296 réponses à ce sujet

[Moiaussi]

Shandepared wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

But if the relay isn't opened...

What if it does open? What if saving the Council leaves the fleet too weak to stop Sovereign and he opens the relay right then and there? Do I even have to explain this?

You know why I am such a jerk to everyone? It's because I'm frequently frustrated.

The reality is that, in advance, it was not possible for Shepard to be certain which was right. I argue in favour of saving the DA based on evidence available, but your decision is also reasonable based on the evidence available.

It is also possible that even if sovereign wasn't harmed by bombardment, that he might have been distracted by it, buying more time. But we don't know. I do know that due to either good anaysis, foresight, or even just plain luck saving the council turned out the better choice, and did so not merely by writer's fiat, but for the reasons I gave, that I originally had in game before reading any writeups or even before seeing the results. The actual results weren't even known until ME2.

So I stand by my point that Renegades go for the obvious, immediate safety solution, and paragons take a longer view. Both approaches have risks. Different kinds of risks, but nevertheless risks. For the record, I don't always take the paragon choice.

[Spectre_907]

Shandepared wrote...

What if it does open? What if saving the Council leaves the fleet too weak to stop Sovereign and he opens the relay right then and there? Do I even have to explain this?

Spectre_907 wrote...

As I said before, we retain control of the Citadel. The only way Sovereign can contorl it is if someone on board the Citadel physically transfers control to Sovereign via the master control unit. This was the whole point of Saren being possessed by Sovereign and saying "This station is mine." There is no faith in saving the Council. At most, we loose a few ships and then go after Sovereign. But Sovereign can not gain control of the Citadel unless it possesses Saren.

That said, it becomes in the interest of galactic stability to save the Council and not create a power vaccum. The ambiguity of the fact that we know nothing about the battel and the fact that we still have control over the Citadel makes the choice a matter of maintaining the status quo or using the battle to sacrifice the leaders of the human military rivals. Saving the Council is what a Spectre ought to do.

And I will go as far as to say that this is one of the choices where personal morals and Spectre obligations are in agreement.

Modifié par Spectre_907, 09 octobre 2010 - 05:27 .

[Spectre_907]

@tommyt_1994

Does the fact that the Blue Suns is not actively participating in anything threatening to galactic stability in the immediate sense make killing Vido for that sake a moot point? What if killing Vido disrupted the Suns, causing instability in it's ranks (as a result of infighting, lack of Vido's logistics and entrepreneurial skills, etc.), destabilizing colonies looking to the Suns for protection against other colonies or from other groups. Anhur looking to Eclipse to fight against the batarian slavers is a good  example of a stable mercenary company actually benefiting the stability of a region.

It would seem wise to leave them organized.

Personally, I never saw the need to kill Vido for that reason but only for the sake of the suicide mission. In this particular sense it would be what a Spectre ought to do but personal morals and Spectre obligations could be in agreement.

Modifié par Spectre_907, 09 octobre 2010 - 05:42 .

[JaegerBane]

tommyt_1994 wrote...

You guys are discussing the logical and tactical aspects of that decision though, not the morality.

Since I'm the OP, I'll make a new topic for discussion.

Let's look at Zaeed's loyalty mission. Going in, you believe Zaeed's reason to be there is that he had a contract to liberate the refinery. But soon you learn Zaeed's real reason for taking th emission, to take revenge out on the leader of the Blue Suns. Zaeed let's his own goals take over and acts on his feelings and severely endangers the initial mission (liberate the refinery). You are faced with the choice of saving the workers or listening to Zaeed; keeping in mind that the goal of loyalty missions is to clear everyone's minds so that your ultimate goal can have better chances of success. (it is a SM, and Zaeed may prove to be vital in stopping the collectors) You have to make sure to not approach the decision here like it's a video game, you don't know that if you save the workers Vido will get away, or if you don't save them he won't get away. If your personal morals would urge you to save the workers, should you not listen to them because the ultimate goal here is to stop the collectors? (and thus greatly improve the galaxy's chances against the reapers) Sheps' goal is to get everyone clear-headed to combat the reapers because if they're not, your chance of completing this near-impossible mission are even worse. Oh and add all that to the fact that if you're a spectre, killing a major merc boss probably falls into the region of a "necessary sacrifice for the grater good".

So do you go with your personal morals? Or do you put them to the side and focus on the big picture? Whether it be your spectre obligations or completing the Suicide mission.

The problem here is that you're not taking an adequate step back. The purpose of the loyalty missions is to ensure everyone is psychologically ready for the mission they're undertaking, and that obviously does involve making sure everyone has, as you say, a clear head.

Based purely on that, it would appear going after Vido at the expense of both the mission and the lives of a bunch of innocent workers is the correct decision from overall point of view.

