Consultation on Different Population Caps

General discussions about the Particracy web game.

Re: Consultation on Different Population Caps

Postby Wu Han » Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:46 pm

In defence of the population changes:

I think when discussing the equivalency between Terran populations and Earth, it is important to recall that Earth has 7.6 billion people spread over 195 countries. This proposal gives Terra a world population of 4,346,820,505 over 59 states. This gives an average of 73,674,923 per nation in Terra. Caeteris paribus, if there were just 59 states on earth, the average would be 125,423,728.814 per nation. In this sense, the population changes are almost conservative.

I think it could be realistically assumed, if Earth is the absolute model for Terra, that the remaining 3.3 billion individuals live in the "developing world." In fact, people in the past have been very liberal with populations in the developing world. For example, the wiki entries for Kimlien (130m), Hanzen (180m), Utembo (185m), Suyu Llaqta (240m) all present populations much larger than any of the current Great Powers. Despite this, I am not aware of a single instance in which a controller has argued great military or economic power on the basis of their population.

Continuing on this track, is it not widely accepted that American (pop: 311.6m) military power is superior to India (pop: 1.3b)? There is a disparity of over 4:1 between these two powers. In Terra, with these changes, the lowest population great military power (Vanuku, pop: 100m) and the highest population nation (Indrala: 218m) have a disparity of just 2:1. The point here being: population is not the most important determinant of military strength, and more that this, population disparities are much lower than in the real world.

Finally, I think that RP quality is a far more important factor in determining economic and military strength than any part of the game mechanics. I would never suggest that the game's economic mechanics (GDP) should triumph over the RP; if this were the case, Rildanor (for which there hasn't been a forum post since March 18th) would be the largest economy in the world (according to the spreadsheet). I think the same could be said with regard to population.
Deputy Continental Roleplay Coordinator for Dovani

莲花党 (Lotus Party) - Indrala [Active]
User avatar
Wu Han
 
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 10:51 am
Location: Kaizhou, Jiaozhi, Indrala

Re: Consultation on Different Population Caps

Postby lewiselder1 » Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:30 pm

Wu Han wrote:In defence of the population changes:

I think when discussing the equivalency between Terran populations and Earth, it is important to recall that Earth has 7.6 billion people spread over 195 countries. This proposal gives Terra a world population of 4,346,820,505 over 59 states. This gives an average of 73,674,923 per nation in Terra. Caeteris paribus, if there were just 59 states on earth, the average would be 125,423,728.814 per nation. In this sense, the population changes are almost conservative.

I think it could be realistically assumed, if Earth is the absolute model for Terra, that the remaining 3.3 billion individuals live in the "developing world." In fact, people in the past have been very liberal with populations in the developing world. For example, the wiki entries for Kimlien (130m), Hanzen (180m), Utembo (185m), Suyu Llaqta (240m) all present populations much larger than any of the current Great Powers. Despite this, I am not aware of a single instance in which a controller has argued great military or economic power on the basis of their population.

Continuing on this track, is it not widely accepted that American (pop: 311.6m) military power is superior to India (pop: 1.3b)? There is a disparity of over 4:1 between these two powers. In Terra, with these changes, the lowest population great military power (Vanuku, pop: 100m) and the highest population nation (Indrala: 218m) have a disparity of just 2:1. The point here being: population is not the most important determinant of military strength, and more that this, population disparities are much lower than in the real world.

Finally, I think that RP quality is a far more important factor in determining economic and military strength than any part of the game mechanics. I would never suggest that the game's economic mechanics (GDP) should triumph over the RP; if this were the case, Rildanor (for which there hasn't been a forum post since March 18th) would be the largest economy in the world (according to the spreadsheet). I think the same could be said with regard to population.


I second this and would add three things;

1 - The population numbers should not affect the rankings, but I believe the rankings should at least in a small way affect the populations, with larger changes gradually happening over longer periods of time. Still this can be debated at another point in time I feel.

2 - In response to CCPs comments, I understand your opinion but I feel to equate Indrala to China and therefore say it should have a large population is to assume that culture (which is all the nation’s RL identities represent) is the primary factor that determines population, which is obviously false.

3 - Terra does not need to be Earth, the populations do need need to accurately represent populations on Earth, but should I feel be allowed to vary significantly for the simple fact that Terra’s history, geography and the way Terra works is fictitious and unique and cannot he compared to Earth in these ways, noe does it need to be. Not to mention that in theory we should account for an additional 2000 years of population growth versus our own world!

