General Size of polities

[Gray Lensman]

I have started putting together a campaign. I am using the Cepheus engine rules with modifications and the near space map (with the HSC stars removed).

I am Limiting Jump to 2 Parsecs. Period. The science that drives it does not allow for higher distances, although I am allowing for decreases in mass, volume, and fuel usage with higher TLs.

During this process I got to thinking about the size of polities. Given the hard limit of Jump 2, would a polity the size of the Imperium even be possible. I know that in the OTU the Ziru Sirkai (?) was huge.

But would it even be possible?

I mean, at Jump 2 just how big a polity would be viable. 3 Months = 12 weeks = 24 Parsecs traveled. How much good can a message that is three months old actually be? Some things (commerce) for example, may not be greatly affected. But what about military orders, just for another example?

Just a thought exercise.

 

[McPerth]

Well, 3I communications times are quite longuer than the 3 months you talk about...

 

[willtron3030]

Given it's size after the Consolidation Wars, long travel/communication times seeded of the demise of Vliani rule Strict, ruthless enforcement of Vilani law and cultural norms (the purpose of the consolidation, I guess) only slowed the end of the Grand Empire.

[It makes me wonder if some 3I sophontologist will revisit the work of the old Solomani anthropologist, Robin Dunbar, and extend his work into span of control, cognitive load and how they relate to the maximum stable size of interstellar government.]

 

[Gray Lensman]

Well, 3I communications times are quite longer than the 3 months you talk about...

And ...

If it takes 3 months to get a message to the ruler that the polity is being invaded? Central control is always the norm. Even today in the U.S.

So, local commanders may have the authority to defend themselves, but if the country of ??? invades the State of ??? and it takes three months for that message to reach D.C.... How viable is your defense gonna be. They may not conquer and secure the State. But I believe they would be pretty well entrenched.

Even at 3 months comm time that would give you Sector sized (roughly) polities. Okay, you can give the Subsector leaders a great deal of decision making power, but does that REALLY solve the problem. Plus, the more power you give them, the more likey they are to try to go their own way.

I am sure this has been discussed before. Anybody have links to old threads?

 

[robject]

You can handwave as large an empire as you like.

But: do you really care how big empires can get?

Let me ask it another way. "Big" is relative. Can you sidestep the issue and focus the game on a subsector where a few (four?) pocket empires' borders meet? That's how the Keith brothers did it for their supplements. It gives plenty of intrigue without wasting time on details that, in the player-centered scheme of things, might not be important enough to nail down at this time.

 

[Major B]

I remember reading something related but do not remember the source.

It said that the limit of empire was about the 1-year mark.

This was a Traveller source so it assumed the 3I system of nobility with strong oaths enabling decentralized decision-making but the conclusion was that the Empire would have difficulty holding anything more than a year's communication time back to the ultimate decision maker.

I think that may be as good a rule of thumb as any regarding the potential maximum but the actual maximum may be far different given a couple of criteria.

Two criteria come to mind immediately but I'm sure more will occur to other readers.

First, if there is no opposition then expansion will eventually reach maximum. But no Traveller Universe will have no opposition to expansion. The nature of the potential and actual opponents will be a limiting factor where there is opposition.

Second, the nature of the worlds will be another limit. Near-earth worlds that can (relatively) quickly be colonized will in time serve as a jumping off point for further expansion. Less hospitable worlds will be a hindrance. If your map has few hospitable worlds, there will be barriers to expansion and over time the pattern of expansion may be more like branching corridors than an expanding ink blot.

 

[Fovean]

Second, the nature of the worlds will be another limit. Near-earth worlds that can (relatively) quickly be colonized will in time serve as a jumping off point for further expansion. Less hospitable worlds will be a hindrance. If your map has few hospitable worlds, there will be barriers to expansion and over time the pattern of expansion may be more like branching corridors than an expanding ink blot.

