Future Tech Advice and Assistance Thread [O.O.C.]

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

For a mostly defensive military and nation, what would you all say is a healthy and reasonable military size?

I primarily ask because I am curious, I have a population of 35,593,613,022.

I have a main line military force, and reserves.

[Feazanthia]

For a mostly defensive military and nation, what would you all say is a healthy and reasonable military size?

I primarily ask because I am curious, I have a population of 35,593,613,022.

I have a main line military force, and reserves.

It is wholly dependent on tech level, territory needed to defend, doctrine, etc. There is no hard number, and most people would say not to have hard numbers.

[SquareDisc City]

Simple way is to look to a real-world analogue and use the percentage from it.

Remember that as real-world nations go the USA is far from the norm in military spending and manpower, and that whatever the size of a nation's forces most are not involved in front-line combat.

[The Fedral Union]

Right I may also point out that if your not at war and haven't been at war for ages you don't need to have fleets of o doom and millions of conscripts on alert 24/7 Its just not needed. Space is really, really big.. How you go to war or why is your choice, but doing it to "expand" or for resources is silly, really silly. The distances involved mean its unlikely anyone will share a "border". Systems are like islands in this case, as far as personnel numbers? X as Feaz pointed out (variable) the total number of forces in your nation doesn't come up. Its just fluff and fluff that's not needed. If its just defensive anyway it will be small, and frankly if your not at war most should be in reserves.

[Huerdae]

It is wholly dependent on tech level, territory needed to defend, doctrine, etc. There is no hard number, and most people would say not to have hard numbers.

This is my viewpoint. At what point in any given RP do the total numbers of your military come into play? For that matter....35,593,613,022? Don't you think that within a day or so, that number could rise or fall significantly? It seems a bit odd to me that you would have any number anywhere near that accurate for a nation...especially pulling fluid time into the idea here. How does that matter to the RP? To the story?

I know I'm highly anti-numbers, but let's be reasonable, people. Even taking a few million in the US, how often to people live and die?

Let's play with some numbers. Pulling up the 2010 US census, I've got right about .8% deaths over the course of a year. Running off the same year's approximately 308 million people, We're seeing about 2.46 million die in a year. Every day, that puts us at about 6750 deaths. Running with a birth rate of 1.3% out of the 2010 numbers, that's 10,950 births in a day. Shall we continue to play with numbers? That means about 7 births a minute. With about 4.6 deaths a minute.

So, back to your number. Roughly 100 times that. You can assume 460 deaths a minute, assuming the exact same statistics. Or 700 births a minute. Oh, right about 11 births a second. Yep. Let's track population down to an individual person, shall we?

No, I really don't think that makes sense. Sometimes, less accuracy is more accurate.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

Those 22 guys are the most important in the army. Without them the whole edifice comes crashing down!

[Avenio]

Those 22 guys are the most important in the army. Without them the whole edifice comes crashing down!

Who knew the guys who operated the spehss potato peelers were so important?

[OMGeverynameistaken]

Those 22 guys are the most important in the army. Without them the whole edifice comes crashing down!

Who knew the guys who operated the spehss potato peelers were so important?

Are you kidding? Potatoes are vitally important to keeping a military machine running!

[SquareDisc City]

Going down to the last man is a bit silly, but a general idea of the military strength can certainly be relevant. If you want to RP international politics and diplomacy, you're going to be interested in the military and for that matter economic capabilities of the various nations involved. If you're just RPing one battle or war, then if you're lacking an idea of the size of the deployment and the size of your nation's military as a whole you'll get by with the nitty-gritty details but you'll be hampered in considering the wider situation, for example how much the conflict is stretching your nation's capabilities. (And yes, you could just say "About a third of the whole Navy were despatched to the battlespace" and continue to duck giving specific figures, but that seems unsatisfying.)

Also, if you have reasonable descriptions down of your stuff - whether it's the numbers, the tech base, the geography, whatever - you reassure others that you're not pulling stuff out your arse. (And yes, I know I don't have said reasonable descriptions yet.)

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

It is wholly dependent on tech level, territory needed to defend, doctrine, etc. There is no hard number, and most people would say not to have hard numbers.

This is my viewpoint. At what point in any given RP do the total numbers of your military come into play? For that matter....35,593,613,022? Don't you think that within a day or so, that number could rise or fall significantly? It seems a bit odd to me that you would have any number anywhere near that accurate for a nation...especially pulling fluid time into the idea here. How does that matter to the RP? To the story?

I know I'm highly anti-numbers, but let's be reasonable, people. Even taking a few million in the US, how often to people live and die?

