310 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

Lately, I'm often reading about scenarios where Earth is abandoned or completely lost to the Reapers, and some people apparently don't care a lot about that.

You should care. If Earth falls to the Reapers or is abandoned for any reason, humanity will be destroyed as a political, military or economic power. This is why:

Earth is not a world of slums and barbarism.
Earthborn Shepard is from such a place on Earth, but Earth as a whole is in a new golden age, according to the Codex. Different regions profit differently from the influx of resources and technological development, but all in all Earth is, compared to earlier times in its history, a very good place to live. Source: Codex Entry "Humanity and the Systems Alliance"

Earth accounts for an estimated 99% of humanity's population base.
Earth has a population of over 11 billion. Humanity has about "a dozen established colonies and hundreds of industrial outposts" (Source: Codex Entry "Humanity and the Systems Alliance"). The established colonies have populations of around 3-5 million (source: planet descriptions of Terra Nova, Bekenstein and Eden Prime, wiki entry about Elysium (source unclear)) , That makes about 50 million for the established colonies and let's say those industrial outposts account for another 50 million (which is very generous). That's a sum of 100 million human colonists, assuming they're all human, which isn't true (see Elysium) but can be overlooked for the sake of the argument. 100 million to Earth's 11 billion, that is roughly 1%. 99% of all humans live on Earth, 1% in the colonies. 

Economic and military considerations:
You could argue that not all people on Earth contribute the same to the total economy as the colonies. That might be true, but even if we say that only the reasonably developed nations "count", let's say with a third of Earth's total population, that's still 3.6 billion to 100 million, meaning that 97% of Earth's economical power is located on Earth, even if you don't consider that the colonies will likely have more children and minors. And those with low productivity still count as consumers.
Since military costs money, you can also conclude that losing Earth would mean that the Alliance will be unable to support most of its personnel and material resources. Humanity will be, if maybe not in danger of extinction as a species, then at least no longer a factor anymore, not worth of consideration by even a minor power of the galaxy.

So abandoning Earth is not a viable strategy. Except if you don't care about reducing humanity to a power of no consequence at all - or if you go with that hypothetical plan of TIM's to hide a few million humans from the Reapers and outlast their occupation.

Edit:
This point by Saphra Deden should also be considered. Humanity will be unable to expand for a significant time, possible many generations, until the populations of the established colonies are big enough for emigration:

Saphra Deden wrote...
[...]without Earth there will be no more human expansion because the first generation of settlers on any human colony are people from Earth.

Also, Earth is a major source of revenue for the colonies, buying up a lot of the resources they dig up. These resources are largely then reinvested into the colonies in the form of ships and more colonies and industrial
facilities. Earth pays the costs of establishing industrial outposts. There are several worlds seen in the games which were scouted out or are actively developed by companies and countries based on Earth.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 25 juillet 2011 - 12:11 .

[sponge56]

It would be good to stick this post in the 'why should the alliance defend earth' thread so we can let this topic die, you pretty much answered it brilliantly

[Rivercurse]

Even if 99% of us are wiped out, surely that's a price paragons would pay to save every other race and end the extinction cycle? I know I would.

[CroGamer002]

[Ahriman]

Humans are special, you will be surprised how fast they will recover even 99% of them will be wiped out.

[Blarty]

The issue here is... is it just Earth or also the other established species that have found their way to the citadel.

Of course with it being Shepard, Earth is both the most important planet to him, and likely to be the first, but it is highly unlikely that the attack on Earth, and the decimation of the human race will be an insolated incident.

If all races suffer near equally then socio-political, economic and even military differences, in real-terms, will likely remain proportionally the same, perhaps not in the immediate term of Earth's attack but certainly in the longer term.

Although I agree that abandoning Earth is not a viable 'strategy', strategy is rarely a concept at the forefront of your mind when you are being routed. This all reminds me of the Kashyyk beacon in KOTOR

[Fixers0]

 I will just quote this here:

Zulu_DFA wrote...


