I can't explain your last observation, but maybe I can clarify a couple of points you make earlier on.

I'm pretty sure that condition #1 and condition #2 are in fact identical. Why? Because I think that Caesar Alan means 'if construction costs are more than the total net loss', which is the same as 'being in profit except for construction costs'. Correct me if I'm wrong Alan.

Secondly, in the first year, I think you have forgotten about Caesar's donation which counts as income! If you have stayed out of debt (which you must have done to get 10 prosperity points) then, by definition, your city made a profit in the first year.

Still thinking about the last one though, hmmmmm.

[This message has been edited by Maximus Minimus (edited 06-10-2003 @ 10:37 AM).]

Because, in the second case, you have made more money from negative construction, your total net income has increased and therefore your tribute has increased. This means that your total losses, neglecting construction costs, have increased.

I think you must have started off with a donation of 50,000 to make the balance sheet make sense. Now, in the first case, neglecting construction costs, you have made a profit of one denarius. In the second case you have, neglecting construction costs, broken exactly even. That 50,000 must count in these calculations even though it is not displayed. The game is probably then being a bit harsh and not giving you credit for breaking even. That accounts for three points of prosperity. The other three are a bit of a mystery. Maybe must the game thinks that if you did not make a profit in your first year then you must have has a bail out loan? I'm not sure about that.

I think we're getting there.

Maximus Minimus,
Thanks very much. I missed the starting cash as an income wich isnt shown on the list. My last experience wich has a negative ccost had 50.000 starting cash as you calculated.
The income was: 50.000 + 32.420 = 82.420 Dn
The expenses were (except ccost):
17.944 + 663 + 20 + 63.792 = 82.419 Dn
So I could get the 10 points here and when tribute was one more Dn I couldnt. Now everthing is clear for this, thanks.

Also I see that I misunderstood Caesar Alan's explanation. In one of the cities I thought I had no income (since missed the starting cash). Indeed the two conditions seem to be the same.

I have only one more thing to test:
What if I'm in debt when including ccost, but I'm not in debt when not including it.
Assuming I have 10.000 Dn starting cash, 4.000 imports and 8.000 ccost. I have to test that too. According both conditions it should work, shouldnt it?

Maximus Minimus,
After a few more tests I see that you were right. In another thread I mentioned that 10 prosperity was possible with no income if ccost was more than other expenses. But that was wrong. None of us realised the starting cash at that time.
As a result I can say if you are calculating prosperity dont count construction cost and do count the starting cash and resque loan as an income.Even taking the resque loan doesnt affect the 2 points for making a profit and you can still get 10 if the income including starting cash is more than expenses except ccost.
Both sites say you will lose 1 point when the city lost money but I think it should, you lose 1 point if you are in reds. Since when I was in reds I was still supposed to make a profit and got the two points but lost 1 point for being in reds and ended with 9 when I spend all the resque for construction.

Philon, it sounds like you must be right about that. I can't see how else you would get nine. Well I'm glad that's all sorted! I'm still not quite sure I understand why you got four points in the previous example, rather than eight. Do you?

[This message has been edited by Maximus Minimus (edited 06-10-2003 @ 03:51 PM).]

Maximus Minimus,
I'm not sure why I got 4 instead 8. But I'm sure about one thing. The first year was a mystery for a long time.
In this thread you can read how the first year confused players. And it confused me too. We had to wait for a looong time until a genius like you came and saw the simple thing: the starting cash counts as an income.
The calculation given above should make this clear for everyone.

There are still some unclear things remained about prosperity.
One is the -3points for not paying tribute
and the other is -1p when city loses money. I think these two issues need more testing and thats what I'm gonna do.

+2 If your prosperity cap is higher than your current rating
+2 Your city makes a profit
This means; if your income (including exports, taxes, donates, and starting money for the first year) is more than your expenses (dont count construction cost) you make a profit.
+1 10% or more of your population lives in villas
+1 Less than 30% of your population lives in tents or shacks
+1 Active Hippodrome
+1 Less than 5% unemployment
+1 There is at least one Grand Insulae or better in your city
+1 You pay at least 2 Dn more than Rome's wage
-1 City loses money
-1 Unemployment rate is above 15%
-1 Your wages are below Rome's
-3 You go broke and Caesar bails you out
-3 Failure to pay tribute

Hmm.. very interesting, thanks Philon and Maximus Minumus.

