A question about military manpower vs population

[Starhawk]

Hey all this is an actual literal post don't worry I'm NOT screwing with you here

Anyway I have a few questions I'd like to have answered before I continue writing my story because it is a question I find very important.

On the subject of military manpower vs population size and planetary resources. I am going to break this down into several sub-subjects as follows:
Universe (which sci-fi verse)
Size of Stated nation/empire
Estimated or Stated size of population
Size of Military or at least assumed size
Question for you guys.

Universe: Star Wars
Nation: Galactic Empire size (a thousand thousand worlds)

Estimated Populace: Several trillion sentients

Size of Military (est.): Several hundred thousand starships, tens of thousands of star destroyers, 4 SSDs, 2 Eclipse class, 1 shadow clas SSD. Tens of millions of soldiers.

Summery: Okay now aparently the bulk of the Imperial Armed Forces are Human, however we are talking about a galaxy of trillions of sentient beings, now excluding the "grown" ranks of stormtroopers we know that there is a regular army, and even more massive fleet.
Question: How could the galactic Empire EVER have held it's self together as it apparently is a Humans only club and humans would be dramatically outnumbered, take into account that the Imperial Military is apparently always stretched thin even fighting such a tiny foe as the rebellion.
Question 2: Is the Imperial Military too small to begin with or is it too big for reason?

Universe 2: Honor Harrington
Nation: Star Kingdom of Manticore (Size 3 planets+ several small outposts)

Estimated Size of Population: 10 billion between Manticore, Gryphon and Sphynx

Size of Military: 2,000 capital ships at it's height including over 200 SDs with crews of 6,000 to 6,200, plus the fortresses that the navy has established which have about 2 million people spread across them.

Question: The constant complaint of the Royal Manticoran armed forces is a shortage of Manpower, isn't this a bit blown out of proportion considering the Royal Military includes females in it's drafts? I mean a population of 10 billion with a military population of about 20 million and still complaining about manpower shortages? Wouldn't it simply be a matter of building the ships and guns then training the people? I think a population of 10 billion could easily put about 400 million men and women in uniform without dramatically effecting their economy.


Universe 3: Star Trek
Nation: UFP (size 150 planets)

Estimated Population: Maybe 4 trillion

Estimated Military Size: LOL none! they have the "starfleet" which is not military. But anyway aparently they have about 70,000+ starships and no ground forces except in wartime where they create a temporary Star Fleet marine Corps.

Summery: Okay the federation is by and far one of the SMALLEST nations out of any Sci-Fi universe yet during the dominion war we hear projected casualties number 900 BILLION not MILLION, but BILLION!
Okay now assuming 150 worlds with an average population of 2 billion we get a grand total population of about 300 BILLION now assuming most of the Fed worlds number more like 10 billion we still only have about 1.5 trillion people which means just about what 90% of the entire Federation population should be obliterated during the war.

Question: The Starfleet apparently has billions of people yet only tens of thousands of ships, does this make sense for the small number (galacticly speaking) of worlds within the Federation?

Universe 4: Andromeda
Nation: All Systems Commonwealth (Size 1,500,000 worlds)

Estimated Population: Stated about about 9 trillion

Military size: 150,000 warships divided into 10 sector fleets with additional support ships such as haulers, engineering ships, repair ships, crew transports, non warships.
We know that the Nitechean fleet at Hephestus was 10,000 ships with a total manpower of 1,000,000 now dylan states they had over ten times as many ships and a hundred times as many men this puts the High Guard manpower at 100,000,000 personnel of a great many species, and this excludes the Home Guard fleets and Militias.

Question: For a population of 9 trillion, isn't a military of 100,000,000 spread over 6 galaxies and several "non-combatant" occupations a little small? Considering the High Guard was actually apparently smaller then the estimated size of the Federation Starfleet and protecting a vastly larger territory?


Universe 5: Warhammer 40k
Nation: Imperium of Man (1,000,000 worlds)

Estimated Population: quadrillion (considering a single hive world has a population of about a trillion or more and there are several hundred hive worlds within the empire)

Military size: Estimated Fleet size is stated at tens of thousands of capital ships, I read several estimates that place the number at about 50,000 capital warships spread throughout the five battle fleets.
Now the ground forces of the empire is where it gets complex so here's a small breakdown:

Imperial Guard: Several billion soldiers mainly male

Space Marines: 999 chapters of roughly 1,000 marines each plus the Crusade chapter which has about 3,000 marines for a rough marine count at just over 100,000.

Sisters of Battle: Again about 100,000

Planetary Defense Forces: This is actually BIGGER then the Imperial Guard.

Question: Is the Warhammer universe' military just a little over the top or would this be a realistic possibility to have UNTOLD BILLIONS of soldiers, so many in fact that only 3 or 4 people in the entire universe knows the exact number considering the nature of the Warhammer universe and the bloodthirsty nature of the Empire?


Universe 6: Icaran Universe
Nation: Icaran Star Empire (Size 358 planets)

Population: 303.9 Billion (258 billion humans (est.))

Size of Military:
176 SD (1,073,600)
20 DN (106,000)
4 Minesweepers (2,000)
1 Super Monitor (10,100)
6 Troop ships (600 crew+ 24,000 regimental soldiers)
6 repair ships (6,000 crew)
5 Flag Monitors (75,000)
6 Raiders (SuperMonitor) (66,000)
6 LC raiders (9,300)
10 Construction Ships (50,000)
59 Shipyards/Combat Bases (1,475,000)
Total Ships: 240- 62 other support craft such as population transports miners and warpers
Total Manpower: 2,897,600

State Security: About 2,000,000
Planetary Defense Forces: Let's say 10,000,000
Total Fighting Population: 14,897,600 (all human)

Question: Is this military-v-population thing worth mentioning as a "major trait" of the Icaran Empire or would it be a rather small/normal sized military for an Empire with Icara's nature/size

Overall Question: How big is too big or on the flipside how small is to small for sci-fi military's and empires? Please post on your opinions

[geoschmo]

Technology is a force multiplier. The current state of the military is undergoing a shift towards smaller numbers of more highly trained professional soldiers with a lot more investment in weapons and technology. There is some disagreement about the best way to effect this change, but almost noone disagrees that it's coming. And we are just at the start of this trend now. Forecasted hundreds or thousands of years into the future of your sci-fi universes it's not at all unbelievable that the numbers of military forces needed to conquer or protect populations in the many trillions would seem pathetically small by our current standards. Considering that you can sit in orbit and obliterate a population that won't submit, it doesn't seem like it would take all that many boots on the ground anyway.

Of course conquering and controlling are two different things, but populations can be controlled in other less violent ways for the most part. An empire that's growing will understand this. To the average Joe and Jane in the population it doesn't matter if the seat of the governemnt is on your continent, the other side of the world, or the other side of the galaxy. If they aren't too oppressive you can get along ok.

On the other hand the logistics of supporting a military that is a significant portion of overall population would be simply staggering. And considering that all those support personell and vehicles have to be supported as well and you can see that it's quite possible that a point of diminishing returns could be reached where it's just not practical to get a larger military, even as your empire continues expanding.

[Starhawk]

Yes but on the other side of the equation what kind of military would actually count as "Large" or "small" in terms of trillions of people?

As I said the Star Trek universe for example the Federation has something like 70k starships each wtih a minimum crew of about 50 and on several occasions we hear that starfleet personnel number in the billions.
Now add to that the very inconsistant number of planet-v-population-starfleet size and star trek just gets confusing.
I mean as I said unless the Federation has a few hive worlds how could they lose 900 BILLION people in a single war and not be utterly and totally destroyed as a people?


Well another argument Geoschmo is that technology has a way of winding back around in a circular pattern by that i mean eventually technology would nullify it's own effect, some say that we may eventually see the return of WWI and WWII style warfare someday in the future, not because the technology has become primitive again but because both sides having that kind of tech may very well result in a return to the old style of fighting.

Likewise it is not always a good idea to destroy a world, especailly one with billions of people because if you think about it Empires are not built by destroying those you seek to conquer. Just like the US and Russia don't go around nuking everyone we find a threat as that would hurt everyone in the long run and in the end increase future resistance against your nation/empire.

Now assuming a planet would have it's own military forces (lets say even a few hundred thousand) then you WOULD need ground forces to seize a planet from your enemy, of course an orbiting warfleet could help but it would likely be in the tactical sense not the strategic sense, I mean a well placed kinetic strike or energy strike could be very effective in haulting an enemy advance but the odds of friendly fire risks would skyrocket.

And if you look at it the threat of utter annihilation usually drives people to greater resistance not passivity as they may well begin to think you would destroy them anyway.

So if you think about it wouldn't military forces increase again as this "circular" pattern of technology countering it's self equalized the playing fields?

[El_Phil]

Starhawk said:
Well another argument Geoschmo is that technology has a way of winding back around in a circular pattern by that i mean eventually technology would nullify it's own effect, some say that we may eventually see the return of WWI and WWII style warfare someday in the future, not because the technology has become primitive again but because both sides having that kind of tech may very well result in a return to the old style of fighting.

So if you think about it wouldn't military forces increase again as this "circular" pattern of technology countering it's self equalized the playing fields?

There is a cycle, offence and defence. When one improves the other reacts to it. Whether in weapons or tactics. Faced with charging knights? Longbows
Faced with armoured charging knights? Shoot the horses.
Armoured knights and horses? Gunpowder

Over simplified maybe but that's the principle. This held true until nukes against which a ballistic missile shield might work and only Moscow with 100 dedicated ABM batteries is really safe at the moment. However that doesn't stop a nuclear tipped cruise missile ruining you day.

The big trend that I see is the consequence of a small failure in defence:
If an archer missed one knight at Agincourt it wouldn't change much.
If an anti-tank crew missed one tank in North Africa it could ruin their day, but someone nearby could cover.
If your SAMs miss an F/A-18 you'll have a hole in your defence network eveyone else will steam through.
If your ABM shield missese one nuke...
If your fleet misses one ship on a 'glassing' mission.....

[NullAshton]

Humans populate most of the Star Wars galaxy, I'd guess around 80% of the population is human. The alien populations are repressed by means of fear, and controlling laws. The Rebellion is viewed by the empire as a minor threat, and very little resources are used against them, most of the forces are used for tyranny and conquering new systems.

[geoschmo]

Starhawk said:
Well another argument Geoschmo is that technology has a way of winding back around in a circular pattern by that i mean eventually technology would nullify it's own effect, some say that we may eventually see the return of WWI and WWII style warfare someday in the future, not because the technology has become primitive again but because both sides having that kind of tech may very well result in a return to the old style of fighting.

Technology never has and never will eliminate the need for technology in battle. Individual pieces of tech can nullify each other's effects, but then another technological advance will come along and upsets the balance. It's a cycle, not a cirlce, between technology to kill and technology to protect from being killed. It's been going on since the second guy used an animal hide to block the first guys stick.

[Starhawk]

geoschmo said:

Technology never has and never will eliminate the need for technology in battle. Individual pieces of tech can nullify each other's effects, but then another technological advance will come along and upsets the balance. It's a cycle, not a cirlce, between technology to kill and technology to protect from being killed. It's been going on since the second guy used an animal hide to block the first guys stick.

Oh you misunderstand me I did not mean that technology becomes irrelivent I meant that I've heard/read/saw people who argue to the fact that okay say a hundred years from now side

A. Has lasers, tanks, armor that protects against lasers, nukes and nuclear defense systems.

Side B: Also Lasers, tanks, armor that protects agaisnt lasers, nukes, and nuclear defense systems.

Side A- v-Side B
Laser Anti-laser armor
Anti-Laser armor Laser
Nuke Anti Nuke
Anti Nuke Nuke
Tank Tank
Airpower Airpower
Sea Power Sea Power

Now what they said is basically that because both sides become roughly equal do to the very technology that gives them an advantage their "advanced weapons" are neutralized as "advanced" by the fact that they have "advanced countermeasures" and likewise these "advanced countermeasures" are rendered un "advanced" by the weaponry employed against them.

Basically it's like pitting two WWI era soldiers against one another they are both now just rendered into just "grunts" fighting one another on such a level playing ground that trench warfare may again rear its ugly head.
Or more likely not a WWI but a WWII because the sides would indeed have tanks and mobility warfare.

So the argument is that the very technology that makes them advanced compared to us levels them out with one another to the point where it would likely come down to attrition warfare again one way or another, where one side simply tries to find the other's technological/numerical breaking point.


Did that make sense this time? (seriously I'm asking because some times I don't type as well as I speak or think)

[El_Phil]

It makes sense.

But I think it's wrong. You will never get then anti-technology evolving at the same rate as the technology. It's not until you know what your fighting against that you can develop an effective counter-measure. So the first use of a clever technology will normally have the edge as no-one has developed the appropriate counter-measures.

So very rarely have a force with a clever weapon and only that clever weapon met a force with the exact clever anti-weapon. In fact the counter-tech tends to be cleverer than the tech it was designed to counter. Take the tank, originally designed just to cross no-mans land and beat machine gun emplacements. Look what it became.

[El_Phil]

Starhawk said:
Universe: Star Wars
Nation: Galactic Empire size (a thousand thousand worlds)

Simple Answer: Rule by Fear. That and most ships are tied down as garrison fleets to stop anything from even starting to happen so the actual available fleet is fairly small. Hence why the Rebellion manages to do anything, they're massively outnumbered but only on paper. If the GE ever gathered its fleet to crush the Rebels they'd risk rebellion in most sectors.

Universe 2: Honor Harrington
Nation: Star Kingdom of Manticore (Size 3 planets+ several small outposts)

Uhhh. Because Honor once said so, hence the universe warped itself so that she'd be right. I admit that confuses me. Perhaps half the population is frightened of space?

Universe 3: Star Trek
Nation: UFP (size 150 planets)

Because continuity is a very dirty word in ST. If there is ever any agreement between adjacent episodes you should count that as a rare blessing. One writer thought that massive casulaties would emphasise one point without ever thinking of the actual consequences.

But if you think TNG had a tiny fleet take Kirk's day with only 12 Constitution class! Still they were the 'Uber Connie 'o' Doom' TM capable of traveling further and faster and with bigger weapons and shields than anything in Trek before or since.

Universe 4: Andromeda
Nation: All Systems Commonwealth (Size 1,500,000 worlds)

Uber tough ships that are very fast maybe? The ships did look quite pricey so building a new one wasn't something you do lightly. Someone who knows more should probably answer

Universe 5: Warhammer 40k
Nation: Imperium of Man (1,000,000 worlds)

WH40K is skewed by its obscenely Gothic nature, rest assured it can only be a matter of time till it turns out the Emperor is agent of Chaos, the Space Wolves rebel or something equally depressing. OK maybe a bit too far. Anyway the tag line ~ish 'In the future there is only war!' should be a clue. There is no real other career choice as far as I can see, your in the Imperial Guard, Planetary defence force, Fleet, making weapons in some way or mining. There's nothing else as far as I can tell.

Universe 6: Icaran Universe
Nation: Icaran Star Empire (Size 358 planets)

The actual percentage is tiny, it's a lot of people to be sure, but it's not a society geared up for war. Maybe industrially as churning out SDs etc takes alot of resources and maintenance just as much. But actual human population, well 0.005% says it all. For the UK at the moment say 190,000 total in the armed force (accoring to the MoD) out of 60 Million. Thats what 0.3% in peace time and after almost a decade of constant cuts (let's be honest here an increase in the budget less than inflation is a cut)

So if anything Icaran society is very unmillitary, people outside of the shipyard/fleet base planets could probably go years without even seeing any evidence of the millitary.

[Starhawk]

Universe 6: Icaran Universe
Nation: Icaran Star Empire (Size 358 planets)

The actual percentage is tiny, it's a lot of people to be sure, but it's not a society geared up for war. Maybe industrially as churning out SDs etc takes alot of resources and maintenance just as much. But actual human population, well 0.005% says it all. For the UK at the moment say 190,000 total in the armed force (accoring to the MoD) out of 60 Million. Thats what 0.3% in peace time and after almost a decade of constant cuts (let's be honest here an increase in the budget less than inflation is a cut)

So if anything Icaran society is very unmillitary, people outside of the shipyard/fleet base planets could probably go years without even seeing any evidence of the millitary.

[/quote]

Yeah I suppose you are right about that I mean granted in the Icaran Empire there are whole worlds that are devoted solely to the production of weapons for the Empire but for the most part the average citizen would only see the signs of the military in Planetary Defense Forces (which are not "regular" military) or if a division of warships dropped by.

You actually gave me a great idea El_Phil I should point out how for the most part most worlds in the Empire go decades without seeing any signs of the Royal Military beyond what they see in the news.