Traffic vs "jobs" or "occupancy"

[SC4BOY 21]

When I query building I get always a "dual number" 

Residence  will be "Occupants" such as 306/322

Does this mean that the building at its current form has potential to hold 322 sims and that there are 306 in it now? 

For Commercial and Industrial it will be "Jobs" 22/32 for example.. Does this mean that there are more jobs available? 

Do either of these numbers relate in any way to the "traffic" in and out of the building if you use the "Traffic Query" tool? (alt-?) For example if I get a new industrial building and it immediately shows maybe a 16/24 number. Does this have any relationship to the ability of sims to get to the building? Does it just pop up with people working there no matter what? If I start getting traffic to the building .. for example 7 cars 5 pedestrians and 2 trains for example.. are those supposed to relate to the number of sims working there or getting to work there or does it mean like "customers"? I note that these don't seem to relate to traffic on the road/street or whatever that is beside the lot. 

Hopefully I have made my questions clear..

[Bones1 96]

The number you get when you query, such as 306/322, means that the building has a maximum capacity of 322 when it's "100% desirable", but at this point it is in a less-than-desirable area and only holds 306. In other words, it's telling you that the area is 95% desirable for that particular building class (R$$, CO$$, or whatever).

If it's a job building, then that means that only 306 sims can work there. However, that doesn't mean that 306 are actually working there; you can query that using the route-query tool on the building.

[dmrsunz 2]

However, that doesn't mean that 306 are actually working there; you can query that using the route-query tool on the building.quote>

I didn't know that, I thought the first number was actual occupancy. So theoretically the difference between the route query number and the "306" number is how many more R sims are needed by the business, right?

Where did you discover that bit of info?

[Bones1 96]

Yes. However, note that a building needs the right mix of R$, R$$, and R$$$ working it in to reach its maximum potential employees. And, it has to be conveniently located so that sims will work there. Otherwise, it still functions fine, but doesn't actually employ many sims.

Here's a chart for job mix, that has been posted a few times in previous threads:

____\_Jobs Provided

Jobs_\R$___R$$__R$$$

CS$___100%_0%___0%

CS$$__68%__27%__5%

CS$$$_62%__30%__8%

CO$$__40%__50%__10%

CO$$$_20%__65%__15%

IA____100%_0%___0%

ID____100%_0%___0%

IM____50%__45%__5%

IH____10%__80%__10%

[dmrsunz 2]

Wait a second! I just got back to the game and I queried a commercial building, King Design, and the regular query numbers were 18/22, meaning that at most 22 Sims could be employed if Desirability where maximized, but the current max is 18; however the route query showed 30 employees commuting by car! ???

[Goldfish4209 9]

This commuter/jobs difference has also mystified me. Any answers on that?

[Bones1 96]

Originally posted by: dmrsunz Wait a second! I just got back to the game and I queried a commercial building, King Design, and the regular query numbers were 18/22, meaning that at most 22 Sims could be employed if Desirability where maximized, but the current max is 18; however the route query showed 30 employees commuting by car! ???quote>

 

Yeah, the commute query is a bit misleading. What it's telling you is how many cars/pedestrian/busses/etc are arriving at that building and using that building to get to other adjacent buildings.

For example, commuters can park at one building, and then use it to get to the building next to it, or next to that. So, you'll get a commute query that makes it seems like more people are working at a building than possible.

Route-query some of the adjacent buildings. You'll notice that the path will show the sims arriving at the other building.

This happens most with industry, but also happens with commerce.

[dmrsunz 2]

So then what can we really know about occupancy? From the reg. query I can know the building's desirability. The route query does not help. Is the route query behavior the result of the "tract"-based calculations use by the simulation; a tract being that mythical area written of in the Prima Guide? Seems to me it comes back to the simple X/Y desirability number. That's all you can attempt to influence directly. I want to understand this beccause I have big demand for R$ and R$$ and big demand for all type of Cs, Co, and IHT but R$ and R$$ are commuting out of the city for work and abandoning over commute time. I zone Com and Ind but in many places near where the R abandonment is occurring those zones take many months to develop if they develop at all. I was hoping that understanding the query and using Equinox's RCI Query Modd would help, but so far I haven't been able to crack the nut.

