43 réponses à ce sujet

[KotorEffect3]

What sort of numbers do some of you think we are looking at when it comes to the expedition in terms of the size of the population in the expedition?  It will have to be large enough to sustain a viable population once we get some colony worlds going but it will still be extremely limited.  At the minimum it will be in the thousands even the tens of thousands but I can't see it eclipsing more than a few hundred thousand if even that.  While the arks look big they are still limited in the numbers they can reasonably sustain for a journey that will take centuries.

[Shadow Recon117]

Whatever the size needed to sustain a population, I would say double that for the Ark. There needs to be a contingency if say half the pods fail. Nobody wants the expedition to be dead on arrival so to speak.

[RoboticWater]

Actually the Minimum Viable Population has been calculated to be about 160 (80 with certain caveats), so BioWare have a lot of room to maneuver if they wish.

 

For dramatic purposes, this number could go up in the thousands, but it wouldn't need to. 200-500 of each species + 500-1000 mixed military personnel would seem like a healthy and defensible contingent to send on a potentially dangerous exodus.

[Ralfufigus]

Ehh... 11.

[KotorEffect3]

I also think it would be smart to get more than one colony world up and running.  A little diversification would be good.  Can't have too many since it would not be smart to spread ourselves to thin but it would be good to have more than one just in case something were to happen to one of the colonies.

[UpUpAway]

If my guess about the "downed Prothean aerostat colonies" on Agetoton being a possible source for the ARK technology, I'm going with the following little tidbit as a hint at numbers as well:

 

"There are several areas of debris that may be the wreckage of downed Prothean aerostat colonies. Based on the size of the debris fields, a population of over 100,000 was likely."

 

(taken from the Wiki page about Agetoton)

[Remix-General Aetius]

3...........no, 4!

[Wulfram]

I'm guessing it'll be in the tens of thousands, but I don't really have a basis for that. It just seems like that would fit with the sort of story they want to tell.

RoboticWater is right that you don't need all that many for a viable population

[Sekrev]

RoboticWater is right that you don't need all that many for a viable population

 

No you don't but to have any viable infrastructure, maintenance, food processing, manufacturing, etc, requires more people than you might think at first. There's some liberty by throwing in VI/AI but you have to account that for every action you want to undertake; whether that is going exploring, military action, settling, it doesn't matter, there will be a large support structure necessary which needs to be maintained, staffed, managed, etc.

 

Just a viable gene pool won't cut it.

[Medhia_Nox]

The best thing would be to maintain genetic material in stasis.  

 

- Maintain a small (thousand or less) population of adults in stasis for travel (Pathfinders). 

 

- Begin growing children once planetary systems are discovered. 

- Raise and train them via AI programs.  

 

- Release them in populations once adult Pathfinders discover habitable worlds. 

Yes, I would expect any reasonable search of the Andromeda to AT LEAST take decades.  I know this is ME though... so it'll all be such poor science for the dubious distinction of "storytelling".  

 

OR

 

Ludicrously big generational ships (only fitted with "stasis pods from deck to stern") 

 

- Release Pathfinders

 

- Release others on a situational basis. 

 

- viable populations on Earth is one thing.  It is a very hospitable planet.  viable populations in enemy territory - on hostile, untamed worlds - quite another.  So the populations will have to be larger.

 

NOTE:  A popular theory in science suggests 160 "breeding pairs" can create a viable population in space.  Which - I find ridiculous given how many false starts humanity has had in its 200,000 years.  You would need to hedge you bets with much larger populations of potential breeding pairs.

 

NOTE 2:  "Breeding Pairs" has a lot of implications for space travel.  So for Bioware to avoid a LOT of SJW complaints... they'll have to just go with a make believe large population.  

