Started by z, August 02, 2008, 05:07:50 PM
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Quote from: jplumbley on October 27, 2009, 09:12:48 PMI would like you to proove this... I have not had any problems what-so-ever with abandonment in my cities due to the PH [pathfinding heuristic] being higher than yours. If you are so confident that the PH causes abandonment, proove it with Simulator Z and raise the value to 0.009 and show me the abandonment.
QuoteIt would be interesting to see how this one change in the PH effects other play styles. There is a big question of why do I not get abandonment with a PH of .009 but you do? Maybe there was an anomoly in your experiment? I simply have not seen anything like that happen in my cities other then when I was using the MAXIS Default Simulator.I am not trying to challenge your test, but I think it needs more testing.
QuoteTelltale signs that the Simulator is unbalanced:1. Abandonment when there is sufficient demand and jobs available.2. Sims taking obscure paths.3. Possible Abandonment/Repopulation cycle. (can be caused by other things aswell, such as poorly designed network structure, other Simulator issues, etc.)There are others aswell but these are big ones.
Quote from: RippleJet on November 04, 2009, 07:39:23 AMThere are only five of them in the game:Abandoned due to lack of powerAbandoned due to lack of waterAbandoned due to low desirabilityAbandoned due to commute timeAbandoned due to low demandThe third one is the one that you would get due to low customers in a commercial building, or due to any other desirability factor being too low (all in all, for any RCI type due to the desirability falling below the abandonment threshold).The fourth one is the only one that you'd normally get in residentials, unless you cut off power or water.The fifth one is the one you'd get if the overall demand for that RCI type is negative, and that can occur for all RCI types.
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on November 07, 2009, 04:15:15 AMInteresting post, though... I still have a question: what affects how frequently the game "refreshes" its paths for the entire city? Say you bulldoze a road, and you get the "flying car" bug using the path query tool (and in the congestion data view it still shows up)... how long does it take, usually, before the game refreshes itself and corrects all the paths for its Sims when they travel?Does the PH affect this, or is it something else within the simulator, or even as a direct result of computer speed?
Quote from: xxdita on November 07, 2009, 04:26:41 AMOne dumb question, which I think needs to be asked.Can a building become abandoned due to it's desirability factors changing?
QuoteAnd if so, is that abandonment still defined as "Abandoned Due To Commute Time"? I only ask because I can't recall ever seeing an abandoned building with "Abandoned Due To Pollution", or any other reason aside from commute time. Perhaps all abandonment is blamed on commute times?
QuoteNot to discount your tests by any means, I just think we still don't have enough information. Perhaps get pics of the area in question's desirability before & say 10 years after switching traffic sims? Especially R$$$.
Quote from: z on November 07, 2009, 03:43:12 AMAnyway, it all started when Jason challenged me to a duel. (No, that can't be right. What was it? Oh yes! ) to prove an assertion I had made based on experiments I performed when I first built Simulator Z. I had found that increasing the pathfinding heuristic above .003 would produce abandonment in various situations. Jason's response was:So I did exactly what Jason had asked. I took Simulator Z, raised the PH to .009 and showed him abandonment where none had existed before, and I did it all publicly in this long post. However, in a later post, Jason stated the following:OK. I'm sure that there are other skeptics out there besides Jason.
