661 réponses à ce sujet

[aimlessgun]

Saphra Deden wrote...

aimlessgun wrote...

And you're blind to the fact that the Council's position in the galaxy could easily be far better, but they made compassionate choices instead of ruthless ones.They clearly care about their moral cleanliness, even if only for selfish reasons.

Compassion has nothing to do with it. What matters to them is convenience. A relatively stable galaxy is easier to rule over. Their laws and the structure of their government have nothing to with compassion. It's all about protecting their power.

So you're saying they think a galaxy with humans and krogan in it is more stable?

Modifié par aimlessgun, 06 avril 2011 - 01:13 .

[Inquisitor Recon]

Are we operating under the assumption that somehow the reapers are going to devastate humanity but leave the other races mostly intact so they could kill us for some reason?

[Almostfaceman]

ReconTeam wrote...

Are we operating under the assumption that somehow the reapers are going to devastate humanity but leave the other races mostly intact so they could kill us for some reason?

Um yes - the topic is if Earth is destroyed - no mention of Asari/Salarian/Krogan/Hanar/ homeworlds being destroyed is made.

Now if you want to ask the question "will we be pissed if Earth and every other council race homeworld is destroyed" - that would be a different debate.  Sort of - the other races have had a lot longer to colonize than humans have.

[jamesp81]

Tleining wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

Without Earth, the Skyllian Verge and Terminus colonies will be undefended.  What few humans are left will be enslaved or killed by pirates and raiders.

No, there is no doubt, if Earth is destroyed, humanity is done, FOREVER, as a galactic power and quite possibly will be an extinct species within a few decades.  It's really that simple.

uh, how do you figure? It's the Systems Alliance that's responsible for protecting the colonies. Sure, without Earth, major funding would dissapear, but money from the Colonies would go directly to the Alliance. And even without Earth and the Fleet, the Colonies could be protected by Mercs. Noveria and Feros seem to be doing that right now.

to the OP: As was already mentioned, if you screw up, yes, Earth being destroyed should be in the game. But not as an unavoidable event.
Though massive damage to the Surface is pretty much a given.

~95% of the human population lives on Earth.  You wipe out 95% of humanity, and we have a word for that: ****ed.

Mercs aren't cheap.  The Terminus and Skyllian Verge colonies would ALREADY be hiring them if they could afford them.  The only way the colonies are defended is by the Alliance navy.  As of now, since most of humanity's economy is concentrated on Earth, no Earth means no fleet.

This is not complicated people.  The destruction of 95% of the human race and a similar percentage of its economy will doom humanity to slavery at best and extinction at worst.

The outer colonies are not invaded by Batarians because they're afraid of the Alliance.  No Alliance, nothing stopping them then.

[aimlessgun]

Saphra Deden wrote...

aimlessgun wrote...

So you're saying they think a galaxy with humans and krogan in it is more stable? Alright then.

It's
stable enough with a neutered krogan population that has no
interstellar influence. They think it will be even more stable when
humans give up their independence and sovereignity and bow to them like
the goody-goody volus and elcor. Two races who have been associates for
thousands of years and always will be.

What the Council wants is to expand its economy without creating any rivals. Humanity is a rival.

But you're arguing that stability is their only, primary goal. Wiping out the humans and krogan would have been trivial, and would minimize risk. Why take any risks if all you care about is stability?

Modifié par aimlessgun, 06 avril 2011 - 01:17 .

[ADLegend21]

Part of me thinks "Why should earth get blow up because we knew what we had to do to fight the reapers when no one beleived us and they'll survive cuz they didn't know or something, Damn Aliens" and then another part of me says "I'mshowing this to the other races and going lock and load or I'll blow my brains out and you're F**ked cuz I'm the only one who knows how to kill these things" and then another part of me says "pshmost of my Sheps are spacers, Earth doesn't mean anything" but for the most part I'm sure the council (Bioware) wouldn't let the homeworld of one of their member races get eradicated....but if they did it'd be Earth, God forbid anything happen to the glorious aliens who are better than humans in everyway.

[James2912]

Nyoka wrote...

You know, I'm thinking Saphra Deden's attitude is a perfect example of why the galaxy is better off without earth, and possibly even without humans.

If we had an opportunity to sacrifice ourselves to save the galaxy, I'm sure some terra firma guys wouldn't be willing to do it. They'd rather do nothing so at least the aliens will get screwed, too. Yeah, there are people like that in this planet.

uhh the aliens in mass effect are practically human they act just like humans, they just reflect different parts of us. They are as imperfect as we are. While your busy chiding Saphra on morality you are advocating for the extinction of billions of people because of a few bad apples. Please don't act like you have any sort of moral high ground its insulting to your intelligence.