[RoboticWater]

No you don't but to have any viable infrastructure, maintenance, food processing, manufacturing, etc, requires more people than you might think at first. There's some liberty by throwing in VI/AI but you have to account that for every action you want to undertake; whether that is going exploring, military action, settling, it doesn't matter, there will be a large support structure necessary which needs to be maintained, staffed, managed, etc.
 
Just a viable gene pool won't cut it.

Sure, but this is the future. Food and shelter should be even less of a problem than it is now. Autonomous, solar-powered machines solve a ton of problems.

[Medhia_Nox]

Sure, but this is the future. Food and shelter should be even less of a problem than it is now. Autonomous, solar-powered machines solve a ton of problems.

 

That means we have: 

- Mining equipment for the aquisition of raw materials

- Refinery of raw materials and the creation of both synthetics and alloys and the like

- Factory for manufacturing various parts

- Shipping to get various parts to one place

- Factory for constructing machines

- Shipping for dispersion of autonomous - solar-powered machines.

 

1)  The space between the Milky Way and Andromeda is vast.  Gathering resources would be so silly.  

2)  Everyone is supposed to be sleeping in this "stasis" trip.  Are we saying:  "An AI did it"? 

[Sekrev]

Sure, but this is the future. Food and shelter should be even less of a problem than it is now. Autonomous, solar-powered machines solve a ton of problems.

 

Yeah true, and some Bioware handwaving can 'fix' a lot as well. I'm just saying that people generally underestimate just how much people/resources you'd need for something seemingly straightforward. And it's evident that Bioware writers don't always have a very good grasp of this either, or just don't care (see ME3 Cerberus suddenly being a major power)

[nfi42]

42

 

Being serious, that would have to take DNA and clone plants and animals for food and maybe intelligent species.  Minimum size to sustain a population means no disasters, and adequate food supply.  A huge gamble if they don't find an adequate planet or if they have a natural disaster or a war with an enemy,  So it's guaranteed.  If Bioware doesn't write it like this, then the start of MEA is sort of like the ending of ME3 but  not as stupid. An ironic way to start MEA.

[Monk]

I'm taking a semi-mathematical approach to this. Cruisers in the MEU (ME Universe) are approximately 700m. Considering that RL carriers are approximately 55% larger, this would put the Arks, likely carrier class, to be approx. 1088m. This makes MEU carriers 318% larger than RL carriers (using the USS Enterprise's stats). With numbers alone, the population could be >18,500 people on a normal cruiser. Considering the Arks have four arms, assuming tech advancement to make use of redundant system space, this would mean each Ark could hold a total population >60,000. With a minimal of three Arks seen, we have at least 180,000 sentients going to Andromeda.

 

List form…

• MEU Cruisers: ~700m
• RL Cruisers (i.e. USS Long Beach): ~220m
• RL Carriers (i.e. USS Enterprise): ~342m
• MEU Carriers: ~1088m == ~1.088km == 318% larger than RL Carriers
• MEU Space Stations (i.e. Citadel): ~44.7km == 4110% larger than MEU Carriers

 

• RL Carrier Complement: 5828 (maximum)
• MEU Carrier Complement: ~18,500
• Ark Complement (four arms): ~74,100 [RL to MEU]
• Citadel Population (total): 13.2M (except keepers)
• Ark Complement (four arms): ~32,100 [Citadel to MEU Carrier]

 

Expected Ark Complement (per): 30,000 - 75,000

Expected Ark Complement (per, statisically-ish): 47500 +/- 35000

 

My guess, anyway.

[themikefest]

as many as Bioware needs to make the game and any future games in Andromeda

[Totally Not a Poodle]

Several hundred thousand on each Ark ship.

 

One: I highly doubt people were conscripted for this mission. I expect everyone on board is a volunteer. That means the numbers will be a lot less than if they conscript, because you are trusting that people will actually want to do this.

