Are humans the most populous race?

[draxynnic.3719]

> @"Oglaf.1074" said:

> “Blimps” in a setting where helicopters exist have always struck me as odd. Not to change the topic or anything, but yeah. Always seemed weird. Just like how there are bows and firearms yet no crossbows (the evolutionary mid-step).

 

Not so much, actually. There are people who still make them today and, furthermore, advocate them as a 'middle ground' between ships and cargo aeroplanes as a means of transport (cheaper per tonne than shipping by aeroplane, faster than ships).

 

Heck, I think they've even been reconsidered for military applications, albeit never taken up (probably because, honestly, they are too vulnerable in a modern battlespace).

 

In the Tyrian context - while we don't know what powers a charrcopter, it's possible that airships are used for a similar reason that blimps occasionally get reconsidered in the real world: because they're a lot cheaper to keep in the air for the cargo capacity they have. Charrcopters seem to only be able to fly for relatively short periods at a time - airships seem to be the only aircraft available to Tyrians capable of travelling long distances or to remain 'on station' for an extended period.

[Dustfinger.9510]

Doubtful. Humans aren't the alpha race in GW2 that they are in other games. We know humans compete with Centaur for Krytan lands and we also know that Cantha isn't just a land of humans. That Tengu were in Cantha.

 

I'd put my money on Charr since they are actually 4 entire nations worth of strong population.

[Aaron Ansari.1604]

> @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

> we also know that Cantha isn't just a land of humans. That Tengu were in Cantha.

Technically, yes, but in the same sense that Ascalon isn't a land of just charr because there are also grawl there. The tengu had two villages, plus raiders up in a cluster of mountains. The humans had a city the size of a kingdom, with a population density that makes modern Rata Sum look deserted.

 

> I'd put my money on Charr since they are actually 4 entire nations worth of strong population.

 

Even aside from the logistics issues of feeding charr that drax has brought up in the past, the humans, as best we know, have five nations with respectable populations... and two of those have had entire continents to stretch out over. If the rest of Elona alone has as many people as what we've seen of Vabbi and Istan, then the humans could be as numerous as any two other races put together, _without_ counting Cantha.

[Dustfinger.9510]

> @"Aaron Ansari.1604" said:

> > @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

> > we also know that Cantha isn't just a land of humans. That Tengu were in Cantha.

> Technically, yes, but in the same sense that Ascalon isn't a land of just charr because there are also grawl there. The tengu had two villages, plus raiders up in a cluster of mountains. The humans had a city the size of a kingdom, with a population density that makes modern Rata Sum look deserted.

>

> > I'd put my money on Charr since they are actually 4 entire nations worth of strong population.

>

> Even aside from the logistics issues of feeding charr that drax has brought up in the past, the humans, as best we know, have five nations with respectable populations... and two of those have had entire continents to stretch out over. If the rest of Elona alone has as many people as what we've seen of Vabbi and Istan, then the humans could be as numerous as any two other races put together, _without_ counting Cantha.

 

> @"Aaron Ansari.1604" said:

> > @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

> > we also know that Cantha isn't just a land of humans. That Tengu were in Cantha.

> Technically, yes, but in the same sense that Ascalon isn't a land of just charr because there are also grawl there. The tengu had two villages, plus raiders up in a cluster of mountains. The humans had a city the size of a kingdom, with a population density that makes modern Rata Sum look deserted.

>

> > I'd put my money on Charr since they are actually 4 entire nations worth of strong population.

>

> Even aside from the logistics issues of feeding charr that drax has brought up in the past, the humans, as best we know, have five nations with respectable populations... and two of those have had entire continents to stretch out over. If the rest of Elona alone has as many people as what we've seen of Vabbi and Istan, then the humans could be as numerous as any two other races put together, _without_ counting Cantha.

 

OP brought up the size of the land. A kingdom is note worthy but I don't think the land of Cantha is just humans any more than Kryta is. Charr are spread throughout and dominate their lands. Krytans don't.

 

 

the logistical issues come from carnivores needing hunting territory. It doesn't account for intelligent species who raise cattle.

 

Humans are a well rounded species. Normally, wellrounded means without opposition, they can stretch out over any amount of land available. With opposition, they get culled by specialist but due to their generalized nature, will ultimatly survive because they can scurry and hide in a multitude of holes until danger passes.

 

So, if the disasters havn't touched those other kingdoms, you'd may be right. But, they may also have population that were ravaged.

 

[ThatOddOne.4387]

will ultimatly survive because they can scurry and hide in a multitude of holes until danger passes.

 

What? Humans haven't ever done that as a default.

[Dustfinger.9510]

> @"ThatOddOne.4387" said:

>

will ultimatly survive because they can scurry and hide in a multitude of holes until danger passes.

>

> What? Humans haven't ever done that as a default.

 

Well, they kind of did. Every time they get driven back and retreat somewhere, they are surviving in a different cluster in a different area.

 

edit: To be clear, I pointed out the advantage of a generalized species. Hiding I na hole until danger passes is the most extreme version and application of that advantage,. I'm not trying to take humanities humanity away and say they didn't fight. Im saying that even when they were losing the fight that they were definatly fighting, they were moving and surviving.

 

edit 2: Notice my avatar, Skritt have a more specialized version of that same advantage. If we were at war with the Skritt, they would fight and get driven back unending. But, they would survive and always be back when the climate allowed them to bounce back.

