Migration Concepts

[MrFun]

Another Apolytoner suggested that I create a separate thread for this -- I guess that would make sense, since there can be different ideas offered for this concept, and it can be more complex than other ideas. So instead of creating multitudes of posts on just this idea in the "Ideas" thread, I set this thread up.

I hope this is acceptable to the mods. Here is a copied and paste post that I put in the "Ideas" thread:



migration

I do not know if this would be too complicated, but if there is a simple way to stimulate migration through the progamming language in designing the game, it woud great, in my opinion.
Here is what I'm thinking the way migration could work in Civilization IV:

1) intramigration--some of your citizens will move from one city to another within your civilization, taking away one or two population points, and adding them to destination city, making population growth and decline more realistic.

2) emigration/immigration--some of your citizens will migrate to another civilization whose culture is significantly higher than yours, removing one or two population points from your civilization and adding one or two population points to that other civilization city that is the destination

as for factors that determine when intramigration and emigration/immigration occurs:

a) odds of your citizens moving from one city to another within your civilization will increase if they live in a city considerably less developed than the one they're attracted to (comparison of city improvements, wonders, and terrain improvement surrounding cities)

and another factor would be if there is a significant greater number of happy faces in city they're attracted to

b) odds of losing some of your citizens to another civilization depends on how much greater the other civilization's culture is compared to yours, and the proximity of that civilization to yours (overseas on another continent, or next door neighbor, or separated from you on same continent with another civilization)

another factor would be if you and other civilization have similar regional identity (European, American, so forth) or if you're more dramatically different



For those who are knowledgeable in computer programming, how difficult would it be to integrate this idea into Civilization IV??

And of course, I'm very interested in hearing other people's ideas on different migration proposals.

[Brent]

I would like this combined with precise number of people. I don't want to have to build a settler to join another city.

[MrFun]

I'm not sure what you mean, Brent.

[Skanky Burns]

Isn't this already covered abstractly by standard city growth?

Or is this like a semi culture-flipping thing where only part of the cities population crosses over to another city?

[Fosse]

I think that this is meant to be actual citizens that already live in cities packing up and moving to greener pastures, and I'm in support of it.

I think that the cities' relative levels of economic success should determine how attractive they are to potential immigrants.

And MrFun, I think Brent was saying he wants cities to have "107,574," people in them, instead of "5 Population." And I agree.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Skanky Burns
Isn't this already covered abstractly by standard city growth?

Or is this like a semi culture-flipping thing where only part of the cities population crosses over to another city?

No, I don't think so -- I think the population growth as it is in Civilization III only shows birth rates.

If you say that migration is shown abstractly by population growth, why don't other cities decrease as other cities increase?

And as I have said before -- only part of the population -- a small part -- would migrate or emigrate. Maybe only one or two population points, that would result in a loss or gain of say, 12,500 citizens or 23,200 citizens.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Fosse
I think that this is meant to be actual citizens that already live in cities packing up and moving to greener pastures, and I'm in support of it.

I think that the cities' relative levels of economic success should determine how attractive they are to potential immigrants.

And MrFun, I think Brent was saying he wants cities to have "107,574," people in them, instead of "5 Population." And I agree.

Ok, I understand now. But I disagree -- you can have simple population points and then when you switch to the city view, you see the actual population -- like we do now in Civilization III.
But we could have more realistic population numbers represented -- and much less standardized or monolithic. For instance, in Civilization III, every size 13 city has basically the same population in their city view. I think that is too unrealistic.

[MattH]

I like the idea of having population numbers that actually do something. Combined with an advanced diplomacy system, you could do some really interesting things (like the shutoff of asian immigrants coming to the U.S. in the late 1800's.)

[Trifna]

One MAJOR aspect of immigration is jobs. This means growth. So cities growing fast economically would have an advantage for this and would see people flock there. Of course, if they're coming from another civilization, we could expect a huge part of them slowly going back to their former civilization after.

Factors to be considerated for the "immigration factor":
- happiness
- jobs (=economical growth)
- is it a different civ (then, what's the relation between both civs)
- your own culture strength could slow people from taking off

[MrFun]

Oh, another thing -- when you receive migrants into your cities, they retain their nationality for a set amount of time before becoming assimilated.

[Roman]

This is a good concept. I would also like to combine it with making population growth independent of food production. Sure, food production would set the limit on population growth, but it should not determine it. Just because there is plenty of food in the U.S.A. does not mean its population is growing faster than Ethiopia, where food is much more scarce.

[Fosse]

Originally posted by Roman
This is a good concept. I would also like to combine it with making population growth independent of food production. Sure, food production would set the limit on population growth, but it should not determine it. Just because there is plenty of food in the U.S.A. does not mean its population is growing faster than Ethiopia, where food is much more scarce.

I agree with food not determing growth, but I also do not want food to cap growth. Just look at Ethiopia. If, in Civ terms, food had capped their growth somehow then, well... they wouldn't be starving.

It would be great if that happened in real life! But since it doesn't, let it not happen in Civ either.

[chequita guevara]

Actually, the Ethiopia example brings up something. The problem there in't that they have more people than they can feed, but that the area is prone to regular droughts.

How come we don't have droughts in Civ? Serious droughts can send a civilization into long term decline. Just look at what happened to the Byzantine Empire after the drop in food producitivity in the 6th Century. An event, BTW, that the sent the Avars surging westward.

[Puma]

natural causes

Well, we'd all like to see more (to our taste) "realism" injected all over civ - 'cause it's already soo cool - and I have to agree I'd like to see migrations and natural disasters. I remember seeing a volcano in one of the c3c mesoamerican snapshots. Just yesterday I was shocked to find one of my musketmen tumbling on his butt because he fortified on a jungle square - that was cool. I want more. I want droughts, hurricanes, floods - even if abstracted for the sake of efficiency. Problem one, I think timelines would have to change to less time per turn. Can a hurricane last 10 years? Problem two, turns would take so much longer to process, and I think that would take a lot away from the game - or not?
We are never satisfied.

[Rasputin]

there is always the balance between realism and game playability...

A lot of people have to realise this is CIVILISATION not The Sims..

I mean by that , that a lot of game stuff is abstracted and not necescerily real..

For instance, the spare food in each city is not jsut a measure of fodo, but is a game abstract for that citys ability to be able to grow, meaning it includes food, jobs etc in that abstraction.

And we have starvation in game once food dries up and citys go down in size.


As for the city number versus population, again for ease of clarity on map the citys have to have a pop number for cuty size as in size 5 , but as people say when you open the civ window you see popualtion real size.

All i would ask is that the range of pop versus city numbers be boradened so that a city size 5 might have between 100,000- 200,000 then a size 6 200,000-500,000 or some such range,..