803 réponses à ce sujet

[Smeelia]

Saphra Deden wrote...

No, I haven't. If you think I'm relying on a "what if" with the rachni then I can justify it for you. My justifications are these: If the rachni are powerful enough to be helpful then they are powerful enough to be harmful. We know from the rachni wars, Peak 15, and the Cerberus team how dangerous rachni can be.

That they are powerful enough to be harmful doesn't prove they will be harmful.

Saphra Deden wrote...

Ultimately the outcome hinges on an "if/then" statement. Is the queen telling the truth? Yes or no.

If yes: she will help us.

If no: she won't help us.

Right and we don't know which it will be regardless of whether we kill her or not.  So killing her becomes:

If she was telling the truth: We killed a potential ally.

If she was lying: We killed a potential enemy.

We still don't know which was right so either choice could be right and either choice could be wrong.

Saphra Deden wrote...

For the Collector base you reason that the base might be trapped? What evidence or examples do you have to support this?

Is it the Reaper derelict? That was a Reaper, not the Collector base. Further discounting this example is the Normandy crew who you find are not indoctrinated. Another counter is that we can observe any researchers on the Collector base for signs of indoctrination. The logs from the derelict Reaper gave us clear indications of what was happening. If the team drops out of contact a crew (including Shepard) can be sent to investigate and if necessary the base can be destroyed.

If their "dead" bodies are potentially dangerous then why would we assume that their bases wouldn't be? The entire Citadel and Mass Relay system is an elaborate trap so it's not a leap to think that a base might have some sort of danger.  There have been a few Reaper artifacts found in mines and similar that indoctrinated people (usually making them become husks), it's pretty clear that you're never entirely safe with Reaper tech so it's definately a leap to assume it'll be safe.

Saphra Deden wrote...

Is your argument that Reaper technology is dangerous? To that I say of-course it is. We don't understand it, after all. If we take the time to research it when we are given the opportunity we can eventually come to understand why and how it is dangerous and elminate the risks.

Attempts to research Reaper tech so far have caused a lot of problems (quite a few assignments involve dealing with these problems).  The best result from research of Reaper tech (aside from what they let us have) was the Thanix Cannon and it was gained from a destroyed Reaper, maybe blowing the base and researching the parts could similarly provide better results with lower risks.

Saphra Deden wrote...

Is your argument that Reaper technolgy will not be useful? To that I have twp answers: EDI and the thanix cannon.

 
There's also the Mass Relays and all those other things they left for people to find.  Of course that was part of their trap so it's hard to be sure that any Reaper tech we do get wasn't intended to be available to us.

Saphra Deden wrote...

I get your point fine, but you are wrong. Both choices are not valid. The arguments in support of destroying the base are all rather "baseless" (funny).

There are arguments against keeping the base too and I've seen plenty of arguments that support destroying the base which can't be disproved (for example, assuming that there will be valuable technology that we'll lose doesn't mean there will be and assuming that it wont be a trap doesn't stop the possibility that it could be).

[MB957]

Wow! quite the response! I appreciate the posts! I know some people are rolling their eyes and saying.."oh nooo...this post againnn..." lol! but to those I say, please have patience with us newbies to mass effect. These choices and actions are all new to me, even though it may be old and worn to you! I am sure at some point, it was new ground for everyone and provided an interesting topic of discussion!

I tried to search for old posts on this topic, so as not to bother anyone, but I wasn't successful in that particular endeavor. So, this new post!

I never played ME1, and when ME2 came to ps3, I was excited and went get the game. I have played countless hours of DAO and Awakenings, but never any mass effect games.

At the beginning of the ME2 game, I had the opportunity to make several choices that would have been made in the ME1 game, ie.. save the council/ not save council...kill/ not kill wrex...etc etc.

I mostly saved everyone, seemed like the "good guy" thing to do, but I knew that I didn't have the full picture, and zero emotional investment in the characters.

someone mentioned killing the arachni queen. I always save her in the choice given at the opening of ME2. And it seems to turn out fine, even get a messenger at illium!

I wonder how much impact saving/destroying the collector base in ME2, will have on game choice in ME3.

and while it certainly isn't the only big choice in the game, to me, it was fairly important.

I was also upset that my squad didn't see keeping it as a good thing...lol! Then I was wondering why bioware saw destroying it as paragon. *shrug* game play and rpg choice I suppose!

either way, it's a fun game!

