| Dubhthaigh | Thursday, September 3, 2015 - 12:56 pm 
Accurate to June 3572
COUNTRY STATS
Statistics compiled for individual countries on LU. Only countries with a population >45,000,000 were considered.
Total Production
| President | Country | Production | | Aries | Candinnalm | 1,215,268,003,751 | | Orbiter | Dream Land | 1,145,788,149,630 | | Aries | CC3 | 1,048,742,311,905 | | Aries | Rubie | 1,047,379,403,896 | | Aries | AA8 | 1,042,660,412,173 | | Aries | CC5 | 1,028,449,797,482 | | Aries | CC9 | 1,008,609,490,204 | | Aries | CC2 | 1,005,819,301,787 | | Aries | Camp Victory | 965,209,108,677 | | Aries | Garrotte | 880,923,255,280 | | Aries | CC6 | 865,930,078,489 | | Volvo | Volvolia | 733,220,380,401 | | NiAi | NiAi StarRepublic Core | 722,973,523,033 | | FLOYDooo | Roost | 720,134,742,277 | | Jackseptic | California Republic | 685,056,086,726 | | Casual Industries | Casual Industries | 667,366,936,138 | | james | starry night | 543,586,635,598 | | Ruthless | Clown | 517,477,551,601 | | SuperSoldierRCP | Melichor | 515,158,947,727 | | arthur | The Kingdom of Inda kava | 484,634,063,038 | |
Production Per Worker
- Total Production / (Total Employed - Employed Army)
Suffers from inherent bias towards countries with high welfare that might not in fact be as profitable.
| President | Country | PPW | | SuperSoldierRCP | Altair | 11,036 | | SuperSoldierRCP | Oceanica | 10,781 | | SuperSoldierRCP | Poletaris | 10,762 | | SuperSoldierRCP | Venision | 10,693 | | Volvo | Concordia | 10,674 | | Aries | Candinnalm | 10,574 | | SuperSoldierRCP | Metalison | 10,537 | | Volvo | Tropicalia | 10,536 | | corleone452 | Lenor Ash | 1,0524 | | Aries | AA8 | 10,482 | | Volvo | Falconia | 10,457 | | marshal.ney | Grand Duchy of Marshall | 10,439 | | Aries | CC3 | 10,381 | | Aries | Rubie | 10,331 | | Aries | CC5 | 10,320 | | Volvo | Libertad | 10,319 | | Aries | CC9 | 10,307 | | drys0013 | UCM LU | 10,277 | | Volvo | Costa Feliz | 10,276 | | Tycoon | tycoonia | 10,264 | |
Best Paid Workers
| President | Country | | SuperSoldierRCP | Melichor | | Tobe Lerone | Evoio | | Aries | Candinnalm | | President Jenda | The Republic of Mindan | | ghariban3 | Pardus Empire Core | | FLOYDooo | Roost | | kevin | The Badlands | | Jackseptic | Cherokee Nation | | Aries | Garrotte | | Diana Peachbrier | United Kingdom | | Aries | Camp Victory | | jay lu | KDA | | Aries | AA8 | | Christos | New Apo Republic | | Aries | CC9 | | Aries | CC6 | | russianruk | The Republic of Cloudy | | Aries | Rubie | | Jackseptic | Apache Tribe | | dingleyjames18 | States Of England | |
Highest Government Expenses
- Includes Education, Health, Transport and Social Security, but not general cost of government or military expenses.
| President | Country | | SuperSoldierRCP | Melichor | | Aries | Candinnalm | | Aries | Garrotte | | NiAi | NiAi StarRepublic Core | | Aries | AA8 | | Jackseptic | California Republic | | Aries | Camp Victory | | Aries | CC9 | | Orbiter | Dream Land | | Aries | CC6 | | Aries | Rubie | | Aries | CC2 | | Aries | CC3 | | FLOYDooo | Roost | | Aries | CC5 | | Volvo | Volvolia | | Ruthless | Clown | | james | starry night | | arthur | The Kingdom of Inda kava | | Letsie | Lets dance | |
'Profit' Per Worker
- A very complex calculation factoring in production, modeled government spending (not general cost of government or military spending), modeled salary level, employment levels, and general spending coefficients. It is of course imperfect due to limited available information, but remains a good representation of profit efficiency per worker. Designed to be more accurate than PPW.
