2146 réponses à ce sujet

[Sviken]

smudboy wrote...
Yes, which is irrelevant, as he himself states, unless the Reapers are dealt with first.

Agreed. However, my point was that after he and Shep deal with the Reaper threat (if they manage to defeat them... of course), TIM would most likely use the base for his own purposes.

But it did and was.  He planned out that Shepard would be able to handle whatever threat/trap the Collectors posed.  He was confident in Shepard's abilities, and knew he had an ace up his sleeve: EDI.  He didn't want to tell Shepard or else they'd tip off the Collectors.  This is very clear in the narrative.  You may not agree with this, and neither do I, but we understand that: 1) TIM knew what he was doing, 2) It was for the good of the mission (to get data), 3) It worked, and 4) Aside from a glib comment by Shepard to the crew, the "crew" (Mordin, Jacob and Miranda) are okay with this.

Point taken. Anyway, you can say that TIM was very confident in Shepard's abilities, but there was a heavy risk sending Shepard onto the Collector ship. After all, TIM didn't knew much about the Collectors and what they are capable of. He had his suspicions, but nothing more.

Modifié par Mortis5, 13 octobre 2010 - 07:48 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Casuist wrote...

Fair enough. All evidence shown is that she is working against the SB. TIM knows this, and claims the opposite.

From an omnipresent viewpoint... yeah, but from the perspective of how she is in the game, apparently not.  When you first meet her she's threatening to kill someone.  Like it or not she changed and was willing to do all manner of things to track the Shadowbroker down and kill him.  Could have worked with Shadowbroker agents to gain information and get closer.  From a outside/phone record tap perspective, you could suspect that she's working with the Shadowbroker by being friendly with some of the SB's main people.  Doesn't seem like an off-key assumption.

What claims about TIM or Cerberus do you feel are untrue?

How extreme Cerberus is.  The worst offenses came from defection and attempts to save a project that TIM would've otherwise shut down.  (Overlord and Teltin)

No reason to doubt his explanation. Plenty reason not to trust him.

Once you understand that he has that mindset you can trust that he'll be that way.

The Reapers are a greater long-term threat, quite obviously. Under certain scenarios, not giving the base to TIM is a better option with respect to defeating the reapers, namely those scenarios where TIM may be working at cross purposes (whether or not he intends to).

They're not the greater long-term threat if TIM has the base, because you feel TIM with the base would ruin or hinder your chance of winning when otherwise that liability wouldn't be there.  To you, without the base TIM is an afterthought in your battle against the Reapers.  With the base, TIM is the first problem you see towards stopping the Reapers.

To put it another (and my original) way, TIM is a greater liability than the Reapers if you destroy the base... while the Reapers are the greater liabilty than TIM when keeping the base.  The lesser liability is something you assume you can handle when the other is gone.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 13 octobre 2010 - 07:57 .

[Zulu_DFA]

NYG1991 wrote...

I always wondered why there wasn't a " this sounds like a trap" dialogue option when Tim tells shep about the collector ship.

I don't blame Tim for not telling I blame shep for not suspecting.

There is an option "But how did the Turians manage..." and then "Why wouldn't their own buddies react..."

So Shepard kinda can suspect something but choose to keep it to himself.

NYG1991 wrote...
At the same time though. Why would Tim have to worry about tipping off the collectors? The QEC was supposed to be strictly person to person so only he and shep hear what's said.

It is ironic that the argument "TIM is bad because he lies to Shepard about the Collector ship" is brought up by the people, who play Shepards TIM has the least reason to trust.

Besides, TIM can't trust Shepard's squadmates. He doesn't even know (lies, all lies!!!) who is Archangel really, when he gives Shepard the dossiers.

Currently I think it was Garrus, who snicthed for the Shadow Broker aboard the Normandy. Could also been Mordin.

Would Shepard maintain the "need-to-know basis" policy within his team? Not the one that reproaches TIM for it, apparently.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 13 octobre 2010 - 08:12 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

tallinn wrote...
Imagine a TIM that takes the base to seize the power in the galaxy and to obtain human domination. Will this make the galaxy weaker or stronger to defeat the Reapers? I say it makes it weaker.

Problem there is TIM isn't that stupid.  His focus has been on defeating the Reapers and they've been paramount in his mind.  Unless he feels he can beat the Reapers at the level he's at, he wouldn't divert resources toward any other agenda.  It's even stated in documents that TIM is pouring everything into stopping the Reapers.