[OrlesianWardenCommander]

Well I like it when I first played me2 what you do in playthrough number one is what you would of personally dOne if put into that situation yourself I spared the base seemed logical too get as much info on the reapers as possible and if anything make the next game more exciting although I feel like Tim will either betray you, the base will be the next reaper iff mission or TIMs research finds something Shepard can use at great cost to shepards him/herself or humanity itself and you have too decide too betray Tim or use what he found in the base, possibly making Shepard the ultimate anti hero.

[Dean_the_Young]

Sajuro wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

nevar00 wrote...

The Collectors were being controlled by the Reapers... there will be no 'schematics' (or at least there shouldn't be) as the Collectors are not doing any planning or thinking themselves.

There would be no schematics for the same reason there would be no data storage and computers.

The Collectors freely use data storage and computers.


Each individual Collector is not Reaper-controlled, only the Collector General.

And the room where the information was most likely stored was consumed by a huge fireball in both endings.

If you destroy the base, it's a fireball of an explosion that kills everything.

If you keep the base, it's a neutron pulse which will preserve the base and it's equipment.

[Smeelia]

Saphra Deden wrote...

No, but they can be. It's all about the capability. There is lots of evidence that the rachni are capable of doing harm. There is not any evidence that the Collector base is capable of the same.

Again, except all that evidence.  The Reapers are devious and have been fooling races every 50,000 years for a very long time, what are the chances of this one base being the one completely harmless thing?

If you're getting hung up on the idea that we haven't seen the trap yet remember that we've seen just as much of the useful Reaper destroying technology that you envisage being on the base.  We only know that the base is used for building new Reapers (and we destroy parts of the "factory" area anyway) and that might be all it can be used for, building a Reaper wouldn't help us without some method of control (and no one has even managed to control Husks so far, a comparitively basic Reaper invention).

There's also the fact it was being used to build a Reaper in the first place, that seems quite dangerous.

Saphra Deden wrote...

The base is not a Reaper.

Right and neither are those other artifacts that indoctrinated people elsewhere, why wouldn't the base have a similar security system?

Saphra Deden wrote...

Those attempts also gave us EDI and the Thanix cannon. Regardless, you are missing the point and the issue. When the Reapers arrive their tech will be in kill mode and it will be applied against you. To have any effective chance of resisting it you need to understand it first. Thus you need to study it.

Two technologies that only helped us get this base so far (and again, could be within the Reaper's expected technology level for us, the ones who did best against them had managed to understand the Mass Relays and a lot more and even they failed to stop them).  Those technologies also had huge background research beforehand (AI research and Particle Weapons), anything more complex may not have that advantage (especially if it means researching something that the Reapers don't want us to have and had tried to keep secret).

The base doesn't have to be intact to be studied as I said so even the possibility of useful tech isn't enough to justify keeping the base intact.  There's also the issue of handing it over to Cerberus, which carries all sorts of associated risks.

Studying Reaper technology is part of the Reaper plot, trying to find something different that the Reapers don't expect could well be more helpful.  Even if we come to understand the Reaper technology completely before they arrive, that'd just make us a match and they've had a long time to prepare.  It's highly unlikely that they'd have the full details of all of their technology on a single base that has one relatively simple and specialised function so even if we do find something useful we'd probably need some ingenuity to actually make enough of it to have a chance against the Reapers.

MB957 wrote...

I mostly saved everyone, seemed like the "good guy" thing to do, but I knew that I didn't have the full picture, and zero emotional investment in the characters.

I think that's one problem with playing the later games first, even if they let you make choices you wont really have a good idea of the details or what they really meant.  It's quite possible the collector base choice will seem like that for people new to Mass Effect playing ME3 first.

MB957 wrote...

I wonder how much impact saving/destroying the collector base in ME2, will have on game choice in ME3.

and while it certainly isn't the only big choice in the game, to me, it was fairly important.

I was also upset that my squad didn't see keeping it as a good thing...lol! Then I was wondering why bioware saw destroying it as paragon. *shrug* game play and rpg choice I suppose!

I'm hoping they make the outcome interesting and maybe give you some follow up missions to make the most of your choice.  Some people would prefer forcing a right or wrong choice but I like the idea that both could actually work depending on what you do afterwards (which seems more realistic to me).  I'm sure that saving/destroying the collector base wont doom you either way but it might be interesting to be fighting from a near doom position or winning at a terrible moral cost depending on what you pick.

I have to admit that the Paragon/Renegade options for the base are one of those that you could argue could be different.  Keeping the Genophage data from Mordin's loyalty mission is a Paragon choice, the collector base is sort of similar from a moral stand-point (though there are other factors of course) and I think Legion, Mordin and perhaps others can say something along those lines if you have them along.  It is a shame that pretty much everyone thinks you were wrong for keeping the base, especially after some of them support it while you're there.  I'd rather have had them support you either way (especially if they're loyal).