| President | Country | PrPW | | kingtimbo | Sentinel | 7,433 | | Casual Industries | The Anti | 7,167 | | matthewsean14 | United Metropolitan Area | 7,149 | | SuperSoldierRCP | Altair | 6,970 | | Acron7 | The United Kingdom of Unoddo | 6,914 | | corleone452 | Lenor Ash | 6,797 | | Orbiter | Sandy Shores | 6,578 | | marshal.ney | Grand Duchy of Marshall | 6,534 | | Volvo | Concordia | 6,524 | | Casual Industries | Gravity | 6,508 | | SuperSoldierRCP | Venision | 6,483 | | SuperSoldierRCP | Poletaris | 6,460 | | SuperSoldierRCP | Metalison | 6,398 | | Belltr | The Republic Of Altis | 6,383 | | James the Fair | The Kingdom of England | 6,369 | | Tycoon | tycoonia | 6,357 | | Orbiter | Fort Klamath | 6,345 | | Volvo | Falconia | 6,332 | | liveforeddie | Jurassic Park | 6,292 | | marshal.ney | Principality of Elchingen | 6,280 | |
EMPIRE STATS
- Statistics compiled as the sum of each country in the empire. Only players whose total population exceeded 100,000,000 were considered.
Total Production
| President | Production | | Aries | 10,108,991,163,644 | | Letsie | 2,838,243,058,397 | | Orbiter | 2,615,486,482,387 | | Volvo | 2,264,981,969,471 | | NiAi | 2,155,396,293,089 | | Casual Industries | 1,736,231,686,504 | | SuperSoldierRCP | 1,661,307,275,627 | | caesarroxy | 1,590,108,222,303 | | garbogast | 1,505,717,993,847 | | Rob Kennedy | 1,394,785,374,707 | | Jackseptic | 1,236,773,022,538 | | Natures Wrath | 1,069,905,093,353 | | Stephen Ryan | 1,040,964,638,283 | | Romeo Vicardi | 956,078,765,442 | | Ranger13 | 885,457,500,806 | | Marshal.ney | 876,999,822,410 | | Laguna | 861,495,071,046 | | Floydooo | 794,665,816,586 | | Lay Low | 766,025,471,356 | | Prizepack | 758,225,021,892 | |
Total Population
| President | Population | | Aries | 2,063,641,520 | | Letsie | 696,216,967 | | Garbogast420 | 673,942,682 | | Rob Kennedy | 672,549,823 | | Orbiter | 643,987,271 | | NiAi | 549,098,362 | | Volvo | 492,875,071 | | Caesarroxy | 477,870,829 | | Jackseptic | 475,834,084 | | Casual Industries | 472,044,296 | | SuperSoldierRCP | 393,083,665 | | Romeo Vicardi | 328,949,468 | | Stephen Ryan | 304,570,863 | | Laguna | 284,374,718 | | Natures Wrath | 278,126,383 | | Ranger13 | 245,916,095 | | Ruthless | 240,567,798 | | Arthur | 228,083,217 | | Marshal.ney | 218,801,851 | | Lay Low | 217,876,067 | |
Production Per Worker
- Total Production / (Total Employed - Total Employed Army}
- Suffers from bias towards high welfare states.
