| Alexander Bella | Tuesday, June 4, 2013 - 03:22 am 
im wondering if the gm knows what numbers of corps would be required to make an economy in the game that produces everything needed for the production of corps and the population |
| SuperSoldierRCP | Tuesday, June 4, 2013 - 10:02 am
its impossiable lol |
| James the Fair | Tuesday, June 4, 2013 - 12:49 pm
I've tried that myself, it can never be done. |
| SuperSoldierRCP | Tuesday, June 4, 2013 - 08:45 pm
I used to be able to do it. But with the last year its become very hard. With 2CEO and a main you can but it be VERY difficult |
| Alexander Bella | Wednesday, June 5, 2013 - 01:17 am
why its just finding the right number of corps isn't it? |
| Alexander Bella | Wednesday, June 5, 2013 - 01:17 am
there can be leftovers that can be sold on market but no imports |
| Jennifer | Wednesday, June 5, 2013 - 05:13 am
Way to many products needed to make it feasable, |
| NiAi | Wednesday, June 5, 2013 - 07:16 am
As said, you can with huge amounts of corps and contracts make your people self-sufficient. However that would be in "Mercantilism" manner since you would avoid imports but still export.
Many corps are never going to make a profit, so it is also expensive. |
| Laguna | Wednesday, June 5, 2013 - 01:59 pm
If you are talking about autarky, it is not possible. |
| Jennifer | Wednesday, June 5, 2013 - 02:21 pm
I tryed at first but it seemed every corp I built needed 2 new support corps. Talk about a snowball,got carried away now have over 280 corps in ent,150 in Country,BUY,BUY,BUILD,BUILD, CRASH.LOL |
| Alexander Bella | Wednesday, June 5, 2013 - 04:29 pm
Of course it's feasible you just need enough people ....one of every corp at least with multiple electric oil and other such corps I'm just wondering if the gm... Since they designed the corps know the perfect ratios needed |
| Alexander Bella | Wednesday, June 5, 2013 - 04:31 pm
I am talking about autarky |
| SuperSoldierRCP | Wednesday, June 5, 2013 - 05:31 pm
Bella its NOT fesable.
many have tried, i'm the one who prides myself on self sufficiency. Best ive ever been able to do is about 30%. I have 2-750corp and empire of 5 with 500M total population and i barely break 30% its not possible, stick to weapons/space when being self sufficient let the market do the rest |
| SuperSoldierRCP | Wednesday, June 5, 2013 - 05:43 pm
Bella its NOT fesable.
many have tried, i'm the one who prides myself on self sufficiency. Best ive ever been able to do is about 30%. I have 2-750corp and empire of 5 with 500M total population and i barely break 30% its not possible, stick to weapons/space when being self sufficient let the market do the rest |
| XON Xyooj | Wednesday, June 5, 2013 - 11:16 pm
if you have corps or countries specializing in every available product in the sc world, theoretically it's possible. if it's not possible then something is wrong with the game. but of course having the right number of people/population would still be the base of the whole foundation. |
| Alexander Bella | Thursday, June 6, 2013 - 03:05 am
I suppose I believe you supersoldier.... maybe if the game had a better contract system? anyways I only have 30 million people so it was more theoretical just wondering if the gm had a outline of how the perfect economy with no shortages would work |
| Laguna | Thursday, June 6, 2013 - 03:10 am
Theoretically, it is not possible.
The idea is simple: for every corp, you will need two to supply it.
These are not the numbers, but you get the point. That's why I tell you people to conquer C3s and build corps if you see a lot of "green". |
| Alexander Bella | Thursday, June 6, 2013 - 09:29 pm
its not possible for one Corp to supply several other corps?.. so if you have an oil Corp supplying an electric Corp then you build another electric Corp you wont need another oil Corp |
| XON Xyooj | Thursday, June 6, 2013 - 11:55 pm
interesting, for every corp need two to supply it? then it's an infinite loop without end?
there is no full economy for a country in this game then? |
| chris | Friday, June 7, 2013 - 12:26 am
It's probably not possible for 100% isolation, but you can get pretty close. By value of products I already have 82.5% local exports, 75.6% in local corp imports and 88.9% in local country imports. These numbers are skewed because of my country purchasing military equipment. (not a necessity)
This does however exclude all infrastructure purchases and most potential military purchases.
