117 réponses à ce sujet

[Undertone]

ViktorReznov wrote...

Undertone wrote...

Actually I think it's because there hardly is a logical reason to destroy the base (other then cool explosion cinematic ) so they tried to salvage the situation.

Of course I am open to criticism - name me at least one and I'll agree that destroying the station isn't completely retarded.

I don't think anyone sane would have a reason to destroy an entire Collector base. The sheer technological gap between Collectors and the rest of the galaxy would make its capture not only logical, but also paramount. I mean, look at the Collectors' involvement with the Reapers, and their integration with Reaper tech... The fields of bio-engineering and genetics alone would advance at warp speed.

Blowing it up just to see the explosion would be an incredibly foolish act on behalf of anyone, former-Spectre-saviour-of-the-Universe or not. Although I was not very keen of handing it over to the Illusive Man - how much do we REALLY know about him? And the incident with the "derelict" Collector ship put up a big question sign for me.

Well, I hope Mister "I'm So Cool, Look at My Enigmatic, Straight Face"  will use that base for good - he'd better do, I lost Jack in order to fetch him his toy.

Pretty much my point exactly. Whether Mr. Tim uses it to advance humanity after the Reapers are destroyed is completely different. We need everything to stop the Reapers. (again why advancing humanity is considered so bad is totally beyond me)

[Undertone]

There's a thing called plot armor you know.

[cdtrk65]

I find it funny how many people are just dying to get back in with the Alliance/Council...I've played through paragon, renegade and half and half a few times. One thing that stands out is their inability to accept anything that Shepard says at face value...Oh and since when is an eye witness a not vaible? (tramatized or not) I suppose since he was a human accusing a Turian he wasn't.



I was kind of surprised that Ashley was so dead set against SHepard working with Cerebrus since she spent most of the first game complaining about the politican (heck even Kaiden did some of his own).



But as for Shepards purposed speech, it wouldn't work. Every reason doesn't need to be explained, I felt what was said was satisfactory. As other's have said you don't want to go overboard since not ever player is going to have the same reasons for destroying the base. Myself, I felt nothing could be gained from keeping it around, except more indoctrination (hey and who's to say that these guys can't unleash hell all by themselves look at Saren), and TIM didn't strict me as the trust worthy sort.

[AdmiralCheez]

Undertone wrote...

Let me quote Mr. Awesome (Garrus):

- Typical alliance attitude. You fail to see the bigger picture.

Typical renegade, convinced that your decisions are better than everyone else's.

Which one is worse - human dominance or extinction? (Why people would consider human dominance something bad is also beyond me but...at least there you have logical reasons for balance of power)

FALSE DICHOTOMY.  You can save the galaxy without screwing over 80% of its citizens, you know.  Human dominance is bad for the same reason batarian, volus, or salarian dominance is bad: too easy to abuse your power, and everyone hates you to the point that a revolution is pretty much bound to happen.

I have not played Overlord or LotSB so I can't comment on them. Cerberus has fail experiments but it also brings you to life. You would be dead if it wasn't for Cerberus - dead, finito, non existe, dust, nothing, nihil. And Normandy 2 and a bunch of other stuff. Cerberus is the only one willing to fight.

Shepard was about the only thing they did right.  Overlord tanked.  Akuze was a slaughter.  Their experiments with the rachni and the creepers resulted in hundreds of deaths.  The Reaper IFF team was indoctrinated.  Paul Grayson backfired.  The Subject Zero thing blew up in their faces.

[ViktorReznov]

thurmanator692 wrote...

ViktorReznov wrote...

Undertone wrote...

Actually I think it's because there hardly is a logical reason to destroy the base (other then cool explosion cinematic ) so they tried to salvage the situation.

Of course I am open to criticism - name me at least one and I'll agree that destroying the station isn't completely retarded.

I don't think anyone sane would have a reason to destroy an entire Collector base. The sheer technological gap between Collectors and the rest of the galaxy would make its capture not only logical, but also paramount. I mean, look at the Collectors' involvement with the Reapers, and their integration with Reaper tech... The fields of bio-engineering and genetics alone would advance at warp speed.

Blowing it up just to see the explosion would be an incredibly foolish act on behalf of anyone, former-Spectre-saviour-of-the-Universe or not. Although I was not very keen of handing it over to the Illusive Man - how much do we REALLY know about him? And the incident with the "derelict" Collector ship put up a big question sign for me.

