2146 réponses à ce sujet

[Nightwriter]

Finnish Dragon wrote...

1. The Reapers mutated them and then gave them the base.

This one, I'm thinking.

[UNAVAILABLE]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
The nice thing about the IFF is that it doesn't take long to install. Once the relays are shut down, if they are shut down, not installing the IFF would be stupidity at the highest form.

Copying and distributing the IFF would be a far simpler, easier, cheaper, and reliable solution to the problem than recreating galactic infrastructure with a subpar replacement.

I would agree, if we could guarantee the IFF is a solution. I remain unconvinced that the Reapers could not reprogram the Relays to respond to a different signal and reprogram their IFFs to broadcast a different one. We might be able to tweak our IFFs to hack it, but then we get into a game of "who's the faster/better hacker?" Not something I'm particularly interested in playing against the Reapers.

Again, I don't think replacing the Mass Relays is feasible, but understanding them well enough to remove any locking systems might be. IF there were time/resources available to create a few Mass Relays, I would suggest that they would make the most sense connecting ship and weapons factories to the manufacturers of the raw materials they need. I wouldn't even put these relays in space, but make them more like the Conduit, located on world. That way mined ore can still get to the processing foundries, which can then pass their products on to be used in the final product.



If you don't mind, I'd like to revisit our discussion from the other day, and run an idea by you. To recap, we were talking about the data available on the Collector Base computers. It is my assertion that Harbinger could have used the advanced warning he got of Shepard's approach to delete useful data and insert harmful tech. So I've given some more thought to how harmful tech might work.

Suppose the schematics detail how to build an advanced shield system for ships. No systems are copied, everything is reverse engineered and redesigned from scratch. The results are a tenfold increase in shield strength with about the same energy requirements. The technology is relatively easy to scale from the smallest scout ships to cruisers, and even space stations. The final product performs well under the heaviest of weapons testing.

The trick. What we don't know is that this isn't actually Reaper tech. It's the tech of some species that they defeated long ago, and the Reapers passed it along to us, unmodified, as they got it from the inventor species. This technology served the species that invented it very well, right up until they met the Reapers. The technology has a very difficult to find "Achilles Heel" that essentially nullifies it. Maybe it's a very specific form of energy at a particular frequency, or even a series of alternating frequencies. The point is, the Reapers discovered this Achilles Heel a long time ago. I would suggest that the longer it took for them to locate it, the less likely we are to discover it in time. The Reapers get double sneakiness points if the Achilles Heel involves an energy form that we cannot detect or manipulate.

So when the Reapers show up, off go our advanced ships to face them and:

Ship Captain: I have the Reapers in sight. Hey, why are they smiling?

Modifié par UNAVAILABLE, 28 septembre 2010 - 03:16 .

[UNAVAILABLE]

Let me preface this with a somewhat off topic alert which I will justify below, but this idea is vaguely connected in the sense that the pro-keep the Base camp asks for viable alternatives to studying the base (and justifiably so I would add).

So I would like to use that thin stretch of relevancy to ask about dark energy. Does anyone have any thoughts as to whether or not this may become a more significant plot element in ME3?


Why did I post this off-topic here? This site has serious login problems for those of us on satellite internet. I can't post original messages, I can only reply to existing ones. As such, I have to operate as a thread pirate, and hijack existing threads whenever the conversation topic drifts within range. Sorry.

[Dean_the_Young]

Nightwriter wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Commander Kurt wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
I assume you'll also hold that standard to the Council, the Salarian STG, and the Asari Matriarch groups, yes?

I was not aware that they had come very close to destroying all uplinked tech (or something equally reckless). I'm trying to remember something like that, but can't. I am by no way an expert, so you might be right.

Could you give me some examples?  

Saren, Maleon's attempt to cure the genophage, and Saren again. All three groups have 'nearly' let the galaxy be destroyed or fall into ruin. If Overlord nearly letting disaster happen disqualifies, so should Saren and a cure to the genophage being handed over to the bloodpack.

… But these are all examples of how these groups failed.

Cerberus is not in question for failure, it is in question for heinous cruelty.

It’s like saying the police are no better than Charles Manson because they didn’t stop a mugging in time.

No. The only way they’d be no better than Charles Manson is if they ordered a young woman to cut a baby out of her stomach.

Sorry Night, but in this case Cerberus was in question for its failure.

[Lady1Aph]

after reading the posts here i wanted to comment on the collector base thing.

