650 réponses à ce sujet

[Knoll Argonar]

I thought that, since Collector Base was actually a Reaper factory, destroying it would unable reapers to reproduce. Giving it to Cerberus is risky not because they may use it for human-dominancy purporses, but because the Base can get out of control.Therefore, destroying it they can't use that base to create a reaper to assault the Citadel to get the other reapers back (what they wanted), so they get stuck in Dark Space.



That means I win and even if I don't, they'll be ****ed.

[Zavox]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Sorry but blowing it up because you don't want to compromise your "humanity" isn't logical.

... also, in most debates Paragons want the happily-ever-after ending and don't want their decisions to punish them.

No problem, I just see it as a healthy discussion, no problem with that right? [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/smile.png[/smilie]

It can be logical if you do not for example wish to see a future where races can be dominated, it's a moral issue but also a logical one. Domination over groups can cause unrest and thus civil war, or various other scenarious. If you do not want that for those reasons, it's logical aswell.
Besides, I've said if a choice isn't logical I'd probably go for the renegade choice if that one is, but that happens rarely.

Well, those Paragons are just sissies then, but I get your point. I find that view takes the whole point out of the game.

Modifié par Zavox, 13 décembre 2010 - 12:18 .

[Collider]

I blew it up because I in no way trust Cerberus to:

a. Not blow themselves up with it.

b. Use it in a moral or logical manner.

[BellatrixLugosi]

Whats to keep the reapers from Re-securing the Collector base if you saved it?

[Vaenier]

BellatrixLugosi wrote...

Whats to keep the reapers from Re-securing the Collector base if you saved it?

We would just blow it up like you?

[greed89]

BellatrixLugosi wrote...

Whats to keep the reapers from Re-securing the Collector base if you saved it?

better question whats to stop them form blowing it up with all the little cerberus tools inside

[Zavox]

Vaenier wrote...

BellatrixLugosi wrote...

Whats to keep the reapers from Re-securing the Collector base if you saved it?

We would just blow it up like you?

Remember that it's Cerberus you're speaking of. They couldn't even blow up their own base with Grayson still on it.

[Vaenier]

Zavox wrote...

Vaenier wrote...

BellatrixLugosi wrote...

Whats to keep the reapers from Re-securing the Collector base if you saved it?

We would just blow it up like you?

Remember that it's Cerberus you're speaking of. They couldn't even blow up their own base with Grayson still on it.

You ever get the feeling that Cerberus is incompitant for the sake of the plot? Like, they go beyond stupidity in order to achieve the things Bioware wrote them to do...

How am I suposed to believe they can even exist if Bioware themselves dont take them seriously and write whatever is convienent for the current plot.

[SonofMacPhisto]

luakel wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

All I need is a ship, a pistol, and two badasses to back me up. Galaxy saved.

1. M5 Phalanx? Check
2. Wrex?           Check
3. Grunt?           Check
4. Normandy?    Check
GET SUM REAPER B*TCHES!

Forget that, if we get to recruit then my Shepard is going to recruit. When he gets back to the flaming remnants of our homeplanet, he'll have 1) picked up a handy shoulder-mounted "Fat Man" class nuclear launcher, 2) found Master Chief's ship and told him to save the world again, 3) bought Gordon Freeman's contract from the G-Man with all those credits from ME1, and 4) commandeered a certain Firefly-class vessel to carry him and his two badasses back to Earth.

I heard a certain Battlestar recently became available, and this guy Kirk has been running his mouth regarding this brand new ship he captains.  It's named after some old aircraft carrier, I think.

Anyway, you might want to talk to them! 

[Zavox]

Vaenier wrote...

You ever get the feeling that Cerberus is incompitant for the sake of the plot? Like, they go beyond stupidity in order to achieve the things Bioware wrote them to do...

How am I suposed to believe they can even exist if Bioware themselves dont take them seriously and write whatever is convienent for the current plot.

Oh, yes, that certainly has passed my thoughts.
But nevertheless, it gives one more reason not to go with Cerberus right?

[greed89]

with there Success to Failure rate i would say that its Ceberus's Successes that are for the sake of plot

[greed89]

Antares1987 wrote...

greed89 wrote...

