310 réponses à ce sujet

[AdmiralCheez]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Their interest in galactic stability is in so far that stability favors them: when stability does not favor them, they're no more inclined towards it than anyone else (see: when they aren't holding the reigns of power).

Well, durr.  Politicians hardly ever give up power.

[Xilizhra]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

The Council is a group of a select few powers whose interests may or may not be aligned with your own.

Their interest in galactic stability is in so far that stability favors them: when stability does not favor them, they're no more inclined towards it than anyone else (see: when they aren't holding the reigns of power).

The best that can be said of the Council is that they aren't malevolent, and the worst is that they aren't benevolent. They aren't inclined to harm others on principal, but in practice they have no hesitation to harm others when it does suit them. (The Spectres, the genophage v2, and many more.)

Well, having them support galactic stability works just fine for me, since having them do so is fairly easy.

[DarthSliver]

Well they continue to ignore the Reaper threat when it has already smacked them in the face. So much for protecting the Galactic community. Its also not anyones fault but the Council's why salvaging Sovereign didnt bring alot of results. They shouldve had Citadel Military/ C-sec on top of that salvage operation. They turn a blind eye when it suits them best and waits for the threat to be a real problem before doing something about. But whatever when the Reapers are actually attacking the Galaxy it will be too late for them to prepare, i doubt Earth is the only planet getting hit.



So I bet its going to be a blessing that the Council didnt deal with the Geth 300 years ago when ME3 comes.

[Dean_the_Young]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Their interest in galactic stability is in so far that stability favors them: when stability does not favor them, they're no more inclined towards it than anyone else (see: when they aren't holding the reigns of power).

Well, durr.  Politicians hardly ever give up power.

It would seem duh, bug a number of people confuse the Council's self-interest for a desire for stability in and of itself.

If a status quo stability doesn't favor them, they aren't as much in support of it.

[AkiKishi]

All governments primary focus is on stability. Because stability is in everyones interest.Without stability there is no confidence and without confidence there is panic.

Avoiding panic is the reason they don't tell people about the Reaper threat, news that the Reapers are coming would cause huge instability and panic. That's why they work quietly behind the scenes through spectres.



You only have to look to the War of the Worlds broadcast to see what sort of effect news of the Reapers would have. That's not something you do without some really compelling evidence.



These guys are responsible for billions upon billions and you expect them to move on a whim?

[Gabey5]

1. AI research is Illegal
All AI is bad imo

2. 'Old Boys' club(paragon only)
calm down humans you just got here 30 years ago
3. The Quarian/Geth conflict
They made their bed, they have to sleep in it
4. The Genophage
don't care the Krogan should always be kept in check

5. Spectres
its a galaxy of billions.... they are necessary and it would be naive to think otherwise

6. Ekuna
everyone pulls their weight the council isnt a soup kitchen, if you can't pull your weight your off the team
7. The Krogan Rebellions
A galactic war should only be used as a last result

[AdmiralCheez]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

It would seem duh, bug a number of people confuse the Council's self-interest for a desire for stability in and of itself.

If a status quo stability doesn't favor them, they aren't as much in support of it.

Thing is though, the current state of affairs is no threat to their power, and keeping themselves in power is part and parcel of "the way things are."

Bunch of sissies is what they are, but they're hardly the "bad guys."

[Flamewielder]

Carl Sagan's effective application of "The Rules of the Game": cooperate (paragon) when there's reciprocity; compete (renegade) when there isn't. The Council's only virtue is that their efforts to maintain the status quo has had the side effect of galactic peace.



Give the Council a chance at good faith cooperation, screw them if they don't.

[James2912]

I want to overthrow the Council and create a galactic republic. Where representation is not based on the color of your skin/race/ whatever. I don't like galactic apartheid.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Xilizhra wrote...

2. 'Old Boys' club(paragon only)
There is still, despite the Alliance's ascendence into the ranks of the Citadel Council, a power clique against Humanity. This is demonstrated during the events of ME2 where Councillor Anderson requests 'increased access to the Council's space tracking network.' Why doesn't the Alliance, already a member of the Council, have this?