I for one destroyed the base, because i honestly dident think that TIM made any valid arguments to why we should keep it, also i did take past events into consideration like what cerberus did with the torian, the husks etc. With all those things in mind i dont think that TIM would be abel to use the base to it fullest portential without failing badly. so it comes down to the fact if u wanna keep cleaning up the mess of TIM`s failurs (not spelled right but u get the meaning) in the furture. Its pretty clear that if u keep the Collector Base then at some point in ME3 ull have to go back to the base to clean up yet another of TIM´s messes.

Modifié par Lady1Aph, 28 septembre 2010 - 04:33 .

[chris025657]

UNAVAILABLE wrote...

Let me preface this with a somewhat off topic alert which I will justify below, but this idea is vaguely connected in the sense that the pro-keep the Base camp asks for viable alternatives to studying the base (and justifiably so I would add).

So I would like to use that thin stretch of relevancy to ask about dark energy. Does anyone have any thoughts as to whether or not this may become a more significant plot element in ME3?


Why did I post this off-topic here? This site has serious login problems for those of us on satellite internet. I can't post original messages, I can only reply to existing ones. As such, I have to operate as a thread pirate, and hijack existing threads whenever the conversation topic drifts within range. Sorry.

Yeah, I think it's safe to say dark energy will play some role in the plot of ME 3. They just wouldn't mention it as many times in the game if it wasn't going to be a part of the plot later on. It's a Chekhov's gun. I really don't see how the placeholder term for the unexpected acceleration of the expansion of the universe could have anything to do with the Reapers though. 

[General User]

Arijharn wrote...

General User wrote...

The closest analogy I can think of for the CB is a bizarre mix of breeding ground and shipyard. “How?” is a good question to ask there. How do they make their barriers/weapons so strong? And can we replicate them? How can (if it can) indoctrination be prevented or reversed? These are vital questions that may be answered by an intact CB, but they are also questions that can be answered elsewhere, and they are far from the most important question about the Reapers.
 

Really? Where? When?

When the Reapers are already here? That's too late isn't it? This is why I put forth my questions in the last thread to those purely against using the CB to validate their 'pie in the sky' claims. To be honest, while in my personal opinion you've done a much better in putting forth reasonable answers, this is still a nebulous claim. It's precisely because the CB is here now before the Reaper threat that is why it's essential to understand, if not for any new information about the Reapers themselves then for better technological understanding to defend against the Reapers.

Emotionalism and compassion are all well and good, but what good are they when you and everyone else you love is dead?

Where else are they going to be studied? Most likely from samples recovered from that devastated ward on the Citadel in the aftermath of Sovereign's destruction.. but if you have a sample size of 1, then I'd now have 2 sample sizes, which means that I would have a better understanding of any given situation than you, being less prone to Chaos within the data. And that's the best case scenario as well isn't it? What if that ward gives you no information at all? You've basically squandered your best chance. Of course, you'll be able to triumph given the fact that it's a game, but in real life? I don't have the same degree of faith.

And also @mosor, who raised similar points.




If the question is “where can we find better examples of Reaper technology than on the CB?” Then the answer is, simply: NOWHERE!  The CB is far and away the single greatest concentration of Reaper technology, methods and practices yet discovered.


If the question is “where else can effective counter-Reaper technology be developed?” Then the answer is, simply: ANYWHERE!  EVERYWHERE! As I’ve posted before, logic says the galactic state-of-the-art is already quite close to the Reaper’s tech level, a century at the outside, and as little as ten years.


Look at what Miranda was able to accomplish in the Lazarus project, and that was with a small staff working in relative isolation. Assuming EDI was developed in the same location as the SR-2, a “remote location in the Voyager Cluster” could be a major source of anti-Reaper tech. The thanix was developed in a turian military laboratory somewhere, that already is another prime candidate for anti-Reaper weapons.  The asari-made silaris armour seems to be quite effective against lighter Reaper craft.


Joker seems to have come up with a winning tactic for leveling the playing field in terms of kinetic barrier strength, the “don’t get hit” method (historically popular among fighter pilots).  The method is admitedly difficult for anything heavier than a cruiser (but we've been over that already).



I admit to being an ardent antireaperist and proshepardian. I don’t think I’m being overly emotional. I don't think my emotions are overshadowing my judgment, nor does any one side of this argument have a monopoly on emotionalism. In ME2 Shepard works with a terrorist group in order to stop a heretofore unstoppable galactic apocalypse; worry, and apprehension, fear, even terror is an appropriate emotional response to that situation.  

Paragon preachiness notwithstanding, Shepard’s line about “not letting fear compromise who I am” is actually a valid point, one that could apply to both sides of this argument.

Fear  is a bit of a double edged sword in this case. If blowing up the base because one is “afraid of what TIM might do with it” is unwise, so too is keeping the base because one is “afraid of what the Reapers might do to us.”