[Inquisitor Recon]

Almostfaceman wrote...
Um yes - the topic is if Earth is destroyed - no mention of Asari/Salarian/Krogan/Hanar/ homeworlds being destroyed is made.

And how does the destruction of a single planet result in humanity being near-extinct? You probably have at least a billion people in colonies off-world. If the Council races started fighting each other after the reapers are defeated numbers of ships and military assets would be far more important than total population.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Almostfaceman wrote...

Respectfully, I think you're forgettign the fact that the Krogans don't need to be eliminated - they're dying already.  Tuchanka is not a viable planet for, say, the batarians.

It is repeatedly made clear in the Mass Effect story that humanity is seen as upstarts and bullies.  The Krogan aren't seen the same way because like I said before - they're dying. 

If Earth is gone - it's not even arguable that it will be a huge blow to the Alliance.  It's mentioned in the codex that the Alliance is regarded a "sleeping giant" because only 3% of the populatoin joins the armed forces - but there are huge reserves.  If those huge reserves are gone there is no more sleeping giant.

I think the batarians and the large armies of the Terminus would be the major problem if humanity is decimated.  I see a few getting saved by the Asari and maybe the Salarians - but the resource grab will begin - especially if Earth is not left a nuclear wasteland.  The batarians will attack and enslave and grab territory.

If humanity does have a resurgence it will be the branches of humanity saved by the Asari or another friendly race - and it will take a looong time since no race is really keen for humanity ro re-emerge as the "bully" again.

Whether or not the Krogan are really dying is... up to interpretation. You ask Mordin, and he says they are really trying to keep the Krogan population to pre-uplift levels... this means a decline until they reach that population level, but once they're there, the population is meant to stabalize. I think that the population has been at the "desired" level for 20-40 years, and was actually starting to rebound - which is why they had to make the modified Genophage. So yes, it feels to the Krogan like they are dying, but they aren't. At least, they aren't if you trust Mordin. And if I can't trust Mordin to be honest about science, then I really, really do not want to play this game anymore.

How humanity is seen depends a lot on how Shepard is seen. This is strange but true. I hardly ever get any real racism from non-Batarians and non-Volus at this point. Well, and Mr. Turian Airquotes.

That's one reason it is hard as hell for me to do a serious full-renegade playthrough. I am humanity's poster child, so I have to smile big, all rosy-cheeked and forgiving. That's another reason I like playing as Femshep - she gives off that non-threatening, maternal, Asari vibe everyone loves so much. Look, I have a freaking mini-council in my goddam spaceship. I even do outreach to the underprivileged races like the Krogan, Quarians, and Drell. I'm even kind to Batarians, if they give me a chance. Now, most of these people are on my ship because I genuinely like them, but even if I didn't, I'd keep 'em around because that multicultural poster of us all standing together and smiling is worth its weight in gold-pressed latinum.

I think that if humanity is decimated but still maintains any colonies in council and Alliance space, the council can't afford to let them be wiped out, or attacked. Humanity would probably lose all their terminus system colonies, but they still have some within citadel space, and those would be protected heavily.

If the council lets a former citadel race be driven to extinction or complete marginalization, whether council race or associate, it looks bad for them. It looks bad for them forever.  The biggest thing council membership offers is safety - that's why the Volus joined the citadel, rather than maintaining species independence. If the humans are wiped out, why can't the Volus be next? The Volus are weak and defenseless even now - outside of citadel space, they have to pay mercenaries to defend their colonies, because they have nothing like the Alliance military.  If the council will not defend the weak races among them, then they are of no use at all, and will lose relevance quickly.

The only reason the council got away with not helping the Quarians was that the Quarians screwed themselves over by creating the Geth, and in doing so they broke a lot of laws. Now, if humanity makes destroying Mass Relays a habit, then yeah, they'll probably let us twist like the Quarians. But if we play things straight, they have to defend us, to make council membership seem like a good idea to all the associate races.

Humanity may be seen as a bully now, but if we got wrecked by reapers, we'd seem like that kid in a TV show who you think is a bully, but then you get to know him and find out he has a horrible family life, and really just needs someone's love and support to turn his life around. That metaphor got away from me a bit, but you get the idea. I can't imagine that humanity is seen as inherently more brutal or bully-like than the Krogan, and also bear in mind that the Turians aren't looking too rosy themselves. And if we're hurt, and give the council the puppy-dog eyes, and they turn away, they look like the villains.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 06 avril 2011 - 01:25 .

[Malanek]

Almostfaceman wrote...
Yes, you made statements in your previous post wihout asking yourself first the obvious questions I then asked.  You can't say the batarians aren't that bloodthirsty when they are obviously shown to be that bloodthirsty.  I knew you couldn't have an answer to why they aren't "that bloodthirsty" because you certainly couldn't get that answer from the game.

