View Full Version : Squalor
therother
10-08-2004, 21:25
For those not enamoured with details, here are my conclusions from a few tests, qualified by the fact that I manipulated the game a little.
Conclusions
I can confirm, categorically, that the various Temples of Juro (and I suppose other 'growth' temples), and the water supply buildings, both have no effect on squalor itself. Squalor seems to be a factor that is only related to city size, and government building. However, they do counter its effects on public order (via health and culture), whilst farms counter the decrease in growth rate.
Only the Government buildings and certain Governor traits and ancillary characters, seem to affect the level of squalor, given a constant population. The ancillary characters Geomancer (+1) and Architect (-1) both affect squalor if they are in the governor’s retinue, as well as a number of his traits: alleviators include the Natural Philosophy, Kind Ruler and the Good Builder lines, each varying from 1 to 3 (5 to 15%) in effect depending on the level you reach along those trait lines. The prim and proper trait also affects squalor, reducing it by 1. Traits that add to the problem include the Bad Builder, Miserly, and Cheapskate lines; again their affect is from 5 to 15%, only this time in the wrong direction.
The growth of squalor appears to be linear, at a rate of approximately 1% per 300 men, assuming you have constructed the appropriate level Government building. EDIT: The situation is slightly more complex than this. See later on.
You seem to get a fixed penalty if don't construct the available government building, rather than a compounded one, but that requires more in-game testing to be sure.
I can also confirm the reports of others that the Imperial Palace is indeed the trigger for Old Marius to reform the Legions, as I got to train Legionaries on the first turn! There may be a secondary date trigger as well though.
Major Edit:
Tabulated below are the population levels, for each Government building, for each level of squalor:
Sq% GH GV GP PCP IP
5 1150 1500 1500 1500 1500
10 1900 3000 3000 3000 3000
15 2650 4250 4500 4500 4500
20 3400 5000 6000 6000 6000
25 3850 5750 7500 7500 7500
30 4150 6500 9000 9000 9000
35 4200 7250 10500 10500 10500
40 4550 8000 12000 12000 12000
45 N/a 8750 12750 13500 13500
50 4900 9350 13500 15000 15000
55 5250 9500 14250 16500 16500
60 5600 9700 15000 18000 18000
65 5650 10050 15750 19500 19500
70 5950 10250 16500 21000 21000
75 ... 10400 17250 22500 22500
80 10750 18000 24000 24000
85 10900 18350 24750 25500
90 11100 18700 25500 27000
95 11450 18750 26250 28500
100 11750 19050 27000 30000 Patch 1.2 Limits P/O here
105 11800 19400 27750 31500
110 12150 19500 28500 33000
115 N/a 19750 29250 34500
120 12500 20100 30000 36000
125 12850 20250 30750 37500
130 13200 20450 31500 39000
135 13250 ... 32250 40500
... ... ... ...
250 ... ... 61500 Cap for Growth Squalor
Sq%: Public order penalty from squalor. To get the growth penalty, divide by ten.
GH = Corresponding population level for settlement with the Governor's House.
GV = Corresponding population level for settlement with the Governor's Villa.
GP = Corresponding population level for settlement with the Governor's Palace.
PCP = Corresponding population level for settlement with the Pro-Consul's Palace.
IP = Corresponding population level for settlement with the Imperial Palace.
NB: There is a limit on the amount of disorder that squalor can cause. This seems to be 125%. Growth rate penalty is capped at 25%, which is reached at a population of 61500 (with the Imperial Palace).
See posts further down the thread for explanation of the figures in this table.
End of Major Edit
Methodology
All right, here's what I did:
I started a Brutii game, medium setting. I gave myself a large injection of cash > 1,000,000 denarii. I set all tax rates to normal. Removed both governors from my two cities, and then gave Tarentum a population of 30,000 men from 4,500. I only improved growth buildings (using process_cq), and monitored for squalor.
Immediate effects:
Squalor: 15% > 125%
Growth rate: 2% > -21%
Garrison: 60% > 5%
Taxes: 772>1224 (58.5% increase)
Trade: 238>307 (28% increase)
Constructed: Latifunda, Curia, Pantheon of Juro, and an Arena (for public order, daily games)
Squalor: 100%
Growth rate: -0.5%
Garrison: 5%
Taxes: 1224
Trade: 530
The reduction of squalor came when I constructed the Government buildings, 5% for Pro-Consuls/ 20% for Imperial palace (remember my population is now 30,000)
In my other city, Croton, I did three experiments. In the first one, I increased the population from 4,300 to 30,000, but I then immediately constructed all the growth and water supply buildings. In the 2nd, I did the same, only I then reduced the population back to the 4,300 level and let it grow very rapidly indeed. In the 3rd, I destroyed the water supply buildings and let it grow without them. The idea of the latter two was to study the effects if rapid growth rate with and without water buildings, the first was to gauge any differences between a 30,000-man city with and without adequate water supply.
As with a number of such studies, I'm badly hampered by the intrinsic rounding in the game. For instance, a squalor level of 10% could mean as little as 5.01% (if they round up) or as much as 14.99% if they round down. Even assuming that they round to the nearest 5%, that’s still +/-2.5% either way. This makes it very difficult to determine if the relationship between factors is linear or just slightly non-linear, as that level of error essentially makes observation at the lower end highly suspect.
In another post (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?p=599476#post599476), I concocted a formula to estimate garrison bonus. Here I can show it working (the garrison was 5 80 man units):
-2.8 + 701*(80*5/4500) = 60%
-2.8 + 701*(80*5/30000) = 6.4%
NB: These calculations only hold true for large units sizes. The game appears to scale the garrison effect according to the average size of the units in the game. So two units of Hastati have the same relatively effect from small to huge unit sizes. Ergo you need to scale appropriately. Multiple the result of the equation by the following factors to get the right result:
4 for small
2 for normal
0.5 for Huge
Right, I think I've earned my pint this evening...
Ha, that's certainly true! ~:cheers: Ingenious methodology there, nice work.
Doug-Thompson
10-08-2004, 22:13
Excellent work, therother. Have another pint from me.
So, "happy" buildings (other than the "city hall" buildings you describe") do nothing to curb squalor. They only delay squalor's ill effects.
