Isolationist economy

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

Could it be done through a Common Market is the real question.

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.

1 question i invaded a country with -1,090,155,620 construction (about 300) why? if i start with 600B

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.

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?

Double post...

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.