Some little problems I found in the USA and Canada

This is not a bug, I just thought this was wrong.

1. Detroit>Chicago?

Detroit is worth more than any other city in USA: Great Lakes. I think this is wrong because realisticly, Chicago has more money, Detroit is Bankrupt, and Detroit is falling apart. I dont see how it is worth more Chicago.

2. Detroits & Torontos populations

Detroit is lsited as 4.4 million people on Afterwind. Realistically, Detroit only has 0.9 million people. The rest live in the suburban cities around Detroit. Also, Toronto has a population of 2.5 million on Afterwind. As a resident of Toronto, I know that Toronto has a population of at LEAST 3 million. 2.5 is a very old estimate.

3. USA: South worth more than Ontario?

USA: South is the area of the USA in Afterwind that only has one city: Memphis. I have a hard time believing that Memphis can be worth more than Ontario. Toronto itself is probably worth more than Memphis, and if not, it is combined with Ottawa and Winnepeg.

1) True

2) Im pretty sure it was requested that they include suburban populations a while ago, Im not sure if it was implimented. The US is worthless without its suburbs.

3) The whole country bonus is for the worth of the other minor cities in the territory, just btw.

There is lots of others innacurate stuff in the games too. By exemple Paris only have the people who live in the city while london have everyone in the agglomeration. An other strange fact is that Canada in the game cost more and is worth more than France or UK. A lots of time, it is not the biggest city of a territory that are in the game by exemple Québec agglomeration is 2 times bigger than Halifax agglomeration. And in my opinion Quebec city would be much more useful than halifax in the game. The best should be to have both of them.
Would like to know why its not representing the reality?
But I can understand small differences with the reality for balance reason but Paris with 2 millions versus London with 12 millions is far from reality......

Sorry, but what's an agglomeration?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_agglomeration

Next time check on Wikipedia before to ask a question like that=)

Skrevet av KYBL, 29.11.2011 at 18:53

This is not a bug, I just thought this was wrong.

1. Detroit>Chicago?

Detroit is worth more than any other city in USA: Great Lakes. I think this is wrong because realisticly, Chicago has more money, Detroit is Bankrupt, and Detroit is falling apart. I dont see how it is worth more Chicago.

2. Detroits & Torontos populations

Detroit is lsited as 4.4 million people on Afterwind. Realistically, Detroit only has 0.9 million people. The rest live in the suburban cities around Detroit. Also, Toronto has a population of 2.5 million on Afterwind. As a resident of Toronto, I know that Toronto has a population of at LEAST 3 million. 2.5 is a very old estimate.

3. USA: South worth more than Ontario?

USA: South is the area of the USA in Afterwind that only has one city: Memphis. I have a hard time believing that Memphis can be worth more than Ontario. Toronto itself is probably worth more than Memphis, and if not, it is combined with Ottawa and Winnepeg.

Detroit has industry, something that will never change. Modern politics are something the admins have said really don't affect Afterwind. Detroit in history has and will be remembered as the industrial center of america, and for a great period of it's life it had a very high population, and a large area.
On the Detroit population, most suburban areas are within confines of Detroitian land, but once you extend beyond Macomb county Detroit really stops. When thought about, Detroit can be thought of the same way you could think of Manchuria for example- you can say it is only in China, but being realistic, Manchuria can be thought of as extending into Russian territory, this same principle also falls on the Greater Metro area of Detroit. In fact, many people in Metro Detroit think of themselves as living in Detroit for their own various reasons.
On Toronto's population- I agree on the fact the info should be changed, but that's it. I don't know much about Toronto and it's urban and suburban population, but I would estimate including it's metro area it has maybe 4 million people.
I do not wish to talk about Ontario's industry, seeing as it would lead to a flame war.
USA: South has many bigger cities, such as Mobile and Louisville, but it does seem fairly odd the South is more economically advanced than Ontario.

Detroit probably does have more monetary value than chicago does (chicago doesn't have much production/industry, while detroit does -- chicago will outpace detroit later). There are more than 0.9 million people in detroit lol, the "suburbs" that you talk about are usually the outer skirts of a major city, not considered suburbs. Also, no area of canada will be worth more than the U.S.

Skrevet av the99percent, 29.11.2011 at 21:29

"Also, no area of canada will be worth more than the U.S."

