Population numbers
- Thread starter KaTiON_PT
- Start date
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
I believe it's inanely hardcoded in the dll. It's really needing to be adjusted for C2C.
I think it shows very nicely the logarhitmic exponential grown of masses. Well, maybe cut down a little on the top... biggest city I have seen had almost billion people but in future megacities it is not that bad when there are far worse realism holes in the mod.
RulerOfNothing
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 24
It isn't. If you play vanilla BtS you get population 1 being 1000 people whereas C2C has population 1 being 50 people.
Well there is a big difference in time scale. By a large thousands of years.
RulerOfNothing
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 24
1) this is irrelevant - time scale doesn't affect population numbers at all
2) I misread Thunderbird's comment (note: 'engine' != 'dll') but the population numbers are in the getRealPopulation function of the CvCity class.
Raven Destroyer
Prince
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2010
- Messages
- 597
It kinda Does, mean we're talking about from the dawn of mankind till the transcendence of mankind, so it does Affect Population numbers, Vanilla starts a lot later, and means a single pop accounts for the village, (1000 being still kinda large) while C2C 1 Pop with it's 50 is a clan trying to scrape out an existence by tracking the migrating herds and gathering herbs and berries along the way in the prehistoric pre-neolithic age,
The Timescale does affect Population numbers, because you'd want to line it up with what's a probable population during a said time frame,
EDIT: Found that the code that defines population numbers is around line 10198 of CvCity.cpp.
For posterity here are the current populations numbers in accordance to each pop level as of version 38.5 and SVN 10197, but I believe these will remain the same for a long time.
Attached are six graphs, three are log scales and three are normal (linear) scales for easier observation.
Observations:
For posterity here are the current populations numbers in accordance to each pop level as of version 38.5 and SVN 10197, but I believe these will remain the same for a long time.
Attached are six graphs, three are log scales and three are normal (linear) scales for easier observation.
Observations:
- It's possible to have hundreds or maybe even thousands of pops but pop 295 is the maximum number possible before the population number overflows.
- Pop 100 and 101 both share the same population level (200 million).
- There are 19 different population growth sequences, see the list below for more information.
- The population growth sequence from pop 73 to 74 is 2 750 000, which isn't right as the next one (74 to 76) is only 2 500 000.
Spoiler Population growth sequences :
Spoiler Full list :
Attachments
Last edited:
Yudishtira
Spiritual/Creative
Never mind rising sea levels - a city of 2 billion would sink under the weight.
Is it possible in-game to get to size 295? From personal experience I know that 150 is doable, and I'm only in Information Era so... (ok I have to say it every time, my version is very old so should not be taken as a guide etc etc)
I strongly suggest that some figure of around 100 million be set as the highest that you can expect to reach, perhaps even reducing the increments after this to something tiny like 100,000 or less. Given that our cities tend to grow more utopic than dystopic, even 100 million seems like too many. Or are we staying permanently on our holodecks and completely unaffected by physical reality?
Is it possible in-game to get to size 295? From personal experience I know that 150 is doable, and I'm only in Information Era so... (ok I have to say it every time, my version is very old so should not be taken as a guide etc etc)
I strongly suggest that some figure of around 100 million be set as the highest that you can expect to reach, perhaps even reducing the increments after this to something tiny like 100,000 or less. Given that our cities tend to grow more utopic than dystopic, even 100 million seems like too many. Or are we staying permanently on our holodecks and completely unaffected by physical reality?
Yudishtira
Spiritual/Creative
Ecumenopolis: planetwide city. Our cities cannot even form conurbations because of the laws of physics maintaining huge gaps in between
.
Secondly, Coruscant is a mess: net
would be maybe a million.
Thirdly, Lucas and his peeps seldom if ever treated the minutiae of "their" galaxy with sufficient respect, often ignoring the consequences of their 'big-picture' creativity. We cannot afford to do likewise (plus we're all nerds with an insatiable appetite for the tedious and seemingly unimportant...
)
.Secondly, Coruscant is a mess: net
would be maybe a million.Thirdly, Lucas and his peeps seldom if ever treated the minutiae of "their" galaxy with sufficient respect, often ignoring the consequences of their 'big-picture' creativity. We cannot afford to do likewise (plus we're all nerds with an insatiable appetite for the tedious and seemingly unimportant...
)
Raven Destroyer
Prince
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2010
- Messages
- 597
take a look at the most densely populated cities, how they manage to get that density to work, and see if there's a way to extrapolate how much denser it could get, I guess at a certain point digging Down for living space would also become the norm and standard, at first for the lower class that keeps the city running, and later also those that would have a decent income, but besides that there's also the logistical picture, How can one feed and Clothe that many people, without it destroying the planet within years
pepper2000
King
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 899
Those of us who study cities for a living define a city (roughly) as a continuously built up urban region that is a unified labor market, which means that from any point in the "city", a person should reasonably be able to commute to the central business district. This definition is starting to get stretched now that more cities are moving toward a more polycentric structure (that is, several employment subcenters), but usually there is a well-defined central business district. This definition has nothing to do with the formal political definition of a city, which is usually arbitrary. Think of cities as metropolitan areas instead.
All throughout history up to the present day, the most important limiting factor on city size is transportation infrastructure. Ancient cities were limited primarily by feasible walking commutes and secondarily by the need for defensive walls. Ancient Rome and other ancient megacities had very high population densities by modern standards, so much that severe traffic congestion (from pedestrians!) was a major problem. Transportation of goods is as important as transportation of people, and the logistics of bringing food and water into a city were also limiting factors to urban growth.
