Shepard Quest Mk VI, Technological Revolution

No.

It's still a major investment of our research capacity.
But worth it, I would say. If only for logistics. We have unlimited energy. Normal materials are abundant in asteroids. Eezo is rare, and is the logistics chokepoint. It has to be mined in hard to reach places. Artificial eezo completely negates that issue.

And, in a war against Reapers, lack of infrastructure to hit (or, rather, lack of long logistical chains to cut) is going to be very important.
...

Making artificial eezo is a 64000 point tech. Stuck behind 3rd generation arc reactors, which is another 16k points down the line. And we have no idea as to the efficiency of the production of artificial element zero. It could collapse the eezo market, sure.
First of all, you are an order of magnitude off in RP counting. As to efficiency - I assume that, just like any other tech on our techtree, the development means "it's now economically viable to produce eezo, rather than mine it".

It could also shave 10% off the cost of ships. Which is, on a galactic economy scale, a lot of money, but when you want to turn the entire population of the galaxy into space nomads it's frankly not enough of a margin, or even just humanity. Not when we've never actually seen the properly settled regions of human space instead of startup colonies, the fringes and temporary base camps except from a distance, nor have we seen in Mass Effect the full extent of the socio-economic ramifications of one and a half centuries of further development and automation, as well as access to the mineral wealth of space.
There are basically no "properly settled" human planets except for Earth, from what I understand.
... Space is large, yes. There's also a lot Reapers, and they can use the Relay Network to move far faster than that fleet ever could on the strategic level, while if the refugees try it it's a big red flag for the Reapers to pounce on.
Space is mind-boggingly large, and if we stay away from relay systems (for example, moving perpendicular to the galactic plane), there's no way they'll find us. FTL sensors aren't really a thing.
Um, not really? The problem here is the supremacy of offense; if nothing else, the Reapers can decide "fuck it" and nova-bomb the sun around which your super-expensive orbital ringed planet is orbiting; we don't really have any tech that can survive a close-range supernova. Really the best we can hope for if we can't either diplomance our way out of the problem, or possibly out von-Neumann the Reapers by making friends with the Geth, is to delay long enough to evacuate the garden worlds and settle into what amounts to an eternal cat-and-mouse game where our ships shred each others' and build new attack ships out of the enemy's debris. That's a process which will take decades even with a decisive technological advantage, given that the Reapers are going to out-number us hundreds or even thousands to one in the best case scenario. Any orbital rings or other massive fortresses built around planets will be long since converted into expanding clouds of vapor by then.
Space stations, however, might be a good investment. You could place them in deep space (even if they aren't really mobile themselves) away from potential nova bombs.

Because, yeah, nova bombs are the biggest strategic danger here.
 
From my understanding
One possible Weakness in maintaining the offensive is that
Ships have to discharge their cores by landing on planets after traveling a certain distance
Is it possible to create space stations or orbital rings that allow ships to discharge in space?
Will it be an advantage or does multi cores make that irrelevant?
 
Last edited:
Space is mind-boggingly large, and if we stay away from relay systems (for example, moving perpendicular to the galactic plane), there's no way they'll find us. FTL sensors aren't really a thing.
Actually, as @Hoyr pointed out just a little while ago, the Reapers do have FTL sensors:
Normally interferometric arrays are used to analyze planetary landmasses, or to determine the astrophysical properties of stellar systems. The powerful array salvaged from the Hercules system can be used for something much more ambitious: the Crucible tunes into the mass relays' command switches. Installing the interferometric array into the Crucible's systems results in a real-time map of the entire galaxy, including the position of each and every Reaper in the Milky Way.
Note that the way the Crucible gets its "real-time map of the entire galaxy" is by hijacking the one the Reapers already have. That's one of the other functions of the Relays, apparently.

From my understanding
One possible Weakness in maintaining the offensive is that
Ships have to discharge their cores by landing on planets after traveling a certain distance
Is it possible to create space stations or orbital rings that allow ships to discharge in space?
Will it be an advantage or does multi cores make that irrelevant?
1) Multi-core drives make discharging irrelevant.
2) It's very likely that the Reapers already have multi-core drives, given all the graphics of them having electrical coronas and the like.
3) You don't need to land to discharge a normal eezo drive; in fact the most common dumping grounds for charge are gas giants. Also, no ship larger than a frigate (other than the Reapers) is designed to land.
 