 

Two: Each volunteer would require testing, both physically and mentally. For instance, any genetic disabilities would likely not pass - it does no good to start up a new civilisation with a bunch of people all susceptible to various disabilities, life threatening or otherwise. You would need to make sure that every individual is in good condition. Basically, if you are disabled, you are unlikely to get a ticket. Exceptions can and likely would be made to those few tha offer something invaluable to the missions efforts. For example, someone like Stephen Hawking would probably get a ticket.

 

Also, if someone shows signs of stress and not being able to deal with it. Again, unlikely to get a seat on the ship. These people need to show that they can handle the journey and mission, otherwise it would likely fail before it really begins.

 

There may be millions of volunteers, but a journey like this comes with a host of risks. Anything can happen. Only those fit for duty (with exceptions here and there) would be allowed to go.

 

Three: A reasonable population size would be taken over the maximum possible population size. This is to do with resources. If you land in Andromeda and find that nothing is fit for human consumption, then you are going to have to survive on what you brought with you. The longer that that is possible, a solution is more likely to be found before everyone starves. Let's one Ark is filled to the brim with food and water. The other two Arks are filled to the brim with people. That food is not going to last long, is it?

 

Now I highly suspect that we will have facilities to produce our own food and water on the Arks. Still though, that would only last so long.

[RoboticWater]

That means we have: 

- Mining equipment for the aquisition of raw materials

- Refinery of raw materials and the creation of both synthetics and alloys and the like

- Factory for manufacturing various parts

- Shipping to get various parts to one place

- Factory for constructing machines

- Shipping for dispersion of autonomous - solar-powered machines.

 

1)  The space between the Milky Way and Andromeda is vast.  Gathering resources would be so silly.  

2)  Everyone is supposed to be sleeping in this "stasis" trip.  Are we saying:  "An AI did it"?

Why wouldn't we bring a sufficient number of machines to begin with? If we have the Arks, we would presumably come to Andromeda prepared. Even if we didn't, Mass Effect is still a universe with "mini-fabricators" and stuff like that, so landing parties can probably start being productive immediately.

 

Getting to Milky Way production levels isn't the objective; survival is. Besides, AFAIK, the structures on Mass Effect's uncharted worlds are pre-build/easily-constructed buildings that can serve any purpose. I don't see why the Arks couldn't hold onto a bunch of prefab factories.

 

And are you questioning whether a computer can autonomously gather resources and produce more machinery? Because that's exactly the kind of work computers are good at.

 

Yeah true, and some Bioware handwaving can 'fix' a lot as well. I'm just saying that people generally underestimate just how much people/resources you'd need for something seemingly straightforward. And it's evident that Bioware writers don't always have a very good grasp of this either, or just don't care (see ME3 Cerberus suddenly being a major power)

I'd be disappointed if we didn't have any resource conflicts in ME:A, but BioWare have more than enough sci-fi gimmicks to handwave the more meticulous aspects of colonization.

[Big I]

From the survey leak, we know that

Spoiler

Ryder will be going out and finding colony sites, plural, for the expedition and deciding the focus of the colony (mining, exploration, etc). Unless each colony is just a glorified outpost, that means thousands of people per site and dozens of colonies.

 

So I predict hundreds of thousands minimum, and probably several million to give Bioware in story reasons for expansion plans in any sequels (building new cities, settling new hub worlds, etc).

[Sekrev]

I'd be disappointed if we didn't have any resource conflicts in ME:A, but BioWare have more than enough sci-fi gimmicks to handwave the more meticulous aspects of colonization.

 

Yeah, and they should it's not an RTS I don't like micromanaging every little detail at all. In fact, the whole base-building element does not really appeal to me for a Mass Effect setting. But I do like things to make sense in-universe, whether with some handwaving or not.

[Big I]

- Begin growing children once planetary systems are discovered. 

- Raise and train them via AI programs.  

 

There's little evidence "vat grown people technology" exists in ME, at least for humans. The closest we've seen is Okeer's creation of Grunt (which he says is based on Collector technology) and Saren's "genophage cure", aka cloning program, which was destroyed. And synthetics are the most distrusted (and illegal) form of life in the Milky Way, there's no way anyone would trust AIs to raise the next generation of organics.