I am Reminded of the Old Aesop, the Scorpion and the Frog

http://en.wikipedia....on_and_the_Frog

the Moral is, is that some thing that is dangerous and toxic, will always prove to be Dangerous and Toxic, and if u ignore its nature you will have no one to blame but your self when you get stung

that's how i feel about the reaper base and Reaper Tech

Knowledge is nothing without wisdom.

which Cerberurs has shown to be lacking

[Epic777]

Man, the way people are popping to conclusions you would think the collector base has all the weaknesses of the reapers in an easy to read instruction manual. Maybe in me3 you will find harbingers diary or something

Modifié par Epic777, 13 décembre 2010 - 01:45 .

[Inverness Moon]

Zavox wrote...

Ehm, well maybe because it's TIM? They know you're allied with TIM so the alliance will not fall in line. Nor the Turians or Quarians for that matter. It's best to just cut TIM out of the equation. As for the base itself, how are you going to present evidence to the alliance and/or council and whoever else you want about the reapers (the datepad in that last scene Joker gives you). "Yeah, me and TIM just found it floating around in space". Besides, any new weapons will be highly suspect, and other races will notice it's reaper tech. Kinda will be a 1+1=2, and then they will know you haven't been trustworthy and klabam. How bigger it is, how more improbable it is to hide.

What you're saying is not convincing. Both paragons and renegades have already worked worth Cerberus and many people know it. There is nothing to stop me, as a renegade, from telling everyone I'm no longer with Cerberus and telling them I destroyed the collector base or stopped the whole operation without mentioning what happened to the base. There is no reason for me to go around telling everyone that I gave the base to Cerberus or that we're allies. So my point here is that I don't see how giving the base to TIM is going to hurt any alliances so long as nobody finds out. And neither TIM or myself is going to be the one telling people.

As for how I'm going to present evidence, the same way anyone who blew up the base is going to. New weapons being suspect? By the time anyone learns of that stuff, they'll be too worried about the reapers to care.

I don't care whether people find out the truth after the reapers are done with, but it isn't exactly hard to keep everything a secret beforehand. People really have more important things to do than question my judgement, such as surviving.

Zavox wrote...

Then you're one of the few. The twitching of it's mandibles was pretty convincing, not to mention his look backwards to the explosion.

I'm one of the few what? I said that I believed the only time Harbinger gave up control was right at the end as you just described.

Zavox wrote...

Yes, he just sheds 90% of it's body... wtf would be the point of that? If he's shedding a large part of it, why not everything? It's not like he needs the blood vessels, as those have been shedded for sure. At most I'd suspect some braintissue. But then again, that brain had been shot to pieces in the suicide.

Because shedding all that unnecessary stuff means less weight and more mobility. Naturally an organic body probably wouldn't survive long like that but I doubt Sovereign was concerned with the long term survival of Saren's body. And the blood vessels are where the nanomachines would circulate throughout the body.

Zavox wrote...

He litterally said to wait for a shot at Sovereign, what else is there to interpret. I've never heard an officer order his soldiers to hold fire, but then expect them to fire at something else. You need to be specific when commanding, not expect something of them. His orders were clear and that's all you get, you're the one that's assuming he means more. Also if you watch the scene a bit better, you will see that the Alliance definately is ignoring the geth and do nothing to them.

Good point that it was indeed an event after the choice, it's merely something though to prove that concentrate meant neglect everything else and shoot down Sovereign. Concentrate usually means neglect other parts to focus on something else.

Concentrate in combat does not mean neglect everything else no matter what. You have to defend yourself. Look, I really don't care what you think it means. What is important was my intention when I told them to concentrate on Sovereign, which I've made quite clear doesn't mean ignoring the geth.

Zavox wrote...

And besides, even if he did take care of the geth aswell, what... and I'm repeating myself here, what would be the point of letting the Destiny Ascension fall? In both instances you need ships to take care of the Geth.. might aswell save the Destiny Ascension while you're in the process. Large reward, very small drawback if you take care of the geth anyway.

As I mentioned before, the Destiny Ascension was tasked with getting the Council the hell out of there. They're not going to stick around to contribute to the battle in any significant way.

Zavox wrote...