It should be possible to build a country/empire which creates everything it needs (100% local imports for corps+country) but actually exports intentionally too. Doing the math tells me my county needs 88% of what it produces, and that is excluding the fact that my corps are at 123% production, not 100%. with this in mind, the figure is around 72%, with high welfare, high salaries and no military you could probably push this futher down. |
| Space313 | Friday, June 7, 2013 - 12:56 am
Self sufficientcy is possible, at least for a while that is. This is because as your population grows, they will need more, thus needing more corporations and then need to be supported and etc. It would need a huge number of corporations, as well as population, so a VERY complicated equation would need to be created before you even try to be self sufficient. Not to mention the balance between population growth and income that would have to be created to keep people where they are. |
| Laguna | Friday, June 7, 2013 - 01:04 am
Nope. Not even the worlds are "self-sufficient". |
| chris | Friday, June 7, 2013 - 01:40 am
The worlds aren't because of people developing infrastructure, warring, and building the wrong corps. Also because every time a country is unregistered, all the infrastructure in the country resets.
Assuming my country can be taken as nothing special, the fact is any country can make more than it uses (by value of product), therefore it can be self sustaining, the only reason it isn't and it's so difficult is many corps produce more of their product than what can be consumed (one Fruit Juice corp supply's around 1.5 billion people)
I don't think a formula is necessary, just looking at your corps and building what they need to supply them will eventually result in a self sustaining economy. The best way to do this would be to start with a massive population (probably more than 100 million people), build enough corps so the country imports 100% locally, then so that first wave of corps are all locally supplied ,and repeat. Eventually you will have corps overlapping and 100% local imports for your country and corps. |
| Laguna | Friday, June 7, 2013 - 02:37 am
No, that's not the reason. And it is a fairly poor excuse at that, since the amount of adjustment is quite small compared to the rest of the system. I wrote that one can't close the loop, because you'll need a disproportionately higher amount of corps step by step.
You are all welcome to try as much as you want. But don't complain after you fail. And then don't complain about "poor design" - it is what it is, and quite frankly it is among the best around. |
| Laguna | Friday, June 7, 2013 - 03:17 am
Thought of two ways of testing this:
1. Look at the market situation of a single product. Divide the shortage (surplus) by the amount a single corp produces in a month. This will tell you how many corps are necessary to be built (closed) to close the gap.
Now, multiply the Corps in Deficiency (Excess) by the number of workers needed to supply a single factory of the product in question. With this you will know how many workers need to be relocated to the market.
Repeat the step for all products.
Now, what do you do? Sum of all the numbers. If the number is 0, then yes you can have a closed economy. If it is negative, then you would need an infinite amount of pop to be in autarky. If positive, then you need 0 population.
Of course, there are disturbances in the short-run or some aspect unique to the period in question, so it is highly improbably that it will be exactly 0, even if you could have autarky. So, what to do? i) leave weapons out of the analysis, ii) use an average over several periods, iii) use hypothesis testing.
2. Repeat the step for all worlds.
Order the numbers in ascending order. Order the worlds in ascending order by population. These should match.
If the order does not match, it is a possible result of the disturbances or you may indeed have a (slim) chance at autarky.
I suggest someone runs the numbers before adding to this conversation. If many of you are that interested in this, then you can use Google Drive to coordinate and gather the data simultaneously. |
| chris | Friday, June 7, 2013 - 04:29 am
I'm not sure where I implied the design is poor, maybe when I mentioned country deactivation? To clarify, I think Simcountry is a fantastically complex game and the design is great, most if not all issues, especially involving world trade and products are minor and necessary. In the case of country resets, the dispersing of people, hospitals and products are necessary, good for new players and ignoreable for old ones.
I'm not sure your analysis will be accurate. Your first step will tell you how many corps are needed to close the gap in one month, but this is not the information required. If there is a shortage of say, 1000 Hospitals every single month then as many hospitals are being built as their are being requested at the moment, just in previous years their was an issue. The market is stable. The production of 1000 corps will mean next month supply will meet demand perfectly, but the month after their will be a 1000 surplus, then 2000 ect. If however, there is a shortage of 1000 one month, 1001 the next, 1002 the next ect then the market is unstable and one corp is necessary to stabilize it. The analysis needs to focus on the change in demand, not the demand itself.
This analysis is made harder (and possibly impossible) by the fact that SC adds products if their in extreme supply/demand. (another example of something not realistic, but good, necessary design)
Also your assuming 100% employment which is incorrect, whilst the true employment rate can be found and factored in, it is necessary for a accurate answer.
I don't believe that a loop of 100% imports and exports is plausible, but a self sustained economy is possible, due to the fact that the amount of money a corporation or country earns through selling products is higher than the amount needed to spend on buying them. |
| Alexander Bella | Friday, June 7, 2013 - 05:21 am
Laguna your numbers are skewed because C3s consume more then they produce due to some GM meddling which i assume is used to produce more demand allowing players to actually profit.... i think chris stated it finely... if i can produce more then i consume then theoretically with perfect corp sizes i could be self sufficient... or you could just find the perfect ratios which would require a large population |
| Laguna | Friday, June 7, 2013 - 04:24 pm
The analysis is sound and correct.
