Coalition numbers, considering phantoms retconn, should be near of Crayters. Also tbh Jiang Xi numbers too small for so long time colonised planet, and ye no numbers for Volgograd. But, yeah that should be definitely in times, times less than Sairs have.
Since Phantoms were retconned, Coalition's population should be much bigger than in infocard.
I did some calculations before and came to the conclusion that Coalition's population should be at least as big as of Malta.
Reasons:
1) a rule of thumb in human demographics is that for a stable genetically diverse (no incest) population to exist, the initial number should be at least 50 people (25 couples). Since Coalition members managed to get on their own to Omega 52, this condition is likely to be fulfilled.
2) Sirius Coalition was formed in 23 AS, giving them 800 years to grow. Even if we take modest natural population increase, by 825 the population should be pretty big. More especially since in authoritarian states with planned economy fertility is also "planned" and promoted with free medical care, good maternal leave and propaganda.
3) Coalition has two habitable planets, increasing the pool of available resources, place for population growth and survivability from disasters. Also this means that space travel was re-engineered relatively early to allow colonisation of the neighbouring planet. If this level of technology was available, the technological level for supporting population growth was also available.
All of this is a hypothetical as everything on Disco, of course, but the qualitative model thereof works and shows numbers between 400 million and 800 million for both planets combined. To me it makes sense
(07-11-2018, 09:31 PM)Anton Okunev Wrote: Coalition numbers, considering phantoms retconn, should be near of Crayters. Also tbh Jiang Xi numbers too small for so long time colonised planet, and ye no numbers for Volgograd. But, yeah that should be definitely in times, times less than Sairs have.
We produce chineses since 23 A.S.!
Jiangxi being the Chernobyl-esque nuclear wasteland that it is didn't seem like the best place to grow a population, so I didn't count it. Seeing as I have no confirmed canon source for your claim to the Coalition's numbers being near Crayter's, I'm gona have to discount it. Sorry m8.
(07-11-2018, 09:36 PM)Lythrilux Wrote: Population numbers are rubbish.
On the contrary: population numbers mean a whole helluvalot when it comes to geopolitics. Y'can't field fleets without people to pay taxes to support them, and can't crew ships if ya don't have the people to stuff into them. Consistent numbers and considerations as to those population numbers a big step in writing and worldbuilding.
[ sci·am·ach ]
/sīˈamək/
A simple, angry man casually working his way through life on a personal quest to acquire copious amounts of street cred.
The only valid way to represent population is saying "x faction is larger than y". You can't go into specifics because its such a mess. So many population infocards have been implemented willy nilly without QA, or have been changed/added through bias.
(07-11-2018, 09:43 PM)Sciamach Wrote: [quote="Anton Okunev" pid='2014166' dateline='1531341119']
Coalition numbers, considering phantoms retconn, should be near of Crayters. Also tbh Jiang Xi numbers too small for so long time colonised planet, and ye no numbers for Volgograd. But, yeah that should be definitely in times, times less than Sairs have.
We produce chineses since 23 A.S.!
Jiangxi being the Chernobyl-esque nuclear wasteland that it is didn't seem like the best place to grow a population, so I didn't count it. Seeing as I have no confirmed canon source for your claim to the Coalition's numbers being near Crayter's, I'm gona have to discount it. Sorry m8.
Jiangxi is Chernobyl-like because of the mentioned Phantoms that have been retconned. The planet is a mixture of lush jungles (abundance of bioresources) near equator and harsh tundra in the polar regions. I took that into consideration.
(07-11-2018, 09:43 PM)Sciamach Wrote: [quote="Anton Okunev" pid='2014166' dateline='1531341119']
Coalition numbers, considering phantoms retconn, should be near of Crayters. Also tbh Jiang Xi numbers too small for so long time colonised planet, and ye no numbers for Volgograd. But, yeah that should be definitely in times, times less than Sairs have.
We produce chineses since 23 A.S.!
Jiangxi being the Chernobyl-esque nuclear wasteland that it is didn't seem like the best place to grow a population, so I didn't count it. Seeing as I have no confirmed canon source for your claim to the Coalition's numbers being near Crayter's, I'm gona have to discount it. Sorry m8.
Jiangxi is Chernobyl-like because of the mentioned Phantoms that have been retconned. The planet is a mixture of lush jungles (abundance of bioresources) near equator and harsh tundra in the polar regions. I took that into consideration.
I don't want to debate the specific numbers, but I'd assume a major event like that wouldn't have been retconned, but instead replaced with another faction, like the Nomads.
I kinda disagree here with Garda, because both Coalition planets is shit. I more tempted look on it as on colonised regions like Siberia. Volgograd numbers limited by artifical infrastructure, required for just surviving on it. So i think it should be near of 5 mils. Maximum 10 with proper supply.
Jiang Xi had very odd numbering on my look: peoples will not settle it so poor just due "wild live and unpredictable conditions". Peoples originated from nations from harsh land on earth dont have that mindset, especially when alternative - is artifical domes on Volgograd.
But even so, i doubt it would more than 30-50 mils. Still think it society was pretty in static until 6-7 century A.S.