Seriously, this thought process about concentrating on Sovereign is really flawed. Either you concentrate solely on Sovereign and should get outflanked by the geth OR you concentrate on Sovereign while battling the geth and thus saving or close to saving the Destiny Ascension. Take a bit more effort and you have a big reward. It's flawed, just admit it.

No it's not flawed, but your interpretation of it is.

First of all, if the geth are dealing with the Destiny Ascension and believe that Sovereign can take care of itself, they're not going to bother trying to defend it. This would leave the Alliance fleet unhindered in their attack on Sovereign.

Secondly, if some of the geth do move to defend Sovereign they would be dealt with accordingly, but the Alliance need not go out of its way to secure other ships under attack by the geth before moving onto Sovereign. That is what is meant by concentrating efforts on Sovereign.

Finally, I doubt the Destiny Ascension and the Alliance fleet were the only ships there. I would be surprised if there were know more Citadel fleet ships around to deal with the geth. They might not be fast enough to save the Ascension, but oh well.

Merlin 47 wrote...

I know......it's funny that way, isn't it?  I do agree with you on this, Lovgreno; I have yet to see any Renegade player say that destroying the base was a good idea, yet I've seen plenty of Paragon players agree that keeping it has its advantages.

Saying something is a good idea and saying something has advantages are two completely different things. Destroying the collector base has its advantages, but they aren't nearly significant enough to justify destroying it in my eyes, which is why its a terrible idea.

Antares1987 wrote...

EDI was their only known success in Reaper tech and who knows how long it took to make her. There's more to this than just the obvious, to ignore the details is absolutely foolish.
 

So what is your point? It's not like reaper technology is readily available or they have a relatively long amount of time to study it. You have to start somewhere. Saying its their only known success with reaper technology isn't really saying anything. However, the fact that EDI was essential to the completion of your mission is much more significant.

greed89 wrote...

I am Reminded of the Old Aesop, the Scorpion and the Frog

http://en.wikipedia....on_and_the_Frog

the Moral is, is that some thing that is dangerous and toxic, will always prove to be Dangerous and Toxic, and if u ignore its nature you will have no one to blame but your self when you get stung

that's how i feel about the reaper base and Reaper Tech

Then did you decide not to use the Thanix cannon? And, did you destroy EDI as soon as you found out she was based on reaper technology?

If your answer is anything but yes on both questions they're you're a hypocrite.

Zavox wrote...

Oh, yes, that certainly has passed my thoughts.
But nevertheless, it gives one more reason not to go with Cerberus right?

Only if you're metagaming. 

BioWare milks Cerberus for missions when they need some for Shepard, but turn around and use them to bring Shepard back and give him almost everything he needs to defeat the collectors. The fact that so many just dismiss Cerberus as incompetent is a failure in writing on BioWare's part because if people can't take Cerberus seriously then how do you expect them to take the collector base decision or anything other decision seriously when it comes to Cerberus?

[Vaenier]

Epic777 wrote...

Man, the way people are popping to conclusions you would think the collector base has all the weaknesses of the reapers in an easy to read instruction manual. Maybe in me3 you will find harbingers diary or something

I think the point is you dont know. And blowing it up without knowing is just dumb. Its better to find out first, study it, try to understand. If it ends up not being worth it, then blow it up.

When has the moral ever been to destroy that which you do not understand?

[Ryzaki]

When that which you don't understand has a history of screwing things up? Yeah I'd blow it up first ask questions later.

[Vaenier]

Ryzaki wrote...

When that which you don't understand has a history of screwing things up? Yeah I'd blow it up first ask questions later.

Did you kill the Rachni too?

[greed89]

Epic777 wrote...

Man, the way people are popping to conclusions you would think the collector base has all the weaknesses of the reapers in an easy to read instruction manual. Maybe in me3 you will find harbingers diary or something

"Dear Diary, to day i assumed direct control!, but stil lhad no sucsess in getting shepards body sigh...."

Then did you decide not to use the Thanix cannon? And, did you destroy
EDI as soon as you found out she was based on reaper technology?

If your answer is anything but yes on both questions they're you're a hypocrite.

We have no choice when it comes to EDI

as ive said befor a Thanix cannon is the only thng remotly safe about a reaper

Modifié par greed89, 13 décembre 2010 - 02:11 .

