NationStates

Posted: **Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:19 pm**

Proposed Change: Major reworking of lifespan modeling. Less important: the environment, political corruption, and citizen niceness. More important: citizen health, economic strength, poor incomes, and government spending on health and welfare. Executing the elderly has less effect in nations where citizens rarely reach 65+ anyway. Brand new, ordinary-ish nations have lifespans in the high 60s rather than low 60s.

Posted: **Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:43 pm**

I support this. *smiles as citizens are about to have an average lifespan of more than 80 years*

Posted: **Tue Feb 13, 2018 7:45 am**

Verily in favour of.

Posted: **Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:48 am**

[violet] wrote:Beta 006: Lifespan

Proposed Change: Major reworking of lifespan modeling. Less important: the environment, political corruption, and citizen niceness. More important: citizen health, economic strength, poor incomes, and government spending on health and welfare.

Shouldn't the level of charitable spending be a factor there, as well? I'm not sure how you'd calculate that, though, I admit... Maybe, at least in part, have it (as in various RL cultures) increasing with Religiousness?

Posted: **Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:34 am**

Bears Armed wrote:Shouldn't the level of charitable spending be a factor there, as well? I'm not sure how you'd calculate that, though, I admit... Maybe, at least in part, have it (as in various RL cultures) increasing with Religiousness?

Compassion would be the logical stat for how much your citizens contribute to charity. [violet] said the calculation is already counting Niceness, which is close enough, although it was counted under the "less important" column.

That said, even charity isn't strictly necessary. Commercial healthcare could be fine if your citizens are rich enough to afford it. Which is where the economic strength and poor income factors come in.

Posted: **Tue Feb 13, 2018 1:56 pm**

Grudgingly in favour of this. I've always wondered why my Lifespan was so high when my health is so abysmal. Testing this out on my nation gives the somewhat expected precipitous drop.

Posted: **Tue Feb 13, 2018 4:14 pm**

Looks good to me. From the nations I've tried out there are going to be some major changes to the census rankings for lifespan and development. Most of my nations exhibit fairly small changes of just a few years, except this one which rises from 24 up to 90, surely one of the biggest changes of any nation?

Also, not sure if this is a bug, or just as a result of some rescaling, but Pinkiopia sees substantial increases in both lifespan and death rate.

Posted: **Tue Feb 13, 2018 6:07 pm**

Pretty good change, as many of my nations have high lifespans now, just don't take 3 months like last time, ok?

Posted: **Tue Feb 13, 2018 6:34 pm**

Pencil Sharpeners 2 wrote:... Also, not sure if this is a bug, or just as a result of some rescaling, but Pinkiopia sees substantial increases in both lifespan and death rate.

Morpheus, we have found him. He is THE ONE.

Edit: the matrix has my keyboard

Posted: **Tue Feb 13, 2018 6:40 pm**

Holy cow. This would drop my lifespan to 27.47 years :unsure:

I'd be okay with it though.

Although I don't think we should lower the impact the environment has on citizen health. The importance of a good environment to a healthier populace is especially true in the real world, and ought to be on NS.

Posted: **Tue Feb 13, 2018 6:47 pm**

Vovodoco wrote:... Although I don't think we should lower the impact the environment has on citizen health. The importance of a good environment to a healthier populace is especially true in the real world, and ought to be on NS.

In the real world we don't sleep in latrines either. NS treats it as if we'll all chock to death if a city park gets bulldozed over, too unrealistic.

Posted: **Tue Feb 13, 2018 6:52 pm**

The Glorious Third Reign of Templedom wrote:
Vovodoco wrote:... Although I don't think we should lower the impact the environment has on citizen health. The importance of a good environment to a healthier populace is especially true in the real world, and ought to be on NS.

In the real world we don't sleep in latrines either. NS treats it as if we'll all chock to death if a city park gets bulldozed over, too unrealistic.

Fair enough lol. I'm looking for a compromise though. Welfare, healthcare, economic strength, income, and environment having a huge impact on the health of a nation's citizens is a pretty fair beta.

Not to mention I'm okay with turning my country into a Green Libertarian one, which should soften the blow from the ridiculous lifespan shortage this beta would cost me.

Posted: **Tue Feb 13, 2018 7:00 pm**

Pencil Sharpeners 2 wrote:Also, not sure if this is a bug, or just as a result of some rescaling, but Pinkiopia sees substantial increases in both lifespan and death rate.