While the Reapers are busy harvesting Earth, the Alliance has time to come up with a better plan to stop the Reapers than "we fight or we die". Such a better plan would involve some kind of super-weapon, or a virus, or something else, that might actually hurt the Reapers. Bonus points if you saved the Colector Base and  TIM can put a million puppies in a giant blender to figure out some weak spots on the Reapers. When the Alliance is as much ready as it can be, it will launch the general offensive. Bonus points if the aliens' fleets get sacrificed first in the process. Then there might be a chance that the Humanity might persevere as a species, even if 99.9% of it dies.

By contrast, if the Alliance attempts to evacuate the Earth (which is impossible), its fleet will be destroyed by the Reapers. Given that the stupid aliens seem to be doing the same thing (with the same result), there won't be any force to be put to work when TIM or Batarians or whoever come up with the deus ex machina. Then the Reapers proceed unrestrained to harvesting 100% of sapient life in the galaxy.

99.9% < 100%.

0.01% > 0%

Therefore it's a plain outright retaded act of folly for the Alliance to try evacuating Earth's population from under the Reapers' claws.

Modifié par Fixers0, 25 juillet 2011 - 11:33 .

[sponge56]

Fixers0 wrote...

 I will just quote this here:

Zulu_DFA wrote...


While the Reapers are busy harvesting Earth, the Alliance has time to come up with a better plan to stop the Reapers than "we fight or we die". Such a better plan would involve some kind of super-weapon, or a virus, or something else, that might actually hurt the Reapers. Bonus points if you saved the Colector Base and  TIM can put a million puppies in a giant blender to figure out some weak spots on the Reapers. When the Alliance is as much ready as it can be, it will launch the general offensive. Bonus points if the aliens' fleets get sacrificed first in the process. Then there might be a chance that the Humanity might persevere as a species, even if 99.9% of it dies.

By contrast, if the Alliance attempts to evacuate the Earth (which is impossible), its fleet will be destroyed by the Reapers. Given that the stupid aliens seem to be doing the same thing (with the same result), there won't be any force to be put to work when TIM or Batarians or whoever come up with the deus ex machina. Then the Reapers proceed unrestrained to harvesting 100% of sapient life in the galaxy.

99.9% < 100%.

0.01% > 0%

Therefore it's a plain outright retaded act of folly for the Alliance to try evacuating Earth's population from under the Reapers' claws.

Im so glad that zulu has played mass effect 3

[Fixers0]

sponge56 wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

 I will just quote this here:

Zulu_DFA wrote...


While the Reapers are busy harvesting Earth, the Alliance has time to come up with a better plan to stop the Reapers than "we fight or we die". Such a better plan would involve some kind of super-weapon, or a virus, or something else, that might actually hurt the Reapers. Bonus points if you saved the Colector Base and  TIM can put a million puppies in a giant blender to figure out some weak spots on the Reapers. When the Alliance is as much ready as it can be, it will launch the general offensive. Bonus points if the aliens' fleets get sacrificed first in the process. Then there might be a chance that the Humanity might persevere as a species, even if 99.9% of it dies.

By contrast, if the Alliance attempts to evacuate the Earth (which is impossible), its fleet will be destroyed by the Reapers. Given that the stupid aliens seem to be doing the same thing (with the same result), there won't be any force to be put to work when TIM or Batarians or whoever come up with the deus ex machina. Then the Reapers proceed unrestrained to harvesting 100% of sapient life in the galaxy.

99.9% < 100%.

0.01% > 0%

Therefore it's a plain outright retaded act of folly for the Alliance to try evacuating Earth's population from under the Reapers' claws.

Im so glad that zulu has played mass effect 3

I'm so glad you played the previous games.

Modifié par Fixers0, 25 juillet 2011 - 11:40 .

[Ieldra]

Blarty wrote...
The issue here is... is it just Earth or also the other established species that have found their way to the citadel.

The difference is that the longer-established species will have more colonies and more populated colonies. See the asari: Illium has 85 million and it's one of the *youngest* asari colonies. If Thessia is destroyed, it will severely hurt the asari as a nation, but it will hardly destroy them as a power.

So, yes, I am more inclined to sacrifice the older species' homeworlds than Earth, if such a thing cannot be avoided.