As I wrote on another forum, the usual formula is an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure. Maybe the "formula" with squalor is one ounce per ton.
therother
10-09-2004, 00:45
Hmm, just starting a more conventional examination of squalor, trying to clarify the relationship between population, squalor and the effect of the 'Town Hall'. I'm still running it, but I thought I should air my preliminary findings/suspicions.
The problem with the previous investigation was that I never studied the development of squalor with anything lower than an Imperial Palace. With the top level of governance, does seem that a 1% squalor increase equates to 300 extra men.
However, it's becoming clear that is not the case for the lower buildings. It seems to me, from the raw data I'm collecting, that the ratio is closer to ~150 men to 1% increase in squalor. I suppose this is what the game means that squalor will go out of control if you don’t upgrade the governor's residence!
There are still some a few questions I have. I'm going to upgrade one of my cities, whilst leaving the other to rot with just the Governor's Villa. Hopefully I can more sharply determine the rates, as there are huge error bars on the gradient at the moment!
PS Cheers Tamur and Doug-Thompson. I was due a Deuchars (obligatory, parochial alcohol reference).
By 1%, do you mean 1% population growth bonus or 1% public order.
From my observations, squalor goes up faster the lower your base government building is. I'm not sure whether it's because later buildings have a fixed reduction in squalor or increases the population required to add another point of squalor. I'm currently leaning towards the latter.
therother
10-09-2004, 03:43
By 1%, do you mean 1% population growth bonus or 1% public order.Well, I'm not sure what you mean. Are you referring to this, "1% squalor increase equates to 300 extra men." By that I mean that you will get another squalor icon, which represents 5%, every 1500 men. But I'm about to expand on that massively, as it seems to be much more complex than that, so watch this space.
Edit: Sorry, I have just got what you meant. I was so engrossed in what I was doing that I just missed what you were saying. I mean 1% public order.
From my observations, squalor goes up faster the lower your base government building is. I'm not sure whether it's because later buildings have a fixed reduction in squalor or increases the population required to add another point of squalor. I'm currently leaning towards the latter.As am I.
Inuyasha12
10-09-2004, 04:10
NOTE: If you want to get architect vice take your general and build several watchtowers and/or forts. He will earn it in no time. I found this out while building watchtowers along my border with one general.
Red Harvest
10-09-2004, 04:10
Doesn't "architect" and such come from the academy? I'm not really sure what the building does...I assumed it gave me some nice ancillaries. Some of my really high management, high influence, high star types seem to have no squalor, despite decent populations.
I've wondered if squalor builds on itself? Seem like you should be rewarded for doing early public water works, roads, walls, and city govt upgrades. On the otherhand, if you did them late it should be slow to fall. Squalor begets squalor.
therother
10-09-2004, 04:45
Doesn't "architect" and such come from the academy? I'm not really sure what the building does...I assumed it gave me some nice ancillaries. Some of my really high management, high influence, high star types seem to have no squalor, despite decent populations.AFAICT, academies and beyond make it more likely for ancillaries to show up. They are a requirement for some. But the "trigger" for the architect, according to the export_descr_ancillaries.txt file in home/data is:
Trigger trigger_architect
WhenToTest GovernorBuildingCompleted
Condition SettlementBuildingExists >= proconsuls_palace
and IsGeneral
AcquireAncillary architect chance 5
So, if I'm parsing this properly, there is a 5 per cent chance of getting an architect in a settlement that has just build a Pro-Consol's Palace or greater.
If you want to find the ancillaries that do need the various Academies, open up the file above and search for the "academy", "scriptorium", and "ludus_magnus".
I've wondered if squalor builds on itself? Seem like you should be rewarded for doing early public water works, roads, walls, and city govt upgrades. On the otherhand, if you did them late it should be slow to fall. Squalor begets squalor.You would think so, but I'm beginning to think not. There seems to be set populations at which squalor will increase. More about this in a bit!
therother
10-09-2004, 05:13
Right, these are the population levels for various levels of squalor with the Governor's Villa:
Sq%: Public order penalty from squalor. To get the growth penalty, divide by ten.
Pop: the population of the settlement.
Diff: population difference between this squalor level and the last. Iterations are usually 5%, with one exception.
Men/PO%: the number of men it takes to raise the Public Order (PO) penalty due to squalor by 1 per cent.
Sq% Pop Diff Men/PO% Comment
5 1500
10 3000 1500 300 'Normal' population levels
15 4250 1250 250 |
20 5000 750 150 |
25 5750 750 150 V
30 6500 750 150 Should be upgrading now!
35 7250 750 150
40 8000 750 150
45 8750 750 150 Given to here for 'free'
50 9350 600 120 Non-linearity sets in, but only mildly
55 9500 150 30 Here we go, you're really paying now!
60 9700 200 40
65 10050 350 70
70 10250 200 40
75 10400 150 30
80 10750 350 70
85 10900 150 30
90 11100 200 40
95 11450 350 70
100 11750 300 60
105 11800 50 10
110 12150 350 70
115 N/a Oddly, this doesn't exist.
120 12500 350 35
125 12850 350 70 Growth penalty decouples from order.
130 13200 350 70
135 13250 50 10
...
On so on. I don't think it's particularly worthwhile to go on, you get the idea.
The growth penalty, until this point is a tenth of the public order squalor penalty %, i.e. if squalor takes 2% off your growth rate, it takes 20% of your settlement's loyalty. 125% off loyalty is the hard limit. I put the city up to 50,000 men, and it was still 125%.
I thought that creating buildings that improve public health would decrease the squalor level, but that doesn't seem to help for me. I upgrade the government building right when I get a chance, and the water supply buildings as soon as I can. But it still seems like squalor is always a problem no matter what.
I don't like it. Why don't people just get up and clean something. That would help I think. ~;)
RedKnight
10-09-2004, 06:01
Very cool, therother. I'll take a harder look sometime when it's not late Friday night and I've been sharing some beers - virtually. ~:cheers: One thing perhaps pounded into the ground but which I don't remember seeing is that, AFAIK, when you make a water building, it doesn't show up as affecting the bottom/negative side of the Details, just the positive/top side. Which is to say it only counters squalor, it doesn't directly affect it.
