1 réponse à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

A long post, but a cornerstone of many of my 'reimaginings': justifying the Alliance's in-universe power by giving it the colonies, population, and a rationally limited galaxy to compare to. At the very least, the long-term colonization is a cornerstone of my thinking.

===

One of the bigger complaints in the Mass Effect universe is the aspect of how 'Humans are Special': how, in such a short amount of time, Humans suddenly became such a major power, even dominant power, in the galaxy. Even ignorring the whole DNA-variation bits, this is only heightened by the short timeframe involved (Prothean Ruins to interstellar colony: 3 years. Mars Discorery to a tie in first contact: nine years. First contact to Council: not even 30) and the huge population disprerency (of a galaxy that flips between 'trillions,' 'hundreds of billions', Humanity's biggest colonies have... under ten million, or less than NYC).

In short, one of the hardest parts of the Mass Effect lore to accept is how little time Humanity has been upgrading for, and how small the Human population is. In most respects, this doesn't matter: Mass Effect never pretends to do logistics/demographic growth as a precise science, nor does time development last the same. Numbers are dictated more by theme and narrative than consistency.

Had these two aspects, pre-First Contact timeline and Galactic Population, been changed, immersion and plausibility might have been much smoother. I'll address the points in sequence.

The pre-ME1 timeline would have been the easiest to fix, simply by expanding it. As it is, half a human lifetime isn't much.

In my mind, the time between Mars and First Contact should have been closer to a century than half a decade: a time to justify Humanity spreading into space with established, sizable, colonies, to re-tool it's infrastructure with the Mass Effect technologies, and grow up a population to actually be, well, justifiably relevant. Billions in a galaxy of trillions is another of bioware's less-than-best statistic fumblings. If the average Human life-span is now 150-something, at least give us the time to actually establish it. As it is, the only people who could be that old at this point are the people who were a hundred when the Mars Cache was first discovered.

Widening the time gap allows for more growth, expansion-wise and population-wise, while the lack of contact with Aliens could be justified by a far more wary-approach to Relay expansion: the knowledge that the Protheans were there, and then something wiped them out, might be basis for 'off-relay' expansion: far more focus on settling colonies off the beaten path, while extensive, multi-year surveilance and spying before spreading past new relays after the initial rapid expansion. It could also be thrown in how Humanity was 'knocked out of the loop' by one relay or another being knocked out of orbit, and so the discovery the 'direct path' to the Citadel/Galaxy is only discovered after first contact.

In addition, a long time-span might allow one of those news tid-bits about how the last people who were alive and involved when the Mars Cache was found are passing away, marking the end of an era. Sort of like how we have news stories about the last WW1 vets: people from a distant time.

The galactic population shift could be justified in two separate ways: by
noting/making humans have more humans, and by the rest of the galaxy
restricting its own growth.

From a Human perspective, we could raise the human population by raising the growth rate, and means. Part of this would rectified due to culture shifts (young birthing age, colonization society, social programs encouraging large families), and the liberal use of the timeline to justify it. Families with four, five, or more children are the norm, with government subsidies and VI helpers making it a plausibility instead of a burden.

To also help in that wiggle-room, we could introduce how pre-ME1 Humanity had periods of time in which it made liberal use of clones. Possibly even a pre-Mars and pre-First Contact time period of when
nations raised clone armies to fight the wars, and after the wars the clones (lasting, durable, real-people clones: not break-down-immediately short-term ones) remained and were then used to help with colonial expansion. Significant parts of the human population, and especially biotics, could trace their roots to a clone-soldier who settled down after the wars.

However, the primary basis would be if we didn't assume the Human population growth rate was the galactic norm. Instead, say that Humanity qualified as a 'fast-breeding' race in a galaxy in which the
Council effectively legislates how much growth a species can have.

And that growth rate is Asari, who would have a distinction of having especially slow population growth (since every generation is hundreds,
not dozens, of years).

Why would the galaxy submit to such a thing? Economics, politics, and a recognition of Asari co-dominance on the Council to push it.

For historical/consensus reasons, the policy of tying growth has expanded: the Asari and Salarians made such an agreement early on to
avoid trouble between themselves even before other species were found, with the Salarian Matriarchs agreeing as it helped consolidate their power over the species for their domestic gain. During the Krogan Rebellions, when the Krogan birth-rate was exponential, the two species browbeat the other species with faster growth rates into agreeing to population limitation after the Rebellions in order to prevent another Krogan-style threat by numbers. And when the Turians, who would naturally breed at the same rate as Humans, were found, submitting to the growth rates (at a Council-member target goal)
was a condition for Council Membership. Afterwards, the policy was
formalized, and marks a fundamental cornerstone of the multi-alien
Council: species, once they grow to a certain size, must agree to population controls, and the growth limit is based off of the Asari as a
standard, and is implemented in such a way that the Asari, Salarians,
and Turians, having the larger populations in the first place, will maintain their population dominance even as smaller groups are (for a while) allowed to grow faster.

