Gathering limits - ProgD update

[Jur Schagen]

As a one-time change, there will be a minimum of (current pop divided by three) slots in each city; this should re-balance the relationship between current population and low random slot numbers for existing cities. Expect this to change in the next day or so.

Done. 117 slots were added to 28 locations; 32 were in the Polish area (judging by the name...)

NOTE: it will be based on the people in city square at the time of the change, so if you want to get an extra slot for your town, you might want to peep out of you building/vehicle.

I DISAGREE!

I didn't think I could do it otherwise... but Jos has got tricks up his sleeve that I didn't know of... and yes (I think) it was based on all pop, not just city square. We are all learning every day...

Misty, Julie, Nick, some interesting points raised... I'm waiting for others to comment, but to me this is about the difference between a game and a chat box.

Jur.

[Agar]

I had a question about this, and hopefully this can be reviewed and changed if nessecary.

Did this change the limit to about one third of the population or raise it to about a third of the population?

The difference here being not the populated areas, but the barren ones. If it set it to a third the population, then mountains and deserts are now shut down. Zero population divided by three = zero gatherers.

I hope this was a raise and this concern is pointless, but if not ...

[Augery]

The population divided ny three is the minimum, so if there are zero people in a place the minimum is zero, the actual value will be higher.

[Agar]

The population divided ny three is the minimum, so if there are zero people in a place the minimum is zero, the actual value will be higher.

Unless the OOC staff page is out of date, you're not on it. Rather hear if from Jur or someone similar than someone that appears to be guess. No offense intended, just want to hear it from the source.

[west]

For locations where the number of slots available was fewer than one third the number of inhabitants, the number of available slots increased. For other locations nothing was changed; they still have the same number they were originally assigned regardless of population.

[Agar]

Thanks West. I was just walking through the day and was struck with the horrific thought of "What about the deserts?!"

If this tweak has worked as advertised, things may progress more in the manner intended. Thanks to all involved, and a special thanks to Jur, for communicating with the players of cantr about the issues we have. Talking is always good.

[PRUT]

I like Keves idea, but is should be just one step ahead from current land scarcity system and the ideal one.
The second step should be implementing maximum amount of posibble gathered resources per location.

For exampe:

I location XXX we can gather:
max 5000g of stone per day
max 6000g carrots per day
...

That total amount would be divided to all gatherers working on current project for example carrots. If the limit is 6000g and 20 people are farming - everybody gains 300,
if one of them have a dung fork - he would gather 570, when others - 285, and so on... (dependingly of tools, skills, machinery) It's not to hard to discover right algorhitm

I know that is much more complicated in programing point of view - but it's really fair and good idea - worth to be implement.

[marol]

I location XXX we can gather:
max 5000g of stone per day
max 6000g carrots per day

You forgot that in real world maximum amount depends on technological advance. OK, more people means lesser gathering, but at global (city) point of view - to develop more complicated tool or harvesters gives nothing with your proposal.

What you suggest is (with your example):
20 people farming without tools - everybody gains 300,
20 people farming with dung forks - everybody gains 300 too,
20 people framing with harvesters - everybody gains 300 too.
Not good... If city has enough people - tools are useless.

[Chris Johnson]

I location XXX we can gather:
max 5000g of stone per day
max 6000g carrots per day

You forgot that in real world maximum amount depends on technological advance. OK, more people means lesser gathering, but at global (city) point of view - to develop more complicated tool or harvesters gives nothing with your proposal.

What you suggest is (with your example):
20 people farming without tools - everybody gains 300,
20 people farming with dung forks - everybody gains 300 too,
20 people framing with harvesters - everybody gains 300 too.
Not good... If city has enough people - tools are useless.

EDIT : Now I'll add what I meant to say after quoting

This ignores the fact that machines & tools speed up the process, the 20 with dungforks will collect those 300g of carrots twice as fast as the 20 without. The Harvesters working at 4 times the speed .

Or to look at it another way you only need 10 people with dung forks or 5 with harvesters to do the work of 20 - Thats where technological developments are applied - they free labour - If you still want a peasant economy then use 20 untooled people or free 10 of them to get on with other things

[joshua johnson]

I am hoping you actually undo these increases in gathering slots. Having scarce resources makes for lots more interaction, and will promote trade. Some towns will have a hard time adjusting, but that is part of the game!

A good example is Brunoi or Quillanoi, both sizable towns with limited gathering numbers. It is my opinion that this will create new trade, new specialists, and other things that make the game interesting. Just look at the new ideas popping up and being argued about in Quillanoi. My character doesn't like it much, but from a player perspective.....the former low resource slots were absolutely fabulous. If it is raised to a third of the number of people outside, then there is no shortage anymore...and the game is less interesting.

PLEASE....GIVE US THE OLD, LOW, HARD TO DEAL WITH, TRADE PROMOTING SHORTAGE OF SLOTS! It makes things much better because they are harder.