Pray tell - what does 'therother' mean? Sounds like a couple of words jammed together - or is it a British term? Er sorry - I meant a Brittania term.
therother
10-09-2004, 06:42
One thing perhaps pounded into the ground but which I don't remember seeing is that, AFAIK, when you make a water building, it doesn't show up as affecting the bottom/negative side of the Details, just the positive/top side. Which is to say it only counters squalor, it doesn't directly affect it.Indeed. I think, personally, it would make more sense if it did actually directly affect squalor. But it doesn't, or at least I haven't been able to discern any noticeable effect, and I've been looking pretty hard!
I suppose it makes no difference in the end, as the effect of squalor does not seem to be compounded - it increases in predetermined steps based on population and Government building - so it matters little to the squalor level when you build the government buildings: it will drop back to the level, appropriate for your current population, it would have been had you build the new Government building as soon as you could. However, as the table above shows, you start to pay an extra penalty, both in growth rate and public order, for such slovenly practices, and it gets pretty steep.
Pray tell - what does 'therother' mean? Sounds like a couple of words jammed together - or is it a British term? Er sorry - I meant a Brittania term.It's just an old nickname, and given the relative paucity of nicknames I had as a kid, I didn't have much of a choice when I was deciding on usernames 10+ years ago. So it has kinda stuck with me, especially online.
BTW, it's pronounced "The Rother", not "The R Other" as some seem to think!
therother
10-09-2004, 07:33
Right, these are the population levels for various levels of squalor with the Governor's Governor’s Palace:
Headings are the same as before:
Sq% Pop Diff Men/PO% Comment
5 1500
10 3000 1500 300
15 4500 1500 300
20 6000 1500 300 Normal Pop Levels
25 7500 1500 300 |
30 9000 1500 300 |
35 10500 1500 300 v
40 12000 1500 300 Can upgrade to Pro-Consul's
45 12750 750 150
50 13500 750 150
55 14250 750 150
60 15000 750 150
65 15750 750 150
70 16500 750 150
75 17250 750 150
80 18000 750 150
85 18350 350 70
90 18700 350 70
95 18750 50 10
100 19050 300 60
105 19400 350 70
110 19500 100 20
115 19750 250 50
120 20100 350 70
125 20250 150 30 Again, the growth penalty decouples.
130 20450 200 40
...
So is anybody gunna mod squaker to be less devastating? It is really starting to piss me off.
therother
10-09-2004, 09:11
So is anybody gunna mod squaker to be less devastating? It is really starting to piss me off.Well, I'm not a hardcore modder, but the only thing I could think of that's easily accessible is to mod the traits, so that ever general who's ever in a settlement is given -10 squalor or so.
I've haven't fully tested this, so if you try backup your files.
Open home/data/export_descr_character_traits.txt, find this entry
Level Great_Builder
Description Great_Builder_desc
EffectsDescription Great_Builder_effects_desc
Epithet Great_Builder_epithet_desc
Threshold 36
Effect Influence 1
Effect Construction 15
Effect Squalor -3
Change Effect Squalor -3 to whatever you want, and perhaps remove the other effects.
So you could change it to:
Level Great_Builder
Description Great_Builder_desc
EffectsDescription Great_Builder_effects_desc
Epithet Great_Builder_epithet_desc
Threshold 36
Effect Squalor -10
Then search further down for:
Trigger governor_building
WhenToTest GovernorBuildingCompleted
Condition GovernorInResidence
Affects GoodBuilder 1 Chance 20
Change to:
Trigger governor_building
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd
Condition Condition EndedInSettlement
Affects GoodBuilder 36 Chance 100
If you want the game to display the right figures, you'll need to edit the appropriate line in home/data/text/export_VnVs.txt
I've had a quick check and it seems to work quite well. A few only get Excellent Builder, but that's better than nothing I suppose. The Great Builder guys put a 80% Public order cap on squalor, even in the largest of large cities, and will eliminate it in all but larger Large cities. It's crude, I know, but hopefully it'll tide you over until one of the modders gets into gear.
Remember to backup those files, and - if RTW's files are anything like MTW's - be sure to put exact the right spaces, tabs, etc in the file. Do one thing at a time, and check that RTW still loads. Run the game with the "-show_err” command for help if you make a mistake. CA says that it should give you more information about what went wrong in the error checking.
Edit: You could also mod a health building, but that would just counter the effect, not reduce squalor itself. I suppose you could mod the health building to actually combat squalor. The advantage of this would be that you could remove the mod without affecting the game, whereas all family members in the game are permanently modified in the mod below. Also squalor could be tackled in all your settlements without the need for family members.
For example, in home/export_descr_buildings.txt:
sewers requires factions { ct_carthage, egyptian, greek, roman, } and building_present_min_level market trader
{
capability
{
population_health_bonus bonus 1
}
construction 2
cost 800
settlement_min large_town
upgrades
{
baths
}
}
And edit the population_health_bonus bonus to something larger. You would either want to mod the upgrades or just remember not to build them as it would remove your extra bonus. You might also want to let the other factions in on the scheme.
good work. I will comment after i understood everything. ~;)
Is it possible to mod the game so that squalor only have half the loyalty effect it has right now ?
CrackedAxe
10-09-2004, 15:19
I'm just a couple of decades into my Briton campaign, and it concerns me that I cant upgrade the cities here past the minor stage, but the population keeps on growing. Is the squalor going to spiral out of control?
Very interesting post.
I believe you're over-complicating garrison effects. however. I'm pretty sure it's just 0.5% pop for 5% order, up to 80% max effect.
Edit: actually it's more like 0.4 or 0.45% pop for 5% order, but at low levels and normal+ unit size, that's pretty much the same thing.
At least that's what I got when i played around with it a while ago. The relationship does seem to be linear, whatever the precise constant and rounding method. I usually multiply pop% by 12, round up at 2.5 increments, and get the right figure.
For those not enamoured with details, here are my conclusions from a few tests, qualified by the fact that I manipulated the game a little.
Conclusions
I can confirm, categorically, that the various Temples of Juro (and I suppose other 'growth' temples), and the water supply buildings, both have no effect on squalor itself. Squalor seems to be a factor that is only related to city size, and government building. However, they do counter its effects on public order (via health and culture), whilst farms counter the decrease in growth rate.
