Imperial population distribution.

[robject]

Well, what we do know from AOTI is that the distribution of high-pop worlds is pretty close to that of the Marches. So, though we're quite free to speculate, it's not unreasonable to assume that something close to Book 3 was used.

It's nice to have the flexibility to define the TU according to whatever you need it to be, but requiring that this be The Rule can be worse than creating a One True Value. It means that published resources for the uncharted parts of the TU are "apocryphal", and have no general-purpose value.

To me, the fun or flexibility lies in unexplored space (wherever that is), or lurking in the no-man's-land of low population worlds, or in the subtle nets of alliance and rivalry amongst slippery neighbor worlds. And that's improved by a known TU rather than an unknown one.

Having said that, I also like the idea of referee's preserves, or an incompletely mapped Imperium. For instance, just map the worlds up to 2 parsecs from the Xboat routes and you've still got half of an Imperium unmapped and unknown.

But then, as referee I can always take away from the OTU safely. It's much harder to add what's not there.

 

[aramis]

But then, as referee I can always take away from the OTU safely. It's much harder to add what's not there.

To a point, I agree.

I think, however, that a good bit of the GT-___ detail is well beyond excessive and extremely far past useful, firmly into the "straightjacket" category.

It is far harder to delete that which the players have come to expect. If I were to run Traveller right now, I'd have to make certain my players do not expect ANY of the GT alternate assumptions which contradict my take on the canonical OTU, even though I am not running GT. WHy? because many of the available players expect the GTU, possibly with the rebellion. But the GTU defines a number of things that are neither defined in OTU canon nor true in the OTU as I've developed from official sources.

Take, for example, sub-ducal landed nobles. Based upon the Library Data essay, we know they exist. Based upon Bk 3, we know they don't rule Imperial Astrographic areas. We know from the UWP's that they don't rule the worlds they are the nobles of.

So, IMTU, they run the starports as their fiefs. It's not contradicted in canon, even though it isn't supported either. It explains some of the wealth of canonical nobles such as the Marquis of Aramis. GT Nobles supposedly directly contradicts this, however... I wouldn't know other than by peoples' various posts pointing out (like I would really give a rat's caboose, since I don't do GT and GT isn't canonical outside GT) that GT contradicts me.

So, as you can see, the fact that it's defined in an official ATU causes me grief running other versions.

 

[rgd]

Originally posted by robject:
Well, what we do know from AOTI is that the distribution of high-pop worlds is pretty close to that of the Marches. So, though we're quite free to speculate, it's not unreasonable to assume that something close to Book 3 was used.

I'm sure they did, it's seems the most likely way for them to have gone about it.

It just seems to me that older sectors (Core, Vland, Old Expanses, etc., etc.) should have been (and should be) generated with modifiers similar to those they used for the Solomani Rim. If the Rim is an "older developed sector" and gets those mods to pop and TL, why wouldn't the other sectors that are far older?

And as for high-pop distribution, there have been conversations (at least on the TML) about the 1st and 2nd Imperiums concentrating on garden worlds - so it's possible there were fewer high-pop worlds than one might expect in a developed sector, but they might have been a LOT more populated.

It's nice to have the flexibility to define the TU according to whatever you need it to be, but requiring that this be The Rule can be worse than creating a One True Value. It means that published resources for the uncharted parts of the TU are "apocryphal", and have no general-purpose value.

Like Judge's Guild's sector(s) that was decanonized and recanonized by QLI has no value? Or DGP's Diaspora, also decanonized? I'm not sure I see how (and it is late so I may be a bit fuzzy) - I'm not sure I see how having a range of possible values for aspects of the OTU (i.e. for things unspecified exactly) affects published 3rd-party resources? Refs are free to use them if they want or not - if they fit with their view of the OTU and their TU, then great. (Canon resources are a little different though, obviously.)

