Hi Pop Worlds

[alex_greene]

A sentient species might have a hundred billion individual entities, yet its presence could be invisible somehow, for instance if the individuals comprising that race are very, very small.

Consider a sentient hyperintelligent species of social insects, or the Vashta Nerada shadow entities from that two part Library episode of Doctor Who.

The Puppet Masters are another possibility: when asked how many of them there were, the possessed entity replied, "One."

As for those very high population ratings of 8, 9 and A+, the UWP ratings are given to the mainworlds of star systems. That's not to say that the entire populations will be living on the actual surface of that mainworld, and only on that mainworld. Colonies could exist scattered throughout the system in habitats, space bases and on inhabited and habitable colony worlds, yet all could be required to be registered with the mainworld as being native to the world and star system, and all that the Scout service did to give the system its high pop rating was to just take a copy of the census.

 

[Mithras]

As an additional note, I do find adventures on low pop worlds easy to write and game. On the other hand, hi pop adventures tend to devolve into my old cyberpunk mission tropes, which would be OK but I am running a cyberpunk game at the moment, and don't want adventure overlap. Its the low pop wild frontier feel of Vilis that led me to detail and game in it last year (total pop 2 billion), but I am expanding out into Regina which is heavy on the numbers (165 billion, second highest in the Marches after Mora).

On arcologies, maybe I haven't looked at them enough - but it seems to me it would be like RPing in a huge shopping centre. That's the image I get! So I've always stayed away from them, in an adventure writing sense.

By solving the issue to your own campaign's satisfaction, I am hereby recommending you for the coveted "starburst for extreme common sense".

 

[Tobias]

Which is, sorta, my point ... as I have noted elsewhere, demographic realities are such that if such high pop hellholes (and, regardless of tech, a planet with 40 billion pop would be a hellhole to a significant number of its citizens)

I disagree.
If you extended, for example, the population density of Japan to the entire surface area of the world, you would end up with a total population of 50 billion. And I can assure you a few things about Japan, namely that while it is a heavily urbanized country, it is far from a "hellhole" - also there are still vast strips of unsettled (and currently unsettlable) terrain in the country atm, and there are also a lot of sparsely settled rural areas remaining.

The only challenge would be to make the entire surface area of the world (or at least, shall we say, 90% of it) to be at least as livable as Japan.

EDIT: Hm, somewhat scooped. Serves me right for not reading the whole thread.

 

[aspqrz]

And, strangely, its the reason why the "real world" (tm) will never achieve the ludicrously high pop levels we are talking (in excess of ten billion, on a sustained basis) ...

<snip>

The only way these ludicrous high pop worlds could exist, really, is if there was some sort of fundamentalist religious enforcement of not only anti-birth control measures but actually enforcing higher than desired reproduction rates.

And, of course, what does that do ...

... it means people *emigrate* to all those ludicrously low tech worlds nearby, for "lebensraum", and rough it a TL or two lower than the TL of their massively populated homeworld and are grateful for it!

Yet another of the logical problems caused by ill conceived attempts to "explain" and "detail" the OTU :roll:

Phil

Basically, yes. But two points

1. worlds with no way off (tech, system, blockade)

Tech has been disposed of already ... within the Empire, unless a world is interdicted (and its likely these would be rarer than they actually are, but that's another issue), as I have noted, there is no reason (no believable reason, anyway :wink: ) why any world would have a TL less than average average stellar. None.

Interdiction ... blockade. There's not a whole hell of a lot of rebel worlds within the Imperial borders ... ergo, there's not a whole hell of a lot of blockaded worlds. Interdicted worlds ... that's another issue. If you believe in the "big friendly, prime directive" version of the OTU (which, frankly, I don't ... YMMV :wink: ) I suppose that, under unusual circumstances, a tiny number of such worlds might exist (but not for long, given a 1000 year plus Imperium). But these generally aren't high pop 40 billion plus worlds.

2. Aliens. I mean, this is SF, right ?

Yes, I suppose ... not Aslan, forex, however. Nor Vargr. Nor K'Kree ... Hivers? I don't think so ... but, obviously, I wouldn't in the case of the Hivers, whatever the actual truth of the matter might (or might not) be ... :shock:

Humans? Well, since the 3I is human, that puts the kybosh on that idea :wink:

Like I said, if you start to think seriously about the 3I and the attempts that have been made over the years to detail it, it all starts to fall to pieces because, frankly, they don't make a whole hell of a lot of sense when taken as a whole, and, indeed, often don't make a whole hell of a lot of sense even in isolation.

But, as I said, YMMV ...

Phil

 

[alex_greene]

"Good news! We've managed to ease overcrowding in our Pop A+ system by shaving off a few points. We're now Pop 8."

"And the bad news?"

"We'd contracted the Soylent Corporation for population control."

 

[aspqrz]

This is why I think the mainworlds themselves shouldn't ever have more than 10 billion people on them... but there's a lot of room in the system for more. I think a high TL system could support 100 billion people on satellite colonies and orbitals - but the TL will need to be at the high end (14/15?) to do it. Orbitals would be preferred to colonies on inhospitable worlds though.

I really can't see planets (or even systems) having trillions of people on them though.

Indeed. But even with the assumption that they're on Orbitals etc. I am not sure that you wouldn't find it impossible to get the women to breed that many people in the first place ... which is the problem.

All the evidence we have is that as wealth and education increase average family size eventually goes down.

Yes, I am aware (based on evidence here in Oz) that women express (if the Australian Burea of Statistics is to be believed) a desire to have more kids than they actually do have ... but the difference is between 1 and 2, usually, and even if they all got to have two, that is still below replacement rate, let alone having enough to increase population markedly.

So it all boils down to how you convince the women to have all those babies to increase the population to those levels in the first place and then sustain those population levels in the long term.

Unless, as I suggested, we have some weird anti-contraceptive and anti-woman religion or social mores, not gonna happen ... even if you posited artificial wombs, which would remove one of the important reasons women don't have more children ... time off work/career ... it only ameliorates it, as it merely reduces it by 9 months from a minimum of around 6 years (to school age).

And doesn't really have an impact on the economic reasons for having fewer kids.

So it still doesn't make a lot of sense ...

YMMV of course

Phil

 

[aspqrz]

Which is, sorta, my point ... as I have noted elsewhere, demographic realities are such that if such high pop hellholes (and, regardless of tech, a planet with 40 billion pop would be a hellhole to a significant number of its citizens)

And I can assure you a few things about Japan, namely that while it is a heavily urbanized country, it is far from a "hellhole" -

See the bit I highlighted?

Given that Japan's population is in sharp demographic decline ... far, far less babies than the replacement rate ... they're not gonna have that "focussed overpopulation" problem for much longer, relatively speaking.

And a chunk of Japanese do migrate every year ... not a huge number, sure, for 127 million ... but multiply it by 40 fold ... :wink:

One way or another, its not gonna be high pop for long, even assuming it rates it even now :wink:

Phil

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Babies can be made in other ways than naturally in a SciFi setting.

Consider:

CJ Cherryh used clones in her Company Wars setting.

Lois McMastes Bujold uses Uterine Replicators in her Miles Vorkosigan setting. AND she created a planet entirely of men.

Cloning and artificial Wombs are both possible at Traveller tech levels. When you remove the gestation period from the reproduction equation, then populations are no longer tied to the desires of the breeders. The Government can control the population rate by adding/reducing the number of artificial persons. Set a cultural bias against natural (dirty) pregnancies and the government controls the population numbers. Make it commericial and the government doesn't control the population, corporations do, and if making babies is profitable, they will make a lot of babies.

 

[Tobias]

See the bit I highlighted?

Yes. It's a) not a "significant" part and b) irrelevant.
Japan is one of the richest countries in the world. Yes, as in all first-world countries there is also a small part of the population living in grinding poverty. Lack of space does not have anything to do with this. (Case in point: The US.)
So, not only is the place not a "hellhole" for a significant part of the population, there is also no evidence that population density is responsible for making it a "hellhole" for a non-significant part of the population - but good evidence to the contrary.

Japan does, just by the way, in no way have an abnormally high population density. As examples, South Korea, the Netherlands, Taiwan and Belgium have higher ones. Many others have population densities in the same ballpark. If you extended the UK's population density across the globe, you would still end up with ~30 billion.
Almost every country in central Europe would be a "hellhole" by such standards.

Given that Japan's population is in sharp demographic decline

That is even less relevant. The argument was that such a high population density would make conditions a "hellhole" for a "significant" percentage of the population. Currently, Japan does have such a high population density and is not a "hellhole" for a significant percentage of the population.
And actually, the decline of population density is considered the largest threat to living standards in Japan (and other countries with similar demographics, Germany or Italy for example.)

As for migration: Even in Japan, with its extremely harsh immigration laws, the net migration is at ~0. If Japan relaxed said laws, you can be sure that migration would contribute to, not subtract from, population growth.


The problem may be that you assume a ~40 billion world to be something close to a Coruscant "world-city". It wouldn't be. Not even remotely. To get a glimpse of a world-city, expand, for example, the population density of New York City to the entire landmass of Earth. That would yield some 4000 billion, or four trillion people.

 

[rust]

Well, there are currently about 1.4 million Nikkei in Brazil and about 1.2
million Nikkei in the USA, so there has obviously been some Japanese
emigration.
And the more than 350.000 abortions per year do also not fit in well with
the image of a society that is happy with its population density.

 

[zanwot]

Hey guys, all these statistical pieces of information are ultimately irrelevent. You can extrapolate all you want, the truth is our demographics are a consequence of cultural habits, economical models, policies, and more importantly medical technology.

All of which can be pretty mixed up in a SF setting like traveller, and that is without considering transhumanism.

Anyway, it is interesting to try and guess, but ultimetely one can invent anything as long as it is self consistent, and that is the charm of it.

 

[Tobias]

And the grasping for straws begins...

Well, there are currently about 1.4 million Nikkei in Brazil and about 1.2 million Nikkei in the USA,

Yeah, so what? There are 34 million descendants of Irish immigrants in the US (about 10 times the population of Ireland) - by your logic that means that Ireland right now has an incredible overpopulation problem.

so there has obviously been some Japanese emigration.

Leave that goalpost where it is, please.

And the more than 350.000 abortions per year do also not fit in well with the image of a society that is happy with its population density.

Yeah right. That's the usual reason for an abortion. "Gee, I think the population density is too high, so I'm gonna abort."

Fact is: If a population density implied by some tens of billions on an Earth-sized world automatically means a "hellhole", then you and I currently live in a "hellhole" and have lived in "hellholes" for our entire lives...

...which are only now becoming slightly better places because of shrinking birthrates, which - as everybody acknowledes - are a gift from heaven instead of, say, a big problem.
I rest my case.

 

[Tobias]

Hey guys, all these statistical pieces of information are ultimately irrelevent.

Not if used to refute an absolute statement instead of making one.

Assertion:
A world with 50 billion people on it is necessarily going to be hellhole for much of the population.

Refutation:
A world with 50 billion people on it is not necessarily going to be hellhole for much of the population.
(But it still might be, for any number of reasons.)

 

[rust]

...by your logic that means that Ireland right now has an incredible overpopulation problem.

No, it means it had an overpopulation problem at the time of the emi-
gration.

Before contraceptives became available and abortion became legal, the
usual way to handle overpopulation was emigration, and afterwards the
medical means to reduce the number of births replaced emigration as
the preferred method to deal with overpopulation - which is the reason
why almost all societies living in countries with a high population densi-
ty that have access to a good medical technology are shrinking, and not
growing.

 

[Infojunky]

Given that Japan's population is in sharp demographic decline ... far, far less babies than the replacement rate ... they're not gonna have that "focussed overpopulation" problem for much longer, relatively speaking.

Just a point here Japans replacement rate is 1.4, the standard for a stable zero growth population is a replacement rate of 2.1.

For further reference the US's is around 2.1 - 2.2 native population trends below immigrant population trends higher.

 

[captainjack23]

as I have noted, there is no reason (no believable reason, anyway :wink: ) why any world would have a TL less than average average stellar. None.

Yes there is: it was rolled that way ! And I believe that it was rolled that way. :mrgreen:

Seriously, as for logic, rest assured that I've given it some serious consideration. How hard is the below to swallow:

Local fabrication is below that of the imperium, partly or wholly stagnated because of the ease of trade. " A manhattan project ? Please. here's a catalog from Imperial Armaceuticals* . Order the A-bombs and the boosters, and the anthrax vaccine and lets move on, hmmm ?."

Then trade....stops. Oh say, like with the long night. Or, a bankrupt frontier subsidised trade company. Or a war. Or a treaty.

There are redzoned worlds with earthlike tech and a pop of 8 . So, how long to get from there to pop A here on earth ? Not very long.

Interdiction ... blockade.<snip>these generally aren't high pop 40 billion plus worlds.

See above. Plus, I'm not suggesting that there are buckets of them, anyhow. One is more than enough for gaming purposes.

Plus, it may not be the OTU, or even if it is, the 3Imp. Do the Vargr do it ? The K'Kree ? The .....Zhodani ?

Expand your net, bro. You'll catch more fish -

2. Aliens. I mean, this is SF, right ?

Yes, I suppose ... not Aslan, forex, however. Nor Vargr. Nor K'Kree ... Hivers? I don't think so ... <snip>Humans? Well, since the 3I is human, that puts the kybosh on that idea :wink:

[/quote]

Two points: first, all of the above are races with easy starfaring, and at least half of them have a biological urge to spread out; So, no surprise that they don't clot up in Hi Pop worlds.
Secondly, there are lots of other aliens in the imperium -even human ones (so to speak). Check out everyones favorite -the Dandylions -high pop, no real motivation to spread out, despite access to space travel. Perfect opportunity for a hive world city.

Like I said, if you start to think seriously about the 3I and the attempts that have been made over the years to detail it, it all starts to fall to pieces because, frankly, they don't make a whole hell of a lot of sense when taken as a whole, and, indeed, often don't make a whole hell of a lot of sense even in isolation.

But, as I said, YMMV ...

Phil

Indeed. MMMV. Part of the issue is we are answering the question from two viewpoints - yours is a strict OTU veiwpoint, mine is within the rules framework, and that of the GM trying to run a game. So it's hard for us to actually cross points -even with serious thinking on both sides.

Is the OTU broken as a whole and in part ? I honestly can't say. I just don't think this part of it is particulalry broken, insofar as broken means "doesn't work" and/or "is completely unrealistic".

Besides, the OP was about help with Hi and Lo pop planets from a GM perspective, right ?


*Imperial Armaceuticals of Remulak : "Because sometimes you need guns and drugs !":

 

[Tobias]

No

Yes. That's exactly what logically follows from your previous statements.
"Japan has overpopulation now" -> "There are so many descendants of Japanese emigrants" is the exact equivalent to
"Ireland has overpopulation now" -> "There are so many descendants of Irish emigrants"

Before contraceptives became available and abortion became legal, the usual way to handle overpopulation was emigration

You do know how absolutely ridiculous the above statement is when referring to Japan of all places? Oh... you don't?
And just so it doesn't get forgotten around this tangential quipping:

Fact is: If a population density implied by some tens of billions on an Earth-sized world automatically means a "hellhole", then you and I currently live in a "hellhole" and have lived in "hellholes" for our entire lives...

 

[captainjack23]

And the grasping for straws begins....

Play nice.

It's a cool discussion,so let's not get overinvested in arguing and rhetorical flourishes.

That said, I'm still curious where people stand on two issues that have become intermingled here:

1. Are Very Hi Pop (B+) worlds conceptually possible (we know that from the rules they aren't, but thats less interesting)

2. Are High pop (9+) worlds invariably BAD places to live (I avoid "hellhole due to its associations with uninhabitable worlds -my choice, do what thou will )

 

[rust]

@ Tobias:

Look, no need at all to get heated about this.

First, I just stated that there obviously has been Japanese emigration -
nothing more, nothing less.

Second, I did not mention Japan at all in the second post, only coun-
tries with high population density in general.

But we will obviously not see eye to eye, so just let us end it here. :wink:

 

[Tobias]

1. Are Very Hi Pop (B+) worlds conceptually possible (we know that from the rules they aren't, but thats less interesting)

"B+" encompasses a very large range of possible populations. B to C would mean between 100 billion and 9000 billion. The latter, at least, stretches my imagination. But if the entire star system is included, it might be possible - especially since a high-tech population of several trillions has the economic power to conduct major terraforming projects - maybe even build a Dyson swarm like object.

2. Are High pop (9+) worlds invariably BAD places to live

Of course not. Current world + Imperium-level-TL = Potentially very high standard of living for every inhabitant.
Technologically, our current world could have a decent standard of living for its entire population (unless you insist on narrowminded status symbols like gasoline-powered cars for everybody). It is not because the economic and political conditions aren't tere.