The problem is you're not factoring the rather worrying situation that Vido has just sacrificed the mission to fulfill his personal vendetta. That is not the kind of mindset Shep can realistically tolerate - while ensuring they have clear heads and closure, Shep also has to make damn sure they're physically capable of operating as a team, and sticking to the objectives - simply going along with Zaeed's maniacal vengeance run doesn't really help that. Obviously the moral issue is there, yes, but it's also a question of whether Shep can trust Zaeed to actually do his job when the time comes. Shep wouldn't be a responsible commander if he simply allows a deviation of that kind of magnitude to occur whenever Zaeed pleases. If Zaeed can't function as part of a team then he's effectively useless, and it's shep's duty to see to it that Zaeed realises that.

As it happens the paragon option makes Zaeed re-think what he was doing and it leaves him a significantly more stable person. It could have also left Zaeed a raving lunatic, in which case it would have been up to Shep to either leave him to die or to kick him off the team, but at the very least, it would have removed a potential problem from his lineup. Sorting Zaeed out, however, accomplished this without losing his services.

[Moiaussi]

JaegerBane wrote...

The problem here is that you're not taking an adequate step back. The purpose of the loyalty missions is to ensure everyone is psychologically ready for the mission they're undertaking, and that obviously does involve making sure everyone has, as you say, a clear head.

Based purely on that, it would appear going after Vido at the expense of both the mission and the lives of a bunch of innocent workers is the correct decision from overall point of view.

The problem is you're not factoring the rather worrying situation that Vido has just sacrificed the mission to fulfill his personal vendetta. That is not the kind of mindset Shep can realistically tolerate - while ensuring they have clear heads and closure, Shep also has to make damn sure they're physically capable of operating as a team, and sticking to the objectives - simply going along with Zaeed's maniacal vengeance run doesn't really help that. Obviously the moral issue is there, yes, but it's also a question of whether Shep can trust Zaeed to actually do his job when the time comes. Shep wouldn't be a responsible commander if he simply allows a deviation of that kind of magnitude to occur whenever Zaeed pleases. If Zaeed can't function as part of a team then he's effectively useless, and it's shep's duty to see to it that Zaeed realises that.

As it happens the paragon option makes Zaeed re-think what he was doing and it leaves him a significantly more stable person. It could have also left Zaeed a raving lunatic, in which case it would have been up to Shep to either leave him to die or to kick him off the team, but at the very least, it would have removed a potential problem from his lineup. Sorting Zaeed out, however, accomplished this without losing his services.

Pardon, but aren't you making a blind assumption that Zaheed will be needed regardless of how he acts? Setting fire to the refinery does nothing to kill Vido and just means that to get to Vido you have to run through a burning refinery. When I did the mission with my infiltrator, I couldn't help but think 'You ruddy idiot! I could have taken him out with a head shot, but you pulled that stupidity???'

If Zaheed turned out to be that much of a loose cannon, he shouldn't be brought along in the first place. Keeping to the original mission is a loyalty test of Zaheed's suitability, not of Shepard's. 

The cut scene of Vido escaping is bad writing though. (1) Shepard doesn't even try to stop him regardless of weapon(s) or specialtie(s). (2) the gunship could have been tracked. If there is any huge fleet in orbit they certainly weren't mentioned and they didn't bother with the shuttle.

[tommyt_1994]

@Spectre_907 and Jagerbane: I agree with you, I actually addressed those points earlier in the thread and said that my Shep would take the paragon route and ditch Zaeed if he couldn't persuade him. I earlier stated that my Shep wouldn't tolerate that kind of instability and frankly wouldn't wamt Zaeed on my ship if I couldn't change him. And pacifen already brought up your point Specte_907 and I agree. To quote myself about what I said in regards to killing Vido, because I don't feel like thinking it up again:



Pacifien wrote...



tommyt_1994 wrote...

*snip*Oh and add all that to the fact that if you're a spectre, killing a major merc boss probably falls into the region of a "necessary sacrifice for the grater good".





Does it really, though? A major merc boss who's been around for years is the evil you know, the evil you can predict. Creating a power vacuum leads to chaos and the victor could be even worse than the guy you offed.





What you proposed could happen as a result, I certainly don't see it as a stretch. But couldn't killing Vido also lead to massive infighting of major people in the oganization itself over who should step up and take his place? Which would lead to Mercs killing off other mercs which is fine with me.



I don't know which situation is more likely, they both hold weight IMO. But they both require a lot of speculation, no one knows what'll happen.

[Moiaussi]

Nm Jaeger, we seem to agree after all.. misread your post

[Sundance31us]

Of course, you could skip the "what would a Spectre do" angle by telling the Council where to stick their reinstatement offer.

[tommyt_1994]

^That'd require passing up on a 'you can murder and do whatever you want and get away with it' pass. No thanks

[Frybread76]

tommyt_1994 wrote...

