GM assistance in population issue

My pop is declining at a steady rate in my main was 110M. (That was over 2 real months ago) but now is 89M and falling. The health index is 160 so it makes no sence. I even added several Million to stablize but nothing has happened. I spoke to several other players and they have no clue aswell as what could be the cuase of it. Both my pop and high welfare both dropped @ the same time so it was assumed it was because of pop selling
BUT
I check my records back to Dec 31 of 2011 and i haven't sold ANY pop on LU.
In fact the last time i sold pop was from a FB nation on April 7th.

My question to the game master is why is this declining? There are lots of other players with higher pop and they continue to grow. One play has 300M and there pop dones't change at all.

Did i miss something or is this a GM error? Any help on this matter would be nice

Related question- Does transferring pop between the empire have the same negative effects as selling pop?

Super, it's probably a population bubble where a large number of them are retiring, and then dying, at the same time. Look through your population age spread page, its a bit hard to figure out but thats prob whats going on. Didn't you buy large amounts of pop in a short time a while back?

Transfer lots of your execs and seniors (the older ages mainly) for LLW (generally younger) from a C3 or two. You will ride it out eventually.

Sylar, I dont think it does.

Did you recently sell population?
in any of the countries in the empire?

If so, please read the game news. search population, or selling population and you will find many repetitions of news about it.

also, on the forum, search same words and you will find it all over the place.

if you are NOT selling population and did not sell population in the past several real months, please give me specific names.
(World and country).

I'm with Crafty; sounds like a retirement bubble to me.

Country would be Melchior on LU Andy.

https://sim05.simcountry.com/cgi-bin/cgi2nova?SN_ADDRESS=wwwCountry&SN_METHOD=w3graph&miTable=cntrhist&miKey=1170&miColumn=vCmainTotalPopulation


See I thought i thought it was a bubble to but i dont have a ton of retired.
Above is someone with positive growth and a lower health index yet they are growing.

So im really confused on why im srinking

Ok thx Crafty. Im glad to hear, would be kinda harsh to penalise transfers between empires.

It is the population sales. it can take some time to stop.
If you purchase several millions, it will improve or entirely stop declining.

Well i havent sold pop in real MONTHS on LU and its been over 2month since i sold pop on FB.

Does sell pop effect effect your ENTIRE account?

no
the entire empire.

ok

How long does this last because on LU its been over 6months since i sold pop the decline shouldn't have lasted this long

If LU is 6 months ago, this should compensate for the sale of about 10 millions or more.
The damage declines from day 1 but very slowly.

FB was recent.
purchasing population is reversing the process.

Ok thanks for the Info

My only thing is i sold population over 6real month ago. 1080game months(90Game years), Don't you think that's to long?. I can understand a few years but it seems like to much of a penalty. Since the start(you can verify) my main was 110M at the start of the decline, as of now i'm at 88.5M meaning I've lost 21.5M population not counting the population I've transferred/bought along the way. It seems like 1M pop sold = 10M that must be bought. Personally you don't think that's to much. I can understand 4-5M.
But honestly 6months of decline in welfare(which directly effects a players production)/population losses which effects again production is very painful. Really what happens is that if a player sells a few M there ENTIRE empire is suffering a MASSIVE downfall.

No being augmentative I'm just trying to bring this issue to light to the GM. In short you sel

We have warned players about it many times.
this is bit late in the process.

purchasing 2 millions for each million sold is more than enough to compensate and you end up with much larger population.

That's a heavy penalty to pay for selling some population. They're your assets to sell after all. Does'nt seem fair to be punished for it. Seems like the GM wants the population market for themselves.

We are very sorry for the introduction of this feature a long time ago. It was a major error.
we do not think that there is any reason for any country to sell population, it is always damaging the country no matter in what state it is. population is the most precious asset.

so we are discouraging it. We announced many times how bad it is for the country, gradually increased the minimum number of the population that must stay in the country etc.

we will continue to discourage and eventually, this feature will become unusable. it should not have been there in the first place.

Andy I think the reason some not all presidents sell population is when they take a presidents country. So instead of removing the feature, let the - sell population feature - only be for countries that are taken from a president. This way it does not damage the economy or the empire. But the feature of selling population should only be for 24 months after taking the country from a president after that no more population can be sold. Some countries taken from presidents are not kept and we sell off population and an all other assets, so the feature should be kept active only for the first 24 months, and only for countries taken from presidents.

Yes indeed.

Selling of population from a conquered country is a major bonus for success in a high level PvP war.

This shouldnt be removed.

As you stated Andy, population is a players most precious asset. So defend it one way or another yourself, we are talking about populations over 45M (which is too high IMHO) not new young countries. Why should a large empire have the protection of game rules that makes their countries far less attractive to aggressors?

This is one of the main issues I feel you at W3C should look at again as I feel it is half the reason for the dying of the war side of the game.

Every time you disagree on a feature, you declare a function in the game dead. selling population is on for years so why did it influence the war game? maybe it did and here is another reason for population sales to go.

there are however many wars each day and many more to come.

the best countries in the game are ones with high population. One with 300M is making a huge profit each game month. It is indeed the most important asset and there is never a reason to sell them.
The only reason to sell population is gold coins and this is done despite the devastating damage to the empire.

We are not looking for solutions to keep this going on in any form. there is no reason for this to be part of the game. No country in the world is selling its population. It would be a crime against humanity.

This is an old error, and a very bad one. It must be phased out.

"No country in the world is selling its population. It would be a crime against humanity." LOL I agree, and if this was happening in real life trust me the world would go to war over it.

But, in some forms it does happen. Look at prostetution rings in some countries. Women and children are shipped off from poor countries to western countries and prostituition rings are formed for money.

mmmm! this could be a new feature in simcountry!

Black market dealers of illegal goods, like drugs, prostituion, and other forms of black market goods. This should be done by CEOs only and countries would be the ones buying the goods maybe as a bonus to an index or something.

Anyway thats my spill for a new feature for today! I am always comming up with new ideas and features that simcountry can add, some good some bad amd some just plain morally wrong. <

Throughout history, countries have invaded other countries and taken it's population back to it's own country and empire to be forced labor, servants and to fill it's army ranks. Stop kidding yourselves as if selling population does not related to real world. It does, It always has. It's in man's nature. So why wouldn't it be in a country econ and war game? If you invade a country and win then you should be able to remove it's population back to your country or empires.

The game makes good GC's selling population, why would it want players cutting in on it's GC market? That is why they don't want players selling pop. With the GC market the way it is now selling pop will get even worse as players opt for accumulating Gold ignoring the penalty to avoid using the Visa card. It's business. It's also smart business.

Transferring Population between you empire countries however should not be pena

I haven't paid attention to whether there are pemalties attached to empire pop transfers; if this is happening, I am also dead set against it. Population is the great resource (as GM themselves assert), and to use that resource most efficiently --within--our--own--empire-- should be free, if it is, in fact, not.
I was right in my earlier surmise, it looks like, that GMs are assuming sole control of GC and population in order to play a more active part in the (real) financial aspect of the game. Even though I disagree with the way this is being implemented, i can see the reasoning behind it. I will just repeat what I have said before, that if this is the case (and apparently it is) WHY don't GM admit it in open forum? I think it would clear the air about these issues. If this post is removed or I am banned, you will know that I have hit a nerve somewhere.

Andy, I am only pointing out that conquering large countries with many population with the aim to sell the population and make GC profit from the war was a common event.

Of course now this is not viable as the penalty your empire pays is so high. Hence I say it reduced the instance of war. In my view it reduced war dramatically as well as not being able to raid inactive countries at low war levels where people no longer play SC has.

It is not clear to me which part W3C wishes was never introduced, the actual selling of pop in the first place or the penalty set on selling empires?

Of course I agree with you that it wouldnt happen real world, but this a game, there are many things here that wouldnt happen real world.

And when you say there are many wars going on and many more to come, you will note that most of them are players against the AI or C3s, no longer person v person.

PS. Half the disagreement here is that I call WAR a person v person happening as opposed to C3 fighting. Andy, you call any action war, inclusive of the taking of C3s. Ok, fair enough...but, when you say W3C is encouraging war and planning many changes to make it more exciting and accessible DO YOU INCLUDE PvP WAR? or are you considering C3 wars only?

Do you wish to encourage the skills and knowledge needed for a once important part of the game? Would you rather people only learn high war level C3 fighting?