[ThatOddOne.4387]

Ehm. You'd still be wrong, but hey-

 

And by what measure do Charr dominate their lands whilst Humans do not dominate theirs? The Charr do not have absolute dominion over their territory as is abundantly clear. Neither of them do.

[Dustfinger.9510]

> @"ThatOddOne.4387" said:

> Ehm. You'd still be wrong, but hey-

>

> And by what measure do Charr dominate their lands whilst Humans do not dominate theirs? The Charr do not have absolute dominion over their territory as is abundantly clear. Neither of them do.

 

-Good talk. Your lack of evidence or logic leaves me nothing to work with there, so I'll move on to the next point.

 

-Absolute dominion seems an unreasonable standard. We see the centaur and the humans drive each other off land back and forth. Charr get driven off land by other charr.

 

 

[ThatOddOne.4387]

And ghosts. And Branded. And humans in history. Also unable to take Ebonhawke after 200 years of constant siege.

[Konig Des Todes.2086]

> @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

> OP brought up the size of the land. A kingdom is note worthy but I don't think the land of Cantha is just humans any more than Kryta is. Charr are spread throughout and dominate their lands. Krytans don't.

 

We were explicitly told time and time again that Canthans forced all non-humans out. There were really only four non-humans cultured species of note in Cantha during Factions (Tengu, refugee dredge, naga, and wardens - one can also argue yeti though, as one would giants in GW2). Charr may "dominate" their lands, but they don't wiped out or exile all other cultured species. Ascalon has hundreds of ogres, grawl, and harpies - for starters.

 

> @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

> the logistical issues come from carnivores needing hunting territory. It doesn't account for intelligent species who raise cattle.

 

Actually the logistical issues come from needing land to feed the cattle being raised and how many cattle must be raised.

 

However, charr have been confirmed to be omnivores (though they prefer meat), so it's still not as major as drax has argued, IMO.

 

> @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

> -Absolute dominion seems an unreasonable standard. We see the centaur and the humans drive each other off land back and forth. Charr get driven off land by other charr.

 

You realize the entire premise for why charr are allied with the other major species is because they're pressured by **numerous** threats? Not just the Flame Legions, but the ghosts, humans, ogres, and branded. Humans were the most reasonable threat to negotiate with, but they weren't the weakest - the fact they willingly just replaced "humans" for "separatists and renegades" in the end as the better alternative goes to show how much better humans are than you seem to take them for.

[Dustfinger.9510]

> @"ThatOddOne.4387" said:

> And ghosts. And Branded. And humans in history. Also unable to take Ebonhawke after 200 years of constant siege.

 

Yes, and an unkillable army of ghosts who never lose resources and can always come back at full strength and an elder dragon army. This isn't doing the job of painting the humans and the charr as the equals that you want it to.

 

Humans drove Charr out of their land in the past. Then the Charr mobilized and despite Ebonhawke, who was being supported by Asura, the humans were slowly losing that war.

 

It's GW lore that humans only dominated the charr when they were fracrutred and fighting amongst themselves. When the charr united, they were winning. Not without cost but definatly winning.

[Dustfinger.9510]

> @"Konig Des Todes.2086" said:

> > @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

> > OP brought up the size of the land. A kingdom is note worthy but I don't think the land of Cantha is just humans any more than Kryta is. Charr are spread throughout and dominate their lands. Krytans don't.

>

> We were explicitly told time and time again that Canthans forced all non-humans out. There were really only four non-humans cultured species of note in Cantha during Factions (Tengu, refugee dredge, naga, and wardens - one can also argue yeti though, as one would giants in GW2). Charr may "dominate" their lands, but they don't wiped out or exile all other cultured species. Ascalon has hundreds of ogres, grawl, and harpies - for starters.

>

> > @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

> > the logistical issues come from carnivores needing hunting territory. It doesn't account for intelligent species who raise cattle.

>

> Actually the logistical issues come from needing land to feed the cattle being raised and how many cattle must be raised.

>

> However, charr have been confirmed to be omnivores (though they prefer meat), so it's still not as major as drax has argued, IMO.

>

> > @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

> > -Absolute dominion seems an unreasonable standard. We see the centaur and the humans drive each other off land back and forth. Charr get driven off land by other charr.

>

> You realize the entire premise for why charr are allied with the other major species is because they're pressured by **numerous** threats? Not just the Flame Legions, but the ghosts, humans, ogres, and branded. Humans were the most reasonable threat to negotiate with, but they weren't the weakest - the fact they willingly just replaced "humans" for "separatists and renegades" in the end as the better alternative goes to show how much better humans are than you seem to take them for.

 

-Cantha: I did forget that they had forced all non humans out. So, if they were left relatively unscathed by recent disasters, they do have the possibility for a huge population. I also don't make the claim that charr wiped out any competitors so there is no disagreement there.

 

-Agreed. Drax' degree of severity seemed to resemble hunting lands. if those figures were for simple cattle farming and grazing lands they can only be wrong. We their cattle are basically kept penned up away from predators so the cattles food must be brought to the cattle rather than the cattle left to graze.

 

-I'm not saying humans are the weakest or trying to trash on them. I am saying humans aren't the equal of charr. Would you agree or disagree with that?

[Aaron Ansari.1604]

> @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

 

> It's GW lore that humans only dominated the charr when they were fracrutred and fighting amongst themselves. When the charr united, they were winning. Not without cost but definatly winning.

 

But only at a point where the humans were fractured and fighting among themselves. Ascalon had already been at war for 57 years when the charr hit, as had Orr, and Kryta. Similarly, Kryta's centaur troubles were only what they were because the centaurs were being helped by a powerful faction within the humans.