Actually, as @Hoyr pointed out just a little while ago, the Reapers do have FTL sensors:

Note that the way the Crucible gets its "real-time map of the entire galaxy" is by hijacking the one the Reapers already have. That's one of the other functions of the Relays, apparently.
I... have no idea how this works. Mass Relays are BS, and it seems that "super-FTL" physics (with infinite velocity) has so many effects (FTL sensors, phasing, etc) that it's not even funny.
 
If the reapers or any sort of enemy are capable of destroying any defenses we can put up
how can we prevent valuable planets from falling to our enemies?
Planets especially garden worlds are very valuable
They are centers of manufacturing as well as food production and provide important mineral resources. And serve as source of manpower
How can we keep hold of these valuable resources if we can not develop any sort of defenses that are effective against an offensive enemy like the reapers?
Can defenses be build against the reapers?
 
Last edited:
If the reapers or any sort of enemy are capable of destroying any defenses we can put up
how can we prevent valuable planets from falling to our enemies?

We can't. Or rather we might be able to fight them off, in space, but the planet below would be so devastated we'd have lost anyway.

How can we keep hold of these valuable resources if we can not develop any sort of defenses that are effective against an offensive enemy like the reapers?

By moving them into mobile space stations. Food production and manufacturing can all be done on space stations. The only limiting factor is if they can move fast enough to just travel from system to system minding or if it's easier for resources to be mined and shipped to them.

Can defenses be build against the reapers?

We know of nothing that can defeat against the Reapers detonating the local star. So any defense significant enough to hold them back would just result in the solar system being obliterated.
 
If the reapers or any sort of enemy are capable of destroying any defenses we can put up
how can we prevent valuable planets from falling to our enemies?
Planets especially garden worlds are very valuable
They are centers of manufacturing as well as food production and provide important mineral resources.
How can we keep hold of these valuable resources if we can not develop any sort of defenses that are effective against an offensive enemy like the reapers?
Can defenses be build against the reapers?
That's the point. In a situation of total war, where the goal of the enemy is destruction, not conquest, ie where collateral and rules of war are not a concern, fortification-type defenses of planets are, basically, impossible. You cannot defend garden worlds.
 
We know of nothing that can defeat against the Reapers detonating the local star. So any defense significant enough to hold them back would just result in the solar system being obliterated.
I mean I know that nothing can stand against the reapers detonating a star but it does not mean the reapers would do so
The reapers would need these planets as much as we need them
Planets are a source of new husks as well as the source of building materials for new reapers
Reapers would also need the factories on the planets to produce weapons for their armies
Thus the reapers will not destroy planets with high populations and valuable resources
They will try to capture them to gain those resources
Thus is it possible to build defenses to deny the reapers those resources?

I mean the reapers desire the complete destruction of our civilization but that does not mean they will destroy every planet there they face significant resistance
They want to harvest us
They can not do that it they detonate a star and destroy the planet and all the life forms on it
 
Last edited:
Emm, I know Reapers are capable of something like 'noving' a star, but doesn't that goes agains their primary objective?
The Catalyst, and consequently the Reapers, are exceedingly complex VI type of artificial intelligence, and
despite their destructing/harvesting they "preserve" life (not the one they process into a new Reaper, I mean other worlds with potential to sustain, and evolve life.)
I mean by "hypernoving" stars they, pretty much destroy more organic life (existing and potential) than any "hostile" creation could do by itself.
 
They are, however, completely willing to do full scale orbital bombardment down to the bedrock.

They once found a planet in the previous cycle which was considered to be 'Tuchanka turned up to eleven', tried to the harvest the inhabitants for a year, lost destroyers, harvesting platforms and indoctrinated forces to it for a year, decided 'screw it' and blasted it and then moved on.
 
Hm, true, but that was, as you said, after years of unsuccessful harvesting. And that is evidence that they can allocate relatively large amount of resources (and time) for their harvests.
(And I'm not surprised they just up and desolated that world. 1 species compare to galactic level is not that important anyway.)

And I'm not disputing that Reapers won't bombard any evidence and remains of civilisation (they leave minimal evidence of "precursor" races, and technological examples, for their "plan of development path"). They will do it after they managed to harvest necessary "materials" for their objectives (aka new Reaper to "preserve" that species)
 
By the way, how would drone spam do against reapers? I don't mean like, thousands of drones, I mean like, hundreds of thousands to millions of drones.
If we scatter drone bays across a solar system like some sort of hornets nest mine, would that be efficient at eroding Reaper numbers?
 
The problem is, the Reapers have a good grasp of 'sunk cost fallacy' due to being AIs.