I suppose it's even kind of like all the different editions of Traveller - the different settings. There's a range of possibilities. I personally like the CT, strong Imperium era as opposed to the post-apocalyptic "oh, another world of 10 billion corpses" TNE (I know that's a harsh generalization, but it's the image that stuck with me). I probably won't use the TNE timeline, but go with the GT one. A range of possibilities I think is better. That was a design goal of Traveller, whereas an RPG like the Serenity RPG or the Star Wars RPG have a lot of info and don't really need a range of values (as much) - everyone's seen what the milieux are like and the games seek to replicate them.

Examining the GEnie/sunbane data and coming to conclusions about the economic strength (and thus military strength) and other 'facts' of the whole 3I limits the thinking to that One True Value - "well, we all know the 3I can't afford X so it has to make do with Y" and thus limits the usefulness of all the great thinking done on forums like this and the TML to that one version of the TU.

(Although I suppose I wouldn't protest if I felt the data were generated in a reasonable way. q.v. above. )

To me, the fun or flexibility lies in unexplored space (wherever that is), or lurking in the no-man's-land of low population worlds, or in the subtle nets of alliance and rivalry amongst slippery neighbor worlds.

I agree - I do wish they had left a true open frontier in the CT era. Like perhaps if the Vargr Extents hadn't extended as far into Gvurrdon but left a reasonable subsector or two wide gap between them and the Zhos (after getting through some minor client states or something maybe).

Or if they'd played up the wide-open rimward reaches of the Solomani Confederation - say a sourcebook dedicated to that setting with the Solomanis as the stars, not the Imperials.

And that's improved by a known TU rather than an unknown one.

Uh, I must be dense tonight, sorry. I don't see how having One True TU with all facets hard and fixed helps you enjoy unknown, unexplored space.

Having said that, I also like the idea of referee's preserves, or an incompletely mapped Imperium. For instance, just map the worlds up to 2 parsecs from the Xboat routes and you've still got half of an Imperium unmapped and unknown.

But then, as referee I can always take away from the OTU safely. It's much harder to add what's not there.

Well, unless say everyone's conclusion based on this suspect data is that the 3I simply must be a veritable weak shell with little power but occasionally shows of the flag when your vision is one where the 3I is in general on the stronger end of the spectrum, and has a variety of areas (frontier, core, backwater, march (buffer zone), populous, sparse, advanced, primitive - i.e. it has some good texture to it and isn't parsec after parsec of the same old stuff). You lose out on the group-think of forums like this and the TML. Yes, that's not life- (or game-)threatening, but it means more work too (i.e. having to add what's not there without the help of others).
If a range of values was accepted, analyses might end with conclusions for a variety of data points (the weak imperium, the strong imperium, etc.) and let refs choose what helps them for their vision of their TU.

 

[aramis]

Good stuff, RobD...

But, in the current market, we WILL need an OTU, perhaps not the same one, but we will need one.

I'm preferential to rebuilding a new vision of the OTU from the ground up rather than trying to patch the current OTU.

 

[rgd]

Originally posted by Aramis:
Good stuff, RobD...

Thanks.

But, in the current market, we WILL need an OTU, perhaps not the same one, but we will need one.

Oh I agree. (If I gave a different impression I didn't communicate well.)

I agree there needs to be an OTU - it definitely serves a purpose. It establishes a common framework for individual TUs, and supplements/resources/adventures - and many refs appreciate having published adventures and saving the time writing them up.

I think the way GDW did it was good - balancing between too much information that hems in a ref and not enough. I know years ago I used wish there was something like an Atlas but with all the social digits filled in - but now I think that would limit the number of possible TUs (well, those that are arguably close to the OTU. With the OTU vague in areas that lets many other TUs be 'compatible' with the OTU).

I'm preferential to rebuilding a new vision of the OTU from the ground up rather than trying to patch the current OTU.

That's an interesting idea. I'd assumed T5 would be quite like the other revisions, new rules, new era in the OTU timeline to adventure in. Can you tell me more about your vision?

A completely new OTU? Or perhaps just a dramatic shift in focus (like the rimward unexplored areas of the Solomani Confederation?)?

 

[Peter Newman]

Rod D wrote
"Some comments originally posted by Peter Newman:
"And since we know that there are not that many people in the Imperium than we know that overall population growth wasn't that high.""

