3478 réponses à ce sujet

[Sajon1]

Shandepared wrote...

shep82 wrote...

With all these differing reasons for keeping or destroying the base it will be very interesting to see what the consequences of each action is.

An email and a news report.

 Ha Ha Ha

[mosor]

The worst case scenario for the saving the base is that the base does not help destroy the reapers, but intead you gain the suspicion of every other organic being in the galaxy, so when you run to them for help their first reaction is to put a shotgun to your face. Infact, the scenario you put forward for keeping the base should be the absolute best thing that can happen to the renegade path,

Is really there any evidence to suggest the having the base = victory, at least with the certainty that the even the absolute worst outcome will still have you beat them?  <_< If there is, then yes, keeping the base is worth it. But we don't know that. I can just as well assume the destroy the base will allow you to gather a grand coalition, giving you a equally valid path to fight the reapers.

Why would that be? If you play paragon shep, you already gained everyone's trust by saving the council, ect ect. Nothing stopping you from telling everyone in the council that cerberus has the base. No need for a reaper IFF since all the collectors are dead. Just send the 5th fleet and take it over. Cerberus doesn't have the power to stop an alliance fleet just yet. I know you don't have that option since the game ends with that decision, but who knows for ME3?

In regards to your second argument. Having the base does not equal victory, No rational person really says that. Most people state that having the base increases the chance of gaining more intel or tech on your enemy. Destroying the base reduces that chance to zero.

For your final point,, you're assuming keeping the base means not having a grand coalition.  You can play absolutely paragon, help and build trust with other races, forge that coalition together and still keep that base. That ups the odds more against the reapers. How all that plays out depends on your choices in ME3. I'd still rather have the collector base card to play rather than blow it up.

[Captain Jazz]

mosor wrote...
No need for a reaper IFF since all the collectors are dead.

The reaper IFF triggers a security protocol in the Omega 4 relay which makes your route much more accurate, meaning that you won't stop too far from the receiving relay and end up getting dragged into, and mushed into a fine organometallic paste by, the huge black hole in the area... the status of the collectors has no bearing on that.

Going back to the previous argument, why are you so convinced that the worst possible case for giving the Collector base to cerberus is that cerberus end up being the dominant power after the reapers are defeated?
It was inhabited by a race who were entirely enthralled by the Reapers. We know from historical reports that indoctrinated creatures simply cease to function when they lose contact with the reapers. The Collectors were functioning quite convincingly. It therefore seems sensible to assume that the collectors were in direct contact with the reapers the whole time.
Maybe that was only through a direct line to the Collector general or maybe it was through devices placed all through the base. If the former is the case I accept that there is no longer any threat, if the latter is the case I accept that the radiation pulse may have damaged these devices so that they no longer function, but that's a hell of a gamble when you're risking giving Cerberus, who, despite their incompetence, are well connected and powerful, to the Reapers.

[Costin_Razvan]

.....giving Cerberus, who, despite their incompetence, are well connected and powerful, to the Reapers..

Correction. TIM is well connected and powerful while those under him, even Miranda. have little to no power in the Alliance save for a few personal agents maybe.



A science team that would be sent to secure the Collector Base would pose little threat to the Galaxy if Indoctrinated.

[lovgreno]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

A science team that would be sent to secure the Collector Base would pose little threat to the Galaxy if Indoctrinated.

But if the reapers and collectors (there may be more of them) took back the base with help from Cerberus husks (they must have many of those by now...)  the suicide mission would all be for nothing. It would once again be a threat against the galaxy. And I doubt it would be as easy to retake it or destroy it as reapers are smart enough to learn from their setbacks.

As long as the base exists it is a very real threat so the burned earth tactic would be wise if you want to play it safe.

[mosor]

Captain Jazz wrote...

The reaper IFF triggers a security protocol in the Omega 4 relay which makes your route much more accurate, meaning that you won't stop too far from the receiving relay and end up getting dragged into, and mushed into a fine organometallic paste by, the huge black hole in the area... the status of the collectors has no bearing on that.

No. The IFF is just an identify friend foe beacon. Not some piece of advanced technology that lets you navigate anything.  It's lets the collectors know you're a friend so they don't swarm you or activate any automated defeces upon entering their space. Thats why if you die and save the base, you see a cutscene of cerberus sending their ships to that base. The collectors were dead so they didn't need an IFF any longer.

Going back to the previous argument, why are you so convinced that the worst possible case for giving the Collector base to cerberus is that cerberus end up being the dominant power after the reapers are defeated?
It was inhabited by a race who were entirely enthralled by the Reapers. We know from historical reports that indoctrinated creatures simply cease to function when they lose contact with the reapers. The Collectors were functioning quite convincingly. It therefore seems sensible to assume that the collectors were in direct contact with the reapers the whole time.

Harbringer had a machine to interface with the collector general over vast distances and through the collector general to individual drones.. The collectors were modified to be a conduit for the will of the reapers. They are not indoctrinated in the usual sense. They're manufactured drones, so no direct ccontact is needed.

Maybe that was only through a direct line to the Collector general or maybe it was through devices placed all through the base. If the former is the case I accept that there is no longer any threat, if the latter is the case I accept that the radiation pulse may have damaged these devices so that they no longer function, but that's a hell of a gamble when you're risking giving Cerberus, who, despite their incompetence, are well connected and powerful, to the Reapers.