And the population control enforcement device, of course, is the genophage. Genophage-light, of course, but the genophage all the same. The alternative to submitting to the genophage if you breed faster than the Asari is to enter Terminus space... which is not a guarantee that you still won't be genophaged by the Salarians in secret (see Krogans).

Overall, though, slow population growth is seen as a good thing by the Council, and is a mainstream of Paragon (Council-standard) ethics. No one grows too fast, so no new military competitors emerge too quickly. Moreover, the population stability makes long-term economics more stable, allowing for continuous, predictable growth with fewer bust/boom cycles.

By the time Humanity roles around, besides the Terminus space most the galaxy follows firm population growth control, whether voluntarily (Salarians), by Council edicts (Turians, the rest of Council space), or have it enforced on them (Krogan, various members of Terminus). Once you consider how slow the galactic growth rate (as a consequence of following Asari glacial standards) is, how much faster Human growth rates are by nature, and then factor in both Human policies favoring growth and the historic additions of clones to the population, and Humanity's population fraction after a hundred-plus years of space would not only be higher, but justifiably 'significant' and sensible.

Of course, rebalancing human economies of scale and development don't just help the backstory, but could have factored into the story going forward as well. The 'Humans are exceptional' motif being based around 'Humans don't have the yoke of the genophage light' especially.

Human population growth would provide a basis for pre-ME1 tensions between the Alliance and the Council in addition to Humanity's (more justified) status as a sleeping giant. Part of the Council system, after all, is now based around making everyone grow at the rate of the Asari (and institutional check to preserve Asari power, and to manage any
sudden-ascent population groups). Humanity, while not hostile like the
Krogans were (and their willingness to join the Council Space is a huge
mitigating factor for their 'threat level'), has far too high a population growth, and it's intractibility over the issue is one of the biggest tension points, even though one of the significant post-First Contact concessions the Alliance made was to stop all cloning projects
and infrastructure. (Naturally, 'terrorist groups' are known for 'finding' old such technologies and using them in secret.)

However, the Alliance has maintained that if a Human genophage were to be introduced to any Human population without the Alliance's consent, it would be an act of war by the Salarians (regardless of whether it is the Salarians do it or not). Since the Salarians are militarily allied with the Turians, an involuntary introduction of the genophage amounts to instant war against the Council, and amounts to the feared 'Humans raze the galaxy in defeat' scenario.

In the leadup, the two sides have reached an impass: the Council demands Humanity submit to the genophage before it be allowed to gain any more galactic power, and the Alliance insisting that it get more power in order to be able to defend it's interests before it would agree to such a thing.

Besides a notable military/economic base (now justified by the
population), the Galactic concern about Humanity is that they're
'growing too fast', and as long as they refuse to sign the Population
Growth Treaty then they are viewed as a mix between 'the next coming of the Krogan', with many Turians advocating they be beaten now, while they still can be and have the treaty enforced, while many of the smaller
species look to the Humans example as a basis for why they should be
allowed to let their own populations grow. Humanity, pre-ME1, is a
headache for the Council from both sides, the militarists demanding a crackdown not only against Humans but other Terminus species who are indulging in growth, and the weak races seeing the sort of gains and concessions that humans are getting for higher birth rates that aren't being reduced.

Only the overall Human willingness to abide by most other Council
laws and edicts mitigates the Council's concern for now, but the prospect of a war is real and not indefinite.

In this scenario, population control, as much as Dreadnaughts, becomes the new galactic power issue, and a reflection of the galactic
issues.

Consider:

In a Paragon Playthrough, as part of ascending to the Council as an
equal race Humanity submits to the Council's edict (with 'Council
preferred' growth targets, of course) via a voluntary application of the Human genophage, which is something all races besides the Salarians and Asari have applied to them. Concerns alleviated, the Council races are much more friendly (also because of the Destiny Ascension saving, of course), and Humanity is another good, sensible race that's willing to curb itself for the greater good.

Humanity, however, experiences some harder times, with many dissidents rejecting the genophage imposition and leaving the Terminus instead. Human colonies in the Terminus are increasingly people who don't want to be afflicted with the genophage, which is seen as a totalitarian abuse by the Alliance and a betrayal of Humanity. That, combined with a much greater loss of forces in the Sovereign decision, puts Humanity at a significant short/medium term weakening in ME2: they're militarily weak, and the process of implementing the genophage is seeing great numbers of people (and colonies) leave the Alliance in that moment of weakness.