[Throw_this_away]

The challange in ME3 certinally does make you think differently when deciding on the base in ME2. Do we have time to develop the tech ourselves?

[TuringPoint]

Dave of Canada wrote...

EDI is part Reaper, we've already recieved Reaper and Base schematics from a few minutes in the base. It's logical to think we'd be able to get more when we stop and smell the roses in the base instead of shooting everything that moves.

I don't know that we got Reaper schematics from being in the base a few minutes.  If we did, don't we have everything we need?

[Dave of Canada]

Throw_this_away wrote...

The challange in ME3 certinally does make you think differently when deciding on the base in ME2. Do we have time to develop the tech ourselves?

3-4 years to plan, finance, create and test such technology? I heavily doubt it. More so without the assistance of Cerberus.

[Inverness Moon]

greed89 wrote...

We have no choice when it comes to EDI

as ive said befor a Thanix cannon is the only thng remotly safe about a reaper

Bull****. You said that reaper tech would always provide to be dangerous and toxic, but you're using EDI anyways? And what makes you think you have a choice when it comes to the collector base? You may have the choice to blow it up, but that isn't the same as the choice of whether or not to use it if it turns out to be your only hope.

Anyhow, you're contradicting yourself by saying the Thanix canon is the only thing remotely safe. Obviously your statement about reaper technology was inappropriate because blanket statements like that are inappropriate and ignorant. Now then, you have nothing on which to base your assertion that the Thanix canon is the only safe thing that can be gained. To put it simply, you don't know all of the components of a reaper.

Edit: There is no evidence that we got schematics from the base. The data pad during the ending cinematic could be nothing more than a limited overview of Harbinger and the other reapers' capabilities. That also happened after the choice about what to do with the base which means it wouldn't factor into it.

Modifié par Inverness Moon, 13 décembre 2010 - 02:40 .

[greed89]

Inverness Moon wrote...

greed89 wrote...

We have no choice when it comes to EDI

as ive said befor a Thanix cannon is the only thng remotly safe about a reaper

Bull****. You said that reaper tech would always provide to be dangerous and toxic, but you're using EDI anyways? And what makes you think you have a choice when it comes to the collector base? You may have the choice to blow it up, but that isn't the same as the choice of whether or not to use it if it turns out to be your only hope.

Anyhow, you're contradicting yourself by saying the Thanix canon is the only thing remotely safe. Obviously your statement about reaper technology was inappropriate because blanket statements like that are inappropriate and ignorant. Now then, you have nothing on which to base your assertion that the Thanix canon is the only safe thing that can be gained. To put it simply, you don't know all of the components of a reaper.

Edi may  of been made form studying reaper tech but that dosnt mean she IS reaper tech

Reaper tech is Always danegerous, every time  peeople mess with it  bad **** happens

Saren, The miners on that side mision, the dead reaper

its a Fool me once  situation

[Zavox]

Inverness Moon wrote...

What you're saying is not convincing. Both paragons and renegades have already worked worth Cerberus and many people know it. There is nothing to stop me, as a renegade, from telling everyone I'm no longer with Cerberus and telling them I destroyed the collector base or stopped the whole operation without mentioning what happened to the base. There is no reason for me to go around telling everyone that I gave the base to Cerberus or that we're allies. So my point here is that I don't see how giving the base to TIM is going to hurt any alliances so long as nobody finds out. And neither TIM or myself is going to be the one telling people.

As for how I'm going to present evidence, the same way anyone who blew up the base is going to. New weapons being suspect? By the time anyone learns of that stuff, they'll be too worried about the reapers to care.

I don't care whether people find out the truth after the reapers are done with, but it isn't exactly hard to keep everything a secret beforehand. People really have more important things to do than question my judgement, such as surviving.

I find it very hard to believe that the Alliance, Turian Hierarchy and the Migrant fleet would ever join up forces with cerberus. If you find it a reasonable assumption be my guest, but every evidence points to the contrary. Plus you're only POTENTIALLY solving the reaper problem, and in the meantime creating another. That's what they did with the Rachni, look how that turned out.

I'm one of the few what? I said that I believed the only time Harbinger gave up control was right at the end as you just described.