Only the Government buildings and certain Governor traits and ancillary characters, seem to affect the level of squalor, given a constant population. The ancillary characters Geomancer (+1) and Architect (-1) both affect squalor if they are in the governor’s retinue, as well as a number of his traits: alleviators include the Natural Philosophy, Kind Ruler and the Good Builder lines, each varying from 1 to 3 (5 to 15%) in effect depending on the level you reach along those trait lines. The prim and proper trait also affects squalor, reducing it by 1. Traits that add to the problem include the Bad Builder, Miserly, and Cheapskate lines; again their affect is from 5 to 15%, only this time in the wrong direction.
The growth of squalor appears to be linear, at a rate of approximately 1% per 300 men, assuming you have constructed the appropriate level Government building. EDIT: The situation is slightly more complex than this. See later on.
You seem to get a fixed penalty if don't construct the available government building, rather than a compounded one, but that requires more in-game testing to be sure.
I can also confirm the reports of others that the Imperial Palace is indeed the trigger for Old Marius to reform the Legions, as I got to train Legionaries on the first turn! There may be a secondary date trigger as well though.
Methodology
All right, here's what I did:
I started a Brutii game, medium setting. I gave myself a large injection of cash > 1,000,000 denarii. I set all tax rates to normal. Removed both governors from my two cities, and then gave Tarentum a population of 30,000 men from 4,500. I only improved growth buildings (using process_cq), and monitored for squalor.
Immediate effects:
Squalor: 15% > 125%
Growth rate: 2% > -21%
Garrison: 60% > 5%
Taxes: 772>1224 (58.5% increase)
Trade: 238>307 (28% increase)
Constructed: Latifunda, Curia, Pantheon of Juro, and an Arena (for public order, daily games)
Squalor: 100%
Growth rate: -0.5%
Garrison: 5%
Taxes: 1224
Trade: 530
The reduction of squalor came when I constructed the Government buildings, 5% for Pro-Consuls/ 20% for Imperial palace (remember my population is now 30,000)
In my other city, Croton, I did three experiments. In the first one, I increased the population from 4,300 to 30,000, but I then immediately constructed all the growth and water supply buildings. In the 2nd, I did the same, only I then reduced the population back to the 4,300 level and let it grow very rapidly indeed. In the 3rd, I destroyed the water supply buildings and let it grow without them. The idea of the latter two was to study the effects if rapid growth rate with and without water buildings, the first was to gauge any differences between a 30,000-man city with and without adequate water supply.
As with a number of such studies, I'm badly hampered by the intrinsic rounding in the game. For instance, a squalor level of 10% could mean as little as 5.01% (if they round up) or as much as 14.99% if they round down. Even assuming that they round to the nearest 5%, that’s still +/-2.5% either way. This makes it very difficult to determine if the relationship between factors is linear or just slightly non-linear, as that level of error essentially makes observation at the lower end highly suspect.
In another post (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?p=599476#post599476), I concocted a formula for garrison bonus. Here I can show it working (the garrison was 5 80 man units):
-2.8 + 701*(80*5/4500) = 60%
-2.8 + 701*(80*5/30000) = 6.4%
Right, I think I've earned my pint this evening...
Major edit
Tabulated below are the population levels, for each Government building, for each level of squalor.
Sq%: Public order penalty from squalor. To get the growth penalty, divide by ten.
GV = Corresponding population level for settlement with the Governor's Villa.
GP = Corresponding population level for settlement with the Governor's Palace.
Sq% GV GP
5 1500 1500
10 3000 3000
15 4250 4500
20 5000 6000
25 5750 7500
30 6500 9000
35 7250 10500
40 8000 12000
45 8750 12750
50 9350 13500
55 9500 14250
60 9700 15000
65 10050 15750
70 10250 16500
75 10400 17250
80 10750 18000
85 10900 18350
90 11100 18700
95 11450 18750
100 11750 19050
105 11800 19400
110 12150 19500
115 N/a 19750
120 12500 20100
125 12850 20250
130 13200 20450
135 13250
...
NB: There is a limit on the amount of disorder that squalor can cause. This seems to be 125%. I don't believe there is, in any practical sense, a similar limit for the growth rate penalty.
See posts further down the thread for explanation of the figures in this table
Doug-Thompson
10-09-2004, 16:48
Does the training of units effect squalor more than it effects the general population?
For instance, I send a bunch of ships that need retraining to a port of a city with lots of squalor. A total of 300 or so "sailors" are taken from the general population.
However, does the squalor go down for 300 population at a fixed rate, or do the people living in squalor "get a job" in the navy, thereby reducing squalor more?
Does the training of units effect squalor more than it effects the general population?
For instance, I send a bunch of ships that need retraining to a port of a city with lots of squalor. A total of 300 or so "sailors" are taken from the general population.
However, does the squalor go down for 300 population at a fixed rate, or do the people living in squalor "get a job" in the navy, thereby reducing squalor more?
don't think it makes a difference. pop is pop. note that 300 men will not affect squalor at all (unless you're on the marign), since the game moves in 5% increments.
therother
10-09-2004, 19:52
I'm just a couple of decades into my Briton campaign, and it concerns me that I cant upgrade the cities here past the minor stage, but the population keeps on growing. Is the squalor going to spiral out of control?Barbarians can't upgrade cities beyond minor city status, so can't get a hold of further upgraded farms, growth temples, and the like. Therefore, if CA has done its numbers right, your squalor should start to balance out your growth rate long before you'd reach the 125% Public Order Maximum, by virtue of the growth rate squalor penalties.
Is it possible to mod the game so that squalor only have half the loyalty effect it has right now ?I don't know of a way. A trait (or building) that has an effect of (+/-) 10 is a 50% effect. However, this doesn't mean a 50% reduction of the current squalor level, but a 50% absolute reduction: it will reduce 10 from the squalor icons in public order calculation, whether you have 10 to subtract or not. Example: You have 80% Public order disruption due to squalor (16 squalor icons appear). You put a governor with -10 squalor in the settlement, and it will go down to 30%, rather than 40%. Further example, you have 20%, and move him in. Squalor will disappear.
I believe you're over-complicating garrison effects. however. I'm pretty sure it's just 0.5% pop for 5% order, up to 80% max effect.Quite possible. I only graphed a handful of points.
Edit: actually it's more like 0.4 or 0.45% pop for 5% order, but at low levels and normal+ unit size, that's pretty much the same thing.