Well, I hope Mister "I'm So Cool, Look at My Enigmatic, Straight Face"  will use that base for good - he'd better do, I lost Jack in order to fetch him his toy.

jack-may you find the peace in death that eluded you in life.

As for the tech gap between humans and collectors. quite simply, there isnt one. the Normandy single handedly blew up their cruser, that was easilly 100 times larger, in a couple of shots on its own home turf. the reapers have a fatal flaw: their sheer overconfidence. they didnt even have the collectors' base have external defenses because "no one could possibly reach it" Sovereign was destroyed at the citadel even when "we live because they allow it, and we will be destroyed because they demand it"
twice so far, they have failed, and shepard is now going for a third

Well, as the saying goes, your weapon is only as good as you are. classic "David versus Goliath" situation. But, while it is true that the Collectors were unprepared (although, given the amounts of mutilated ship hulls around their end of the Omega 4 relay, they would hardly be twitchy and fearful), they probably never expected a ship with Reaper IFF to jump into their home turf.

But what puzzled me was why would such an important structure have only ONE cruiser? Beings as advanced as Reapers should understand the concepts of redundant defenses and backups. If I was Harbinger, I'd put a minimum of five capitals there. And even so, they're taking a lumbering giant against a nimble frigate armed with what is basically modified Reaper technology (the Thanix cannon was based on salvaged Sovereign weapons). Offtopic, in all spacesim games I always fly corvettes/frigates - never capships. A capship's worst nightmare is not another capship, but a frigate... something faster, smaller, and more agile than it. Again, David will almost always defeat Goliath.

So that base was doomed the moment Normandy fired its cannon at its sole defender. That final mission was practically screaming at me how the Collectors/Reapers failed the "better safe than sorry" strategy. 

But, Reapers' arrogance aside, the technology in that Collector base could improve on many levels in the ME universe. Weapons, defenses, biotics, organic engineering, and much more.

[Jagri]

Perhaps the British would know of some better way to explain to TIM why the base needs to be destroyed?





40 seconds into the film



Arn't they such a charming people? Or at least Peter Molyneux is...

[Aggie Punbot]

Undertone wrote...

Provide me one logical argument why the base should be destroyed. Because there is none, hence why the stupid speech Shepard gives to TIM.

1). Because the risk of indoctrination is too great.
2). Because TIM cannot be trusted to use said technology to save the galaxy and not conquer it.
3). Because the Reapers created that technology and will have a definitive advantage against us if we use it against them (i.e. they know exactly how it works and exactly how to stop it or manipulate it into destroying us). For a cinematic example, see The Fifth Element when Zorg gives one crate of weapons to the aliens. Do you recall what happened to them when they used a technology they were unfamiliar with?
4). Because our using it may, in some way, make the Reapers stronger (perhaps by either killing, indoctrinating or absorbing even more humans).

I've just given you four logical reasons. I suspect you're going to go back on your word and claim that they're not "valid" reasons, though, but I thought I might give you a chance.

Similar to a renegade Shepard killing the Rachni Queen because she cannot be trusted, Shepard can logically destroy the base because TIM also cannot be trusted.

Modifié par TS2Aggie, 08 décembre 2010 - 04:52 .

[Undertone]

TS2Aggie wrote...

Undertone wrote...

Provide me one logical argument why the base should be destroyed. Because there is none, hence why the stupid speech Shepard gives to TIM.

1). Because the risk of indoctrination is too great.
2). Because TIM cannot be trusted to use said technology to save the galaxy and not conquer it.
3). Because the Reapers created that technology and will have a definitive advantage against us if we use it against them (i.e. they know exactly how it works and exactly how to stop it or manipulate it into destroying us). For a cinematic example, see The Fifth Element when Zorg gives one crate of weapons to the aliens. Do you recall what happened to them when they used a technology they were unfamiliar with?
4). Because our using it may, in some way, make the Reapers stronger (perhaps by either killing, indoctrinating or absorbing even more humans).

I've just given you four logical reasons. I suspect you're going to go back on your word and claim that they're not "valid" reasons, though, but I thought I might give you a chance.

Similar to a renegade Shepard killing the Rachni Queen because she cannot be trusted, Shepard can logically destroy the base because TIM also cannot be trusted.

1) I would agree with you on the risk of indoctrination. That indeed can backfire in unforseen ways perhaps.
2) I would agree with you here partially. While I would personally like to keep the base for myself and not giving it to TIM (since I don't trust him completely despite being renegade), it is irrevelavant if he will save it or conquer it. My whole position stems from the idea that we are trying to *have* a galaxy after all. Saving it or conquering it is irrevelant - the point is not to have utter extinction. Balance of powers will always shift. If humanity took charge after the Reaper war was won (thanks to TIM), I am confident that eventually the balance of powers will be equalized. (For example in WW2 only US initially had a nuclear weapon, currently 9 (have to check) countries have nuclear weapons). 