So if a star system is too heavily entrenched, then they will either ignore it until later (there is that one planet were Turian, Human, Asari and Salarian forces grouped up as a part of a mixed race military excerise, saw the Reapers and went JOLLY COOPERATION on them to the point were they beat off several Reaper invasions and the Reapers decided to stick with the occasional raid because they allocated forces elsewhere) or just blast it with everything.

Our best bet would be to try to set up a ton of automated defenses here and there, make the place look inhabited, so when the Reapers turn up, they have to punch through the defense grid, only to find no one.

We just have to find a way to make it look believable.
 
By the way, how would drone spam do against reapers? I don't mean like, thousands of drones, I mean like, hundreds of thousands to millions of drones.
If we scatter drone bays across a solar system like some sort of hornets nest mine, would that be efficient at eroding Reaper numbers?

Could work, but we need suitable bait to get them in system.

And keep them away from the Mass Relays, the Reapers enjoy lobbing bombs from one Mass Relay to the other to clear the path.
 
@Ramble Not knowing Reaper true hacking abilities is a deterrent, but "countless" mini space fighters against super big "dreadnoughts"....

If we scatter several 100'000 or more against 1 Reaper, and every drones weapons range is more than 200 m and ignore mass effect shields, ... we might thin their numbers a little. but one of the problems is as @Tabron89 said.
 
Last edited:
First of all, you are an order of magnitude off in RP counting. As to efficiency - I assume that, just like any other tech on our techtree, the development means "it's now economically viable to produce eezo, rather than mine it".

'Economically viable' means 'can be done at close to cost of other methods for the consumer.' A massive drop in the price of eezo is not a required result, only that if it costs a thousand credits to mine, refine and transport a unit of eezo we can create, refine and transport the same stuff for close to a thousand credits total too.

And keep them away from the Mass Relays, the Reapers enjoy lobbing bombs from one Mass Relay to the other to clear the path.

Interstellar Cruise Missiles is on our tech tree. We can develop the same capacity.
 
Last edited:
Interstellar cruise missiles + mass relay sensor map = one hell of a bait.

Build a bunch of missile boats, plonk them in a system with a mass relay, fire them off, see the Reapers swarm in response, then jump our guys in behind the Reapers.
 
'Economically viable' means 'can be done at close to cost of other methods for the consumer.' A massive drop in the price of eezo is not a required result, only that if it costs a thousand credits to mine, refine and transport a unit of eezo we can create, refine and transport the same stuff for close to a thousand credits total too.
Yes. Even if it costs 10000 for us to produce eezo while it costs 1000 to mine eezo, our way would still lead to rapid flooding of the market. And would shrink logistical trains required to obtain eezo, which is very important in case of war.

Plus, I really doubt it'll cost that much. Normal materials aren't expensive at all, compared to eezo, and we have free energy. I really can't overestimate how important this is. We have free energy in arbitrary quantities, for free. Moreover, we have very advanced material science. What does this mean? It means that, past initial setup, running our factories should be cheap.
 
Yes. Even if it costs 10000 for us to produce eezo while it costs 1000 to mine eezo, our way would still lead to rapid flooding of the market. And would shrink logistical trains required to obtain eezo, which is very important in case of war.

Plus, I really doubt it'll cost that much. Normal materials aren't expensive at all, compared to eezo, and we have free energy. I really can't overestimate how important this is. We have free energy in arbitrary quantities, for free. Moreover, we have very advanced material science. What does this mean? It means that, past initial setup, running our factories should be cheap.

... Eezo normally forms as a consequence of stars exploding. And I don't mean the normal 'ongoing thermonuclear driven explosion lasting for billions of years' stars exploding, I mean the 'as far as we knew there was no star here until it exploded brightly enough within minutes at most to be seen from across the galaxy' kind.

That's the sort of absurd energies even the best RL particle accelerators have trouble achieving, and it's telling that eezo is not in fact lousy everywhere there's rocky planets, no, it only shows up in large quantities in chunks of rock very close to the remains of such stars, which implies that the energies implied are not only absurd but may require prolonged exposure to the over powered gravity fields of black holes and white dwarfs.

Which means that it's quite possible that our profit margin for producing eezo (which is likely to require specialised facilities, unlike most our stuff) is going to end up tiny between maintenance and security to prevent raiding. Because having free energy is nice, but if you need TeraWatts of power over a month to produce a single unit of eezo, as well as maintain and staff the production facility and the power plant you'd be surprised how expensive it ends up being.
 
Last edited:
Gen III arc reactors are going to pump out TWs of power.

....

We could probably develop a gravity drive that doesn't use eezo if they are capable of that.