At least that's what I got when i played around with it a while ago. The relationship does seem to be linear, whatever the precise constant and rounding method. I usually multiply pop% by 12, round up at 2.5 increments, and get the right figure.Hmm, perhaps I'm not following your method properly? For the example above, we have 400 men in a settlement of 4500. That means the garrison is 8.9% the size of the settlement. It has a 60% garrison bonus reported.
I calculate, by your method, it should be around 100% (~12*9). I did think that it might be the difficulty level, but I started a very hard and an easy campaign game, and in both my formula worked quite well.
To make it a rule of thumb, you should multiple Garrison % (*) by 7 and subtract 2.5 or 3. As you say, the maximum is 80%, and perhaps the minimum is 5%?
(*) [(garrison size/settlement population)*100]
However, does the squalor go down for 300 population at a fixed rate, or do the people living in squalor "get a job" in the navy, thereby reducing squalor more?Dorkus is right: it doesn't matter how the population changes, the effect on squalor is the same.
What example are you referring to?
In my experience, multipying % of pop by 12, then rounding up at units of 2.5 (so if you have 6.1% garrison * 12=73.2 rounded up to 75% order), always gets you within 5% of the actual value.
I haven't tested this rigorously, however. The way I did it originally was I took like 20 units of peasants (at normal unit size) in and out of a huge city and that ratio jumped out.
Since then, I haven't noticed huge deviatinos from that ratio, but then again I haven't paid too close attention, since I generally don't have too many problems with order.
btw, i'm on vh/vh. so the differnece isn't because of my difficulty level.
therother
10-09-2004, 20:34
What example are you referring to?In the middle of the starting post of the thread, the one you've quoted in its entirety, are the following two examples.
-2.8 + 701*(80*5/4500) = 60%
-2.8 + 701*(80*5/30000) = 6.4%
It was comparison of the garrison effect before and after changing the settlement population from 4500 to 30000. The game reported the garrison as 60% to 5%, which was borne out by my calculations above.
just pulled out an old save game and used the multiply by 12 method on about 20 provinces ranging from 700 pop to huge city size. Seems to get it right within 5% for all of them.
Are you sure you have the 400/4500 city correct?
therother
10-09-2004, 20:36
Are you sure you have the 400/4500 city correct?100% correct. But I've discovered why we are diverging. It's the unit sizes. You're on normal and I'm on large. The game scales the garrison effect accordingly.
100% correct. But I've discovered why we are diverging. It's the unit sizes. You're on normal and I'm on large. The game scales the garrison effect accordingly.
ah of coruse. *bonks head*
ca really shouldn't have done that though. if you get the gain, you should bear the pain.
therother
10-10-2004, 16:33
I should point out, if only for completeness, that the relationship between size of the garrison and the settlement population in determining the garrison public order effect is in fact non-linear. Best fit I've had to my data (excluding high order polynomials, of course) is a sum of decaying exponentials, but it's quite complex and not really very useful for a quick calculation of how many men you need to pacify a troublesome settlement, especially as it's quite linear in the normal ranges. The rules of thumb that Dorkus and I detail above should suffice, with the simple proviso (for my rule) that you should scale the figure by the following factors depending on the unit size setting:
4 for small
2 for normal
0.5 for Huge
therother
10-10-2004, 22:32
Here's the Imperial Palace data.
Note: I deleted the old post by accident. The data in this one is identical.
Sq% Pop Diff Men/PO%
5 1500
10 3000 1500 300
15 4500 1500 300
20 6000 1500 300
25 7500 1500 300
30 9000 1500 300
35 10500 1500 300
40 12000 1500 300
45 13500 1500 300
50 15000 1500 300
55 16500 1500 300
60 18000 1500 300
65 19500 1500 300
70 21000 1500 300
75 22500 1500 300
80 24000 1500 300
85 25500 1500 300
90 27000 1500 300
95 28500 1500 300
100 30000 1500 300
105 31500 1500 300
110 33000 1500 300
115 34500 1500 300
120 36000 1500 300
125 37500 1500 300
130 39000 1500 300
135 40500 1500 300
thanks for the work therother. I, and i'm sure others, appreciate it very much.
therother
10-11-2004, 01:32
Sorry, I messed up my previous post with the Imperial Palace. Will get the data back shortly...
This is the data for the Governor's house. I've stopped at 70 simply because you'd never be able to reach 6000 men without a fair number of slaves, and you'd be crazy not to build the Governor's Villa!
Anyhow, I see the short in the thread title staring back at me with a certain irony.
Pro-Consul's Palace will be up shortly, I hope.
Edit: As it stands, I don't see much point in doing a study with no Government building in place. That and it's much harder to do as I can't mod my usually suspects in to help narrow down the transition point. Does anyone know of a way to train units without a Governor's House?
Sq% Pop Diff Men/PO%
5 1150
10 1900 750 150
15 2650 750 150
20 3400 750 150
25 3850 450 90
30 4150 300 60
35 4200 50 10
40 4550 350 70
45 n/a
50 4900 350 35
55 5250 350 70
60 5600 350 70
65 5650 50 10
70 5950 300 60
...
125 8560
therother
10-11-2004, 03:32
Whew! That's it all completed. Will edit the first post with the new data.
Sq% Pop Diff Men/PO%
5 1500
10 3000 1500 300
15 4500 1500 300
20 6000 1500 300
25 7500 1500 300
30 9000 1500 300
35 10500 1500 300
40 12000 1500 300
45 13500 1500 300
50 15000 1500 300
55 16500 1500 300
60 18000 1500 300
65 19500 1500 300
70 21000 1500 300
75 22500 1500 300
80 24000 1500 300
85 24750 750 150
90 25500 750 150
95 26250 750 150
100 27000 750 150
105 27750 750 150
110 28500 750 150
115 29250 750 150
120 30000 750 150
125 30750 750 150
130 31500 750 150
135 32250 750
One of the most useful parts of your research is finding out the magic number for population growth is 8%. That means we should plan for growth to be around 8%, a little more or less depending on the circumstance. By the time you get to 24,000, squalor will make the net growth to be 0%, which is the best case scenario.
