Talk:Systems Alliance

I got this article started, and I hope to add more to it eventually, but if anyone feels I missed something, or wants to polish it up a little, feel free! SpartHawg948 13:19, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

-Should we add the list of worlds and/or systems claimed by the Alliance by Shepard in the game? I think any world surveyed is claimed. 76.235.209.192 04:50, 1 December 2007 (UTC) No, we shouldn't-it's different from game to game. You'd just be redoing the lsit of surveyable planets. That did bother me though. You've claimed about a hundred worlds for the Alliance, many of them habitable, almost all of them with archeological sites or resources-why doesn't Shep get any props for that?


 * Any world on this list should be a definite member world, either a colony or a developed resource world such as Therum. -- Ninsegtari 15:28, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Military
Well I do not see anything about the military. I did how ever get the Codex Entry Systems Alliance Military Ranks from the game on here. As of now it is a separate article. Someone can take a look at it and add it. We should also get the specializations on here too. And if you dont know what I mean then look in the game codex for Systems Alliance Specializations or the like.

How about adding the picture of the arcturus fleet assaulting the Citadel under military?

If it got a quite good quality and fit into the article, so go ahead. If you have to you can take away the pictures of the Normandy and the Mako. Swedish guy 06:08, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

The ships with the Normandy in the Arcturus fleet are destroyers. so maybe we should put a picture of those in the destroyerDerekproxy 19:52, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually due to confusion with the artists, those models were re-designated as being cruisers. See here. But those pictures are not meant to be of actual vessels of that weight, they're just illustrative. --Tullis 20:00, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Also wanted to point out that destroyers have never been mentioned in Mass Effect. In naval terms, destroyers and frigates are pretty similar (as an example, the US Navy didn't have frigates till after WWII, they were destroyer escorts). The way ship classes are laid out in ME destroyers would be pretty redundant, and probably tactically useless, as they would be (if they were to conform w/ naval standard as ME ship classes have so far) larger than frigates but smaller than cruisers. SpartHawg948 03:05, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


 * the official art of ME says the alliance fleet operates destroyers and even shows one thats why i brought it up plus destroyers in the US navy to day provide the backbone of the Carrier battle groups protection from air threats.Derekproxy 18:40, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Merge
Should we merge this article with the article about the humans? The asari, salarians etc. all have their government and race in the same page, why not humans? It could be a little trouble with the history section, but we cold just fill the beginning with a very quick summary of humanitys early history and then have a section with the history of the systems alliance.

Economy
I think Binary Helix should be added to the list. BH is an Alliance company as evidenced by their base on Europa (Jupiter's moon) and Khalisah Al-Jilani's questuion in regards to the destruction of an Alliance research facility on Noveria (Peak 15). -- Ninsegtari 15:28, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Go ahead, just don't let all companies get on the list. this is only for the major companies.

Is Devlon Industries a human company? It doesn't mention it in the in-game description. However, the quarian armor has the word "THERMAL" on the hip. An english word on the armor would lead me to believe it comes from a human company. -Ninsegtari 22:34, October 3, 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not proof, but in Revelation, Stinger pistols (which are manufactured by Devlon in the game) are standard issue for Alliance MPs. Maybe they should be removed from this list. --Tullis 23:12, October 3, 2009 (UTC)

Patavig
Should Patavig be considered a member world? Though the world has been claimed by the alliance it is neither a colony nor an industrial world. It is completely useless to the alliance which is why they are negotiating planetary rights with the volus. I think it should be removed from the list. -- Ninsegtari 20:02, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The title of the list is 'known member worlds', not known useful worlds. But good point: I just added it as a point of interest because it shows the Alliance being diplomatic to other races for once : ). Go ahead and take it out. --Tullis 20:11, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * This also raises a question in regards to the legitamacy of Trebin. I added it because, although Trebin is not a colony or an industrial world, ExoGeni is actively terraforming the world. Your thoughts? --Ninsegtari 22:22, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd leave Trebin on - not only is it being terraformed but you can land on it, and there's an assignment there too - but that does raise the question of what the criteria are for a planet being a 'claimed world' worth including. Hmm. --Tullis 22:29, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * This will adjust the criteria to include colonies, industrial worlds, Alliance installations, and Alliance worlds in the process (PROCESS!) of terraformation. --Ninsegtari 00:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Sol System
In the same vain as the Patavig discussion I feel that we should delete the Sol System from the list. However this raises the question as to whether or not we should include Luna and Mars as member colonies. They are technically colonies, this is true, but should they be included? Neither colony can support life on the surface. --Ninsegtari 01:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * They do have a population, even though the planets aren't terraformed. Technically, Proteus would be eliminated under those criteria as its surface is hostile and colonists can only live in underwater complexes. Regardless I think the Sol System definitely belongs on this list - it's the human home system, after all. --Tullis 07:09, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