Rod D wrote
"Well, a big point in my posts has been that we don't know a lot of things for certain about the 3I."

I agree that trying to figure demographic assumption from system generation rules is a bad idea.

However

The library data says that many planets were populated at the start of the Long Night. T4 library data (the words, not the error prone UPP numbers) says that many planets still were. If you go by the number of inhabited planets and the minimum populations you'd need to have a viable breeding pool during the Long Night than their must have been way more than 10 billion people in year 0. I'm also rejecting the notion that the Imperium is much more populous than canon says it is because more people means more ships which invalidates all the data about the size of the Imperial navy.

As far as I'm concerned the Imperium has a population of more than 1 trillion, and less than 100 trillion, but I'm not welded to it having the 15 trillion is supposedly should have.

Rod D wrote
"It's possible the TU could be much more populous than currently assumed, if the older more developed sectors are more heavily populated than CT sysgen would have you believe. It's also possible it's *less* populated. "

Yes it is possible to assume both those things but that would contradict my interpretaion of the words in the library data, see my comments above.

quote:
It may be that the factors encouraging the use of birth control have less to do with the overall population of your planet and more to do with how the relative economic return of having children. Thus even if little Suzi and Eneri can get land for their new house at CR 1 per acre and move out once they hit 18 or 19 if you've spent more feeding and educationg them than they'll give you back by supporting you in your old age are you really going to bother having them?"

Rod D wrote
"Good points. And how does anagathics use affect that too?"
I don't think it does, anagathics are too expensive for their use to significantly affect demographics. I'd say the real question is how do Vilani life spans, and the oddities of reproductive pratices in the minor races affest these patterns.

quote:
Therefore I don't think we can axiomatically assume that there will be populaion growth at all.

Rod D wrote
"I quite agree.

We should strive to develop extrapolations or conclusions that encompass the range of possible values for TUs for the subject in question, not try to divine the One True Value for the OTU. That lets people tailor their TU as they like it and be close to the OTU and have the benefits of the analyses."

Yes, thats why I suggest an Imperim that has a population within an order of magnitude or so of the 15 trillion that is bandied about.

 

[rgd]

Originally posted by Rob D.:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
I'm preferential to rebuilding a new vision of the OTU from the ground up rather than trying to patch the current OTU.

That's an interesting idea. I'd assumed T5 would be quite like the other revisions, new rules, new era in the OTU timeline to adventure in. Can you tell me more about your vision?

A completely new OTU? Or perhaps just a dramatic shift in focus (like the rimward unexplored areas of the Solomani Confederation?)? </font>[/QUOTE](This probably isn't the thread to post this question, and you probably have detailed it somewhere else. If so, I can fumble my way about this board and find it.)

 

[rgd]

Originally posted by Peter Newman:

I agree that trying to figure demographic assumption from system generation rules is a bad idea.

However

The library data says that many planets were populated at the start of the Long Night. T4 library data (the words, not the error prone UPP numbers) says that many planets still were. If you go by the number of inhabited planets and the minimum populations you'd need to have a viable breeding pool during the Long Night than their must have been way more than 10 billion people in year 0.

Sounds reasonable. My posts haven't been entirely on the topic of imperial population distribution - more on the assumptions used, but my initial reaction would be to agree.

I'm also rejecting the notion that the Imperium is much more populous than canon says it is because more people means more ships which invalidates all the data about the size of the Imperial navy.

As far as I'm concerned the Imperium has a population of more than 1 trillion, and less than 100 trillion, but I'm not welded to it having the 15 trillion is supposedly should have.

I don't think I was arguing for populations well in excess of 100 trillion (not having done the math of calculating a number of sectors generated like the Rim), so again at first glance I'd agree with your estimations.

Yes it is possible to assume both those things but that would contradict my interpretaion of the words in the library data, see my comments above.

I suppose it's a matter of degree - I wouldn't think the population was in the quadrillions, but
I haven't given it enough considered thought. My thoughts were only on what I considered inaccurate bases for assumptions in using the GEnie/sunbane data.

