Population curves

For what's not in 'Top Priority Game Design'. Post your ideas, visions, suggestions for the game, rules, modifications, etc.

Moderator: Oberlus

Message
Author
User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Population curves

#31 Post by Oberlus »

Grummel7 wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 7:03 pm Great, Oberlus opts for simple and Geoff wants the formula to be more complicated :roll:
Maybe, but I'm not sure.
Geoff the Medio wrote: Fri Feb 11, 2022 12:51 pm I would have population change on a planet be a combination of:

1) local population growth that creates new population, pretty much as now, which is determined from the local situation (species, current population, target population, stability, environment, accessible specials, overlapping fields, focus, buildings, bombardment) and some additional imperial factors like techs and adopted policies

2) migration that moves population between planets but doesn't create any more, which would be determined from populations and stability levels and distances to other planets of the same species, within an empire and potentially to other empires, and affected by whether there is a supply connection and be large-scale controllable by players primarily by using imperial policies, and to a lesser degree locally with via focus settings

Ideally there would be viable strategies involving offensive migration policies to either drain the population of another empire or to destabilize another empire by encouraging migration to them that (perhaps?) puts some of their planet populations above target, which results in a stability penalty.
I would make one equation to control population creation on planets, based only on local population and empire-wide modifiers. Basicly what Geoff said in point 1.
Then I would make policies and builings to control population migrations, what's in Geoff's point 2.

I think that is simple enough.

I am against considering populations of other planets when calculating local growth, and I am against trying to control migration of populations within the population growth formula.


I agree with all the rest you said now. I'm already convinced (several pages ago) that the equation you proposed should be commited.

Code: Select all

Value = min(Target, Value + Factor * Value * (Target + 1 - Value) / Target)
Or this, which is the same but shorter:

Code: Select all

min(Target, Value + Factor * Value * (1 - (Value-1)/Target))
Then we can polish the migration mechanisms.

Evacuation as a focus, I like it.

As per above, I don't like the idea of changing the formula with a policy to simulate migrations by doing (complex?) adjustments to the growth of each planet depending on the population of the other planets.

Your idea to steal populations sounds so cool.

A policy to move populations from overpopulated planets to planets with plenty of space, more or less the opposite of the Evacuation focus. The effect won't be super simple but should not be hard to predict the results without a spreadsheet. Something like calculating the number D of planets that qualify as destinations (e.g. less than 50% target pop, target pop > 2), calculating the number O of planets that qualify as origins (e.g. more than 80% target pop, target pop > 10), then selecting at most the D most full planets, grabing 1 pop from each, and distributing it uniformly among the D destinations. If D>O, each destinations gets less than 1 per turn, if D<O, not all origins will donate popolation in that turn.

User avatar
Grummel7
Space Dragon
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:44 pm

Re: Population curves

#32 Post by Grummel7 »

Oberlus wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 8:03 pm I agree with all the rest you said now. I'm already convinced (several pages ago) that the equation you proposed should be commited.

Code: Select all

Value = min(Target, Value + Factor * Value * (Target + 1 - Value) / Target)
Or this, which is the same but shorter:

Code: Select all

min(Target, Value + Factor * Value * (1 + (Value-1)/Target))
Well, let's do it then. I'll prepare a PR.
Do you agree with the factor of 0.08 as well?

Of course the shortened fraction should be: (1 + (1 - Value)/Target), or (1 - (Value-1)/Target) if you prefer it.
I think the original is easier to read, I guess I'll keep it as a comment.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Population curves

#33 Post by Oberlus »

Grummel7 wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 9:06 pm Do you agree with the factor of 0.08 as well?
Yes.

Grummel7 wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 9:06 pm Of course the shortened fraction should be: (1 + (1 - Value)/Target), or (1 - (Value-1)/Target) if you prefer it.
I think the original is easier to read, I guess I'll keep it as a comment.
Yes, my bad. And if you think the original is easier to read, keep it and forget about the shorter one.

