Calculating GWP Using the T5 Resource Value, Not RUs
Resources : Resources are exploitable natural resources, minerals, ores, metals, energy sources, biological assets, and any other items of limited availability. - T5, Book3, p.27
Consider two worlds, Alpha with a population of 3 million and Beta a population of 2 billion, both with a Raw Resource score of 12. That’s 400 resources per 100 mm citizens on Alpha but only 0.6 resources per 100 mm citizens of Beta. (I use 100 million to keep results mostly above 1). For the sake of this discussion, I’m going to assume equal distribution of resources across the population, but we all know that only happens on Utopia and Dystopia in the Neverbeenthere Sector.
For this example, both worlds have the same TL 12, the same class Starport A. Alpha is Trade Class = Ag, Ri and has an Importance of 3 with an infrastructure of 5. Beta is Trade Class = Hi and also has an Importance of 3, with an infrastructure of 9.
What I would infer from this is that the citizens of Alpha have a higher standard of living than Beta. BUT not a larger economy. Also, Beta doesn’t / can’t utilize all of the resources that are available. Trade classification aside, 400 raw resources/per 100 mm seems not poor.
I would also infer that Beta is not self-sufficient and imports resources to for its population. I would speculate that Beta purchases resources from Alpha, and that the well-being of Alpha is in Beta’s best interest. Or perhaps Beta plans to conquer Alpha to ensure access to those delicious resources.
The question becomes when is a planet not self-sufficient in terms of Raw Resources? Does a planet need 1 Raw Resource per 100 mm? I’m using that as a placeholder for now. A planet with a population of 1 billion would be self-sufficient if Raw Resources > 9. A world with a population of 2 billion or more can’t be 100% self-sufficient, as a baseline concept. See table below.
In order to be sufficient with 1 Raw Resource per 100 mm, Beta needs 20 raw resources, and has a deficit of 8 Raw Resources. Conveniently, their political ally Alpha only uses 1 resource (actually 3/10) of the 12 Raw resources available to be self-sufficient, and gladly becomes wealthier trading their surplus resources for tasty Beta credits, luxuries and military hardware.
I’m not sure how to convert this into trade surpluses or deficits, nor do I necessarily want to do that. I’m trying to simplify things rather than complexify them. This still doesn’t get me the GWP I need to calculate a MCr based military budget, to spend on SDB’s, destroyers and frigates.
Resources Per 100 Million Population
UWP Population | ||||||
Raw RES | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
2 | 2,000 | 200 | 20.00 | 2.00 | 0.20 | 0.02 |
5 | 5,000 | 500 | 50.00 | 5.00 | 0.50 | 0.05 |
8 | 8,000 | 800 | 80.00 | 8.00 | 0.80 | 0.08 |
9 | 9,000 | 900 | 90.00 | 9.00 | 0.90 | 0.09 |
10 | 10,000 | 1,000 | 100.00 | 10.00 | 1.00 | 0.10 |
11 | 11,000 | 1,100 | 110.00 | 11.00 | 1.10 | 0.11 |
12 | 12,000 | 1,200 | 120.00 | 12.00 | 1.20 | 0.12 |
15 | 15,000 | 1,500 | 150.00 | 15.00 | 1.50 | 0.15 |
19 | 19,000 | 1,900 | 190.00 | 19.00 | 1.90 | 0.19 |
Further thoughts
Not all resources are equal in value, so I’m assuming a mix of needed minerals, ores, biological goods, etc.
Agricultural Planets have greater access to renewable resources.
Direct investment by external parties may be needed to increase the infrastructure, and exploit resources. (Insert evil mining corporation on a population 5 world with 15 Raw Resources.)
Does Infrastructure limit the amount of Raw Resources available to world? I seem to recall something along those lines in T4: Pocket Empires. Is there an infrastructure bottleneck? Instead of using 12 Raw Resources, use the Infrastructure of 5 for Alpha and 9 for Beta. Enough resources, but not enough means to get Raw Resources to the population. Raw Resources per 100 mm on Alpha drops to 166.67 and Beta to 0.45. The problem with this concept is that you can’t solve it by importing more goods, since your own resources are already bottlenecked.
This leads into further consideration of Labor and Infrastructure:
This system assumes that the Raw Resource value is absolute and not exponential. The assigned value of 12 resources has the same “economic value” in every system, though the types of resources may vary. We know that worlds with planetoid belts and gas giants gain additional resources, from which we can posit that the 12 resource "points" may be spread throughout the system, and not laying in a pile under an ancient red dragon. Because Raw Resources are defined and constant, it is divisible by population, providing a measure of per capita economic value.