But in short - yes I don't trust TIM myself, so I would partially agree with you.

3) Again I agree partially. While it would make us more predictable using Reaper-based technology you can draw a Halo parallel here. I am not saying let's use that technology at face value - let's improve on it, incorporate it with our technology. This would create more unpredictability while allowing us to know our enemy. If we know nothing about the Reapers - how can we hope to defeat them? You are correct however that if we use solely their technology that would weaken us.

4) Research, research, research. By researching it extensively you can uncover the drawbacks, dangers of reaper technology and either eliminate them or learn to minimize said drawbacks, dangers.

But I would concede to you that your first reason can possibly have serious implications. But if we have the means to detect indocritation, do you think we can take such risk? I would be willing to take that risk if it's possible to detect indocrination. Whatever personal is indocrinated to uncover the secrets can be killed/studied until we come up with results. In the present state where we can't detect it however I would agree with you completely.

You have to understand - my beef with most paragon decisions is that such decisions usually get backed up by illogical reasoning or Paragon players claim the result justifies it. The problem stems from the fact that every paragon decision turns out right.

Modifié par Undertone, 08 décembre 2010 - 05:15 .

[Undertone]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Typical renegade, convinced that your decisions are better than everyone else's.

FALSE DICHOTOMY.  You can save the galaxy without screwing over 80% of its citizens, you know.  Human dominance is bad for the same reason batarian, volus, or salarian dominance is bad: too easy to abuse your power, and everyone hates you to the point that a revolution is pretty much bound to happen.


Shepard was about the only thing they did right.  Overlord tanked.  Akuze was a slaughter.  Their experiments with the rachni and the creepers resulted in hundreds of deaths.  The Reaper IFF team was indoctrinated.  Paul Grayson backfired.  The Subject Zero thing blew up in their faces.

I don't think renegade decisions are better, I think most of them are rational and logical. Not all however. I want to apologise if I come off as arrogant, ******, **** or whatever. That is not my intention. I am however annoyed by the self-proclaimed rightousness of most paragon players claiming the results justify their choices. Like I said in the above post - all paragon decisions turn out right and result into more content. All renegade choices result in lack of content etc. (you can't have dead people return yes, but you can have organizations, sisters, brothers wanting revenge for you killing said people, just an example of how you can incorporate said renegade choices that result in dead) This makes the game one-sided. I hope you and I can agree on that.

The balance of power between each race remains secondary to defeating the Reapers and preventing extinction. I only argue against the rationality of decisions which would damage our war effort/chance against the Reaper. In cases where it would not - I fully realize that my personal Shepard is pro-human and wants to see humanity on top but other Shepards like equilbrium and good relationship between humanity and other races. I hope you can see the difference.

Again I can't speak about Overlord since I haven't played it. I have no memory of what they wanted to achieve on Akuze, hence I won't argue there. They did get knowledge on the creepers and rachni though. The Reaper IFF team was indoctrinated indeed but it allowed you to get your hands on that IFF. I haven't read the books - are the books cannon anyway? Subject Zero was a rogue cell. I don't see why TIM would lie - a Paragon still needs to stop the Reapers and needs TIM at present moment, a Renegade wouldn't care.

[Manic Sheep]

Undertone
wrote...



2) I would agree with you here partially. While I would personallylike to keep the base for myself and not giving it to TIM (sinceI don't trust him completely despite being renegade), it is irrevelavantif he will save it or conquer it. My whole position stems from the idea that weare trying to *have* a galaxy after all. Saving it or conquering it isirrevelant - the point is not to have utter extinction. Balance of powers willalways shift. If humanity took charge after the Reaper war was won (thanks toTIM), I am confident that eventually the balance of powers will beequalized. (For example in WW2 only US initially had a nuclear weapon,currently 9 (have to check) countries have nuclear weapons). 


But in short - yes I don't trust TIM myself, so I would partially agree with you.

While I do agree with this for the most part (I kept the base on my ‘canon’ play
through for many reason you have said). The paragon option is hardly unjustified for reasons other have stated and I do think it could present a problem if TIM makes a grab for human dominance before the reapers have been dealt with. With the reaper invasion on the horizon the last thing you want is even more division between the races and wars breaking out. I would like to think that TIM isn’t quite that stupid but I’m not going to guarantee it.