This. In trying to build “realistic” expansion among the stars I keep finding tendrils, arms, branching corridors rather than a sphere of expansion. It feels right, regardless of the paradigm I impose (no deep space jumps for example, or allowing asteroid belts to carry the same priority as garden worlds). It always becomes an island hopping campaign to lay down the empire’s foundations.

IMTU I found six months to be the max distance to the frontier that I’m happy with but I like a proto Traveller / Firefly / small Empire campaign so YMMV.

 

[hiro]

Just a thought exercise.

Wouldn’t the size be a function of time to expand/settle and the ability of the central government to exert influence over the colonies?

It’s not just the time it takes to give orders, it’s whether the orders will be obeyed!

What’s the spread of garden worlds on the near space map? I own it but am woefully unfamiliar with it (blush).

What size navy will your central government have? Does it have the capacity to visit multiple far flung garden worlds and lean in on them?

If a colony doesn’t have the means to resist, the time the navy takes to drop in and have a friendly conversation is moot if the colony knows it’s just a matter of time before they do.

If they have the means to resist, be that a navy or some form of leverage over the core, I think the polity just found it’s border.

Polity members who are dependent on the core for survival (food, technology, defence etc.) are easy to ensure compliance.

 

[McPerth]

And ...?

Just pointing at it.

If it takes 3 months to get a message to the ruler that the polity is being invaded? Central control is always the norm. Even today in the U.S.?

Central command is only posible when instant communication are. Otherwise, governors and military brass (or independent commands) have to be given autonomy.

So, local commanders may have the authority to defend themselves, but if the country of ??? invades the State of ??? and it takes three months for that message to reach D.C.... How viable is your defense gonna be. They may not conquer and secure the State. But I believe they would be pretty well entrenched.?

That will also depend on how far cna they reach in this same time. The attacker is likely to have to spend time in refuelling, repairing an mopping up stong positions (htat use to be the improtant ones).

Even at 3 months comm time that would give you Sector sized (roughly) polities. Okay, you can give the Subsector leaders a great deal of decision making power, but does that REALLY solve the problem. Plus, the more power you give them, the more likey they are to try to go their own way.

I am sure this has been discussed before. Anybody have links to old threads?

In fact it would not be 3 monts for the capital to react, as they must then asemble to forcé for a response (that wil lalso take time, even to notify them). That's where intelligence and forewarning takes so much importance.

And yes, the more power you give to local commanders (be them political or military), the more likely they are to sucede. That's why I think naval units are rotated on a regular basis, so that they don't become attached to a specific región, but to the Empire at large.

Those forces will also depend on the local opposition they may face, of course.

 

[kilemall]

Polity size IMO would be determined by spacy versions of the same factors as always-


1) Astrophyisical, the analogy to ability to cross terrain barriers. In this case, jump limitations, J-2 will ultimately limit rift boundaries.



2) Cultural/political cohesion, the classic Traveller version being the First Imperium and Imperiums in general with landed vested nobility. Other OTU races have their own cohesion mechanisms,not the least of which is different possibly repellent or threatening alien races.


3) Other polities, which provide pushback, a boundary, limits but also an 'other' to rally resources and support for dealing with- or economic opportunity.



4) Secession. In this case I would define potential polity size as basically 1 year's communication out from loyal power centers. This is predicated on the idea of a seceding territory needing time to build a defensible fleet vs. reaction of loyalist territories/leaders in crushing the rebellion. If you can maintain loyal retainers and fleets 2 years out, well then your empire can be 3 years in circumference. Put another way, it's ship build rates and capacity vs. communication and transit time for fleets in being.


5) TL. Obviously jump tech, but also more efficient power generation, medical care, industry, etc. will help with cohesion and fighting power and a sense of vitality and 'polity to be a part of'. Stagnation technically lends thoughts away from building the future through development to carving up the parts of the empire that can be grabbed.

 

[Gray Lensman]

WOW!

