My Shepard no longer feels a political obligation to her species since the Alliance discharged her, and she has no family she feels an obligation to (the closest thing is, well, Liara). Although realistically, she'd probably try to stay out of a race war altogether if one cropped up, or do her best to end it through nonviolent means. Society would probably have to break down a lot for this hypothetical scenario to come to pass.
Of course, she also believes that the asari are more likely to maintain good diplomatic relations with other species than humans are, not to mention that they have a higher galactic population. So on a purely statistical basis, siding with the asari will be more beneficial to more people than siding with the humans.
Which Species Do You Think Is The Biggest Threat To Human Dominance?
Débuté par
Gabey5
, janv. 28 2011 02:57
Retour en haut
#227
Posté 30 janvier 2011 - 04:21
OmegaXI
-
- Members
- 997 messages
Xilizhra wrote...
I admit that if it did come to an outright war, I would side with whichever side had the asari, because I'm fond of their culture. But I'd really rather it not come to that.SandTrout wrote...
I agree with Undertone. I hope that you don't mistake my disagreement with you, Zilizhra, for hostility. The people saying that they'll oppose humanity no matter what definitely draw my ire, but you just seem to believe (however naively) that a different path would be better for the species.
Understandable, I myself will side with the humans, our race has done more in less time then any other thats known in the current ME universe beside the Reapers. I look at the other races and see rivals that have done questionable things. I'm not saying humanity hasn't but to pretend that these other cultures arn't able or willing to do some pretty horrible things is just "Hoping the wolf will pass by the door". I don't like the fact that they have used biological weapons I don't like the fact that they try to hinder humanity like its their given right. I'm open to diplomacy, but only if its an even trade. Why should humanity limit itself because their whim.
I look and see how the orginal council races treated humanity on a double standard. I see human dominance meaning that they other races could not threaten humanity without losing so much they would never recover, I don't see it as humanity making them 2nd class citizens in a human empire. I see it as ensuring the human race survives, cause lets be honest the councils track record is just as messed up as human history.
Now after the Reaper war is all said and done and humanity is in the strongest position we should step forward to keep the order until they build themselves back up, I see leaving the universe to run in anarchy as a greater sin then stepping into power. Otherwise a little be of evil must be done so there can be alot of good surivive.
So sometimes to save the rightious you must stroke the demons within.
#228
Posté 30 janvier 2011 - 05:36
Nashiktal
-
- Members
- 5 584 messages
Biggest threat to humanity? Depends on the subtext.
If we are talking about a straight up war... With no third party intervention or deus ex machina, I would say the Turians would be the biggest threat. It would be a few steps up from the covenant and human war in halo. (Disclaimer, I only bring up halo for lack of other games ive played with similar plot)
Humanity has been in space for 19 years. We have a few colonies started up that take a small population from earth. The Turians have been in space for a few thousand years. By this point their colonies are sending out colonies. It stands to reason they not only beat us by population, but by industry as well.
If we are talking about a threat outside of war... I would say the Asari. The Asari reproduction just screams cultural suppression. (for other races)
If we are talking about a straight up war... With no third party intervention or deus ex machina, I would say the Turians would be the biggest threat. It would be a few steps up from the covenant and human war in halo. (Disclaimer, I only bring up halo for lack of other games ive played with similar plot)
Humanity has been in space for 19 years. We have a few colonies started up that take a small population from earth. The Turians have been in space for a few thousand years. By this point their colonies are sending out colonies. It stands to reason they not only beat us by population, but by industry as well.
If we are talking about a threat outside of war... I would say the Asari. The Asari reproduction just screams cultural suppression. (for other races)
#229
Guest_Elithranduil_*
Posté 30 janvier 2011 - 05:54
Guest_Elithranduil_*
Guest_Elithranduil_*
-
- Guests
Turians or Krogans without genophage.
