Question for SbS concerning parcel value

I dont know if anyone else asked this, I havent checked, but let me know:

TLDR as a meme

So in a recent discussion Caspian had talked about how parcels were too accurate when it came to food supply(Taiga will be used as an example as always), and 300,000 parcels would support over 500,000 people based on their calculations.


Now Caspian said 5-10 parcels to a person would mean the nearest person would be 300-600m away "How fun would that be to play?" Now, off topic a little, but I dont think everyone is gonna be, or even want to be a farmer for food alone, so Caspian, please dont use that as an excuse, because heres where we get into the meat of my question,

What about NPCs? Let's look at actual population stats on Snipehunters post:


So heres the numbers for those of you who didn't open that

Actual population: 114,640

Max population: 418,252

So let's do some math, we won't be using the parcel number on that link but just use Caspian's number, 300,000.

Caspian said If it was 3 acres(parcels) to a person that would be 100,000 people, and if it was 10, 30,000 people.

Heres the issue, our NPC's will starve to death with that as the calculation and it will be a solely player based population, so let's account for the NPCs instead, because the numbers I gave from that link are total populations, not anything to do with the player population, player population shouldn't matter actually, NPCs need food just as much as we do, so:

Actual population: 114,640

Max population: 418,252

Starting at 3 parcels-per-person we would already be starving, because: 14,640 of taiga's population would not have food, even at 2 parcels-per-person its 150,00 people, which means we would have to watch our numbers or else we might run into the same problem, so let's just get a solid number, how many parcels, for just taiga in this example, would be accounting for the population while not going over it, to me it seems simple enough,

418,252(max pop)÷300,000(parcels)= 1.39 parcels to a person(npcs are people too)

Now, that just accounts for taiga, and gives you an idea of what that number should kind of look like, but heres where it becomes in issue with that as well:

Not every parcel is for farming, in fact, can you guess what Food's biggest competitor will be? Buildings

People need a place to sleep, a place to craft, a place to store items, a place to govern, a place for their horses, and a place to trade.

And that's just buildings, Food farming isnt what everyone wants to do on their parcels, so that's a whole other issue.

So the real number comes down to this, what number of parcels would be actually used for farming food, and farming food alone? That I couldn't tell you, but even my number wouldnt cut it, but that's for max population.

Oh, and that's another thing, yield, as an adequate farmer for food alone theres bound to be a whole other host of issues to be accounted for, how much time within 7 Elyrian years, is actually farmable for crops? If you already have crops farmable for the dark and cold years of Elyria I guess that's okay, but theres also bugs, disease and soil quality, which I hope is also accounted for.

Anyway, that's all, I hope I dont sound like a huge idiot for asking, maybe NPCs dont need food(never stated to my knowledge) but this concerns me seeing as how based on that conversation Caspian had, he only accounts for player population, and doesn't even touch on non-farming parcel usage.

Good day

Mayor of Gartalia - Friend Code: 464345

5/13/2019 12:55:35 PM #1

This may be a tangential issue, but using the Taiga as a sample is a bit of a misnomer. This is not a predominately agricultural region of Elyria. You may want to re-figure your calculations for a more Agri-based environment.

If I read the tribal lore correctly, the Brudvir don't do a lot of farming for just that reason. It just isn't sustainable. They get most of their dietary needs from a protein based diet. They hunt it. And supplement it with found foodstuffs such as those that will grow in this non-agricultural area.

This then requires them to interact with the other tribes, in particular the Hrothi and the Neran, to obtain the majority of their agricultural based items. I suspect a fairly brisk trade system will have to exist for them to survive and prosper. I'm picturing something similar to the early American west where the voyagers/mountain men would exchange pelts and furs yearly for provisions at some type of Rendezvous.

I think that many of the tribes in the more extreme biomes are designed that way so that the Neran and T'oresk become the intermediary trade tribes necessary to hold the continent together and promote interaction vs. retreating to isolation and xenophobia. For the Brudvir it is about agriculture. For the Janoan it is about labor. And so on.

We Are The Many... We Are The One... We Are THE WAERD !!!

5/13/2019 2:08:29 PM #2

Even with that, Caspian never said "just Taiga parcels will be changed" he means all parcels, I used Taiga as an example because the numbers and context was all there, but it's never been stated that this only affects taiga, from inference of what he's said, all parcels will be changed, which is why I brought up the question.

You also didnt address the fact that Caspian never mentions npcs, only players

Mayor of Gartalia - Friend Code: 464345

5/13/2019 5:06:27 PM #3

You are right, I didn't...

My thoughts were more along the lines of the social structures vs. the actual productivity of each parcel.

Different but possibly parallel topics...

Sorry for diverting the direction of your flow.

We Are The Many... We Are The One... We Are THE WAERD !!!

5/13/2019 10:57:21 PM #4

I dont think it will be as bad as it seems on paper.

Seeing as there are 1700 settlements and a population of 114k you have to consider that some people are too old to work, some are children, and the range inbetween of people who can work fields, hunt, or fish. Not to mention there are many other jobs other than collecting food that people are devoted to with 25k parcels being in use.

A fraction of the 25k parcels would be devoted for food and you could just as easily go hunt wild game in the 300+k parcels containing game above ground or in the cave systems. Along with catching fish. Not to mention that various food sources could give quick nutrition at little cost of energy vs yield. Or that a large fish or a deer could feed a family for a while along with larger game potentially feeding a villiage for a bit. Or foraging food from the forest itself on the go.