[thunderbirdqb09 0]

So how do you make a certain area more desirable?

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Usually by adding serv ices and parks.  Also look around for NIMBY things.

[Bones1 96]

Yeah, and commerce loves traffic (unlike residential). If you've got lots of sims commuting to (or through) the commercial area for jobs, it will drive up commercial desirability in that area. It's sort of self-fulfilling.

[SC4BOY 21]

Originally posted by: Bones1

Originally posted by: dmrsunz Wait a second! I just got back to the game and I queried a commercial building, King Design, and the regular query numbers were 18/22, meaning that at most 22 Sims could be employed if Desirability where maximized, but the current max is 18; however the route query showed 30 employees commuting by car! ???quote>

 

Yeah, the commute query is a bit misleading. What it's telling you is how many cars/pedestrian/busses/etc are arriving at that building and using that building to get to other adjacent buildings.

For example, commuters can park at one building, and then use it to get to the building next to it, or next to that. So, you'll get a commute query that makes it seems like more people are working at a building than possible.

Route-query some of the adjacent buildings. You'll notice that the path will show the sims arriving at the other building.

This happens most with industry, but also happens with commerce.quote>

 

Actually without doing much experimenting it is clearly true that this is not true. I don't claim to know what the answers are, but I definitely know what the answers are not. 

In a well-designed city with good traffic flow, it is often the case that route query will show traffic to the building that is well beyond any capacity that would be possible. I have seen thousands of units traveling to buildings that only held under 100 capacity.. (and no there were not "conglomerate" adjacent buildings)

[Bones1 96]

Ummm, yeah SC4Boy, that's what I was trying to say. The route-query shows you all the sims traveling to AND through the buildings that you query. Many of those sims may be using it as a short-cut to get to an adjacent building. That's why you'll see more sims in your query than a single building can possibly hold. You see this all the time in industrial areas.

[SC4BOY 21]

No they are NOT shortcutting.. they END, STOP, TERMINATE.. what else can I say.. That's clearly the DESTINATION. There is no shortcut.. I tried to make that as clear as I could. And yes I know the phenomena you speak of.. this is not the cause.

[tungston 19]

The route query is time sensitive, there maybe sims coming and going.

[Bones1 96]

SC4Boy, you're either wrong or misunderstanding me. The route-query shows the route terminate at a building, but that may NOT be the building they really terminate at. The sims may take a "short-cut" from the building they park at (or bus to) to some other buildings that is connected to it. This happens all the time in industrial areas, and I've seen it with commercial too.

You are claiming that there can be more sims working at a building than its max jobs. That is NOT the case. The route-query is simply a bit buggy, because it doesn't show the final short-cut. You can verify it yourself by bulldozing those adjacent buildings and you'll see that the number of sims shown in the route-query will drop accordingly. (Give it a few months for the game to update things.)

Well, that's my interpretation of the route-query, anyway.

[dmrsunz 2]

Bones1 and tungston...

You each have different takes on the Current Occupancy numbers in the building Query. Bones1 says its current max occupancy vs optimal max occupancy. tungston says it's actual occupancy vs max occupancy. Please grab your pistols, stand back to back, step off 10 paces, and decide who's right. The Prima guide sides with tungston but we know they lie. Anyway, does it make any difference to gameplay?

tungston: By "time sensitive" do you mean it's like a snapshot of that instant and that other sims might be just getting out of bed (or are busy posting on Simtropolis) and will leave later to arrive at the same building and are not accounted for? To me the game implys that it's all traffic at all times (since I can hit a button and get either AM or PM results).