Philon, you said, +2 for profit, -3 for bail out, that means that if you have a balance of 1 DN, you build a well and have -4 DN, Caesar bails out and you have 996 DN. That would result in a net loss of -1 prosperity right?

EmperorJay,
Bailing out means taking the resque loan, doesnt it? I'm a little confused about that expression.

In one of my tests I ended with 9 prosperity in the first year. This isnt one of maps wich I gave a link for download. I will make some further tests before showing that example. In this city starting money was 15.000 Dn
Imports were near 5.000 and ccost was over 11.000.
Here took the resque loan and still ended with 10. So I lost no points for anything. I spended a little more to see what happens and I ended with 9 when I spended the resque loan too. I was in reds. It isnt possible that I lost here -3 points since the maximum number is 10 including the 2 points for profit.

Maybe all the examples are too confusing so I will repeat all the outcome so far wich is clear enough to share. There are some more details wich arent clear to me yet.

1. For calculating prosperity the game follows the same rules for the first year and later years.
2. If you dont make a profit you cant reach the maximum 10 points a year end.
3. Making a profit means that your income is more than your expenses.
4. Construction cost isnt counted in expenses.
5. Starting money is an income in the first year.

CP

Quoted from philon:

I assumed here that you meant you were given a rescue loan.

EJ,
I took the list from the two sites I mention in the first post. There isnt much new information here.
The only new thing is a discovery by Maximus Minimus that starting money counts as an income when calculating profit for prosperity. I havent readed that before anywhere. So I think Maximus Minimus was the first person to clear the clouds around the first year. Since there isnt much feedback from old timers I can only hope I havent missed any old thread.
CP

Some people might consider me an "old timer", although Jayhawk has been around this site considerably longer than me. However, as far as I know, I was the first to discuss the possibility of getting Prosperity 10 in the first year (in the CBC event "Sufferin' Sahara", as briefly mentioned in Prosperity 100 in 10 years, in Tarsus), and have followed the discussion since. I think that philon has mentioned everything relevant.

(By the way, in the above-mentioned thread, I thought that my failure to achieve Prosperity 10 in the first year in the "Sufferin' Sahara" event was due to my taking the rescue gift. catalina offered evidence that that wasn't the case. From what I've read here, taking the rescue gift was not my problem, and I'm at a loss to explain the failure. Of course, that's all academic now.)

One thing that should be noted is that the lists of various things that cause Prosperity to change were originally wrong, and some of the items were interpretted incorrectly. Our knowledge is improving, but I wouldn't be too surprised if tomorrow someone showed that a Prosperity rise of 11 is possible.

Quote:

Thats a bit of an interesting comment Brugle. But if you recall I was unsure at the time when we were doing these trials of the possiblity of 11 points in the first year. However as no one has done it, it possibly is still a myth. The first year is still slighlty different from the later years but I think if it was possible someone would have sorted it by now. I have been following the comments Caesar Philon, and it is interesting that you are reviving this topic.

Never accept what someone else says unless you can prove it for yourself.

Clifford,
I had keeped working on this topic since the first year was for me annoying. I was asking myself how it was possible to get 10 prosperity in the first year without an income. I thought I had no income, but I was wrong. In one of the maps shown above the income shows zero but actually it wasnt zero since the starting cash counted as an income.

In another map, thats the last example, the calculation is for me clear enough and I have no more questions about the first year. Maybe you missed that example.
In the last example:
income:
32.420 trade receipts
50.000 starting money
total: 82.420
expenses:
63.792 tribute
20 soundries
663 wages
17944 imports
total: 82.419

profit: 1 DN, result 10 prosperity
In this example if tribute is 1 dn more you wont make a profit and wont get 10pr. If the file is played until the end of dec the result will be 4 pr. If you only delete for instance a garden this will affect tribute and you will get 10.

Edit:
I would be happy if I could give a natural example. But without cheating it isnt possible to get a negative or zero construction cost. Therefore it isnt possible to prepare a sav file in the moment where you are in the very edge of making a profit or not.
But in the above example you are at a moment where only 1 Dn changes the result.

[This message has been edited by philon (edited 06-12-2003 @ 02:04 AM).]

Out of interest how come you are paying tribute in the first year. I thought no one did? Might be wrong though.

Just to clarify the point about the rescue gift. I showed to my own satisfaction whilst I was playing the recent contest 'Graduation', that the rescue gift does not count as a bail out as far as prosperity is concerned. You are fine until you are in the realms of 'Caesar furiously lends you 5000 denarius'. This is a loan, the first one is a gift so you are not technically in debt at that stage. In fact I think that the rescue loan counts as income.