Ah, I misunderstood your sentence there. The fact that it's able to operate on itself, as shown in the end, shows it's possible and thus a very valid argument to my point. Retribution novel further shows that it's a drain on the host and (assumed by Grayson) the reapers.

Because shedding all that unnecessary stuff means less weight and more mobility. Naturally an organic body probably wouldn't survive long like that but I doubt Sovereign was concerned with the long term survival of Saren's body. And the blood vessels are where the nanomachines would circulate throughout the body.

I'm sure it won't, but what does that have to do with the reapers unable to control complete machines?

Concentrate in combat does not mean neglect everything else no matter what. You have to defend yourself. Look, I really don't care what you think it means. What is important was my intention when I told them to concentrate on Sovereign, which I've made quite clear doesn't mean ignoring the geth.

Concentrate in combat means you are going to take away firepower from the geth, thus neglecting that part. When the Destiny Ascension is destroyed and the geth have free reign they will come for the Alliance and you would need the same firepower dealing with the geth than you did before if you decided to save the Destiny Ascension.
It was very obvious in the choices that concentrating on Sovereign and neglecting to save the Destiny Ascension meant you would rush and concentrate solely on Sovereign. I found it conveyed that pretty well. Judging by the subsequent cutscene where the Alliance totally ignores all geth, I think you cannot do anything else than admit you're wrong on this point. Bioware meant it as ignoring all geth, if you thought it meant differently, you've misinterpreted it.

As I mentioned before, the Destiny Ascension was tasked with getting the Council the hell out of there. They're not going to stick around to contribute to the battle in any significant way.

Not an answer to the question posed. If dealing with the Geth to hold them at bay, while concentrating on Sovereign (which didn't happen), how would that differ to dealing with the Geth to save the Destiny Ascension? Both require firepower, both will drain resources from the fight with Sovereign. If you give just a bit more effort in saving the Destiny Ascension you will get a big reward with very little drawbacks. That's why concentrating on Sovereign while holding the Geth at bay is flawed, just as much as solely concentrating on Sovereign is flawed. But for some reason you do not seem to understand this.

No it's not flawed, but your interpretation of it is.

First of all, if the geth are dealing with the Destiny Ascension and believe that Sovereign can take care of itself, they're not going to bother trying to defend it. This would leave the Alliance fleet unhindered in their attack on Sovereign.

They would as soon as the Destiny Ascension is destroyed, which, by the way, is before you even engage Sovereign according to the cutscenes. Guess there's not much time lost saving it as opposed to not saving it, eh?

Secondly, if some of the geth do move to defend Sovereign they would be dealt with accordingly, but the Alliance need not go out of its way to secure other ships under attack by the geth before moving onto Sovereign. That is what is meant by concentrating efforts on Sovereign.

Hackett specifically said to hold fire and concentrate on Sovereign, that's all that matters. You can start rabbling all you want, but the fact he says that in that cutscene says enough. If he wanted any vessel to return fire on the Geth if fired upon he would've said so. That's what commanders do, not to let their subjects second-guess what he meant.

Finally, I doubt the Destiny Ascension and the Alliance fleet were the only ships there. I would be surprised if there were know more Citadel fleet ships around to deal with the geth. They might not be fast enough to save the Ascension, but oh well.

Thanks for this interesting point, previously you tried to nail me on the Destiny Ascension leaving the battle anyway even if you save it. What about the Turian vessels you see in the cutscene? They also get saved when you save the Destiny Ascension. They do however get destroyed if you choose to not save the Destiny Ascension, so no the entire Citadel fleet was destroyed because of you choosing to concentrate solely on Sovereign.

Only if you're metagaming. 

BioWare milks Cerberus for missions when they need some for Shepard, but turn around and use them to bring Shepard back and give him almost everything he needs to defeat the collectors. The fact that so many just dismiss Cerberus as incompetent is a failure in writing on BioWare's part because if people can't take Cerberus seriously then how do you expect them to take the collector base decision or anything other decision seriously when it comes to Cerberus?

How so? Fact still stays that ingame Cerberus has one truckload of screw-ups. It's actually the paragons that do not metagame here with their decision, but the renegades for the reason you just listed.

Modifié par Zavox, 13 décembre 2010 - 03:25 .