^That'd require passing up on a 'you can murder and do whatever you want and get away with it' pass. No thanks

Yes.  Even Paragon Shepard likes to keep all of his options on the table.

[JaegerBane]

Moiaussi wrote...

Nm Jaeger, we seem to agree after all.. misread your post

Yeah, I couldn't figure out why you were disagreeing with me as you were basically saying the same thing I was

[DPSSOC]

tommyt_1994 wrote...

^That'd require passing up on a 'you can murder and do whatever you want and get away with it' pass. No thanks

Ah yes but you still retain the "You can murder and do whatever you want and get away with it" pass. from having a long list of dead people who tried to stop you from doing what you want or keep you from getting away with it.  It's essentially the Batman Card where yes what you're doing is illegal but who's honestly dumb enough to try and stop you.

[mosor]

Moiaussi wrote...


Pardon, but aren't you making a blind assumption that Zaheed will be needed regardless of how he acts? Setting fire to the refinery does nothing to kill Vido and just means that to get to Vido you have to run through a burning refinery. When I did the mission with my infiltrator, I couldn't help but think 'You ruddy idiot! I could have taken him out with a head shot, but you pulled that stupidity???'

What Zaeed did by starting that explosion also showed a lot of ingenuity. What may have resulted in fighting an overwhelming force is now something that is managable.  The only problem with that decision was that he never cleared it with you first. However, I must say it's very creative. A person like that can be a valuable asset. Especially considering all that rage is directed at one person, while in any other situation he is quite level headed.

Regardless, I usually go after Vido anyway. Depending on when you do Zaeed's loyalty, you come across a few N7 missions where commited acts of butchery and piracy. A guy like that is a danger to the galaxy. He should be put down like the dog that he is.

[Zulu_DFA]

mosor wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...


Pardon, but aren't you making a blind assumption that Zaheed will be needed regardless of how he acts? Setting fire to the refinery does nothing to kill Vido and just means that to get to Vido you have to run through a burning refinery. When I did the mission with my infiltrator, I couldn't help but think 'You ruddy idiot! I could have taken him out with a head shot, but you pulled that stupidity???'

What Zaeed did by starting that explosion also showed a lot of ingenuity. What may have resulted in fighting an overwhelming force is now something that is managable.  The only problem with that decision was that he never cleared it with you first. However, I must say it's very creative. A person like that can be a valuable asset. Especially considering all that rage is directed at one person, while in any other situation he is quite level headed.

Regardless, I usually go after Vido anyway. Depending on when you do Zaeed's loyalty, you come across a few N7 missions where commited acts of butchery and piracy. A guy like that is a danger to the galaxy. He should be put down like the dog that he is.

When you look through the confusing three-squad gameplay mechanics, you may see that Zaeed is the boss on Zorya.

When he says, "Shepard,  this is my show. Let me run it and then I'm all yours", I'm OK with that. basically that's how every loyalty mission is set up. You can either stick to what the starring squadmate wants, or do it your way (sometimes to outright betray the squadmate). So it is with Zaeed.

You don't like Zaeed? Fine, you may as well uninstall the DLC. But pretending that you being dick to Zaeed is not personal is a standard issue paragon hypocrisy.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

As a Spectre I make decisions based on what I would do in that given situation. I think that's part of the status of being a Spectre. Your skills and judgements (under the occasional scruitiny and constant doubt of the council), are why you were chosen and how you're expected to behave out in the field.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 10 octobre 2010 - 01:32 .

[mosor]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

mosor wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...


Pardon, but aren't you making a blind assumption that Zaheed will be needed regardless of how he acts? Setting fire to the refinery does nothing to kill Vido and just means that to get to Vido you have to run through a burning refinery. When I did the mission with my infiltrator, I couldn't help but think 'You ruddy idiot! I could have taken him out with a head shot, but you pulled that stupidity???'

What Zaeed did by starting that explosion also showed a lot of ingenuity. What may have resulted in fighting an overwhelming force is now something that is managable.  The only problem with that decision was that he never cleared it with you first. However, I must say it's very creative. A person like that can be a valuable asset. Especially considering all that rage is directed at one person, while in any other situation he is quite level headed.

Regardless, I usually go after Vido anyway. Depending on when you do Zaeed's loyalty, you come across a few N7 missions where commited acts of butchery and piracy. A guy like that is a danger to the galaxy. He should be put down like the dog that he is.

When you look through the confusing three-squad gameplay mechanics, you may see that Zaeed is the boss on Zorya.

When he says, "Shepard,  this is my show. Let me run it and then I'm all yours", I'm OK with that. basically that's how every loyalty mission is set up. You can either stick to what the starring squadmate wants, or do it your way (sometimes to outright betray the squadmate). So it is with Zaeed.

You don't like Zaeed? Fine, you may as well uninstall the DLC. But pretending that you being dick to Zaeed is not personal is a standard issue paragon hypocrisy.