United Nations?
why is the representative government for humans, "the Systems Alliance" and not the United Nations because the world has about 203 countries and 192 of those countries are in the UN?Lexlexx1 17:19, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

UNSC was takenDerekproxy 18:51, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Because the Systems Alliance evolved completely independent of the United Nations, as is described in Mass Effect: Revelation. The SA was originally a multi-national entity responsible for the exploration of space and the governance of extra-solar colonies. It only evolved into the representative government for all of humanity in the wake of the First Contact War. In fact, all of this is described in detail in the article. Re-read the section entitled "History", and all should be made clear. SpartHawg948 20:25, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

ok i think i miss that bit and the unsc is from halo, bioware could of just called it UN not unsc Derekproxy Lexlexx1 21:07, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

you had that coming i like to make jokes If i wanted (i'm a sy-op for 3 wikis)to spend a lot of time here I'd be joker24 or somethingDerekproxy 00:28, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Military Doctrine
I find it interesting that Humanity is considered a military "sleeping giant" with low levels of troop numbers. 3% of the population volunteering for the Alliance military would account for over 300 million soldiers (population approx. 12 billion). -Ninsegtari 14:30, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * Think about it: basically the entire turian species is in the military, and the Alliance schooled them during the First Contact War. : ) --Tullis 14:52, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, this does constitute a sleeping giant to species with compulsory military service, where much more of the population is under arms. However, the reason the analogy was used is that, like the United States in 1941 (which is how this particular phrase entered the lexicon), should the Alliance go to war and need to institute a draft, it could rapidly become (likely) the largest military in Citadel space. It is also worth considering that they may not all be active duty troops. For example, the United States has 3 million members in it's military. However, 1/2 of these are Reserve or National Guard. The Alliance may have a similar policy. Also, in an aside, where did those population numbers come from? SpartHawg948 19:16, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think it refers to being the largest military, I think the thought from the Council is : holy horse whiskers, look what they can do with such a small military, imagine if they had an extra third or half on top of those numbers, etc. And don't forget that the Alliance uses tech support (drones, VIs) more than any other race's military, so that gives them another advantage. --Tullis 20:02, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * Well yeah, I didn't say it was the largest military, just that it may have the capability to become so. I mean, only 3% of the pop are in the military. If that were to get ramped up by means of a draft, the size of the military would very rapidly increase. SpartHawg948 04:56, September 26, 2009 (UTC)
 * Ha, more like 'holy horse whiskers, they did this with only 3% and they could barely crawl out of their own gravity well a hundred years ago.' We're not just the child with a gun, we're the child with automatic weapons and proximity mines.--desala 59.167.82.18 10:39, September 26, 2009 (UTC)
 * Ummm... what? What does that have to do with the size of the Alliance military and the use of the term "sleeping giant"? SpartHawg948 11:08, September 26, 2009 (UTC)
 * The child thing is what the other races said about humans and the turians after Shanxi (they were taking the gun away from the child, Terra Firma guy says they also tried to shoot it dead). It is not just about the size of the military, as other people have said, but about potential and capability and resolve. Humans had the military capacity to not get slaughtered during the First Contact War, imagine what they could do a generation or two after that - hence the sleeping giant. Giant toddler. Whatever. --desala 59.167.82.18 11:23, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