| President | PPW | | Aries | 10,169 | | Corleone452 | 10,140 | | Volvo | 10,024 | | CrackerJack | 9,929 | | Acron7 | 9,922 | | Tycoon | 9,634 | | James | 9,259 | | Marshal.ney | 9,166 | | SuperSoldierRCP | 9,103 | | Christos | 8,961 | | LB Musty | 8,906 | | Orbiter | 8,855 | | Natures Wrath | 8,849 | | Johanas Bilderberg | 8,634 | | FLOYDooo | 8,573 | | Kevin | 8,535 | | drys0013 | 8,506 | | Kingtimbo | 8,420 | | Casual Industries | 8,406 | | NiAi | 8,334 | |
Highest Government Expenses
- Includes Education, Health, Transport and Social Security, but not general cost of government or military expenses.
| President | Gov Expense | | Aries | 1,014,128,470,962 | | Letsie | 346,540,121,070 | | NiAi | 308,750,320,952 | | JackSeptic | 282,195,725,109 | | SuperSoldierRCP | 276,540,151,688 | | Volvo | 250,007,064,030 | | AlexGorayev | 224,052,232,060 | | garbogast420 | 218,234,072,317 | | Rob Kennedy | 217,051,105,110 | | Orbiter | 194,998,092,481 | |
'Profit' Per Worker
- A very complex calculation factoring in production, modeled government spending (not general cost of government or military spending), modeled salary level, employment levels, and general spending coefficients. It is of course imperfect due to limited available information, but remains a good representation of profit efficiency per worker. Designed to be more accurate than PPW.
| President | PrPW | | Corleone452 | 6,320 | | Orbiter | 6,167 | | Kingtimbo | 6,042 | | Tycoon | 5,852 | | Volvo | 5,850 | | Aries | 5,564 | | Casual Industries | 5,493 | | James | 5,455 | | Marshal.ney | 5,294 | | Dubhthaigh | 5,191 | | LB Musty | 5,082 | | Rnbastos198 | 5,006 | | Natures Wrath | 4,915 | | caesarroxy | 4,881 | | Johanas Bilderberg | 4,677 | | Stephen Ryan | 4,592 | | Drys0013 | 4,574 | | Arthur | 4,493 | | Benjamin Vi Britannia | 4,406 | | Jimmy | 4,358 | |
DISCLAIMER: I am human and have probably at some point made a mistake, be it in missing a player or misspelling a name, incorrect copying of numbers etc. The formulas I used, especially PrPW and Highest Government Cost, are designed to be as accurate as possible but cannot be perfect and will not match the in game data exactly. Be nice :-) |
| Aries | Thursday, September 3, 2015 - 03:41 pm
Thanks for the stats Dub!
One note, CC6 actually gets held back in the production stat because of its 42 space corps. I believe those don't show up in the production category at all due to the lack of a space production group on the business page.
My empire is still adding pop and corps. I expect to be at 2.5 billion pop and 12.5 trillion monthly production in a few (real) months. |
| Orbiter | Thursday, September 3, 2015 - 07:17 pm
thanks bunches!
i do love the profit per worker category, not one i've seen before, but its been what i've been trying to do, get the most of what i got, and its nice to actually show that off for once. |
| Dubhthaigh | Thursday, September 3, 2015 - 09:25 pm
Thanks for the positive feedback, guys :-) |
| Aries | Thursday, September 3, 2015 - 10:10 pm
Profit Per Worker is interesting but I am curious how that was calculated and what it is intended to show. If I understand it right, you looked at the production of a country and attempted to figure the costs of this production by looking at certain government costs and the salaries of those workers.
If this is the case, this figure would be an imperfect view of country profitability as the salaries of workers not only contributes towards the production value of the country but adds to country income in the form of population contributions to government income including citizen taxes, health, and eduction contributions. I would think looking at government income (which already figures what corporations can afford to pay the government after paying their workers) and comparing to the same government costs might give a larger picture of profitability.
edit: Oh, and it does not account for a country's ownership stake in these countries and their corresponding profit or dividend payments . Some of the top countries/empires I noticed in "Profit per Worker" ship much of the net income of their corps out of the country to an enterprise. |
| Dubhthaigh | Friday, September 4, 2015 - 12:25 am
I thought you might have a problem with that stat ;-)
All data was taken from the downloadable Country Indexes sheets, as I had no appetite for visiting each country individually in game and attempting to bypass finance index / news bar secrecy. This meant I had to model each element of government expenditure from scratch (ie recreate the game calculations for Health, Education etc) as the downloadable data simply does not include said information. Similarly government income data is conspicuously absent, so all we are left to work with is the value of total production.