It's the rescaling. Currently Pinkiopia is ranked low in the world on both Lifespan and Death Rate! Under the beta, Pinkiopia's average lifespan will increase a little but still be less than average, while its Death Rate will increase a lot and be higher than average.

Posted: **Tue Feb 13, 2018 7:05 pm**

If I may, what's the reasoning behind lowering the impact the environment has on lifespan? Are there some nations with an unrealistically high lifespan due their environment when, all things considered, they live in a dangerous undeveloped hell hole?

Posted: **Tue Feb 13, 2018 7:23 pm**

Yes, the general feeling is that the effect of the environment is overstated in a couple places, including Lifespan. It should be a factor but not an overwhelming one.

Posted: **Tue Feb 13, 2018 7:25 pm**

[violet] wrote:Yes, the general feeling is that the effect of the environment is overstated in a couple places, including Lifespan. It should be a factor but not an overwhelming one.

Fair enough.
*sigh*

I guess I'll just have to live the next 9 years of my life to the fullest lol

thx :bow:

Posted: **Wed Feb 14, 2018 5:56 am**

Trotterdam wrote:
Bears Armed wrote:Shouldn't the level of charitable spending be a factor there, as well? I'm not sure how you'd calculate that, though, I admit... Maybe, at least in part, have it (as in various RL cultures) increasing with Religiousness?
Compassion would be the logical stat for how much your citizens contribute to charity. [violet] said the calculation is already counting Niceness, which is close enough, although it was counted under the "less important" column.

I thought that 'Compassion' was based largely on your nation's willingness to support state funding of such matters (& welfare), meaning that it would already be factored-in and that nations whose people prefer charities instead would probably have relatively low values for this trait...

Posted: **Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:59 am**

Bears Armed wrote:
Trotterdam wrote:Compassion would be the logical stat for how much your citizens contribute to charity. [violet] said the calculation is already counting Niceness, which is close enough, although it was counted under the "less important" column.

I thought that 'Compassion' was based largely on your nation's willingness to support state funding of such matters (& welfare), meaning that it would already be factored-in and that nations whose people prefer charities instead would probably have relatively low values for this trait...

I don't think so. My puppet Iguanarctica has low healthcare, non-existent welfare, but very high compassion.

Posted: **Wed Feb 14, 2018 7:43 am**

I'm completely for this.

Posted: **Wed Feb 14, 2018 8:25 am**

Bears Armed wrote:I thought that 'Compassion' was based largely on your nation's willingness to support state funding of such matters (& welfare), meaning that it would already be factored-in and that nations whose people prefer charities instead would probably have relatively low values for this trait...

Purely my speculation: "compassion" as it is right now has no practical effect on anything but merely a score tied to a medal (world ranking icon). No 'charity' component in existence either, "welfare" spending is totally controlled by issue answers. Would be great if mod can confirm this.

[violet] wrote: ... Less important: the environment, political corruption, and citizen niceness. More important: citizen health, economic strength, poor incomes, and government spending on health and welfare. ...

Also, I think "cheerfulness" (optimism) is more apt than "niceness" (friendly, hospitable).

Posted: **Wed Feb 14, 2018 12:51 pm**

Very interesting. I’ve always been a bit surprised that my personal nation had such a low lifespan, given its high technological advancement, massive personal incomes, relative wealth equality, and so on. It was all that damn polluted environment’s fault.

*fist shake*

Looking forward to the average Landser living a bonus fifty years.

Posted: **Wed Feb 14, 2018 4:09 pm**

The beta description is a little misleading: this beta actually removes Niceness altogether from the algorithm. So there is no longer any impact on Lifespan from Niceness (nor its close relative, Compassion).

Posted: **Wed Feb 14, 2018 4:14 pm**

Fantastic! My life expectancy is at 27.97 years for some bizarre reason, and has been for a while despite major investment in universal healthcare. The beta raises it to 90.28 years, so a massive difference!

Posted: **Wed Feb 14, 2018 7:05 pm**

I don't mind this though I'm one of the ones with a big jump. I gain 72 years roughly. From 23 to 95 years.

Posted: **Wed Feb 14, 2018 7:58 pm**

46566 wrote:I don't mind this though I'm one of the ones with a big jump. I gain 72 years roughly. From 23 to 95 years.

That seems a bit much...

I see similarly enormous effects on nations such as Christian Democrats, Digmound, and Sovereign Default. I think the beta is just a bit imbalanced.

I’ve wanted this for a while, though. Most NS nations are developed nations, and developed nations should have lifespan in the 70+ range