Let's play with some numbers. Pulling up the 2010 US census, I've got right about .8% deaths over the course of a year. Running off the same year's approximately 308 million people, We're seeing about 2.46 million die in a year. Every day, that puts us at about 6750 deaths. Running with a birth rate of 1.3% out of the 2010 numbers, that's 10,950 births in a day. Shall we continue to play with numbers? That means about 7 births a minute. With about 4.6 deaths a minute.

So, back to your number. Roughly 100 times that. You can assume 460 deaths a minute, assuming the exact same statistics. Or 700 births a minute. Oh, right about 11 births a second. Yep. Let's track population down to an individual person, shall we?

No, I really don't think that makes sense. Sometimes, less accuracy is more accurate.

There are a lot of factors that result in death, and numbers are sometimes tracked as it by census.

Since the census is available to all people, thats the number of the time it was taken.

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

Right I may also point out that if your not at war and haven't been at war for ages you don't need to have fleets of o doom and millions of conscripts on alert 24/7 Its just not needed. Space is really, really big.. How you go to war or why is your choice, but doing it to "expand" or for resources is silly, really silly. The distances involved mean its unlikely anyone will share a "border". Systems are like islands in this case, as far as personnel numbers? X as Feaz pointed out (variable) the total number of forces in your nation doesn't come up. Its just fluff and fluff that's not needed. If its just defensive anyway it will be small, and frankly if your not at war most should be in reserves.

Having a small military in one solar system seems very silly to me, especially given that the possibility of alien threats is seemingly high. Our very experience leads us to have a strong military, because we need to make sure we are safe, its why Sol is a fortress basically.

We are paranoid, we know what alien weaponry can do, and we are not going to let them have any advantage if they are hostile.

[Huerdae]

Well, now, I'm going to disagree. Not because any particular point is wrong, per se, but because I feel that not a single point of that requires exact numbers. I'm not saying you shouldn't have an idea of what you're capable of. You most definitely should, but having it down to the exact numbers and names of divisions available, ships and ship names, who is in charge, etc. is a step well above and beyond what I expect. Indeed, someone with too much information that they're flaunting actually turns me away from RP. If someone starts firing fancy ray guns at me, I'm more comfortable with them than if they fire a 62 jiggajugwatt laser beam simply because 62 jiggajugwatts means nothing to me. Numbers, in terms of the people in the RP itself, are often the last thing on their mind. Sometimes, that's not the case - say, a computer limitation on engaging less than 3km from the target due to weapon safeties - but most of the time, it is. A sniper cares about the exact distance to target - your basic rifleman is content knowing his target is about 65m out.

This can be applied to many levels of an RP, and the advantages you state - how much a given conflict stretches your nation's resources, for example, can be given easily. Let me, for example, use my own nation. I maintain and use approximately five or six War Fleets at any given time. One of these is generally not in active duty, either used as reserves or out of date ships being refit, but that also means it's not a full war fleet. Including combat losses, and knowing that each full war fleet is 545 ships (I think) not including strike craft, this means I feel I could have anything from 200 to 500 ships in that war fleet. Others are more likely to maintain higher standards of readiness, but all told, I could have a variance of nearly 500 ships from the given, assumed numbers.

Does this mean that I don't know what my nation is capable of? Most definitely not. This is a sustainable rate, for the HSE, but more importantly, there has been only one time that I have put forth a force so massive that it put this in danger. And you know what? That was easy to denote. Even someone with less accurate numbers can tell when their nation is stretching its limits. During the gate war, I deployed a full war fleet to attack Derdon, Sojent-Ra, and Foer. Later on, the same group ended up conquering Alstania as well, though that surrendered peaceably. Derdon never fell. Even so, many characters, even several not named in those threads, showed up later with experience in these conflicts. The way in which these things are handled in the thread is more important than knowing "this is exactly a third of my navy". The fact that I was doing three threads over the case of the Gate War (which, sadly, did not complete itself) and the following aftershock Battles for Foer were plenty. Fresh, green troops on the battlefields, as well as the way people in the threads interact...the details of your nation don't have to be explicitly stated.

These details can be derived from what you see. Green soldiers manning the defenses. Hard rationing of an already rationed military unit. Fresh commanders, or desperate placements of troops because there are no reserves available - the frequency of these things tells a story, not a number on the page. You don't feel the fact that a third of your fleet is at war. You feel the hunger in your gut because you've been on the front lines for four months and there's nobody to replace you, and two out of every three supply shipments gets gunned down as the enemy tries to get you to give up that desperate scrap of ground your four friends died for.

