its interesting, i've been told i'm wrong, because i have to many agg and mining corps, and now, because i don't have enough.
further, in my countries, i've been running at 100 EI, with HI ranging from 60-95, in the past, i've ran 120-150 for EI, and even had countries with 200 EI,
I've tried many, many things, many different ways, over the 9 years i've played. Their are some thing that have been pretty consistent.
assuming that your government salaries are with in a decent range of your corp salaries, 4-5 for teachers, UT, nurses, doctors, and senior doctors, will give you a healthy increase. unless you are having a problem, or are trying to increase your index fast, its not necessary to raise them higher
for the other things, it does largely depend on what your work force needs, but my numbers are a good starting point. considering that when i orginally looked at the country in quest
as far as not upgrading, i did have my corps set to not upgrade, efficiency, and recently started them upgrading again.
the country i'm talking about, has a natural increase of HLW, at 260M, which no one else is able to do. upgrading would lower the demand of HLW, but it kicked my ass, mostly in the HLM catagory. so i had to stop upgrading, to catch up, which i did, by raising my priorities to adjust. the funny thing is, while the need for HLM became terrible, it put allot of my other professionals out of work. before making adjustments to my priorities, these catagories, that where naturally increasing, started declining, do to large numbers of unemployed, even tho i need them to go back to work. so i had to focus largely on the biggest problem, HLM, until that was more level to my other problems, and fix each professional, in the order they where hurting. tell eventually i was able to fix them all.
and this was with a
Orbiter, I saute you, that could almost be a dissertation
I'm not so sure about the HLW though. I am already seeing 0 of them after a couple of weeks and only building level 2 corps with 5 ceo hi tech corps. I have a declining average age of 32 ish and the age range of most my HLW is 40-50 which also happens to be about the peak age for working population... Hmm, seems I remember this from several years ago.
Of course, I can (and will) work around it with population transfers from C3s. It just does seem, not a bug, but maybe a matter that has always needed a touch of re-examination by GM. HLW balance should maybe be more achievable in house.
i believe the HLW problems has many aspects, but give this a try, instead of always having your education priorities always add up to 120, keep them in the 80-120 range, training just the stuff you need for the next corp.
if you have allot of extra teachers, or MLM, or what ever, go ahead and lower the priorities for those, even if you only need to use 90 total points,
for instance, and just for example, a chemical corp uses 8000 LLM, what need do you have for 70K umemployed? maybe make a target unemployed level of LLM of 20K, if it starts going over, reduce your EP, if under, then raise it. thats 50K professionals that wont be trained, and remain in your worker pool, making their way through the ranks to HLW... same is true for MLM and so on
just don't go below 80, or maybe give it a try, i never have, but i think that the game will close schools
short term, this means that early on, you'll be building low tech corps, to stabalize your work force, and establish the worker promotions, but later on, you'll be able to build HT corps
about GM involvement, at this time, the only thing i'd ask for, is a higher limit before the "obsolete unemployed" feature kicks in, given that corporations are much larger now, we need a larger pool to draw from
for instance, the auto-demotion feature kicks in for HLW in the 75k-ish range, but the auto-promotion feature kicks in at 40K, which automatically raises the total number of HLW to the demotion range. so right after you hit 40K, it will shoot up to 80K, then right after drop to 65K. also, if you want to avoid both features, that means that you only have about a max window of 32K, i realize this wont make since to most, but i'll figure out a better way to explain it, eventually
an extra tid bit
comparing my country to one of similar size, with a higher HI, and lower average age, one that should have a better birth rate, but mine is higher, at 260M you don't really have a birth rate, but a 0.004 difference, for those of such large countries, its worth looking at.
my theory, is older LLW throw off the birth rate. when i brush over his age categories, health index, and basics, he should have a better birth rate, but he doesn't, what i've got is less elderly workers, about 20% less
but this one is only a guess, making changes that dramatically effect the work force, can take some time, so its possible that things could switch. but if i'm right, it would only strengthen my over all premise of "over training"
again, don't run to the bank on this one, its just worth looking at
Average age owns natural growth over birth rate. I am experiencing +150k in monthly natural growth vs. your +5k. I have more older seniors but I have many more of the younger students as well where you have more in the 50-65ish range. Training is difficult to explain with my demographics as I am doing a series of worker trades and pop transfers. My focus has been on average age to increase pop growth and I have had some success with it.
o aries,
i was talking birth rates, not natural growth, you've got about 35 points to your health index, so yea, your gonna have more pop growth, but with your average age, you should be having a higher birth rate, but thats not the case. its marginal, i'm just pointing out that in spite of having everything we normally look at for birth rates, in your favor, the actual birth rate is not.
i'm offering that because i have a higher percent "baby making workers," it translates into a higher birth rate, but as i said, i wasn't certain, i also have an over all higher percent of population in that range, and both countries have the same number beside each age catagory, you know, i think the whole pop growth thing thing has become clearer, or atleast some things to try out, i've been considering how to make those higher indexes for those high Peace game levels work, and this has given me more to consider
a
Yes, you have more "baby making workers". Why the beginning of your post played like there is a mystery is humorous. You have more in the 24-40 range while I have more in very bottom of the range, the 18-21s.