Quote from: jplumbley on October 29, 2009, 06:48:06 PMI dont begin to trivialize this as "elementary"... I will say I do not know exactly how A* is used in SC4, but we do know it is a function in a larger equation or a function of a series of equations which determine the IF, HOW, WHERE, WHEN, etc. for a Sim to reach thier destination. What you have read only strengthens what my belief of the PH is used for, if in fact what you have read is true.To me...PH is the HOW of the Simulator. It is what the Simulator uses to determine WHICH path to choose to get from point A to point B and the value of the PH, from my understanding, is how accurately it compares the routes that it finds. But, this has no direct relationship to IF the path it chooses is a successful or unsuccessful path. Now, from time to time depending on the accuracy of the value it may select a route that is slightly "slower".Speed is the cost per tile, we know the Simulator will use Speed with multiple variables like the CvS, Intersection vs Speed properties and more to determine the cost of each route it checks.The IF part, is where abandonment will come into play, and it should be as simple as an IF/THEN statement for the Simulator to compare the "best" route it finds for the Sim against the Maximum Commute Time. If the total round trip cost of the trip is over 17, then the building becomes abandoned.Now, the part that makes this theory dicey is the fact that there are 1000s of Sims in one building, with multiple destinations.... I do not know how MAXIS has handled this but it is very easy to see that in many cases your buildings dont have all of thier Sims commuting. One might chalk this up to so Sims are kids and go to school instead of work, etc. But maybe there is another reason for this, a more practical one in reference to the Traffic Simulator. In a building of 1000s of Sims, even 100s of Sims, there will be routes that work and routes that dont. The way I believe that MAXIS has handled the failed routes is by comparing the number of successful and unsuccessful routes from the same building and if the number of failed routes reachs a certain threshhold, such as 40% for example, then the building will become abandoned. But, by the same token if the building has a much higher percentage of successful routes then the building will stay inhabitted and depending on how many unsuccessful routes are found could be used to determine the descrpancy between "building occupancy" and "building capacity".So for the sake of an example for those who don't understand my theory: (this will in no way be totally accurate, but an idea of how this may work)Lets take a building that has a Building Capactiy = 1000 SimsNow, the 1000 Sims in the building will search for routes to the random destinations they have chosen for work. The Simulator will do it's work, calculate the cost of each trip, compare them using the value of PH then compare the cost of each the best route for each Sim with the Commute Time allowed.After the routes have been compared and the best ones for each of the 1000 Sims has been compared to the Commute Time, the Simulator finds that 700 or the 1000 Sims found a successful route to work. Which, surpasses the 60% requirement (just an example remember) for the building to be considered "Occupied" so the building does not abandon.So, you will probably see 700 Sims leaving the building and following thier route to work. But when you query the building, it might say there are 893 Sims occupying the building. Why are the other 193 Sims still in the building you may ask? Well, it may only take a percentage of the Sims who did not find a successful route out of the building, but left the others in to possibly increase population for stage caps, demand and other purposes in the game that these Sims would effect.It is a theory, but to be honest I think this is how the game really deals with pathfinding, abandonment and how they two together act to effect other parts of the game. It is probably by no means a "perfect" description of how it works, but a general idea and I am sure there are other things that are not taken into consideration that take this basic theory and make it more complex under the same basic prinicpal I have just described.
Quote from: jplumbley on November 07, 2009, 07:06:35 PMI have a problem with your assertion that "Higher Max Commute Time" = faster game speed..... You have pointed out that Simulator A runs slower than other Simulators, which is true. So, then if Maximum Commute Time is what creates this "slowness" why does Simulator A run slower than the default Simulator when Simulator A has a Max Commute Time almost 3x higher?Your post is interesting. You have shown that the 0.009 value can cause abandonment in any Simulator, but still there are questions why it happens in some cities but not all. You again have attacked me in trying to say I have missed it... but it is hard to say I miss it when I don't run into the problem. Your entire post seems hostile towards me.I also disagree with your assertion that the City is "less attractive" to R$$$ Sims and more attractive to R$ Sims. The PH should not be effecting the demand as this statement would suggest. What is more likely is this is a side-effect of the Pathfinding itself, something more along the lines of something I posted earlier where the buildings are dilapidating due to the number of paths in that building being "not valid" but not enough to the point where the building has abandoned. Quoted below is that theory I had posted over a week ago:The relevant part in this quoted post is where it discusses the part of the theory is where the game determines how to abandon a building. Dilapidation would come into effect here because it would create a buffer zone between "normal occupancy" and "outright abandonment".