That machine is designed for Harbinger to interface with the collectors who were modified extensively to be able to interface with that link. Without modifications, it shouldn't work on any other being.

As for cerberus, they're not incompetent. They have a lot of successes. You just cleaned up a few of their failures. As I said above, an incompetent organization wouldn't be able to bring someone dead back to life, find the rerasources to build a new normandy with intergrated reaper tech, or build an AI as advanced as EDI. Never mind building up an organzation as well funded an powerful as cerberus is.

Modifié par mosor, 03 juillet 2010 - 05:34 .

[Raizo]

You know, that is a really, really good question, why do people ( in this case me ) destroy the Collectors base?



At the time it seemed like the right thing to do.



After watching what happened to the people from Horizon ( or what happens to the Normandy's crew if your arrive to late ) it just did not make any sense to me to keep somthing like that.



The Collectors were working for the Reapers and they were helping to build a Human Reaper, I just assumed there was Reaper technology on the Collector Base and I don't trust Reaper technology, I'm too afraid of indoctrination.



Last but not least I did not want it to fall into Cerebus' hands. Sure TIM and his scientist would have probably been able to study and use the technology on the base ( provided they all did not gte brainwashed by Reaper indoctrination ) but I could guarantee that cerebus would also use the technology on the other spieces in the Galaxy. I could not have that on my conscience.

[Unit-Alpha]

In essence: I like explosions.

The true is that this will not make a great deal of difference in the long run. The outcomes will only be slightly different so I go with the one that abides by my moral standing in the game and is the most enjoyable.

Modifié par Unit-Alpha, 03 juillet 2010 - 07:00 .

[Smajdak]

mosor wrote...
No. The IFF is just an identify friend foe beacon. Not some piece of advanced technology that lets you navigate anything.  It's lets the collectors know you're a friend so they don't swarm you or activate any automated defeces upon entering their space. Thats why if you die and save the base, you see a cutscene of cerberus sending their ships to that base. The collectors were dead so they didn't need an IFF any longer.

Wrong.  EDI said that after the collector ship mission: " Standard relay transit protocols would not allow safe transport. Drift of
several thousand kilometers is common, and would be fatal in the galactic core.
The Reaper IFF must trigger the relay to use more advanced, encrypted protocols." No ship without reaper IFF can travel through Omega 4 relay. At least not without high risk of getting crushed by black hole.

About that collector base - In my opinion, it's better to destroy it. Not only because I am not sure if it is wise to give that much power to Cerberus (I am still not sure what to think about them - you get most information either from Cerberus or people who hate Cerberus. I do not hate them, but I do not trust them), but mainly because we would be accepting Collector technology. As Legion said, accepting some technology blinds you to alternatives. Collector technology is way behind Reaper tech (after all, we were able to destroy collector ship, but I doubt we could destroy a Reaper) and Reapers know everything about it. But destroying the Collector base would force Cerberus to focus on developing new weapons, maybe coming up with something Reapers do not know and which might give humanity a chance against them.

And by the way, I doubt it really matters - I do not think that Reapers will be undefeatable in Mass Effect 3 if you did not destroy/preserve the base. That would anger so many fans.

[Costin_Razvan]

And by the way, I doubt it really matters - I do not think that Reapers will be undefeatable in Mass Effect 3 if you did not destroy/preserve the base. That would anger so many fans.

I for one would hope that is the case. What's the point of a trilogy if you can just pick up the third game and win it having made very wrong choices in the second?

Of course that's a fool's hope.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 06 juillet 2010 - 01:36 .

[smudboy]

Smajdak wrote...

mosor wrote...
No. The IFF is just an identify friend foe beacon. Not some piece of advanced technology that lets you navigate anything.  It's lets the collectors know you're a friend so they don't swarm you or activate any automated defeces upon entering their space. Thats why if you die and save the base, you see a cutscene of cerberus sending their ships to that base. The collectors were dead so they didn't need an IFF any longer.

Wrong.  EDI said that after the collector ship mission: " Standard relay transit protocols would not allow safe transport. Drift of
several thousand kilometers is common, and would be fatal in the galactic core.
The Reaper IFF must trigger the relay to use more advanced, encrypted protocols." No ship without reaper IFF can travel through Omega 4 relay. At least not without high risk of getting crushed by black hole.

About that collector base - In my opinion, it's better to destroy it. Not only because I am not sure if it is wise to give that much power to Cerberus (I am still not sure what to think about them - you get most information either from Cerberus or people who hate Cerberus. I do not hate them, but I do not trust them), but mainly because we would be accepting Collector technology. As Legion said, accepting some technology blinds you to alternatives. Collector technology is way behind Reaper tech (after all, we were able to destroy collector ship, but I doubt we could destroy a Reaper) and Reapers know everything about it. But destroying the Collector base would force Cerberus to focus on developing new weapons, maybe coming up with something Reapers do not know and which might give humanity a chance against them.

And by the way, I doubt it really matters - I do not think that Reapers will be undefeatable in Mass Effect 3 if you did not destroy/preserve the base. That would anger so many fans.