[SC4BOY 21]

Bones1 No I am claiming more traffic can terminate at a building than the building "stat" as stated in the xxx/yyy found in the "query tile" information. I know what you are talking about and as I am now saying for the fiftygazillionith time, that is not what is happening.. sheeez

And tungsten I have found this stat to be stable for many months.. I've never made it a point to try to see what the limit is, but I believe there is sufficient data to show that, independent on how much our "senses" want this traffic to be "workers", that it contains a component of travel that extends beyond that number.

As I have stated before, I don't know what the component is, nor what its parmeters are, but I don't think it takes a lot of experimentation to show that is a constant and consistent element of sim travel in large, well-pathed cities. I have seen many people state uncategorically that this is wrong, even though they admit to seeing the event, but they justdon't want to see it. .*shrugs* I guess intuition can just be a powerful element of judgement.

Although I certainly am willing to be shown that it is an "oddity" of an imperfect travel implementation, I don't believe there is shown enough data to state this is absolute. The simple "wish" for it to be that in order to meet one's RL concept of what it's meant to be is not adequate.

[Bones1 96]

Originally posted by: SC4BOY

Bones1 No I am claiming more traffic can terminate at a building than the building "stat" as stated in the xxx/yyy found in the "query tile" information. I know what you are talking about and as I am now saying for the fiftygazillionith time, that is not what is happening.. sheeez

quote>

 

Okay, calm down. I think we may be saying the same thing. I agree that more traffic can terminate at a building than its max capacity. Like I said before, the route-query shows this.

However, from my bit of experimenting, I don't think the route query is showing the final working place of all the sims. Some of those sims seem to be working at adjacent buildings. If I bulldoze/dezone those adjacent buildings, the route-query shows less sims terminating at the original building.

Or, if I route-query the adjacent buildings, the route shows the same path as if I query the first building.

This leads me to believe that the sims are actually working at the adjacent buildings, even though the route-query doesn't show that final part of the trip. I think Maxis did that so that sims could work in industrial buildings that don't develop adjacent to a road. It seems to work similar in commercial areas, although less frequently (since all commercial building do develop next to a road, by design).

I'm not sure if you agree with that part or not. If not, how do you justify the extra sims that the route-query shows? How do you justify that sometimes a route-query on a building shows a path ending at an adjacent building and not the building you query?

[tungston 19]

Originally posted by: dmrsunz Bones1 and tungston...

You each have different takes on the Current Occupancy numbers in the building Query. Bones1 says its current max occupancy vs optimal max occupancy. tungston says it's actual occupancy vs max occupancy. Please grab your pistols, stand back to back, step off 10 paces, and decide who's right. The Prima guide sides with tungston but we know they lie. Anyway, does it make any difference to gameplay?quote>

 

Far be it from me to disagree with Bones, he delves into this technical stuff much farther than I have the patience to do.

Actually I don't think what we are saying is different, a building is going to be occuppied at the current maximum.  Or if not, why not.  If not wouldn't  the code writers have added a number to show the occupancy. 

[Lord Kronos 0]

The situation that Bones1 is seeing in Industrial sections is the games way of representing industrial facilities. It has a Main building to which commuters commute (and park there), and from which freight leaves. These extra buildings (smoke stacks, sheds etc.) that don't have commuters add to the number of available jobs, and add to the facilites available to the main building (Farleys Foundry for example. I'll provide some pictures of what I'm talking about if people need them to understand what I am saying.

I however, have never seen this occur in a commercial sector, so perhaps if you could provide a picture of it happening in a commercial area it would be greatly appreciated and would perhaps settle you're little argument.

Regards

LK

[SC4BOY 21]

bones1 No we are not showing the same thing. There is no "adjacent building". Now for the fifty gazillionandoneth time.. it is NOT ANY ADJACENT BUILDING ISSUE. There are simply more sims going to the building than there are in the XXX/YYY value of the building.

 

I don't "justify" it, nor need I. There is simply excess traffic. Unlike yourself apparently, I don't need to have "reasons" to observe data. I see the data. I verify its values. I investigate possible alternatives.. that's that. 

