64 réponses à ce sujet

[Spartas Husky]

.....gravity of other celestial objects are also in work here, for some reason everyone else disregarded them. Even if an object is moving towards a celestrial body it has to overcome every single other celestial body graviational pull on it. By propulsion. If that propulsion stops a tug of war takes place. Same as a comet. even if the sun is pulling it if it happens to pass through a large planet by accident its trajectory can be changed.



if the fusion torches were providing enough power to negate other celestial bodie's pull, turning them off would do something, now what exactly I have absolutely no idea. Still I woudl tend to think there is a moon above terra nova? although we can't see it, moons do serve a purpose other than looking pretty.

[Sinapus]

The whole assignment moves at the speed of plot. It starts at the moment you land on the asteroid and there's no real countdown.



Which is understandable. It wouldn't be fun if you level up a bit, then visit and find Terra Nova rendered uninhabitable because you never got there on time.

[Northern Sun]

A better question might be "Why didn't Shepard let Balak go, release the hostages, and then tell the Normandy to destroy the ship Balak was escaping on?"

[Ghost Warrior]

Northern Sun wrote...

A better question might be "Why didn't Shepard let Balak go, release the hostages, and then tell the Normandy to destroy the ship Balak was escaping on?"

Good question

[Mr Zoat]

There weren't any ships on or around the asteroid, so my guess is that Balak is still there.

[Dean_the_Young]

Northern Sun wrote...

A better question might be "Why didn't Shepard let Balak go, release the hostages, and then tell the Normandy to destroy the ship Balak was escaping on?"

For the same reason Balak didn't rig the bombs to detonate regardless the moment they were approached or he was far enough out the door.

[RiouHotaru]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Northern Sun wrote...

A better question might be "Why didn't Shepard let Balak go, release the hostages, and then tell the Normandy to destroy the ship Balak was escaping on?"

For the same reason Balak didn't rig the bombs to detonate regardless the moment they were approached or he was far enough out the door.

And that reason is: Because he couldn't.  Notice when he leaves, the bombs he left behind are on a TIMER.  Usually timer bombs and switch-related bombs are mutually exclusive.  You can't rig a bomb to both go off on a timer AND also explode when you hit a switch or when you get close enough without having rigged the bombs to work that way WELL in advance.

Likely Balak never anticpated Kate's attempt at signalling for help to actually work, nevermind getting one of the galaxy's best on his ass.  He had to make do with what he had at the moment.  So, in the time he had while you were running around shutting off the torches, he had one switch-based bomb, and three timer-based bombs set around the facility, giving him JUST enough time to get away.

I explain why this works in my videos anyway.

[Aonike1]

Blunt 7rauma wrote...

Since there is already talk about the physics of the asteroid and its inertia, how about the fact that all of the torches are on one plane of the asteroid. It would have been perfectly good to just take out the batarians without shutting the torches down because the asteroid would just be spinning in space around a single axis, not moving forward.

You could actually see torches on the oppsite plane in the opening cinematic

[Dean_the_Young]

RiouHotaru wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Northern Sun wrote...

A better question might be "Why didn't Shepard let Balak go, release the hostages, and then tell the Normandy to destroy the ship Balak was escaping on?"

For the same reason Balak didn't rig the bombs to detonate regardless the moment they were approached or he was far enough out the door.

And that reason is: Because he couldn't.  Notice when he leaves, the bombs he left behind are on a TIMER.  Usually timer bombs and switch-related bombs are mutually exclusive.  You can't rig a bomb to both go off on a timer AND also explode when you hit a switch or when you get close enough without having rigged the bombs to work that way WELL in advance.

There is no mutual exclusivity issue except by authorial fiat, and dumb authorial fiat at that.

There's no technical reason, at all, why bombs can't have multiple trigger types, nor is it some major engineering problem. The only primary difference between a remote trigger device and a timer device is the presence of a signal receiver versus a timer, neither of which are in any sense complicated. A proximity detector is also long since proven technology.

