Colonisation percentages

[unmerged(3525)]

Not sure if this is the right place to post this but one can only hope

Well as I promised, here's an update on the colonisation percentage and, as I suspected, the location element plays a serious big role in everything. This is the factor that also affects the population growth rate by between 0% and 14%.

The first thing to note about the location adjuster is that it is not, as it appears an integer. This had me puzzled at first but explained a lot of discrepancies I was getting in calculation the colonisation percentages. If you work on the basis that this moves in half-point increments then it explains a lot. Wherever the population growth rate is not explained by adding the various constituent parts, it's probably because the location rate is a half less than the figure shown.

The formulae I've found out so far they ignore the effect of conquistadors, explorers and of natives but, as far as I can see, this has already been covered. My few provinces with natives do not give me enough detail to check whether these are correct.

Note also that the additional value that can be gathered from this is that, you can calculate the location factor from a provinces that is not a colony simply by using the formulae above in reverse.

I can confirm that the existing colony or trading post effect is correct.

So the formulae so far are

Siberia: 122% - location * 8%
North America: 90% - location * 8%

Using estimates for location to the nearest half-integer, this explains the success probability for around 15 colonies I have ranging from Enkan to Turkmenistan in Siberia (exactly)

The formulae for North America seems to work for every colony I have (including Yukon and Sierra Madre) with the exception of Concho which has an unexplained variance of 3%.

Note that the higher value for Siberia does not mean that success rates are high. It merely balances out the high location adjusters for the region.

I'll post more if I discover anything else.

 

[unmerged(2073)]

I think I may be getting closer to the truth but forgot to check the colonisation success percentages of a few new colonies I managed to get last night. The difference between Siberia and North America can also be explained by "location" bands since these factors fall within specific bands for the provinces I have. North America lies in the range 2.0 to 4.5 while Siberia has 5.0 to 8.0 for the provinces I'm looking at.

The formulae I would now propose is:

(80% - Location * 8%) where Location < 5.0
(122% - Location * 8%) where Location >= 5.0

Something also happens for Locations with modifiers of 10.0 or more but I only have two colonies from which to test this. My closest estimate is (142% - Location * 8%) but this is really just a guess.

To the figures above you can add a +10% modifier to North America as stated in Huszics FAQ. But this formula now explains the success probabilities I have for Tindore, Tahiti and Antisirana which all lies in the lower range of location modifiers.

Feel free to tell me what you've discovered?

 

[unmerged(3627)]

Do these figures apply to all nations? Or does each of the majors have a different base rate for each area?

 

[BiB]

The 5 colonial nations each have their bonuses.

 

[unmerged(3525)]

I guess that may emerge later once I've got to grips with the way that location affect things. For some reason, I've got plenty of unexplained differences to worry about. Something strage appears to happening still at the very low and very high end of the scale but I think I've managed to convince myself that Australia/New Zealand get the 10% bonus as North America

Perhaps an easy short cut will be to run through a few of the alternative campaigns so that I can compare the results with the Netherlands and France.

 

[unmerged(2073)]

Actually you guys might also be able to explain some major problems I've got reconciling the formuale to the actual percentages. Playing as Portugal, I've got the following big differences.

Timara (NZ) (Location modifier - 0) : -20%
Reunion/Bourbon (Off Madagascar) (Location modifier - 3) : +12%
Kitimak (near Yukon) (Location modifier - 0) : -32%
Wewak (New Guinea) (Location modifier - 1): -28%
Kalepam (New Guinea) (Location modifier - 1): -20%
Jambi (Sumatra) (Location modifier - 14): +30%
Luzon (Phillipines) (Location modifier - 14): +34%

-20% above means that actual percentage is 20% lower than the calculated one which in the case of Timara gives a basic success probability of 90% (80% + 10%) compared to actual probability of 80% for level 2 colony = base success probability of 70%.

Any ideas wouls be much appreciated.

 

[BiB]

Colonial nations also can get negative "bonuses" For example Portugal has an unreasonable hard time establishing anything in Jakarta while Holland has a very big chance there. Most likely to help histrocial colonisation.