#230
Posté 30 janvier 2011 - 01:25
282xvl
-
- Members
- 184 messages
1. Geth: Because their fleet strength may rival the entire combined forces of the citadel races. They answer to no authority like the council races and are technically at war with the citadel by default (citadel law states AI is illegal ergo it is not legal in citadel space for Geth to be "alive"/exist!) They are vastly superior to organic species in a purely Darwinian sense... this one of the most troubling things about AI. They are 110% doctrinally set up for great-power war.
2. Turians: because their current fleet could decimate us. If their government ever decided to get militant/defy the council they could go on a conquering spree that would rival the Krogan rebellions or Rachni war. They have the military-industrial complex and standing forces to fight a major war, and their tactical doctrine is suited and designed for great-power war. They also have a "world police complex" stamped into their racial memory - this bodes poorly for less powerful species like humans who want to engage in meaningful expansionism.
3. Asari: Their standing fleet is powerful enough to knock us flat as is. Their economy is incredibly strong, probably due to extreme life spans. They are technically advanced (can begin to consider the idea of building relays) and they are diplomatically proficient so they could easily label us black sheep and turn other races against us. They are also biologically compatible with our type of garden world, so competition with them is possible in the future. Luckily their society is and military doctrine is poorly suited to great-power war - if we defeat their standing fleet we could beat them.
4. Salarians: Again standing fleet capable of beating us. Restlessness due to short life spans suggests competitive for territory and resources. Ruthlessly renegade in warfare - they might genophage us. They would certainly pearl harbor our fleet, kennedy our leaders and 9/11 our military industries. However their ship designs and military doctrine are very short-term oriented. If we could thwart their pearl harbor and bring their fleet to decisive battle they could be beaten.
5. Batarians: Because they are willing to use super WMD terrorism like goddamn asteroid drops and nuclear strikes on colonies. Not likely to ever defeat us but they can cause a terrorist attack the political fallout of which would leave our government unrecognizable and probably very fascist and unpleasant. Also if they ever get their hands on a super-weapon (klendagon cannon, leviathan of dis etc) of any kind they will probably instantly use it on us.
6. Humans: Because its only a matter of time before there is more than one human government.
2. Turians: because their current fleet could decimate us. If their government ever decided to get militant/defy the council they could go on a conquering spree that would rival the Krogan rebellions or Rachni war. They have the military-industrial complex and standing forces to fight a major war, and their tactical doctrine is suited and designed for great-power war. They also have a "world police complex" stamped into their racial memory - this bodes poorly for less powerful species like humans who want to engage in meaningful expansionism.
3. Asari: Their standing fleet is powerful enough to knock us flat as is. Their economy is incredibly strong, probably due to extreme life spans. They are technically advanced (can begin to consider the idea of building relays) and they are diplomatically proficient so they could easily label us black sheep and turn other races against us. They are also biologically compatible with our type of garden world, so competition with them is possible in the future. Luckily their society is and military doctrine is poorly suited to great-power war - if we defeat their standing fleet we could beat them.
4. Salarians: Again standing fleet capable of beating us. Restlessness due to short life spans suggests competitive for territory and resources. Ruthlessly renegade in warfare - they might genophage us. They would certainly pearl harbor our fleet, kennedy our leaders and 9/11 our military industries. However their ship designs and military doctrine are very short-term oriented. If we could thwart their pearl harbor and bring their fleet to decisive battle they could be beaten.
5. Batarians: Because they are willing to use super WMD terrorism like goddamn asteroid drops and nuclear strikes on colonies. Not likely to ever defeat us but they can cause a terrorist attack the political fallout of which would leave our government unrecognizable and probably very fascist and unpleasant. Also if they ever get their hands on a super-weapon (klendagon cannon, leviathan of dis etc) of any kind they will probably instantly use it on us.
6. Humans: Because its only a matter of time before there is more than one human government.
#231
Posté 30 janvier 2011 - 01:34
282xvl
-
- Members
- 184 messages
Races that are no threat:
Krogan - because if they ever cured the genophage or started getting organized we could just nuke them from orbit. I don't care how many billion baby krogan you can produce down on tuchanka since they don't have an existing fleet or meaningful military industry they have no ability to prevent us from knocking out any attempt they make to establish one.