[Spectr61]

What sort of numbers do some of you think we are looking at when it comes to the expedition in terms of the size of the population in the expedition?  It will have to be large enough to sustain a viable population once we get some colony worlds going but it will still be extremely limited.  At the minimum it will be in the thousands even the tens of thousands but I can't see it eclipsing more than a few hundred thousand if even that.  While the arks look big they are still limited in the numbers they can reasonably sustain for a journey that will take centuries.

Neal Stephenson came up with a fantastic (IMO) solution to this in his excellent book "Seveneves".

The concept is species continuity and continuing viability following an extinction level event.

Hint; Seven Eves.

[Kabooooom]

Actually the Minimum Viable Population has been calculated to be about 160 (80 with certain caveats), so BioWare have a lot of room to maneuver if they wish.

For dramatic purposes, this number could go up in the thousands, but it wouldn't need to. 200-500 of each species + 500-1000 mixed military personnel would seem like a healthy and defensible contingent to send on a potentially dangerous exodus.

And actually, advanced genetic manipulation technology would lower that number even further - which the mass effect civilizations definitely have.

People also overlook that the Arks could easily hold a library of newly fertilized embryos from diverse genetic populations of every single Citadel species. It would take up little space, and would be a very logical thing to do (along with a seed library of plants, for that matter).

There's little evidence "vat grown people technology" exists in ME, at least for humans. The closest we've seen is Okeer's creation of Grunt (which he says is based on Collector technology) and Saren's "genophage cure", aka cloning program, which was destroyed. And synthetics are the most distrusted (and illegal) form of life in the Milky Way, there's no way anyone would trust AIs to raise the next generation of organics.

Shepard's clone was grown in a vat to full size over the course of two years. So yeah, there's plenty of evidence that the technology exists in Mass Effect.

[Helios969]

Several hundred thousand on each Ark ship.

 

One: I highly doubt people were conscripted for this mission. I expect everyone on board is a volunteer. That means the numbers will be a lot less than if they conscript, because you are trusting that people will actually want to do this.

 

Two: Each volunteer would require testing, both physically and mentally. For instance, any genetic disabilities would likely not pass - it does no good to start up a new civilisation with a bunch of people all susceptible to various disabilities, life threatening or otherwise. You would need to make sure that every individual is in good condition. Basically, if you are disabled, you are unlikely to get a ticket. Exceptions can and likely would be made to those few tha offer something invaluable to the missions efforts. For example, someone like Stephen Hawking would probably get a ticket.

 

Also, if someone shows signs of stress and not being able to deal with it. Again, unlikely to get a seat on the ship. These people need to show that they can handle the journey and mission, otherwise it would likely fail before it really begins.

 

There may be millions of volunteers, but a journey like this comes with a host of risks. Anything can happen. Only those fit for duty (with exceptions here and there) would be allowed to go.

 

Three: A reasonable population size would be taken over the maximum possible population size. This is to do with resources. If you land in Andromeda and find that nothing is fit for human consumption, then you are going to have to survive on what you brought with you. The longer that that is possible, a solution is more likely to be found before everyone starves. Let's one Ark is filled to the brim with food and water. The other two Arks are filled to the brim with people. That food is not going to last long, is it?

 

Now I highly suspect that we will have facilities to produce our own food and water on the Arks. Still though, that would only last so long.

It may go as you've laid out, but I personally find it unbelievable that you could find that many volunteers and properly screen them.  There's just not enough time.  I think you're core group would be hand-selected personnel having a hand in gathering resources, building the infrastructure, and assembling the Arks.  The bulk of the workers however may or may not be "volunteers."

[EpicNewb]

Humans and Krogans should make up the majority.

 

They're great at expansion and colonization.