I think, for reference, I have fairly effective descriptions of my stuff. Most of which comes with number of crew in a vehicle (not all vehicles have this), general descriptions of what they can do (not really even what they look like), and a vast array of pointless facts that I actually use far more than any numerical value simply because that's what people do, in my experience. It's not like a game where if you cross 20% of your armed forces deployed, you get these negatives on your supplies and the effectiveness of your troops. It's a feel you'll see on the ground, something far less quantifiable.

Does this properly explain my views?

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

Well, now, I'm going to disagree. Not because any particular point is wrong, per se, but because I feel that not a single point of that requires exact numbers. I'm not saying you shouldn't have an idea of what you're capable of. You most definitely should, but having it down to the exact numbers and names of divisions available, ships and ship names, who is in charge, etc. is a step well above and beyond what I expect. Indeed, someone with too much information that they're flaunting actually turns me away from RP. If someone starts firing fancy ray guns at me, I'm more comfortable with them than if they fire a 62 jiggajugwatt laser beam simply because 62 jiggajugwatts means nothing to me. Numbers, in terms of the people in the RP itself, are often the last thing on their mind. Sometimes, that's not the case - say, a computer limitation on engaging less than 3km from the target due to weapon safeties - but most of the time, it is. A sniper cares about the exact distance to target - your basic rifleman is content knowing his target is about 65m out.

This can be applied to many levels of an RP, and the advantages you state - how much a given conflict stretches your nation's resources, for example, can be given easily. Let me, for example, use my own nation. I maintain and use approximately five or six War Fleets at any given time. One of these is generally not in active duty, either used as reserves or out of date ships being refit, but that also means it's not a full war fleet. Including combat losses, and knowing that each full war fleet is 545 ships (I think) not including strike craft, this means I feel I could have anything from 200 to 500 ships in that war fleet. Others are more likely to maintain higher standards of readiness, but all told, I could have a variance of nearly 500 ships from the given, assumed numbers.

Does this mean that I don't know what my nation is capable of? Most definitely not. This is a sustainable rate, for the HSE, but more importantly, there has been only one time that I have put forth a force so massive that it put this in danger. And you know what? That was easy to denote. Even someone with less accurate numbers can tell when their nation is stretching its limits. During the gate war, I deployed a full war fleet to attack Derdon, Sojent-Ra, and Foer. Later on, the same group ended up conquering Alstania as well, though that surrendered peaceably. Derdon never fell. Even so, many characters, even several not named in those threads, showed up later with experience in these conflicts. The way in which these things are handled in the thread is more important than knowing "this is exactly a third of my navy". The fact that I was doing three threads over the case of the Gate War (which, sadly, did not complete itself) and the following aftershock Battles for Foer were plenty. Fresh, green troops on the battlefields, as well as the way people in the threads interact...the details of your nation don't have to be explicitly stated.

These details can be derived from what you see. Green soldiers manning the defenses. Hard rationing of an already rationed military unit. Fresh commanders, or desperate placements of troops because there are no reserves available - the frequency of these things tells a story, not a number on the page. You don't feel the fact that a third of your fleet is at war. You feel the hunger in your gut because you've been on the front lines for four months and there's nobody to replace you, and two out of every three supply shipments gets gunned down as the enemy tries to get you to give up that desperate scrap of ground your four friends died for.

I think, for reference, I have fairly effective descriptions of my stuff. Most of which comes with number of crew in a vehicle (not all vehicles have this), general descriptions of what they can do (not really even what they look like), and a vast array of pointless facts that I actually use far more than any numerical value simply because that's what people do, in my experience. It's not like a game where if you cross 20% of your armed forces deployed, you get these negatives on your supplies and the effectiveness of your troops. It's a feel you'll see on the ground, something far less quantifiable.

Does this properly explain my views?

I don't recall asking for your views, I was just explaining why I have a population that is exact.

And then after that explaining half assly why I prefer to have a large defense force.

Its all dependent on how the player wants to do their stuff, so long as people can trust you and so long as you keep the story in mind, no issues should arrive. So I don't get why you had to type all that out, no offense :/

[The Legion of War]

Because it's his advice, on an advice thread?

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

Because it's his advice, on an advice thread?

He specified it was his own thing though, doesn't seem much like advice in that case, especially after the fact I gave a reason for certain things of mine.

[Huerdae]

I don't recall asking for your views, I was just explaining why I have a population that is exact.

And then after that explaining half assly why I prefer to have a large defense force.

