While I didn't initially intend to do so I remake a lot of decisions in a way that I know is more effecient. Like clicking the paragon answer even though it is foolish imho, because I know that "all paragon" is aa billion times more efficient than "mostly paragon" as it was before.
The question is, what to choose for the big decisions. In the suicide mission, will I make the same, partially relatively poor choices? Send Garrus as Tech specialist and then, sending Grunt as escort, not having lost only Garrus, but also Jack and Mordin (for the original point average for "Holding the Line" was 1.33 - six to an average of eight).
Also will I decide to not destroy the heretic geth, but to reprogramm them, knowing that it will make a difference of 30 paragon points - it was 30 renegade points at least when I decided to destroy them. Originally I didn't care much about the ratio of points, thinking that only the absolute score mattered. I was happy for all kinds of points, didn't care whether renegade or paragon. It just turned out that I had around 85%% heroic in the end, I didn't plan it.. Now knowing the system better it looks reasonable to always click the paragon answer, no matter how foolish I think it is.
The problem is, then I correct such things and then import the character to Mass Effect 3, it's not really what "truely" happened in my game anymore, it's an idealized version. Not truIy the decisions I'd have made for my Shepard, but an optimized version, knowing the outcome... wonder how you did it when you made a cycle, playing through Mass Effect 2 with a re-importet Mass Effect 2 character.
Modifié par Schattenkeil, 08 octobre 2010 - 03:54 .
Retour en haut