I've never seen this, so can't really reply.

He is talking about the council's refusal to support humanity in investigating the missing colonies. You can hear about it in the citadel news (with Emily Wong). Can't remember the specifics but it's something about them voting 3-1 against giving Anderson and the alliance more support.

It's pretty clear they are still trying their best to hold humanity out, despite them being part of the club now.

[Pwener2313]

I say get rid of the problem in ME1. Obviously they'll come around in ME3 but almost screwing the galaxy to extinction by siding with Udina and grounding the galaxy was one mistake that I wasn't going to overlook.



Wathever they're bad or good, it all comes down to them getting ahead. If it doesn't benefit them or dislike something, they'll air quote you into the next rotation cycle.

[Dean_the_Young]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

It would seem duh, bug a number of people confuse the Council's self-interest for a desire for stability in and of itself.

If a status quo stability doesn't favor them, they aren't as much in support of it.

Thing is though, the current state of affairs is no threat to their power, and keeping themselves in power is part and parcel of "the way things are."

Humanity's sudden rise is the single greatest threat to their power, because Humanity is outside their system yet is seen as holding the power to throw over the system, even in defeat: Humanity's entrance and development has already changed the old status quo, making the leading powers lose face (First Contact ending in a draw) and overthrowing established powers (driving out the Batarians, outright beating them in a unofficial war), and whether the new status quo will be favorable to the Council or not is unknown, and part of the reason why the Council has invested so much effort and attention to either restraining the Alliance or coopting it.

Ultimately, through the rise of the Alliance, Saren's invasion, and the return of the Reapers, the status quo is changing, and it's changing in ways the Council can not dictate what that status quo will be. It is increasingly no longer 'the way things are', but rather 'the way things were' versus 'the way things will be', with the past tense and future tense not necessarily being the same thing.

Since the player, as Shepard, has the ability to dictate how things will be, it important for them to recognize what has been need not necessarily continue to be unless they choose so. A status quo will return regardless, but it need not be another one that serves the interests of the old Council.

Bunch of sissies is what they are, but they're hardly the "bad guys."

Never said they were. But they aren't 'really good', or even 'pretty good', or even good.

[AkiKishi]

Lizardviking wrote...
He is talking about the council's refusal to support humanity in investigating the missing colonies. You can hear about it in the citadel news (with Emily Wong). Can't remember the specifics but it's something about them voting 3-1 against giving Anderson and the alliance more support.

It's pretty clear they are still trying their best to hold humanity out, despite them being part of the club now.

They are very determined to stay out of the Terminus systems in case it provokes a war. Humans seem intent on going where ever they want. They don't stop them doing that, but they don't provide aid when they get into trouble. That seems a fairly reasonable stance to me.

[Barquiel]

Lizardviking wrote...

He is talking about the council's refusal to support humanity in investigating the missing colonies. You can hear about it in the citadel news (with Emily Wong). Can't remember the specifics but it's something about them voting 3-1 against giving Anderson and the alliance more support.

There is a news report that the STG is investigating the colony attacks if you saved the council in ME1.

a new council...I don't know

[AdmiralCheez]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Never said they were. But they aren't 'really good', or even 'pretty good', or even good.

Hence my labeling them as "Lawful Neutral."

As for the human shebang, that's the fun part of Mass Effect.  Keep in mind, though, that in light of the Battle of the Citadel, letting humans join the club was the smartest choice, as it not only added to the power pool but eased hostility between Earth and the council races (for the most part).  Also, remember that the current council is not the same as the one that unleashed the genophage or condemned the quarians--the general sway of politics changes based on who's in office.

Ranting off on a tangent, but the current council, I believe, is more than anything extremely cautious.  They'd rather tiptoe around as many major issues as possible than confront them.

The salarian's a skeptic, and refuses to mobilize without solid evidence, which prevents disasters in the long run but prevents immediate action.