In a Renegade Playthrough, the Human-dominated Council pretty much
drops it as an issue, not enforcing it (which is largely done by the
genophage virus itself) while still maintaining the parts that help it
most (no cloning by other species). Humans retain their growth, and other species (mostly non-Council) start openly trying to defy the genophage as well. Part of Humanity's hold on power is in part the acceptance by the smaller species who now benefit most from this, especially as Humanity provides assistance/legal cover against old-Council legal challenges. The old Council is largely screwed vis-a-vis the galaxy in the long run: the Asari can't make their population grow faster without resorting to cloning (which the Alliance has selectively enforced), the Salarian's own political system is too built-in on the population control to be willing to allow rapid growth (though some free-breeding Salarian colonies have started up), and the Turian Hegemony has culturally assimilated population control as a necessity, and so WON'T change during what they see as a 'hiccup' in the proper order of things (read: they intend to reinforce it later, and don't want to lose the high ground themselves, not least because they don't want to culturally).

Humanity suffers some harder diplomatic concerns in their scenario of dominance. There's constantly the threat of not only the Turians starting their war, for both political and population reasons, but there's also the
concern that the Salarians might unleash the genophage regardless, even at the threat of the Alliance killing them. A significant perception by
the galaxy (or at least by the old Council races: the lesser races are
getting help from the Alliance) is that Humanity, having stabbed The
Galaxy in the back, intends to sit back until the Human population has
reached a point at which their dominance by numbers is irreversible.

Of course, in either playthrough the issue of the universality of the
genophage is something that matters to every race. No one, after all,
can cure it... even if they've left Council space. This leaves a lot of
(well justified) grief with the Council. The Batarians, for example,
have not only left the Dreadnaught treaty, but are also increasingly
known as the most dedicated group to breaking the genophage since they are no longer Council members, despite constant STG/Spectre
interference. The Quarians, on the other hand, having been crippled by
the Geth, are stuck with the genophage baggage: their treatment from the Council is historically worse, because not only did the Council leave
them out to drive, evict them from other colonies, and kick them out,
but publicly and openly refused to help them by trying to cure the
Quarian Genophage. (The 'No Exceptions' policy.) The Quarian growth is
anemic, and on top of the immunity issue they have as much hate/residual anger towards the Council as they do towards Cerberus.

And, naturally, issue of the Krogan genophage is another category of its own, since Krogan natural growth is so far above everyone else's. Given that Paragon, or conventional Council morality, means NEVER allowing the cure of the genophage, while Renegade has come to mean
free-birthing, for good and ill, there some serious contradictions in there. Then again, the Krogan growth is magnitudes above the rest. But a fair charge to level at the Renegades (who's position is to cure it) is hypocrisy on the birth issue if they want to keep it against the Krogan.

===

When the population-control system was introduced, it started for entirely self-serving reasons between the two species that mattered
most: the Salarians, who's matriarchal culture already gives the precious few who can give birth incredibly disproportionate power, and
the Asari, who just grow slowly. From the Asari perspective, they didn't
want to be swarmed by the Salarians: from the Salarian Matriarchs'
perspective, agreeing to a limit would enhance their own power.

Until the Krogan came along, that was it. Some other species had higher birth rates, but were too small or too weak to pose much of a threat, and many of them didn't grow significantly faster anyways: the Asari and Salarian populations, already having such a large head start, could grow slower in terms of percentage and stay even vis-a-vis eachother while still staying ahead of, say, the Volus. Who aren't going to be zerg-rolling anyone soon anyway. There was a defacto population
stability.

The biggest departure is with the Krogan and the Turians. The Council, having replaced the threat of the Rachni with the Menace of the Krogan, didn't want to do the same with the Turians, who are also a Human-esque 'fast race.' In fact, in the future that will be a point of commonality and comparison between the two species: Turians
will say to hesitant humans 'Look at Us: We used to breed as fast as
you, and even with the genophage we're still as powerful as we are.
Don't be afraid.'

In ME1 squadmate dialogue, the difference in views between Wrex and Garrus would be great. Wrex talks with envy about how Humans don't have the genophage. Garrus, for his part, argues the other side: that a non-weaponized Genophage isn't a bad thing for a culture.

Getting the Turians to agree would have been the hardest part, but once they did (and it's far from implausible to supply reasons) the genophage became 'de-weaponized': if the victors who used it would submit to it, it losses much of its fear. And once the Turians agreed to it (with, of course, negotiations about what their proper population share of the galaxy would be), the concept of a stable, largely static galactic population proportions became normalized. It's no longer extreme.