It's whether or not we can transfer the heat from said gravity drive to somewhere else without slagging said drive or heat transfer system.
 
... Eezo normally forms as a consequence of stars exploding. And I don't mean the normal 'ongoing thermonuclear driven explosion lasting for billions of years' stars exploding, I mean the 'as far as we knew there was no star here until it exploded brightly enough within minutes at most to be seen from across the galaxy' kind.

That's the sort of absurd energies even the best RL particle accelerators have trouble achieving, and it's telling that eezo is not in fact lousy everywhere there's rocky planets, no, it only shows up in large quantities in chunks of rock very close to the remains of such stars, which implies that the energies implied are not only absurd but may require prolonged exposure to the over powered gravity fields of black holes and white dwarfs.

Which means that it's quite possible that our profit margin for producing eezo (which is likely to require specialised facilities, unlike most our stuff) is going to end up tiny between maintenance and security to prevent raiding. Because having free energy is nice, but if you need TeraWatts of power over a month to produce a single unit of eezo, as well as maintain and staff the production facility and the power plant you'd be surprised how expensive it ends up being.

Although eezo production will be at first difficult
Does that really mean we should not be researching artificial eezo production?
eezo mining is very dangerous and expensive even now and can only be done by few major cooperations that can afford to do so.
Is it possible that our artificial eezo production will be cheaper and more affordable simply because it is safer and does not need expensive equipment used to survive the intense radiation of dead stars?
Even if there is no economic advantage there is a significant military advantage if we have means to produce artificial eezo.
In case we are cut off from eezo rich systems, we would still have a supply of eezo for our ships. Since humanity is a newcomer to the galaxy, I doubt that we have as wide access to eezo as other species.
In world war one, when germany faced to threat of being unable to produce artillery shells due to being cut off from sodium nitrate deposits in chile.
The invention of the Haber-Bosch process allowed Germany to continue their production of munitions.
If not for the process, Germany would have been forced to surrender early in the war. And we would not have gotten the unintended benefits of the haber-bosch process such as cheap fertilizer allowing crop production to increase dramatically.
Is it possible that the process for producing artificial eezo have the same effect?
 
Last edited:
Although eezo production will be at first difficult
Does that really mean we should not be researching artificial eezo production?

No.

Is it possible that our artificial eezo production will be cheaper and more affordable simply because it is safer and does not need expensive equipment used to survive the intense radiation of dead stars?

Economically viable does not necessarily equal cheaper in production. A part of the reason why eezo is so expensive (despite being a required food supplement for asari living in eezo poor environments) is that demand likely outstrips supply. And probably by a considerable margin. Because of this, the production cost of eezo is much lower than the sale price.

Now, that means that economically viable artificial eezo production can be more expensive than the mining of an equivalent amount of eezo, so long as the potential sales price without running a loss is lower than the price of mined eezo. In fact, unless mined eezo is cheaper to produce than artificial eezo the entire mined eezo market will collapse as more and more artificial eezo floods the market, outcompetes the mining efforts and is strategically much less of a bother because you no longer have to guard those eezo mining sites and can just pile more defenses on your already inhabited worlds where eezo is being produced.

It might take a while, but it'd happen, similar to the way that nitrate is no longer being mined anywhere in the world when the Haber-Bosch process and similar are just that much more convenient and without the hassle of building and maintaining nitrate mines across the world and shipping it around the globe.

Even if their is no economic advantage there is a significant military advantage if we have means to produce artificial eezo.
In case we are cut off from eezo rich systems, we would still have a supply of eezo for our ships. Since humanity is a newcomer to the galaxy, I doubt that we have as wide access to eezo as other species.

Oh certainly, there's much to be said for the benefit of having artificial eezo production capabilities. But unless the Reaper War stretches on beyond a couple of quarters it won't really matter if we have it or not. Unless we piss off the Citadel and they lock the SA out of the Citadel's markets, but what idiot would actually do that?

Is it possible that the process for producing artificial eezo have the same effect?

To a limited extent, yes. Or a major raw materials production sector collapses.
 
I think people are also overestimating the willingness of the Reapers to basically raze the galaxy in a massive war. They want to reap the harvest- to make more Reapers from our gestalt, to pay the seeds for a new crop to grow. You can't do that if you're mass scattering solar systems and planets. You can't hide a war of that scale not can you collect any meaningful harvest from the various races. Despite their name (or in fact because of it) the Reapers aren't interested in mindless genocide.

And as for escalating, total war against an opponent capable of semi-reliably inflicting casualties on Reapers is an OCP for them. They don't consider a war so much as a harvest.
 
Back
Top