The reasons for keeping the base are obvious, reasons for blowing it up… not so much, but they are there.   As long as the reason you have for doing what you do is positive and not fear based, I’ll fault no one for it.
 

I would also make the point that, if everyone you love is already dead, faith and compassion may be at their most important, since that would be about all you have left, that and vengence.

Modifié par General User, 28 septembre 2010 - 08:19 .

[Ieldra]

[quote]General User wrote...
If the question is “where can we find better examples of Reaper technology than on the CB?” Then the answer is, simply: NOWHERE!  The CB is far and away the single greatest concentration of Reaper technology, methods and practices yet discovered.

If the question is “where else can effective counter-Reaper technology be developed?” Then the answer is, simply: ANYWHERE!  EVERYWHERE! As I’ve posted before, logic says the galactic state-of-the-art is already quite close to the Reaper’s tech level, a century at the outside, and as little as ten years.[/quote]
If I might add this question:

Where else but at the Collector base can we find out more about where our own technology must go to counter the Reaper threat effectively? Particularly those elements that are still a complete mystery, like indoctrination?

This conflict won't be won by guns and shields. If things like indoctrination and electronic infiltration aren't countered, it will all come to nothing. Against the latter, there is EDI and what might come from it, should it prove dependable, but against indoctrination, there is nothing as yet. It absolutely must be studied before a counter can be found.

I'm also not quite that optimistic about your assessment of military technology. The SR2 upgrades worked well against the Collector ships, but they aren't Reapers.

[quote]I would also make the point that, if everyone you love is already dead, faith and compassion may be at their most important, since that would be about all you have left, that and vengence.[/quote]
The phrasing used by Arijharn was "if you and everyone else you love is dead", meaning essentially if everyone is dead, what does having stuck to your ethics matter? I, btw, would add that it is irrational to say that keeping the base as such is morally questionable. The only part where ethics come into it is the question of giving it to TIM.






[/quote]

Modifié par Ieldra2, 28 septembre 2010 - 05:55 .

[LorDC]

General User wrote...
If the question is “where else can effective counter-Reaper technology be developed?” Then the answer is, simply: ANYWHERE!  EVERYWHERE! As I’ve posted before, logic says the galactic state-of-the-art is already quite close to the Reaper’s tech level, a century at the outside, and as little as ten years.


Look at what Miranda was able to accomplish in the Lazarus project, and that was with a small staff working in relative isolation. Assuming EDI was developed in the same location as the SR-2, a “remote location in the Voyager Cluster” could be a major source of anti-Reaper tech. The thanix was developed in a turian military laboratory somewhere, that already is another prime candidate for anti-Reaper weapons.  The asari-made silaris armour seems to be quite effective against lighter Reaper craft.

1) Examples you give directly contradict your point. Both EDI and Thannix were developed based on salvaged Reaper tech. While actual research took place somewhere the foundation of it was laid by Reaper tech.
2) Some things just cannot be made out of the blue. Real life example: Tank development was going on from WW1 but only actual battlefield statistic of WW2 gave us understanding of where tank armor should be strongest.

Modifié par LorDC, 28 septembre 2010 - 06:34 .

[General User]

@mosor 



You raise some interesting arguments specific to this post and they deserve to be addressed directly. I do address some of the points you raise in response to a post by Arijharn.  It’s on page 9, check it out and let me know what you think! 

mosor wrote...

You're assuming we know all the circumstances. We really don't. As for the reapers, clearly I must have missed something, because I have absolutely no clue on how the reapers intend to conquor the galaxy since their plan A failed. I've seen their barriers, their guns and their indoctrination devices. Do they have any other tools at their disposal? I don't know. Personally I'd like to find out before we meet them in combat.

OK, umm…circumstances of Collector activity, cool. We know who they were (repurposed protheans), we know what they were doing (abducting thousands/millions/billions of humans), we know when they were doing it (ongoing, until the Normandy comes calling anyway), we know where they were doing it (starting in the Terminus Systems, likely moving on to the Alliance proper, taking their catch back beyond the Ω4 relay), we know why (to build a human-Reaper), how is a bit fuzzier but we know enough to be able to stop them, which is enough for me.


Reaper plans for conquest. I don’t think they know exactly what they’re going to do at this point! To our knowledge they’ve never been in this situation before. Logic says they head for the galactic rim, find/activate/take a mass relay and strike directly at the Citadel. Any major species’ home-world would also be a reasonable diversionary target, but the Citadel as the hub/centre of the relay network is the only “must have” position in the galaxy.  They always took it first in the past, and it’s hard to deny that the Reapers are creatures of habit. But that’s what we pay admirals so much for.