Undertone wrote...



You have to understand - my beef with most paragon decisions is that such decisions usually get backed up by illogical reasoning or Paragon players claim the result justifies it. The problem stems from the fact that every paragon
decision turns out right.

 The renegade decision are never really wrong either tho yes they tend to end with a darker result than the paragons if
you compare them and some renegade specific cameos are needed (I think Conrad was meant to be that but the import glitched) just because allot of the decision could have backfired and didn't doesn’t mean there is no logic behind the decision. Mass effect is not a realistic game nor do I think it’s meant to be. Space Opera remember? Most the decision in the game seem to set tone more than anything else. Difference between superman and batman I suppose.

Modifié par Manic Sheep, 08 décembre 2010 - 06:00 .

[GodWood]

"I won't let fear compromise....." etc etc.

"I won't sacrifice the soul of our species...." etc etc.



Probably the worst dialogue in the whole game.

[AdmiralCheez]

Undertone wrote...

I don't think renegade decisions are better, I think most of them are rational and logical. Not all however. I want to apologise if I come off as arrogant, ******, **** or whatever. That is not my intention. I am however annoyed by the self-proclaimed rightousness of most paragon players claiming the results justify their choices. Like I said in the above post - all paragon decisions turn out right and result into more content. All renegade choices result in lack of content etc. (you can't have dead people return yes, but you can have organizations, sisters, brothers wanting revenge for you killing said people, just an example of how you can incorporate said renegade choices that result in dead) This makes the game one-sided. I hope you and I can agree on that.

Not really, no.  Renegades got more XP in ME1, and in ME2 could make fights a lot easier for themselves.  They missed out on what, a couple cameos and a store discount?  Seriously, though, unless you can name one renegade decision that ultimately wound up putting you in a bad place, you can't complain.  Besides, renegades get a bonus squadmember (Morinth) and loyalty power (Dominate).  Before you say "paragons can get Morinth, too," please keep in mind that siding with Morinth nets massive renegade points and therefore is a renegade decision.  So yeah, I'd say it's even.  Paragons get a couple NPCs, renegades get a squadmate.  Yay.

The balance of power between each race remains secondary to defeating the Reapers and preventing extinction. I only argue against the rationality of decisions which would damage our war effort/chance against the Reaper. In cases where it would not - I fully realize that my personal Shepard is pro-human and wants to see humanity on top but other Shepards like equilbrium and good relationship between humanity and other races. I hope you can see the difference.

The balance of power may be secondary, but it is not necessary to disrupt it in order to win.  I nuked the base because I believed it would ultimately wind up in more Cerberus f*ckupery, possibly crippling the war effort.  Besides, I'd rather have that massive turian fleet on my side and not start a race war, thanks.

Again I can't speak about Overlord since I haven't played it. I have no memory of what they wanted to achieve on Akuze, hence I won't argue there. They did get knowledge on the creepers and rachni though. The Reaper IFF team was indoctrinated indeed but it allowed you to get your hands on that IFF. I haven't read the books - are the books cannon anyway? Subject Zero was a rogue cell. I don't see why TIM would lie - a Paragon still needs to stop the Reapers and needs TIM at present moment, a Renegade wouldn't care.

Yeah, the books are canon.  Unfortunate, cuz they suck, but hey.  TIM did, in fact, lie; he sent you into the Collector ship with full knowledge that it was a trap.  His excuse?  "Oh, I knew you'd make it lol."  Talk about gambling with other people's lives...  Their "knowledge" on the creepers and rachni was minimal: "oh they can't be controlled but are good at killing stuff lol."  The science team could have taken better precautions against indoctrination once they noticed its effects.  Akuze, as a refresher, was simply an "experiment" to see how lethal the Thresher Maws were, and Overlord...  Well, I won't spoil it for you, but it's pretty bad.

So yeah, Cerberus is pretty much Team Rocket with a politcal motive and higher body count.  Hence, handing the base over to those idiots is about as smart as letting Jessie, James, and Meowth play with anthrax and dirty bombs.  If Cerberus could get things done without astronomical costs and/or the pointless loss of human life, I'd be willing to save it for them.  As it is, they are both dangerously zealous and foolishly reckless.

Paragon Shep: Wait, trust those guys with that kind of technology?  That's one helluva risk.
Renegade Shep: But the priiiiiiize...

[Undertone]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Undertone wrote...