 

We've only had one, arguably two, points where humans and charr fought each other without needing to worry about their own kind killing them. The first was the war that carved out Ascalon, and the humans won that one. The second was the siege of Ebonhawke, and that was a two-hundred-year stalemate.

 

> -I'm not saying humans are the weakest or trying to trash on them. I am saying humans aren't the equal of charr. Would you agree or disagree with that?

Disagree.

 

> Drax' degree of severity seemed to resemble hunting lands. if those figures were for simple cattle farming and grazing lands they can only be wrong. We their cattle are basically kept penned up away from predators so the cattles food must be brought to the cattle rather than the cattle left to graze.

 

I don't have a horse in this particular race, but I am curious why you think it must be wrong. To reiterate the argument as I understand it: [Only about one-tenth of consumed biomass is converted into new biomass.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_pyramid#Pyramid_of_productivity) Growing a hundred-and-fifty-pound animal (a human) on plants requires ~1500 pounds of plants. Growing a three-hundred-pound animal (a charr) on other animals that themselves eat plants requires ~30,000 pounds of plants. Assuming an equal density of edible plants, that means you can support about twenty times as many humans as charr, per cultivated square mile. From what we've seen of charr areas in Ascalon, they don't cultivate much of their land, so the discrepancy should theoretically be even higher. None of that is factoring in predators- even if it is safe to let cattle graze a vast area, they will still need more than ten times as much land as the human equivalent- the ten times because you're losing biomass at the intermediate step of cattle, the more because the grass they're grazing on isn't as efficient as cultivated fields of crops.

 

For what it's worth, I also don't think that this is going to impact the population of charr, but only because it's a very technical thing for ANet to account for. Logically, if Tyria was constructed in a way that followed such constraints, every explorable Krytan area would need to be one big corn field to support Divinity's Reach.

 

 

 

[Dustfinger.9510]

> @"Aaron Ansari.1604" said:

> > @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

>

> > It's GW lore that humans only dominated the charr when they were fracrutred and fighting amongst themselves. When the charr united, they were winning. Not without cost but definatly winning.

>

> But only at a point where the humans were fractured and fighting among themselves. Ascalon had already been at war for 57 years when the charr hit, as had Orr, and Kryta. Similarly, Kryta's centaur troubles were only what they were because the centaurs were being helped by a powerful faction within the humans.

>

> We've only had one, arguably two, points where humans and charr fought each other without needing to worry about their own kind killing them. The first was the war that carved out Ascalon, and the humans won that one. The second was the siege of Ebonhawke, and that was a two-hundred-year stalemate.

>

> > -I'm not saying humans are the weakest or trying to trash on them. I am saying humans aren't the equal of charr. Would you agree or disagree with that?

> Disagree.

>

> > Drax' degree of severity seemed to resemble hunting lands. if those figures were for simple cattle farming and grazing lands they can only be wrong. We their cattle are basically kept penned up away from predators so the cattles food must be brought to the cattle rather than the cattle left to graze.

>

> I don't have a horse in this particular race, but I am curious why you think it must be wrong. To reiterate the argument as I understand it: [Only about one-tenth of consumed biomass is converted into new biomass.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_pyramid#Pyramid_of_productivity) Growing a hundred-and-fifty-pound animal (a human) on plants requires ~1500 pounds of plants. Growing a three-hundred-pound animal (a charr) on other animals that themselves eat plants requires ~30,000 pounds of plants. Assuming an equal density of edible plants, that means you can support about twenty times as many humans as charr, per cultivated square mile. From what we've seen of charr areas in Ascalon, they don't cultivate much of their land, so the discrepancy should theoretically be even higher. None of that is factoring in predators- even if it is safe to let cattle graze a vast area, they will still need more than ten times as much land as the human equivalent- the ten times because you're losing biomass at the intermediate step of cattle, the more because the grass they're grazing on isn't as efficient as cultivated fields of crops.

>

> For what it's worth, I also don't think that this is going to impact the population of charr, but only because it's a very technical thing for ANet to account for. Logically, if Tyria was constructed in a way that followed such constraints, every explorable Krytan area would need to be one big corn field to support Divinity's Reach.

>

>

>

 

 

 

-Of those two points, when humans won, it is GW lore hat it only happened because the khan-ur was killed and the charr were fractured. The second was not a 200 year stalemate. While Ebonhawke is a strongly held position, the humans are slowly losing the entire war. We see this in the books.

 

-You disagree. Why?

 

-For this reason: "the rule of thumb is that a carnivorous or mostly-carnivorous animal requires about ten times as much territory as a herbivorous or omnivorous animal of similar size in order to sustain itself". It deals with wild animals. Not a working infrastructure where inefficiencies are minimised. We see cattle often penned in and food can be shipped to them. The cattles food may well be cultivated fields of crops. The charr could also be eating cultivated fields of crops.

 

[Aaron Ansari.1604]

> @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

> > @"Aaron Ansari.1604" said:

> > > @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

> >

> > > It's GW lore that humans only dominated the charr when they were fracrutred and fighting amongst themselves. When the charr united, they were winning. Not without cost but definatly winning.

> >

> > But only at a point where the humans were fractured and fighting among themselves. Ascalon had already been at war for 57 years when the charr hit, as had Orr, and Kryta. Similarly, Kryta's centaur troubles were only what they were because the centaurs were being helped by a powerful faction within the humans.

