| SuperSoldierRCP (Little Upsilon) | Tuesday, August 3, 2010 - 12:44 am 
I think we should have the limits on Populations raised to a higher level, if you look below you see my stats are far from low but yet the pop die cap hits me at 55M when you have the bar at 100M total population size and at only 50% or so it seems counter productive
Population Size 54,037,650
Education Index 209.40
Health Index 124.36
Social Security 148.69
Employment Index 94.63
Transportation Index 269.25
Business/Trade Index 129.40
Finance Index 128.28
Budget 2,161.14B SC$
Welfare Index 126.02
After the math of my last 16months alone i have gained 60,000 in Population which is about 3750 per month.
I observed several C3 all from 9.5M to 11M in size and have seen that they gain anywhere from 120-160k new citizens a year.
I understand the WC3 wish to keep populations low but i believe the cap in which country's lose pop or start to see slowing in there growth should be within the 70-80M not the 50-60M5
------Opinions?------- |
| Aaron Doolavay (White Giant) | Tuesday, August 3, 2010 - 07:43 am
Maybe we should be happy we're allowed over 60M at all. That's my humble opinion. |
| Barrenregions (Fearless Blue) | Tuesday, August 3, 2010 - 05:27 pm
Not really. I think we should have as much as we want. |
| White Darkness (Little Upsilon) | Saturday, August 7, 2010 - 04:33 am
The whole point of the limiter was to minimize the gap between long term players and new players.
Admittedly, having the die off with a requirement of 120M is kind of silly though. |
| BrokenAmbitions (Little Upsilon) | Saturday, August 7, 2010 - 04:44 am
I think, limits, would be a pointless addition, plus, as I've been doing, Im trying to get my health to 250 @ 83M pop. seems im only losing 8K now, compared to what i was losing, besides, if everyone just had a "limit" it'd be boring.. |
| Scarlet | Saturday, August 7, 2010 - 09:07 am
Quote:Maybe we should be happy we're allowed over 60M at all. That's my humble opinion.
Quoted for truth. |