It helps to recall the other aspect of the re-write: that most species are naturally slow-replicating. Not necessarily Asari slow, but to them Humans breed fast. Humans are of the 'short-lived but fast-breeding' archetype, even with artifically extended life spans. But for many the genophage is a matter of incredibly minor alteration, and a get-in-key to one of the most beneficial clubs in the galaxy.

Part of making this universal genophage go through, as a matter of course, is concessions and aid to the new species who would never be a super-majority in the first place.

The Council system, as a whole, helps people get to their share of the
galactic population much faster than they would otherwise ever achieve
on their own: tech aid, preferential economic deals, etc. Species who
would do away with the Council and go to the Terminus instead would
almost never get what they could have gotten... and may end up genophaged anyway, without their consent, and too weak to do anything
about it.

Ultimately, the genophage isn't viewed as extreme by the rest of the galaxy in large part because of how little difference it makes in the galactic picture. Species who would aspire to use their population growth in such a way don't get that far. For most species in general, it doesn't matter. And, of course, it's been in place for so long that it's an accepted fact of life: while people might be against the genophage in certain cases (the over-powering Genophage which is leading to Krogan extinction, the tragedy of the Quarians who are locked into baseline growth after their genocide and so will likely never recover), galactic disputes over the galaxy are not so much over it's rightness, but rather it's application in certain instances. The difference between thinking police having guns is extreme, as opposed to certain policemen with guns being extreme.

Yes, it's a significant culture difference, but that's rather the point. These are aliens. They've come accustomed to different expectations. Whether Humans play ball, or not, is up to the Humans.

[Dean_the_Young]

Warning: This is over 3k words. TL;DR for a reason.

This is taken from a PM about justifying the Human rise to power, from Mars to ME1, and how relatively modest changes to the backstory, and expansions on the world-building, could have helped justify why one species can do in fourty years want many have failed in four hundred.

(Step one is to increase that forty by a bit. A bit more... still more...)

The thoughts in this post are not about how to make the Alliance stronger than it is portrayed as in ME1, but rather to justify how Humanity could even be that strong in the first place. The intent is not to rewrite all of ME1 or 2, but rather to outline some concepts that could have expanded upon themes and ideas already listed, to (arrogantly) greater effect. Some are minor: some possible but never-implied demographic changes and details. Some are significant: thematic changes to plot devices of various importance, like Terminus Space or the Genophage.

These points of interest are intended to be mutually independent, and while some are complimentary each is meant to be able to stand on its own. While no one of them can quite justify everything, various combinations of them could help your peace of mind about the backstory.

Disclaimer aside, take a seat. Get a nice drink. This may take you awhile...

///

The core problem with the Mass Effect backstory is that it never addresses any
reason why Humanity should be even remotely compatible to the galaxy in
terms of population, technology, or innovation that would otherwise
justify it being a big power if humans are equivalent to other races on
more-or-less equal terms.
While the writers (thankfully) never indulge in any sort of xeno-superiority reasoning, they never provide much else either. Rather than a racist justification for a rise to power, we're left wondering where how we even got as much as we did... especially when number tallies of ships and economy so diminish Humans by comparison. And the numbers for Humanity we do get make us puzzle at how this could be done in less than fourty years after the Mars cache was found.

That first forty years is the largest obstacle to any sort of credibility. Miranda was apparently made a bare few years after Mars, a perfect Human in genetics and biotics even before biotics were understood and fully recognized. When the warships the Alliance used for Shanxi were made, and why. The most basic logistical comparisons for the number and size of Human colonies.

The single biggest thing that could have helped was an extended
colonization period before first contact. Whether key relays linking
what Humans explored to Council space were lost by accident (like the Mu
relay) or actually hidden (if the Council forbids the opening of relays
lest they find new Rachni, they could have hidden the far ends so that
new Rachni wouldn't find them), the point here would be that Humanity's
isolation 'down the Relay chain' is a historical anomoly, but not
impossible. Humanity has XYZ years that it develops in a colonization phase, maybe has a
unfication war, whatever, and by the time of First Contact already has numerous and significant colonies of its own.
By the most reasonable basis for Humanity to be able to be considered a 'large' power by ME1 is if it were already significantly established by First Contact.

And that needs time. Time for plausible numbers of Humans to plausibly compare to galactic populations. Time for ships to be made. This is the biggest thing. The most important thing. Absent all else, this alone could have helped: another fourty, eighty, a hundred years of peaceful colonization, or of space-related colonization following some event.

The thing is, though, that isn't necessary to stand on its own.