I don't think renegade decisions are better, I think most of them are rational and logical. Not all however. I want to apologise if I come off as arrogant, ******, **** or whatever. That is not my intention. I am however annoyed by the self-proclaimed rightousness of most paragon players claiming the results justify their choices. Like I said in the above post - all paragon decisions turn out right and result into more content. All renegade choices result in lack of content etc. (you can't have dead people return yes, but you can have organizations, sisters, brothers wanting revenge for you killing said people, just an example of how you can incorporate said renegade choices that result in dead) This makes the game one-sided. I hope you and I can agree on that.

Not really, no.  Renegades got more XP in ME1, and in ME2 could make fights a lot easier for themselves.  They missed out on what, a couple cameos and a store discount?  Seriously, though, unless you can name one renegade decision that ultimately wound up putting you in a bad place, you can't complain.  Besides, renegades get a bonus squadmember (Morinth) and loyalty power (Dominate).  Before you say "paragons can get Morinth, too," please keep in mind that siding with Morinth nets massive renegade points and therefore is a renegade decision.  So yeah, I'd say it's even.  Paragons get a couple NPCs, renegades get a squadmate.  Yay.

The balance of power between each race remains secondary to defeating the Reapers and preventing extinction. I only argue against the rationality of decisions which would damage our war effort/chance against the Reaper. In cases where it would not - I fully realize that my personal Shepard is pro-human and wants to see humanity on top but other Shepards like equilbrium and good relationship between humanity and other races. I hope you can see the difference.

The balance of power may be secondary, but it is not necessary to disrupt it in order to win.  I nuked the base because I believed it would ultimately wind up in more Cerberus f*ckupery, possibly crippling the war effort.  Besides, I'd rather have that massive turian fleet on my side and not start a race war, thanks.

Again I can't speak about Overlord since I haven't played it. I have no memory of what they wanted to achieve on Akuze, hence I won't argue there. They did get knowledge on the creepers and rachni though. The Reaper IFF team was indoctrinated indeed but it allowed you to get your hands on that IFF. I haven't read the books - are the books cannon anyway? Subject Zero was a rogue cell. I don't see why TIM would lie - a Paragon still needs to stop the Reapers and needs TIM at present moment, a Renegade wouldn't care.

Yeah, the books are canon.  Unfortunate, cuz they suck, but hey.  TIM did, in fact, lie; he sent you into the Collector ship with full knowledge that it was a trap.  His excuse?  "Oh, I knew you'd make it lol."  Talk about gambling with other people's lives...  Their "knowledge" on the creepers and rachni was minimal: "oh they can't be controlled but are good at killing stuff lol."  The science team could have taken better precautions against indoctrination once they noticed its effects.  Akuze, as a refresher, was simply an "experiment" to see how lethal the Thresher Maws were, and Overlord...  Well, I won't spoil it for you, but it's pretty bad.

So yeah, Cerberus is pretty much Team Rocket with a politcal motive and higher body count.  Hence, handing the base over to those idiots is about as smart as letting Jessie, James, and Meowth play with anthrax and dirty bombs.  If Cerberus could get things done without astronomical costs and/or the pointless loss of human life, I'd be willing to save it for them.  As it is, they are both dangerously zealous and foolishly reckless.

Paragon Shep: Wait, trust those guys with that kind of technology?  That's one helluva risk.
Renegade Shep: But the priiiiiiize...

Well you do bring your arguments that definitely bear weight. While I still believe that saving the base is the right choice, I do concede my previous point that it is completely illogical to destroy it. I understand your point of view.

Thanks for wasting time and effort into writing this.

Heh would you agree with me though that the dialogue is pretty retarded? 

[AdmiralCheez]

Well you do bring your arguments that definitely bear weight. While I still believe that saving the base is the right choice, I do concede my previous point that it is completely illogical to destroy it. I understand your point of view.

Hence the point of the paragon/renegade system: both work equally well.

Thanks for wasting time and effort into writing this.

Nah, bro.  Waiting for my iPod to finish charging so I can shut my computer off.  Plus I type fast.  Woot!

Thanks for trying to belittle my posts, though.  Really, I'm flattered.  You should insult everyone you argue with; it's a great tactic.

Heh would you agree with me though that the dialogue is pretty retarded?

Happens all the time.  Both moralities say some lines that give the player no choice but to facepalm.  But yeah, I was like "WTF Shep you are making me sound like an idiot."

[Undertone]

Heh you got it all wrong, it was meant to be a compliment. And no, I never tried to belittle your posts. The problem with writing is that it can misinterpret intentions whenever the voice and tone or body language isn't present. Trust me I know from experience.