The Game does nothing that influences this in C3s. Not even when he magically ups upgrades and and the quality of the supplies for C3s, because that doesn't alter the quantities. The distortion comes from adding or absorbing quantities, but since he stops at a multiple of the supply/demand, he just mascaras the situation.
Now, I see when you guys are talking about self-sufficiency you aren't talking of autarky, but of "supply all I need and export the rest". That's different. I don't think it can happen either.
It is a bit more difficult to test this... Well, you can look at just how much of your population needs to be employed to satisfy its own needs.
1) Pick a C3 like country. See how much it needs in a month for a particular product. Divide by how much a factory of that kind produces in a month. Multiply by the staff necessary to field it. Divide that number by the number of workers in the country.
Pick a large country and do the same.
If the number approaches 0, then there is a possibility to be self-sufficient. But if the ratio is close to 1 even in the large country, forget it.
2) Then, to factor in the factories... Do the same as you did for the country needs with the factories' supplies. If the ratio is larger than 1 you are screwed. Actually, you can skip the previous step and just do this one. |
| Crafty | Monday, June 10, 2013 - 06:45 pm
If any of this were to be tested it would require a stable game format. There are several influencing factors that are still being 'tweaked'. Corp size/hiring numbers and production numbers for two. |
| XON Xyooj | Thursday, July 11, 2013 - 12:05 am
if were just the players to participate in the game, then i think it will likely be possible with proper coordination. but with the so many c3 in the game, it's unlikely possible to have a closed economy in any of the worlds. though i theorized that is possible to have a closed empire, with the empire being able to produce what it needs within itself. on earth, america did almost like a closed economy that after the second world war, so why is it not possible in sc when the number of products is much less than in the real world earth. if it is not possible to have a closed economy in sc, then the programming should be look at, perhaps review of economy 101/102 again regarding micro/macro economies. |
| beyer83 | Monday, July 22, 2013 - 02:34 pm
It's perfectly possible with a little knowledge of matrices:
You are given the amount of resources each corp needs, and how much it produces, you can even include a random buffer percentage for production, price, cost, and employment variability. However, if you try this by producing only one product to meet the demand and then start with the next product, then it won't work. The trick is to calculate the ratio of corporations needed, and gradually build them accordingly. As the number of corporations increase while maintaining the ratio, the self-sufficiency percentage increases as well. It is also important to mention that the more corporations maintaining the ratio, the more insignificant single failures of corps become. |
| Old Man Jenkins | Wednesday, May 20, 2015 - 04:17 am
Could it be done through a Common Market is the real question. |
| Madoff | Thursday, May 21, 2015 - 03:38 pm
Yes, it can be done with a common market. But why bother?
Mercantilism is best avoided in the game for the same reason it's avoided in real economies: it's inefficient. That's why real life countries abandoned mercantilism.
In real life, people and countries focus on selling the stuff they're good at producing. Then they use their earnings to buy stuff they wouldn't produce well. That makes efficient use of their skills and earnings.
That's better than mercantilism, where countries try to produce everything, even stuff at which they suck and for which they get paid poorly.
In the game, mercantilism is just too time-consuming and requires owning some corps that are unprofitable or poorly profitable. Instead, it's better to use one's time and capital to develop the most profitable corps. |
| J | Thursday, May 21, 2015 - 06:27 pm
1 question i invaded a country with -1,090,155,620 construction (about 300) why? if i start with 600B |
| Aries | Thursday, May 21, 2015 - 06:53 pm
Negative construction means structural damage to cities and other population centers. Countries damaged by war will always need a heavy influx of construction for repairs. |
| marshal.ney | Thursday, June 11, 2015 - 02:27 pm
question concerning Madoff's post above:
In real life, people and countries focus on selling the stuff they're good at producing. Then they use their earnings to buy stuff they wouldn't produce well. That makes efficient use of their skills and earnings.
That's better than mercantilism, where countries try to produce everything, even stuff at which they suck and for which they get paid poorly.
I've never noticed a difference between countries in this game as to output from particular industries (assuming all other factors are stable). How does that apply? or is that treading into the Aries/Orbiter discussion in another thread? |
| ryanduffy1990917 | Monday, July 13, 2015 - 11:56 am
Double post... |
| ryanduffy1990917 | Monday, July 13, 2015 - 12:00 pm
Marshal:
Certain corporation types produce more per worker than others, just as some yield more profit per worker than others. Thus running corporations of all product types in an attempt to achieve 'self sufficiency' is in itself inefficient, and an example of mercantilism-esque strategy in not producing "what the country is best at."
Also, the population demographic in a country has a large bearing on what type of economic model it should hold for optimal efficiency. To some extent this is a product of education/health levels etc. Thus in trying to run corporations of every product type, rather than focussing on a bottom-up strategy, you are also neglecting to follow an economic plan that takes into account the realities and specialties of the country: Mercantilism. |