Everyone here assumes that TIM is taking the Reapers threat as serious as Shephard does and, having obtained the base, will use it to fight the Reapers. We do not have any evidence that this would be case. I see more signs that it will be not. I expect Cerberus to be another trouble maker in ME3.

So... Mass Effect 2 didn't happen in your playthrough?

Yeah I don't understand how everyone suddenly forgot the events and success of ME2 mission... the Cerberus Lazarus Mission.

So, TIM did fight the Reapers? He did fight the Collectors. He wanted to know what is at the other end of the Omega 4 Portal. Do not take everything he says for granted. Reassuring Shephard in his fear of the Reapers is needed to motivate him to do what he is supposed to do for TIM.

Which is to stop the Reapers.

There is no clue what so ever how to defeat a full-powered Reaper fleet attack, with or without the base. TIM is the type of character that allies with his strongest enemy if he sees he can't beat him. Maybe his idea is to sacrifice all other races to the Reapers while preserving mankind? Would fit well into his job description.

Clues are only possible if you keep the base.  At the moment, there's absolutely NOTHING left regarding the Reapers (that we know of) left to study.  On top of that, the CB is a friggin' Reaper factory  Of course it'll have some things of use in it.

If it didn't, why destroy the base?  Because you can't trust TIM with useless information?

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 13 octobre 2010 - 08:06 .

[RiouHotaru]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

NYG1991 wrote...

I always wondered why there wasn't a " this sounds like a trap" dialogue option when Tim tells shep about the collector ship.

I don't blame Tim for not telling I blame shep for not suspecting.

There is an option "But how did the Turians manage..." and then "Why wouldn't their own buddies react..."

So Shepard kinda can suspect something but choose to keep it to himself.

NYG1991 wrote...
At the same time though. Why would Tim have to worry about tipping off the collectors? The QEC was supposed to be strictly person to person so only he and shep hear what's said.

It is ironic that the argument "TIM is bad because he lies to Shepard about the Collector ship" is brought up by the people, who play Shepards TIM has the least reason to trust.

Besides, TIM can't trust Shepard's squadmates. He doesn't even know (lies, all lies!!!) who is Archangel really, when he gives Shepard the dossiers.

Currently I think it was Garrus, who snicthed for the Shadow Broker aboard the Normandy. Could also been Mordin.

Would Shepard maintain the "need-to-know basis" policy within his team? Not the one that reprimands TIM for it, apparently.

Doubtful.  If it was a snitch, it would've been referenced in the dossiers.  Also, the SB himself might've commented on it.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Could've just hacked Normandy surveilence or intercepted the signal as it traveled back to TIM.  Evidence suggests that Liara may have done this... as she knows who you're sleeping with.

//DER DERRRRRRR!!!!!!!

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 13 octobre 2010 - 08:08 .

[Zulu_DFA]

RiouHotaru wrote...

Doubtful.  If it was a snitch, it would've been referenced in the dossiers.  Also, the SB himself might've commented on it.

Like hell it would. But "absense of evidence is not the evidence of absense", is it, huh?

[Phaedon]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Why not what?

Your opinion, I assume, is based around a concrete and reasonable fear that is supported by the game's lore, and not logically circumventable or limited by the facts of the issue.

Right?

I have been using facts for my posts, please check the 20 last pages.
I don't get what you are trying to say, that anyone who destroyed the base did it because they didn't use logic ? K. 

Modifié par Phaedon, 13 octobre 2010 - 08:24 .

[LordHelfort]

Im concurring with Phaedon, in a realistic scenario where an invading species of what can only be called 'Roflstompacaust warships' is coming into town, you would want to know every bit possible, possible weak points, get ahold of their weapons technology. TIM, certainly not trustworthy, can be dealt with later, because being worried about WHEN he will abuse said technology (if abuse is ensuring Humanity calls the shots in the galaxy, sign me up) is a moot point if the Reapers are turning everyone into baby food.

[RiouHotaru]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Doubtful.  If it was a snitch, it would've been referenced in the dossiers.  Also, the SB himself might've commented on it.

Like hell it would. But "absense of evidence is not the evidence of absense", is it, huh?