There are a number of subplots or ideas, many already in the story as is, that could have been used in expanded ways to justify Human power. Most never were: some can't be now, others could slip in even in ME3. Here are some possibilities that would have
set a more even playing field for some reasonable (or at least more
plausible) reasons. These are different plot points that, while
individually not enough, could have been added/included at various
points in the history of Humanity's rise to power.

1a) The galaxy and Council space simply aren't that densely (or highly) populated.

Civilization growth isn't linear, but vaguely exponential depending on circumstance. Large
cities grow faster than small towns, produce more industry and ideas,make more money, and so on . Five hundred people divided equally in two cities will develop
faster than if they were divided equally across fifty. This can apply
with colony worlds as well: species that have spread themselves thin
trying to colonize many worlds have benefited economically from resource extraction and diversity, but have
slowed down their growth by drastically lowering their home world population, the
primary source for colonists. This could be driven by competitive needs,
Council policy to slow down growth rates to stabe levels, or simply
historic accident. The general point is that because colonization is so
easy with Mass Effect technology, many/most races over-expand and slow their growth. With no
population-focus goal to prohibit this, the established species of the
galaxy are spread 'wide' but not 'thick'. History and policy combined can also lower their homeworlds to levels far below what we would expect. In a hypothetical example, the Asari may
have many 100-million person colonies, but their homeworld is a 'mere'
few billion because they traded homeworld population for slower-growing
colonies, and also say lessening the population on the homeworld as a virtue in and of itself (ecological reasons, resource depletion, etc.)

In a nutshell, mass effect economics could claim significant colonization enhances economic strength
but stalls population growth, and so the gap between Humans and Aliens isn't as far as many as
would be assumed. Species trade the economic gains of extensive
colonization for the population densities that would enable faster
growth.

1b) Earth, at the time of e-zero discovery and ME1, is an extremely high-density world by galactic standards.

Tying in with the above, a potential 'unique' factor for Humans that
isn't inherently 'humans are special' is an accident of history:
Humanity discovered Mass Effect tech at an optimal time. The general
course of history for most species could be along the lines of 'you find
e-zero before your planet peaks at population capacity, or you destroy
yourself.' While Earth might be an exceptionally habitable homeworld compared to other species,
what's really important is that where the Drell grew too large for their
resources, Humanity was able to discover the Mars cache BEFORE a
over-population problem could reduce the species. Humanity hit a golden
number in the lottery everyone faces: the higher your population by the
time you find Mass Effect tech, the better off you are to start
colonizing. Wait too long, however, and you destroy yourself. Humanity
won this by accident (bar any 'they delayed announcing the Prothean
cache' conspiracies), but the benefits are significant. Due to
colonization efforts and economic stability goals, plus past wars such
as the Krogan Rebellions or Terminus conflicts, the population of the
Council homeworlds could be justified at a few billion: say seven, but
offset by all those many-million strong colonies. By the time of ME1,
however, Earth could be justified as a hive world in which tens of
billions live (a balance only sustainable by mass effect tech and
constant colonial imports), far in excess of what most Council species
maintain.

In a nutshell, Humanity has all its eggs in one basket, the home
world, but it's an exceptionally lucky basket that has (so far) avoided
the wars and self-destruction that reduce other species numbers.

2a) Humans are (potentially) a fast-breeding species compared to the galactic standard.

The Asari are supposedly the largest, most populous race in the
galaxy. They've had a long head-start, but this shouldn't be enough on
its own. The Asari reproduction period isn't measured in decades, but in
centuries: most of the Asari we've known haven't even averaged one
child a century. Such a species isn't growing fast, and yet, again, this
is the largest race in the galaxy, and presumably they wouldn't be such
if they weren't more or less normal (as far as civilizational growth
goes). If Humans are capable of even passing periods of high-growth,
then 'population catchup' could be a viable Human strength to help
explain things. Not, to be clear, Rachni or Krogan standards. But one of
Humanity's potential assets could be a far more malleable reproduction
rate than most species. In a sense, we already see this today on earth:
there are nations who can't even meet the steady-population reproduction
rate, but then there are places that undergo population explosions at
the same time, with families of five or more children. This variance
could be an on again, off again facet of Human growth to catch up, and
be explained by history/culture/Alliance effort during the colonization
period. It doesn't need to be constant: Humanity could be going a
population slow-down during ME1. But it certainly would be an
interesting facet of galactic concerns of Humanity in ME1: if Humans are
violent and small, no one much cares. But if Humans are violent and
provenly capable of replacing losses quickly, that's important.

In a nutshell: Humans vary between 'galactic norm' breeders and 'fast breeding', depending on brith trends at the time.