I was on the fence as to whether the stat should be called PrPW or APPW (adjusted production per worker). I settled for PrPW for the sole reason of its emphasis upon the efficiency and net cost of production - it takes into account the money spent to achieve it, unlike basic PPW. Anyone can raise their welfare index to 200 and attain an absurdly high production stat, but it is simply not practical in terms of game goals (or profit).
The name was thus misleading, and perhaps a better way to explain it would be as a gauge of the most cost efficient production processes. Thus while you are correct in pointing out that the calculation does not directly account for increased government service contributions from better paid workers - information that is simply not attainable from the spreadsheets - this is fairly irrelevant for what the stat is trying to gauge. Apologies for the misnaming. Ah, but I hear you say "contributions should be factored in to the cost of achieving production even if they are not directly involved in the isolated and welfare-index-fuelled process of production" ...
Well, in that case, I would also question how much of a difference this omission of increased spending would make to overall profitability. Increased contributions do not increase production, and there is a solid argument that they do not create wealth in a country either, but rather go some way to mitigate inherent inefficiencies. Even if you were to dispute this, which is a maintainable position, a comparison of our two main countries may provide useful: At my current salary/health level (in Chaos I) my anticipated health contributions at 260M pop (the population of Candinnalm) would be 20bn, whereas Candinnalm's are 33bn. Therefore your salary commitments have resulted in a net recoup of 13bn SC$. This may seem significant, but to attain the same PrPW rating as Chaos I, Candinnalm would have to recoup c.425,000,000,000 in additional contributions (or clean production). How deep are your citizen's pockets?! Of course these calculations are rough and ready, but seem hold true in practice.
With regards to the ownership stake of production, you are once again correct. Having clarified the intent of the stat I am sure you will see however that this isn't so much an issue, especially since regardless of the means by which income is channeled back to the country - something immeasurable from the spreadsheets - production and PrPW remains the ultimate limiting factor from which profit itself is reaped.
I feel PrPW represents the most comprehensive method I can follow for gauging production efficiency at least from the the data available, and despite its obvious flaws is still a much more accurate grasp of a country than basic PPW. I will try to include spending policies and gov contributions in future iterations however, while the issue regarding farming out of production does remain and shall forever be unsolved unless the game gods include many more tabs in the spreadsheet data. |
| Aries | Friday, September 4, 2015 - 12:52 am
How does our income tax compare? |
| Dubhthaigh | Friday, September 4, 2015 - 12:01 pm
I think we are still operating from different mindsets with regards to what the figure actually represents. A helpful allusion might be that i'm talking in 'gross' and you are considering the 'net.' PrPN is concerned with the production process, whereas you are attempting to evaluate it from the perspective of overall result, including other factors not directly relevant to the production equation.
Our countries are actually remarkably similar in terms of end result (profit etc, and income tax), but we go about this in quite different ways:
1: The strength of countries that rank highly for PrPW is that they achieve a high level of production whilst incurring a minimal level of associated costs within that process.
2: The strength of your countries is that they receive a comparable end profit to the nations that scored highly in PrPW - despite the additional costs incurred - through the inflation of total production level, and supplemented by post production-process mechanisms such as consumer spending, income tax and contributions.
The value of the PrPW stat is then not primarily in judging end profit (I have already apologised for the misleading name) but in finding the most inherently efficient production process - not including unrelated 'net' post process factors - which was always my goal.
The exercise becomes valuable when one considers that while type 2 countries may be able to recoup some of the inefficiency of that process through aforementioned channels (contributions etc), this can never exceed the original inflated costs. This becomes especially important when one considers that areas such as the military do not receive contributions at all, and there is no balancing income benefit from this system that makes up for the much greater expenditure in this area.