Except that Garrus is intensely loyal to Shepard, made even more obvious if you're a FemShep and romance him.  Betraying you the SB is grossly out of character for him.  And Mordin's an analytical thinker, I doubt any logical process would produce the conclusion: "Betray Shepard."

Also, that quote only works in context.  You can only apply it where the evidence or lack thereof makes sense.  It'd be like me trying to argue the existence of unicorns simply because there's no evidence they don't exist.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

RiouHotaru wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Doubtful.  If it was a snitch, it would've been referenced in the dossiers.  Also, the SB himself might've commented on it.

Like hell it would. But "absense of evidence is not the evidence of absense", is it, huh?

Except that Garrus is intensely loyal to Shepard, made even more obvious if you're a FemShep and romance him.  Betraying you the SB is grossly out of character for him.  And Mordin's an analytical thinker, I doubt any logical process would produce the conclusion: "Betray Shepard."

Also, that quote only works in context.  You can only apply it where the evidence or lack thereof makes sense.  It'd be like me trying to argue the existence of unicorns simply because there's no evidence they don't exist.

I know I already said this up there, but it's something to think about besides Garrus being a traitor:

Someone could've just hacked Normandy surveilence or intercepted the signal as it traveled back to TIM.  Evidence suggests that Liara may have done this... as she knows who you're sleeping with.

//DER DERRRRRRR!!!!!!!

[RiouHotaru]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Doubtful.  If it was a snitch, it would've been referenced in the dossiers.  Also, the SB himself might've commented on it.

Like hell it would. But "absense of evidence is not the evidence of absense", is it, huh?

Except that Garrus is intensely loyal to Shepard, made even more obvious if you're a FemShep and romance him.  Betraying you the SB is grossly out of character for him.  And Mordin's an analytical thinker, I doubt any logical process would produce the conclusion: "Betray Shepard."

Also, that quote only works in context.  You can only apply it where the evidence or lack thereof makes sense.  It'd be like me trying to argue the existence of unicorns simply because there's no evidence they don't exist.

I know I already said this up there, but it's something to think about besides Garrus being a traitor:

Someone could've just hacked Normandy surveilence or intercepted the signal as it traveled back to TIM.  Evidence suggests that Liara may have done this... as she knows who you're sleeping with.

//DER DERRRRRRR!!!!!!!

Unless you were loyal to her, or never romanced her to begin with.  Liara has even LESS reason to betray you.

[Zulu_DFA]

'd.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 13 octobre 2010 - 08:46 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

RiouHotaru wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Doubtful.  If it was a snitch, it would've been referenced in the dossiers.  Also, the SB himself might've commented on it.

Like hell it would. But "absense of evidence is not the evidence of absense", is it, huh?

Except that Garrus is intensely loyal to Shepard, made even more obvious if you're a FemShep and romance him.  Betraying you the SB is grossly out of character for him.  And Mordin's an analytical thinker, I doubt any logical process would produce the conclusion: "Betray Shepard."

Also, that quote only works in context.  You can only apply it where the evidence or lack thereof makes sense.  It'd be like me trying to argue the existence of unicorns simply because there's no evidence they don't exist.

I know I already said this up there, but it's something to think about besides Garrus being a traitor:

Someone could've just hacked Normandy surveilence or intercepted the signal as it traveled back to TIM.  Evidence suggests that Liara may have done this... as she knows who you're sleeping with.

//DER DERRRRRRR!!!!!!!

Unless you were loyal to her, or never romanced her to begin with.  Liara has even LESS reason to betray you.

That's true, doesn't have to be Liara.  And Liara can gather information without betraying you... could be looking for things to put against Cerberus.

Either case, if Liara could do it, so can others.

[RiouHotaru]

Yes, but merely because they can doesn't mean they will.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

True, but worth being cautious over anyway... since most view Cerberus as an enemy.

[Zulu_DFA]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Liara may have done this... as she knows who you're sleeping with.

TIM himself told her.

Along with where to get your dog tags.

Which had been on you during the 1st Normady crash and gone with your near-corpse to Cerberus in the Blue Suns' stasis pod. TIM then had decided to send them to Hackett for the time being, to confirm your KIA status.

[Zulu_DFA]

RiouHotaru wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Doubtful.  If it was a snitch, it would've been referenced in the dossiers.  Also, the SB himself might've commented on it.

Like hell it would. But "absense of evidence is not the evidence of absense", is it, huh?

Except that Garrus is intensely loyal to Shepard.