What about the reapers themselves? Do they have any weaknesses to exploit? We can't expect every reaper to possess an avatar that Shepard can kill so joker can one shot a reaper.

Reaper weaknesses!  One of my favorite topics! There are two that we know of, killing their avatars and a large enough force applied directly. The truth is, even with the CB, we won’t know how effective our weapons and tactics are until we actually engage the Reapers in battle. Sending a massive fleet out to meet them is “oh, such a bad idea” for “oh, so many” reasons.
 
But if you’re looking for the real weakness of the Reapers, think Greek! It’s hubris and rage. Plain and simple. 5th Fleet couldn’t scratch Sovereign’s paint at the Battle of the Citadel, Sovereign could just as easily cut his losses, admitted defeat and withdrawn intact, but his pride wouldn’t let him, and he couldn’t control his anger.  Instead, certain he could never be defeated, he possessed Saren, and the rest is history. 

 

I like your idealism and optimism, but if it wasn't for the protheans we'd be dead just like them. I personally don't underestimate my enemies, and would rather have as much intelligence as possible for I fight them.

As far as intelligence goes… as I’ve posted before the most vital information we could possibly gain on the Reapers isn’t technological at all; it’s political. What are their objectives, short and long term? What are they willing to sacrifice in order to achieve those goals?  What are their origins? How are decisions made amongst them?  Under what conditions would they accept or offer surrender or negotiation (if it’s even possible)?

 
It is these questions, with the exception or the origins one, that are least likely to be answered by the information found in what is essentially a breeding ground (and shipyard).


Finally teamwork, unity, puppies, and rainbows, etc. (i.e. those prothean scientists). A lot of people have done a lot of things to get us to where we are today, some more important than others. And a lot more people are going to have to do a lot more if we’re going to win. If they do, we will.  But we have to do it together.

[General User]

Ieldra2 wrote...

General User wrote...
If the question is “where can we find better examples of Reaper technology than on the CB?” Then the answer is, simply: NOWHERE!  The CB is far and away the single greatest concentration of Reaper technology, methods and practices yet discovered.

If the question is “where else can effective counter-Reaper technology be developed?” Then the answer is, simply: ANYWHERE!  EVERYWHERE! As I’ve posted before, logic says the galactic state-of-the-art is already quite close to the Reaper’s tech level, a century at the outside, and as little as ten years.

If I might add this question:

Where else but at the Collector base can we find out more about where our own technology must go to counter the Reaper threat effectively? Particularly those elements that are still a complete mystery, like indoctrination?

This conflict won't be won by guns and shields. If things like indoctrination and electronic infiltration aren't countered, it will all come to nothing. Against the latter, there is EDI and what might come from it, should it prove dependable, but against indoctrination, there is nothing as yet. It absolutely must be studied before a counter can be found.

I'm also not quite that optimistic about your assessment of military technology. The SR2 upgrades worked well against the Collector ships, but they aren't Reapers.

I would also make the point that, if everyone you love is already dead, faith and compassion may be at their most important, since that would be about all you have left, that and vengence.

The phrasing used by Arijharn was "if you and everyone else you love is dead", meaning essentially if everyone is dead, what does having stuck to your ethics matter? I, btw, would add that it is irrational to say that keeping the base as such is morally questionable. The only part where ethics come into it is the question of giving it to TIM.

Well said and fair points all.
 
Keeping the base is most definitely NOT morally questionable in and of itself, if something I said implied that it was, I wish to state emphatically that I did not mean to do so. I do NOT believe this is the case. Making decisions based on fear alone is questionable, in the sense that such decisions warrant closer reflection and review, not that those decisions will be inherently wrong.
 
Obviously if an individual is dead, worldly ethical concerns no longer apply to them. Not so much for those that are left to carry on in their name. In fairness, Shepard is a bit of a grey area in this regard. I should have been more careful crafting my response. I could edit it I suppose… nah. 
 
Ok, indoctrination. It’s not a complete mystery. I don’t want to quote the codex, but we have a general to fairly comprehensive idea how it works. So far the only real counter measure is to limit exposure. 
 
Having a working indoctrination field available for study would be invaluable in this field. Blowing up the base would be invaluable to the entire war effort.
 
I reached my conclusion on the size of the “tech gap” with the Reapers with pure logic. I freely admit that, while the Normandy’s performance against the Collector cruiser reinforces my position, it stops well short of confirming it.

[General User]

LorDC wrote...