And you know something in the mass effect universe that does distance communication, proximity detection, and certainly a timer function all in one? Pretty much every single omnitool in existence. Off-the-shelf civilian technology available to pretty much anyone. It is not some sort of restricted, hard-to-replicate technology.







There's no technical reason why bombs can't have multiple trigger types. There is no innate mutual exclusivity issue except by authorial fiat, which is the same thing we had going on with this question in the first place.

[RiouHotaru]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Northern Sun wrote...

A better question might be "Why didn't Shepard let Balak go, release the hostages, and then tell the Normandy to destroy the ship Balak was escaping on?"

For the same reason Balak didn't rig the bombs to detonate regardless the moment they were approached or he was far enough out the door.

And that reason is: Because he couldn't.  Notice when he leaves, the bombs he left behind are on a TIMER.  Usually timer bombs and switch-related bombs are mutually exclusive.  You can't rig a bomb to both go off on a timer AND also explode when you hit a switch or when you get close enough without having rigged the bombs to work that way WELL in advance.

There is no mutual exclusivity issue except by authorial fiat, and dumb authorial fiat at that.

There's no technical reason, at all, why bombs can't have multiple trigger types, nor is it some major engineering problem. The only primary difference between a remote trigger device and a timer device is the presence of a signal receiver versus a timer, neither of which are in any sense complicated. A proximity detector is also long since proven technology.

And you know something in the mass effect universe that does distance communication, proximity detection, and certainly a timer function all in one? Pretty much every single omnitool in existence. Off-the-shelf civilian technology available to pretty much anyone. It is not some sort of restricted, hard-to-replicate technology.



There's no technical reason why bombs can't have multiple trigger types. There is no innate mutual exclusivity issue except by authorial fiat, which is the same thing we had going on with this question in the first place.

The technical reason might be he simply didn't have the time or resources.  Is it really so hard to believe that maybe he just didn't set them up that way because of something OTHER than a "plothole"?

[TelexFerra]

because, despite what movies and many video games tell us, bad guys aren't omniscient?

[Dean_the_Young]

RiouHotaru wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Northern Sun wrote...

A better question might be "Why didn't Shepard let Balak go, release the hostages, and then tell the Normandy to destroy the ship Balak was escaping on?"

For the same reason Balak didn't rig the bombs to detonate regardless the moment they were approached or he was far enough out the door.

And that reason is: Because he couldn't.  Notice when he leaves, the bombs he left behind are on a TIMER.  Usually timer bombs and switch-related bombs are mutually exclusive.  You can't rig a bomb to both go off on a timer AND also explode when you hit a switch or when you get close enough without having rigged the bombs to work that way WELL in advance.

There is no mutual exclusivity issue except by authorial fiat, and dumb authorial fiat at that.

There's no technical reason, at all, why bombs can't have multiple trigger types, nor is it some major engineering problem. The only primary difference between a remote trigger device and a timer device is the presence of a signal receiver versus a timer, neither of which are in any sense complicated. A proximity detector is also long since proven technology.

And you know something in the mass effect universe that does distance communication, proximity detection, and certainly a timer function all in one? Pretty much every single omnitool in existence. Off-the-shelf civilian technology available to pretty much anyone. It is not some sort of restricted, hard-to-replicate technology.



There's no technical reason why bombs can't have multiple trigger types. There is no innate mutual exclusivity issue except by authorial fiat, which is the same thing we had going on with this question in the first place.

The technical reason might be he simply didn't have the time or resources.  Is it really so hard to believe that maybe he just didn't set them up that way because of something OTHER than a "plothole"?

If the technical reason is that he doesn't have the resources, the reason he doesn't have the resources is authorial fiat.

It's not a plot hole. There is no internal contradiction in the story, for the same reason there is no internal contradiction (ie, plot hole) in him being able to escape.

It might be implausible, unrealistic, and (correctly) reek of 'this is a game with honest choices' setup, but I'd be the last to call it a plot hole.

[JohnnyBeGood2]

It is a given that Balak should die because he is Batarian.

Modifié par JohnnyBeGood2, 10 janvier 2011 - 12:22 .

[Abeja1225]

Wouldnt its original path be an opposing force as well as the gravity of Terra Nova?