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1880
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Population curves

#34 Post by wobbly »

Oberlus wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 8:03 pm Evacuation as a focus, I like it.
+1
A policy to move populations from overpopulated planets to planets with plenty of space, more or less the opposite of the Evacuation focus.
Repurpose bootstrapping policy? I'd also like an opposite direction policy for metropoles.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Population curves

#35 Post by Oberlus »

wobbly wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 6:59 am
A policy to move populations from overpopulated planets to planets with plenty of space, more or less the opposite of the Evacuation focus.
Repurpose bootstrapping policy? I'd also like an opposite direction policy for metropoles.
In my mind, Colonization and Bootstrapping are conceptually overlapped, and each of them makes for a (in most cases) situational advantage that most often will be of interest for short periods of turns. So I prefer other policies that give more general-purpose or longer bonuses.

The whole Bootstrapping policy is so weird to me. I don't even have a Spanish word for that. I just don't grab the concept. It's an alien and aesthetically quite ugly/lame concept for me, probably even less because it just makes no fucking sense to me that a Texan boot (footwear) is something related to starting or kickstarting something (not even in Space). Each time I open the Policies window I have to put up with that icon of a Texan boot in a 4x space game and it just blows my mind.

So, I vote to use Colonization instead. Colonization then implies the government promoting migration of the population to new, uncharted lands full of opportunities of growth and yarayara, and making the migration economically and logistically easier. This in turns makes colony ships/buildings cheaper (population is interesting on the Empire founding new places for them to migrate to) and enable automatic migration of people from most to least populated planets.


For the opposite direction, I don't know. My concern here is that if you have some small colonies and a big one, the big one is big because it already has lots of population, so it's growth rate is quite high, tens of times faster. If you move population from the slow-growth planets to the fast-growth planets, you get your big planets filled faster because of the new births in the big planet than because of the inmigrants. So the policy would be of little use or just counterproductive in most or all situations.

However, I'd like to have a way to accellerate the grow of certain planets, not all of the small pop. ones. For example, if I acquire Egassem for my Laenfa empire and want to have an Egassem metropole ASAP, I makes no sense to use migration (there are no other egassem in empire yet), for that case I could only use Population policy. But I'd like to have something more local/individual (building or focus).

What if we make Growth focus to also boost local population growth?

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Population curves

#36 Post by LienRag »

Oberlus wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 10:22 am and yarayara,
Can you create a Policy (whatever it does as long as it benefits the game and fits the name) called Yarayara ?

I'd really love to have a Yarayara policy in the game... The name is so cool !

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Population curves

#37 Post by Oberlus »

LienRag wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 10:27 am Can you create a Policy (whatever it does as long as it benefits the game and fits the name) called Yarayara ?

I'd really love to have a Yarayara policy in the game... The name is so cool !
Wat? xD
Just in case. "Yara yara" is a way to say "blah blah" that I learnt from an Argentinian.

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13587
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Population curves

#38 Post by Geoff the Medio »

Oberlus wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 10:22 amThe whole Bootstrapping policy is so weird to me. I don't even have a Spanish word for that. I just don't grab the concept. It's an alien and aesthetically quite ugly/lame concept for me, probably even less because it just makes no fucking sense to me that a Texan boot (footwear) is something related to starting or kickstarting something (not even in Space). Each time I open the Policies window I have to put up with that icon of a Texan boot in a 4x space game and it just blows my mind.
Regarding the term bootstrapping, if you've ever referred to booting up or rebooting a computer, you're making the same reference. It's also just one of several policies that use similar references, like the chess knight for feudalism, stockpile "liquidation", a stoplight for traffic control, a sash-wearing figure holding up a little paper booklet for border control, etc.
What if we make Growth focus to also boost local population growth?
The reason it doesn't now is mainly because of the probably micromanagement that would result if it was possible to accelerate planet growth by swapping focus.