You have not addressed why I have more babies though. Not a few more. Many many more. In fact, my population from ages 0-12 is staying stable with my population size/growth, while your population is declining in this area while your overall population grows. Why is this?
Aries, of course you have more babies from your larger population of 18-21s than Orbiters 24-40s, don't you remember being than young ;p
Seriously, I admire your devotion in understanding how these things work, and I will relay the actual facts of the matter for you once my superior intellect has absorbed enough data to arrive at an empirical conclusion.
aries, your really good at reading enough to agrue, i did say why, you have 35 points higher health index, which is the main reason for the more babies, which is something i can clearly change.
but as health indexes, and ever declining populations at higher levels, has always been a problem, i'm doing a variation of my own "sim plague" experiment. that has been recreated, and verified by at least one other player.
i don't do many worker exchanges, being at WL2, limits this, i can of course make exchanges with my slaves, but i prefer not to, to keep my population as unmolested as i can,
my current experiment with pop, is, well, i'm curious is the main problem with high health indexes is the sudden increase, and not the actual number? if you increase the HI, is lowers the death rate, meaning pop of all ages have less death. this has the greatest effect on babies, and elderly. so if you raise your health i
aries, you are predictable, what i said about the birthrates, was to bate you into a discussion, it was off the subject, but you couldn't avoid a pissing contest.
i offered bate higher up in the thread, that could have created a pleasant, conversation, a meeting of the minds to solve a sim-problem that has always been around, but you only read enough to argue.
You offered up such a small bit of data to the overall picture. The birth rate is such a trivial piece of data.
I believe I am on to something bigger and think I currently have the monopoly on it. Countries with substantial positive growth with populations greater than 200 million are difficult to find. I have developed Candinnalm into a baby-making country of sorts. It has sustainable natural growth. Demographically, it has a very young population. This maintains the growth at a cost of a smaller workforce. Notice my working people+jobless numbers about 121.5 million compared to over 124 million for Dreamland.
My country Garrotte has taken this to a greater extent while I have several more countries I am developing to be similar. I have found that developing countries in this way requires utilizing tools beyond the health index, which I find to have a more marginal influence on things that what you would think.
while i have 10K more birth per year, i have a 33% higher death rate of babies my 0.342 to your 0.247. when you compair my 6.6% of 0-4 year olds, to your 8.1%, even with fewer births, its because yours have a better survival chance.
your trading pop in a way to manipulate your death rate. and keep your babies alive. good job, i might consider a version of that, i'm not sure i want to try tho, its tempting. but i'm at wl2 because i don't want to be committed to that much effort.
and i must add, by looking around, some of the things i thought about death rates, and birth rates, i was under the assumption that death rates where effected by HI and life expectancy, clearly HI has that effect, but in comparing Dream land to CC5, that have similar health indexes, CC5 with a higher life expectancy, has a significant higher death rate, at 120M pop less, it will of course have a higher birth rate, it does have a higher average
all that said, i still, don't have the HLW problem, unless i have another problem i have to deal with
the only HLW problem i have, is because the GM have "fixed" the problem so many times, that the auto-correct has kicked in. which i try hard to avoid. when the trigger was 30K that was reasonable, but safe window to avoid game triggers, is barely enough for some corps
the main thing that needs to change, is an increase to the "obsolete unemployed feature," why don't we talk about that? which has been a large amount of thread until you got defensive.
aries, also, at a personal note, where do you see yourself in 5 years? do you really want to spend 5 years trading imaginary workers in a browser game? just to be an 800 pound gorilla, until you step out the front door?
wouldn't it be more rewarding to figure out how the game works, and let it work for you, freeing your time up to have a life, and still be good in sim country? some how, i think that was the original intention, not this min/max crap that always ends up with long term problems.
i've said it before, and yet again, Jozi created a very deep game, with robust features, that we have yet to really figure out, a decade after its creation.