1) Examples you give directly contradict your point. Both EDI and Thannix were developed based on salvaged Reaper tech. While actual research took place somewhere the foundation of it was laid by Reaper tech.

True, so was alot of the Lazarus Project.  Everyone knows that.  Maybe you could rephrase our point, I'm not sure I understand.


If I implied that Reaper tech should not be studied, let me state now that this is a silly notion.  My point was that, the tech gap with the Reapers being quite narrow, the CB is not necessary to close it. 

LorDC wrote...


2) Some things just cannot be made out of the blue. Real life example: Tank development was going on from WW1 but only actual battlefield statistic of WW2 gave us understanding of where tank armor should be strongest.

No argument here. If anyone thinks waiting for a magic sword to fall out of the sky is a sensible strategy I can only pray they aren’t a decision maker. Ditto anyone who thinks finding some prothean super-gun buried in the dirt (I’m looking at you Bioware), is a reasonable plot device.

[ISpeakTheTruth]

I believe that the answer to defeating the Reapers is probably going to revolve around recruiting the Geth to your side. Remember that the Heretics caused all kinds of trouble heck they were even able of crippling/ or destroying the largest Council ship in the galaxy (The Accension) rather easily. Now remember that the Heretics were only a small fraction of the Core Geth so not only do they have what is probably the most powerful fleet in the galaxy but they also have somthing else that no other specie has.



They're independant. Their technology has nothing to do with the technology that the Reapers left behind to form every other specie's tech. Because the Reapers know what their tech is going to be like they are able to defend themselves effectively from it. The Geth us technology that they themselve have created so its entirely possible that the Geth's weapons would be more effective agains the Reapers than another fleet of equal size.



We also have to remember that we aren't handing the Base to the Council or the Alliance we're giving it to a mad man who wants to have dominion over the entire galaxy. Remember this quote? "This technology could secure humanities survival against the Reapers and more." This guy is going to use this technology for his own reasons.



This is how things are going with final decisions in ME. In both games we are given a choice that is either Paragon or Renegade. The Paragon endings make sure that the Council lives and that Humanity is made an equal which in turn makes other species trust us. The opposite end puts humanity in charage of everything but also makes every other Council race hate us and the Turian's are breaking the Dreadnaught treaty (Basically we're seeing the begining of a civil war) In ME2 we can destroy the Reaper Base because its tech may help in one battle but in the end will only make other species distrustfull of us and in the end not want to side with us. The other we gain technology that could be usefull.



The game is making two different scenarios. The Paragon - The galaxy becomes a united force against the Reapers. We may not have the best Tech we do have the support of every Specie in the galaxy at our back.

Renegade - Humanity is the most powerful single force in the galaxy that has supperior Technology but because of the things it has done to gain this power no one trusts us enough to follow us and the defense of the galaxy is disorganized.



Take your pick as to which one you think is going to have the best outcome.

[Bad King]

I've looked at a few reasons for keeping or blowing the base.

I have 3 main characters- A Paragon, a Renegade and a more neutral guy (a mix).

I blew it with my Para, kept it with my renegade, and so with my neutral guy I had to choose...

I went with keeping it. I checked a few of the arguments against keeping the base and examined them:

1). A point a lot of people make is that the base could indoctrinate and corrupt any cerberus team experimenting there- similar to what happened to the derelict reaper. This indoctrination could be caused by reaper technology implanted around the base. While this is a fair point, I realised a few things which undermined the validity of this argument. Firstly the base contains collectors. As they have been implanted with cybernetics and modified genetically, the reapers don't need to have equipment to indoctrinate them- they don't need indoctrination! However what if the reapers have indoctrination devices as a means of defending the base should it be taken from the collectors? Again, unlikely- the Omega 4 relay debris field as well as the legions of collectors meant that losing the base was highly unlikely- I'm going to take a leap of faith and assume that the Reapers did not expect the base to be taken and thus didn't take the necessary precautions of laying indoctrination devices in the base.

2). Another argument was that humanity should not dabble in technology that is way beyond their time. Looking at the effect of the Salarians giving tech to the Krogan (thus inevitably triggering the Krogan rebellions) this argument appears valid. However keeping the base wouldn't be the first time humanity have used reaper/collector technology: Okeer made deals with the collectors in order to further his plans of creating a Krogan super soldier- thus Grunt was made partly through the use of collector tech. Grunt was a valuable asset to the team and didn't end up screwing things up. The Thanix cannon is also based on advanced reaper tech, again this was a valuable piece of technology- it helped wreck the collector cruiser. Even EDI was based on reaper tech! If it weren't for EDI, I doubt the suicide mission would ever have succeeded (although who knows? She may yet turn on us in ME3!).

