Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

VIP - POPs, POP Growth and Demographic Issues

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
OHgamer said:
OK so we need to make some Arabs in Lebanon Catholic. Will do some digging if I can find any reliable stats on LEB pops



Turkish genocides - methinks you mean Armenians, do not recall any collective actions against the Assyrian Christians by Ottoman authorities, though my knowledge on Iraq in this era is a bit shaky. Assyrians are variant of Orthodox Christians not sure if it would be proper to call them Arab Orthodox or if we'll need a new culture here.
Click to expand...


No there are numerous churches in the assyrian culture. Some are akin to the maronite's in Lebanon.. others follow other faiths. It's a reall confusing spot, and unfortunately I don't think it'd be possible to find data on the various religions they we're under. But Catholic and Orthodox woudl be most accurate. Another reason for their own culture, Ottoman's shouldn't be able to use them in a conscripted army! The Assyrian diplomats usually found ways around ottoman laws, and their communities were pretty much left unbothered by the Ottomans unless there were times of war (WWI being the worst period for Assyrians, and it triggered a very large migration out of the country). The Assyrians during WWI were promised their own nation (Their numbers are still very large at this time) by the British and French if they rised against the Ottomans, so they did. But, the promise was backed down after the war, and it left them at the mercy of either the new iraqi government or the fleeing ottomans.

I don't know about WWI, but the Assyrians in WWII we're very crucial in Iraq. Having been one of the only units in Iraq that fought the pro-axis coup.

http://www.zyworld.com/Assyrian/The Assyrian Genocide.htm

EDIT: I should add that most of the acts were done by Kurdish vigilante's. Some of them did involve Ottomans.
 
Last edited:
There are some POPs I think should be in certain places... So, here goes.

1) British should be in British India, at least a few along the coasts.
2) There should be small POPs of Dutch and German in Eastern North America to represent the amish communities which have existed for hundreds of years.
3) Anglo-Canadians should populate the Praries a bit more instead of staying in Ontario and the west coast.
4) Should there be any POPs in Central America other than Central Americans? I always see a significant amount of Finnish and Polish POPs moving there but they get assimilated as fast as the get off the boat.
5) Many times as Japan I have colonized Bonin but no Japanese want to move there. The island looks big enough to sustain a higher population, rather than the 1000 Melanese that don't move.
6) POPs in general (other than Yankee and Russian) are very picky about where they colonize. I have a hard time getting British, French, and German POPs to settle in colonies. Particularly coastal provinces in Africa.
7) I think POPs that emmigrate to the USA should retain their culture a little longer than currently permitted. I know that many ethnicities that moved to the American west kept their culture up to the 1920's. POPs shouldn't be so quickly assimilated; in my opinion. I do like how there are always some French POPs in New Orleans. Nice touch. :)
 
egallivan said:
There are some POPs I think should be in certain places... So, here goes.

1) British should be in British India, at least a few along the coasts.
2) There should be small POPs of Dutch and German in Eastern North America to represent the amish communities which have existed for hundreds of years.
3) Anglo-Canadians should populate the Praries a bit more instead of staying in Ontario and the west coast.
4) Should there be any POPs in Central America other than Central Americans? I always see a significant amount of Finnish and Polish POPs moving there but they get assimilated as fast as the get off the boat.
5) Many times as Japan I have colonized Bonin but no Japanese want to move there. The island looks big enough to sustain a higher population, rather than the 1000 Melanese that don't move.
6) POPs in general (other than Yankee and Russian) are very picky about where they colonize. I have a hard time getting British, French, and German POPs to settle in colonies. Particularly coastal provinces in Africa.
7) I think POPs that emmigrate to the USA should retain their culture a little longer than currently permitted. I know that many ethnicities that moved to the American west kept their culture up to the 1920's. POPs shouldn't be so quickly assimilated; in my opinion. I do like how there are always some French POPs in New Orleans. Nice touch. :)
Click to expand...
The assimilation is a process that is only controlled by the engine, we can't do anything about that.
So, if you start adding 1000 german POPs in Canada or USA, you will see them assimilated in less than a month.
That's exactly the reason why we didn't add spanish aristocrats in South America.
Also, about Central America, those RGOs are completelly without people, that's why the POPs go there, to get a job and better living conditions.
POPs immigration to the colonies is more or less the same, we can do much about that, the engine decides wen they go there...
 
egallivan said:
There are some POPs I think should be in certain places... So, here goes.

