in this discussion. I am referring to the party cards.

The consumption used is 0.1 crates per citizen per 3 days.
The details about them, can be found here: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2821

Avonmora, currently, has 21 ports and a total population of 23.5B. It's a huge number if you compare to earth that has 6B. But even in terms of Avonmora, the figure is unrealistic and has forced us to nerf something for the second time at our history: NPC citizens tax nerf. We plan to release the tax figure to the nations, to set it as high or low (with relative affects) as they want. So we can't take it too seriously in mind at this moment.

Another feature that messes with it, is the Transport Immigrants feature. However, this one is more related to NPC tax as the more tax npc citizens pay, the more important this route becomes. So again, these can be revised in the future.

We mostly need to focus to keep close to the realistic numbers, if we can. To do this, we could check the actual capacity of what a trade ship could carry back in time. This will not be enough though as the ships here can make 24 routes a day (or more with risk). It becomes obvious that there needs to be a simulation to the current game metrics. Like I started out, it is a hard task.

Now that you are all aware of the difficulties (at least some of them) let's see some examples.
Before this, we will refer to consumption per day. Market prices, at the beginning at least, will keep renewing every 3 days.

If we use the 0.1 crate per citizen per 3 days, we have 0.035 crates/citizen per day.
This means that the average port, currently at about 1.1B, will consume 38.5M of each resource per day. However, we could all agree that during a party, we consume a larger amount than daily use, so we could revise this number and still be within reason. Let's say halve it.

If we halve it, then the consumption is set to 0.0175
Our average port will then require 19.25M of each resource,daily.

Here, we need to define what require means.
Require means that the population needs this amount of resources to survive and grow.
We will define these in detail later.

This is a double edged knife for 2 reason:
-High consumption and inability to meet the demand keeps ports warehouses empty. This means that port pay an extra +2 for each resource.
-In the same time, the population will not be able to survive and grow, but it will instead perish.

Ultimately, it will balance itself out, so where the double edged knife I just mentioned resides?

Well, it resides in voodoo and as long as Black Death and Transport Immigrants are in the game, these will be open to those who want to control the market. It is not that bad though (one hand) and we cannot proceed in such a radical change, such as removing these cards right away (other hand). Therefore, till we reach a point that we can get rid of the cards, we will need to accept that proposed figures may not be final and may be revised if cards leave (only natural but sometimes you need to state the obvious).

Current Total Cargo of ships in trade routes, total at 4,610,387 crates. This means that the maximum crates that can be carried from one port to another in a single day, without risk, is about 55M or 2.6M per day/port.

Goroum seems to have the largest volume right now, with about 8.5M crates, daily.

So, the proposed solution above, at 0.0175 crates/citizen/day would mean negative growth till all ports would reach an average of
55M / 0.0175 = 3.15B or 150M

I personally do not find unrealistic this number. The immediate problem we will get, will be a rampant decrease rate which however will be compensated by trade. This means that player who invested in ports population will face a disadvantage in comparison to players who have not. The disadvantage is big enough to ignore so this figure will need to be reached gradually. We can control this with the growth rates though, not the consumption right away.

The initial idea we had for rates, was the following simple idea:

+0.1% of port population for each resource when 100% of consumption is covered.
-0.1% when consumption is 0.

As a formula, this means the following:

Growth rate = -0.1% + ( 0.2% * availability/consumption )

So, if consumption is 20M crates and the port has half of it, 10M, the growth rate will be:
Growth rate = -0.1% + (0.2% * 10m/20m) = -0.1% + 0.2% * 0.5 = -0.1% + 0.1% = 0 growth
and 10M of the resource will be consumed.

That's for each resource though. When a port can provide all 7 resources, then the growth rate would be 0.7%
If the port could not provide any resource at all, it would be -0.7%
This also could serve as a very patient early on modifier. Normally, we would need a rampant negative growth for every missing crate. If we do this, like we said, we will create instability with current system, as explained above.

There is another problem though,this time for port production. If the port citizens consume as much as 20M resources a day, then who will cover this in the long term? Who could possibly cover this? Resources will simply run out. So, we are in short, in a big puzzle. The figures we will use, need to take in mind current state, not only optimal state.

Trying to marry everything together, I would say that the optimal number lies to what fleets can carry. This however should still affect the port populations in a way so we can come to the right numbers at some point. Then we will be able to give npc tax rates to the nations to decide, which will affect growth rates further. Then we will open the way to remove Transport Immigrants and Black Death, at least in the current form.

So, actual Consumption could be instead halved once more and then temporarily reduced 7 times. Growth rate will need the original proposed consumption but with multiplied by 7 basic negative growth.

Here is in formulas format:
-Population Consumption is set at 0.0175 / 2 / 7 = 0.00125 crates per citizen/day (for each resource)
-Population Growth = -0.1% * 7 + (0.2% * availability / consumption)

This means that we will get a default -3.5% growth rate per port, even if all resources (for a 1.1B port, it will need 1.375M * 7 (this is for each resource) = 9.625M
To keep this fair, early on we will also divide it by 7. So growth will depend from -0.7% to 0.7%

To complete this, we need a smart way to revert to the actual format in an intelligent way. We cannot keep wasting citizens daily as a game basic feature. So, the above formula needs to be dynamic.