[Ieldra]

@Fixers0:
It is correct that it is neither possible nor viable as a strategy to evacuate billions of humans from out under the Reapers' noses. I expect a significant population loss before the war is ended. All I'm saying is that if Earth is lost, whether by ultimate necessity or by callous abandonment by people like Zulu, then humanity will be destroyed as a power.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 25 juillet 2011 - 11:44 .

[BatmanPWNS]

I don't even want to sacrifice a species to save the universe. I hope there is a way to unite all of them because I don't like commiting genocide.

[MDT1]

@Fixers0:
Political decisions made facing the threat of destruction have often been retaded in human history, I don't see your problem here.
Also I could argue, that system Alliance government doen't know/think that the have absolutly 0 chance of holding Earth. The only one who got a glimps of the Reaper fleet was commander Shepard in arrrival and thus the player.
People always seem to forget that there is no such thing as perfect information for everyone in a realistic scenario.

Modifié par MDT1, 25 juillet 2011 - 11:52 .

[Blarty]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Blarty wrote...
The issue here is... is it just Earth or also the other established species that have found their way to the citadel.

The difference is that the longer-established species will have more colonies and more populated colonies. See the asari: Illium has 85 million and it's one of the *youngest* asari colonies. If Thessia is destroyed, it will severely hurt the asari as a nation, but it will hardly destroy them as a power.

So, yes, I am more inclined to sacrifice the older species' homeworlds than Earth, if such a thing cannot be avoided.

Agreed, but the Reapers having a goal of total annihilation is fairly blunt and to the point.... whilst, if Shepard fails, the other species may well have more colonies, it's only really delaying the inevitable.

But yes I see your point, although if they have more colonies, does that not mean that (post Earth 'falling' to the Reapers) the chance of a colony being Asari or Turian, etc is higher than that of it being a human colony.

[Ieldra]

BatmanPWNS wrote...
I don't even want to sacrifice a species to save the universe. I hope there is a way to unite all of them because I don't like commiting genocide.

I was talking about sacrificing homeworlds, not complete species. Even losing Earth wouldn't wipe out humanity as a species. It would only hit humanity quite a bit harder than the older species. Thessia may account for 20-50% of the total asari population. That's a terrible cost, but I'd rather pay that than Earth's 99%.

[Fixers0]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Fixers0:
It is correct that it is neither possible nor viable as a strategy to evacuate billions of humans from out under the Reapers' noses. I expect a significant population loss before the war is ended. All I'm saying is that if Earth is lost, whether by ultimate necessity or by callous abandonment by people like Zulu, then humanity will be destroyed as a power.

For me that's an accaptable loss, considereing that most of the Alliance backing and resources  comes from corporations and colonies outside of the solar system, i'm willing to take the risk.

[MDT1]

Fixers0 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Fixers0:
It is correct that it is neither possible nor viable as a strategy to evacuate billions of humans from out under the Reapers' noses. I expect a significant population loss before the war is ended. All I'm saying is that if Earth is lost, whether by ultimate necessity or by callous abandonment by people like Zulu, then humanity will be destroyed as a power.

For me that's an accaptable loss, considereing that most of the Alliance backing and resources  comes from corporations and colonies outside of the solar system, i'm willing to take the risk.

Where did you get your information? All codex entries I found about that subject suggest otherwise.
What you describe sounds more like Cerberus then the System Alliance.

Unlike you I'm not a ZULUfanboy so I have no unlimited faith in his prophecies. I need sources so please quote yours like we did. Admitted, this was easier for us as we actually have any.

Modifié par MDT1, 25 juillet 2011 - 12:03 .

[Blarty]

There's also the blow up a lot of people to kill one man.... are the Reapers' at this point as interested in Earth as they are in getting Shepard, in which case, fleeing Earth and having, at least some of, the Reapers following Shepard has some function in limiting the damage

[jamesp81]

This thread should be stickied.

I've been preaching this from the rooftops since the Arrival DLC came out. It's frustrating because the writing is on the wall for anyone with a passing familiarity with the codex, which apparently is not a lot of the community.