You folks have given me plenty to think about.

I Thank You All.

 

[aramis]

Wouldn’t the size be a function of time to expand/settle and the ability of the central government to exert influence over the colonies?

On Earth, 6 months travel round trip was about the limit of a stable empire. As it crossed that size, Rome cracked. Same for the Mongols.

 

[McPerth]

On Earth, 6 months travel round trip was about the limit of a stable empire. As it crossed that size, Rome cracked. Same for the Mongols.

OTOH Spnish Empire had Philipines or nearly 300 yeasrs, and round trip was quite more than 3 months, I guess...

 

[Gray Lensman]

History was what started my thought train rolling. I have plenty of time to think it over. I am just using the near space map. I am generating the data (except SOL) by hand (love rolling dice) using a mix of systems.

As for the arms of exploration/colonization that would have different sponsors ala 2300. My setting already has a World Government by the time FTL becomes possible. There are some slowboat colonies as well as non-human races out there. There is a Line in MT that says "Space is empty. Life is everywhere."

Campaign will start as exploration with the advent of FTL, evolve into a mercantile/Star Merc type thing, then a pocket empires type scenario with intelligence plots, small unit actions, working up to playing nation states (gotta look for my copy of the Great Game rules ;D).

 

[whartung]

What's the value of "bigness"? Big in contrast to what? "Bigness" of what?

If it's a loose confederation of trading worlds, how important is it in that case? If trade can move from one side of the confederation to another, "safely", "reliably", then skies the limit, right?

If the confederation is "self policing", if one system, gets uppity, the nearby siblings can give it an attitude adjustment. The game there to not let any one system gain a large external advantage over the others.

If there's an "external" threat, then Big certainly can act as a deterrent.

If there is no external threats, then all problems are "local" for assorted values of "local" (one system, cluster of neighboring systems), to the point that they can be handled "locally".

In the end, the empire has a mass of its own. Hard to respond to a planet wide plague when you get the messages 6 months out.

 

[aramis]

OTOH Spnish Empire had Philipines or nearly 300 yeasrs, and round trip was quite more than 3 months, I guess...

Modern is 7 weeks or so - Valencia to NZ to Manilla. (Using charter speeds.)

Modern shipping speeds are about 3x to 4x faster than fast sailing ships of the 1600's. (Depends upon whether the ships caught or fought the current and prevailing winds.)

16th-17th C Galleon's had a speed of up to 8 knots, while clippers in the 1800's could reach 30+... Caravels in the 16th C averaged 4 and were capable of 8-10.

And most modern sea shipping is under 20 kts now. (12-15 kts, typically)

Couple this with the frequent insurrections, and the armed camp mentality - Spain barely hung on to this extreme end. (Fear of reprisals and the large occupation forces, rotated relatively often, kept locals from aiding the various insurrections). If the people of the PI had decided to, they could have thrown off the Spaniards many times, if only they could unite.

The local governors, however, held the PI in check, mostly by playing one group after another against each other. Much as Rome lasted an extra 200 years by becoming a loose confederation of 3 empires... one of which lasted about 700 more after the other two. Rome, as a united empire, crumbled at the edges of 6 months... but still had lasting cultural impacts still felt to this day.

Above 3 months each way, one cannot get troops there in one "war-year" with time to go, fight, and return. Returning is a huge morale issue. Yes, all the empires extended past this, but it lead to local identity instead, resulting in eventual destruction by revolts. (Excepting the British, which technically still exists in a nominal confederacy called the Commonwealth of Nations, but no longer the martial powerhouse it was in the Pax Britanica.)

It's a longstanding idea in poli-sci that you can double the control radius if you have a feudal system... but above that, it becomes too tenuous.

https://www.championfreight.co.nz/times
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/jul/25/slow-ships-cut-greenhouse-emissions

 

[hiro]

Campaign will start as exploration with the advent of FTL, evolve into a mercantile/Star Merc type thing, then a pocket empires type scenario with intelligence plots, small unit actions, working up to playing nation states (gotta look for my copy of the Great Game rules ;D).