Volus: Militarily inept. No fleet to speak of. No military history or industrial complex to speak of.
Drell: Stateless indentured refugees. No government, military, industry or meaningful economy.
Quarians: Powerful standing fleet but zero military industry. Ships are largely rusty old relics, numerous but rickety and primitive. Ships are optimzed for refugee living space, not combat. Insufficient numbers to field meaningful ground armies. Galactic pariahs (would get gangbanged if they got aggessive) and biologically frail.
Hanar: Big stupid jellyfish. Physically incapable of fielding a ground army of any kind except perhaps consisting of Drell, which lack militarily meaningful numbers. No meaningful standing fleet or military industrial complex. No history of warfare or any established fighting doctrine.
Collectors: Extinct.
Rachni: Extinct. (Unless Shepard screwed up - but even so, very small initial numbers, no established homeworld or industry, no standing fleet as of yet - we could deal with them before they became a problem.)
Krogan - because if they ever cured the genophage or started getting organized we could just nuke them from orbit. I don't care how many billion baby krogan you can produce down on tuchanka since they don't have an existing fleet or meaningful military industry they have no ability to prevent us from knocking out any attempt they make to establish one.
Volus: Militarily inept. No fleet to speak of. No military history or industrial complex to speak of.
Drell: Stateless indentured refugees. No government, military, industry or meaningful economy.
Quarians: Powerful standing fleet but zero military industry. Ships are largely rusty old relics, numerous but rickety and primitive. Ships are optimzed for refugee living space, not combat. Insufficient numbers to field meaningful ground armies. Galactic pariahs (would get gangbanged if they got aggessive) and biologically frail.
Hanar: Big stupid jellyfish. Physically incapable of fielding a ground army of any kind except perhaps consisting of Drell, which lack militarily meaningful numbers. No meaningful standing fleet or military industrial complex. No history of warfare or any established fighting doctrine.
Collectors: Extinct.
Rachni: Extinct. (Unless Shepard screwed up - but even so, very small initial numbers, no established homeworld or industry, no standing fleet as of yet - we could deal with them before they became a problem.)
Modifié par 282xvl, 30 janvier 2011 - 01:36 .
#232
Posté 30 janvier 2011 - 01:51
SajPl
-
- Members
- 65 messages
All of the council races could take on humanity, but the fact that humans are part of the galactic society for just 2 decades and still could take on 3 major powers (asari, turians, salarians ; 1 on 1 of course ) says a lot about human potential. The second thing that humanity's military is a sleepong giant, because so few humans decide to serve in the military and i guess that in the event of an all out war humnity would make military service mandatory.
I dont see the turians really having a chance to beat humanity - that was proved during the first contact war, which had more turian casualties, besides their military doctrin wouldnt be able to compete with humanity's - waiting for strong strikes that would never come, while their economy and supply lines would get destroyed.
Salarians simply dont have the physical capability to fight humanity and I think humans are smart enough to counter any genophage attempt.
The Asari could be a problem because of their diplomatic abilities but in a 1 on 1 war they again lack the physical capabilities and they are not a species that's naturally agresive (they are all women after all). Humans proved they will be the major power in the galaxy really son : during first contact, during the conflict with the batarians and the skyllian blitz, at the battle of the citadel.
The Geth could be a problem because we dont really know their strength and from what we hear they are really powerful and being synthetics they dont have to worry about pain, fear or defetist behaviour but yet again I believe human ingenuity could play a major role.
The only real threat to humanity would be a union of several races against them but then again humanity is a part of gallactic society so thats not rally a concern.
I dont see the turians really having a chance to beat humanity - that was proved during the first contact war, which had more turian casualties, besides their military doctrin wouldnt be able to compete with humanity's - waiting for strong strikes that would never come, while their economy and supply lines would get destroyed.
Salarians simply dont have the physical capability to fight humanity and I think humans are smart enough to counter any genophage attempt.