3). Perhaps the most sinister point raised would be TIM's long term goals with the reaper base. I can bet keeping the base will mean that a lot of unethical cerberus style experiments will be performed on the base's technology. On top of this cerberus may even gain a lot of power from the base's tech putting them far ahead of any other faction in the galaxy, and perhaps, in the long term securing cerberus's dominance over the galaxy (which is most likely a bad thing unless TIM is replaced by a nicer leader ). My only justification for this is that keeping the base may save many lives from the reapers.

It really was a tough decision!

Modifié par Bad King, 28 septembre 2010 - 08:57 .

[Dean_the_Young]

General User wrote...

LorDC wrote...

1) Examples you give directly contradict your point. Both EDI and Thannix were developed based on salvaged Reaper tech. While actual research took place somewhere the foundation of it was laid by Reaper tech.

True, so was alot of the Lazarus Project.  Everyone knows that.  Maybe you could rephrase our point, I'm not sure I understand.


If I implied that Reaper tech should not be studied, let me state now that this is a silly notion.  My point was that, the tech gap with the Reapers being quite narrow, the CB is not necessary to close it.

You argued that EDI and the Thannix were proof that out tech was near what the Reapers have, with the implication they were entirely domestic and self-made. This is completely untrue.


A lot of your argument is that Reaper technology is logically 'close' to what we have now as galactic standard. It's a position repeatedly denied by the game: the Collector technology is 'near' us, in the sense that their technology they trade is described as upto a decade beyond the cutting edge. That's a generational leap in and of itself, and ten years is not 'close' by most relevant evaluations. But the Reaper technology is, repeatedly, evaluated at far more than that. Two hundred years is the evaluation of the Reaper base itself, which is an impossible difference to catch up to (and then build from) before the Reapers come. So is ten years, come to that.

[General User]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

General User wrote...

LorDC wrote...

1) Examples you give directly contradict your point. Both EDI and Thannix were developed based on salvaged Reaper tech. While actual research took place somewhere the foundation of it was laid by Reaper tech.

True, so was alot of the Lazarus Project.  Everyone knows that.  Maybe you could rephrase our point, I'm not sure I understand.


If I implied that Reaper tech should not be studied, let me state now that this is a silly notion.  My point was that, the tech gap with the Reapers being quite narrow, the CB is not necessary to close it.

You argued that EDI and the Thannix were proof that out tech was near what the Reapers have, with the implication they were entirely domestic and self-made. This is completely untrue.


A lot of your argument is that Reaper technology is logically 'close' to what we have now as galactic standard. It's a position repeatedly denied by the game: the Collector technology is 'near' us, in the sense that their technology they trade is described as upto a decade beyond the cutting edge. That's a generational leap in and of itself, and ten years is not 'close' by most relevant evaluations. But the Reaper technology is, repeatedly, evaluated at far more than that. Two hundred years is the evaluation of the Reaper base itself, which is an impossible difference to catch up to (and then build from) before the Reapers come. So is ten years, come to that.

I take umbrage, umbrage I say good sir (why isn’t there an umbrage emoticon? I take umbrage at a lack of umbrage emoticons).

But seriously, I cited, the Lazarus Project, EDI, and the thanix specifically as spectacular examples of successful reverse engineering efforts of Reapers tech in earlier posts. I didn’t (and honestly still don’t) think my phrasing was particularly unclear, but then again I had my earlier posts in mind, others might not. Miscommunication increasingly probable in this situation.

“Let me be clear.”-Pres. Obama ad nauseum. I'll restate my position on Reaper reverse engineering and the “tech gap”.


Ahem…, I don't at all believe the tech gap with the Reapers as wide as others seem to, if it were, Cerberus and the Turian military would never have been able to reverse engineer Reaper technology at all.



Think about it, if the galactic civilization tech base wasn’t at least, as the Americans say, “in the ballpark” there could never have been any reverse engineering, which there obviously was.

 
If a “bow and arrow” or even a “gunpowder” society were to encounter were to encounter an intact fighter plane, tank, or guided missile cruiser, much less a thoroughly exploded one, they wouldn’t have a clue where to start or what to do with the thing, or its pieces as the case may be.

 
I see the tech gap with the Reapers as being much closer to a turn of the 21st century vs. turn of the 20th century gap, or even narrower. The Reapers have enough of an edge that they can make mincemeat out of our fleets in a stand-up battle, but not so much that we couldn’t understand how they did it, or make a strategy to prevent it from happening.