1) British should be in British India, at least a few along the coasts.
2) There should be small POPs of Dutch and German in Eastern North America to represent the amish communities which have existed for hundreds of years.
3) Anglo-Canadians should populate the Praries a bit more instead of staying in Ontario and the west coast.
4) Should there be any POPs in Central America other than Central Americans? I always see a significant amount of Finnish and Polish POPs moving there but they get assimilated as fast as the get off the boat.
5) Many times as Japan I have colonized Bonin but no Japanese want to move there. The island looks big enough to sustain a higher population, rather than the 1000 Melanese that don't move.
6) POPs in general (other than Yankee and Russian) are very picky about where they colonize. I have a hard time getting British, French, and German POPs to settle in colonies. Particularly coastal provinces in Africa.
7) I think POPs that emmigrate to the USA should retain their culture a little longer than currently permitted. I know that many ethnicities that moved to the American west kept their culture up to the 1920's. POPs shouldn't be so quickly assimilated; in my opinion. I do like how there are always some French POPs in New Orleans. Nice touch. :)
Click to expand...


Let's see here:
1. India POPs are under review, so expect changes in teh future..
2. I redid the USA POPs a while ago, and included many of the immigrant communities. But the way assimilation works, and AI/player tendencies, those POPs get truned into Yankee Protestants real quick. It's a problme we're exploring some possible "solutions" to.
3. That's an engine issue, as POP movement is based on several factors, wome of which appear to be "hidden."
4. Those Finnish and Polish POPs are immigrants. They disappear because of the way assimilation works, as noted in #2 above.
5. Again, as above, it's an issue with the way immigration/emmigration works.
6. Ditto above.
7. The whole assimilation thing has been bugging me for quite a while now. It's way too fast, and if you have a full_citizenship party in power, with medium to high taxes, those immigrant POPs will turn into whatever the national culture/religion is in a very, very short period of time. The problem is that we can't actually mod the assimilation rate. But what we can, and are doing is to try and slow the process down as much as possible. How effective that will prove to be is yet to be determined.
 
For the british in India i have a number from my encyclopédia, in 1805 there were, 22 000 british for the army, 2000 for the administration and 8000 as merchants or workers for privates societies just in comparison in 1931 there were 168 000, 60 000 for the army, 4000 for the administration, 104 000 as workers of privates societies.
I also think thta if you add some, only add them, in Bombay, Delhi, Calcutta and Madras.
 
Dunois said:
For the british in India i have a number from my encyclopédia, in 1805 there were, 22 000 british for the army, 2000 for the administration and 8000 as merchants or workers for privates societies just in comparison in 1931 there were 168 000, 60 000 for the army, 4000 for the administration, 104 000 as workers of privates societies.
I also think thta if you add some, only add them, in Bombay, Delhi, Calcutta and Madras.
Click to expand...

Still working on numbers but as for location that is what I haved done, save instead of Delhi I put them in Semla (that was the "summer capital" for the British in India because of its location in the Himalaya foothills - much cooler than Delhi or Calcutta in summer).
 
I agree with you, but in that case you have to only put 1000 aristocrats in each location and perhaps 1000 capitalists in Delhi, Calcutta, Bombay and Madras, so you have 5000 aristocrats, 4000 capitalists.
Also some clergymens could be add too, along with officers and maybe soldiers.
But i think that the total number of british population should not exceed 70 000 peoples.
 
Dunois said:
I agree with you, but in that case you have to only put 1000 aristocrats in each location and perhaps 1000 capitalists in Delhi, Calcutta, Bombay and Madras, so you have 5000 aristocrats, 4000 capitalists.
Also some clergymens could be add too, along with officers and maybe soldiers.
But i think that the total number of british population should not exceed 70 000 peoples.
Click to expand...


Actually capitalists are being merged with aristocrats, and there will be clergy, officers and soldiers.

Tentative :

1911 Bombay - British : aristocrats 1/clergy 1/officers 1/soldiers 2 - 20K
1954 Madras - British : aristocrats 1/clergy 1/officers 1/soldiers 2 - 20K
1967 Calcutta - British : aristocrats 2/clergy 1/officers 1/soldiers 2 - 24K
1493 Semla - British : officers 1/soldiers 2 - 8K

Total British population - 72K
 
Last edited:
OHgamer said:
Actually capitalists are being merged with aristocrats, and there will be clergy, officers and soldiers.

Tentative :

1911 Bombay - British : aristocrats 1/clergy 1/officers 1/soldiers 2 - 20K
1954 Madras - British : aristocrats 1/clergy 1/officers 1/soldiers 2 - 20K
1967 Calcutta - British : aristocrats 2/clergy 1/officers 1/soldiers 2 - 24K
1493 Semla - British : officers 1/soldiers 2 - 8K

Total British population - 72K
Click to expand...

In my version of British Indian pops, clerks and soldiers are the main component with capitalists and officers acting as the British elite with the aristocracy in the Indian nobility's role. Missionaries should only be put in a secondary role because of the post-Mutiny decree of reigning the prostelization of native subjects. I put the number of british at 100,000.