But not to Cerberus. Kinda went Anderson-style on you, why couldn't he?

And he needed money for his ailing mom.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 13 octobre 2010 - 08:49 .

[NYG1991]

The fact of the matter is while Cerberus has had successful projects they've also got a high rate of failure. Even Lazarus which, while successful, cost the lives of everyone on the station in order to bring shep back. Their mantra seems to be "high risk, high reward". So it's reasonable to assume future problems at the base while Tim is controlling the experiments there. He's not going to take the safe cautious route if it means any delay in getting the info he needs.





It's just as much a risk keeping the base and assuming whatever goes wrong can be cleaned up by shep as it is to assume that we will be able to fight the reaps without data from the base.



I destroyed it cause I didn't want to be stuck cleaning up another fiasco caused by Tim recklessness while trying to convince other people to help. I trust Tim will do what he can with any blueprints/data from EDI and some salvaged scraps of the base and will be able to glean something from it that might help. Cerberus is much better at research than they are at safety.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

NYG1991, again that's something that can't be blamed on Cerberus...

Once more, the only reason that happened is due to a traitor that Miranda kills as soon as finding out.

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Liara may have done this... as she knows who you're sleeping with.

TIM himself told her.

Along with where to get your dog tags.

Which had been on you during the 1st Normady crash and gone with your near-corpse to Cerberus in the Blue Suns' stasis pod. TIM then had decided to send them to Hackett for the time being, to confirm your KIA status.

Makes sense to confirm the KIA status... so that Cerberus didn't "kidnap" Shepard.

That's interesting regarding the love interest thing being leaked by TIM, when was that confirmed to have happened?  I missed that.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 13 octobre 2010 - 09:03 .

[Casuist]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

From an omnipresent viewpoint... yeah, but from the perspective of how she is in the game, apparently not.  When you first meet her she's threatening to kill someone.  Like it or not she changed and was willing to do all manner of things to track the Shadowbroker down and kill him.  Could have worked with Shadowbroker agents to gain information and get closer.  From a outside/phone record tap perspective, you could suspect that she's working with the Shadowbroker by being friendly with some of the SB's main people.  Doesn't seem like an off-key assumption.

We can go on the evidence we have. The fact that TIM clearly withheld relevant information regarding Liara (lie of omission) makes his not having any evidence of her changing sides (wildly out of character) far more likely than your "well, there might be something" explanation.

How extreme Cerberus is.  The worst offenses came from defection and attempts to save a project that TIM would've otherwise shut down.  (Overlord and Teltin)

See above mocking of rationalizations. We know TIM and Cerberus are entirely okay with kidnapping and experimenting on human children at risk of their lives (ME: Ascension establishes this even independent of Teltin). We know TIM and Cerberus are willing to blow up a ship full of quarians for personal gain, (Miranda: "It was nothing personal!") we know that they have no qualms about killing innocents through any number of examples, and that the experiments that Toombs went through were every bit as bad as David's experience. Even if you look at the Overlord and Pragia examples in the best possible light (i.e. taking  TIM's word at face value) - he's committed equivalent moral transgressions that are not under debate. Again, if you're ready to accept those actions as a necessary sacrifice to the greater good- you may. Don't pretend that Cerberus and TIM are not "extreme." 

Once you understand that he has that mindset you can trust that he'll be that way.

Yes, I can trust that his need to manipulate shepard may someday get shepard killed, and that the death may have been avoidable.

They're not the greater long-term threat if TIM has the base, because you feel TIM with the base would ruin or hinder your chance of winning when otherwise that liability wouldn't be there.  To you, without the base TIM is an afterthought in your battle against the Reapers.  With the base, TIM is the first problem you see towards stopping the Reapers.

You are splitting hairs. The reapers are the priority by either perspective. You claimed otherwise.

To put it another (and my original) way, TIM is a greater liability than the Reapers if you destroy the base...
while the Reapers are the greater liabilty than TIM when keeping the base.  The lesser liability is something you assume you can handle when the other is gone.

The greater threat is... the greater threat- namely that which will cause the greatest harm. If you're ready to admit that the paragon choice still prioritizes the reapers as the long-term evil that must be addressed beyond others, then on this particular nuance I'll leave you to your semantics.  