Quote from: ldog on November 07, 2009, 09:38:51 PMI haven't had time to try to observe the attractiveness theory, although in regards to the ph, we know it shouldn't have anything to do with it; yet it is pretty clear it seems to effect more things than it should. As far as it being the pathfinder though, changing the ph does directly affect the pathfinder, so if you think it is the pathfinder then you can't disagree with the ph.I still think your dilapidation/abandonment theory is valid, but I don't see how this contradicts it.Anyway, I know your post was directed to Steve, but I had to throw my 2¢ in
Quote from: jplumbley on November 07, 2009, 06:05:04 PMI did not "challenge you to a duel" and I think you should stop acting that I am "dueling" with you... I am sorry you have seen this as some kind of duel.... Where it is clearly a one-sided duel and one I am not trying to participate in but collaborate in a group effort.
QuoteI am tired of your attitude and the way you relentlessly attack my work with impunity.
QuoteBelieve me I have been trying really hard not to fight with you and give you some respect, unfortunately I do not feel you see it, nor are you even trying to give me that same respect.
Quote from: jplumbley on November 07, 2009, 07:06:35 PMI have a problem with your assertion that "Higher Max Commute Time" = faster game speed..... You have pointed out that Simulator A runs slower than other Simulators, which is true. So, then if Maximum Commute Time is what creates this "slowness" why does Simulator A run slower than the default Simulator when Simulator A has a Max Commute Time almost 3x higher?
QuoteYour post is interesting. You have shown that the 0.009 value can cause abandonment in any Simulator, but still there are questions why it happens in some cities but not all. You again have attacked me in trying to say I have missed it... but it is hard to say I miss it when I don't run into the problem.
QuoteI also disagree with your assertion that the City is "less attractive" to R$$$ Sims and more attractive to R$ Sims. The PH should not be effecting the demand as this statement would suggest. What is more likely is this is a side-effect of the Pathfinding itself, something more along the lines of something I posted earlier where the buildings are dilapidating due to the number of paths in that building being "not valid" but not enough to the point where the building has abandoned.
Quote from: ldog on November 07, 2009, 09:38:51 PMI am also still able to get quite a lot of abandonment with .003 , same testbed.
Quote from: jplumbley on November 07, 2009, 10:03:36 PMI think Steve's wording was probably misleading. His tests seem to confirm the theory I posted last week, but the PH isn't effecting the demand (the way I would read attractiveness would in my mind be translated to demand in technical terms)... I do not think dilapidation is a mechanic of a demand related situation, but a technical response to how the game is handling the finding of "valid commuters" and "invalid commuters".
QuoteA question I would have now would be does the demand for R$ go down and the demand for R$$$ go up with the changes that occur? If this is the case, then as a side-effect of that mechanic it would effect demand but instead R$$$ demand is rising instead of falling as Steve suggested. But this would be due to the drop in population for R$$$ and rise in population for R$. If the demand stays the same, the game may actually still interpret many of those buildings to be still considered R$$$ buildings even though they are dilapidated and still fill the higher wealth jobs available.
QuoteI simply dont see the direct relationship to demand that Steve has suggested. I see a mechanic the game employs while handling "invalid traffic routes".
Quote from: z on November 07, 2009, 11:56:36 PMJason, if you are interested in such a post, you could help me by furnishing the capacity numbers for the simulator used in the tests. Otherwise, I'll use my best estimate.
Quote from: z on November 07, 2009, 11:56:36 PMThere is a misunderstanding here. I do not see this as a duel, or that you are dueling with me. What you quoted was intended to be a joke, and to lighten things up a bit, especially as I was about to drag people through a long and complex post. The "dueling" part was crossed out; I stated, "No, that can't be right," and I proceeded to make a little fun of myself for not seeing what was really going on. It seems to me that if I was attacking anyone in that statement, it was myself. Between that, the various animals jumping up and down, the other animated icons, and the other jokes, I really didn't expect anyone to take that part of the post seriously. I am sorry that you did; please simply see this as humor that did not work as intended.