For example, Julii's Arretium has 2.5% base farming bonus, IIRC. Great Forum would add 1%. Three Aqueduct line upgrades would add 1.5%. 3 Ceres temple upgrades would add 1.5% and 3 farm upgrades would add 1.5% for a total of 8%.
therother
10-11-2004, 20:06
One of the most useful parts of your research is finding out the magic number for population growth is 8%.
Indeed. I've just concocted a worked example:
You start as Brutii and Tarentum at 4,500. You want it to reach 24,000 and then stop there.
Tarentum has a basic farm level of 3.5%. You check the table to see that you'll need an 8% growth rate to balance out the squalor with an Imperial Palace at 24,000.
So you decide to build Temples of Juro (up to 2.5% growth), a forum (or above) (1%) for a total of 7%. Now comes the decision on farming. Farms cannot be destroyed, unlike the buildings above, so be careful. Just build up to Communal for a 1% increase, as the increase of various other factors from the pantheon far outweighs the extra income from farming.
(Edit: In fact, looking at the figures, you'd be as well building up to public baths instead of farms, as they give the required 1%, plus a 10% increase in Public Order, for only a small decrease in denarii (~160). This means that you could just build the Arena instead of needing the Coliseum in the example below, and a 10% garrison effect, at 24,000, would take at about 5 units of peasant at 100 denarii each, so it makes financial sense as well.)
So we have 8% growth but 8% growth penalty from squalor. This means that the settlement is in equilibrium, and so the population will always return to 24,000 if any fluctuations happen (disbanding/creating units, slaves, or plague).
If you want to minimise the time to 24,000, build all farms, water supply and Juro temples that you can, then knock down the Juro temples and/or water supply buildings, and build the other temples to rid yourself of the extra growth. Having an arena or hippodrome helps in these situations as you can hold games to offset the public order problem, whilst you switch temples.
Now you need to balance out the 80% Public order problem. As Tarentum is the capital, usually, there is no distance-to penalty or cultural penalty. As an aside, the former will not be reduced (barring a move of capital), but the latter should eventually subside.
So, let's assume we built the Pantheon of Juro, which gives us a 50% increase in Public Order (25% health/25% native), and you’ve built the Curia (10%), and an Coliseum (15%). That's 75%. So you have 95% public order. Add in a few units, or a governor with some influence, and you have a stable city at 24,000, with easily manageable squalor.
Away from the capital, you might want to explore the water supply buildings rather than the farms, as they give a public order bonus as well as a growth bonus.
Edit: In the above, I've not mentioned tax rates: they are at normal. You can, of course, use the tax rate as a temporary measure to both affect the growth rate and public order.
I wouldn't knock population down too much. I'd use the Temple of Juno/Ceres/Aphrodite/etc. to rapidly build up to 24,000 before knocking it down and replacing it. However, if my public order is high enough, I wouldn't mind building a few farm upgrades or whatever until my public order is around 100% on normal taxes. The reason is that trade income is affected by population. I'm not sure by how much so hopefully, that will be your next research project.
therother
10-12-2004, 00:16
I wouldn't knock population down too much. I'd use the Temple of Juno/Ceres/Aphrodite/etc. to rapidly build up to 24,000 before knocking it down and replacing it. However, if my public order is high enough, I wouldn't mind building a few farm upgrades or whatever until my public order is around 100% on normal taxes. I agree entirely. That's why I've been going around arguing against the rebel/slaughter method of dealing with your cities. Newly captured cities on the edges of your empire, yes: your core cities, big no no! That's very bad planning! But there are instances where you may not want to deal with a very large city, i.e. an inland city that you want to use for troop production.
The reason is that trade income is affected by population. Not just tax. Trade is definitely affected too. I still haven't been able to fully justify it, but I believe the larger your city, the more imports you will attract. The problem is that geography has an input, as well as established trade routes. There is also a suspicion voiced by others that trade to a city may be increased by it's local land network, but I have no data to suggest that as yet. Land trade is definitely affected by population though. Of that I have plenty of evidence.
I'm not sure by how much so hopefully, that will be your next research project.I'm ashamed to say it, but a study of the economics was my first project! Other tangential studies, like this one, keep sidetracking me! But I'm still on it...
I tested a little by building and disbanding peasants and the addition seems fairly small on a one-turn basis. I tried queueing up 9 peasant units in Salamis and Antioch's exports to Salamis dropped from 1614 to 1610. I disbanded 4 peasant units in Salamis and it went up from 1614 to 1616. I'm not sure how this adds up in the end. Maybe the game has some points where it jumps or maybe population affects it very little at all save for allowing building upgrades.
therother
10-12-2004, 00:54
I tested a little by building and disbanding peasants and the addition seems fairly small on a one-turn basis. I tried queueing up 9 peasant units in Salamis and Antioch's exports to Salamis dropped from 1614 to 1610. I disbanded 4 peasant units in Salamis and it went up from 1614 to 1616. I'm not sure how this adds up in the end. Maybe the game has some points where it jumps or maybe population affects it very little at all save for allowing building upgrades.The problem is that you will need a much larger range of population change, without anything else changing (a tip of the hat to Tamur). The best way I've found is to directly modify the memory address containing the population of each individual city.
I'm not a programmer so I'll leave that up to you.
sunsmountain
11-01-2004, 22:55
Just found the magic 8% growth number. Stability all the way :charge:
Basically not assuming any other penalty, this can be countered by roman buildings: 10 (curia) + 35 (pantheon) + 15 (arenas) + 20 (health) = 80%
Taking into acount temples and health buildings, compared to the romans:
- parthians are at 0, since they only get sewers (5 health). But Parthia has only one god temples for 50 (pantheon), compensating that.
- greeks are at -5, for they don't have city plumbing (15 health).
- carthage is at -30, no pantheons, only baths. Worshipping Baal still puts you at -10.
- egypt is at +5, assuming no Isis temple all their pantheons are 50, yet only baths. These numbers may seem small but at 24000 they really do matter.
[- barbarians already have their stable limit at 2%, so they will almost always grow too large. Their buildings are 15/30 + 10 = 25/40%, putting them at -65/40]
Not the place for strategy. When i get around to it, i'll continue this analysis for a full treatment on squalor & public order.
On the note of squalor, has anyone tried adding Effect Squalor -x to a buildings list of traits? Seems like since a general can affect city stuff a building might be able to do all the same traits/abilities that aren't diplomacy related.