If you want to argue about it that is fine. Be as bull-headed as you like. I've only told you several times IN A ROW that

1. There are more sims going to the building than the XXX/YYY values

2. There is no adjacent building issue.

IF you have something to ADD to this observation, feel free. But if you feel that simply saying it over and over makes it not true, then you are SORELY MISTAKEN.

generally: If I had a picture handy I'd post it.. but it has been observed by MANY who are not too blind to see it.. Its existence is absolutely not in question. Only the reason or rationale is in question. Some say it is some "transient phenomena" that goes away. I have seen it quite persistent, though I made no effort to make an experiment with it to try to explain it.

When I run across it next time, I'll post it. But this would not settle the issue.  If I get some time sometime, I may try an experiment, but it is rather a pain in the butt to do.. That is why people would rather explain it as a "transient phenomena" (or bullheadedly simply deny its existence).  It only seems to occur in EXCELLENT TRAFFIC cities with high flow. Also I only recall seeing it in commercial, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen in industrial. I have never seen it in residential either (though it is verified that there is R to R traffic in Simcity, so I suppose its possible)

There may be many explainations including some sort of "customer" representation, or the "query tool" is in error for some reason ( I have seen various situations in which I think the query tool shows very dubious numbers).. or whatever.. I don't know.. but simple denial of its existence is pretty silly.

[Bones1 96]

SC4Boy, if you'd calm down for a minute, you'd see we're observing the same thing. I simply add the "adjacent building" theory to explain it.

I do not know why you deny the "adjacent building" theory. It doesn't contradict anything else you've said. You simply choose to discard it for no reason?

Oh, tungsten, we're actually arguing about something different than the original question. I answered the original question way up on the 2nd post. The thing we're arguing about now is what Kronos is explaining.

I'll post a commercial pic next time I see it. It's much more rare to see in commercial than in the industrial area. (Probably because all commerce has road access.)

[tungston 19]

Originally posted by: Bones1 Oh, tungsten, we're actually arguing about something different than the original question. I answered the original question way up on the 2nd post. The thing we're arguing about now is what Kronos is explaining.quote>

 

I was answering Dmrsumz.  

I am not about to get into the argument you are having with SC4boy.  I have not seen what you two are talking about, mainly I would not care about it.  I don't deem it to be important, I concern myself more with things that affect the smooth running of the city.  There is no way anyone can understand all of what the code might turn out.  If there is reason to think this has an ill effect, then I will watch to see what you guy's come up with to correct it.

I hope this doesn't come off sounding snippy, I don't intend for it to be.

[SC4BOY 21]

Originally posted by: Bones1 I do not know why you deny the "adjacent building" theory. It doesn't contradict anything else you've said. You simply choose to discard it for no reason?quote>

I "deny" it because it isn't there.. plain and simple.. Does it occur? probably.. does it explain my observations? No.

Originally posted by: tungston  I don't deem it to be important, I concern myself more with things that affect the smooth running of the city.  There is no way anyone can understand all of what the code might turn out.  If there is reason to think this has an ill effect, then I will watch to see what you guy's come up with to correct it.quote>

It is not detrimental at all as far as I know. (though if we understood cause/effect we could draw better conclusions).  Investigations into this kind of issue often lead to revelatory things about the function and play of SC4. It is only of concern from that standpoint.

Well that and the fact that I only regret that I don't speak bones1's native language.. clearly it isn't English.. 

[tungston 19]

SC4boy: Don't be put off by my lack of enthusiasm, I really don't think anything revolutionary is going to be determined by this investigation.

[SC4BOY 21]

Originally posted by: tungston SC4boy: Don't be put off by my lack of enthusiasm, I really don't think anything revolutionary is going to be determined by this investigation.quote>

 

I have no concerns at all about your comments. Have some sort of persecution complex? What statement have I made that leads you to believe this? The easiest way to show lack of "enthusiasm" is not to post where you have no interest. 

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Sorry, guys, but this is turning into a pissing contest.  You remind me of Leibnitz and Newton, and we all know they were both somewhat in error.  Thread closed.