The Asari could be a problem because of their diplomatic abilities but in a 1 on 1 war they again lack the physical capabilities and they are not a species that's naturally agresive (they are all women after all). Humans proved they will be the major power in the galaxy really son : during first contact, during the conflict with the batarians and the skyllian blitz, at the battle of the citadel.
The Geth could be a problem because we dont really know their strength and from what we hear they are really powerful and being synthetics they dont have to worry about pain, fear or defetist behaviour but yet again I believe human ingenuity could play a major role.
The only real threat to humanity would be a union of several races against them but then again humanity is a part of gallactic society so thats not rally a concern.
Modifié par SajPl, 30 janvier 2011 - 02:00 .
#233
Posté 30 janvier 2011 - 02:28
Dean_the_Young
-
- Members
- 20 683 messages
That view glosses over quite a bit. Andquite wrong in a number of cases.
It's not that no species can take Humanity, but rather that taking Humanity would cost too much to them, and they wouldn't gain enough in return.
For all that the Council has been heralded as a symbol of galactic unity, it really wasn't. It was a system of balancing three powers to perpetuate their own power, and while sustaining that balance suited all three, it was always in terms of protecting their individual interests as individual species. Not unity for unity's sake: the setup was a reflection of galactic circumstance, not an ideal that must be held. Once that balance was toppled, the lack of a true unity has meant that the three powers are simply three divided powers that can be played off eachother, just like they played eachother for centuries.
The Asari and Salarians played the Turians against the Krogan. The Turians and Salarians teamed against the Asari on military matters. The Asari and Turians could outmuscle the Salarians. The Salarians and Asari began raising Humanity up as a counter to the Turians.
It's like a lean-to of three sticks. As long as the three are leaning against eachother and tied together, they were stable and upright. Once they were broken apart, however, there is nothing innate keeping them from falling on the ground, and nothing but external forces will put them uptogether again.
Humanity holds the Citadel. This is the new status quo. While any race could engage, and even win, a war with humanity, Humanity is strong enough to make such a phyric victory, and cripple the other race as well. As the Council setup was always about strength, and not sentimentality, a crippled Turian, Asari, or Salarian race would just as promptly be shouldered out by the 'intact' powers when they re-fill the political vacuum. And the Council races have a history of turning their backs on the weak, the losing, and the inconvenient.
No species wants to throw itself on the Alliance sword for the sake of the others. Each race would prefer someone else do it, while they make personal gains with the Alliance in place.
It's not that the aliens couldn't fight a war, if they found the political will for it. It's that the new equilibrium has them not wanting to: whereas the full Council was three counter-leaning supports over a warm fire on a hill, the Human council setup is Humanity on the hill with the fire, and the three Council powers prowling in the darkness, waiting for one of the others to fight while they swoop in to the fire after the Humans and the Other remove themselves from play.
It's not that no species can take Humanity, but rather that taking Humanity would cost too much to them, and they wouldn't gain enough in return.
For all that the Council has been heralded as a symbol of galactic unity, it really wasn't. It was a system of balancing three powers to perpetuate their own power, and while sustaining that balance suited all three, it was always in terms of protecting their individual interests as individual species. Not unity for unity's sake: the setup was a reflection of galactic circumstance, not an ideal that must be held. Once that balance was toppled, the lack of a true unity has meant that the three powers are simply three divided powers that can be played off eachother, just like they played eachother for centuries.
The Asari and Salarians played the Turians against the Krogan. The Turians and Salarians teamed against the Asari on military matters. The Asari and Turians could outmuscle the Salarians. The Salarians and Asari began raising Humanity up as a counter to the Turians.
It's like a lean-to of three sticks. As long as the three are leaning against eachother and tied together, they were stable and upright. Once they were broken apart, however, there is nothing innate keeping them from falling on the ground, and nothing but external forces will put them uptogether again.
Humanity holds the Citadel. This is the new status quo. While any race could engage, and even win, a war with humanity, Humanity is strong enough to make such a phyric victory, and cripple the other race as well. As the Council setup was always about strength, and not sentimentality, a crippled Turian, Asari, or Salarian race would just as promptly be shouldered out by the 'intact' powers when they re-fill the political vacuum. And the Council races have a history of turning their backs on the weak, the losing, and the inconvenient.