[Obadiah]

I think the guidance the switch off the torches comes from the initial situation analysis on board the Normandy, and Shep doesn't know where Balak is until the first torch is switched off and Kate is contacted.

[jeweledleah]

Northern Sun wrote...

A better question might be "Why didn't Shepard let Balak go, release the hostages, and then tell the Normandy to destroy the ship Balak was escaping on?"

becasue ability to do that would negate the whole "make a hard choice" mechanic.  which actualy would be quite lovely, but not intended by the author.

[Greybox_Inception]

 more plotholes.

Modifié par Greybox_Inception, 21 février 2011 - 05:09 .

[Greybox_Inception]

JohnnyBeGood2 wrote...

It is a given that Balak should die because he is Batarian.

no, he's a terrorist.

[caradoc2000]

Greybox_Inception wrote...

JohnnyBeGood2 wrote...

It is a given that Balak should die because he is Batarian.

no, he's a terrorist.

One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist.

[puercoperro335]

I literally just completed this assignment less than a half hour ago, and in the post-mission dialogue the chief engineer dude there says something along the lines of being able to alter the course of the asteroid before it would have been too close to the atmosphere to alter it's trajectory.

Pay more attention next time?

[stormx2233]

All Im going to say is, its a game. Does it really matter if shutting them down did anything at all, it was good fun to play around on an asteroid.

[TelexFerra]

puercoperro335 wrote...

I literally just completed this assignment less than a half hour ago, and in the post-mission dialogue the chief engineer dude there says something along the lines of being able to alter the course of the asteroid before it would have been too close to the atmosphere to alter it's trajectory.<br />
Pay more attention next time?

Shutting off the torches does not alter the asteroid's vector.

[Mr Zoat]

I thought that the asteroid was originally on a safe trajectory and was being turned towards the planet. Shutting off the torches prevents them pointing it at the capital.

Modifié par Mr Zoat, 27 février 2011 - 08:07 .

[TelexFerra]

Inertia

[Bazedragon]

TelexFerra wrote...

windsock wrote...

Aeowyn wrote...

TelexFerra wrote...

philiposophy wrote...

Since the torches are powering the asteroid towards the planet, shutting them down absolutely is your priority. What are the lives of a few scientists on X57 compared to the millions who are going to die if that thing hits its target?

Whether or not the torches remained active, the asteroid would still have been on course with Terra Nova.

No, you see it in the end, I guess the asteroid goes back to it's normal "route" and avoids hitting the atmosphere of Terra Nova.

No, being that there isn't any friction to stop the asteroid, it would have continued on its colision course. Shutting down the torches stops any increase in velocity, but doesn't change its bearing. Once that was taken care of, it gave you enough time to deal with the terrorists and restore control of the facility to change direction, most likely into a stable orbit.

Regardless of either way it hits the atmosphere something bad is going to happen. It can smack straight into the thing which is bad, or if the torches weren't activated in the right amount of time in order to allow an orbit to be built the asteroid would have hit the atmosphere and started aerobraking, which would result in it deorbiting as well.

Thank you sir for demonstrating how Isaac Newton is the deadliest son of a **** in space.

An object at a constant velocity stays at a constant velocity until acted on by an unbalanced force.

Which is exactly what actually happens - if you pay attention. You don't deactivate all three torches at the same time, so the force acting upon the asteroid becomes unbalanced. It will begin to rotate upon an axis caused by the two - and subsequently one - remaining torch. This MAY be enough to affect the bodys trajectory enough to make it skim the atmosphere... While there may still be something of a pressure-wave is Shepard is too slow (i have a habit of forgetting to pause if i go AFK in mako), it would not be as bad as a direct impact.

We also do not have an ETA for collision, if there is enough time (once torches are offlined and terrorists dealt with) - crews may be able to navigate the asteroid into position anyway.
___

As for letting Balak go - as much as I didn't want to, I can't exactly let innocents die, and what if he has a dead-mans'-switch wired into the ship? Blow it, and charges go boom anyway. Better not to take that risk, right?