> >

> > We've only had one, arguably two, points where humans and charr fought each other without needing to worry about their own kind killing them. The first was the war that carved out Ascalon, and the humans won that one. The second was the siege of Ebonhawke, and that was a two-hundred-year stalemate.

> >

> > > -I'm not saying humans are the weakest or trying to trash on them. I am saying humans aren't the equal of charr. Would you agree or disagree with that?

> > Disagree.

> >

> > > Drax' degree of severity seemed to resemble hunting lands. if those figures were for simple cattle farming and grazing lands they can only be wrong. We their cattle are basically kept penned up away from predators so the cattles food must be brought to the cattle rather than the cattle left to graze.

> >

> > I don't have a horse in this particular race, but I am curious why you think it must be wrong. To reiterate the argument as I understand it: [Only about one-tenth of consumed biomass is converted into new biomass.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_pyramid#Pyramid_of_productivity) Growing a hundred-and-fifty-pound animal (a human) on plants requires ~1500 pounds of plants. Growing a three-hundred-pound animal (a charr) on other animals that themselves eat plants requires ~30,000 pounds of plants. Assuming an equal density of edible plants, that means you can support about twenty times as many humans as charr, per cultivated square mile. From what we've seen of charr areas in Ascalon, they don't cultivate much of their land, so the discrepancy should theoretically be even higher. None of that is factoring in predators- even if it is safe to let cattle graze a vast area, they will still need more than ten times as much land as the human equivalent- the ten times because you're losing biomass at the intermediate step of cattle, the more because the grass they're grazing on isn't as efficient as cultivated fields of crops.

> >

> > For what it's worth, I also don't think that this is going to impact the population of charr, but only because it's a very technical thing for ANet to account for. Logically, if Tyria was constructed in a way that followed such constraints, every explorable Krytan area would need to be one big corn field to support Divinity's Reach.

> >

> >

> >

>

>

>

> -Of those two points, when humans won, it is GW lore hat it only happened because the khan-ur was killed and the charr were fractured. The second was not a 200 year stalemate. While Ebonhawke is a strongly held position, the humans are slowly losing the entire war. We see this in the books.

>

> -You disagree. Why?

Right. Leaders die during a war. That happens. The other side doesn't always recover.

 

If we're only admitting cases where no known major leader dies, that just leaves Ebonhawke. And what we see in the books is the humans there possessing the same amount of land that they did 200 years earlier, with no sign of the situation changing. They weren't losing, they weren't winning, it wasn't going anywhere at all. Yes, the gate to Kryta wasn't functional in EoD, but there was no indication that it was changing the tide of battle. We know that supply caravans were still getting through- that's how Logan met Rytlock and Caithe in the first place- they just had to take the long, dangerous route.

 

> -For this reason: "the rule of thumb is that a carnivorous or mostly-carnivorous animal requires about ten times as much territory as a herbivorous or omnivorous animal of similar size in order to sustain itself". It deals with wild animals. Not a working infrastructure where inefficiencies are minimised. We see cattle often penned in and food can be shipped to them. The cattles food may well be cultivated fields of crops. The charr could also be eating cultivated fields of crops.

>

 

The 'inefficiencies' aren't in land use. They're in the digestive process- the great majority of biomass consumed, ~90%, goes towards energy, the metabolism, etc, or else gets expelled again as waste. Only what's left over from that gets to go towards bone, muscle, fat, all that. It has nothing to do with domesticated vs. wild- the only way to avoid it is to breed a cow that runs on energy derived from something other than the food it eats.

 

EDIT: Granted, that does leave the possibility that the charr grow crops somewhere off-screen. However, we don't see that, while we do see ranches. I think it's fair, then, to say that ranching is a bigger industry for the charr than farming. If that's the case, the crops would ameliorate the difference, but certainly not do away with it. It just might make the difference a factor of fifteen instead of twenty.

 

Not to mention, even if the charr were fed 100% on crops- something we know isn't true- they are still larger than humans. Twice as large is the lowball estimate, which means even if they weren't ranchers, they'd still only be able to support half the population that humans could in the same space.

[Eekasqueak.7850]

I wouldn't use Cantha as an argument in this discussion at all because we have no idea what is going on there, all the humans could be corrupted into dragon minions for all we know. Elona is hardly a very populous kingdom either, most of it is uninhabitable desert and between Joko's takeover, the branded and Balthazar it's suffered some losses. Sure Joko drove out non-humans, but we see first hand how quick he is to give out harsh punishments and we literally have to stop his judges from killing people all the time.

[Dustfinger.9510]

> @"Aaron Ansari.1604" said:

> > @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

> > > @"Aaron Ansari.1604" said:

> > > > @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

> > >

> > > > It's GW lore that humans only dominated the charr when they were fracrutred and fighting amongst themselves. When the charr united, they were winning. Not without cost but definatly winning.

> > >

> > > But only at a point where the humans were fractured and fighting among themselves. Ascalon had already been at war for 57 years when the charr hit, as had Orr, and Kryta. Similarly, Kryta's centaur troubles were only what they were because the centaurs were being helped by a powerful faction within the humans.

> > >

> > > We've only had one, arguably two, points where humans and charr fought each other without needing to worry about their own kind killing them. The first was the war that carved out Ascalon, and the humans won that one. The second was the siege of Ebonhawke, and that was a two-hundred-year stalemate.

> > >

> > > > -I'm not saying humans are the weakest or trying to trash on them. I am saying humans aren't the equal of charr. Would you agree or disagree with that?