Either way, I believe we have waffled about this more than enough, and can probably agree to disagree :P |
| Aries | Friday, September 4, 2015 - 02:43 pm
Heh, that is a long answer to a 6-word question, that was not answered. It would be easier if your finances were unhidden as mine are.
On the stat itself, perhaps, I am unsure of what the goal of having an "efficient production process" is. For a country, it is too narrow to be a measure of economic health, regardless of your classification of their economic strategy. This is because government income has 3 essential tiers:
1. Corporate/Enterprise tax
2. Worker Tax/Contributions
3. Profit Sharing/Dividends (ownership)
Your stat starts with production, which can be a "gross" stat but the net for a country would be a measurement that considers the value of the workers contributions to a country in all tiers. "Strength" in production could be considered to be the potential value in these tiers but "strength" in PrPW does not show the value/worker to a country.
As I mentioned, I believe the problem is that the wrong gross stat is used. If you are considering government costs you must consider all government income and when you consider workers' salaries you must consider their contribution to Worker Tax/Contributions in addition to production (I also would consider the additional contribution to the investment fund). Only government income will provide that clarity.
"The exercise becomes valuable when one considers that while type 2 countries may be able to recoup some of the inefficiency of that process through aforementioned channels (contributions etc), this can never exceed the original inflated costs."
^^An effective stat would settle this or unhide your books^^ |
| Dubhthaigh | Friday, September 4, 2015 - 03:37 pm
It's a very long post that argues the answer to said 6 word question is completely irrelevant in terms of the context of this conversation.
Quote:On the stat itself, perhaps, I am unsure of what the goal of having an "efficient production process" is.
I'm not quite sure how to explain something this obvious, other than that an inherently efficient process is by definition superior to one that unnecessarily inflates costs, rectifies some of this inefficiency through post-process mechanisms, only to ultimately achieve a very similar result. Especially when there are other areas reliant upon this process (military spending) that are not able to be balanced as such. This is why your question regarding income tax is irrelevant.
EDIT: Think of our countries this way:
1: Chaos 1 is a boat, it has an engine that weighs 1 tonne and produces 10000 horsepower. It travels at 20 knots.
2: Candinnalm is a boat of the exact same shape and size. It has an engine that weighs 2 tonnes and produces 20,000 horsepower. Due to the weight of the engine the boat lets in a little water. Thus a large number of those engine horses are used in pumping water back out and into the sea. It travels at 20 knots.
3. A war is happening and the boats need to carry 5 people each across the sea.
A: Chaos I can take the extra weight because it's engine is light and it's not deep in the water. Only some water gets in.
B: Candinnalm is already low in the water and more thus seeps in once the people are inside. However, there is no more horsepower in the engine - all of it is already being used to propel & pump. The collected water in the boat is thus much higher.
key: Boats = countries. Engine=production (and its cost/efficiency). Horsepower = income. Water = expenditure. Military people = military spending.
I hope this answers your income tax query. If it doesn't, then its probably worth noting that Chaos I collects $4000 profit per employed corporate worker. Adjusted to the workforce of Candinnalm, this would entail a country profit of 320Bn. Candinnalm collects $3425 profit per worker, when one discounts your 50bn military spending.
Either way, I would gently suggest you read my reply before continuing to argue along the same line of argument as before, which pointlessly focuses on government income and net results. The stat does not intend to measure this, rather it refers to the base potential to collect income (and the most efficient means of doing so without relying upon post process balancing). If you think this is a worthless enterprise then there is also no point in including the total production stat in future posts. After all, this "is too narrow to be a measure of economic health."
I have already said on a few occasions it is impossible to base any these stats on government income - the data is simply not there in the spreadsheets. If you want to write down the income/expenditure stats, corp type breakdown, ownership %, tax levels and salary/welfare data, worker levels and quality settings of every corp and every country on LU be my guest. That might result in an "effective stat," depending on how scewed it was by secrecy settings.