What is Infrastructure, and what does the value express? Is it absolute, or is it relational to another value? It is relational, as it is derived from the Importance, Population, the presence of a Starport and other interstellar facilities and bases. I conclude that the Infrastructure value is relational to the world population. Infrastructure does not produce value, it is additive or subtractive to the economy in that it increases or decreases the value of the goods and resources through the efficient delivery of the economic output. How efficient is that infrastructure?
An infrastructure value of 9 is not the same on a Population 9 world as on a Population 7 world. An infrastructure of 9 provides more efficiency to the Population 7 world, than to the Population 9 world. For simplicity, an easy formula for Economic Efficiency Modifier ECOEFMO = Infrastructure / Population. A world with INF 9 / POP 9 has an ECOEFMO of 100%, whereas INF 9 / POP 7 produces and ECOEFMO of ~ 128% and INF 7 / POP 9 has an ECOEFMO of ~ 78%. I’m mulling if there should be a +/- 1 in that equation.
The goal of this exercise was to utilize the additional World data from T5 to replace the Striker GWP model.
Striker Model:
Alpha Striker GWP = 12,000 x 1.6 x 1.2 = 30,720 x 3mm = 92 BCr GWP
Beta Striker GWP = 12,000 x 1 = 12,000 x 2,000,000,000 = 32 Trillion Cr GWP
My working house rule:
Replace Per Capita GWP with Resources x 1,000 x (TL/10) x (Infrastructure/Population) and retain the trade modifiers, which I will rework in another post.
From this proposed change Alpha GWP = 69 BCr and Beta GWP = 28.8 TCr or 75% and 90% of the Striker calculated GWP.
A random sample of 24 worlds using this method show the remodeled GWP value between 31% and 202% of the Striker GWP with the average being 113%.
Higher values result when the Raw Resources and ECOEFMO are higher, and decline dramatically for worlds with few Raw Resourced and smaller Infrastructure.
This method provides a per capita GWP derived from T5 UWP statistics, rather than assigning the same base GWP to every world with a certain TL. And it can be easily calculated.
Farther down - something on Foreign Exchange rates, now that I can estimate a world's GWP.
*The Random Sample is 24 worlds in the Glimmerdrift Reaches Sector that are Non-Aligned:Human, with a Population > 5, TL > 5 and a Population Modifier of 2,4 or 6. More testing to be done.
What is Infrastructure, and what does the value express? Is it absolute, or is it relational to another value? It is relational, as it is derived from the Importance, Population, the presence of a Starport and other interstellar facilities and bases. I conclude that the Infrastructure value is relational to the world population. Infrastructure does not produce value, it is additive or subtractive to the economy in that it increases or decreases the value of the goods and resources through the efficient delivery of the economic output. How efficient is that infrastructure?
An infrastructure value of 9 is not the same on a Population 9 world as on a Population 7 world. An infrastructure of 9 provides more efficiency to the Population 7 world, than to the Population 9 world. For simplicity, an easy formula for Economic Efficiency Modifier ECOEFMO = Infrastructure / Population. A world with INF 9 / POP 9 has an ECOEFMO of 100%, whereas INF 9 / POP 7 produces and ECOEFMO of ~ 128% and INF 7 / POP 9 has an ECOEFMO of ~ 78%. I’m mulling if there should be a +/- 1 in that equation.
The goal of this exercise was to utilize the additional World data from T5 to replace the Striker GWP model.
Striker Model:
Alpha Striker GWP = 12,000 x 1.6 x 1.2 = 30,720 x 3mm = 92 BCr GWP
Beta Striker GWP = 12,000 x 1 = 12,000 x 2,000,000,000 = 32 Trillion Cr GWP
My working house rule:
Replace Per Capita GWP with Resources x 1,000 x (TL/10) x (Infrastructure/Population) and retain the trade modifiers, which I will rework in another post.
From this proposed change Alpha GWP = 69 BCr and Beta GWP = 28.8 TCr or 75% and 90% of the Striker calculated GWP.
A random sample of 24 worlds using this method show the remodeled GWP value between 31% and 202% of the Striker GWP with the average being 113%.
Higher values result when the Raw Resources and ECOEFMO are higher, and decline dramatically for worlds with few Raw Resourced and smaller Infrastructure.
This method provides a per capita GWP derived from T5 UWP statistics, rather than assigning the same base GWP to every world with a certain TL. And it can be easily calculated.
Farther down - something on Foreign Exchange rates, now that I can estimate a world's GWP.
*The Random Sample is 24 worlds in the Glimmerdrift Reaches Sector that are Non-Aligned:Human, with a Population > 5, TL > 5 and a Population Modifier of 2,4 or 6. More testing to be done.
Comments
Post a Comment