The dynamic part will be the current population.

So, here is the proposed formula:
Population Growth = ( -0.1% * ((Port Population/1000000) * 6 / 950) + 1/19) + 0.2% * Availability/Consumption) ) / 7

With this formula, around 300M population it will there will be no negative growth anymore, provided that you will be able to provide the required resources.


==================================END OF BLA BLA======================================================================


Prerequisites:
-----------------
Removal of:
Potato Party
Rum Festival
Tobacco Gathering

This cards will need competitive replacements.

Enjoy!

[Shadowood]

Will this make owning a port a super hard chore to keep up with? If so, I would see the desire to own one diminish, especially owning multiple (not a bad thing).

- Each resource will be consumed equally? Seems food would be a higher demand resource then say tools.
- Each Port gets its own Warehouse? Or is this shared by player warehouses? Nation Warehouse?? Confused on this part

[PhoenixKnight]

I think consumption should vary by resource type and nation treasury
For example:

Food should have a high consumption
Cotton will be less as people don’t buy as many clothes as they eat.
Iron and tools are durable so even less

Now as treasury grow people will live more lavishly and consumption will increase.

If population is more than consumption can handle, Famine occurs with population disgruntlement. Revolution looms

[DezNutz]

Where do you get the default -3.5% from? I'm not seeing how you get to it.

[Captain Jack]

Woah, I velieved no one would post really. The post is huge. Here are the answers:

-We need to start with equal consumption when it comes to npc consumption. Or else, the number of producing ports must be relevant. By the time these are equal, I do not see much reason to deal this differently.

If it is the realism part that is of concern, I find it hard to meet it. Probably the price should be enough to claim the simulation or the crate! You know, wood crates are larger than these of rum

-Each port already has its own warehouse. Since always. It is used by the market and it can fit 2.1B crates of every resource. Based on what this warehouse contains, the port prices are defined at every resource update.

-There is no such -3.5% at the final proposition. We wanted to avoid this for the reasons explained, so this very complicated formula came up instead. This is the point where we decided to also incorporate population number in the growth rate. The population should play a role in this after all.

[Shadowood]

Additionally, if each resource is consumed equally, will then the prices be adjusted to all be the same? "Equalized"

I know most players trade routes with the highest revenue. This will cause traders to abandon high revenue routes to "feed the need" of all resources. This will limit their income if prices were not "equalized".

[DezNutz]

I'm trying to follow the math and I understand that the final proposal doesn't have it, but the -3.5% in your explanation just appears out of nowhere. The formula preceding it does not mathematically allow the result to be -3.5%. I don't see how you obtained this number and the effort to prevent it in the circumstance provided.

So, actual Consumption could be instead halved once more and then temporarily reduced 7 times. Growth rate will need the original proposed consumption but with multiplied by 7 basic negative growth.

Here is in formulas format:
-Population Consumption is set at 0.0175 / 2 / 7 = 0.00125 crates per citizen/day (for each resource)
-Population Growth = -0.1% * 7 + (0.2% * availability / consumption)

This means that we will get a default -3.5% growth rate per port, even if all resources (for a 1.1B port, it will need 1.375M * 7 (this is for each resource) = 9.625M
To keep this fair, early on we will also divide it by 7. So growth will depend from -0.7% to 0.7%

[Bigtea47]

It would be great if you needed plantations to supply these resources npc consume. That way bigger plantations means bigger port.

On another note, if we want things to be more realistic. Why don't ports sell back the resources they buy?
If people import tools for example to Aiora, Aiora should try and sell em back for profit. So other players can use these tools.
Ahora then earned gold, which can be used for other future projects, or be tied into nations

[sXs]

I just ran some scenarios based on the math(which needs some work).... i think the way this is set will actually have the opposite effect as proposed.

Since port prices will fluctuate with demand and market pressure, a natural equilibrium will be reached where no profit can be made. All goods will flow to the market with the highest price which will drive down the price back and forth until the range of prices will be so small the only profit would be the buff received from casting cards.

There still need to be a production port discount in order to prevent this type of scenario.

Basic market economics will come in to play here. Since the only guiding force in the markets will be supply and demand, a balance will be reached in pricing.

A supply port base price should still remain at a discount to ensure some profit can still be made. But even this will not prevent a flat line in pricing amongst the purchasing ports.

Psaral produces Tobacco

Let say 3 ports paying the most will be Akrotiri, Gasp and Chalkos. The natural inclination is to trade with those ports. Those ports then become oversupplied driving prices down so traders move on to the next port. same scenario.

With the formulas provided the gap in pricing will get smaller and smaller as traders shift from port to port. equilibrium within 1 GC would be reached fairly quickly base on port trade and consumption formulas. In fact, based on the trade volume in some ports currently, it would be reached within a week.

Some modifiers need to be added to ensure profit in trading................. I can't believe I am saying that trade would be threatened in Pirates Glory.

If this is confusing to some I can run the spreadsheets and post. Will take awhile to compile all the data, but will show in a week plus or minus a few days. price balance would be reached and prices across all of Avonmora would be flat.

[sXs]

I left out that the key to this is that all ports will trade in all goods according to the OP.