No species wants to throw itself on the Alliance sword for the sake of the others. Each race would prefer someone else do it, while they make personal gains with the Alliance in place.
It's not that the aliens couldn't fight a war, if they found the political will for it. It's that the new equilibrium has them not wanting to: whereas the full Council was three counter-leaning supports over a warm fire on a hill, the Human council setup is Humanity on the hill with the fire, and the three Council powers prowling in the darkness, waiting for one of the others to fight while they swoop in to the fire after the Humans and the Other remove themselves from play.
#234
Posté 30 janvier 2011 - 03:28
Barquiel
-
- Members
- 5 848 messages
OmegaXI wrote...
Xilizhra wrote...
I admit that if it did come to an outright war, I would side with whichever side had the asari, because I'm fond of their culture. But I'd really rather it not come to that.
I look and see how the orginal council races treated humanity on a double standard.
I see no double standard here.
"Sometime around 1785 CE, a batarian fleet bombarded the salarian colony world of Mannovai; in 1913, the Batarian Hegemony annexed the independent asari colony of Esan"
The council didn't declare war on the batarians. They are always passive when single colonies are attacked. Asari, salarians, humans...it doesn't matter.
...and I agree with Xilizhra; I wouldn't side with the alliance either.
Modifié par Barquiel, 30 janvier 2011 - 03:32 .
#235
Posté 30 janvier 2011 - 04:10
Flamewielder
-
- Members
- 1 475 messages
An apt analogy. The permanent members of the UN Security Council have been doing the same since its creation. While it is not a "world government", it ensures a status quo the permanent members all benefit from. I'm sure anyone will recognize that the Security Council can mobilize far more resources to serve its agenda than the UN's humanitarian projects...Dean_the_Young wrote...
It's not that the aliens couldn't fight a war, if they found the political will for it. It's that the new equilibrium has them not wanting to: whereas the full Council was three counter-leaning supports over a warm fire on a hill, the Human council setup is Humanity on the hill with the fire, and the three Council powers prowling in the darkness, waiting for one of the others to fight while they swoop in to the fire after the Humans and the Other remove themselves from play.
But before pro-humans and pro-aliens start flaming eachother, I'd like to remind all that the universe is "neutrally designed", i.e. neither side of the debate is particularly more virtuous than the other. There is no moral high ground in the issue of which species should/should not achieve prominence, as prominence is achievable through different moral paths.
While it is true that the Council species greatly benefited from their status when you compare them to the minor/latecomer species like the Hanar, Drell, Volus or Elcor, all seem to have achieved some measure of progress and contentement with the current situation (the Volus gripe, but is seems they gripe about many things...)
The Council worked great for the big 3 for over 2000 years... Should Humanity choose a "paragon" approach, it can use it's current top dog position to convince the big 3 to come back to the fire and get a "tetrapod" set up. Do do so would imply sharing some of it's new-found power with the other three but they all benefit enough that they'll work hard to keep the status quo. Less prominence for long-term prominence.
The "renegade" approach (i.e. keeping the fire for itself) means Humanity will enjoy imperium over the others and actually dominate over the others for some time, until one of the big 3 gets frustrated enough that it will take itself AND Humanity out of the game. Clear, but potentially short-term prominence... and looking at Aria T'Loak, I think it would likely be the asari taking down Humanity (hence TIM's research into some way to neutralize the asari species biotic abilities).
#236
Posté 30 janvier 2011 - 05:29
tvr321
-
- Members
- 44 messages
StarGateGod wrote...
VOLUS
This is why we can't have nice things...
#237
Posté 10 février 2011 - 09:32
Gabey5
-
- Members
- 3 434 messages
Xilizhra wrote...