Still if there is enough opposition to these numbers I would support a second re-evaluation of the new proposals more thoroughly involving the rest of the GRC, though I don’t feel such conditions have actually been met at this point in time.
CRC for Dovani
Discord Admin

aka Lewis

Currently:
Medina (Third-World)

Previous:
Statrica (Third-World)
Nationale Partei (Dorvik)
Volkskommunistische Partei (Narikaton)
Liberale Partei (Narikaton)
User avatar
lewiselder1
 
Posts: 398
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 8:35 pm

Re: Consultation on Different Population Caps

Postby CCP » Tue Jun 05, 2018 12:07 am

I don't agree with the assumptions underlying your numbers either. That's why putting the cart before the horse and publicly agreeing to a change of a GRC-developed list without first sufficiently consulting the GRC is putting the cart before the horse. You had two months to change those numbers in consultation with the GRC. There was no reason for you to wait until the numbers were released publicly before making a decision to change the numbers unilaterally, and there's no reason Polites should have allowed you to do that. When the Artania RP Team sought changed numbers, we discussed it first amongst ourselves and then submitted our suggestions to the rest of the GRC for comment. At no point did we make any public statements to the affect that we as the Artania team had any authority to change anything without first seeking support from the rest of the GRC. There is no reason that same process shouldn't have been used here. Unfortunately, most of this thread has turned into a debate between GRC members. That can and should have occurred over the last two months in our dedicated forum, not here in public. It makes these matters appear disorganized and arbitrary.

As I suggested during the Rankings Consultation confusion, ONE GRC member needs to be designated to speak for the whole GRC during these consultations. Too many cooks in the kitchen makes for indigestion.
CCP
 
Posts: 798
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 4:24 am

Re: Consultation on Different Population Caps

Postby cm9777 » Tue Jun 05, 2018 2:41 am

Personally, I am in favour of the decrease in the Indralan Population but not any of the other changes. In the interests of making a full compromise deal I’d suggest halving the remaining increases/decreases. A valid point has been made that this is a public consultation and it shouldn’t be a debate forum for the GRC. Regardless, this is what has occurred and we need to move on from it. I am also expressing this opinion not as a moderator but as a player and my opinions should have no binding authority on the final numbers. I leave that in the hands of the GRC itself and Polites (the main author of the project). I fully support the project and must reiterate that this opinion is my own.

Perhaps this should’ve been further discussed on the GRC instead of on the public consultation. What’s done is done and while it is preferable for this not to have happened the way it has, it’s not a major deal and something that can easily be adapted to.
Nationale Liberale Partei Inactive

Dundorfische Nationalistisches Allianz Inactive

Federalistische Partei Inactive

Patriot Party Inactive

Modrá Thalleristická Aliancia Active

Moderation
cm9777
 
Posts: 875
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 6:05 pm

Re: Consultation on Different Population Caps

Postby Polites » Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:35 am

Alright, then how about this: we increase Dankuk's population as per Lewis' proposal, decrease Indrala's slightly, and return Kazulia and Talmoria to the original proposal?
Me pinguem et nitidum bene curata cute vises,
Cum ridere voles, Epicuri de grege porcum
Polites
 
Posts: 2322
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 3:48 pm

Re: Consultation on Different Population Caps

Postby cm9777 » Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:53 am

Polites wrote:Alright, then how about this: we increase Dankuk's population as per Lewis' proposal, decrease Indrala's slightly, and return Kazulia and Talmoria to the original proposal?


I would personally support that.
Nationale Liberale Partei Inactive

Dundorfische Nationalistisches Allianz Inactive

Federalistische Partei Inactive

Patriot Party Inactive

Modrá Thalleristická Aliancia Active

Moderation
cm9777
 
Posts: 875
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 6:05 pm

Re: Consultation on Different Population Caps

Postby CCP » Tue Jun 05, 2018 2:51 pm

cm9777 wrote:
Polites wrote:Alright, then how about this: we increase Dankuk's population as per Lewis' proposal, decrease Indrala's slightly, and return Kazulia and Talmoria to the original proposal?


I would personally support that.


I don't support the Indrala decrease, but I can live with the others. If everyone else wants Indrala nerfed, I won't object further.
CCP
 
Posts: 798
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 4:24 am

Re: Consultation on Different Population Caps

Postby lewiselder1 » Tue Jun 05, 2018 4:25 pm

Polites wrote:Alright, then how about this: we increase Dankuk's population as per Lewis' proposal, decrease Indrala's slightly, and return Kazulia and Talmoria to the original proposal?


Sounds good to me. Personally still think Kazulia and Talmoria should be higher but if this is the majority will then I won't push back against it.

cm9777 wrote:Personally, I am in favour of the decrease in the Indralan Population but not any of the other changes. In the interests of making a full compromise deal I’d suggest halving the remaining increases/decreases. A valid point has been made that this is a public consultation and it shouldn’t be a debate forum for the GRC. Regardless, this is what has occurred and we need to move on from it. I am also expressing this opinion not as a moderator but as a player and my opinions should have no binding authority on the final numbers. I leave that in the hands of the GRC itself and Polites (the main author of the project). I fully support the project and must reiterate that this opinion is my own.