And even if there is 45k parcels of farmland it has been said you can have potted plants along with being able to lay a foundation of soil and create new farm plots. Or that you could potentially turn forest/wood parcels into farmland if you clear them. The devs have also said that we can change our biome by what we do or how well we manage our biomes.

You can also depelete your fish and game parcels over time and need to rely on more meat, crops, or fish depending on who is doing what or even extint renewable resources from your biome.

We also have to consider max yields before insects, weather, climate, and cooking are involved. You might end up needing a ton of ingredients and lose a portion of what goes in to make a single meal that gives better nutrition. So there is that too.

Or that this biome could represent half a kingdom as most kingdoms will have two biomes within it. So potentially these numbers could potentially be doubled depending on its scale.

In all there will be a lot of food and it seems like you can probably support 25 or more people with a single farm per year with all factors considered before fishing, hunting, and foraging. Along with growing plants in pots. So really its not going to be that bad.

5/13/2019 11:58:40 PM #5

I did some quick research. Now everything that follows will be based on real life measurements and expectations. I would assume (you know what they say about that) that SBS would attempt to keep the ratios for RL to IG roughly that same.

So based on that assumption here is what i have: One Orchard Kit contains enough seeds to fill 4 farm plots. If i remember correctly one farm plot is 16x16m.

I will be using semi-dwarf apple trees for this example. Semi-dwarf trees need to be planted about 5-7m apart. If planted 5m apart you can fit 9 on one 16x16m plot (you can plant more if you plant along the plots edges, but that would over hang into adjacent plots).

In the real world an industrial tree farm can yield 500 apples a year per tree (fun fact) as medieval tech farmers, we can expect yields more inline with a "back yard" farmer, who can see a yield of 80-150 apples a year per tree. So 9 semi-dwarf apple trees in the real would would yield between 720-1350 apples a year.

If you eat 1 apple a day, 9 trees will supply you with 2 years of apples. If we keep that ratio, one apple tree plot (16x16) can feed 2 elyrians per year. One 64x64 parcel, if filled with only semi-dwarf apple tree farm plots would fit 144 trees (16 farm plots of 16x16). Meaning one orchard parcel could feed 32 elyrians per year.

addendum: I'm aware you will have to eat more then just apples, but on the same note, i doubt you would eat an apple everyday.

5/14/2019 3:09:32 AM #6

Disclaimer, information from Discord conversations are up for change.

Here, Snipehunter said:

Technically, if you could preserve the food you grew perfectly (which you can't to be clear) on a parcel, you could sustain 22.2 people for a year on a calorie restricted diet. And that likewise assumes nothing on the parcel but crops.

and shortly thereafter said:

Realistically, you can expect half that yield from the two fields you can plant in a parcel, under normal conditions with perfect care. We expect that, at least at first, more like 35%-40% of that yield is likely.

So then, using the more conservative values, that would mean a parcel would support about 7 people. So for a population of 114,640, you'd need about 16.4k parcels dedicated to farming.

Edit: Of course, you would need less if you added food from hunting/fishing.

5/14/2019 6:16:59 AM #7

Posting discord chat log to the forum is frowned upon. The oldest pinned message in the CoE common room give more details.

I have a very different interpretation from mentioned in the OP.

Firstly, these population figures are already outdated. The parcel number stays true, but as Snipehunter explained here, the figures are not current figures.

In short, OP is working with number when SBS is still trying to solve the resources distribution problem. As they have solved the problem, these figures no longer holds true.

Secondly, max. population has nothing to do with NPC. As Snipe explains here, it just means the population when the resources are 100% utilised. I have never heard the devs separate NPC and player population, because they designed them to be the same thing from the beginning. Similarly, I interpret actual population as the population at the existing resource utilisation level at expo.

Thirdly, the model / alogrithm used by the dev should have already taken account of land not used for agriculture / hunting etc. The way I understand it, is that the devs are trying to pinpoint which location should have settlements, and settlement of what size. And we can never define settlement location if SBS's model did not assume there are lands not suitable for farming. Therefore, I interpret the figures presented has already averaged those un-farmable land.

If you look through the discord chat log, the devs have answered me that they have also taken into account land dominated by creatures / animals.

Since I did not join the voice chat yesterday, I am not sure what issues it is with the water simulation model. It may affect the size of agricultural land etc. But one thing for sure, those population figures will not hold true when we hit expo.

Never argue with an idiot, cuz he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Vice mayor of Lighthalzen

5/14/2019 6:43:24 AM #8

I think you entirely missed Caspian point.

When they were talking about having to adjust survival parameters (aka food consumption, production....) they were not at all talking about the game at cruise speed, following their intended parameters, they were pushing the reasoning to the maximum limits.... because you know, US, the retarded morons that will play this game without any concern for the world of Elyria and doing so will fuck up every thing and destroy any sens of balance the devs tried to built it with.

They were pushing the reasoning to the extreme, calculating what total population could be sustained if all available land was dedicated to food production.

Why would they do so ? Because of us as i said, between the people that have built gigantic settlements by merging titles, those that will do it with villager tokens, those that have been doing both and the people that will do it in game by massing hundreds of players in one settlement, the need for farming land will be high and the transformation of every parcels of land into farms to sustain those monstrosities will give people ideas if they do not yet have them.

So here it was, they were talking about a dilemma, to ensure they can keep population into the constraints of the game knowing that us players will do our best to fuck things up by pushing for those limits, they had to make sure maximum sustainability was not above their expected limit, but doing so without harming normal game play. If they only tweak how much land you need, as Caspian pointed it that means you are scattering players and limit some game play.

What is importent to get from those talks is that they take into account the catastrophic effects we players will have on the world, but they try hard to balance that without destroying game play.

Log in to post