Dean_the_Young wrote...

If you keep the base, it's a neutron pulse which will preserve the base and it's equipment.

It might destroy the seeker swarms though (otherwise they might still be a threat in some areas at least) and they could be useful technology.  Maybe not so much against the Reapers, although you never know.

Modifié par Smeelia, 02 mars 2011 - 11:59 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Smeelia wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

If you keep the base, it's a neutron pulse which will preserve the base and it's equipment.

It might destroy the seeker swarms though (otherwise they might still be a threat in some areas at least) and they could be useful technology.  Maybe not so much against the Reapers, although you never know.

I realize it might be hard for you, but really? Put more thought into it before you say these kind of things.

[Smeelia]

Saphra Deden wrote...

What evidence?

Ignoring things doesn't make them not exist.

Renegade version: It's a big damn Reaper base for making Reapers, it's dangerous.

Yes the danger could be mitigated or overcome but that doesn't stop it existing.  Anyway, can you prove the danger doesn't exist? I don't have to prove either way, my point is that both are possible.

Saphra Deden wrote...

It did have a security system. The security was the Omega-4 Relay itself and the oculus probes.

Those are the parts we know about, what evidence is there that that's everything?

Saphra Deden wrote...

What does that have to do with anything? That new technologies in the base might not have as much prior research behind them only means they'd be more useful. It means they would be far more advanced than anything we have now. As I said we need to narrow the tech gap.

If you have something that you already understand to compare it to then it's easier to understand or invent something larger.  You can't build a cart without wheels.  We'd be starting from the ground up, making the research process longer and not likely to produce particularly useful results for some time.  Otherwise we could be using technology we don't fully understand and that's not exactly safe either (infact it's part of the Reaper trap).

Saphra Deden wrote...

No, it isn't. The Reaper plot relied upon using mass relays and the Citadel without questioning them.

Sovereign says that they encourage races to follow predictable paths of development with their technology, the Mass Relays and Citadel are only part of it.  Most races use kinetic barriers, biotics and other eezo based technologies that are fairly similar and based on the "Mass Effect".

Saphra Deden wrote...

Answer me this: what new technologies are you going to invent out of the blue? New technologies aren't enogh either. You need to study the Reapers first. Studying them will tell you what kinds of technologies you need to invent.

You've got it backwards. Identify problem ----> develop tool to fix problem.

What you are proposing is the opposite of that. You want us to just invent new tech and then hope it is useful against the Reapers.

You said yourself the base isn't a Reaper and even studying Reapers hasn't helped us fight them (and is something probably still being done without the base).  We already know some things about the Reapers and have a lot of their technology (formerly believed Prothean) lying around.  It's quite possible that there's something useful in the hidden areas of the Citadel or maybe something useful that could be learned from the Mass Relays.

We know what they use to fight with, what their defences are (if not how to replicate them) and that they can be killed.  If we can find something that ignores or even benefits from kinetic barriers then that could be useful.

I'm not sure if there's evidence of dark energy being related to the Reapers, perhaps it has the potential to provide an appropriate technology that the Reapers hadn't expected (or perhaps it's an area that the Reapers hadn't anticipated being studied at all).  There are other possibilities such as true beam weapons research, alternate types of shielding and armour and so on.

The point is, we may not need the base at all and it's at least as likely to be a threat as it is to help us.  We just don't know (and neither does Shepard when making the choice) and nothing you've said so far proves otherwise.

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Smeelia wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

If you keep the base, it's a neutron pulse which will preserve the base and it's equipment.

It might destroy the seeker swarms though (otherwise they might still be a threat in some areas at least) and they could be useful technology.  Maybe not so much against the Reapers, although you never know.

I realize it might be hard for you, but really? Put more thought into it before you say these kind of things.

Right, maybe you could enlighten me as to what was wrong with that comment? I was just speculating.  Your reply was rather weak since it didn't explain anything or provide anything constructive to the discussion.  I'd be happy to know if there's a specific reason that the seeker swarms would/wouldn't be affected, I'm here to discuss things after all and part of that might include learning new things or considering new ideas.

Modifié par Smeelia, 03 mars 2011 - 12:28 .

[Moiaussi]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Smeelia wrote...

That they are powerful enough to be harmful doesn't prove they will be harmful.

No, but they can be. It's all about the capability. There is lots of evidence that the rachni are capable of doing harm. There is not any evidence that the Collector base is capable of the same.