All other stats I have posted - including the PPW one which places you at the top - rely on the same data premises, and have never been questioned before. In fact PPW has all the weaknesses you mention, plus its own larger inherent failures. PrPW merely cuts out some of them.
My goal here is to do the best with what is available, and I am fairly confident my stats are as reliable and in depth as any that have ever been posted. |
| Aries | Friday, September 4, 2015 - 04:44 pm
I think I can give a better description of the boats and use actual country (boat) data.
Chaos 1
govt income 110 Billion (total boat power)
govt cost 34 Billion (weight)
Total Employment in All Corporations 20,453,280 (rowers)
Military Personnel
14,737 (passengers)
Total Occupants
20,468,017 (rowers+passengers)
$5380 Boat Power/Rower
$1660 Weight/Occupant
-----
$3720 Net Power/Occupant
$2,300,000 Weight/Passenger
Candinnalm
govt income 477 Billion (total boat power)
govt cost 255 Billion (weight)
Total Employment in All Corporations 85,334,644 (rowers)
Military Personnel
1,640,912 (passengers)
Total Occupants
86,975,556 (rowers+passengers)
$5590 Boat Power/Rower
$2930 Weight/Occupant
-----
$2660 Net Power/Occupant
$155,000 Weight/Passenger
To be fair, I think your stat is most similar to Net Power/Occupant. This figure accounts for all government costs. I think government costs have been oversimplified into costs to facilitate productivity and costs for military a bit though. Countries of different sizes and demographics will have different challenges here apart from the production process.
Corporate salaries are figured into Boat Power/Rower. In this area, Candinnalm has a more efficient production process. |
| corleone452 | Friday, September 4, 2015 - 05:58 pm
wow, I can`t believe I am top in Profit/per worker and Production/per work.
I don`t even know how I did it. |
| Orbiter | Friday, September 4, 2015 - 08:12 pm
lol
Quote:I'm not quite sure how to explain something this obvious... -Dub
i loved that, i can totally relate |
| Orbiter | Friday, September 4, 2015 - 08:36 pm
corleone, congrats
hey dub, a gentle suggestion/question, do you have an easy way to do a profit per pop calculation. (if you even bother to do this again, thanks for the effort!)
for instance,
Dream Land,
this months profit, 270.4B (but if you could take the average over a game year, it'd be better,)
pop 264M
270.4B/264M = 1.02B profit per million population
this stat would have the flaw of not taking into account military, but it does show a general presidential efficiency beyond simple corps management. |
| Aries | Friday, September 4, 2015 - 08:41 pm
What is obvious is that the stat does not actually represent the efficiency of the production process. Production/Workers or, if you want to add in salaries, Govt Income/Workers are the most obvious calculations of this.
What is still not obvious is the purpose/goal of excelling in his calculation.
Does it mean I get more income for the same number of workers? No
Does it mean that my costs for the same level of production are lower? No
Quite simply, it does not calculate what it implies it would calculate. When I asked, Dub gave a boat analogy and suggested a country that can do well in this stat has the capacity to support a larger military or even a larger military/worker. Is this true? No, it isn't. |
| Aries | Friday, September 4, 2015 - 09:05 pm
I agree with the profit thing, Orbiter, in that it might make more sense to look at this when the economy on LU is not bucking like a bronco.
For this month:
Dreamland
Direct Data
Govt Income $436 Billion
Govt Cost $166 Billion
Govt Cost - Military $149 Billion
Govt Profit $270 Billion
Govt Profit - Military $287 Billion
Total Employment in All Corporations 97,906,558
Derived Data
Govt Profit/worker $2758
Govt Profit/worker - Military $2931
Candinnalm
Direct Data
Govt Income $468 Billion
Govt Cost $255 Billion
Govt Cost - Military $200 Billion
Govt Profit $213 Billion
Govt Profit - Military $268 Billion
Total Employment in All Corporations 85,582,045
Derived Data
Govt Profit/worker $2489
Govt Profit/worker - Military $3131
Chaos 1
Direct Data
Govt Income $109 Billion
Govt Cost $34 Billion
Govt Profit $75 Billion
Total Employment in All Corporations 20,449,617
Derived Data
Govt Profit/worker $3668
I think it is easier, at a small size, for several reasons to hit these numbers when you are smaller. Here is my smaller country entry from FB.