That's a good point. Though, controlling Shepard and having Zaeed as a finger puppet makes it difficult for most people to be aware of that. Not sure if you last point was directed at me. I always kill Vido. Killing Zaeed is especially silly if you recruited him early game, having him keep people alive during the suicide mission, only to kill him during his loyalty mission because somehow the suicide mission wasn't enough for you to trust him.

And I thought I was a heartless renegade!

Modifié par mosor, 10 octobre 2010 - 02:22 .

[StarcloudSWG]

I don't have a Paragon Shepard who did *not* go after Vido. Going after Vido means he gets replaced. One way or another, the change is going to leave the Blue Suns less organized and effective for a while.

[mosor]

Also the blue suns are a legal and legitimate organization, not some criminal mafia by nature. Vido just turned them more criminal by hiring batarian miscreants. A new leader might actually do some good.

Modifié par mosor, 10 octobre 2010 - 02:51 .

[Sundance31us]

Maybe it's because I like to play Lawful Neutral fighters, but I look at Zaeed's loyalty mission this way:



Eldfell-Ashland Energy hired Zaeed to liberate their refinery on Zorya from the mercenaries who took it; I'm quite certain that Eldfell-Ashland didn't pay Zaeed to destroy their refinery and kill their employees just to satisfy a personal vendetta he has with the Blue Suns.

When you pick him (Zaeed) up on Omega he does mention Vido, but makes it perfectly clear that the purpose of the mission is to "take care of" the situation at the Edfell-Ashland refinery.

By offering to assist with the situation on Zorya, Shepard is accepting the task as set forth by Zaeed on Omega on behalf of Eldfell-Ashland. When Zaeed tries to change the object of the mission through threats my Shepard (Spectre or not) has no problem telling Zaeed where he can stick his loyalty.

[Arijharn]

mosor wrote...

Also the blue suns are a legal and legitimate organization, not some criminal mafia by nature. Vido just turned them more criminal by hiring batarian miscreants. A new leader might actually do some good.

You don't honestly believe that do you?

The Blue Suns are both criminal and not. Which and by who's law can be brought against them to account for their actions? Space is big, how is any governmental agency even supposed to track even half of what they do?

I let Vido get away though usually, because I think that because you were there at the time and could do something to save lives then why wouldn't you do it? (This isn't paragon or renegade really, I would think if I was a worker in that situation I would hope that someone decides to pull me out of the fire at least).

[mosor]

Arijharn wrote...

mosor wrote...

Also the blue suns are a legal and legitimate organization, not some criminal mafia by nature. Vido just turned them more criminal by hiring batarian miscreants. A new leader might actually do some good.

You don't honestly believe that do you?

The Blue Suns are both criminal and not. Which and by who's law can be brought against them to account for their actions? Space is big, how is any governmental agency even supposed to track even half of what they do?

I let Vido get away though usually, because I think that because you were there at the time and could do something to save lives then why wouldn't you do it? (This isn't paragon or renegade really, I would think if I was a worker in that situation I would hope that someone decides to pull me out of the fire at least).

I didn't say they were entirely lawful. Just legal and legitimate. Just how unlawful they become really depends on the leader. Vido took the organization more toward an unlawful route. A new leader may go more the other way. It's not the mafia, it's enterpises doesn't need to be heavily geared toward criminal activity.

[Arijharn]

It's a business, it's enterprises will be heavily geared towards whatever makes them the most money. They're mercenaries at that, they don't have a higher loyalty to anything than getting paid, if they have an income that would net them 4million credits but its means would not be legal, vs. an enterprise that would only net them 2million credits but is legal, then they will take the 4million easily.

[mosor]

Arijharn wrote...

I let Vido get away though usually, because I think that because you were there at the time and could do something to save lives then why wouldn't you do it? (This isn't paragon or renegade really, I would think if I was a worker in that situation I would hope that someone decides to pull me out of the fire at least).

To be honest, If I had no choices like dividing my team,  I'd probably think to secure the situation first and that means taking out the blue suns and hopefully have time later to mount a rescue. Doing it the other way is defintiely more heroic though.

Modifié par mosor, 10 octobre 2010 - 04:03 .

[mosor]

Arijharn wrote...

It's a business, it's enterprises will be heavily geared towards whatever makes them the most money. They're mercenaries at that, they don't have a higher loyalty to anything than getting paid, if they have an income that would net them 4million credits but its means would not be legal, vs. an enterprise that would only net them 2million credits but is legal, then they will take the 4million easily.

Probably, but compared to mercenary contracts, security, and drug smuggling (I know not legal, but at least you're probably not murdering people who didn't have it coming to them on a regular basis)... piracy and screwing over your own clients is probably the least profitable of the bunch.

Modifié par mosor, 10 octobre 2010 - 04:11 .