Aragorn was dangerous too, he admitted so outright when challenged by Sam. Should the halflings have killed him in his sleep and carried on without him? Capacity to be harmful militarily is also capacity to be helpful militarily.

The base is not a Reaper.

We have no clue the full nature of the base. It probably isn't a Reaper, but that doesn't mean it is safe.

Those attempts also gave us EDI and the Thanix cannon. Regardless, you are missing the point and the issue. When the Reapers arrive their tech will be in kill mode and it will be applied against you. To have any effective chance of resisting it you need to understand it first. Thus you need to study it.

And the base isn't neccessarily secure. There may be more Collector vessels and/or bases out there and the whole capture may be for nothing. In the end, attempts to study the derelect Reaper resulted in neither EDI nor Thanix, both of which came from Sovereign who was not just derelect or 'captured' but blown into convenient pieces prior to study. The non-destroyed reaper-tech studied proved rather a lot less safe and in the end had to be destroyed.

[Smeelia]

Saphra Deden wrote...

I agree. The disconnect I think we're having is that you think any evidence you present should be acknowledged even if I do not think it is valid. I'm sorry, but you haven't made a compelling case, thus I remain unconvinced. When someone makes a compelling case to me for destroying the base (if ever) I will let them know and I may even reconsider my position.

Fair enough, you're never going to convince me and I'm never going to convince you so maybe we should just leave it at that?  I think we're mostly retreading old ground anyway at this point and it's not like one of us has to agree for the other one to be right.

On a sort of unrelated note (but still on the collector base topic), if all the equipment is intact why hasn't Harbinger sent an overload/self destruct signal to the base? Maybe he relied on his collector agents to actually interface with anything (and that would be consistent with the Keeper mistake) but it still seems like a strange oversight.

Modifié par Smeelia, 03 mars 2011 - 12:46 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Smeelia wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Smeelia wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

If you keep the base, it's a neutron pulse which will preserve the base and it's equipment.

It might destroy the seeker swarms though (otherwise they might still be a threat in some areas at least) and they could be useful technology.  Maybe not so much against the Reapers, although you never know.

I realize it might be hard for you, but really? Put more thought into it before you say these kind of things.

Right, maybe you could enlighten me as to what was wrong with that comment? I was just speculating.  Your reply was rather weak since it didn't explain anything or provide anything constructive to the discussion.  I'd be happy to know if there's a specific reason that the seeker swarms would/wouldn't be affected, I'm here to discuss things after all and part of that might include learning new things or considering new ideas.

If you can't see at least three good uses for mastering a mass-dispersal targeting/tracking technology with enduring  immobilization capabilities in the Reaper War...

The you haven't considered the threat of ground armies, indoctrinated or otherwise (husks, geth, anything that can have a stasis field put over it).

You haven't considered the threat of dealing with mass panics, or riots, of civilians who aren't inclined to be peaceful or obedient.

You haven't considered the threat of pirates, bandits, or other 'useful idiot' factions that can cause problems elsewhere.

You've completely overlooked the tactical benefits of the 'stasis' power.

[Smeelia]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

If you can't see at least three good uses for mastering a mass-dispersal targeting/tracking technology with enduring  immobilization capabilities in the Reaper War...

The you haven't considered the threat of ground armies, indoctrinated or otherwise (husks, geth, anything that can have a stasis field put over it).

You haven't considered the threat of dealing with mass panics, or riots, of civilians who aren't inclined to be peaceful or obedient.

You haven't considered the threat of pirates, bandits, or other 'useful idiot' factions that can cause problems elsewhere.

You've completely overlooked the tactical benefits of the 'stasis' power.

Right, that was what I meant when I called the seeker swarms "useful technology".  The other comment was that it may not work against the Reapers directly or perhaps that they could have a counter-measure themselves.

A simple misunderstanding then, fair enough and good suggestions for how it could be used.

I suppose it might not matter if you wiped out the swarms on the base since you have samples already, although there may be a control mechanism there (or on the destroyed collector ship maybe).

[ReluctantMind]

As I said in a previous thread (which was immediately misunderstood by a subsequent poster) it comes down to each person's cost/benefit analysis. If you believe the potential cost of keeping the base due to risks from indoctrination or Collectors/possible Collector allies, possible Cerberus misuse, or negative impact on cooperation of other races outweighs the potential benefits of studying the intact base then you blow it up. If you think the reverse then you keep it. There is no proving one is the "right" decision and no amount of dismissal of the opposing perspective will make one side correct. To get meta for a moment, since this is a video game we know that neither decision will result in an inability to defeat the Reapers.
As a side note on the radiation pulse, which seems to require that the Collectors operate their reactor with no shielding as if they were Reavers from Firefly, at the end of the game that sure looks like a standard explosion that blasts down the hallway to obliterate the Collector general and his command center.