Edit: Sorry, Philon already said that!

[This message has been edited by Maximus Minimus (edited 06-12-2003 @ 04:40 AM).]

Clifford,
I didn't mean to suggest that I thought a Prosperity rise of 11 was possible, and I wasn't reviving the topic. It was just an example of something that might be discovered that contradicts "accepted wisdom". I could just as easily have said "getting Prosperity 100 without ever building patrician housing". Since "accepted wisdom" has been wrong about several aspects of Prosperity before, I see no reason to think that we've now "proved" how it works.

philon,
It shouldn't be too hard to prepare a "natural" file which is on the edge of making a profit. The difference between making a profit or not would come from whether traders bought/sold an item (or bought and sold a combination of items, if you want the difference to be only 1 Dn).

Clifford,
If the city makes a profit (counting construction but not tribute), tribute is 1/4 of the profit (with a minimum which might be based on the population). Typically, construction costs are quite high in the first year and the population isn't large, so tribute isn't paid.

Maximus Minimus,
Taking the rescue gift immediately lowers Prosperity by 3, but not below 0. Therefore, the penalty for taking the rescue gift is avoided only when Prosperity is 0 (as in the first year of a mission).

[This message has been edited by Brugle (edited 06-12-2003 @ 12:07 PM).]

I think the most exciting discoveries in all c3 history were Clifford's and Brugle's about prosperity. Here I'm trying to clear only a few details about the first year. As I said above there isnt much new information here.

Brugle,
it isnt possible only for the first year. At least it isnt possible without being in reds. Certainly its easy for the later years but you know in later years there isnt a starting money.
As you know, how profit was calculated in the second and later years was clear to everyone for a long time. But the first year seemed to confuse a lot of players. It didnt seem like the fist year was following the same rules. The reason was that all players, including me, missed to count the starting money as an income. So if the starting money was high enough it was even possible to make a profit without any other income.

The condition I'm looking for is that income is close to expenses (not including ccost) in the first year.

Income = expenses
starting money + exports + taxes + donated money = wages + imports

Since ccost isnt counted in expenses and since it wouldnt be zero or negative in the first year without cheating the above condition is impossible without being in reds. Altough this wouldnt be a perfect example still it would prove that you have to count starting money. I can show an example where you are in reds (you will lose 1 point). Say you are in -12.500 Dn and you wont get the 9 points (1point is lost cuz being in reds) if you spend a little more for anything except construction. In such an example you will have to count starting money as an income. And the numbers will correspond.

Maximus Minimus,
Yes Brugle is right. When you take the resque prosperity will change -3 points immediately even when it is the middle of a year. Since in the fist year prosperity is zero it has no affect. As an outcome it can be said that if you want to increase prosperity fast, maybe in a contest take the resque in the first year.
Btw, there is a starting money, a resque loan and a credit of 5000Dn. The rescque is usually a little les money than the starting cash and it is shown in donates. Was in Graduation by chance the resque 5000 Dn or are you confusing it with the credit?

philon,
Sorry, I wasn't thinking clearly, and forgot that you have to stay out of debt.

Sorry I didn't make myself clear. I meant Philon reviving the topic not you Brugle .

Also Caesar Philon have you seen this thread that got me started on trying to get 10 in the first year. I then changed over to here for the topic as it wasn't really a CBC topic.

http://www.citybuildingcontests.net/YapBB/topicDisplay.php?topicID=128&begin=26

[This message has been edited by Clifford (edited 06-13-2003 @ 00:21 AM).]

Brugle and Philon,

I didn't know that about the rescue loan. Very interesting, thank you.

Clifford,
For me it was clear enough.
I have readed the page you gave a link for. Yes I see how things had started. Also I see that the nonaffect of resque in the first year was guessed right long ago. I havent introduced it as a new information. I think the well known list for prosperity points needs a few explanations added. The list could be ok but a few details are missing.

In the cbc forum page you mention from a city where you lost 2 points. And you explain it by not making a profit. 20.000 Dn starting money, no exports, no taxes, and at the end you arent in debt.
Cliff, I can only say here you made a profit and you lost the 2 points somewhere else.

Also catilina in the famous Prosperity 100 in 10 years, in Tarsus thread shows an interesting example. Here catilina too made a profit and the reason for 10 points wasnt the difficulty level.

CP