Now, as you've said mercantile, perhaps this post by Mike Wightman won't tickle your fancy but, if you go with the idea that:

Once again, by TL9 you have all the technology you need to exploit every resource a system has to offer, mining asteroids for rare earths, mining moons and gas giants for helium3, aluminium, iron, carbon, silicon all so abundant you can build anything you want to in space and exploit any resource.

Interstellar trades changes. I think there are multiple routes with full on post scarcity at one end and the buying and selling of "Exotic luxury goods" at the other with a multitude of options in between but it enables local production of higher TL stuff and encourages independence in the colonies - possible points of friction with the core or active trade. I'd say that at TL9, hydroponics and aeroponics have replaced agriculture as we know it today and while garden worlds are the most desirable to populate, you can do the domed/space habitat thing too.

This is of course straying from Traveller; if you're thinking of moving away from Traveller's computing stalwarts, maybe you're thinking of other ways to stray from the fold :smirk: :devil:

 

[kilemall]

Above 3 months each way, one cannot get troops there in one "war-year" with time to go, fight, and return. Returning is a huge morale issue. Yes, all the empires extended past this, but it lead to local identity instead, resulting in eventual destruction by revolts. (Excepting the British, which technically still exists in a nominal confederacy called the Commonwealth of Nations, but no longer the martial powerhouse it was in the Pax Britanica.)

Perhaps that is implicit in CT chargen itself? Huge army/naval expansions, then the war/emergency is over and many are let go? The story of Traveller itself is of the leftovers of Empire Maintenance killed in the service or let go ahead of their time as a cost expedience?

 

[aramis]

Perhaps that is implicit in CT chargen itself? Huge army/naval expansions, then the war/emergency is over and many are let go? The story of Traveller itself is of the leftovers of Empire Maintenance killed in the service or let go ahead of their time as a cost expedience?

The survival numbers for Army, Navy, and Marines look like the report rates for troop survival in-theater for Vietnam... plus 2. (Scout numbers approximate USCG ones, but are exaggerated by the dice curve.)

Army death rates were 2.1%; Marines 5%, Navy 2%, Airforce 1%. Coast Guard, 7 out of 8000, or 0.9%.

Casualties total, however... 9.5% army, 22.5% marine. Navy was around the 9% mark, as well... but in far fewer incidents.

So, at 9.5%... that would be 3.4/36, which is between 3+ and 4+.
At 22.5%, that's 8/36, between 4+ and 5+. Round Up, add 2... 6+ and 7+

So, the rates given are VERY much "more combat than Vietnam"...

 

[kilemall]

The survival numbers for Army, Navy, and Marines look like the report rates for troop survival in-theater for Vietnam... plus 2. (Scout numbers approximate USCG ones, but are exaggerated by the dice curve.)

Army death rates were 2.1%; Marines 5%, Navy 2%, Airforce 1%. Coast Guard, 7 out of 8000, or 0.9%.

Casualties total, however... 9.5% army, 22.5% marine. Navy was around the 9% mark, as well... but in far fewer incidents.

So, at 9.5%... that would be 3.4/36, which is between 3+ and 4+.
At 22.5%, that's 8/36, between 4+ and 5+. Round Up, add 2... 6+ and 7+

So, the rates given are VERY much "more combat than Vietnam"...

Uh, yeah, that's my point- forces raised for duration of emergency, which doesn't have to be a full war with the Zhos but an insurrection which could suck down millions if multi-planet and be quite lethal.


A large enough empire with near imperial overstretch as we are talking about and/or border states pushing, and likely there is something going on that is a real need, real losses, but short-lived enough to not be permanent or stable.




Paints a picture of turmoil and sacrifice/discard whether OTU or ATU that is at the core of our character's formation.