And if our side does get its hands on a piece of Reaper tech (even if it’s blown to bits) it’s not so far beyond us that we can’t duplicate, replicate, and dare I say (Oh!  Dare!  Dare!) improve upon it. Hence EDI, Lazarus and thanix (I’d be surprised if there weren't others kicking around somewhere, but that's just conjecture).


200 years, eh it’s a stretch, but I think could make it. I’d want to see exactly what criteria were used to make that determination. If anyone could point me in the right direction I’d owe you a high-five.

Hope that clears that up.


Secondly, our technology doesn’t have to be as good as the Reapers’, just good enough to beat them. Something we can do with inferior technology but superior tactics, that’s more or less the game we’ve been playing since Eden Prime, and we’re winning.

[Arijharn]

We haven't been directly involved with Reaper affairs ever, we've been combating against Reaper proxies the entire time in the guise of Saren, the Collectors.



Political information about the Reapers may be useful, but I doubt it'd be effective to be honest because I doubt we could create a schism within their ranks ("I'm the leader, I've segregated my minds to form a majority share amongst all Reapers!" - "No I am, you changed your electorates too late and haven't verified them to the independent electoral commission!"). If wiping out sentient life every 50k years is their focus, I doubt that some pathetic meat bags are going to be able to use rationalism to win any favours (look at Saren) and it would imply anyway that there is something from us that they'll want but can't get if we simply died.



While I agree with you that in essence you could use 'fear' as an argument both for and against keeping or destroying the Collector Base, I think from a purely pragmatic perspective the technological gains or other information gained from keeping and studying the Collector Base to be innately higher by keeping an intact CB. The studying of Indoctrination is also far likely to be safely carried out on the CB as well due to a) It's remoteness, The incomplete and destroyed Reaper shell in the basement and c) It could be studied in scientific conditions.



While it's true however that we were able to reverse-engineer Reaper technology in regards to EDI and Thanix development, there's still limitations involved. EDI after all, is still an AI and is automatically suspect despite the innate usefulness of an AI within the wider galactic community and the Thanix weapon systems are currently only able to be deployed on Fighter and Frigate archetypes for some (non provided) reason (which is another reason why I think Dreadnoughts will be marginalized in the upcoming conflict)

[General User]

Arijharn wrote...

We haven't been directly involved with Reaper affairs ever, we've been combating against Reaper proxies the entire time in the guise of Saren, the Collectors.

There was Sovereign. He was the vanguard, but he was still a Reaper, actual and whole.

Arijharn wrote...

Political information about the Reapers may be useful, but I doubt it'd be effective to be honest because I doubt we could create a schism within their ranks ("I'm the leader, I've segregated my minds to form a majority share amongst all Reapers!" - "No I am, you changed your electorates too late and haven't verified them to the independent electoral commission!"). If wiping out sentient life every 50k years is their focus, I doubt that some pathetic meat bags are going to be able to use rationalism to win any favours (look at Saren) and it would imply anyway that there is something from us that they'll want but can't get if we simply died.

HA!   I like it!  We could take 'em to court too!  "Fine.  We'll only wipe out all sentient life every 100K years."



I was thinking more along the lines of “how hard are we going to have to beat on these guys before they cry uncle?”

A Reaper schism is a bit premature (that’s being charitable) at the moment, but this might not always be the case. Groups of humans fracture when they’re losing badly enough. Depending on how this war goes there may well be some Reapers who favor throwing in the towel before others. It’s radically premature speculation, but something to think about.

Arijharn wrote...

While I agree with you that in essence you could use 'fear' as an argument both for and against keeping or destroying the Collector Base, I think from a purely pragmatic perspective the technological gains or other information gained from keeping and studying the Collector Base to be innately higher by keeping an intact CB. The studying of Indoctrination is also far likely to be safely carried out on the CB as well due to a) It's remoteness, The incomplete and destroyed Reaper shell in the basement and c) It could be studied in scientific conditions.

No argument here. The CB is without a doubt the most direct (and, well argued, safest) way to get access to Reaper technology of all stripes.

I’m just not convinced the undeniable technological benefits of keeping the base outweigh the political benefits of destroying it, nebulous though they may be (then again such is the way of politics, how could they be any other).

Arijharn wrote...

While it's true however that we were able to reverse-engineer Reaper technology in regards to EDI and Thanix development, there's still limitations involved. EDI after all, is still an AI and is automatically suspect despite the innate usefulness of an AI within the wider galactic community and the Thanix weapon systems are currently only able to be deployed on Fighter and Frigate archetypes for some (non provided) reason (which is another reason why I think Dreadnoughts will be marginalized in the upcoming conflict)

I agree. The ignorance of one’s own leaders is easily as deadly an enemy as any opposing army, and often more difficult to conquer. Especially true if "one’s own leaders" are the Citadel Council. 
 
