Things you really want to see in "Cantr Statististics

[Greek]

No idea what's that. It's even possible that some resources can no longer be produced, but I don't know how's that in this case.

[Swingerzetta]

Huh. Interesting. Coke is also there, as an unchanged resource.
Also this suggests that the world's largest stash of silk cloth has not been touched in a year. Is anyone else a little bit fascinated by this? Imagine finding that in a sealed room in a long-dead town somewhere...

[Frankoniusz]

How many chars decided to die from an old age until now?

[bnlphan]

Is it possible to tell how many dead bodies there are that havent been buried?

How many dead characters total are there?

[Greek]

1,989 not buried bodies, including those in sarcophagi etc.

And small recycling:
15 chars who died of old age
54 disassembled vehicles, mostly small wooden carts
10102 deleted note duplicates, 4514 of them were uneditable.

Good work, we are on the way to get rid of useless stuff

[Xander]

15 characters? An entire players worth!

[EchoMan]

When the age limit is lowered we expect an increase in the numbers of killed-off characters.

[Doug R.]

It will be interesting to see how this affects the game. We very well could see an uptick in player activity as the detritus is eliminated, which in turn will make the game livelier, which means we may start enticing new players to stick around. I think that hanging onto unwanted characters because there was no easy way to get rif of them was definitely a source of "drain" on players.

[Chris]

It will be interesting to see how this affects the game. We very well could see an uptick in player activity as the detritus is eliminated, which in turn will make the game livelier, which means we may start enticing new players to stick around. I think that hanging onto unwanted characters because there was no easy way to get rif of them was definitely a source of "drain" on players.

I don't see how. If a town has 10 active characters and 10 sleepers, and the 10 sleepers die, the town will then have 10 active characters. The sleepers don't prevent anyone else from being active. In fact, I would say that the more sleepers a town has, the more active people it has too. That's just how the spawning algorithm works.

[amatorfati]

It will be interesting to see how this affects the game. We very well could see an uptick in player activity as the detritus is eliminated, which in turn will make the game livelier, which means we may start enticing new players to stick around. I think that hanging onto unwanted characters because there was no easy way to get rif of them was definitely a source of "drain" on players.

I don't see how. If a town has 10 active characters and 10 sleepers, and the 10 sleepers die, the town will then have 10 active characters. The sleepers don't prevent anyone else from being active. In fact, I would say that the more sleepers a town has, the more active people it has too. That's just how the spawning algorithm works.

I disagree with this so strongly that I am struggling to even understand how you can seriously believe that having as many sleepers as active people can possibly make a town more active. Are we even playing the same game?

[BosBaBe]

It will be interesting to see how this affects the game. We very well could see an uptick in player activity as the detritus is eliminated, which in turn will make the game livelier, which means we may start enticing new players to stick around. I think that hanging onto unwanted characters because there was no easy way to get rif of them was definitely a source of "drain" on players.

I don't see how. If a town has 10 active characters and 10 sleepers, and the 10 sleepers die, the town will then have 10 active characters. The sleepers don't prevent anyone else from being active. In fact, I would say that the more sleepers a town has, the more active people it has too. That's just how the spawning algorithm works.

I disagree with this so strongly that I am struggling to even understand how you can seriously believe that having as many sleepers as active people can possibly make a town more active. Are we even playing the same game?

I think what he means is that sleepers still add to the amount of characters in one area. The spawning system works by cycling through all the most populated towns and picking one which isn't close to any of your current characters. It doesn't count 'active' players, it just counts how many are in a town. Take this town for example. There are tons of sleepers there and only a few active ones. But people still spawn there often enough because of all the sleepers, and because it's far away from major English islands like Cantr and Treefeather it will often pick that town.

If anything, this will make a major difference in the spawning system. Towns that were previously hugely populated will start losing their older sleepers/non sleepers, and thus lowering the chances of it getting picked in the spawning draw.

[amatorfati]

It will be interesting to see how this affects the game. We very well could see an uptick in player activity as the detritus is eliminated, which in turn will make the game livelier, which means we may start enticing new players to stick around. I think that hanging onto unwanted characters because there was no easy way to get rif of them was definitely a source of "drain" on players.

I don't see how. If a town has 10 active characters and 10 sleepers, and the 10 sleepers die, the town will then have 10 active characters. The sleepers don't prevent anyone else from being active. In fact, I would say that the more sleepers a town has, the more active people it has too. That's just how the spawning algorithm works.

I disagree with this so strongly that I am struggling to even understand how you can seriously believe that having as many sleepers as active people can possibly make a town more active. Are we even playing the same game?

I think what he means is that sleepers still add to the amount of characters in one area. The spawning system works by cycling through all the most populated towns and picking one which isn't close to any of your current characters. It doesn't count 'active' players, it just counts how many are in a town. Take this town for example. There are tons of sleepers there and only a few active ones. But people still spawn there often enough because of all the sleepers, and because it's far away from major English islands like Cantr and Treefeather it will often pick that town.

If anything, this will make a major difference in the spawning system. Towns that were previously hugely populated will start losing their older sleepers/non sleepers, and thus lowering the chances of it getting picked in the spawning draw.

I know what they meant, but I would still argue against even that. I agree with the rule of thumb that larger towns are generally better places to spawn than smaller towns (though not necessarily to stay and live).
I disagree however, that the rule of thumb still applies, if in reality most of that population is undead. Gaining a larger population but decreasing the proportion of the population that is active, to me, completely defeats the benefit of larger populations. In reality the "living" population of the town compared to smaller places is not that much higher, but they get an unnaturally high number of newspawns compared to if all the zombies were dead. It's unfair to towns that play it honestly.

Imagine two towns with the same population. Let's say both have 10 active characters. But town A has only active characters, while town B has half their population undead. Which would you rather spawn in, all else equal? Yet town B will get about the same number of spawns despite there really only being 5 living characters.
Or imagine two towns, both with 10 active characters. But town A has only the active characters, while town B has 10 undead in addition to the living, either standing around or indoors and out of sight. All else equal, both towns should be just as advantageous to spawn in. But town B because it is manipulating an exploit will get more spawns than town A. It's pretty dang skeezy.

Not to mention that it's arguably cheating. Characters are using OOC information about how spawn rates work to make IC decisions. You can't really make any argument that they figured out how spawn rates work IG. It just is not the case, as much as some would want it to be true. Show me the mad scientist chars who went town to town documenting every spawn, , recording town populations, noticed the trend that higher populations had more spawns, and finally then came up with the theory.

I do have to admit though, the undead necropolises that some cities have are hilarious to see in action. Oh, such and such character hasn't worked or said anything in half a year. Drag them to the dungeon! It is kind of amusing.

[BosBaBe]

I'm not saying it's fair, I was just saying that's how the system works, and that thankfully now that the sleeping population will slowly die down, other towns will get chosen on the spawn roll instead. I don't see how that's saying the undead population is equal to the living. In fact I hate that my characters never end up in smaller towns. It's always the huge ones with tons of sleepers. I think the sleepers should just be left to it instead of being constantly fed, because it's making an unfair bottle neck in the system.

[Doug R.]

You all missed my point. My point was that players that trim their dead weight will feel more invigorated and transfer that enthusiasm to their characters, enlivening the game. This is not an issue of numbers at all, but of general positive activity.

[bnlphan]

The only advantage I can see of sleepers is..well disregarding that fact that sometimes they wake up, but if people come to town with ill intent and there's 20 people there they dont know that 10 are sleepers. So they may move along instead of causing trouble thinking they are outnumbered. I'm also guess they help with spawning. More people mean more spawns? So feed them until their hearts give out?