I think the paragon/renegade system works equally wrong  but that's entirely outside of the thread and we can have a personal conversation about it sometime, if you do wish so.

Modifié par Undertone, 08 décembre 2010 - 06:40 .

[AdmiralCheez]

Undertone wrote...

Heh you got it all wrong, it was meant to be a compliment. And no, I never tried to belittle your posts. The problem with writing is that it can misinterpret intentions whenever the voice and tone or body language isn't present. Trust me I know from experience.

Oops.  Sorry, dude.  Here, have a cupcake.

I think the paragon/renegade system works equally wrong  but that's
entirely outside of the thread and we can have a personal conversation
about it sometime, if you do wish so.

Any artificial system that makes value judgments on an individual's decisions--or limits those decisions--is inherently flawed.  Morality is ambiguous and can't be crammed into zeros and ones.

Modifié par AdmiralCheez, 08 décembre 2010 - 06:43 .

[Kenshen]

Undertone wrote...

Actually I think it's because there hardly is a logical reason to destroy the base (other then cool explosion cinematic ) so they tried to salvage the situation.

Of course I am open to criticism - name me at least one and I'll agree that destroying the station isn't completely retarded.

How about everything that we have come to posess that is Reaper or there tech leads to indoctrination or short term disabling of our ship and a base like that would have the strongest affect.  How long do you plan to study it and work around that defense and whatever else they left behind.  All the while you don't know if Harbinger has been listening in. Too many if's for me.

Me personally I destroy it every single time as I would in RL.  However as the game goes I really hope they can put some kind of risk vs reward for picking either.  Make it harder for going paragon please.

[Sajuro]

yeah, suck it cerberus... wait they have that already

[Aggie Punbot]

aryon69 wrote...
Make it harder for going paragon please.

Harder? All of those criminals you've spared could very easily start killing indiscriminately again as soon as you're out of range. By choosing to spare them (instead of detaining or killing them) you're risking the death of a lot of innocent people; Balak comes immediately to mind. How do we know that Elnora, Fist, Powell, the Rachni Queen, Shiala, etc. aren't actually killers and/or still under Thorian control?

We don't; you're taking a risk by sparing them but it's other (potentially innocent) people that will ultimately pay the price if you're wrong (and that is worse than death).

[phatpat63]

Just the end? I wish I could've had different dialogue for every scene w/ TIM.

[rma2110]

First of all, who's to say that using reaper tech won't just get us indoctrinated? Second I don't trust TIM to use the reaper tech wisely. We don't exactly have the time or the resources to study new tech and learn how to use it.

The Normandy was able to destroy one reaper after a few upgrades, so how great can their tech be?  Plus, destroying the base might make it easier to talk the Alliance and the council into joining the fight. I want that Turian fleet.

I also do not believe that the Alliance is doing nothing. Kaiden or Ashley's file is classified for a reason. I think TIM was able to get his hands on it, but didn't want Shep to know the details. I have faith that Anderson was able to get a few things moving.

Modifié par rma2110, 08 décembre 2010 - 09:46 .

[Kenshen]

TS2Aggie wrote...

aryon69 wrote...
Make it harder for going paragon please.

Harder? All of those criminals you've spared could very easily start killing indiscriminately again as soon as you're out of range. By choosing to spare them (instead of detaining or killing them) you're risking the death of a lot of innocent people; Balak comes immediately to mind. How do we know that Elnora, Fist, Powell, the Rachni Queen, Shiala, etc. aren't actually killers and/or still under Thorian control?

We don't; you're taking a risk by sparing them but it's other (potentially innocent) people that will ultimately pay the price if you're wrong (and that is worse than death).

Honestly I can not think of that many I let walk away.  I killed any I felt was a threat and if that meant a hand full of deaths to save countless then I pulled the trigger.  I may not be pure paragon but I do what I feel is best and the council said I could.

[Dean_the_Young]

AdmiralCheez wrote...
FALSE DICHOTOMY.  You can save the galaxy without screwing over 80% of its citizens, you know.  Human dominance is bad for the same reason batarian, volus, or salarian dominance is bad: too easy to abuse your power, and everyone hates you to the point that a revolution is pretty much bound to happen.

Evidence at this point being?

Ignorring the whole 'weakening outselves/letting the Reapers face lessopposition/likely greater Reaper genocide before they're stopped, if they're stopped' is another form of screwing over 100% of all life in another, worse way.