[Surly]

Think of it this way, Joshua... there should be a reason why the cities are where they are. In the olden days of Cantr this was simply because they were spawning points... but I really cannot agree with all the changes that makes the current cities suddenly placed in where they would not have emerged before.

And think of it this way... those places still have vastly fewer slots than people... it is just more reasonable now. I like this change, but it shouldn't totally change the whole method of Cantrian life.

[Chris Johnson]

There is a problem with this fix , Not just from the perspective of joshua above This fix was made at one moment in time, based on the populations at that time

The places which have benefited are those with higher current populations.
Those which have not benefited are the undiscovered and un or under populated regions of Cantr . If things remain static then no new town or region could develop to rival a handful of current high population "old world" centres.

What I'd propose is a new type of project , similar to the road improvement project , - A Land Improvement or Clearence project . The output of this project would be an additional resource collection slot

This would allow individuals, companies, governments etc to develop the potential of their area .

Different land types should be easier to develop . Clearing a few bushes from grassland is easier than draining a part of the swamp .

There still could be caps on potential development, varying by location type and maybe a limit to one project of this type in any location

Special tools could be required and possibly speical resources - I'll leave that to others to suggest


The one-off change in resource slots based on current populations could be thought of as a simulation of previous development - Now let towns develop their own land and resource slots.

Apologies if this is more or less someone else idea already posted - I may have missed this

[Talapus]

I think that your suggestion is original, and I like it. It allows towns to grow large and support a dynamic and interesting structure, and promotes trade and group involvement. It also allows towns to do more to improve themselves. I like the current change that puts more value on many resources, but I thought that they might have been a bit low, so low as to discourage growth in many locations. The idea that more land can be cleared/prepared (simulating the town increasing its borders) allows towns to adjust to changing situations, and ideal in many forms. I would suggest the programming department to consider it, as I think it is the best way suggested so far for intregating this new and interesting system into the current Cantr environment.

[Agar]

I like the idea Chris. Maybe scalable, the way roads are improved bit by bit. That Might have been a better fix than what was done.

Let's let the new change sink in a couple more days, since it was just done, what, yesterday, and see if thing are indeed too easy now.

Tiredness was a huge pain when it first came out, was tweaked a few times and now is a non factor. It would be nice if tiredness DID matter every once in a while, it'd be good to have that come back into play, in a SMALL degree.

Land scarcity is good idea too, and while I agree that it should affect us, this first random assignment squashed a number of large towns, and would have made it impossible for them to exist, for no rational in game reason. It would have been like the gods cursing them.

Imagine if, for no rational reason, the oil vats at McDonalds suddenly could only produce twelve large fries a day, then froze over or something. McDonalds would go out of business, because of a curse.

As bad an analogy as that is, the same kind of effect had happened. Cities with populations of eighty which normally had a ridiculous fourty to sixty people gathering suddenly had seven. Now with the limits raised, they should have around twenty seven available or so. That's still lower than it used to be. It may still be too high. Let the sleepers working on projects that were repeating wake up and say "Who the Fvck cancelled my project?!?!" and let people get back to work. Then we'll see how the chip lie.

[Jur Schagen]

I location XXX we can gather:
max 5000g of stone per day
max 6000g carrots per day

You forgot that in real world maximum amount depends on technological advance. OK, more people means lesser gathering, but at global (city) point of view - to develop more complicated tool or harvesters gives nothing with your proposal.

What you suggest is (with your example):
20 people farming without tools - everybody gains 300,
20 people farming with dung forks - everybody gains 300 too,
20 people framing with harvesters - everybody gains 300 too.
Not good... If city has enough people - tools are useless.

EDIT : Now I'll add what I meant to say after quoting

This ignores the fact that machines & tools speed up the process, the 20 with dungforks will collect those 300g of carrots twice as fast as the 20 without. The Harvesters working at 4 times the speed .

Or to look at it another way you only need 10 people with dung forks or 5 with harvesters to do the work of 20 - Thats where technological developments are applied - they free labour - If you still want a peasant economy then use 20 untooled people or free 10 of them to get on with other things

Note the "per day" in the original post, Chris... but yes, there will be adjustments to the limit for tool because we don't want to "steal" other chars proceeds by using tools...

Lets take this small town where three people are digging potatoes on three slots, each yielding 800g daily - no problem at all. Now, one of them builds a dung-fork. The orther two now get 600 where he gets 1200. They're bound to be annoyed because their proceeds diminish... and he might actually be a "good" citizen, not wanting to do that, so he puts away the dung-fork... not what we want...

So instead, the total output will be increased in this case. Three gatherers on three slots still get 100% of proceeds... but now, one of those gets double... so its 800-800-1600 now.

This is different from a fourth gatherer coming to town. Now there are 4 people gathering on 3 slots, so all get 3/4 or 75% or 600 potatoes each.

Oh and I like your idea about creating slots, Chris... should be a very hard project though...

Jur.