Collector Technology = Reaper Technology

What's wrong with accepting technology?  Blinding you to others?  How?  No one's stopping anyone from inventing some other technology.  The fact that it's right there is a matter of efficiency, not perspective.  The fact that one can potentially get an extra advantage, and one won't accept it, because it's the enemies technology, is stupid.

I too, believe it won't matter anyway.

[Smajdak]

smudboy wrote...
Collector Technology = Reaper Technology

What's wrong with accepting technology?  Blinding you to others?  How?  No one's stopping anyone from inventing some other technology.  The fact that it's right there is a matter of efficiency, not perspective.  The fact that one can potentially get an extra advantage, and one won't accept it, because it's the enemies technology, is stupid.

I too, believe it won't matter anyway.

Collector technology is not the same as reaper technology. When you approach human reaper, EDI says that it is obvious that collectors work for the reapers, because technology used to create this reaper is not their own. But it is true that some Reaper technology can be found in that base.

Accepting technology is blinding you. New inventions are made when there is a need to overcome some obstacle. If you already have a way of overcoming that obstacle, you do not need to invent another way. Even if that another way may be better. You will always be just improving old tech. In ME universe for example, galactic civilizations found mass relays and by using them they were able to travel around the galaxy. If they never found them, they would have to invent something themselves. And that something might have been better (for example something which would not rely on some external structure, some drive inside a ship). And galactic civilizations can (and that is a best case scenario) only discover how the relays work and build new relays themselves.

If they would accept reaper technology, they would gain an advantage, sure. They could find reaper schematics (Collectors had to build that human reaper somehow) and upgrade their dreadnoughts (or build new ones using reaper tech). And they would only focus on understanding and improving that reaper tech. Well, improving is unprobable, considering the age and intelect of reapers. However, if the base is destroyed (and the council would acknowledge the reaper threat), galactic civilizations would focus on improving their current tech, possibly coming up with something completely differrent. Something completely alien to reapers. And the reapers would not know how to fight against that.

And reapers have numbers on their side - you could not defeat them by using the same tech they have. Council races have probably less than a hundred dreadnoughts, while there are at least 295 reapers (from the cutscene at the end of the game). And even dreadnoughts upgraded with reaper tech would be weaker, because they are lot smaller. And building new ships? Impossible to build that many ships before reaper invasion (I am almost certain that it won't take more than a few years for reapers to get to our galaxy).

[smudboy]

Smajdak wrote...
Collector technology is not the same as reaper technology. When you approach human reaper, EDI says that it is obvious that collectors work for the reapers, because technology used to create this reaper is not their own. But it is true that some Reaper technology can be found in that base.

You just proved Collectors Technology = Reaper Technology.  Try again.

Accepting technology is blinding you. New inventions are made when there is a need to overcome some obstacle. If you already have a way of overcoming that obstacle, you do not need to invent another way. Even if that another way may be better.

The obstacle being stopping the Reapers, which we've yet to accomplish.  Use every tech available.

You will always be just improving old tech. In ME universe for example, galactic civilizations found mass relays and by using them they were able to travel around the galaxy. If they never found them, they would have to invent something themselves. And that something might have been better (for example something which would not rely on some external structure, some drive inside a ship). And galactic civilizations can (and that is a best case scenario) only discover how the relays work and build new relays themselves.

You're implying that the result is the same (some technology that does something, i.e. traveling really fast in space), but the means to get there are different.  So?  Why not just steal and use the technology you find?  Wouldn't that be more efficient?

If they would accept reaper technology, they would gain an advantage, sure. They could find reaper schematics (Collectors had to build that human reaper somehow) and upgrade their dreadnoughts (or build new ones using reaper tech). And they would only focus on understanding and improving that reaper tech. Well, improving is unprobable, considering the age and intelect of reapers. However, if the base is destroyed (and the council would acknowledge the reaper threat), galactic civilizations would focus on improving their current tech, possibly coming up with something completely differrent. Something completely alien to reapers. And the reapers would not know how to fight against that.

So you yourself have stated that accepting Reaper Technology (which we already have by the way), would gain us an advantage.  Thus, acquring the base would also gain us an advantage.

You seem to misunderstand how this R&D thing works.  Getting intel on our enemy gives us the advantage, because we can discover their weaknesses (if we're going to a pure military application.)  Not having something to study, which is our actual target, because you think we'll develop a new technology (somehow faster than simply studying Reaper tech), in the sheer hope that the Reapers won't know how to combat it, is still, stupid.

And reapers have numbers on their side - you could not defeat them by using the same tech they have. Council races have probably less than a hundred dreadnoughts, while there are at least 295 reapers (from the cutscene at the end of the game). And even dreadnoughts upgraded with reaper tech would be weaker, because they are lot smaller. And building new ships? Impossible to build that many ships before reaper invasion (I am almost certain that it won't take more than a few years for reapers to get to our galaxy).

Actually that Thanix cannon is pretty darned useful.  Ditto with those thermal clips the geth created.  Tell me again how we're not defeating our opposing forces so far?

You're making the argument for me: if it's a war of numbers, why 1) hopefully create new technology that is less efficient to completeion and less effective, 2) not get every advantage available.

Who said anything about building new ships?

Truly you have a dizzying intellect.

Edit: Additionally, why can't you just do both?  Nothing's stopping current R&D and Reaper R&D, unless you blow up the base...