Ah, so this is the thread where Froggy got her advice to maintain maximum total population growth before squalor at 8%. I should have guessed AndrewT would be involved. ~D
I'll quote what I just wrote in the Colosseum in the thread about what level of farm you should aim for:
I like the way you think on this FBE, but I really don't like the specifics. Unless the city has a really high distance to capital penalty, you should aim for a total of 8.5% or 9% growth before squalor effects. With 8% total, actual growth rates decrease to zero as you approach 24000, and so it takes a very long time to reach the Imperial Palace and the improvements associated with it. Remember that 8.5% gives you double the actual growth rate as you start to approach 24000. I consider that the effects of 5% to 10% decrease in happiness from squalor years down the line are worth putting up with in return for gaining both the Marian reforms and a suite of buildings much earlier, along with increased agricultural income, fewer governors getting the "poor farmer" vice and frequently an earlier reduction in the culture penalty to happiness along the way.
To gain 8.5% or 9% total, I often build to level 3 farms, depending on local production and grain imports, but not until I have built highways, shipwrights, temples, academies, arenas, armourers and at least one military recruitment building, be it a barracks, stables or practice range.
Of course, this advice isn't really applicable to factions who don't have five levels of governor building.
I will try to work out how large much quicker 9% growth is than 8% to get an Imperial Palace.
Well, I took a short conceptual case in a spreadsheet, and assumed a starting population of 12000 with all the necessary province improvements in place for either a 8% or 9% total growth percentage before squalor.
8% gave a population of 24k after 42 turns. 9% gave a population of 24k after 24 turns, with an extra 5% happiness penalty at turn 30 and a further 5% at turn 40, after which it stabilises.
Are those extra 18 turns worth putting up with a hit of 10% to happiness later on? I suspect it is, though it's a no-brainer if your proconsul building or equivalent is of a different culture.
I should point out that this assumes that the rounding of growth rates to 0.5% steps is a real effect rather than just a display effect. Of course, if it is just a display effect then 8% is a very bad choice, because you'd never reach 24000 population, not even by 2004 AD.
therother
04-10-2005, 17:44
Growth rate penalty is capped at 25%, which is reached at a population of 61500 (with the Imperial Palace). Updated first post with the info.
bEDEVERE
06-17-2005, 21:18
On the note of squalor, has anyone tried adding Effect Squalor -x to a buildings list of traits? Seems like since a general can affect city stuff a building might be able to do all the same traits/abilities that aren't diplomacy related.
I was wondering the same thing....
sunsmountain
06-18-2005, 22:34
Afaik, buildings do not reduce squalor. Some temples and farms increase the growth rate, which increases squalor, rather.
The character traits that reduce squalor do not work for buildings
sorry
Weirwood
06-21-2005, 14:53
There's one thing that shouldn't need pointing out, but which is misunderstood time and again, the relation between public health and squalor. Because occasionally people will give the advice to demolish anything related to population growth in order to diminish public unrest.
0.5% additional population growth equals -5% public order through squalor, that's obvious. it also means -0.5% population growth through squalor at the same time, so those public health buildings and temples, and also the highest level of trade buildings, which also give an equivalent increase in happiness, perfectly balance out the additional loyalty loss through squalor they produce.
If you have 0% growth and 100% happiness, and then build sewers, you will still have 0% growth and 100% happiness after squalor rises, but with a greater population and hence more tax and trade income.
The only real problem lies with farms and temples of farming and growth.
There's one thing that shouldn't need pointing out, but which is misunderstood time and again, the relation between public health and squalor. Because occasionally people will give the advice to demolish anything related to population growth in order to diminish public unrest.
0.5% additional population growth equals -5% public order through squalor, that's obvious. it also means -0.5% population growth through squalor at the same time, so those public health buildings and temples, and also the highest level of trade buildings, which also give an equivalent increase in happiness, perfectly balance out the additional loyalty loss through squalor they produce.
If you have 0% growth and 100% happiness, and then build sewers, you will still have 0% growth and 100% happiness after squalor rises, but with a greater population and hence more tax and trade income.
I appologize for straying a little off the topic, but as players often read the Ludus Magna to pick up possible tips to improve their play, I felt it is necessary to point out that while Weirwood is correct in saying they balance out, the reason to destroy the various buildings is to decrease population, thus the garison present in the city will have a bigger impact. Such actions are only needed in situations where a player is unable to control the unrest in a city through other means.
Again, sorry for stepping outside the main discussion. :embarassed:
Since a building can not reduce squalor Adding bonus to the acadamies for order and trade might be a decent counter. AFAIK these buildings have no effect other than adding Ancileries. i.e. they do nothing if you have no govener in the city.
I hate to be dense, but having read all this I'm still a bit confused. ~:confused:
I think what I'm reading is that:
1) There is nothing you can due to reduce squalor because it is an automatic consequence of population size.
2) You can somewhat alleviate the consequences of squalor by a Garrison and Public Health Buildings.
3) Sanitation improvements have no effect on Squalor
4) There is no way to mod buildings to reduce Squalor
Is my understanding correct?
For some reason Squalor bugs me and I want to be able to reduce it, but there seems no way - right?
Thanks for any insight anyone might wish to share.
Alexanderofmacedon
10-26-2005, 23:01
Welcome to the forums Akmatov!
I don't completely understand either, but I think keeping farm constructions down improves squalor.
Thanks for the welcome and the idea! I just recently got into RTW and just more recently got it running on my machine, but I've been trolling here a bit trying to understand things better for a little bit.
Farms, hmmm. Do you think they actually make Squalor worse or do they encourage population growth which then leads to Squalor?
Still very much the newbie at this, but it seems to me Squalor is a good idea - reflecting the down side of having too many people living in a city, that is a bit overdone. Just my opinion at the moment.
Best way to control squalor is to build the appropriate town hall building. You'll see a dramatic drop in squalor (perhaps to reflect the better administration of the city).
Public health buildings are double edged swords. They improve order (NOT squalor), but they also increase pop growth, which is a bad thing if you are concerned with squalor-induced order problems. Consequently, I never build them.
Btw, if you think squalor is "overdone" now, you should have seen it in rtw 1.0, before they capped it at 100% order penalty. The entire board was up in arms about it.