[Fixers0]

MDT1 wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Fixers0:
It is correct that it is neither possible nor viable as a strategy to evacuate billions of humans from out under the Reapers' noses. I expect a significant population loss before the war is ended. All I'm saying is that if Earth is lost, whether by ultimate necessity or by callous abandonment by people like Zulu, then humanity will be destroyed as a power.

For me that's an accaptable loss, considereing that most of the Alliance backing and resources  comes from corporations and colonies outside of the solar system, i'm willing to take the risk.

Where did you get your information? All codex entries I found about that subject suggest otherwise.

Unlike you I'm not a ZULUfanboy so I have no unlimited faith in his prophecies. I need sources so please quote yours.

Let me ask you a question, what has the Alliance to gain by pointlessly sending it's fleet to their doom?

[Ieldra]

Blarty wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Blarty wrote...
The issue here is... is it just Earth or also the other established species that have found their way to the citadel.

The difference is that the longer-established species will have more colonies and more populated colonies. See the asari: Illium has 85 million and it's one of the *youngest* asari colonies. If Thessia is destroyed, it will severely hurt the asari as a nation, but it will hardly destroy them as a power.

So, yes, I am more inclined to sacrifice the older species' homeworlds than Earth, if such a thing cannot be avoided.

Agreed, but the Reapers having a goal of total annihilation is fairly blunt and to the point.... whilst, if Shepard fails, the other species may well have more colonies, it's only really delaying the inevitable.

But yes I see your point, although if they have more colonies, does that not mean that (post Earth 'falling' to the Reapers) the chance of a colony being Asari or Turian, etc is higher than that of it being a human colony.

Do the numbers.

The concept of territory doesn't really apply on a galactic scale, but it could be approximated by using a topology of relay connections instead of distance in space (probably too much math for most people here, so I'll skip the details). What this means is IF the Reapers hit a species' "territory" at the same time and cross it at the same pace as they do another's, reaching their homeworlds at the same time, that would still mean that humanity loses 99% plus half of the colony population (99.5%), while the asari lose 50% plus half of the rest (75%), though probably quite a bit more in raw numbers. 

And then, don't forget: Earth is hit first. So to save an equal ratio of the population (a "fair" distribution, so to speak), you must go to Earth first.

[jamesp81]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Blarty wrote...
The issue here is... is it just Earth or also the other established species that have found their way to the citadel.

The difference is that the longer-established species will have more colonies and more populated colonies. See the asari: Illium has 85 million and it's one of the *youngest* asari colonies. If Thessia is destroyed, it will severely hurt the asari as a nation, but it will hardly destroy them as a power.

So, yes, I am more inclined to sacrifice the older species' homeworlds than Earth, if such a thing cannot be avoided.

This choice is obvious.  The other races are spread out.  The Asari, Turians, and Salarians would all survive the loss of their homeworlds' entire populations, as they'd have the people and resources to recolonize after the fact.  Humanity does not have that capability.

[Arijharn]

Fixers0 wrote...

MDT1 wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Fixers0:
It is correct that it is neither possible nor viable as a strategy to evacuate billions of humans from out under the Reapers' noses. I expect a significant population loss before the war is ended. All I'm saying is that if Earth is lost, whether by ultimate necessity or by callous abandonment by people like Zulu, then humanity will be destroyed as a power.

For me that's an accaptable loss, considereing that most of the Alliance backing and resources  comes from corporations and colonies outside of the solar system, i'm willing to take the risk.

Where did you get your information? All codex entries I found about that subject suggest otherwise.

Unlike you I'm not a ZULUfanboy so I have no unlimited faith in his prophecies. I need sources so please quote yours.

Let me ask you a question, what has the Alliance to gain by pointlessly sending it's fleet to their doom?

The fleet is already here. It's going to respond regardless. Emergency protocols are engaged, evacuation's are run. Sooner or later someone is going to say: "Right, enough, we have to withdraw."

I don't think anybody is saying that the SA has to commit to the point where it wants to save every inhabitant on the face of the planet, just to the point where they can pull up their trousers a bit.