Quote from: z on November 07, 2009, 11:56:36 PMQuote from: jplumbley on November 07, 2009, 06:05:04 PMI am tired of your attitude and the way you relentlessly attack my work with impunity.I don't understand this part. I went over the main body of the post several times, doing my best to keep it clear of anything that might be interpreted as an attack on your work. I changed a number of things that were slightly ambiguous for this very reason. I threw in the "Disclaimer" which was also designed to be a little humorous, but which clearly stated that the purpose of my post was to understand properties of the simulator in general, and not to compare the worthiness of any simulators. You had asked if the effects I had previously demonstrated with Simulator Z could be shown with Simulator A, and my tests were designed to show that. The tests were focused on how various properties of the simulator worked; I just don't see where there was any attack.
Quote from: jplumbley on November 07, 2009, 06:05:04 PMI am tired of your attitude and the way you relentlessly attack my work with impunity.
Quote from: jplumbley on November 07, 2009, 06:05:04 PMBefore I even read your post I have to comment on this...
Quote from: z on November 07, 2009, 03:43:12 AMSo I think I have demonstrated that the same effects I have shown happening in Simulator Z can also happen in Simulator A. But obviously, they don't happen all the time, as Jason has pointed out. So now it's time to answer his question: Why hasn't he seen these effects? I have also gone through the entire testing thread he referenced, and certainly, I think that the general feeling any reader of that thread would get would be that this simulator was working quite well, was a big improvement over previous simulators, and had no major problems. I think one summary Jason posted is also relevant:I would agree with this completely, and in fact, this is what I have concentrated on showing in this post. Why didn't Jason see any of this?
QuoteI haven't done any measurements on the speed of the default Simulator. Have you, or have you seen any?The effect of the maximum commute time on the speed is easy to verify, once you know to look for it. Just take any city that's big enough so that the game slows down in Cheetah mode when Simulator A runs. Time how fast the game runs. Then change the maximum commute time to 600, and run the same test on the same city. You should see a measurable difference. Since the difference is connected with the pathfinding engine, it will vary exponentially with the size of the city, so you're unlikely to get the exact same results I did. On the other hand, you should easily be able to replicate the effect whereby Simulator A runs slightly faster than Simulator Z.
Quote from: z on November 07, 2009, 11:56:36 PMI had realized that I hadn't fully answered this part of the question, and I was planning to address it more. I think that what it comes down to is what you call playing style. There are two aspects of your playing style that you have publicly described that would explain why you don't see this effect. First, you tend to play smaller cities than the one I used in my tests, and based on the way A* works, this would make it exponentially less likely that you would see such an effect. As I mentioned, I went through your whole testing thread, and the only place I saw evidence of this effect was in Nate's city. But that was by far the largest city in your tests, with all other cities being under a million, as far as I could tell. So there's a huge connection between the likelihood of this happening and the size of the city, which your tests appear to confirm. Nate's city when we started was about the same size as my test city.The second factor is that in your cities, you tend to mix different zone types closely together. This not only makes paths between Sims and their jobs shorter, but it means that there tend to be a lot of short, valid paths between Sims and their jobs. This makes the job of the pathfinder much easier. Combine that with the fact that in smaller cities, there are less paths that need to be searched, and the result is that the pathfinder does not need such a precise setting to find correct paths reliably.I saw this effect with the Maxis simulator when I first played the game. On medium-sized tiles, it worked reasonably well for me. But on large tiles, things really fell apart. (Please note: I am not trying to compare the Maxis simulator to Simulator A; I am just comparing this one effect. Simulator A is obviously vastly superior to the Maxis simulator in just about every conceivable way.)
Quote from: b22rian on November 08, 2009, 05:36:37 AMI found out the sim B hard i was using actually had a lower PH value than sim Z does.. (0.025) as compared to .03.
Page created in 0.380 seconds with 36 queries.