I personally found it to be an interesting challenge, and am glad it was as hard as it was in the original version. Few games actually make you think before building things; rtw 1.0 did. (though I have to admit, the fact that farms and public "health" buildings HURT you in squalor remains a bit odd)
Public health buildings are double edged swords. They improve order (NOT squalor), but they also increase pop growth, which is a bad thing if you are concerned with squalor-induced order problems. Consequently, I never build them.They are however good way to stimulate growth in a city whose population has stopped increasing. If later you run into problems with civil order/run away population growth you can demolish the public health building.
They also reduce a cities chance of suffering from plague and reduce the severity and duration of a plague if it should strike.
Yukon Cornelius
10-27-2005, 02:59
Assuming a particular public health building doesn't nail you with a culture penalty (i.e. you're a hairy barbarian and the city in question has a Roman sewer), public health buildings do nothing but good as far as I can tell. You get happiness, growth, and some plague protection all at once. The happiness bonus negates the public order penalty from the added squalor, and you get three actual *good* things on top of that: More tax money, more potential soldiers, and Anti-Plague (TM). The plague reduction is of unknown value, though it's probably safe to assume that it at least cancels out the risk from the added squalor.
So, ultimately, public health buildings give you two bonuses with no penalties: More tax money and increased recruitment potential.
Farms, on the other hand, give you income in exchange for squalor. Considering the ridiculously high base farm level of certain provinces, I could do without farms, personally. It's a shame they're indestructible, since the AI loves to build them and all.
Plague protection is of minimal value, unless you are in that one macedonian province that has a plague trigger.
Growth can be good or bad. If you've already hit the size that you want, then it's a definite bad. Squalor will exactly cancel out the order bonus of the health building, but you will be left with a larger city (and thus one harder to control via garrison).
If you haven't hit your target city size, growth CAN be good. But it's much faster and cheaper, in the long run, to use slavery and/or peasant transfers to get pop growth, if that's what you're looking for.
Great thread. I was going completely in the wrong direction after reading the manual. Time for a course correction.
Avicenna
02-26-2006, 15:06
How do you actually get rid of squalor? I upgrade the city and public health as often as possible, avoid building farms and markets but the squalor level in Carthage is still around 100+%. Is the only way to get rid of it losing the city and re-capturing and exterminating it?
How do you actually get rid of squalor?
You can read this in the first post:
1) Upgrade governement building
2) Reduce population
3) Trait & ancillaries: the Prim-and-Proper trait, the Natural Philosophy, Kind Ruler and the Good Builder lines of V&V's and the Architect ancillary reduce squalor, the Bad Builder, Miserly, and Cheapskate lines and the geomancer ancillary increase it.
Avicenna
02-26-2006, 18:16
You can read this in the first post:
1) Upgrade governement building
2) Reduce population
3) Trait & ancillaries: the Prim-and-Proper trait, the Natural Philosophy, Kind Ruler and the Good Builder lines of V&V's and the Architect ancillary reduce squalor, the Bad Builder, Miserly, and Cheapskate lines and the geomancer ancillary increase it.
I've already fully upgraded to Imperial Palace, with Aqueducts, and put my best governor with best management ancillaries in the city. I've even avoided building squalor increasing buildings such as farms and markets, but the squalor rating is STILL 100+. Is genocide the only way to prevent this?
I've already fully upgraded to Imperial Palace, with Aqueducts, and put my best governor with best management ancillaries in the city. I've even avoided building squalor increasing buildings such as farms and markets, but the squalor rating is STILL 100+. Is genocide the only way to prevent this?
Yes.
gardibolt
03-01-2006, 17:46
What patch are you playing? I thought squalor was capped at 100% as of 1.2.
Pontifex Rex
03-02-2006, 16:07
I've already fully upgraded to Imperial Palace, with Aqueducts, and put my best governor with best management ancillaries in the city. I've even avoided building squalor increasing buildings such as farms and markets, but the squalor rating is STILL 100+. Is genocide the only way to prevent this?
Big city squalor is something we all just have to live with. The genocide option just seems a little gamey to me. Like others, I would rather just cue up a large number of units and ship them off to the front or use them as settlers in frontier provinces. Another option is to send all your mangled units to that city and do a massive retraining program,..it will draw down the population (and squalor quite quickly).
Just a thought. ~:)
Avicenna
03-02-2006, 18:18
Might work.. except it's increasing too quickly, Carthage is nowhere near any front to ship troops to and I'm playing normal units with peasants at 60 only :(
Read the city management faq and the magic 8% pop growth/squalor figure. Basically you want to stop building farms when your pop growth is already at 7-8% to keep squalor-growth at an even keel at 24k pop.
Some buildings, temples and traits will increase pop growth. I messed up Carthage by building a farm upgrade and I'm paying for it now by needing a full stack and good influence govner just to keep things under control just barely.
Pontifex Rex
03-02-2006, 19:55
Might work.. except it's increasing too quickly, Carthage is nowhere near any front to ship troops to and I'm playing normal units with peasants at 60 only :(
Train up a few Biremes to shuttle the troops overseas to the front or smaller cities. Other than that, lower the taxes and keep a good governor on hand. I've rarely have cities riot and never had a city actually rebel (I just keep pushing up the size of the garrison.)
Avicenna
03-05-2006, 17:33
Already building every turn, and garrison public order level maxed out at 80%.
hi all
what i did to get rid of squalor
in the campaign at the mo playing scippie i rule spain, africa, starting on the gaul also rule the coast down to sparta, and through to where macedon start
it is 201bc and my campaign it shifting rapidly
lots of my settlements were full of squalor and duet
the 3 settlements near sparta also the 3 settlements on the island between rome and carthage
wat i did to get rid of squalor and duet
when 1 of the 3 settlements got plague in both areas i moved my generals to a fort or on to a settlement free of plague straight away checking generals are free of plague
if you move the generals straight away i find they stay free of plage
so now keep the plage in the settlements till the population drops to say round 10,000 or below the squalor decreases rapidly till its nearly all gone
it took about 7-10 turns
once plage leaves move generals back you will be able to tax at the highest rate iam brining in 3000 -4000 public orded up to 200% or higher in the settlement
only thing population growth rate is 7% or higher so this could cause problems i know tommorow..
or am i making a complete hash of it!!! :indian_chief:
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.