Well Vag, since you are from Guyana, you really cannot make and valid comment on Canadian, USA comparisons.

yes bcos I am legit from guyana : ) guyana is my home not new york : )

also yes I do, in every aspect except for land area (not even talking about arable land, TOTAL land mass) the U.S. is vastly superior. Anyone, even a third-worlder like me (:() knows this

Canada: Ontario: GDP income 2009
Ontario: 505.803
Manitoba: 44, 592
Total: 550,395

Usa: South : GDP income 2010
Kentucky: 161.400
Tenesse: 250.300
Alabama: 174.400
Mississipi: 98.900
Total: 685,000

So only in GDP income in the past years we can say that USA: South is better
But between 2009 and today canadian economy was much stronger than the american economy
And there is much more industrial ressources in Ontario and manitoba then USA: South
And now Canadian dollars is much higher than 2 years ago

My verdict: When the game was created USA: South > Canada: Ontario

Now: If we take the Candian $=US dollars (In 2011 almost all the time Canadian$ =american $)
Ontario 578,183
Manitoba 50,973
Total=629.156

Verdict: USA: South > Canada: Ontario

If we add the fact that Canadian economy>Beat American economy between 2009 and 2011 and that its normal that american results are higher because they are for the year 2010 and the canadian results are for the year 2009. We can say that today USA: South= Canada: Ontario

To conclude when the game was created USA: South> Canada: Ontario and now USA: South=Canada: Ontario

Skrevet av Stomach Ulcers, 30.11.2011 at 01:08

If the game's money was based on debt rather than GDP the USA would make you lose money every turn for taking it, same goes for detroit.

If the money was based on debt, 90% of countries wouldn't give any income... Debt of a country doesn't indicate it's wealth.

Another point:

Why is New Orleans part of USA: Texas... ? Thus leaving USA: South with only one city. USA: South needs at least one other city and it is only logical that New Orleans be located in the South.

Sitat:

USA: South has many bigger cities, such as Mobile and Louisville, but it does seem fairly odd the South is more economically advanced than Ontario.

in Mobile right now they are building litorial combat ships and it is home to the U.S.S. Alabama battleship of the 1940's. it is also one of the most important ports on the Gulf of Mexico's northern coast. may i also add that it has a population of 400,000 peoplez

Wow seriously none of Canada and USA are better. Each of them have advantages and disadvantages. Of course its normal that american economy is bigger but they are 10X more than Canada. I had proved with fact that the income of Canada: Ontario in the game should be similar than the income of USA: South. Of course i'm not comparing with Texas, California or others huge states. For the natural ressources its normal that Canada have more ressources they have a wider territory and the "Bouclier canadien" is full of minerals, water and forest. USA and Canada will never go to war so the military question isnt important when comparing the 2 countries.

So canadian nationalist and american nationalist could you please stop to say that your country is the "best". Or if you do bring facts and not opinions......
By exemple i'm a Québec separatist and I hate both countries for personal reason but I try as much as possible to stay neutral and evaluate "le pour et le contre" of each country. This principle is called "Neutralité axiologique" or axiological neutrality in english and it would be apreciate that the people on this forum use it as much as possible.

Thanks and to finish on a nationalist note : Vive le Québec libre!

It might be worthy to note that originally, Canada and USA were not divided. They were split into regions just a few months (if that) before version 1.0 was released. I'm just making an educated guess here, but I do not believe that each region reflects the actual GDP of that region, but, rather a portion of the country's GDP.

Ok thanks for the information sificvoid: So you are confirming that the income of countries in afterwind is based on the GDP of the real life country when the game was created?

So if this is right how Canada could get a biggest income than France, UK, Italy, or Germany?.

Aftwerwind income:
France: 593+178=771
UK: 600+180=780
Germany: 651+195=846
Italy: 493+148=641
Canada:273+351+298+39=961

Real life gdp income in 2010 (Game is build with 2010 data? right?):
Germany:3,286,451
France:2,562,742
UK:2,250,209
Italy:2,055,114
Canada:1,577,040

GDP real life/Income in afterwind
Germany:3,286,451/846=3884.7
France:2,562,742/771=3323.9
UK:2,250,209/780=2884.9
Italy:2,055,114/641=3206.1
Canada:1,577,040/961=1641

With this information we can say that Canada is really overpowered in game compared to Europe.
In europe the most overpowered of the "big 4 economy" is UK while Germany is really underpowered.
I can understand that you need to decrease germany power to balance the game but i would prefer to divide germany in 2 to keep it realistic and balanced. If Germany is split in two the new most powerful country of Europe will be France if we take the GDP income as a base. I don't think France will be overpowered because first UK will have almost the same income and second France is surrounded by big countries that are offen played in 10k games.