2b) The Council enforces an artificially small population-growth on the galaxy (by genophage)

This ties into the Asari being the galactic standard of growth.
Except this time it's because of an accident of history, that the Asari
found the Citadel first. This point explains better as a narrative of possible
backstory, so imagine if this is what had happened.

When the Salarians came, the Asari and Salarian matriarchs
met eachother, they wanted to have good ties. But Salarian females can
severely outbreed Asari by massive numbers: population disreprency would
be an obvious concern. A formal (or informal) agreement that the
Salarian Daltrasses hold back on breeding to pariety with the Asari growth rate would be mutually
advantageous: the breeding matriarchs get even greater internal clout by exclusiviety,
and avoid a costly war with the Asari. The Asari aren't outbred, and
gain allies. In the early centuries of the Council, this was acceptable without expansion:
the minor species that arrived weren't significantly faster breeders, or were simply weaker,
and there was peace. But the Rachni birth rates made this problematic,
even when the Daltrasses birthed more soldiers to compensate. The Krogan
were a savior with their countering fast-birthing, but the Krogan
Rebellions were just as bad, if not worse (see potential home-world
wrecking and significant genocides of even the victor, reducing population as in earlier points). When the Turians arrived and dealt with
the Krogan, another (relatively, as in human-level) fast breeder potential-threat was
too much: the Council wouldn't hand off one new fast-breeding foe for
another. In comes the genophage compromise: as part of their entry into
the Council, the Turian Heirarchy voluntarily agrees to have its
birthrate limited (at Council-member preferred rates) by a modified
genophage. This genophage-light becomes a universal tool for equalizing
species growth: tailored to the species, fast-breeding species are held
back. Slower-breeding species have a symbollic 'genophage in name only', to represent that this is a universal burden carried by all the races of the galaxy. Species
are allowed to grow freely to a Council-determined point, and then have to
embrace population growth equal to everyone else: the genophage (whether
it's symbollic or effective) is a universal requirement for
Citadel-space membership. Even going to the Terminus doesn't save you
from it, if the Council thinks you too dangerous. Stable populations make for stable economies: nations that can't replace losses as fast as risk-adverse, disinclined to war. Existing strengths are preserved, favoring the Council, but everyone shares the burden, and everyone gets more carrots for compliance.

So for two thousand
years, the galaxy has been growing at the one, slow rate... of the Asari.
Why the Asari? Because the Asari were the first to discover the Citadel,
made an alliance with the Salarian Daltrasses, and established a
precedent... and as the two strongest species, the Asari and Salarians could convince the Turians and force everyone else to join this scheme. Why does the galaxy fear fast-breeding species? Because the
Rachni, the Krogan, and potentially some minor, lesser Terminus species
that tried to throw their junk around.

Humanity, during its colonization
phase and in its buildup of the Homeworld, simply hadn't met the
Council and so hadn't had this traditional yoke to make it 'equal' to
everyone that would have prevented it's population increase to
major-power proportions. A part of ME1 becomes debating the relative
morality of this restraint to slow growth in exchange for Council
membership, and the genophage becomes an important factor in other
species stories as well. The Quarians can't breed into recovery because
they fight the genophage, the Terminus hates the Council for imposing
it on those who didn't want it, the minor species fear/know they will
never be able to breed to 'major power' proportions because the Council
keeps Council-preferred breeding rates to itself, and the Krogan exist
as the testament to how the Genophage can be a yoke made so tight that
it drives the species to extinction.

In a nutshell, Humanity isn't inherently a faster breeding species than others. The
Council enforces an exceptionally slow breeding on everyone else, for
historical/political reasons.

3) Humans/the Alliance have practiced artificial population addition.

If you can't breed fast enough, add more population from another
source. Depending on how much the writers wanted the Alliance to be
purely Human, there were two different options available. The first
would be adding a history of mass cloning, of some variation thereof.
Artificial wombs with artificial insemniation, if you want to preserve
genetic diversity. The point is that the Human population, whether
during war or colonization, is artificially added upon. More Humans are
made, enough so to make a difference of galactic-power proportions. Such
a strategy would both boost Human power, and justify Council concern: a
war with Humanity wouldn't simply be a war against those alive now, but
the armies that could be made. This ties well with Cerberus's role as a
legitimate threat to the Council: if Cerberus is known to have the
facilities to make its own armies, then even a 'small' group could
potentially do serious harm if hidden and well placed.