> > > Disagree.

> > >

> > > > Drax' degree of severity seemed to resemble hunting lands. if those figures were for simple cattle farming and grazing lands they can only be wrong. We their cattle are basically kept penned up away from predators so the cattles food must be brought to the cattle rather than the cattle left to graze.

> > >

> > > I don't have a horse in this particular race, but I am curious why you think it must be wrong. To reiterate the argument as I understand it: [Only about one-tenth of consumed biomass is converted into new biomass.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_pyramid#Pyramid_of_productivity) Growing a hundred-and-fifty-pound animal (a human) on plants requires ~1500 pounds of plants. Growing a three-hundred-pound animal (a charr) on other animals that themselves eat plants requires ~30,000 pounds of plants. Assuming an equal density of edible plants, that means you can support about twenty times as many humans as charr, per cultivated square mile. From what we've seen of charr areas in Ascalon, they don't cultivate much of their land, so the discrepancy should theoretically be even higher. None of that is factoring in predators- even if it is safe to let cattle graze a vast area, they will still need more than ten times as much land as the human equivalent- the ten times because you're losing biomass at the intermediate step of cattle, the more because the grass they're grazing on isn't as efficient as cultivated fields of crops.

> > >

> > > For what it's worth, I also don't think that this is going to impact the population of charr, but only because it's a very technical thing for ANet to account for. Logically, if Tyria was constructed in a way that followed such constraints, every explorable Krytan area would need to be one big corn field to support Divinity's Reach.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> > -Of those two points, when humans won, it is GW lore hat it only happened because the khan-ur was killed and the charr were fractured. The second was not a 200 year stalemate. While Ebonhawke is a strongly held position, the humans are slowly losing the entire war. We see this in the books.

> >

> > -You disagree. Why?

> Right. Leaders die during a war. That happens. The other side doesn't always recover.

>

> If we're only admitting cases where no known major leader survives, that just leaves Ebonhawke. And what we see in the books is the humans there possessing the same amount of land that they did 200 years earlier, with no sign of the situation changing. They weren't losing, they weren't winning, it wasn't going anywhere at all. Yes, the gate to Kryta wasn't functional in EoD, but there was no indication that it was changing the tide of battle. We know that supply caravans were still getting through- that's how Logan met Rytlock and Caithe in the first place- they just had to take the long, dangerous route.

>

> > -For this reason: "the rule of thumb is that a carnivorous or mostly-carnivorous animal requires about ten times as much territory as a herbivorous or omnivorous animal of similar size in order to sustain itself". It deals with wild animals. Not a working infrastructure where inefficiencies are minimised. We see cattle often penned in and food can be shipped to them. The cattles food may well be cultivated fields of crops. The charr could also be eating cultivated fields of crops.

> >

>

> The 'inefficiencies' aren't in land use. They're in the digestive process- the great majority of biomass consumed, ~90%, goes towards energy, the metabolism, etc. Only what's left over from that gets to go towards bone, muscle, fat, all that. It has nothing to do with domesticated vs. wild- the only way to avoid it is to breed a cow that runs on energy derived from something other than the food it eats.

 

-Goes to evidence of strength. No need to get ridiculous enough to need to eliminate battles where leaders die or don't die. The focus wasn't the death of a leader, it was the fact that the charr war machine had broken down. I would hesitate to base an entire societies strength on the ability to kill one charr.

 

-Ebonhawke was supported by the Asura. It was on the defense while the charr were on the offense. That is not a show of equality.

 

- You didn't specifically answer why. is it because they were able to hold out off an assault for 200 years? Is that why you think charr and humanity are equal?

 

-You asked me about Drax statement. I limited my response to drax statement. Drax' statement, the one I quoted and used to answer your question, is about land use. that statement has inherent inefficiencies that are about land use. Any argument that is not based on the statement makes it seem like you might have a dog in the fight.

 

edit: that new argument would be an effort in futility because we have no idea how the unmapped charr lands are devoted to food production. Nor do we know how much of their diet is supplemented with plants.

 

 

 

[Konig Des Todes.2086]

> @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

> -Of those two points, when humans won, it is GW lore hat it only happened because the khan-ur was killed and the charr were fractured. The second was not a 200 year stalemate. While Ebonhawke is a strongly held position, the humans are slowly losing the entire war. We see this in the books.

 

I believe what Aaron was referring to earlier was The Searing, the only time the charr had anything more than a stalemate, which occurred with the backing of Abaddon (via Titan proxies) during the Third Guild War that had been going on for 57 years. Ascalonians' attention were directed towards Kryta and Orr more than the charr, and were a fractured species (they had been since King Doric's death).

 

I do not believe Aaron was referring to the post-Foefire situation, where the charr had effectively won already, solely in part to The Searing breaking Ascalon's back and defenses. But even then, that stalemate was a tug-o-war to just outside Ebonhawke's walls. The only time humanity has spread out of them ever since its founding in 1080 AE was after the peace treaty talks, as part of the charr's cessions. There wasn't really a "slowly losing the entire war" because the only thing Ebonhawke had to lose, was Ebonhawke. And they didn't lose it.

 

> @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

> -Ebonhawke was supported by the Asura. It was on the defense while the charr were on the offense. That is not a show of equality.