Most overpowered to most underpowered:
Canada>UK>Italy>France>Germany

It would be interesting to compare Canada and europe with the rest of the world but i don't have time for it now.

Maybe someone can create a scenario with the accurate income of every country? If there is people interested i can try to make it when i will have the time.

The incomes aren't supposed to represent real life values, there are way too many inaccuracies for it to be so.

Skrevet av Aristosseur, 01.12.2011 at 11:48

The incomes aren't supposed to represent real life values, there are way too many inaccuracies for it to be so.

Or maybe the developers have done a really poor job of representing real-life values, which could possibly be their intention.

Ivan needs to post ITT.

It's what i'm saying, income and population data are innacurate. I woudl simply want to know from where and why the staff choose by exemple:
London will have the total agglomeration population and Paris only the city population
Canada income should be bigger than european countries incom
We will place Halifax on the map but not Quebec city

I do not think that for balance and strategic reason is the good answer to this question because: each of the exemple do not really balance the game
A France with Paris at 8 troops could help balancing euroep and give a better chance for France to resist to Germany
USA income is "huge" so why we need to have a Huge canadian income too? North america is to powerful in world games so why decreasing european incoem and increasing american income
For Quebec city it would me much more useful than halifax because Quebec would build 2 troosp a turn and halifax 1. Aolso quebec troops could be much more useful than halifax troops who only builds bomber to tb citys of north east usa

So if the map is not like this for balance reason and if population and income are not accurate, from where and why the creator of aterwind have choose strange facts like New York city pop will include all the agglomeration and Chicago only the city population.

For me who love geopolitics the game would be much more entertaining with real fact. Of course its not the opinion of everyone. For me the best would be to have 100% accurate real life population and income but to balance the game split the country as much as you need it. If to balance the game you need to split usa in 50 states do it! If you need to decrease Germany power in europe divide germany and stop using innacurate facts.

Sorry if I criticize the game, but I love it and for me one of the best way to improve this game is to use veridict fact and not hasard choice like " City A= city population, City B=Agglomeration population, City C a strange number between the city population and the agglomeration population".

If i guess right in about 5 months they are going to come out with some new version, mabye a year, whe namok gets to the uk and gets settled in

Realistic numbers are nice, but what's more important to us is balance. So some numbers had to be tweaked.

Some of the proposed adjustments do make sense, like the city population. But it's very difficult to coherently determine it for all the cities worldwide - the city boundaries are rather blurred, and then there are all kinds of agglomerations with several cities bunched together.

You're right Yvan city agglomeration population is hard to evaluate. Almost every source give difference results. Me I would personnaly use the United Nations source. Why simply because it's probably the more neutral, objective and the hardest to criticize.

Here's the wikipedia link to the 100 biggest agglomeration by population( United nations).http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_urban_agglomerations_by_population_%28United_Nations%29

Now with this we have 100 cities that should get 8 reinforcements. 100/500 is it fair? is it enough? is it more or less than now?

Now we have to go on the United nation sites to get the others agglomerations population so here is the link: http://esa.un.org/wup2009/unup/index.asp?panel=2

After this you have to select city population and a country by exemple Canada:

Here's the results for the years 1950 to 2025 : Interesting, maybe make an option in the scenario creator to get the population of the past or the future=) Currently we can change the economy of a country but not the population. Like WW2 scenario ---> Years 1950 or 1940 if available --->Cold War scenario years 1970

Ok let check the cities population of Canada for 2010:
Calgary:1,182,000
Edmonton:1,113,000
Montréal:3,783,000
Ottawa-Gatineau: 1,182,000
Toronto: 5,449,000
Vancouver: 2,220,000

After this we have two big problems to deal with:
First there is only the cities with more than 1 million in there agglomeration that are on this list
Second Ottawa-Gatineau have to be splitted because they are not in the same province

Ok Canada is huge so it certainly need more than this 6 cities: Now West Canada have 3 cities, Ontario 2 and Quebec 1. To be fair i think that 3 cities by countries in Afterwind would be great:

West Canada: Edmonton, Vancouver, Calgary: No problem here. Now capital, Vancouver is the biggest and the country is named British-Columbia in afterwind. Vancouver is the only city of B-C so Vancouver=Capital

Central Canada: Toronto, Ottawa, and ????: For capital the staff have the choice between the ontario capital toronto or the canadian capital Ottawa. Personnally i prefer Ottawa but it's not a major issue. Ok now the third city, here there is 2 choice, Hamilton http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamilton,_Ontario or Winnipeg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winnipeg. Both cities are similar in terms of population, the staff already used Winnipeg in the last map so we keep winnipeg.

Eastern Canada: Montreal,??????,??????: Here Quebec is the obvious choice because http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada it's the only city except montreal in Québec witch is population is higher than Winnipeg or Hamilton. After this we have to go to the maritimes to give them at least one city and the biggest in this area is Halifax. Here our 3 cities Montreal, Quebec and Halifax.For the capital, Montreal is the biggest city and Quebec the capital of Quebec both can be good choise. For myself i prefer Quebec city.

Now for North Canada, White horse is the best chocie i think but if you want to add more action in the northern part of the map use 3 cities like for other regions of Canada and get : Whitehorse, Yellowknife and Iqualuit

Finally our second major issue the Ottawa-Gatineau population:
We have to get a good source who can tell us the population of the gatineau agglomeration and split it from Ottawa. The canadian census of 2006 could be a good source but not perfect. I currently don't have time to search for a better source so lets say this source is accurate. Gatineau city population is 242,400. So we have 1,182,000- 242,000=940,000

To conclude this, now we have a realistic canadian population by city. Now 3 afterwind countries are done. I hope i helped you Yvan and if you need help to remake the map population I can help you.

Final results:

Toronto: 5,449,000: 8
Montreal: 3,783,000: 8
Vancouver: 2,220,000: 6
Calgary: 1,182,000: 3
Edmonton: 1,113,000: 3
Ottawa: 940,000: 2
Québec: 715,515 : 2
Winniped: 694,668: 2
Halifax: 372,858: 1

Actually, as a resident of Toronto, and being born in Kentucky, I would know quite a bit on the topic.

Thomas' populations are all correct, except Vancouver which I think is more like 3 million now.

Canada makes much money off of Tourism, while USA: South does not make as much off of it. Kentucky is actually quite poor for a US state. Allthough it has a GDP like that, you cannot base everything off GDP, for Ontario has to my knowledge a high employment. Ontario also has cities like Niagra Falls which makes much more than the American falls, Sudbury, Kingston, and many other smaller cities.

I do argue that Ontario is still worth more, but not by much.

Lastly, Nashville or Mobile should be added to USA: South and Thunder Bay should be added to Canada: Ontario.

Can you give me any sources that prove that Vancouver is 3 million now? Everythign that i find say that Vancouver have 600 000 in the city and 2,2 million in the agglomeration.

And why Thunder Bay? Hamilton will make much more sense because of his population almost equal than Winnipeg.

If we place Thunder Bay on the map we will have to place every city in Canada with more than 100 000 population and there is a lot. Only in Québec: Gatineau, Sherbrooke, Saguenay, Trois-Rivières, Lévis, Québec,Montréal,Longueuil,Laval and Terrebonne. And with all the others provinces it's impossible to place so many cities in Canada, a country where the total population is around 33 millions.

Skrevet av Cardinal Ouellet, 06.12.2011 at 08:27

Can you give me any sources that prove that Vancouver is 3 million now? Everythign that i find say that Vancouver have 600 000 in the city and 2,2 million in the agglomeration.

And why Thunder Bay? Hamilton will make much more sense because of his population almost equal than Winnipeg.

If we place Thunder Bay on the map we will have to place every city in Canada with more than 100 000 population and there is a lot. Only in Québec: Gatineau, Sherbrooke, Saguenay, Trois-Rivières, Lévis, Québec,Montréal,Longueuil,Laval and Terrebonne. And with all the others provinces it's impossible to place so many cities in Canada, a country where the total population is around 33 millions.

Because Hamilton is part of Southern Ontario, as is Ottawa and Toronto, while Wnnipeg is in Manitoba, or in Afterwind, northern Ontario. it only makes sence to add a city in the middle.