Modifié par smudboy, 06 juillet 2010 - 03:24 .

[Smajdak]

smudboy wrote...

You just proved Collectors Technology = Reaper Technology. Try again.

No, Collector technology (their ship, weapons etc.) is different than reaper tech, which was used to create the base and the human reaper. At least that is what EDI implies. But it doesn't really matter, important thing is that you can get reaper tech from the base.

smudboy wrote...

The obstacle being stopping the Reapers, which we've yet to accomplish. Use every tech available.

Yes, exactly, you have an obstacle and need to overcome it. If you find Reaper tech, you will keep using it, because it is far better than what we have. However, it is probable that tech the Reapers are using is as advanced as possible. So you can be only on the same level as your enemies. But it may not be enough (and there is no way of knowing whether it is enough or not, at least not until it is to late). However, there might be another way. Different way to accomplish the same goal, different way to make more powerful ships. The result might be even better than what the reapers are using now. However, if you start using reaper tech, you would never learn about that, because you would be focused only on trying to improve the Reaper tech you got.

smudboy wrote...

You're implying that the result is the same (some technology that does something, i.e. traveling really fast in space), but the means to get there are different. So? Why not just steal and use the technology you find? Wouldn't that be more efficient?

It would be more efficent.. But not in the long run. By discovering the Mass Relays galactic civilization overcame the obstacle blinded themselves to other options, because there is no reason to try to find new ways when you already have one. But if they would not use the relays, the might come up with something more efficent. In the long run.

smudboy wrote...

So you yourself have stated that accepting Reaper Technology (which we already have by the way), would gain us an advantage. Thus, acquring the base would also gain us an advantage.



You seem to misunderstand how this R&D thing works. Getting intel on our enemy gives us the advantage, because we can discover their weaknesses (if we're going to a pure military application.) Not having something to study, which is our actual target, because you think we'll develop a new technology (somehow faster than simply studying Reaper tech), in the sheer hope that the Reapers won't know how to combat it, is still, stupid.

We have some reaper technology. But not everything. We could not build a reaper. No dreadnought in the fleet has as strong kinetic barriers as Sovereign. After all, everything we have is Thanix.

Studying enemy technology for weaknesses is fine, no problems there. But it won't stop there, you will try to upgrade your technology with Reaper tech. In the best case scenario you will have the same tech they have. Which, in this case, is not enough.

And I am hoping that we will discover a technology that is different from the Reaper tech, something that Reapers do not have and which would give us upper hand. It may be improbable, but it is the only way to win this war by military might.

smudboy wrote...

Actually that Thanix cannon is pretty darned useful. Ditto with those thermal clips the geth created. Tell me again how we're not defeating our opposing forces so far?

Our current opposing forces are not way more powerful than us. Plus, in these cases, all that is hapening is slight modification of our current system (when talking about thermal clips) or adding one weapon while keeping the rest (in case of thanix). But chances are that everything reapers have will be better than what we have, so the best result which can come out of this is a Reaper ship. Still, not enough

smudboy wrote...

You're making the argument for me: if it's a war of numbers, why 1) hopefully create new technology that is less efficient to completeion and less effective, 2) not get every advantage available.

That would make sense if our numbers were comparable to them. By using their own technology you can (probably) make your own ships as powerful as theirs, but you would be still outnumbered 3 to 1. Only chance is to have ships better than theirs, and you can not achieve that by using their own technology.

smudboy wrote...

Who said anything about building new ships?

Well, if you want larger army, which you should want if your enemy outnumbers you 3 to 1, how do you want to do this? By making new ships of course.

smudboy wrote...

Truly you have a dizzying intellect.

This is not really necessary, is it?

smudboy wrote...

Edit: Additionally, why can't you just do both? Nothing's stopping current R&D and Reaper R&D, unless you blow up the base...

Works well in theory. However, if we take it to the extreme, imagine you are a guy from midieval era, still using horses to move between cities. And suddenly, someone would give you everything you need to make a car and start using it. I think that you would stop using horses you would not think about how to make a horses run faster. You would focus on cars. And it's the same with reaper tech - you get something way better than what you have, of course you will stop using that useless piece of junk you were using untill now and will focus on that new stuff.

[smudboy]

[quote]Smajdak wrote...
No, Collector technology (their ship, weapons etc.) is different than reaper tech, which was used to create the base and the human reaper. At least that is what EDI implies. But it doesn't really matter, important thing is that you can get reaper tech from the base.
[/quote]
And the Reapers built the Collectors to become mindless slaves.  Mindless slaves cannot create technology.

There are two possibilities: 1) the Reapers gave them the technology, 2) the Collectors (through Harbinger dealings with other races) acquired the technology.  Either way, it's advanced.  Shepard has no problem picking up the Collector Beam weapon and using it instantly.
[quote]
Yes, exactly, you have an obstacle and need to overcome it. If you find Reaper tech, you will keep using it, because it is far better than what we have. However, it is probable that tech the Reapers are using is as advanced as possible. So you can be only on the same level as your enemies. But it may not be enough (and there is no way of knowing whether it is enough or not, at least not until it is to late). However, there might be another way. Different way to accomplish the same goal, different way to make more powerful ships. The result might be even better than what the reapers are using now. However, if you start using reaper tech, you would never learn about that, because you would be focused only on trying to improve the Reaper tech you got.
[/quote]
Now you're speculating on "probables", "howevers", when you're already stated Reaper tehc is as advanced as possible (if that makes any sense.)

