Post by CELS on Aug 11, 2004 1:56:29 GMT -5
(I don't know if this is in the right forum, or it should be in the World-building forum. Feel free to move it, if you didn't already 
)
As the number of worlds in the Anargo sector is growing, it might be interesting to consider the composition of world types compared to the Imperium-wide composition suggested by GW. Now, I know some of you don't entirely agree with what GW suggested, mainly because they suggest that one in every ten worlds is a forge world !!!
Working on the ASP assumption that the Phi-class category includes industrial worlds in addition to forgeworlds (which is supported by 2nd Ed fluff), I think that we should definitely keep the GW composition in mind. Not follow it blindly, but keep it in mind.
For example, it would be highly inappropriate if we found that 15% of all worlds in the subsector were feudal worlds, because this is a huge leap from the 4% suggested by GW (and furthermore, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense, considering the history of the sector). As you know, we originally designed this sector with the idea in mind that it would be an average sector. While it seems that is not completely realistic because of the potentially very significant anomaly in the Heart of Anargo, the history of the sector might still be considered to be pretty 'average'. No huge catastrophes like the Waaagh! in the Cruciatine sector and no super-special presence of forge worlds or anything like that.
Assuming that we'll eventually have 100 Imperial worlds (not systems) in the Anargo sector, this should give us the following composition
14 hive worlds
35 civilised worlds (includes fortress worlds, cardinal worlds, garden worlds and mining worlds)
20 agri worlds
8 Feral worlds
2 Dead worlds
6 Death worlds
1 Research station
4 Feudal worlds
10 Industrial worlds / forge worlds (since we have decided we're having two forge worlds, this means 8 industrial worlds)
Now, previously, I've told you guys (at least Kage) that worlds with listening and watch mosts and the like should be considered Rho-class, "Research station". Considering the apparent rarity of such worlds though, I'm not sure if that is entirely appropriate. So we're left with the choice of either ignoring GW's composition in this regard, or saying that monitor stations that are not also used as research stations fall into the 'dead world' category, which are Aptus Non and have a population of 0 "excluding Imperial facilities". Either way though, it doesn't seem like we're following GW's directions on this point, as all the systems with complete SR so far seem to have monitor stations.
Your thoughts?
)As the number of worlds in the Anargo sector is growing, it might be interesting to consider the composition of world types compared to the Imperium-wide composition suggested by GW. Now, I know some of you don't entirely agree with what GW suggested, mainly because they suggest that one in every ten worlds is a forge world !!!
Working on the ASP assumption that the Phi-class category includes industrial worlds in addition to forgeworlds (which is supported by 2nd Ed fluff), I think that we should definitely keep the GW composition in mind. Not follow it blindly, but keep it in mind.For example, it would be highly inappropriate if we found that 15% of all worlds in the subsector were feudal worlds, because this is a huge leap from the 4% suggested by GW (and furthermore, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense, considering the history of the sector). As you know, we originally designed this sector with the idea in mind that it would be an average sector. While it seems that is not completely realistic because of the potentially very significant anomaly in the Heart of Anargo, the history of the sector might still be considered to be pretty 'average'. No huge catastrophes like the Waaagh! in the Cruciatine sector and no super-special presence of forge worlds or anything like that.
Assuming that we'll eventually have 100 Imperial worlds (not systems) in the Anargo sector, this should give us the following composition
14 hive worlds
35 civilised worlds (includes fortress worlds, cardinal worlds, garden worlds and mining worlds)
20 agri worlds
8 Feral worlds
2 Dead worlds
6 Death worlds
1 Research station
4 Feudal worlds
10 Industrial worlds / forge worlds (since we have decided we're having two forge worlds, this means 8 industrial worlds)
Now, previously, I've told you guys (at least Kage) that worlds with listening and watch mosts and the like should be considered Rho-class, "Research station". Considering the apparent rarity of such worlds though, I'm not sure if that is entirely appropriate. So we're left with the choice of either ignoring GW's composition in this regard, or saying that monitor stations that are not also used as research stations fall into the 'dead world' category, which are Aptus Non and have a population of 0 "excluding Imperial facilities". Either way though, it doesn't seem like we're following GW's directions on this point, as all the systems with complete SR so far seem to have monitor stations.
Your thoughts?
ok..Im getting it now, I thought there were way less...more like a few hunderd 
You're only just realising this? Oh my... 