Modifié par Casuist, 13 octobre 2010 - 08:57 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Casuist wrote...
We can go on the evidence we have. The fact that TIM clearly withheld relevant information regarding Liara (lie of omission) makes his not having any evidence of her changing sides (wildly out of character) far more likely than your "well, there might be something" explanation.

No relevant information was withheld from Shepard regarding her.  She was "suspected" of working with the Shadowbroker... which correlates with her information-brokering career and new evil-ish attitude.

Don't pretend that Cerberus and TIM are not "extreme."

Never have, only pointed to the fact that they aren't as extreme as they're made out to be.  Again, some of the biggest offenses truly weren't the fault of Cerberus.  You can either acknowledge that or shrug at it. 

Yes, I can trust that his need to manipulate shepard may someday get shepard killed, and that the death may have been avoidable.

First of all though, Shepard was already dead before TIM.  Secondly, you're in the most danger in being a traitor to Cerberus.  If anything, death by Cerberus is more avoidable staying close and taking him out yourself instead of burning the bridge to a point where Cerberus sees you as a liability to them.

You are splitting hairs. The reapers are the priority by either perspective. You claimed otherwise.

If they were "the" priority over TIM, then keeping the base for the knowledge it can gain would be a good idea.  If, however, TIM having the base is too dangerous (even in the face of the Reaper threat), then not letting TIM have the base takes priority.

Simple as that really.

The greater threat is... the greater threat- namely that which will cause the greatest harm. If you're ready to admit that the paragon choice still prioritizes the reapers as the long-term evil that must be addressed beyond others, then on this particular nuance I'll leave you to your semantics.  

Obviously the Reapers are a priority to the paragon choice... but not beyond working with Cerberus again/letting them continue to gather things to study and counter the enemy with.

During the fight against the Collectors, Cerberus studied the seeker swarms and developed a counter-measure to them in small numbers.  Without your approval they also studied Sovereign and made EDI based on that.  You don't feel this should happen again with the Collector Base (regarding letting Cerberus study and develop countermeasures based on that information).

[NYG1991]

Understood. The point I wad trying to make was something usually goes wrong with the type of projects Cerberus undertakes. In the end Tim was right about resurrecting shep and he could be right about the base. I'm counting Lazarus because it's still a project that had a high cost in terms of loss of life. In the end he was right and he may be right about the base. But i'll never know cause I destroyed it



I made the choice assuming whatever he did there was bound to go wrong in some way shape or

form and didn't want to be stuck cleaning it up. Most arguments for keeping it are sound and may end up being the optimal course but there's also no guarantee that Tim can safely extract anything useful in a timely matter without taking unneccesary risks.

[Barquiel]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Casuist wrote...
We can go on the evidence we have. The fact that TIM clearly withheld relevant information regarding Liara (lie of omission) makes his not having any evidence of her changing sides (wildly out of character) far more likely than your "well, there might be something" explanation.

No relevant information was withheld from Shepard regarding her.  She was "suspected" of working with the Shadowbroker... which correlates with her information-brokering career and new evil-ish attitude.

I am really curious how he came to that conclusion.

Feron was a SB agent, TIM recruited him to assist Liara
Feron helps Liara to recover Shepards body - the SB captures him
Liara asks Miranda if TIM plans to rescue Feron, Miranda says "no"
Liara says she'll do it herself
.
ME2
TIM: Liara works for the SB, she can't be trusted (...and she never tried very hard to conceal the fact that she wants to kill the SB)

[Zulu_DFA]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

NYG1991, again that's something that can't be blamed on Cerberus...

Once more, the only reason that happened is due to a traitor that Miranda kills as soon as finding out.

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Liara may have done this... as she knows who you're sleeping with.

TIM himself told her.

Along with where to get your dog tags.

Which had been on you during the 1st Normady crash and gone with your near-corpse to Cerberus in the Blue Suns' stasis pod. TIM then had decided to send them to Hackett for the time being, to confirm your KIA status.

Makes sense to confirm the KIA status... so that Cerberus didn't "kidnap" Shepard.

That's interesting regarding the love interest thing being leaked by TIM, when was that confirmed to have happened?  I missed that.

It's not been confirmed anywhere.

It's just me. I think that Liara has been working with TIM all along.

TIM telling you "she can't be trusted" is just his manipulative-son-of-a-bitсhery to the max. He does not trust you, so makes sure that if you don't trust him, you'll trust Liara out of sheer contrariness. Thus he'll be controlling you either way.