 

Actually, it wasn't. The entire purpose of Jennah being in Ebonhawke during the end Edge of Destiny was that they repair the asura gate that hadn't been functioning for decades if not centuries. They might have supported Ebonhawke at one time, though when is unclear, but they quickly ceased their support suggesting that it was more an individual's support than the Arcane Council's (I wouldn't be surprised if the gate that got replaced was made by Vekk TBH). Before the end of Edge of Destiny, Ebonhawke had to sneak caravans through Ascalon and charr lands (this is what Logan was doing at the beginning of the book, in fact).

[ThatOddOne.4387]

I still think Orr would have been able to fend off the Charr if it hadn't been sunk. *Shrug*

[Castigator.3470]

Sat down to write a quick reply to the discussion. Ended up building the great wall of text.> @"Dustfinger.9510" said:> > -Goes to evidence of strength. No need to get ridiculous enough to need to eliminate battles where leaders die or don't die. The focus wasn't the death of a leader, it was the fact that the charr war machine had broken down. I would hesitate to base an entire societies strength on the ability to kill one charr. > > -Ebonhawke was supported by the Asura. It was on the defense while the charr were on the offense. That is not a show of equality.> > - You didn't specifically answer why. is it because they were able to hold out off an assault for 200 years? Is that why you think charr and humanity are equal?> > -You asked me about Drax statement. I limited my response to drax statement. Drax' statement, the one I quoted and used to answer your question, is about land use. that statement has inherent inefficiencies that are about land use. Any argument that is not based on the statement makes it seem like you might have a dog in the fight.> > edit: that new argument would be an effort in futility because we have no idea how the unmapped charr lands are devoted to food production. Nor do we know how much of their diet is supplemented with plants.> You guys bring up some interesting point on the population of the charr and whether or not they are comparable to the human population.So let me estimate the general population of the charr, by looking at their agriculture and compare that with a human. I even have good news for the charr: I read about lion diets and their consumption of 7-10 kg of meat per day shrinks to around 5 kg when the meat is cooked and further reduced to 3-5 kg per day, depending on the charr's occupation, with a hardworking blacksmith needing more, while a clerical charr might get away with consuming as little as 2,5 kg per day.Adding to that, producing meat doesn't require ten times more land, you can get away with a factor of around twice as much land, much more water and some more energy invested in herding the cattle. Since the charr are using technology wherever they can, I'd even say their meat production is far more efficient than Kryta's while their overall food production may lag behind by 0-50% depending on the harvest.A human (american) consumes around 2,0-2,5 kg of food per day. Let's say Kryta may enjoy a somewhat american standart of living.This generally seems to work out, considering square cube law allows larger creaters to eat proportionally less per body mass than smaller organisms. (Which points to asura seeking snacks on a regular basis, to keep their energy, while charr and norn may go hungry for longer.)All this tells us, that a given charr state may have between 25% and 75% of a given human state's population.We know Ascalon. While the Kingdom of Ascalon is now a dead political entity, the geographic territory of the Iron Legion covers pretty much the same ground. (Remember that Ebonhawke was founded when Ascalon was in its death throes.)The Ascalonian basin has great climate, good rainfall rich soil and a healthy wildlife. It has recovered almost completely from its searing past. Agriculturally I'd be inclined to compare it germany in the year 1600 a.d. which could sustain 20.000.000 human inhabitants. Since we're talking about charr, this makes it between 10.000.000 and 15.000.000 charr. Huge variation, I know, but this is depending on the utilization of the land and their technology. The Iron Legion may be much closer to the 15 million angry cat people, than say, Flame Legion, who suck at agriculture. Plus, Flame Legion may have lost territory, or they have lands to the north of the Citadel of Flame, but I'd put their population at 2.500.000 up to 3.000.000 if they have land that isn't Fireheart Rise. (In fact, it is brought up in events, such as Iron Marches "Protect the Devourer Eggs", that Flame Legion cannot feed its own soldiers. At that point the goldies were already losing, but the events in CoF P1, P2 and P3 indicate that the Flame has been defeated.The legions of Ash and Blood are the real wildcard here, since we do not know how developed they are exactly, nor do we know the territories they hold. We haven't even visited the red and grey citatdels. This doesn't make a guess impossible, though, since the cartographers and explorators of Tyria have a world map.

http://img.picshare.at/1416675597_tyriaocd.png

As we can see, the area east of Ascalon to the Blood Legion Homelands and the great inland sea is enormous. Depending on the climate, this land may feed enough charr to allow Blood Legion to become the next great power. The inland sea points toward continental climate similar to the grassland of asia from the black sea estwards. If that holds true, I'd put Blood legion at a range of 4.000.000-15.000.000 charr. The lower estimate is for a sparse settlement with lots of wilderness, while the high one assumes comparable strength to Iron. Most likely, they'll end up with around 7.000.000 to 9.000.000 charr.Ash Legion is a bit harder to nail down. If we look at the map, east of the Blazeridge Steppes, over the Blazeridge Mountains (which are ogre territory,) there is a peninsula and then the vast inland sea. That isn't necessarily bad, maybe Ash are living around that inland sea and the grey citadel is a charr city swimming on the inland sea, or situated on an island, supplied by fish and what meat the rich coastlands produce. That way the Ash soldier, who claims their territory is near the Blazeridge territory isn't wrong, their naval superiority allowing them to rule the coast with surgical strikes, amphibic landings, night operations and evasion, when necessary.This does explain why Ash is the stealthiest legion. With a secure island/swimming citadel they never have to commit to a losing battle against the land based powers. Unfortunately, the swimming fortress doesn't sustain a huge population, steady control over territory does. This seems to explain why Ash legion is often found fighting against ogres. Let's say Ash Legion is fighting with the ogres for valuable arable land, the best fishing spots and holds the coastline of that nameless inland sea.The land is not as much as the Blood Legion possibly holds, but fertile land and a lot of fishing opportunities, so I'd put the range of Ash Legion population between 2.500.000 and 7.500.000, depending on how much land they possess.The village of Atholma and the Sandswept Isles are inhabited by charr aswell. They sustain themselves through fishing and hunting, living in relative harmony with nature. However, they are at most a few thousand charr, smaller than ebonhawke demographicallly, and politically remote.This adds up to a lot of charr. In millions of Charr we may get:

• Iron Legion: 10-15
• Flame Legion: (Goldies) 2,5-3
• Blood Legion: 7-9
• Ash Legion: 2,5-5

Charr Total: 22-32 millionOn the continent of Tyria, I estimated around 20-30 million humans. This means that humans and charr can be around equal in total population on the main continent of Tyria. Cantha then breaks this balance by adding a massive amount of humans.Beware, though, that population only implies economic opportunities, not military success. Geography, fortifications, tactics, logistics and other factors, like magic, can counter a numerical advantage a tyrian army might have. The Qing dynasty, for instance conquered China, despite being hilariously outnumbered. For this I'd say the charr are generally more powerful than the humans, when it comes to the tyrian continent, owing to their highly organized society and technological advantage.But how did the 20 odd thousand inhabitants of Ebonhawke hold of these millions of charr? Well, the same way mere 300 spartans supposedly held of millions of persians. Ebonhawke has incredible geography. These fortifications would be difficult to take even for modern armies.The charr, like any other civilization can either have a specialized fighting force with a pool of reservists, or face starvation as too many fighters are supplied by too little farmers*. Plus, they are fighting on so many fronts, that the siege of Ebonhawke likely started as a military adventure and prestige project of an ambitious Imperator, was milked as a propaganda project, coninued in a half hearted manner to test siege devices and got preiodically reheated by krytan kings, who needed to externalize internal pressures, pointing at those evil and monstrous charr, while the charr pointed at those cowardly and wretched humans. In a way, their war allowed them to gloss over any other problems their societies may have.*Primitives can levy the whole tribe, but this fails spectacularly when attempted by modern states. The charr were able to do that 250 years ago, but they can no longer do so today, as they are bound the same infrastructure they built to allow for greater populations and technological progress.TLDR: Humans are the most populous race on Tyria (planet). Charr may be the most populous race on Tyria (continent).Despite population parity, the Charr are more powerful, owing to their highly centralized state/military machine.

[Konig Des Todes.2086]

> @"ThatOddOne.4387" said:

> I still think Orr would have been able to fend off the Charr if it hadn't been sunk. *Shrug*

 

It's actually part of the lore they couldn't, they had rushed through the Orrian guard, who were so reduced in number due to sending their armies out to fight in the Third Guild War. The charr had reached the gates of Arah (with the apparent intent on performing a Searing from Arah) when Khilbron finally utilized the Lost Scrolls. The gates of Arah are on the western side of Orr; they invaded from the east.

[Jimbru.6014]

One thing for sure: the least populous race certainly has to be the Sylvari.

 

- According to established game lore, the Firstborn awakened in 1302 AE. The present date in the game, as of LS4 episode 2, is 1331 AE. So even the eldest Sylvari are only 29 years old, and their only mode of reproduction is via the Pale Tree.

- Their only city is The Grove. The only territory they hold is Caledon Forest, and even that is contested. Their largest settlements outside the Grove are mere villages at best. And those settlements can't grow on their own because again, their only mode of reproduction is the Pale Tree. So the Sylvari can't colonize like other races.

- No doubt the Pale Tree is bearing fruit as fast as she can, but as we've seen, she has physical limits. It would make sense that the Sylvari birth rate probably slowed after Mordremoth's attack during LS2, because the Pale Tree was nearly killed and she would need to reserve more energy for her own recovery. That recovery had only barely begun as of the mission to rebuild Caladbolg after HoT, and little to nothing has been mentioned of her since.

- From the beginning of the core game until at least the end of LS1, the Sylvari suffered a steady stream of internal losses to the Nightmare Court and Toxic Alliance; game events since have probably slowed that loss path to a trickle, but it no doubt affected their early population growth.

- The Sylvari suffered the most of all the races from the war against Mordremoth. Their souls were freed, but at the cost of their already limited population being decimated by combat and Elder Dragon corruption. And as I mentioned, the Pale Tree was also affected such that the Sylvari birth rate has probably slowed significantly.

 

So yeah: the Sylvari simply don't have the means or time to have built up a population anywhere close to the other races. In fact, only a few years have passed since the events of HoT, so at this point they're probably still trying to make up for their losses, much less actually grow their population.

 

The Sylvari do have one advantage: they awaken as the physical equivalent of human teenagers or young adults, so they don't have to go through the years of growth from childhood that other races do. But even then, that "adult" status is limited by their race's limited experience and understanding of the world. Ogden Stonehealer alludes to this during the episode where the Commander visits Glint's lair...

[Jimbru.6014]

Also, regarding the Charr, there is plenty of support in the game for them having a large and highly industrious population. Points:

 

- According to official game lore, the Black Citadel is just the Charr's closest major city to the active game world. They have an entire empire outside the active map radiating out from the Blood Legion Homelands, and what we see in GW2 is only a fraction of their full strength. The rest is busy elsewhere in their vast territory.