Its all dependent on how the player wants to do their stuff, so long as people can trust you and so long as you keep the story in mind, no issues should arrive. So I don't get why you had to type all that out, no offense :/

Well, that's wonderful. I didn't type it out for you. That was actually for Square, which spun off of a statement you made. However, thank you kindly for the rebuff, I rather enjoy when someone is so self-centered they can't tell that they're not the only voice here.

But, to respond to your post, I come to a single question - Why? You gave a very exact number, for a very exact point in time. But what value do you gain from it? Or is it just that you wanted to end the number with "022" to feel 'complete'? The time it would take to get that number mandates it is almost instantly wrong. Any sort of reasonable administration for a government that size has to recognize this.

Let me make myself clear for the rest of this. I'm giving advice. A way to view roleplay. What you ask for and what you take from it is up to you. Advice is free, and whether you take it or not is of no consequence. But how you respond to it reflects on you. I'm trying to make you think - trying to give you an idea of the sheer scale you're working with, and you're dismissing it out of hand. I have no problem with that.

I do find, however, that you should reconsider how you respond to things in this thread. This is a place for advice. If you don't want to see other people's views, why are you here? Isn't that what advice is? A way to reflect on your own views and choices to temper them and see if they hold up or should be changed?

"No offense."

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

I don't recall asking for your views, I was just explaining why I have a population that is exact.

And then after that explaining half assly why I prefer to have a large defense force.

Its all dependent on how the player wants to do their stuff, so long as people can trust you and so long as you keep the story in mind, no issues should arrive. So I don't get why you had to type all that out, no offense :/

Well, that's wonderful. I didn't type it out for you. That was actually for Square, which spun off of a statement you made. However, thank you kindly for the rebuff, I rather enjoy when someone is so self-centered they can't tell that they're not the only voice here.

But, to respond to your post, I come to a single question - Why? You gave a very exact number, for a very exact point in time. But what value do you gain from it? Or is it just that you wanted to end the number with "022" to feel 'complete'? The time it would take to get that number mandates it is almost instantly wrong. Any sort of reasonable administration for a government that size has to recognize this.

Let me make myself clear for the rest of this. I'm giving advice. A way to view roleplay. What you ask for and what you take from it is up to you. Advice is free, and whether you take it or not is of no consequence. But how you respond to it reflects on you. I'm trying to make you think - trying to give you an idea of the sheer scale you're working with, and you're dismissing it out of hand. I have no problem with that.

I do find, however, that you should reconsider how you respond to things in this thread. This is a place for advice. If you don't want to see other people's views, why are you here? Isn't that what advice is? A way to reflect on your own views and choices to temper them and see if they hold up or should be changed?

"No offense."

:Sighs:

There is a quote button, use it.

If I make two post and then you come right after it with a post that is seemingly relevant, of course I will think you were talking to me.

Also please act more decent or whatever...I made no intentional offense to you, I was just being blunt and telling you that I don't see the post relevance towards my initial question or to anything I really said.

If the post has no relevance to any advice I was seeking, I am not going to care and I won't see the purpose of it, the advice was already handed out.

All I did was explain the population thing, you didn't have to bring that up, it was of no concern or true relevance, and its just a number....it isn't going to affect you or an RP by much if at all.

Edit: Anyways you can talk to me by telegram if you want. I won't continue the conversation here, the most likely scenario is that an off topic rant would most likely start or continue or whatever, so its best to avoid it starting now, and to move along.

[Huerdae]

:Sighs:

There is a quote button, use it.

If I make two post and then you come right after it with a post that is seemingly relevant, of course I will think you were talking to me.

Also please act more decent or whatever...I made no intentional offense to you, I was just being blunt and telling you that I don't see the post relevance towards my initial question or to anything I really said.

If the post has no relevance to any advice I was seeking, I am not going to care and I won't see the purpose of it, the advice was already handed out.

All I did was explain the population thing, you didn't have to bring that up, it was of no concern or true relevance, and its just a number....it isn't going to affect you or an RP by much if at all.

I find this is a more effective way of managing a conversation. I don't need to see the entire conversation to respond to it. The most recent statements will do. My memory serves well enough for the rest. It tends to make it easier to read. You're particularly demeaning for no point. This is the second time in two posts. The first time I was insulted, and reacted accordingly. Now I'm quite simply telling you to stop. This will be my final response to you regarding this topic in this thread. We are getting off topic.

I return to the point of this being an advice thread. If you don't like the advice, ignore it. Don't tell me that you don't care about it, because that's simply being impertinent to a person who is attempting to be helpful to people who came to this thread for actual advice. If you don't see the relevance, then why respond as you did?