"Good points. And how does anagathics use affect that too?"
I don't think it does, anagathics are too expensive for their use to significantly affect demographics. I'd say the real question is how do Vilani life spans, and the oddities of reproductive pratices in the minor races affest these patterns.

True - not in the OTU - I was just pondering in general.

Yes, thats why I suggest an Imperim that has a population within an order of magnitude or so of the 15 trillion that is bandied about.

Without fully extrapolating what the population might be if the 'older' sectors were generated like the Rim, that sounds reasonable for the OTU.

Rob

 

[aramis]

Rob:

I'd say what we need to do is drop ALL the "details" that are known.

Start back at the beginning:
an Imperium
It has nobility
It has A Navy, A Marine , and A Scout service.
It uses local member's Armies as its own.
It has merchants.
It is 1000-1200 years old
It has enemies on several borders: The Zhodani, The Vargr, the Aslan, the Terrans...
It arose out of a long night, triggered by a series of interstellar wars.

regenerate from there...

 

[rgd]

Anything about the Vilani and the 1I and 2I.
(The Vilani were *seriously* under-described and their influence on Charted Space not thought out enough - but I attribute that to the same desire to 'not detail too much that it hems referees in'.)

You'd want to know how big it is next I'd think.
Is it 6 months from frontier to core, or more or less? I do like the feel of 18th/19th century travel times (and that distance being one of the reasons given for the use of nobility - local trusted representatives of the crown).

 

[aramis]

Rob:

Size and TL intertwine too tightly.

Y'see, SizeInParsecs= MonthsTravelTime * JumpsPerMonth * MaxJumpParsecs

So, given a pure Bk 2, we get at all stellar TL's:
Travel Size = 6 * 2 * 6 = 72 Pc
Commo Size = 6 * 3.9 * 6 = 140.4 ≅ 140 Pc

Bk5 we instead get
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">TL J St Sc
9-A 1 12 23.4
B 2 24 46.8
C 3 36 70.2
D 4 48 93.6
E 5 60 117
F+ 6 72 140.4</pre>[/QUOTE]St = Travel Size, and Sc= Commo Size.

Now, do we want 6 months across (UK in 1700), 6 months capital to Edge (Rome, ca. 1), and in either case, Travel time for goods or Data?

(BTW, the 3.9 J/M fiure assumes losing less than 90 minutes to transfer data, but at least 40...)

 

[rgd]

Originally posted by Aramis:

Size and TL intertwine too tightly.

I think I'm missing your point - or what post/question of my you are referring to here. Too tightly? For what? Pardon my denseness.

Y'see, SizeInParsecs= MonthsTravelTime * JumpsPerMonth * MaxJumpParsecs

So, given a pure Bk 2, we get at all stellar TL's:
Travel Size = 6 * 2 * 6 = 72 Pc
Commo Size = 6 * 3.9 * 6 = 140.4 ≅ 140 Pc

Bk5 we instead get
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">TL J St Sc
9-A 1 12 23.4
B 2 24 46.8
C 3 36 70.2
D 4 48 93.6
E 5 60 117
F+ 6 72 140.4</pre>

St = Travel Size, and Sc= Commo Size.

[/quote]Ah, very interesting. Kind of obvious but I hadn't thought to put it in those terms. Very nice.

Now, do we want 6 months across (UK in 1700), 6 months capital to Edge (Rome, ca. 1), and in either case, Travel time for goods or Data?

(BTW, the 3.9 J/M fiure assumes losing less than 90 minutes to transfer data, but at least 40...)

Well, I'd go for 6 months travel time for data from edge to core - year to other side of Imperium, or to come back from core - which would make it 140pc radius, 280pc diameter, not too different.

Makes me wonder though about the 1I and 2I (or the early 3I depending on the TL progression you envision) - they must be a lot smaller than depicted in canon or else have a much more remote feel on the frontiers. Much longer travel times.