The asari's obsessed with maintaining a good public face, and is probably responsible for most of the tiptoeing and secret-keeping.  Prevents violence or unrest, sure, but it also puts a stopper on radical action and is probably responsible for the TruthHax incident.  Of course, that could be Tela's fault, since she tends to get a little trigger-happy, but we'll never know for sure.

The turian's a pompous dick.  So is Udina.  It's like they're brothers or something.

Anderson is the only one willing to get things moving, but with the three others digging their heels in/lack of political power on his part, his efforts are futile.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Barquiel wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

He is talking about the council's refusal to support humanity in investigating the missing colonies. You can hear about it in the citadel news (with Emily Wong). Can't remember the specifics but it's something about them voting 3-1 against giving Anderson and the alliance more support.

There is a news report that the STG is investigating the colony attacks if you saved the council in ME1.

a new council...I don't know

Maybe. But why decilne offering more support when one of the council racers are under attack? Especially when it's clear that whatever force is behind it is capable of taking out colonies within a moments notice and without a trace.

[Wulfram]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
]Humanity's sudden rise is the single greatest threat to their power, because Humanity is outside their system yet is seen as holding the power to throw over the system, even in defeat: Humanity's entrance and development has already changed the old status quo, making the leading powers lose face (First Contact ending in a draw) and overthrowing established powers (driving out the Batarians, outright beating them in a unofficial war), and whether the new status quo will be favorable to the Council or not is unknown, and part of the reason why the Council has invested so much effort and attention to either restraining the Alliance or coopting it.

The first contact war ended in a draw because the Council stopped the Turian response.  The Batarians were driven out because the Council allowed it.  Humanity's rise has been supported by the Council every step of the way.

@Lizardviking
The people in the Terminus systems are there because they rejected the Council's - and the alliance's - authority.  Even one Alliance soldier - Ashley/Kaiden - recieved a pretty hostile welcome when they were sent to investigate.

Modifié par Wulfram, 07 février 2011 - 06:54 .

[Xilizhra]

Flamewielder wrote...

Carl Sagan's effective application of "The Rules of the Game": cooperate (paragon) when there's reciprocity; compete (renegade) when there isn't. The Council's only virtue is that their efforts to maintain the status quo has had the side effect of galactic peace.

Give the Council a chance at good faith cooperation, screw them if they don't.

I can think of no Paragon option to continue cooperation with someone who screwed you over already.

[In Exile]

Wulfram wrote..
The first contact war ended in a draw because the Council stopped the Turian response.  The Batarians were driven out because the Council allowed it.  Humanity's rise has been supported by the Council every step of the way.

That's not entirely true.

The Council stopped the turians from curb-stomping humanity... but that was as much their interest as it was for humanity.

"Council genocide against unknown alien species" is not exactly the kind of press that would make everyone go around and cheer. They reigned back the turians and opened negotiations. Since the whole war was the turians' fault, stopping it wasn't a sign of pro-human sentiment so much as the barest level of reasonable restraint.

As fo the batarians, what the council actually did was not get involved. The batarians were already aggressive and a headache - they had previously bombarded and annexed asari & salarian colonies. The humans were pissed, and we wanted to curb-stomp the Council. It served their interests to do so, since at worst human lives would be spent correcting a problem for the Council, and at best we'd exhaust each other that that's two headaches that go away.

ETA:

Not to mention that this is wrong. The batarians and the Alliance never went to war. When the Alliance started colonizing the Skyllian Verge, the batarians wanted humanity evicted . The Council refused and the batarians withdrew as an associate rate of the Citadel and began supporting pirate & slaver action against humanity. This led to the Skyllian Blitz, which wasn't any kind of war.

The Council did what was best for the Council. This included encouraging humanity to settle the Attican Traverse and then telling them to **** themselves when it came in to defending against an exclusive geth attack against human colonies.