Camp Echo
Direct Data
Govt Income $168 Billion
Govt Cost $51 Billion
Govt Profit $117 Billion
Total Employment in All Corporations 26,771,074
Derived Data
Govt Profit/worker $4370 |
| Orbiter | Friday, September 4, 2015 - 09:37 pm
i'm gonna make 2 posts here, because this is 2 separate thoughts, that need to be addressed
it is bad form to argue with stats, openly, Dub did what he did, and was not obligated to do it, its rude to criticize him for putting out the effort, openly. this should have been handle through PM.
i for one, do not have the data bases, spread sheets, or other tools to compile stats, i'm grateful that Dub put out the effort. Their have been players in the past that have been soured to doing stats, do to the negative effects.
this really should be something the GM should do, but after years, they haven't. we should be respectful of the people that take the time to do the GMs job. |
| Orbiter | Friday, September 4, 2015 - 09:57 pm
secondly, your both right, the "production," stat, while it accurately reflexs, well, production, it does not accurately reflex profit
to make a "profit per worker" stat, it would seem to me, that it should be based more on the bottom line profit, including all the costs. how ever, it would seem that is difficult to do, and Dub did the best he could. thumbs up!
then further, aries, in your post, you are basing profit, on corporate workers. but your including income tax from gov employees, in your bottom line profit.
i'd say you'd want to include all employees, and military, while subtracting military cost. the government employees, contribute to the bottom line profit, with Health, Education, improving the Country welfare, and production. while keeping the country healthy, and working.
so, modifying your stats,
Dream Land, 264M total pop
Number of Employed 124.6M
Govt Profit - Military $287 Billion (from above)
2.3B/Worker
1.09B/Million Total pop
160 corporate salaries, just for an odd reference
120.35 Country Welfare
Candinnalm, 260.3M
Number of Employed, 116.6
Govt Profit - Military $268 Billion
2.3B/Worker
1.03B/Million total pop
400 Corporate Salaries
131.4 Country Welfare
Chaos 1, 67.2M
Number of Employed, 28.2
Govt Profit $75 Billion
2.7B/Worker
1.1B/Million Total pop
Mostly CEO Corps, 300 Corp Salary
128.97 Welfare
i added a couple of extra stats, not for any reason but for the casual viewers interest. |
| Orbiter | Friday, September 4, 2015 - 10:02 pm
but as you mentioned, the econ has been very turbulent,
i've been watching this, knowing, that atm, the comparison, does represent how we each are able to weather a stormy econ, which is an important skill, but does not represent our full strength.
how ever, my HI is still holding my country welfare back, so even with clear skys, i wouldn't be up to full strength. soon tho, probably with in a month. been hoping things calm down by then. |
| Orbiter | Friday, September 4, 2015 - 11:59 pm
i was trying to wait for the last minute to post this before i hit the door, so that we could move on, so on my way out...
considering Corleone's interest, Dub, do you think that you could do a break down of his numbers, on what put him on the top of your list? i bet it'd really help him. when i checked him out, it seemed he was doing largely the opposite of what i do, maybe looking closer at what he does well might be educational?
shrug |
| Aries | Saturday, September 5, 2015 - 12:11 am
Save your bad form Orbiter. Your first post after mine was not meant to be helpful. Your recent posts seem to scramble to scrape up stats that validate how you do things. Your posts that attempted to link the entirety of government costs to salaries on the thread analyzing Sim-citizen wage data were simply absurd.