Now it’s my understanding that the thanix is mountable on fighters and frigates and is notable for being the first “capital ship” level weapon that can be, but one could in theory be mounted on any platform.
 
I favor fighter-bombers for maneuverability. Reapers are massive and powerful, but also slow when not moving in a straight line. I was watching the Battle of the Citadel on youtube, Sovereign’s firing arcs were ridiculous! The SR-1 had no trouble staying ahead of him (cruisers and dreadnoughts, not so much). An even smaller craft would find it even easier.  

[Arijharn]

General User wrote...


There was Sovereign. He was the vanguard, but he was still a Reaper, actual and whole.

You know what I mean though, Saren was our focus for the majority of the time, hell if Sovereign didn't reveal himself on Virmire we still wouldn't have an idea of wtf was going on. We only came close to the Reaper invasion because Saren told himself it was going to happen anyway and he became the dogsbody of Nazara.

Sovereign was awesome, and he was certainly important but the heavy lifting was all done by Saren.


EDIT: Actually, I'd be pretty disappointed if there was some diplomatic solution or if we played music and suddenly educated the Reapers on the beauty of life...

Modifié par Arijharn, 29 septembre 2010 - 03:34 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

One thing I'd like to add is that you can still take a moral high ground while keeping the base. Shepard warns TIM to not do anything stupid and implies that he'd kill TIM should he stray off the path.

For those that destroyed the base on the "soul of humanity" tag line, this is what you can say/warn if you keep the base for study:

""I'm going to stop the Reapers. But I won't sacrifice the soul of humanity to do it. Remember that." -Shepard

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 29 septembre 2010 - 03:45 .

[Cjrdrifter]

Lady1Aph wrote...

after reading the posts here i wanted to comment on the collector base thing.

I for one destroyed the base, because i honestly dident think that TIM made any valid arguments to why we should keep it, also i did take past events into consideration like what cerberus did with the torian, the husks etc. With all those things in mind i dont think that TIM would be abel to use the base to it fullest portential without failing badly. so it comes down to the fact if u wanna keep cleaning up the mess of TIM`s failurs (not spelled right but u get the meaning) in the furture. Its pretty clear that if u keep the Collector Base then at some point in ME3 ull have to go back to the base to clean up yet another of TIM´s messes.

this besides  that base had most likely tech to indoctrinate its occupants assuming control:devil:

[Mr. Gogeta34]

No one has had "success" against the Reapers except for Cerberus and Shepard.

[Purge the heathens]

Hm... Couldn't the whole indoctrination thing just be solved by sending some people into the base -not Cerberus's brightest minds, of course- and waiting to see if they go slightly crazy? If it had indoctrination, I doubt it would be anything weaker than huskification-grade so it shouldn't take very long to get results. Unless you object to deliberately exposing "guinea pigs" to indoctrination.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

It could, you monitor their logs and you should be able to tell whether something happens early, since earlier experiments revealed the process.



Btw, both the Alliance/Council and Cerberus have failed in fully tackling the Reaper problem. However, only Ceberus has had some victories to go with those failures.

[Commander Kurt]

Shandepared wrote...
My point is that at the very least nobody is any better than Cerberus. They might even be worse. After all the STG, the Council, Alliance, and so forth are doing nothing to combat the Reapers or the Collectors. Cerberus has produced dangerous experiments, like Overlord, but they've also taken successful steps to combat our ultimate enemy.

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Saren, Maleon's attempt to cure the genophage, and Saren again. All three groups have 'nearly' let the galaxy be destroyed or fall into ruin. If Overlord nearly letting disaster happen disqualifies, so should Saren and a cure to the genophage being handed over to the bloodpack.

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Sorry Night, but in this case Cerberus was in question for its failure.

Yup, failure is the name of the game in my book.

Up 'til now they (council/alliance) have saved the galaxy by assigning a spectre to the issue (a spectre who cerberus tried to kill numerous times during his/her investigation). Right now they are doing the same thing that turned out so successful in the past, i.e. leaving it up to Shepard.

I understand your reasoning, if cerberus is responsible for what their people do then so is the council/alliance/STG. The difference is that Maleon, Saren and Benezia were traitors to their organizations. Archer was not. He was loyal to cerberus doing a job for cerberus but doing it in the wrong manner.

To illustrate my point;
If I tell an educated carpenter to build a house, let him know that laws and regulations don't apply and that the mission is to get the job done at any cost, it is actually my own fault if the house falls over. Saren, Benezia and Maleon was told to build a house, and chose to stay home and smoke pot instead.