Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 70

Thread: Squalor

  1. #31
    Senior Member Senior Member Dorkus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    464

    Default Re: A short investigation of squalor

    thanks for the work therother. I, and i'm sure others, appreciate it very much.

  2. #32
    Research Fiend Technical Administrator Tetris Champion, Summer Games Champion, Snakeman Champion, Ms Pacman Champion therother's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,631

    Default Re: A short investigation of squalor

    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?

    Code:
    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
    Last edited by therother; 10-11-2004 at 02:16.
    Nullius addictus iurare in uerba magistri -- Quintus Horatius Flaccus

    History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren't there -- George Santayana

  3. #33
    Research Fiend Technical Administrator Tetris Champion, Summer Games Champion, Snakeman Champion, Ms Pacman Champion therother's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,631

    Default Re: A short investigation of squalor

    Whew! That's it all completed. Will edit the first post with the new data.

    Code:
    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
    Nullius addictus iurare in uerba magistri -- Quintus Horatius Flaccus

    History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren't there -- George Santayana

  4. #34

    Default Re: A short investigation of squalor

    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%.

  5. #35
    Research Fiend Technical Administrator Tetris Champion, Summer Games Champion, Snakeman Champion, Ms Pacman Champion therother's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,631

    Default Re: A short investigation of squalor

    Quote Originally Posted by andrewt
    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.
    Last edited by therother; 10-11-2004 at 23:56.
    Nullius addictus iurare in uerba magistri -- Quintus Horatius Flaccus

    History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren't there -- George Santayana

  6. #36

    Default Re: A short investigation of squalor

    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.

  7. #37
    Research Fiend Technical Administrator Tetris Champion, Summer Games Champion, Snakeman Champion, Ms Pacman Champion therother's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,631

    Default Re: A short investigation of squalor

    Quote Originally Posted by andrewt
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by andrewt
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by andrewt
    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...
    Last edited by therother; 10-12-2004 at 00:18.
    Nullius addictus iurare in uerba magistri -- Quintus Horatius Flaccus

    History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren't there -- George Santayana

  8. #38

    Default Re: A short investigation of squalor

    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.

  9. #39
    Research Fiend Technical Administrator Tetris Champion, Summer Games Champion, Snakeman Champion, Ms Pacman Champion therother's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,631

    Default Re: A short investigation of squalor

    Quote Originally Posted by andrewt
    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.
    Nullius addictus iurare in uerba magistri -- Quintus Horatius Flaccus

    History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren't there -- George Santayana

  10. #40

    Default Re: A short investigation of squalor

    I'm not a programmer so I'll leave that up to you.

  11. #41
    Member Member sunsmountain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    414

    Default Re: A short investigation of squalor

    Just found the magic 8% growth number. Stability all the way

    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.
    Last edited by sunsmountain; 04-10-2005 at 20:42. Reason: philosophy on distance penalty
    in montem soli non loquitur

    (\_/) (>.<) That's what happens with bunnies
    (x.X)(_)(_) who want to achieve world domination!

    becoming is for people who do not will to be

  12. #42

    Default Re: A short investigation of squalor

    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.

  13. #43
    Member Member Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    London
    Posts
    64

    Default Re: A short investigation of squalor

    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.

    I'll quote what I just wrote in the Colosseum in the thread about what level of farm you should aim for:
    Quote Originally Posted by Owen
    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.

  14. #44
    Member Member Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    London
    Posts
    64

    Default Re: A short investigation of squalor

    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.

  15. #45
    Research Fiend Technical Administrator Tetris Champion, Summer Games Champion, Snakeman Champion, Ms Pacman Champion therother's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,631

    Default Re: Squalor

    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.
    Nullius addictus iurare in uerba magistri -- Quintus Horatius Flaccus

    History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren't there -- George Santayana

  16. #46

    Default Re: A short investigation of squalor

    Quote Originally Posted by Sleaker
    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....


  17. #47
    Member Member sunsmountain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    414

    Default Re: Squalor

    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
    Last edited by sunsmountain; 06-18-2005 at 22:39.
    in montem soli non loquitur

    (\_/) (>.<) That's what happens with bunnies
    (x.X)(_)(_) who want to achieve world domination!

    becoming is for people who do not will to be

  18. #48

    Default Re: Squalor

    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.
    Last edited by Weirwood; 06-21-2005 at 14:55.

  19. #49

    Default Re: Squalor

    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.
    Magnum

  20. #50

    Default Re: Squalor

    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.

  21. #51

    Default Re: Squalor

    I hate to be dense, but having read all this I'm still a bit 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.

  22. #52
    German Enthusiast Member Alexanderofmacedon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Where Columbus condemned the natives
    Posts
    3,124

    Default Re: Squalor

    Welcome to the forums Akmatov!

    I don't completely understand either, but I think keeping farm constructions down improves squalor.


  23. #53

    Default Re: 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.

  24. #54
    Senior Member Senior Member Dorkus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    464

    Default Re: Squalor

    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.

  25. #55
    Senior Member Senior Member Dorkus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    464

    Default Re: Squalor

    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)

  26. #56
    Member Member Sleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    109

    Default Re: Squalor

    Quote Originally Posted by Dorkus
    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.

  27. #57

    Default Re: Squalor

    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.

  28. #58
    Senior Member Senior Member Dorkus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    464

    Default Re: Squalor

    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.

  29. #59
    Member Member whyidie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    palo alto, ca, usa
    Posts
    520

    Default Re: Squalor

    Great thread. I was going completely in the wrong direction after reading the manual. Time for a course correction.

  30. #60
    Member Member Avicenna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Terra, Solar System, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, somewhere in this universe.
    Posts
    2,746

    Default Re: A short investigation of squalor

    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?
    Student by day, bacon-eating narwhal by night (specifically midnight)

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO