| Saturday, September 8, 2018 - 06:30 pm |
The next upgrade coming Monday, will increase the number of births again.
This means that the number of people in the 0 to 4 years old group should increase.
It is no guarantee that the population will immediately start growing. This depends also on the health index but also on death rates and it all depends on the distribution of your population in the various age groups.
If you have many in the 18 ti 40 groups, you will have more babies.
if you have many in the 55 to 80 groups, you will have many people dying.
We have also improved the model for computing natural death in all age groups.
we think this will help.
and we have repaired the computation of life expectancy.
we expect life expectancy numbers to go from where they are now (too high or too low), towards a true life expectancy number.
The change will be gradual and may take some time to stabilize.
As birth rates have a short term but mainly a longer term effect, we will now wait a little longer before we decide about a next step.
| Saturday, September 8, 2018 - 06:42 pm |
I just checked some age groups in two of my countries.
I saw that the number of people in the 4 to 8 years old, is LARGER than the number in the 0 to 4 years old.
This is should not be the case.
some kids die and the number in the next age group should be slightly lower.
This means that the number of babies is too low.
I would like to see a change there, not immediately but soon, showing the number of people in the 0 to 4 years, growing and surpassing the 4 to 8 years age group.
Then, the same should happen to the next group.
All of course, assuming that your health index is high, at least 120, pushing death numbers lower.
| Sunday, September 9, 2018 - 11:16 pm |
Thank you so much for the update I appreciate it.
What do you as the GM expect to become the new equilibrium rate for population? I "HAD" 230 million over 2 real months ago and I'm at 195M and still losing large amounts of population despite a 193 healthcare index. Meaning these large numbers are not sustainable. In the past I had no problem buying GC and keeping my numbers stable. However now I would expect to spend by my numbers 150GC or more a month in just population transfers just to maintain the population.
I don't mind paying GC in the mean time to weather the storm so to speak until the changes are made, but I'd like to ask what you think they will be. The GM has encouraged larger nations, economies, and populations but we have no idea on where your standard is ATM. The Game rule requirements are outdated and then we get bit and piece information on the forums, for those of us with med-level or large population nations the losses we are placing significant problems for us.
Please check "Melichor" on LU to see the issues
As population decreases workers disappear which causes employment issues, less pop increases the value of all other index's costing more money, as education rises there is an over education which in very hard to correct, high healthcare leads to massive aging(I'm at 192 life expectancy), not to mention profit to loss ratios.
quickly decreasing population really hurts a country and makes it very hard to recover. I'm barely keeping LLW/MLW/HLW at the moment. I have millions of techies, but no low levels because of over education.
Like I said I'm not yelling or anything. I'll weather to storm just fine and I don't expect money or anything for the losses. I'm looking out for other players who might not have the skills, cash, or ability to manage their account like I can and I would hate for someone else to lose something they have worked so hard to build
I just thought I would bring this issue to our attention,
| Monday, September 10, 2018 - 01:25 pm |
I understand the consequences of the decline in population.
we are coming from a situation where this was taking place if your population was over 60M.
we have gradually changed, removed any hard or soft limits (or increased them to very high levels) and we are following suite with higher birth rates and smaller declines that kick in later.
do not expect you population to start growing fast at 185M but you shoul in time see some changes.
or we might add more to it later.
| Tuesday, September 11, 2018 - 10:41 pm |
Thank you very much for your time on this matter.
I agree with the GM. As a larger Veteran player I acknowledge and expect that I should have to work harder to maintain a higher population nation. I just wanted to know your thoughts that way I can plan appropriately and I can provide solid info to other players.
Thank you very much for the info.