Calcutta
1967;British;Protestant;capitalists;;;;1
1967;British;Protestant;officers;;;;2
1967;British;Protestant;clerks;;;;3
1967;British;Protestant;soldiers;;;;2
Bombay
1911;British;Protestant;capitalists;;;;1
1911;British;Protestant;officers;;;;1
1911;British;Protestant;clerks;;;;3
1911;British;Protestant;soldiers;;;;2
Delhi
1503;British;Protestant;aristocrats;;;;1
1503;British;Protestant;officers;;;;1
1503;British;Protestant;clerks;;;;1
1500;British;Protestant;soldiers;;;;2
Madras
1954;British;Protestant;capitalists;;;;1
1954;British;Protestant;officers;;;;1
1954;British;Protestant;clerks;;;;1
1954;British;Protestant;soldiers;;;;2

Do you think this is good?
 
Praetor said:
In my version of British Indian pops, clerks and soldiers are the main component with capitalists and officers acting as the British elite with the aristocracy in the Indian nobility's role. Missionaries should only be put in a secondary role because of the post-Mutiny decree of reigning the prostelization of native subjects. I put the number of british at 100,000.

Calcutta
1967;British;Protestant;capitalists;;;;1
1967;British;Protestant;officers;;;;2
1967;British;Protestant;clerks;;;;3
1967;British;Protestant;soldiers;;;;2
Bombay
1911;British;Protestant;capitalists;;;;1
1911;British;Protestant;officers;;;;1
1911;British;Protestant;clerks;;;;3
1911;British;Protestant;soldiers;;;;2
Delhi
1503;British;Protestant;aristocrats;;;;1
1503;British;Protestant;officers;;;;1
1503;British;Protestant;clerks;;;;1
1500;British;Protestant;soldiers;;;;2
Madras
1954;British;Protestant;capitalists;;;;1
1954;British;Protestant;officers;;;;1
1954;British;Protestant;clerks;;;;1
1954;British;Protestant;soldiers;;;;2

Do you think this is good?
Click to expand...

Capitalists and clerks I have been told by Generalisimo not to include in IND because of the lack of industrialization, so capitalists become aristocrats and clerks (no British at all) are to be kept in farmer/laborers. 100K also sounds too high, I think even 72K may be a bit high so will likely need to trim a bit more. Missionary role was quite important so I think they should be reflected in the clergy numbers.
 
Praetor said:
Also, should the number of Indian officers be reduced since Indians could not recieve the Queen's commission until after WWI?
Click to expand...

However in the native states you do have officer corps so they need to be reflected for the native states and from what I understand in the era of the BEIC native troops could rise to mid-level leadership in the military though I am leaning towards only British officer corps in IND itself.
 
OHgamer said:
Actually capitalists are being merged with aristocrats, and there will be clergy, officers and soldiers.

Tentative :

1911 Bombay - British : aristocrats 1/clergy 1/officers 1/soldiers 2 - 20K
1954 Madras - British : aristocrats 1/clergy 1/officers 1/soldiers 2 - 20K
1967 Calcutta - British : aristocrats 2/clergy 1/officers 1/soldiers 2 - 24K
1493 Semla - British : officers 1/soldiers 2 - 8K

Total British population - 72K
Click to expand...

Excellent, i would have done that myself so :), but i think that you should not forget Delhi.
For the pop works i would like to say that i am currently working on the Baltic and Poland populations, i will add some germans pop.
 
Dunois said:
Excellent, i would have done that myself so :), but i think that you should not forget Delhi.
For the pop works i would like to say that i am currently working on the Baltic and Poland populations, i will add some germans pop.
Click to expand...


Semla is I think a better representation for the British in the Upper Ganges Valley since it really had a permanent British presence from the 1830s on whereas Delhi was not really a center for the British until after the 1857 Mutiny.
 
OHgamer said:
Semla is I think a better representation for the British in the Upper Ganges Valley since it really had a permanent British presence from the 1830s on whereas Delhi was not really a center for the British until after the 1857 Mutiny.
Click to expand...

So there are no matters ;) .
 
I just realised something!

Theres only indians in India..

In fact there were indians in Africa and Surinam (South American British holding).. the Indians in surinam I think make about 30% or more of the population there today.
 
Burris said:
I just realised something!

Theres only indians in India..

In fact there were indians in Africa and Surinam (South American British holding).. the Indians in surinam I think make about 30% or more of the population there today.
Click to expand...

Problem is that most of the immigration happens post-1857 so it is a bit wrong to put them in other regions at the start. If we can get the add_pop command to work then the problem would be settled.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back