The reason to add policies to control migration effects is that they don't involve micromanagement to use.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Population curves

#39 Post by Oberlus »

Geoff the Medio wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 11:34 am Regarding the term bootstrapping, if you've ever referred to booting up or rebooting a computer, you're making the same reference.
Yes. My problem maybe lies in the dictionary I use (wordreference). Bootstrap is a strap to help you put on a boot (we don't have a name for that in Spanish) or means of advance (and the translations doesn't really fit, the best IMO is "impulso", which is translated back to English as thrust, drive or boost. I'm not asking to change that name and the boot icon, but I feel sorry for the Spanish translator that gets to it if s/he wants to make it make sense with the icon.
Geoff the Medio wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 11:34 am
What if we make Growth focus to also boost local population growth?
The reason it doesn't now is mainly because of the probably micromanagement that would result if it was possible to accelerate planet growth by swapping focus.
That reason is bogus now.
On one hand, we have the frequency of focus-changing has increased noticeably with influence and stability. Apart from the old "research or focus?" decision, we have now "Influence-focused at start (revisit when population is bigger)", "protection-focused if stability too low (revisit when you change policies and stability changes)", "influence-focused if influence deficit (revisit if...)". So every few turns I have to check out the idoneity of focus settings of nearly all my planets.
On the other hand, we have that growth focus won't give you other points, and that a policy for migration between planets can do this better, so the player could use this focus for an advantage seldom if ever, and so micromanagement as an exploit, advantage or necessity is impossible. But it would be good to have it the same we have supply focus (some times useful in a given planet for a few turns, e.g. to reach an outpust to build a colony; usually ignored).
Anyways, what I really like to have is the policy.
Geoff the Medio wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 11:34 am The reason to add policies to control migration effects is that they don't involve micromanagement to use.
And also because it brings in more varied strategies of growth.

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1880
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Population curves

#40 Post by wobbly »

Oberlus wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 10:30 am
LienRag wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 10:27 am Can you create a Policy (whatever it does as long as it benefits the game and fits the name) called Yarayara ?

I'd really love to have a Yarayara policy in the game... The name is so cool !
Wat? xD
Just in case. "Yara yara" is a way to say "blah blah" that I learnt from an Argentinian.
yarrayarra.png
yarrayarra.png (331.04 KiB) Viewed 943 times
Sorry, couldn't help myself, also you are either thinking of yadda yadda, or the Argentinians say it differently.

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 3433
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Population curves

#41 Post by Ophiuchus »

Oberlus wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 8:03 pm I would make one equation to control population creation on planets, based only on local population and empire-wide modifiers. Basicly what Geoff said in point 1.
Then I would make policies and builings to control population migrations, what's in Geoff's point 2.
..., and I am against trying to control migration of populations within the population growth formula.
+1
Oberlus wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 8:03 pm A policy to move populations from overpopulated planets to planets with plenty of space, more or less the opposite of the Evacuation focus. The effect won't be super simple but should not be hard to predict the results without a spreadsheet. Something like calculating the number D of planets that qualify as destinations (e.g. less than 50% target pop, target pop > 2), calculating the number O of planets that qualify as origins (e.g. more than 80% target pop, target pop > 10), then selecting at most the D most full planets, grabing 1 pop from each, and distributing it uniformly among the D destinations. If D>O, each destinations gets less than 1 per turn, if D<O, not all origins will donate popolation in that turn.
that should be possible. if i got you it means 0-1 pop leaving each source planet and 0-1 pop arriving at each target planet (with the sums being equal/no net change of empire population).

Oberlus wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 10:22 am The whole Bootstrapping policy is so weird to me.
I think that is coming from the Baron of Münchhausen story. An old style super-hero. Once he rode/fell into a swamp and there was nothing to grab to pull him out. So how he managed? He grabbed his bootstraps and pulled himself (and his horse) into safety. It is the moment when you dont have anything and build something out of it. E.g. when you start your computer you first need to have a little working stuff in order to build up some stuff you can run the real operating system on.
Pioneer or something similar could also a be word for the policy in english.