As to the data I posted here, I included not only the income tax of government workers but also the costs of their salary, in the form of government costs. By switching this calculation to the general workforce (or population) from corporate workers, you are getting away from quantifying the efficiencies in the economy to simply measuring more of a country focus.
I have more eduction workers, about 2.6 million more, because my population is younger. I will take that. My population growth was 163,744 last month. Yours was 19,375. I have 473 military units upgrading. I just added 30 more this month. That gives me 1.25 million more soldiers deployed than you.
Neither of these groups contribute towards the "production process" or its efficiency but if you need to count them to help your numbers, I understand. You keep the stats that make you happy and I will keep an extra 850k pop/day and the best military in Simcountry. |
| Orbiter | Saturday, September 5, 2015 - 01:38 pm
ok then, now that you got that off your chest, lets move on, wasn't their something else to talk about? |
| Dubhthaigh | Saturday, September 5, 2015 - 01:43 pm
There's a lot going on in this thread and to be honest in my current hungover state I do not have the will to go into all of it :-P It does seem to have descended into talk of "profit" again rather than "production efficiency," which I reiterate is removed from what I had intended the stat to gauge.
Despite this I do feel it is necessary to say a few short things, however:
Quote:hey dub, a gentle suggestion/question, do you have an easy way to do a profit per pop calculation. (if you even bother to do this again, thanks for the effort!)
Thanks for the thanks, Orbiter! Unfortunately the only way that I can see this being done is visiting the home page of each country on LU and reviewing the news bar, which is sometimes hidden. I do agree it would provide a result that would better mirror the erroneous title of my stat, but who has the time to do this?!
Quote:considering Corleone's interest, Dub, do you think that you could do a break down of his numbers, on what put him on the top of your list?
I am away from my computer this weekend, but will be happy to send him a PM (or post in forum) more info during the early stages of next week. It's interesting what you say about him doing things very differently - the PrPW was actually designed so that I might investigate the different ways of achieving efficiency in the game, for my own gratification and schooling - I posted the stat publicly so that others might have the same opportunity to do so (if they are able and willing to look past their own modus operandi of course)
Quote:Save your bad form Orbiter. Your first post after mine was not meant to be helpful. Your recent posts seem to scramble to scrape up stats that validate how you do things.
Aries. I don't usually call people out on the forum, or at least I haven't had to do so in years. But some of the things you have said in this thread alone have not only been butt-naked guilty in terms of what you accused Orbiter of above, but also condescending, aggressive, presumptuous and entitled. We are all guilty of this at times, but to dismiss someone's opinion in that way when committing exactly the same crime is the height of hypocrisy. You have been ignoring my repeated attempts to settle the argument with a "difference of opinion" answer - probably the only way it can end bearing in mind both of our stubbornness - as well as lacking the class to keep your haughty and derisory attitude (which is unjustified due to your generally erroneous arguments) at bay when e.g. dismissing "Dub's analogy about a boat." For comparison, I had the self control to refrain from mentioning, at the time, that your analogy and subsequent analysis of it has absolutely nothing to do with production efficiency, or indeed to do with efficiency at all - it is simply a rehashing of the same argument regarding net overall income you have pursued (because it suits your agenda) from the beginning. The same position I have tried valiantly to get across to you that has nothing to do with the stat.
In short, you have been spectacularly rude to me - which I can and do forgive as my ego has matured and changed in nature much from those past (juvenile) days - but also to Orbiter, who has only tried to act as a mediator and soothe both sides whilst looking out for Corleone's interests. Ignorance is certainly your greatest crime of all however, and to sate its appetite I promise to continue serving up country statistics (despite the issues that have occurred this time) and to include the eminently reliable Total Production and PPW categories. By all means, enjoy your meal.
I hold absolutely no lasting enmity towards you but, unfortunately, you will have to sleep on the sofa for a few days before my opinion of your character and reputation are sufficiently repaired for proper spooning. ;-) |
| Aries | Saturday, September 5, 2015 - 05:02 pm
I am interested in how you answer Corleone and what you can conclude in general about high performance in this stat. |