Harder to hold onto provinces without strong control at lower TLs - no matter if it's canon early Imperia or a newly envisioned history.

(Not that I want to open the RoM TL question, but if the 1I was as big or bigger than the 3I, when the Terrans inherited it, it would have been a LOT harder to govern if command chain was many years or more away instead of say, 6 months. It's a wonder it stayed together as long as it did.)

 

[aramis]

The rule of thumb, based upon history, is that an empire crumbles when round trip to/from the capital exceeds 6 months.

I think I'm missing your point - or what post/question of my you are referring to here. Too tightly? For what? Pardon my denseness.

Size of empire is directly linked to TL of the comm network; they can not be separated in a Bk5 (or later) OTU or Rules based VTU.

Note that pure Bk2 can have a different Jn sequence.
I forgot to account for Computer TLs; Max Jump is limited to Max Computer for Bk2 universes.
Bk2 Universe:
J1-J3 = TL9 (36pc/70pc)
J4 = TL10 (48/94)
J5 = TL11 (60/117)
J6 = TL12 (72/140)

 

[robject]

Interesting. The Ziru Sirka must have operated more like three smaller empires ("Bureaux" indeed!) than one massive one. Three polities with a radius of 45 parsecs or so. Interesting implications.

One of the Bureaux was probably HQ'ed at Vland. That would reach from the near edge of Deneb to Antares, Windhorn to Dagudashag.

Any idea where the other two were headquartered? Perhaps one in Ilelish, and the other in Massilia?

 

[aramis]

sounds about right. But it was 4 Bureax, not three. It just that Nasirraaka, Sharushid, and Makidhadrun are the three which survived.

And Gashiida was the local capital for the Solomani Rim. (Imperium board game)

 

[inexorabletash]

Where's a reference to the 4th bureau? I missed that one. (I miss a lot of things, apparently.)

 

[aramis]

V&V.

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by Aramis:
sounds about right. But it was 4 Bureax, not three. It just that Nasirraaka, Sharushid, and Makidhadrun are the three which survived.

The 1st Imperium had three bureaux. The 3rd Imperium had a fourth Vilani megacorporation called Zirunkarish (I'm not sure of the spelling). When the Ziru Sirkaa constituted itself, Zirunkarish applied for status as a bureau in the Restored Vilani Empire and had it granted.


Hans

 

[rgd]

Originally posted by robject:
Interesting. The Ziru Sirka must have operated more like three smaller empires ("Bureaux" indeed!) than one massive one. Three polities with a radius of 45 parsecs or so. Interesting implications.

Kind of like the Eastern/Western Roman empire split?

But that was an empire 'falling apart' - once the first part of the 1I grew too big, did one or more of the bureaux then decided to start their own subempire a good ways away from Vland?

Or did they establish new sub-empires a good bit closer to Vland than you'd think looking at the extent of the 1I at it's height and then maybe move capitals once their sub-empires got too big?

Either way, I think life under 1I Vilani rule would be pretty tough - they already worked hard to make sure no one else had jump technology and all worlds in their desmesne were 'consolidated'. There probably wasn't a lot of freedom/civil liberties, etc. etc.
(And imagine the Terrans trying to tell them they had rights, after thousands of years of this. Part of why the 2I failed, and why institutions like the nobility work/are accepted/make the common old 1I peoples feel comfortable.)

Unless you want to change Jump, I think Aramis is right - the size is set by the distance your polity can exert control over (six months core to frontier). Unless it is more a confederation of sub-empires of the same/similar culture. (Think how big a 1I-style imperium could be with J-6 technology - three bureaux controlling an area the size of the 3I?)

Rob

 

[robject]

Not like East/West empire at all; you're right, it was a split, not a united empire.

I don't think we have anything like it to compare. Nevertheless, they had to govern all that space for millenia somehow, and distributed uber-control is the only way I can think of it.

It also helps explain how the Terran Confed was able to topple it. It's already brittle and not communicating with itself.

And it also explains why the Rule of Man was unable to hold it together as it fell apart: they created one administrative capital.

In game terms, I don't suppose it matters very often.