So for spanish maybe you also have a saying for being in such a situation. Or how do you call the boot process on a computer?
The boot icon is a problem though to internationalization, it also feels counter-intuitive to me, even though I totally get bootstrapping. I think that is because bootstrapping has nothing to do with boots. So if the icon was a guy pulling on his bootstrings it would make more sense to me, but that is probably taking up too much space,´.

edit2: so i did an image search for bootstrapping. best stuff i found currently.
* a boot where you do not see the upper part (so you can imagine there is a leg in there) standing on a heap of money. So this would mean: a lot of money for someone with (only) a boot; the boot would stand for somebody doing the "dirty"/necessary work in the field https://miro.medium.com/max/2000/0*7ThyJB7vZHc1guk0.jpg
* a boot with a self-referential arrow and a "pull" remark http://quicksilver.be.washington.edu/co ... fault.html
* a guy sitting on rocket - which could mean going to a space/a colony without much stuff

so i could also imagine
* some kind of hierarchy where one boosts the base (e.g. the roots of a tree)
* a boot (with leg or without the upper part) where a fist is pulling on the straps
* a boot where a arm/tentacle is coming out the and is pulling on the strings
Last edited by Ophiuchus on Mon Feb 14, 2022 8:33 am, edited 2 times in total.
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 3433
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Population curves

#42 Post by Ophiuchus »

Oberlus wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 12:17 pm
Geoff the Medio wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 11:34 am
What if we make Growth focus to also boost local population growth?
The reason it doesn't now is mainly because of the probably micromanagement that would result if it was possible to accelerate planet growth by swapping focus.
That reason is bogus now.
...Anyways, what I really like to have is the policy.
i would also like to make growth focus more usable. and like oberlus i think having appropriate switching cost is the solution to micromanagement in this case.
if we go that route, i would suggest upping target population on the planet set on growth focus by one habitable-planet-size (which also increases population growth), and remove the growth bonus from growth specials without using the focus. Note this depends on how evacuation works as there will be the issue of overppopulation if you switch away (so with the current punishment it would be fine).
having higher target pop as compared to faster growth makes the focus not invalidate itself. you could use it to "hack" growth

I still think we should ask 1 IP as cost when you are switching to a productive focus; i.e. industry or research (maybe some other focus like supply; not for influence, defense, stockpiling). That means a negative IP empire cant choose to switch industry/research focus but that is ok. Those planets which already had the focus can stay on it - and if you invade a colony you get the default focus. (Note gifting planets should also cost IP).

on a different issue, also note that i like the current and suggested local growth because it has the following features:
  • it slows down to zero close to target pop, so people dont feel they are wasting population growth as it was with the linear formula (pop+=factor*pop exponential growth).
  • it does not do the crazy growth in mid-pop our current implementation ( pop+=factor*(pop*(target_pop - pop)) )
  • it is slow in the beginning - so it does not feel that population just comes out of nowhere
  • it is similar to linear growth in the beginning - which one would expect I guess.
so if we have something which changes growth it probably should be similar. so same amount of growth in the middle.
But reasoning about the total result of different growth formulas/parameters on many different planets is really hard/complex.
Much easier to just skip it and do two steps: predictable local growth; then do migration based on policies.

(Note i think it acceptible to have different growth formula/parameter based on species, that is adding only ~half as much as base complexity, so i think the alternative of is less than ~four times as complex as having more agency on the growth formula.)
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Population curves

#43 Post by LienRag »

Ophiuchus wrote: Mon Feb 14, 2022 7:52 am remove the growth bonus from growth specials without using the focus.
WTF ?

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 3433
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Population curves

#44 Post by Ophiuchus »

LienRag wrote: Mon Feb 14, 2022 9:27 am
Ophiuchus wrote: Mon Feb 14, 2022 7:52 am remove the growth bonus from growth specials without using the focus.
WTF ?
? care to write something legible ?
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 3433
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Population curves

#45 Post by Ophiuchus »

Oberlus wrote: Tue Feb 08, 2022 9:51 am And so I've been pondering to completely drop the idea tall vs wide and look from another angle: lucky vs unlucky start. Strategies for unlucky starts would be similar in appearance to tall strategies, but designed with FO design principles in mind. Maybe this is another dead end that others have discarded.
The "un/lucky starts" view at least addresses a real problem. Tthe low/tall is "only" widening the strategic space.
So the first view is a more important goal.
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

Post Reply