The other method is by the inclusion of other species. Now, the
First Contact War wouldn't be First Contact if this happened during the
colonization phase, but this could occur afterwards (in another
post-contact war), or we could rename the war 'the Council Contact War.'
The principal is that the human-dominated Alliance has incorporated
smaller, minor species into the fold, whether by conquest or
assimilation. To a small degree, this has already occured in the series:
in the Attican Traverse and Terminus, there are pre-Human colonies that
Humans have taken over by colonization/other means, presumably with
their populations included.

If Humanity has a history of taking individually minor-species
unders its auspice, whether by benevolent history (finding and
rescuing/incorporating Drell-esque post-fallout worlds, which while weak
are still valuable, or species like Volus-analogs who seek vassal
status) or by conflict (a second-contact war, fights in the Terminus, or
even a short war with the Batarians), 'the Alliance', while
Human-dominated, could incorporate the additional strength of a number
of smaller species. Technically, this isn't unheard of: the Turian
Heirarchy is an empire with a number of conquered, assimilated species
that serve as military auxileries. But then, an ascending
Human-dominated empire that eschewes the typical 'one race, one voice'
Council system could be justified cause for concern. It would also add
potential Paragon/Renegade issues as well.

In a nutshell: in combination of other reasons and histories, the
Alliance is stronger than most because it has a multi-species empire of
sorts under it.

4) Humans are politically potent because they are making exceptional
gains in the Terminus and Attican Traverse (and because Council space
is actually smaller than let on)

From planet-scans and dialogue in ME1 and ME2, it's clear that the
Council places a value on other, associate, species colonizing and
civilizing the 'dangerous' places of the galaxy where they have to step
softly, if at all. Colonies in the Traverse and Terminus are in
dangerous territory, but in doing so they gradually push back the
frontier and make Council space both stronger and safer. If we accept
the premise that there is limited space/distribution of new colonization
in 'safe' areas, controlled by and generally favoring the Council, the
civilizing the 'dangerous' areas could be a risky but potentially
profitable avenue of support for species to gain territories AND
influence with the Council. And because the Terminus is reflexively
hostile to the Council (potentially because of policies like this), this
would be a duty that only smaller races (who wouldn't start an
immediate backlash) could do: the rewards of succeeding are not only the
territory settled, but increased concessions and colonization rights in
'safe' areas as well. Naturally, all costs incurred are born by the
colonizer, and the incredibly hostile and dangerous tendencies of the
Terminus (where a single one of the Merc Groups could overrun and raze a
colony of hundreds of years in a single day, for the right money) makes
this exceptionally difficult.

These creates a system of high-risk, high-growth that the Council is
NOT the biggest winner in: the races that grow the fastest are not the Council, but these ones who play by the Council's rules. This effect is even bigger when 'the Galaxy' the
Council claims to be a part of is actually a minority compared to the
much larger, but highly disorganized frontier. The Council is still the
single biggest, strongest, most unified, and safest force and area in
the galaxy, but it's area is actually relatively 'small' in scope
compared to 'the Terminus' as a whole. Islands of civilization in a sea
of chaos: Council space is where small, weak species come for safety,
but there's only so much safe space to colonize, and many species that
want it. It's those who colonize the Terminus that expand the Council's
borders, a role the Council species themselves no longer can do. So the
Council has an interest in encouraging new species to settle the
Terminus, and highly rewards success with various carrots (such a with
technology transfers, economic deals, etc.).

The Terminus is thus where species go to try and make it big. Most
fail: they get overrun, they incur such gains that they stop expanding
after the toll of failurs adds up theyprefer the safety of Council
space. Others get too good, and become part of the Terminus itself: they
get kicked out of Council space, or they leave, and take with them
their empires that gradually become Terminus as well. Humanity is one
Citadel species amongst many: the Batarian Hegemony is an obvious
competitor who's long been in the game, have adopted many of the vices
of the Terminus, and hates a new upstart rival despite having
over-expanded themsleves long ago. The Volus could be trying to buy
their safety and influence in a hard-pressed game of spending money to
make money to expand their influence. Then there are niche-players: the
Elcor take the high-gravity worlds few others want. The Hanara are
natural ocean-dwellers.

Humanity, for whatever a number of reasons (geography of Mass
Relays, factors 1-4, military ability) has done remarkably well so far.
Frankly, this would be a good role for Cerberus to fill, secretly
preparing areas for Human takeover, which only further strengthens the
Alliance, while many other species find Humanity preferable to, say, the
Batarians, the previous front-runner. By position, history, and just
some reasonably rare luck, Humanity is playing the Council system's own
rules and winning: its gains in the Terminus are traded for rewards from
the Council. With Council space much smaller than portrayed in canon,
there is less to be catch up to. With Humanity having (not yet, for
whatever reasons) taken a big fall, a string of successes and context
can justify the Council giving the Alliance the very rewards that make
it powerful. (Like, say, 'if you can hold fifty worlds in the Terminus
for fifty years, we'll allow you to build five more dreadnoughts and
remain in Council space'. Or, 'if you can reduce piracy in this sector
to below one attack a week, the Asari will give you a unilateral trade
concession of .X% for as long as this occurs.')

In a nutshell: Council space is a (relatively) small civilization in
a big frontier that disproportionately rewards successful colonizers in
the dangerous Terminus. The societies involved are actually small.
Humanity's had a streak of good luck (for multiple reasons), rival
colonizer species have not (for multiple reasons, some of which may be
Human-caused), and so Humanity AT THIS MOMENT looks good, and is pushing
its luck bar any catastrophe.

5a) Mass Effect technology actually reaches a plateau before the leap into Reaper-tech

This is a technological-determinacy factor that doesn't explain so
much 'why do Humans do well', but rather 'why aren't Aliens infinitely
ahead of us'. The theory is that, by Reaper design or actually inherent
problems involved, mass-effect technology only gets so good before it
hits a major tripline. Technology does not advance infinitely at the
same pace, and once you hit 'Prothean' levels of technology, you only
make marginal gains at heavy cost. While Reaper tech is far superior by
'thousands of years', it isn't thousands of years of natural development
and progress (a hill), but rather a sudden, abrupt wall before the next
technological revolution (a tower on the top of the hill of progress).
This 'wall' also conveniently serves as the general Reaping point for
the galaxy: civilizations study the ruins of those before, approach this
wall from their own directions of various technological diversities and
Mass Effect, and then muddle around the wall in complacency while the
Reapers decide just when to strike: if a species looks like it's going
to undergo that necessary tech revolution to surmount the walls, like
deciphering the Mass Relays, the Reapers cut them off before completion.
What this means is that technological catch-up is really, really easy:
stuff copied wholesale from the Protheans is behind, but not that far
behind, the 'best' of the galaxy. If the Prothean technology were to be
compared to 1990's military tech, then the current galaxy's tech with
the extra time the Protheans bought us is 2010's tech. Better, but not
unbelievably so. We're all stuck in front of the same tech wall, and
none of us are significantly closer than the Protheans were. Tech-wise,
there simply isn't that much distance to match.

In a nutshell: there isn't a huge qualitative difference between Prothean tech and everything developed after their discovery.

5b) Human innovation is because it unknowingly embraced a galactic taboo (the AI Hail Mary)

The Geth are our first well-known AI experiment gone amuck, but it's
also known that the Council was leery and cautious about it even before
the Morning War. If this were expanded and expounded upon (and
especially if the Geth Rebellion were moved back a thousand years, to
earlier Council history), then a pan-galactic taboo on AI research that
Humanity wasn't aware of could be a good point for why Humans are
exceptional without Humans being special: culture difference that
doesn't spurn an advantage that others have been burned by. This ties
well into (6) if AIs ARE the key to breaking the tech barrier to
understanding and deciphering Reaper tech. Sovereign could have been
implied to have played a role in starting the Geth Rebellion (without
controlling the Geth himself), or even Council research being part of
why the Rachni were indoctrinated: Sovereign's big technological
interference hasn't been 'pushing us to use e-zero', but rather blocking
us from using AI's. And if independent Human research/development of
(more successful) AI's pre-dates the discovery of the Council, this can
also serve as part of Sovereign's motivation for acting now: as long as
the Council chained and locked down AI, it was safely behind the tech
barrier, but with the Humans re-opening the subject of AI, time is up.
'Human innovation' isn't even a 'Human' ability now: it's something
enabled by AI-guided research (AI being able to cross-specialize in more
fields than any organic), but Humans are the first, most accepting
species to use them at current tech levels. The galactic history of
societal development becomes far more traditional: Council/others tried
it first, got burned, took steps to regulate it so it never happened
again, some Human nation did it unaware of previous failures, succeeded,
and gained a major advantage.

In a nutshell: the Council thought AI's too dangerous and
impossible, Humans went ahead and did it anyway and so get the fruits of
first-discovery

And those are the main ones. As you can see, a number of them can be
mixed and matched for better use, and all of them work with the 'give
another hundred years as well' premise. None of them premise anything
that other species couldn't have done, and none of them rely on anything
inherently 'human' that other species couldn't also have. The biggest
differences are systematic changes to the Council on things they already do to various degrees, with added emphasis on possible consequences.

Humanity isn't 'special' as much as it is 'lucky'... but there remain
other 'lucky' species as well, and none of the luck requires anything
too absurd.