If we start using Reaper tech, we would never learn about it?  Do you listen to yourself before you think/write?  C'mon man, this paragraph is gibberish.

[quote]
It would be more efficent.. But not in the long run. By discovering the Mass Relays galactic civilization overcame the obstacle blinded themselves to other options, because there is no reason to try to find new ways when you already have one. But if they would not use the relays, the might come up with something more efficent. In the long run.
[/quote]
If technology is more advanced than the current level, and then you learn how to use it, boom.  You've just jumped ahead to that level of technology.  What are you talking about, in the long run?  What?  Dude!  What planet are you on?  If an alien race came down, and says "hey, here's an efficient, cost effective way of making Fusion power with your current infrastructure."  And we're like "we have theories of fusion power, we'll get there ourselves", that would be completely stupid.

The only difference between that analogy and the base is the manner upon which said alien said hi.

I think you're taking this Reaper-guide-through-our-tech rules to some unknown level.  Everyone is using Reaper tech.  Your argument is if we start using non-Reaper tech, we'll win.  Well that's retarded, but fine: no one's stopping anyone from using or developing non-Reaper tech.  That doesnt' stop anyone else, like the efficient Cerberus group, from not only using Collector Base tech (Reaper), but doing that thing you say.

[quote]
We have some reaper technology. But not everything. We could not build a reaper. No dreadnought in the fleet has as strong kinetic barriers as Sovereign. After all, everything we have is Thanix.
Studying enemy technology for weaknesses is fine, no problems there. But it won't stop there, you will try to upgrade your technology with Reaper tech. In the best case scenario you will have the same tech they have. Which, in this case, is not enough.
[/quote]
Okay, so we agree we're all using Reaper tech.  Should we stop using it and really surprise the Reapers?  I'm sure they won't know wtf we're doing.

So studying it is okay, yet you still want to blow up the base.  Ah huh.

So studying it is okay, but because we're going to keep studying it, and develop new technologies eventually, in the best case scenario, we'll have the same tech they have.  Which in your eyes is not enough.

Which, in comparison to having absolutely no advantage, is preferable?  What?   I think we're done here.

[quote]
And I am hoping that we will discover a technology that is different from the Reaper tech, something that Reapers do not have and which would give us upper hand. It may be improbable, but it is the only way to win this war by military might.
[/quote]
That'd be cool, but why cherry pick?  We need to win.  Seriously, who cares with what tools we do so?  I'm not saying we should start a giant boxing match with our massive Human Reaper, but c'mon man.  You're just dancing around the issue without giving any logical reasoning that would make 1) your choice more effective, 2) more efficient, 3) make sense.  I mean c'mon, what's the top of your head reasoning to blow up the base?  Because it's Reaper tech?  So if my enemy has a gun and I have an sword, I'm not going to pick up one of his dead comrade's gun and use it?  Or pick it up, run, and live to fight another day, and figure out how this magical-explosive powder/pellet thing works?  Are you serious?

[quote]
Our current opposing forces are not way more powerful than us. Plus, in these cases, all that is hapening is slight modification of our current system (when talking about thermal clips) or adding one weapon while keeping the rest (in case of thanix). But chances are that everything reapers have will be better than what we have, so the best result which can come out of this is a Reaper ship. Still, not enough
[/quote]
First you say our opposing force are not way more powerful than us.  Exhibhit A: Sovereign.  Sovereign was way more powerufl then several fleets of ships combined.
Then you say the Reapers will have better stuff than we have, so the best result which can come out of this is a Reaper ship, which is not enough.  Again, you're making my argument for me.  If you can somehow figure out that all we'll get out ouf the base is one ship, and it's still not enough: it's still better than nothing at all.  Who knows what we'll get out of the base: that's the point.  We could get untold tactical and scientific secrets of the universe, but you think we'll just get a Reaper ship?

[quote]
That would make sense if our numbers were comparable to them. By using their own technology you can (probably) make your own ships as powerful as theirs, but you would be still outnumbered 3 to 1. Only chance is to have ships better than theirs, and you can not achieve that by using their own technology.
[/quote]
Wait a second.  The only chance is to have ships better than theirs, but we cannot achieve this by using their own technology????????????????????????
Dude.  Maybe if we first 1) steal their tech, 2) build their ships to a comparable/equal level, THEN WE CAN MAKE BETTER SHIPS?

If this is your argument, then your argument hinges on keeping the Collector Base.  Because by the time normal R&D shop comes up to REAPER level technology, and then tries to surpass it, EVERYONE WILL BE DEAD, several times over.  The fastest route is to take.  The.  Damn.  Base.  And hope for the best, like all your wonderfully ridiculous theories.


[quote]
Well, if you want larger army, which you should want if your enemy outnumbers you 3 to 1, how do you want to do this? By making new ships of course.
[/quote]
Reaper ships?  Reaper+ ships?  Or just the normal kinds?  Cause if it's just the normal kind?  Then you don't need the base.