@Lizardviking
The people in the Terminus systems are there because they rejected the Council's - and the alliance's - authority.  Even one Alliance soldier - Ashley/Kaiden - recieved a pretty hostile welcome when they were sent to investigate.

If Ilium dissapeared, Council wold or no you'd see an asari response. Insofar as the Council knew, there was a specific and targeted and near genocidal plot against one of their member races. That's as close to a declaration of war as you can get.

Political affiliation in ME is as much race based as it is nation based. An attack exclusively on humans is as dangerous to the Alliance as an official declaration of war.

Modifié par In Exile, 07 février 2011 - 07:07 .

[Xilizhra]

If Ilium dissapeared, Council wold or no you'd see an asari response.

An asari response? Sure. A human response? I very much doubt it. A salarian/turian response? Iffy, but I doubt that too.

[AkiKishi]

In Exile wrote...


If Ilium dissapeared, Council wold or no you'd see an asari response. Insofar as the Council knew, there was a specific and targeted and near genocidal plot against one of their member races. That's as close to a declaration of war as you can get.

Ilium is a hub world it disapearing would be a whole other scale of magnetude to a colony.

[In Exile]

Xilizhra wrote...
An asari response? Sure. A human response? I very much doubt it. A salarian/turian response? Iffy, but I doubt that too.

The point that Wulfram made was that the collector attacks weren't Council or Alliance space; but that doesn't matter insofar as the interest of the Alliance is concerned.

What the Alliance in that case asked for was not military support, but intelligence. That's a dick move.

[James2912]

In Exile wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
An asari response? Sure. A human response? I very much doubt it. A salarian/turian response? Iffy, but I doubt that too.

The point that Wulfram made was that the collector attacks weren't Council or Alliance space; but that doesn't matter insofar as the interest of the Alliance is concerned.

What the Alliance in that case asked for was not military support, but intelligence. That's a dick move.

The Council is full of a bunch of dicks. However the Alliance needs to learn to just ignore the Council, like a lot of countries ignore the UN. The Council is full of cowards they won't do anything if humanity is more assertive against its enemies. The Council looks out for there needs just fine the Alliance needs to do the same.

Modifié par James2912, 07 février 2011 - 07:17 .

[In Exile]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Ilium is a hub world it disapearing would be a whole other scale of magnetude to a colony.

Certainly. Illium is a massive economic centre of tens of millions of people. Freedom's Progress and Horizon probably barely had a population of 1.5 million combined. We don't know how many other colonies have dissapeared. At most, probably every colony kidnapped up to the point Shepard woke up likely didn't number past a 5-10 million people.

Nevertheless, that's a tremendous amount of human lives, and it's a targeted genocide. I used Illium as an example of a asari world outside Council space. If we had another similar colony, I'd be happy to point out.

[Dean_the_Young]

Wulfram wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
]Humanity's sudden rise is the single greatest threat to their power, because Humanity is outside their system yet is seen as holding the power to throw over the system, even in defeat: Humanity's entrance and development has already changed the old status quo, making the leading powers lose face (First Contact ending in a draw) and overthrowing established powers (driving out the Batarians, outright beating them in a unofficial war), and whether the new status quo will be favorable to the Council or not is unknown, and part of the reason why the Council has invested so much effort and attention to either restraining the Alliance or coopting it.

The first contact war ended in a draw because the Council stopped the Turian response.  The Batarians were driven out because the Council allowed it.  Humanity's rise has been supported by the Council every step of the way.

The Council's acceptance and allowance of the Human ascent doesn't change the change in power due to Humanity. Even as the Council did make the First Contact War end in a draw, that fact set the tone against them by handing implicit power to the Humans. It's similar, in a sense, to the Russo-Japanese War: a war that marked the first defet of a European country by a foreign power, even though had Russia continued the war they almost certainly would have won. But they didn't, however, and what did happen made the whole situation work against the Russians and for the Japanese.

The Batarians drove themselves out: the Council tolerated it, but to say anyone needed permission is stretching it.