Contrary to common perception, density per se is not a significant limiting factor. The New York metropolitan area could easily house 100 million people in midrise apartments. But transportation would not work in that scenario.
Historically, major waves of urbanization have been driven by advanced in transportation. First, carriages, second, streetcars, and third, automobiles each brought about waves of expansion and lowered population density. Declining population density is a necessity, because faster transportation technologies also require more space, both in terms of the vehicle itself and in terms of greater road area swept out as the vehicle travels larger distances. Speed makes commutes longer, not faster. There is a principle known as Marchetti's constant which observes that in cities from the Neolithic to the present, city sizes are oriented around a half hour average commute.
Cities provide enormous external value. The wealth they create grows superlinearly in population in a phenomenon that economists call agglomeration economies, which is why people are willing to concentrate in the most prosperous cities despite the negative externalities of traffic congestion and other problems. The central cities of a nation or empire typically grow to the largest population they can while still being functional for this reason.
Today, the largest cities are in the tens of millions of people, and that is the highest possible with automobiles and conventional transit infrastructure. The largest metros such as New York City, Los Angeles, London, Moscow, etc. cannot expand out much farther because their exurbs are already at the upper limit of feasible commute time, and they cannot densify much or else they will choke on traffic congestion. Hence traffic congestion and housing prices are growing world problems.
This isn't meant to be fatalistic. Cities can still make smarter investments such as bus rapid transit, better dispersion of employment subcenters, and strategic upzoning on high capacity transit corridors to increase population and general functionality. In the long run, though, better technology is the answer to urban challenges.
I added the Megacities tech to model a new wave of urban expansion brought about by more extensive high speed rail networks, self-driving cars, and greater levels of telecommuting. Today China is planning an urban agglomeration in the Pearl River Delta (the newly opened bridge is part of that project) that will bring up to 100 million people into a single unified urban labor market.
By the end of the Nanotech Era, flying cars and supersonic rails are common and cities can stretch hundreds of miles and house a billion people. By the end of the Transhuman Era, gravtrains and virtual transportation via mind uploading make a planet city, housing 100 billion people or more, feasible. In later eras, cities can span regions much larger than Earth. There is also the question of whether our "population" counts ems and other noncorporeal beings.
Getting back to game mechanics, there is the sticky issue that "cities" off Earth are not cities in the sense described above. By the end of the game a city can span billions of light years. If we restrict our attention to Earth, I don't see a good way to model the conurbation effects that come with better technology, and there isn't ever really an ecumenopolis in the sense of a single city. But I nevertheless think that allowing cities with billions of people in the future eras makes perfect sense. At least, it is no more far-fetched than anything else in the future eras.
All throughout history up to the present day, the most important limiting factor on city size is transportation infrastructure. Ancient cities were limited primarily by feasible walking commutes and secondarily by the need for defensive walls. Ancient Rome and other ancient megacities had very high population densities by modern standards, so much that severe traffic congestion (from pedestrians!) was a major problem. Transportation of goods is as important as transportation of people, and the logistics of bringing food and water into a city were also limiting factors to urban growth.
Contrary to common perception, density per se is not a significant limiting factor. The New York metropolitan area could easily house 100 million people in midrise apartments. But transportation would not work in that scenario.
Historically, major waves of urbanization have been driven by advanced in transportation. First, carriages, second, streetcars, and third, automobiles each brought about waves of expansion and lowered population density. Declining population density is a necessity, because faster transportation technologies also require more space, both in terms of the vehicle itself and in terms of greater road area swept out as the vehicle travels larger distances. Speed makes commutes longer, not faster. There is a principle known as Marchetti's constant which observes that in cities from the Neolithic to the present, city sizes are oriented around a half hour average commute.
Cities provide enormous external value. The wealth they create grows superlinearly in population in a phenomenon that economists call agglomeration economies, which is why people are willing to concentrate in the most prosperous cities despite the negative externalities of traffic congestion and other problems. The central cities of a nation or empire typically grow to the largest population they can while still being functional for this reason.
Today, the largest cities are in the tens of millions of people, and that is the highest possible with automobiles and conventional transit infrastructure. The largest metros such as New York City, Los Angeles, London, Moscow, etc. cannot expand out much farther because their exurbs are already at the upper limit of feasible commute time, and they cannot densify much or else they will choke on traffic congestion. Hence traffic congestion and housing prices are growing world problems.
This isn't meant to be fatalistic. Cities can still make smarter investments such as bus rapid transit, better dispersion of employment subcenters, and strategic upzoning on high capacity transit corridors to increase population and general functionality. In the long run, though, better technology is the answer to urban challenges.
I added the Megacities tech to model a new wave of urban expansion brought about by more extensive high speed rail networks, self-driving cars, and greater levels of telecommuting. Today China is planning an urban agglomeration in the Pearl River Delta (the newly opened bridge is part of that project) that will bring up to 100 million people into a single unified urban labor market.
By the end of the Nanotech Era, flying cars and supersonic rails are common and cities can stretch hundreds of miles and house a billion people. By the end of the Transhuman Era, gravtrains and virtual transportation via mind uploading make a planet city, housing 100 billion people or more, feasible. In later eras, cities can span regions much larger than Earth. There is also the question of whether our "population" counts ems and other noncorporeal beings.
Getting back to game mechanics, there is the sticky issue that "cities" off Earth are not cities in the sense described above. By the end of the game a city can span billions of light years. If we restrict our attention to Earth, I don't see a good way to model the conurbation effects that come with better technology, and there isn't ever really an ecumenopolis in the sense of a single city. But I nevertheless think that allowing cities with billions of people in the future eras makes perfect sense. At least, it is no more far-fetched than anything else in the future eras.
Similar threads