Want Reaper+ ships?  You need the base.
[quote]
This is not really necessary, is it?
[/quote]
Oh god yes, it's the only release I have from swearing my head off at you.  This is beyond simple understanding.  You're in a massive cycle of what if's, based on speculation that the "enemy won't know what hit them, since we didn't study them", or some assinine reasoning.

What if we discover a secret in the base, that doesn't involve military combat?  What then?  Oh great, we don't need to build ships or whatever ridiculous ideas you have!  We can just do something else, because new science has been revealed.


[quote]
Works well in theory.
[/quote]
If it works in theory, then it works, because all you have is a theory!
[quote]
However, if we take it to the extreme, imagine you are a guy from midieval era, still using horses to move between cities. And suddenly, someone would give you everything you need to make a car and start using it. I think that you would stop using horses you would not think about how to make a horses run faster.
[/quote]
You're damn right I probably would.  But no one's stopping anyone from using horses!  Which exactly what you're implying!  So just keep the base!  You can go merrily research how to make cars by yourself and riding horses, while the real men (Cerberus) try and make better, more efficient cars!

[quote]
You would focus on cars. And it's the same with reaper tech - you get something way better than what you have, of course you will stop using that useless piece of junk you were using untill now and will focus on that new stuff.[/quote]
Yes.  That's the point. 

Because cars in your analogy are more efficient.  More effective.  They are a tool which does the job better.  Which is exactly what we need.

God.

Modifié par smudboy, 06 juillet 2010 - 05:54 .

[Smajdak]

Replying to individual parts of your post would be meaningless, because I would be just saying the same thing again and again. That thing is: Considering that Reapers are millions years old, it is almost certain that their technology is as good as it can get. However, it is possible that some technology based on something completely different exists and is way better. It may not be probable, but it is possible. But if you would just use Reaper technology, you would not even consider that option. And Reapers have numbers on their side, so having tech as good as them is not enough. Our tech must be better. Else we are doomed.

To continue my analogy - Let's say that by giving horses some super treatment you could make immortal horses which could run at speed of light and would never grow tired (I know it's nonsense, but how am I supposed to come up with something we never invented because we never thought of it because of better inventions?). But by using cars we blinded ourselves to that alternative.

Or in ME universe - Let's say that there is a way to include something like Mass Relay on every ship, thus eliminating dependency on relay network. Galactic civilizations will never find that out, because they have Mass relays and there is no need to come up with something new.

[smudboy]

Smajdak wrote...
Replying to individual parts of your post would be meaningless, because I would be just saying the same thing again and again. That thing is: Considering that Reapers are millions years old, it is almost certain that their technology is as good as it can get. However, it is possible that some technology based on something completely different exists and is way better. It may not be probable, but it is possible. But if you would just use Reaper technology, you would not even consider that option. And Reapers have numbers on their side, so having tech as good as them is not enough. Our tech must be better. Else we are doomed.

Time for some Smajdak logic:

1. It is almost certain million year old Reaper technology is as good as it gets.
2. However, it is possible non-Reaper technology, not only exists, but is WAY BETTER.
3. If you use Reaper technology, you would not consider 2.
4. Reapers have numbers.  Therefore, 1. is not enough.
5. Therefore, since 2. Must have better technology.
6. Therefore, you must destroy the base.

I'm going to go fly away in my pink elephant now.

Edit: okay I'm back.  (Man I'm so glad my ancestors figured out that flying Elephant thing.)

If 1 is true, keep the base.
If 2 is true (hint: it isn't), you can still keep the base.
3 does not prevent anyone from considering 2, and you can still keep the base.
If 4.is true, then you can still keep the base.
If 5 is true, we must be able to solve our military problem though something better than million year old technology.  This is the crux of your argument.  This is fine: but you have NO argument.  You could say tactics, or strategy or something else: instead, you go for "IF different technology", which will 99.99% always be inferior to 1, considering it is millions of years old and as good as it gets.  I mean I wouldn't describe it as that, but you did.

To continue my analogy - Let's say that by giving horses some super treatment you could make immortal horses which could run at speed of light and would never grow tired (I know it's nonsense, but how am I supposed to come up with something we never invented because we never thought of it because of better inventions?). But by using cars we blinded ourselves to that alternative.

You didn't need to tell me any of your points or analogies were nonsense, but I appreciate the clarity.

Or in ME universe - Let's say that there is a way to include something like Mass Relay on every ship, thus eliminating dependency on relay network. Galactic civilizations will never find that out, because they have Mass relays and there is no need to come up with something new.

But Mass Relays are Reaper tech ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

Modifié par smudboy, 06 juillet 2010 - 06:58 .

[Onyx Jaguar]

I blew it up because upkeep of that facility would be an accounting nightmare. I'm looking out for my Bro TIM

[Smajdak]

You said it yourself - if you have a car, you would not try no make horses better than cars. Galactic civilization would focus on trying to upgrade reaper technology. They would think that they can somehow make it better, even if they can not. They would see no other options. Reaper technology would not save you - You can not turn dreadnought into reaper-like ship, so current ships can be only slightly upgraded. And you could built only very few reaper-like ships before the invasion (for lots of reason, but mainly because of incredible ello cost). Defeating reapers through tactics or something like that? Impossible, reapers are machines of insane intelect who have, for at least 37 000 000 years fought every 50 000 years war in which they completely destroyed all the galactic civilizations. And I am almost sure that it did not go smoothly every time. No way you can outsmart them, they have way more experience than us

How do you want to defeat them? There is more of them, they have better ships, better strategy, better technology... You have to beat them at something. Technology is only field where I think you could win, and using their technology is not enough. You have to be better and only possible way of being better is not using their technology but something else. Honestly, our best chance is to come up with intergalactic drive and just go somewhere else.