'Act more decent or whatever.' I don't think that this really deserves a response. I was just being blunt, right?

...no, that's unfair. I mocked your attitude with my last post, and it did not get the point across. I provided my advice to another, and you felt you had to interrupt to tell me it had nothing to do with your statement. I stand by that point. If it has nothing to do with you, don't bother others about it. There are more people here than you who are trying to have discussions improving their own work, and I include myself in that number. Pointlessly telling me that you don't want to listen to my views when they weren't for you in the first place is needlessly arrogant. Just don't respond if it doesn't apply. If you don't like the advice, or feel it's not accurate, by all means respond constructively so that a conversation may occur which may assist others in making rational decisions. What you have provided so far does not truly count as a constructive or helpful response.

[SquareDisc City]

He specified it was his own thing though, doesn't seem much like advice in that case, especially after the fact I gave a reason for certain things of mine.

Often the best way to give advice is to talk about what you do or did, and whether that was successful or not.

And

Does this properly explain my views?

yes.

[Sskiss]

It is wholly dependent on tech level, territory needed to defend, doctrine, etc. There is no hard number, and most people would say not to have hard numbers.

This seems to make sense to me. Basically, a military should be a "as you need" sort of thing. Given our rather low population densities (when compared to humans et al) you can only "fit" so many Sskiss on a given world. Thus, we need to colonize more often, and terraforming technologies were heavily researched early on in our history for the same reasons. This in part is due to, one, more food resources needed, and two, territorial issues. It's likely that our own military is quite large as a result. However, a rather large percentage of that is taken up by orbital and ground based weapon systems, as well as system defense boats, drone bases etc... In short, more defensive based systems, as opposed to a huge FTL fleets. Most of the ground forces are worker castes trained for battle. The actual elite forces (ground based soldier castes and space navy) only comprises of about 12-15 percent of the total armed forces.

[Kyrusia]

Let's keep things on track, please. Personal jabs at one another are not something that have made their way into this thread frequently. Let's try and not make it a habit. Also, this is an advice thread, not an argument thread. As I've gone over before, if you post something here, expect advisement or advice related to it or some topic mentioned within said post. If you do not want others to comment with their own personal advice based on their experiences in this community, then don't post it.

No one here is free to simply say, "Oh, well, I didn't want your advice. Foop off, thankee-sai." This thread doesn't work that way. As it says in the original post, you're not obligated to agree with the advice given, but you are obligated to respect the advice in the manner in which it was given.

Thank you.

[Milagro]

What kinds of transportation technologies might be very developed in a society that places much value on human contact? By that I mean things like frequently visiting relatives, seeing people in person rather than over a screen, and so on.

I was thinking something along the lines of really high speed trains, but I'm not sure what that would look like in FT. Planes would probably be used for across the planet voyages. Not sure about ships...

How would this all play out in an FT setting?

[StellarGate]

What kinds of transportation technologies might be very developed in a society that places much value on human contact? By that I mean things like frequently visiting relatives, seeing people in person rather than over a screen, and so on.

I was thinking something along the lines of really high speed trains, but I'm not sure what that would look like in FT. Planes would probably be used for across the planet voyages. Not sure about ships...

How would this all play out in an FT setting?

High sped trains to link major city centers on a planet, stereotypical future floating cars that could fly across to smaller towns or individual houses buildings. Your people could also have ultra realistic holograms to allow for good communication when people can't get together in person.

Interstellar travel probably have a booming business of star liners for transport to other colonies if you have them.

[Huerdae]

The HSE uses mostly high speed trains between metropolitan sectors and lower speed trains for inner-city movement. They call them 'rails', but it's the same idea. Due to the way the cities are built, there are multiple levels to them, and not so much space available for personal vehicles. Because of this, personal transportation is rare. Those who do have it tend to have a skidbike - a nuclear powered motorcycle, because it's FT.

Many models of commercial or industrial haulers and liners are listed in my factbook for space travel, but I have very few traditional 'cars' or 'trucks'.

[Oppressorion]

What kinds of transportation technologies might be very developed in a society that places much value on human contact? By that I mean things like frequently visiting relatives, seeing people in person rather than over a screen, and so on.

I was thinking something along the lines of really high speed trains, but I'm not sure what that would look like in FT. Planes would probably be used for across the planet voyages. Not sure about ships...

How would this all play out in an FT setting?

City internal: Monorail, walking.
Short distance: Mag-lev vacumn-sealed train.
Medium: Light aeroglider (w. backup engines).
Long: Sub-orbital capsule, the only way to travel.