Population convention

[Rowan]

Yes, the smaller realms are problematic without some base level of settlement. Ghoere has a higher wartime income than that, though. 40 province levels * 1.5GB per level (heavy taxes) is 60GB. Then add at least 10GB for Law Holding income. Then add taxes on trade routes (probably at least a few GB). Then add required contributions of the guilds and temples during times of war (themselves raking in probably another good 60GB or more, with likely at least half of that commandeered by Ghoere during wartime). That's where I get >100GB starting income. Then there's Financing, Bless Land, and tapping the treasury. I think a massive army is pretty doable

[Birthright-L]

At 06:56 PM 8/3/2009, Rowan wrote:

>I`d love to play a more medieval period with shorter seasons of
>warfare and the logistical issues that entails, but default BR rules
>don`t accommodate that well. Your description of rotating soldiers
>comes close to allowing it with default rules, but is still a bit
>problematic (why keep rotating--why not let them stand down for a
>season or two? For those called up in Spring and Fall, how can they
>make a livelihood if they can`t plant or harvest?). I`ve considered
>a number of rules variations to reflect limited service, but I
>haven`t been able to play them yet

I`ve always assumed that the "average" soldier in a BR unit is
replaced or promoted fairly quickly, and that any experience of the
unit is really more of a reflection of the unit`s leaders rather than
a general XP level of all the individuals in it. That way, there
aren`t units made up of vastly experienced "privates" or "recruits"
who somehow manage to remain unrecognized despite their obvious
prowess. This interpretation of a unit as really being the core
members of its leadership with the "common soldiery" recruited on an
as-needed basis would follow along the same lines as that. Those
soldiers who distinguish themselves might be those who remain full
time soldiers, while the rest go back to their farms....

Gary

[Rowan]

At 06:56 PM 8/3/2009, Rowan wrote:


I`ve always assumed that the "average" soldier in a BR unit is
replaced or promoted fairly quickly, and that any experience of the
unit is really more of a reflection of the unit`s leaders rather than
a general XP level of all the individuals in it. That way, there
aren`t units made up of vastly experienced "privates" or "recruits"
who somehow manage to remain unrecognized despite their obvious
prowess. This interpretation of a unit as really being the core
members of its leadership with the "common soldiery" recruited on an
as-needed basis would follow along the same lines as that. Those
soldiers who distinguish themselves might be those who remain full
time soldiers, while the rest go back to their farms....

Gary

There's still the problem of those 100-or-so men per unit serving during the planting and harvest seasons. How do they subsist when they have no crops? Your units would have to be effectively disbanded during those seasons, I think.

[Birthright-L]

At 06:45 AM 8/4/2009, Rowan wrote:

>There`s still the problem of those 100-or-so men per unit serving
>during the planting and harvest seasons. How do they subsist when
>they have no crops? Your units would have to be effectively
>disbanded during those seasons, I think.

Well, this is all part of a generalized abstraction, so it needn`t
affect anything in particular.... That said, how often are units
really active year round in a way that would need to be reflected by
their actually being at full strength with full-time soldiers in them
24/7/365? Only combat really requires that they be seen as actually
occupied by the rank and file. Garrison duty is easily enough
explained. Any time troops remain in a particular province for a
turn is just as easily accounted for. Movement might be explained as
the cost of disbanding troops, the travel of the officers and
sergeants, and then pressing into service new soldiers, or recalling
those who have been allowed to return home. Since that could all
take place within a province, we`re talking about distances of maybe
10-15 miles... and in that context, we should bear in mind that
nobody even really knows how large a BR battlefield was originally
meant to be. It`s a very simple grid, but that grid might represent
any number of small skirmishes ranging over a province (a war turn is
a week long...) rather than some sort of set piece battle.

Gary

[vota dc]

But the compromise system fails too for mustering.
Classic system 1 level = 1000 2 level = 4000 / compromise system 1 level = 50000 2 level = 60000 both doesn't explain why for 2 level you have the double of troops (too few with the classic and too much with the compromise).

Maybe the easiest solution is
1 level = 10000, 2 level = 20000....10 level = 100000
Then we could use modifier for elves and "unpopulated reigns" level 1 = 6000 etc,for goblins we can use 12000,for dwarves 8000

Aerenwe 200000 (184000 with modifier for the forest)
Alamie 220000 (212000 with modifier for the north)
Avanil 370000
Baruk-Azhik 190000 (152000 with modifier)
Boeruine 360000
Brosengae 120000
Cariele 130000
Chimaeron 100000 (60000 with modifier)
Coeranys 200000 (176000 with modifier for province on Chimaeron border)
Dhoesone 220000 (132000 with modifier)
Diemed 230000
Elinie 200000 (192000 with modifier on the swamp province)
Endier 60000
Five Peaks 210000 (180000 with north goblin and south bandits)
Gorgon's Crown 330000
Ghoere 400000
Ilien 70000
Imperial City 100000
Markazor 200000 (240000 with modifier)
Medoere 90000
Mhoried 310000 (278000 with modifier on north)
Mieres 210000 (170000 with modifier on south and inner provinces)
Mur-Kilad 80000 (64000 with modifier)
Osoerde 200000 (184000 with modifier on sunken lands and spiritsend)
Rhuobhe 20000 (12000 with modifier)
Roesone 210000 (198000 with modifier on Abbatour)
Sielwode 240000 (144000 with modifier)
Spiderfell 50000 (60000 with modifier)
Taeghas 230000
Taline 180000 (160000 with modifier on Thurazor border)
Thurazor 180000 (216000 with modifier)
Tuarhievel 220000 (132000 with modifier)
Tuornen 230000 (194000 if I put modifier on north and west-Rhuobhe and Five Peaks keep low the population,and also make sense that Tuornen fear Alamie)

[Sorontar]

So now Ghoere is only "just" larger than Avanil and Boeruine?

Sorontar

[Rowan]

If we're looking for the most popular standard to use in the BRwiki realm descriptions, there are a couple of things we could try:

1. Have a poll for which of several methods is most popular. This may not get enough participation to really be representative.

2. Use whatever published standard there is for province levels/population levels. This would result in the very low population numbers.

3. Link from every Domain page to a Population page discussing the various alternatives and presenting a succinct list or table of population numbers for each game region (Anuire, Cities of the Sun, Havens of the Great Bay, etc) for each population determination method. This might be the most complete and fair. It could even provide quick summaries of advantages and drawbacks of each method, or what assumptions/purposes the various methods were designed for.


Regardless, I think somewhere we do need to note what method we used.

We've discussed 3 methods here: the BRCS Province Level chart; a 10,000 people per province level, adjusted for race/region; and a compromise base 40,000 per province +10,000 per level, adjusted for race/region.

The fourth option I can recall being discussed in the population threads was mentioned earlier, and I think Kgauck originally proposed it. That is that Cerilia has been settled for plenty sufficient centuries to be considered fully settled to the extent possible for current technology (carrying capacity more or less reached in every civilized province). This would then fix a population for each province according to maximum province level (by terrain and race), using that base of 10,000 per level. Thus every human-inhabited Plains province would actually have 80,000 people, 90,000 if by a river and 100,000 if Coastal. Here, province levels represent organization and economic development, level of control and infrastructure.

This latter option can also have optional modifiers, as well. Modifiers proposed include changes to the base numbers for race and for length of civilization (Decadent realms like Avanil and Diemed might have 10% higher pops, while Refugee or Frontier or Wild areas might have far fewer). This system, I think, offers the most realism, but begs some further impact for the population (larger armies possible but perhaps more problems in the Decadent realms; much slower province Ruling among the less populated areas).

I favor the Population wiki page approach with the 4 options outlined. To avoid confusion and having to correct the BRCS, Domain pages can retain their miniscule population numbers by that formula.

[Rowan]

By the way, I recently came across a few scattered charts and references mentioning European populations. The best internet sources I've seen regarding population estimates from 0-1600AD I can't seem to find right now. Of course, the best sources aren't on the internet.

I've posted figures for Europe over time, for France, and for the Roman Empire. This is because I operate on the assumption that:
A. Cerilia is about the size of Europe;
B. Anuire is about the size of at least medieval France;
C. The Anuirean Empire at its height was roughly comparable to the Roman Empire at some major historical period.
D. Anuire (25%) is the most populous region, followed by Brechtur (18%), Khinasi(12%), Rjurik(8%), Vosgaard (5%), Dwarves, and Elves, with goblins (25%), orogs, and gnolls(7%) fitting in probably around the middle. I'd place these groups at a percentage of total continental population equal to what I have in parenthesis after their number, though this could vary significantly. Of course, these races vary in their ability to use the land, and are typically more specialized in how well they can use the terrain and how dense their populations are, such that elves, dwarves, and orogs at least really shouldn't count in any comparison to human populations of the real world (I've left them out of the % of total calcs).

I'm not looking for an absolute analogue, just something to inform our numbers. I realize that the non-human populations and regions of Cerilia throw off comparisons, but given the stability inherently assumed in D&D settings with 3000 years of medieval/Renaissance technology and the availability of clerical magic (presumably meaning that "medical" care was much better than in our real world earlier history), I tend to think that human settlement should be pretty populous within its tech level period.

The figures posted below suggest a few things:
1. Population fluctuates up and down, but only over many generations/centuries, so the snapshot years or (occasionally) decades during which a BR game is played should NOT involve much real population change (unless there's something like the Black Death). Thus, the Stable, Settled assumption (option 4 above) that doesn't have Rule Province adding 10's of thousands of people to the population is the most reasonable approach, historically.

2. As a side note, in the discussion of Roman populations lower in this post, my benchmark of 1% of the population normally being available for the soldiery is supported. There's a link including Crusader figures suggesting that Knights can be supported around 0.1%, or 10% of the fighting force (of 1% of pop).

3. Even taking the _lowest_ population figures for analogue time periods and slashing them dramatically in HALF, the Anuirean Empire at its height may have had some (45million/2) 22 million people; Cerilia may now have (38/2, 50/2, or 103/2) 19/25/50 million people depending on whether you place it at 1000, 1350, or 1650AD (closer to the latter end being within the Renaissance period most of Cerilia is supposed to be experiencing); and Anuire could have anywhere from 8-10million.

4. Thus you can see that, if the geographical assumptions are correct, option 4 as I presented in the previous post, which renders the highest populations (probably around 30-50% higher than the Compromise option 3), is still a little low. It can still account for the esistence of the non-human races.

I think this shows that options 3 and 4 are much, much more reasonable than options 1 and 2, if any comparison is to be drawn at all from history. Options 1 and 2 support only something like 3-10% of the real world figures.

1650 Europe at 103 million
http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/LUC/.../pop/pop_6.htm
http://www.vaughns-1-pagers.com/hist...ion-growth.htm

http://www.thesolutionsite.com/lesso...tion_graph.doc
Year Population
1000 38 million
1100 48 million
1200 59 million
1300 70 million
1347 75 million
1352 50 million

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogra...politan_France
Population of France:
1226 16,000,000
1345 20,200,000
1400 16,600,000
1457 19,700,000
1580 20,000,000
1594 18,500,000
1600 20,000,000
1670 18,000,000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_demography
400-1000: stable at a low level.
1000-1250: population boom and expansion.
1250-1350: stable at a high level.
1350-1420: steep decline
1420-1470: stable at a low level.
1470-onward: slow expansion gaining momentum in the early 16th century.

1250-1350
By 1300 Europe had too many people and not enough grain production.[2] England, which had a population of around 1 million people in 1086, is estimated to have grown to somewhere between 5 and 7 million people. France in 1328 (which was geographically smaller than France is today) was believed to have supported 18 to 20 million people, which it would not surpass again until the early modern period. The region of Tuscany had 2 million people in 1300, which it would not reach again until 1850. Overall, the population of Europe is believed to have reached a peak of 70 to 100 million. By comparison, the 27 member-states of the European Union in 2009 had a population of 499.6 million. This compares to grain yields that in the 14th century were between 2:1 and 7:1 (2:1 means for every seed planted, 2 are harvested). Modern grain yields are 30:1 or more, but the population is only 5-7 times higher.

http://www.unrv.com/empire/roman-population.php

"The population of the world circa AD 1 has been considered to be between 200 and 300 million people. In that same period, the population of the early empire under Augustus has been placed at about 45 million. "

"At the height of Roman power in the mid 2nd century AD, conservative opinion is that the Empire was comprised of some 65 million people."

"Breaking down the 65 million population estimate, some additional assumptions can be made:

* 500,000 soldiers (legionaries totalling 150,000 and auxilia making up the rest)
* Approximately 600 Senators made up the elite of the elite.
* Perhaps up to 30,000 men filled the roles of Equestrians (knights), or the second tier of the aristocracy.
* 10 to 30% or 6 million to 19 million people lived in the cities, leaving the vast majority of some 46 to 59 million people to live in the country as independent and mostly tenant farmers.
* Rome itself was made up of over 1 million people and, though it would shrink remarkably after the fall of the west, no city would surpass that number until the great urban population booms of the industrial age, 1,500 years or more later.
* The slave population of Rome approached 500,000 on its own, probably half of which were owned by the 600 men of the Senate. Additional estimates have suggested that of the total 65 million people, 2 to 10 million may have been slaves.

After the plagues of the 160's to 170's AD, and the wars of Marcus Aurelius, the population of the empire fell from its previous high, likely down to about 40 million in total. By the beginning of the 4th century, and the reign of Constantine, civil wars and foreign incursions had taken their toll. The number had grown again, likely to somewhere around 55 million, but the rate of growth had obviously slowed considerably."

http://www.google.com/search?

q=Roman+population&hl=en&tbs=tl:1&tbo=u&ei=PZF5Sp2YH47wMcykrKMO&sa=X &oi=timeline_result&ct=title&resnum=15

http://www.tulane.edu/~august/H303/h...Population.htm

"In 100 A.D., Rome boasted a population of over 1,000,000 permanent residents; Alexandria was perhaps between 500,000 and 750,000. The cities of Antioch, Ephesus and Carthage had populations on the order of 350,000 to 500,000 residents. "

"The imperial army perhaps mobilized for military service 3-4% of an adult males reckoned at 4.5 million."

Western Europe: Figures for Western show remarkable growth from 900 A.D. on as northern Europeans cleared forests and perfected deep ploughing techniques. By the eleventh century the populations of Western exceeded those of the Mediterranean world and Near East for the first time in history.

Crusader States: By 1140, the Crusaders occupied the most densely populated regions of the Levant, possibly dominating 1,625,000 residents. Crusader numbers can be sensed by the number of knights who could take field in 1140. The King of Jerusalem could field 675 knights from his vassals and additional 300 knights of the military monastic orders of the Templars and Hospitalars. The Count of Tripoli could field possibly 100 knights; the Prince of Antioch and Count of Edessa together could field no more than 700 knights. This was a potential force of 1,775 knights, but the greatest host that ever engaged was at the Battle of Hattin in 1187, and King Guy of Jersualem could muster no more than 1,200 knights.

[vota dc]

A poll is a good idea,but I still don't understand why giving so importance to the number of provinces for the population.A level 3 province realm could bully against 3 allied realms of 1 province each,but with the territorial system they have less than half population.If the problem is population,we could increase to 20000,or even 30000 for level.

So now Ghoere is only "just" larger than Avanil and Boeruine?

Sorontar

Eheehehehe.It is interesting:the classic system create a big gap between 4,5 and 6 level while a 3 province level has similar population to a 4 level.Because Boeruine has 3 provinces of level 6,it has more population of Ghoere.
The compromise system and the Kgauck system give more population to expanded realms,so Ghoere has more population since has 10 provinces.
My system is based on the total provinces level and Ghoere has more than Boereuine and Avanil.

OT I noticed an error here http://www.birthright.net/brwiki/ind...Province_Level mountains max level should be 3,but Brosengae has a 4 level mountain province

[AndrewTall]

OT I noticed an error here http://www.birthright.net/brwiki/ind...Province_Level mountains max level should be 3,but Brosengae has a 4 level mountain province

It's on the coast - so the normal max is increased by 2 from recollection. Of course the map suggests that it's as much plains as mountains anyway...