About those relays - I said something like relays - I have no idea what should it be, just imagine some kind of hyperdrive.

[smudboy]

Smajdak wrote...

You said it yourself - if you have a car, you would not try no make horses better than cars. Galactic civilization would focus on trying to upgrade reaper technology. They would think that they can somehow make it better, even if they can not. They would see no other options. Reaper technology would not save you - You can not turn dreadnought into reaper-like ship, so current ships can be only slightly upgraded. And you could built only very few reaper-like ships before the invasion (for lots of reason, but mainly because of incredible ello cost). Defeating reapers through tactics or something like that? Impossible, reapers are machines of insane intelect who have, for at least 37 000 000 years fought every 50 000 years war in which they completely destroyed all the galactic civilizations. And I am almost sure that it did not go smoothly every time. No way you can outsmart them, they have way more experience than us
How do you want to defeat them? There is more of them, they have better ships, better strategy, better technology... You have to beat them at something. Technology is only field where I think you could win, and using their technology is not enough. You have to be better and only possible way of being better is not using their technology but something else. Honestly, our best chance is to come up with intergalactic drive and just go somewhere else.
About those relays - I said something like relays - I have no idea what should it be, just imagine some kind of hyperdrive.

And your entire argument hangs on this other potential technology you cannot name or point to, which will HAVE TO BE better than Reaper tech, simply because it is not Reaper tech (which you yourself have stated to be the best there is), all the while agreeing that other science/tech found in the base may assist in determining Reaper weaknesses.

You do not make sense.

Finding science/tech/info/an edge, in the base, is way more probable than your non-existent, magical, non-Reaper tech, which will DEFINITELY be better than any Reaper tech.

Either something is going to help you for reasons 1...n, or it won't, for reasons 1...n.  You have not made any argument providing a negative impact aside from your bizarre immortal horse analogy.

[Smajdak]

I have stated that reaper technology is as good as it can get (ie. it can not be upgraded), not that it is the best possible. Technology based on something else can be much better. Do you watch BSG? Something simillar - Battlestar technology (only metal, only machine) is something completely else than Cylon technology (organic). And if they would never meet, they would possibly get to some point where it would not be possible to upgrade it any further. So even though both technologies would be as good as they can get, one would be better than the second one (probably). Just two different approaches. Again, it is impossible to find an example, just because I would have to come up with something none of us ever thought of because we have some other technology. But just go with the relays - if there weren't any relays, we would have to invent "hyperdrive"

You won't find anything in the base that reapers don't have. It's still the same thing - you can not defeat reapers with their own technology. So you can either have no chance of surviving (by using the base) or have some incredibly small chance of surviving by hoping to find something which would save you. Which is better?

If you preserve the base you will focus ONLY on the new technology, not "waste" your time on something way worse. Thus blinding yourself to other options. THAT is the negative impact of preserving the base. Studying reaper tech would surely be a good thing, but would result in studying only reaper tech.

(And by the way - I believe that story writers in Bioware think the same - after all, no one except Illusive Man agrees with preserving the base. And almost everything Legion says is against it).

[V0luS_R0cKs7aR]

smudboy wrote...

And your entire argument hangs on this other potential technology you cannot name or point to, which will HAVE TO BE better than Reaper tech, simply because it is not Reaper tech (which you yourself have stated to be the best there is), all the while agreeing that other science/tech found in the base may assist in determining Reaper weaknesses.

You do not make sense.

Finding science/tech/info/an edge, in the base, is way more probable than your non-existent, magical, non-Reaper tech, which will DEFINITELY be better than any Reaper tech.

Either something is going to help you for reasons 1...n, or it won't, for reasons 1...n.  You have not made any argument providing a negative impact aside from your bizarre immortal horse analogy.

While researching completely novel tech that perfectly counters the Reapers is unlikely, this approach is STILL more likely to work (IMO) than researching the Collector/Reaper tech (either one, doesn't matter) and trying to beat the Reapers with their own toys, especially considering that the Reapers have been exposed to virtually every possible manipulation of their technology during their harvest of civilizations every 50 000 years (whose development is guided by the mass relays).

Modifié par V0luS_R0cKs7aR, 06 juillet 2010 - 08:27 .

[smudboy]

V0luS_R0cKs7aR wrote...

smudboy wrote...

And your entire argument hangs on this other potential technology you cannot name or point to, which will HAVE TO BE better than Reaper tech, simply because it is not Reaper tech (which you yourself have stated to be the best there is), all the while agreeing that other science/tech found in the base may assist in determining Reaper weaknesses.

You do not make sense.

Finding science/tech/info/an edge, in the base, is way more probable than your non-existent, magical, non-Reaper tech, which will DEFINITELY be better than any Reaper tech.

Either something is going to help you for reasons 1...n, or it won't, for reasons 1...n.  You have not made any argument providing a negative impact aside from your bizarre immortal horse analogy.