I see what you're saying, my only problem is that you are taking two unrelated sources and meshing them, which I fear may lead off-topic. The sleeping giant reference is, I believe, a reference from the in-game Codex, as opposed to an opinion expressed as dialogue uttered by a character. And personally, I don't think the baby w/ a gun thing is really valid either. Seems to me that humanity already possessed the skills inherent to thrive on the galactic scale, all that was needed was a little more info, and obviously we knew how to handle ourselves in a war. It doesn't really take that long (at least militarily) to adapt to new technology. But again, as the original question was related to a bit of info from the codex, I'm just a little leery of bringing a piece of character dialogue from an unrelated incident in to the conversation, as it might cloud the issue. SpartHawg948 19:57, September 26, 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't mean the metaphor should be included, just saying that in light of humans being viewed as a militarily capable species despite being only recently spacefaring and having low numbers in the Alliance military, the term 'sleeping giant' shouldn't really be that much of a surprise. That was, as I understand it, the original observation. If we were roused, we could do serious damage to anyone and everyone. --desala59.167.82.18 01:39, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

In my personal opinion, I believe that Humanityhas ben fighting wars through out its history, and is also always preparing for a war due to this history. I think thatcould be why its a sleeping giant.
 * My only issue with that theory is that, were this the case (fighting wars throughout history, always preparing for war, etc, being the basis for being a 'sleeping giant'), then Mexico, Germany, Italy, Greece, Spain, and the Netherlands would all be 'sleeping giants'. I don't think it's a historical thing, I think it's more a cultural thing, like what Victor Davis Hanson talks about in his book Carnage and Culture. For example, I think that things such as a culture based on freedom, civic militarism, capitalism, technological innovation and adaptation, a propensity for decisive battle, individualism, etc (all of those are among the values Hanson points to- sorry if it seems like I'm plugging his book, but it's one of my favorite books ever!) are what really contributes to the Alliance's status as a "sleeping giant". SpartHawg948 10:28, April 19, 2010 (UTC)

Military Doctrine pt 2- Blitzkreig or no?
Just wanted to elaborate on a recent edit I made (or more accurately, a recent removal of a slightly less recent edit). The Systems Alliance's military doctrine may superficially resemble blitzkreig to the (no offense) less initiated, but any similarities are really just that, superficial. Blitzkreig is a purely offensive strategy emphasizing combined arms (although it still relied very heavily on foot infantry, which is why it ultimately failed in the Soviet Union) and which employs a decisive blow against an enemy force, resulting in a breakthrough and then a mad rush (pretty much with reckless abandon) towards the objective, with little or no regard for the safety and security of ones own flanks or supply lines, as if it succeeds, the campaign will be over long before becoming cut off would be an issue. And as the last sentence suggests, blitzkreig is also dependent upon a very swift conclusion of hostilities.

The doctrine employed by the Alliance more closely resembles a classic Fabian strategy, first employed by Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus, a dictator of the Roman Republic, against Hannibal. The Fabian strategy is able to be employed both offensively and defensively, and which emphasizes avoidance of pitched battles or mass frontal assaults in favor of harassing the enemy and hitting their supply lines with the aim of demoralizing them. Elements of leapfrogging and encirclement are also present, but Blitzkreig? Not so much. SpartHawg948 05:40, April 13, 2010 (UTC)

President of the Systems Alliance
I'm fairly certain that when the Nomandy is impounded, and shepard is sulking in the corner with his romance, (in the first game, after Ilos), There is a conversation option that lets him say something along the lines of "I'll take this all the way to President Menedez if I have to!" Im not certain about the name, I remeber it sounded hispanic.Could this be the leader of the alliance? Hmm... a president and a parliament. if someone is near this point in the game, and will confirm this, we might be able to add this to the article, though I don't remember him saying anything specifically tagging the post of "President" to the Systems Alliance.209.208.106.232 20:57, June 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * You probably mean President Huerta of the United North American States on Earth. -- Commdor (Talk) 21:11, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

I see. Never heard of them, probably mentioned in some obscure codex entry, but that makes sense, thanks.209.208.106.232 21:13, June 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * Just found a YouTube video. Shepard clearly states and shown in the subtitles, it's Huerta. Lancer1289 21:19, June 22, 2010 (UTC)