Perhaps this should’ve been further discussed on the GRC instead of on the public consultation. What’s done is done and while it is preferable for this not to have happened the way it has, it’s not a major deal and something that can easily be adapted to.


I concur.

CCP wrote:I don't agree with the assumptions underlying your numbers either. That's why putting the cart before the horse and publicly agreeing to a change of a GRC-developed list without first sufficiently consulting the GRC is putting the cart before the horse. You had two months to change those numbers in consultation with the GRC. There was no reason for you to wait until the numbers were released publicly before making a decision to change the numbers unilaterally, and there's no reason Polites should have allowed you to do that. When the Artania RP Team sought changed numbers, we discussed it first amongst ourselves and then submitted our suggestions to the rest of the GRC for comment. At no point did we make any public statements to the affect that we as the Artania team had any authority to change anything without first seeking support from the rest of the GRC. There is no reason that same process shouldn't have been used here. Unfortunately, most of this thread has turned into a debate between GRC members. That can and should have occurred over the last two months in our dedicated forum, not here in public. It makes these matters appear disorganized and arbitrary.

As I suggested during the Rankings Consultation confusion, ONE GRC member needs to be designated to speak for the whole GRC during these consultations. Too many cooks in the kitchen makes for indigestion.


I don't object to any of this critique and have privately recognised and explained the errors made on my part, I'd appreciate if we moved on from this in this forum at least. I fear this perhaps gives the impression that the GRC is distinctly divided without context, so would like to reinforce that this is a minor gripe and not representative of the inner workings of the GRC at all.
CRC for Dovani
Discord Admin

aka Lewis

Currently:
Medina (Third-World)

Previous:
Statrica (Third-World)
Nationale Partei (Dorvik)
Volkskommunistische Partei (Narikaton)
Liberale Partei (Narikaton)
User avatar
lewiselder1
 
Posts: 398
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 8:35 pm

Re: Consultation on Different Population Caps

Postby Polites » Tue Jun 05, 2018 5:45 pm

Okay, so, after returning Talmoria and Kazulia to the original proposal and keeping Dankuk, I recalculated Indrala's population with a 7% bonus as opposed to the original 15%, to give it a slightly lower population but still maintaining some climatic determinism. So here's the updated numbers:

Indrala: 284,875,536
Malivia: 203,397,251
Hulstria: 174,964,697
Istalia: 146,694,525
Talmoria: 139,431,327
Dorvik: 133,203,018
Aldegar: 130,495,554
Dundorf: 124,321,515
Valruzia: 124,201,950
Trigunia: 121,536,015
Luthori: 121,292,100
New Endralon: 119,736,352
Hawu Mumenhes: 116,361,591
Lourenne: 109,156,419
Baltusia: 102,195,322
Rutania: 100,712,651
Vanuku: 100,459,068
Tukarali: 99,086,778
Mordusia: 94,744,518
Selucia: 93,580,142
Sekowo: 88,501,606
Lodamun: 86,761,485
Beluzia: 85,343,517
Zardugal: 81,140,960
Deltaria: 79,371,977
Kalistan: 74,254,423
Narikaton: 71,494,345
Endralon: 69,452,571
Hutori: 65,815,242
Pontesi: 59,936,717
Kanjor: 56,997,456
Likatonia: 54,919,695
Kazulia: 54,522,933
Hobrazia: 52,213,117
Jakania: 50,993,654
Barmenistan: 50,976,332
Cildania: 48,025,825
Kundrati: 46,186,284
Gaduridos: 43,601,839
Kalopia: 43,583,317
Beiteynu: 41,289,613
Egelion: 40,890,141
Cobura: 40,217,509
Saridan: 39,200,195
Solentia: 38,447,848
Badara: 36,176,257
Dolgava: 35,262,248
Alduria: 28,345,365
Rildanor: 26,997,456
Dankuk: 26,557,632
Aloria: 23,784,559
Kafuristan: 23,257,903
Telamon: 21,351,904
Jelbania: 18,409,031
Klavia Okeano: 17,731,494
Kirlawa: 15,745,551
Vorona: 13,910,152
Davostan: 13,207,205
Me pinguem et nitidum bene curata cute vises,
Cum ridere voles, Epicuri de grege porcum
Polites
 
Posts: 2322
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 3:48 pm

Re: Consultation on Different Population Caps

Postby Aesir » Tue Jun 05, 2018 9:15 pm

I'm quite happy with how it all looks. As a Beiteynu player, I don't think it would hurt us to be a less-populated country.
Aesir
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2018 3:18 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest