Proposed Population Rule

[Orioni]

With the whole discussion about revamping our forum and organisation, I've been playing with this idea for making our role-play more realistic. The way it works is very simple:

NationStates Population / 10 = more realistic population

That's it really.

 

Why you ask?

 

The populationnumbers in NationStates or way too abnormal. Nations of up to 7 billion already, it's not real. But 700 million I could live with. You could compare it to countries a little bit smaller then China and India. That way, smaller nations can't be invaded by armies of 70 million soldiers for example.

There's a little catch for new nations, who have to stay around for a little longer before fully emerging as a superpower, but I believe it's a good way to learn how to grow from city-state to a real nation. Plus, as I mentioned before, you're protected from huge invasions.

 

So it's quite simple you see. Just devide your numbers by ten (10) and everyone's happy. I think. Now scroll up and cast your vote.

[Xheng]

Europe Region had this rule, and they also applied it to a nation's finances which meant all your money was RPed at 1/10 of its true value.

 

It did make nations more realistic I think.

[Europa]

At the moment this is stated in our RP rules & guidelines:

Now for military. Your military is going to be 2-5% of your nation most of the time. Some nations, if they prepare 2-4 years ahead, can say 10% if they prepare big-time. This, even with preparation, will be a huge blow to that nation?s economy unless they prepare maybe 10-20 years ahead. And remember, that 2-5% is very split. It would be generous to say 50% of your military is combat. But some nations do just for the sake that this is a game and we?re not here to logistic ourselves to death, although this is important. Half of your military, if not more, are drivers of the foods, ground commanders that don?t fight, airplane maintenance, ship maintenance, etc etc etc, its all vital to having a working military. So don?t think you can have 5% of your population be all fighting. It would be generous to say half of that.

 

Indeed there're some nations who're nearing 7 billion, but I've got myself about 4,5 billion, being one of the larger nations in the region.

 

The NS populations are indeed abnormal, but that's how they were designed. Implementing a 1/10-population-rule is a simple rule which can be helpful to create more realistic numbers. But I think your population is what it is, and a linear rule might not be a long term solution.. maybe we could just considered some kind of army size cap? The army size grows along with your population untill your reach a certain population, after which your military doesn't grown any more, but stays about the same..

 

Just my two cents..

 

 

[Nevareion]

All it will do is change numbers rather than roleplays. Does it matter that much? Plus, realism? We have all sorts of un realistic stuff going on, why will that be allowed but numbers which have less impact not? I don't see the point to be honest. Realistic numbers don't make good RP, in fact numbers don't.

Edited January 25, 2006 by Nevareion (see edit history)

[Adaptus]

i agree with Nev here, it doesnt realy matter about number, as long as your sensible with them. i mean no one is going to say, "1 billion marines stromed the beach". it's just unreal, i just say, model your military structure round a RL military, and then if war breacks out, respond in like a RL country, and say somthing like 3 brigades were sent with is about 15,000 troop, i mean that seems realistic, i mean who's going to say 34 brigades were sent to such and such a nation are they, once again, it's too unreal.

[Bhalman]

I concur with Adaptus and Nev.

[Pirilao]

This game for me it?s not realist , as such I do not see reason for the alteration.

That is one another world, is in a different dimension.

[Tagmatium Rules]

I'm going to agree with Nev, Adapt and NC.

 

A nation could have 7 billion, to use O's example, and if they tried to use a force of 70 million soldiers to invade anyone, I'd grap a sturdy stick of oak, chalk "logistics" onto it, and proceed to beat them about the head with it. Numbers are one thing, but realism is another. If RP's are properly done, a nation could have any number of soldiers. The point is, we're trying to make a good story and have a laugh or a good time whilst doing it. Bad RP'ing, no matter the size of the forces involved, would put a spanner in those works. For example, a small force of soldiers could be poorly roleplayed, appearing out of nowhere etc, whilst that person could also role-play properly with a huge force, doing the build-up, etc.

 

An army cap would be the same sort of thing.

[Nevareion]

I think it is more a case of good self regulation and where that fails mod intervention that ensure realism and good rp rather than rules or caps which can be seen as being arbitary.

Edited January 25, 2006 by Nevareion (see edit history)

[Vocenae]

I have voted option B, since I believe that the role-playing members of the forum can rp realistically without being enforced by rules.

Edited January 26, 2006 by Vocenae (see edit history)

[Ide Jima]

Nevareion is right (Just in case you were wondering who else voted on B )

[Orioni]

Okidoki. I get the general idea. I just thought it could be good, but maybe it'll only work it the whole of NS has to follow that rule.

 

...

 

Now there's an idea.

[Vanarambaion]

Yeah, I voted against it for two reasons:

 

1. We're all good RPers (minus certain former members), and we can self-regulate. If it's not necessary to make a rule it is necessary not to make the rule (Sorry to all the non-English speakers, this may not translate well).

 

2. Vanarambaion is a nation that not only has compuslory military service, but the entire country is run by the military, top to bottom. Putting a cap on military would basically strangle the country. Plus I like having been around for long enough to have several billion people.