- Aside: one of the real military problems with conquest is that the more territory you take, the more of your troops are occupied in holding it. And over time, the conquerors may become influenced or even assimilated by the societies they conquered. In that respect, centuries of contact and conflict with humans has slowly influenced the Charr, much like China influenced the Mongols in real history. The Charr had the upper hand in their military wars against humans, but as time has passed from GW1 to GW2, they have slowly lost the cultural war, and they know it and at least some of them aren't happy about it. But that's its own discussion.

- In the open world, every zone in Ascalon has some degree of Charr logistics and infrastructure, and keeping the war machine running is a major plot feature. In Diessa Plateau alone, there are mines, lumber mills, water resources being tapped, and ranchers raising cattle. And it's not just in Ascalon; for example in Wayfarer Foothills, there are Charr rounding up dolyaks and sending them to Ascalon, presumably for food and beasts of burden. So the Charr definitely are not lacking anything in resources.

- Every race has an internal conflict going on. Norn have the Svanir, Asura have the Inquest, and so on. But unlike other races, the "good guy" Charr are clearly winning their internal war against the Flame Legion, which attests to the Charr's overall strength. Pay attention when you play open world in Ascalon, especially the higher level zones; you'll see what I mean.

[Dustfinger.9510]

> @"Konig Des Todes.2086" said:

> > @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

> > -Of those two points, when humans won, it is GW lore hat it only happened because the khan-ur was killed and the charr were fractured. The second was not a 200 year stalemate. While Ebonhawke is a strongly held position, the humans are slowly losing the entire war. We see this in the books.

>

> I believe what Aaron was referring to earlier was The Searing, the only time the charr had anything more than a stalemate, which occurred with the backing of Abaddon (via Titan proxies) during the Third Guild War that had been going on for 57 years. Ascalonians' attention were directed towards Kryta and Orr more than the charr, and were a fractured species (they had been since King Doric's death).

>

> I do not believe Aaron was referring to the post-Foefire situation, where the charr had effectively won already, solely in part to The Searing breaking Ascalon's back and defenses. But even then, that stalemate was a tug-o-war to just outside Ebonhawke's walls. The only time humanity has spread out of them ever since its founding in 1080 AE was after the peace treaty talks, as part of the charr's cessions. There wasn't really a "slowly losing the entire war" because the only thing Ebonhawke had to lose, was Ebonhawke. And they didn't lose it.

>

> > @"Dustfinger.9510" said:

> > -Ebonhawke was supported by the Asura. It was on the defense while the charr were on the offense. That is not a show of equality.

>

> Actually, it wasn't. The entire purpose of Jennah being in Ebonhawke during the end Edge of Destiny was that they repair the asura gate that hadn't been functioning for decades if not centuries. They might have supported Ebonhawke at one time, though when is unclear, but they quickly ceased their support suggesting that it was more an individual's support than the Arcane Council's (I wouldn't be surprised if the gate that got replaced was made by Vekk TBH). Before the end of Edge of Destiny, Ebonhawke had to sneak caravans through Ascalon and charr lands (this is what Logan was doing at the beginning of the book, in fact).

 

-I may be mistaken but I remember a specific reference in Sea Of Sorrows that described humans troops that were rallied to fight outside the walls as being sacrificed to the grinder.

 

-It was. I only know that because while lvling a charr recently, it was in the dialog of either the characters story or a heart quest.

 

-You know a lot about the lore, considering the Charr's societies tech level, industry and military culture, would you consider the humans equal with them and if so, why?

 

@ Castigator: Nice post. it was insightful, well thought out and well done.

[norbes.3620]

> @"Jimbru.6014" said:

> - Every race has an internal conflict going on. Norn have the Svanir, Asura have the Inquest, and so on. But unlike other races, the "good guy" Charr are clearly winning their internal war against the Flame Legion, which attests to the Charr's overall strength. Pay attention when you play open world in Ascalon, especially the higher level zones; you'll see what I mean.

 

Im not s sure about this.

For the Sylvari (u may correct me if im misunderstanding things) did we not defeat the heart of the nightmare court during the Dungen? in the Story Part Faolain ran away after her defeat and in the aftermath her strongest Champions tried to Claim control over the nightmare tree to lead the court into greatness wich is stopped during the explo parts. Later we meet faolain again who hid past the silverwastes but got killed, corrupted and killed again during HoT. So there may be some member of the Nightmare court left but i doubt that they are still a Major threat.

The loss of trust from the other races based in the HoT Story is propably the bigger issue. but cant be counted as an internal conflict.

Indeed the awakening as Mordrem during the incident can be considered as such but the threat is at present already eliminated. so the Sylvari may still be recovering from those losses but the internal conflict is most likely won.

 

and even if i dont disagree that the plant People got the lowest Population ist still to be considered, that sylvari are everywere. they dont tend to build their own villages(but some indeed "create" their own Little oases) wich is based on the fact that they dont have too for reproduction but they are still spreading into every Society. they dont have history of great wars with the other races wich is also helping them to overcome the interracial frontiers.

 

 

and the internal conflict of the humans is also coming to an end.the Annihilation of the White mantle is (almost) granted. their great plot was stopped and there may be some rests remaining but during the raids+ LS3 the leader were defeated, the last mursaat who was a Center pillar of their faith got also killed. Balthasar executed a lot of the White mantle too in the Prozess of his rising too power.

that said there may still be bandits left (whats always to be expected for a Society wich huge Population) but they are not longer controlled by "the puppeteer" and cant be considered a "internal conflict" anymore.