My Shepard no longer feels a political obligation to her species since the Alliance discharged her, and she has no family she feels an obligation to (the closest thing is, well, Liara). Although realistically, she'd probably try to stay out of a race war altogether if one cropped up, or do her best to end it through nonviolent means. Society would probably have to break down a lot for this hypothetical scenario to come to pass.
Of course, she also believes that the asari are more likely to maintain good diplomatic relations with other species than humans are, not to mention that they have a higher galactic population. So on a purely statistical basis, siding with the asari will be more beneficial to more people than siding with the humans.
Shepard was never discharged just declared MIA
#238
Posté 10 février 2011 - 09:47
James2912
-
- Members
- 1 339 messages
Flamewielder wrote...
An apt analogy. The permanent members of the UN Security Council have been doing the same since its creation. While it is not a "world government", it ensures a status quo the permanent members all benefit from. I'm sure anyone will recognize that the Security Council can mobilize far more resources to serve its agenda than the UN's humanitarian projects...Dean_the_Young wrote...
It's not that the aliens couldn't fight a war, if they found the political will for it. It's that the new equilibrium has them not wanting to: whereas the full Council was three counter-leaning supports over a warm fire on a hill, the Human council setup is Humanity on the hill with the fire, and the three Council powers prowling in the darkness, waiting for one of the others to fight while they swoop in to the fire after the Humans and the Other remove themselves from play.
But before pro-humans and pro-aliens start flaming eachother, I'd like to remind all that the universe is "neutrally designed", i.e. neither side of the debate is particularly more virtuous than the other. There is no moral high ground in the issue of which species should/should not achieve prominence, as prominence is achievable through different moral paths.
While it is true that the Council species greatly benefited from their status when you compare them to the minor/latecomer species like the Hanar, Drell, Volus or Elcor, all seem to have achieved some measure of progress and contentement with the current situation (the Volus gripe, but is seems they gripe about many things...)
The Council worked great for the big 3 for over 2000 years... Should Humanity choose a "paragon" approach, it can use it's current top dog position to convince the big 3 to come back to the fire and get a "tetrapod" set up. Do do so would imply sharing some of it's new-found power with the other three but they all benefit enough that they'll work hard to keep the status quo. Less prominence for long-term prominence.
The "renegade" approach (i.e. keeping the fire for itself) means Humanity will enjoy imperium over the others and actually dominate over the others for some time, until one of the big 3 gets frustrated enough that it will take itself AND Humanity out of the game. Clear, but potentially short-term prominence... and looking at Aria T'Loak, I think it would likely be the asari taking down Humanity (hence TIM's research into some way to neutralize the asari species biotic abilities).
Wise words flameweilder neither side has the moral high ground.
#239
Posté 10 février 2011 - 10:32
Homebound
-
- Members
- 11 891 messages
Yahg/humans.
Which is ironic since I consider the Yahg a super-eccentric version of the human sci-fi cliche.
Which is ironic since I consider the Yahg a super-eccentric version of the human sci-fi cliche.
#240
Posté 11 février 2011 - 12:10
Pro_Consul
-
- Members
- 481 messages
Penguins - demonic little bastages.
#241
Posté 11 février 2011 - 12:31
Therefore_I_Am
-
- Members
- 747 messages
The Lolatarians are a race of hobos... Their home planet is so 3rd world with it's politics that they infight more than we do. They can't even muster the courage for a direct confrontation, and instead resort to terrorism and kidnapping.
Modifié par Therefore_I_Am, 11 février 2011 - 12:32 .
#242
Posté 11 février 2011 - 12:54
The Unfallen
-
- Members
- 1 102 messages
Yeah, Batarians are probably worse than Humans as far as their moral standards go.
Alas, Humans do have the "Global Elite" which pose a greater threat to Human dominance than the Reapers, as it was the Reapers that imposed "Galactic Peace" and an "Allied Galaxy" of species to fight them in the first place, but the Global Elite still have de-facto, sovereign, and totalitarian control of the Systems Alliance and all other Human Governments, meaning if they don't want Humanity to become dominant, and thus, not as easy to control, they will not.