[Smeelia]

ReluctantMind wrote...

As a side note on the radiation pulse, which seems to require that the Collectors operate their reactor with no shielding as if they were Reavers from Firefly, at the end of the game that sure looks like a standard explosion that blasts down the hallway to obliterate the Collector general and his command center.

To be fair, the end battle in ME1 wasn't consistent with in-game descriptions of space battles and was said to have been done for appearances so the ending of ME2 could have been similar (or they were too lazy to do two versions).  There was also the scene on Horizon where a GARDIAN laser system used missiles.

[StarcloudSWG]

MB957 wrote...

I suspect this topic has been addressed before, but since I am fairly new and haven't seen it, I suppose we could take another look at it!

Translation: I didn't notice the Search field at the top of the page and I certainly didn't bother to search for the words Collector and Base. Why would I do a simple thing like search a forum to see if the topic has come up before?

Fortunately, this thread hasn't yet disintegrated into a massive firestorm the way most other Collector Base decision threads have.

I give it two or three more pages.

Modifié par StarcloudSWG, 03 mars 2011 - 02:18 .

[Lunatic LK47]

StarcloudSWG wrote...

Translation: I didn't notice the Search field at the top of the page and I certainly didn't bother to search for the words Collector and Base. Why would I do a simple thing like search a forum to see if the topic has come up before?

Do you have to be a dick about it? Last time I checked, there are people that openly stated that the Search function is not all that great, and it's only one step above the older message boards.

[33percent]

I saved it, we needed the techonology to study to fight against the reapers plus he brought me back to life so I repaid my debt to him. Some of you deadbeats don't think in those terms. He brought shepard back to life plus I hated dealing with Alliance petty crap.

Plus I'm on TIMs side anyways, they are like the blackwater. They get sh!t done, and I'm all for if the means justify the ends. For those who hate cerberus, and TIM isn't obvious where he get his funds? Alliance actually pays cerberus behind closed doors only a fool wouldn't believe that when you need someone to do the dirty work.

[Corpsetorn]

Edit

Modifié par Corpsetorn, 03 mars 2011 - 03:17 .

[nevar00]

Saphra Deden wrote...

nevar00 wrote...

Alright I see where this is getting confusing. Let's not call it indoctrination; let's just call it a signal that Ceberus finds on the base that allows them to control the minds of people in the same way indoctrination works for the Reapers.

What if they find magic beans that are the key to defeating the Reapers?

Cerberus could find something that doesn't help fight the Reapers and is still incredibly dangerous.

That was the point I was trying to make, with or without the bad examples.

[Corpsetorn]

33percent wrote...

I saved it, we needed the techonology to study to fight against the reapers plus he brought me back to life so I repaid my debt to him. Some of you deadbeats don't think in those terms. He brought shepard back to life plus I hated dealing with Alliance petty crap.

Plus I'm on TIMs side anyways, they are like the blackwater. They get sh!t done, and I'm all for if the means justify the ends. For those who hate cerberus, and TIM isn't obvious where he get his funds? Alliance actually pays cerberus behind closed doors only a fool wouldn't believe that when you need someone to do the dirty work.

...

Blackwater? Really? That is like, the one comparison you could use to obliterate your arguement. I'm trying not to enforce Godwin's Law here.. it's not easy when it comes to Blackwater.

[nevar00]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Sajuro wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

nevar00 wrote...

The Collectors were being controlled by the Reapers... there will be no 'schematics' (or at least there shouldn't be) as the Collectors are not doing any planning or thinking themselves.

There would be no schematics for the same reason there would be no data storage and computers.

The Collectors freely use data storage and computers.


Each individual Collector is not Reaper-controlled, only the Collector General.

And the room where the information was most likely stored was consumed by a huge fireball in both endings.

If you destroy the base, it's a fireball of an explosion that kills everything.

If you keep the base, it's a neutron pulse which will preserve the base and it's equipment.

I think his point was that regardless of which choice you make, you get the cutscene where the main control room with the Collector General and all those computers explode.  Maybe they were too lazy to make two different versions of the same scene or maybe they thought it would make it "epic", but I'm pretty sure regardless, that was his point.

[Dean_the_Young]

So, fire going through a room of monitors will destroy all the network data across an entire, largely intact space station, and thus render moot any and all implied and promised technological bounty from the Collector Base?