While researching completely novel tech that perfectly counters the Reapers is unlikely, this approach is STILL more likely to work (IMO) than researching the Collector/Reaper tech (either one, doesn't matter) and trying to beat the Reapers with their own toys.

1. How?
2. Who says that's the tactic?

You could find a whole bunch of stuff you don't even know of, which is much more probable than figuring stuff out by yourself.

That same argument can be applied to KEEPING the base.  This is why it's hilarious.

[smudboy]

Smajdak wrote...

I have stated that reaper technology is as good as it can get (ie. it can not be upgraded), not that it is the best possible. Technology based on something else can be much better. Do you watch BSG? Something simillar - Battlestar technology (only metal, only machine) is something completely else than Cylon technology (organic). And if they would never meet, they would possibly get to some point where it would not be possible to upgrade it any further. So even though both technologies would be as good as they can get, one would be better than the second one (probably). Just two different approaches. Again, it is impossible to find an example, just because I would have to come up with something none of us ever thought of because we have some other technology. But just go with the relays - if there weren't any relays, we would have to invent "hyperdrive"
You won't find anything in the base that reapers don't have. It's still the same thing - you can not defeat reapers with their own technology. So you can either have no chance of surviving (by using the base) or have some incredibly small chance of surviving by hoping to find something which would save you. Which is better?
If you preserve the base you will focus ONLY on the new technology, not "waste" your time on something way worse. Thus blinding yourself to other options. THAT is the negative impact of preserving the base. Studying reaper tech would surely be a good thing, but would result in studying only reaper tech.
(And by the way - I believe that story writers in Bioware think the same - after all, no one except Illusive Man agrees with preserving the base. And almost everything Legion says is against it).

If Reaper technology is as good as it gets, then we can't put Mass Relay like tech on ships, as you have described.

However, technology can always be upgraded or learned from to make better technology (really saying the same thing here.)  Technology is not some finalized end unto itself.  Which apparently it is to you regarding Reaper tech, but not anything not-Reaper tech, which is retarded.

How can you not defeat something by having the same technology?  Two people have guns.  What, they're both undefeatable?  Ever heard of tactics, or strategy?  EDI makes a comment on two AI's: the one with the superior hardware wins.  Well how about humans with the same technology against Reapers?  I mean we can tear your tiny little argument to shreds in multiple ways, but it's too nonsensical to discern what exactly you're trying to say here.

That's exactly why you want the base: to find out what the Reapers have.  To find out their tech.  To use it against them, not literally in a gunfighter vs. gunfighter scenario, but to see what their numbers are, their defenses, their weapons, how they eat, breathe, operate, etc.  This is basic, common sense stuff.  But you've got this weird militaristic/one way/determinist technology angle that if "you use it, it won't help."  Which as we know is nonsense.

As it stands, not having a better weapon, defense, etc., won't help.  Why wouldn't you want a better weapon, defense, etc., when going up against a superior opponent, and then applying things tactics, strategy, and the sort?  This is all under your assumption that this is going to be some military applicable technology, aka, the gunfighter scenario.

What if we find out our gunfighter has a limp in his leg, or is left handed, or is blind in one eye, or can't shoot straight when the sun's down, or he's sensitive when you talk about his sister, or any number of obvious flaws that can be exploited.  Do you get where I'm coming from?

If we keep the base, these sorts of bits of data may be there.  We don't know what we'll find: but it's a helluva lot more believable, then you're possible technology, that might be better than Reaper tech, which is the best there is.

I'm quite sure there are a few other characters who are for the base, but that's irrelevant.  (And why you brought that up I have no idea, unless you were just listening to whatever your teammates were saying, and concoted a ridiculous argument that has no basis of reasoning aside from wild speculation.)

[Smajdak]

Sigh, not Mass Relay like tech, just anything that would allow travelling across huge distances in reasonable amount of time. Again - I have no idea how.

It is makes sense to asume that progress has to end somewhere.Or you think that there will always be something new, something we do not know?

Reapers have been around for at LEAST 38 millions years. They are hyperinteligent race. They have fought countless wars. Do you actually think that some data from a space station can show us some weakness? These hyperinteligent machines had 38 milions years to think about it. It is probable that they have found and corrected most of the weaknesses they had. And those which they had not, those were probably already exploited in some war, thus discovered and after that corrected.

EDI says that AI with superior hardware wins - Reapers have superior hardware. Again - At least 300 Sovereign sized ships ready to destroy us. We wouldn't be even able to make 10 of them before their arrival. Maybe not even one.

About that possible technology - how about that quarian research about stars blowing up? What if we could learn how to blow up a star in a few minutes? We would just have to lure entire Reaper fleet into one system and blow up that star. Do you think that we would have got that technology from collector base? Hardly. And if quarians would get their hands on reaper schematics, you can bet that they would stop research about some star and start thinking about how to integrate reaper technology into the fleet.

About party members - all of them disagree with your decision after you keep it - I know it, just did it today. Some of them think it is right to keep it inside the base, however, once you get out, everyone says that you made the wrong choice.

And the reason I mentioned that is that opinion of Bioware story writers is only opinion that matters. And I think that they are "subtly" encouraging us to destroy the base.