Alas, Humans do have the "Global Elite" which pose a greater threat to Human dominance than the Reapers, as it was the Reapers that imposed "Galactic Peace" and an "Allied Galaxy" of species to fight them in the first place, but the Global Elite still have de-facto, sovereign, and totalitarian control of the Systems Alliance and all other Human Governments, meaning if they don't want Humanity to become dominant, and thus, not as easy to control, they will not.
#243
Posté 11 février 2011 - 01:40
James2912
-
- Members
- 1 339 messages
The Unfallen wrote...
Yeah, Batarians are probably worse than Humans as far as their moral standards go.
Alas, Humans do have the "Global Elite" which pose a greater threat to Human dominance than the Reapers, as it was the Reapers that imposed "Galactic Peace" and an "Allied Galaxy" of species to fight them in the first place, but the Global Elite still have de-facto, sovereign, and totalitarian control of the Systems Alliance and all other Human Governments, meaning if they don't want Humanity to become dominant, and thus, not as easy to control, they will not.
I here this accusation a lot, can you please sight a source?
#244
Posté 11 février 2011 - 02:03
praetor_alpha
-
- Members
- 366 messages
Batarians cannot hope to survive a full on war with the Alliance. The codex suspects that the Alliance had the bigger fleet by as early as 2160.
I'd bank on the turians. If they only knew what they were stepping to on Shanxi, things would have been very different.
Maybe the salarians too. They probably have a bigger fleet than the Alliance does (esp. by dreadnought count), but unlike the turians, the Alliance will not be able to outsmart them.
And of course humans themselves. All that progress has side effects, you know.
I'd bank on the turians. If they only knew what they were stepping to on Shanxi, things would have been very different.
Maybe the salarians too. They probably have a bigger fleet than the Alliance does (esp. by dreadnought count), but unlike the turians, the Alliance will not be able to outsmart them.
And of course humans themselves. All that progress has side effects, you know.
#245
Posté 11 février 2011 - 02:04
Pwener2313
-
- Members
- 3 560 messages
After keeping the base, no one poses a threat.
#246
Posté 11 février 2011 - 02:09
James2912
-
- Members
- 1 339 messages
praetor_alpha wrote...
Batarians cannot hope to survive a full on war with the Alliance. The codex suspects that the Alliance had the bigger fleet by as early as 2160.
I'd bank on the turians. If they only knew what they were stepping to on Shanxi, things would have been very different.
Maybe the salarians too. They probably have a bigger fleet than the Alliance does (esp. by dreadnought count), but unlike the turians, the Alliance will not be able to outsmart them.
And of course humans themselves. All that progress has side effects, you know.
Hey don't stereotype, yeah sure Mordin is smart it doesn't mean all Salarians are smart. You have smart humans and smart Salarians. I would however agree that the Salarians would be a dangerous foe, mainly because those dirty basterds would use biological weapons!
#247
Posté 11 février 2011 - 02:10
James2912
-
- Members
- 1 339 messages
Pwener2313 wrote...
After keeping the base, no one poses a threat.
YES FULL OF WIN!
#248
Posté 11 février 2011 - 02:18
Schneidend
-
- Members
- 5 768 messages
Turians. They have the bigger fleet, and our females are inexplicably turned on by them.
#249
Posté 11 février 2011 - 02:23
James2912
-
- Members
- 1 339 messages
Schneidend wrote...
Turians. They have the bigger fleet, and our females are inexplicably turned on by them.
haha yeah I never got that, Turians are just so... ugly... It would be like making out with a lizard. I like Garus and all he is my bff when he is not making calibrations but I could never be sexually attracted to a Turian. And yeah Turians do have the biggest threat and one of their highest leaders is a racist, so war could happen... All I have to say is
Bring it!
http://t2.gstatic.co...S5BIK0WR7sw&t=1
#250
Posté 11 février 2011 - 02:30
Ryzaki
-
- Members
- 34 423 messages
The Asari need to die. Fast. They can breed humanity out of existance.
After them would be the turians.
After them would be the turians.