The Batarians have never attempted to commit genocide. It would actually be exceptionally unusual for a species, with a cultural structure similar to what they have, to develop to the point of star travel if they were as bloodthirsty as you are making out. They would have destroyed themselves earlier.

Almostfaceman wrote...
How, exactly, would humans financially support the Alliance without most of their resources?   Most of the financial wealth for humanity flows through Earth.  There are plenty of nations that exist on this very planet at this very moment that don't have worthwhile forces since they simply can't afford to maintain them.

Thus genocide is not a requirement for the Alliance to be destroyed.

Galatically invested credits. Cerberus for instance is extremely wealthy. Humanity would still own the raw resources as well. I want to make this clear, I never stated this wouldn't be bad, just that humans would not become an endangered species.

Almostfaceman wrote...
The batarians could simply take over our colonies.  If Earth is still habitable - the batarians could grab it as well.  Or any number of Terminus forces could do the same - or join up the the Terminus forces to do the same.  

I suspect invading colonies would be a clear breach of galactic law. Pirates and slavers get away with it because they are difficult to stop not because they are legal....and they don't have to colonise and deal with the consequences.

Almostfaceman wrote...
So then what are these humans parked in Alliance vehicles parked in Council space going to do?  I'll tell you what they'll do - they'll scatter and make the best of what they can with what they can.

Hit and run tactics.

Almostfaceman wrote...
I'm curious as to how much fleet you think there will be left after a war with the Reapers.  More than likely, ALL of the Council races will be hurting.

That's really beyond the scope of this discussion. None of us know how ME3 is going to play out. The Batarians are actually more likely to take a beating than the council races because the Reapers appear to be coming from that direction. Unless they ally themselves with the reapers, but then all the other species are even more likely to support humanity against them.

Almostfaceman wrote...
I see the remaining humans that aren't enslaved by the batarians or other hostiles scattering amongst friendly races and moving forward slowly from that point.

And even in this case humanity still wouldn't be an endangered species.

[jamesp81]

James2912 wrote...

omgodzilla wrote...

Lets assume that ME3 has two discs. The end of disc one would probably include a major story mission similiar to Horizon. In ME3, that mission could be an attempt to take back Earth with the help of all the forces you gathered. It could be a 2 hour long mission that takes you all over Earth but your assault ends up going horribly wrong. The fleet that you gathered ends up getting its ass kicked. In the end, you are forced to retreat and the Reapers go back to their extermination of Earth or whatever.

Then in disc 2, you try and find another way to take them all out. Your fleet took heavy losses but is still quite large. Things get extremely tense as you struggle on your mission. Then near the end of the game we get hit with the news that the Reapers have wiped out all of the 11 billion people that were on Earth. This is where everything gets super depressing and everyone ****s their pants. Along with Earth, several human colonies begin to get wiped out as well.

It doesn't have to go like this but what if Earth dies no matter what you do? Would it ruin the game for you or make things more interesting? Personally, I would love this. Mass Effect has a knack for making humans look like the top dogs in everything, I would love it if humans get their asses kicked to the point where they become the most pathetic species in existence or atleast somewhere close to that.

Somebody has self hate issues. 

People like this make me want to go full tilt pro-Cerberus.

[Almostfaceman]

ReconTeam wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...
Um yes - the topic is if Earth is destroyed - no mention of Asari/Salarian/Krogan/Hanar/ homeworlds being destroyed is made.

And how does the destruction of a single planet result in humanity being near-extinct? You probably have at least a billion people in colonies off-world. If the Council races started fighting each other after the reapers are defeated numbers of ships and military assets would be far more important than total population.

Military assets do not exist in a vacuum - they need an infrastructure.  The vast majority of that infrastructure disappears if Earth's population is gone.  Are you- reading - the other posts in this thread?  Or do you and I need to just echo stuff that's already being said here?

[jamesp81]

Malanek999 wrote...

And I maintain that the Bataraians would not bombard a garden planet populated by humans even if they wanted to. They would lose too much goodwill with the other, strategically superior, races.

Didn't play Bring Down the Sky DLC did you?

The Batarians attempted just that against Terra Nova.  They set an asteroid on a collision course with the planet that would have caused an Extinction Level Event.  Nothing would've survived the impact, not even wildlife.

They have already demonstrated both a willingness and an ability to launch genocidal attacks on humanity.

[Malanek]

jamesp81 wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

And I maintain that the Bataraians would not bombard a garden planet populated by humans even if they wanted to. They would lose too much goodwill with the other, strategically superior, races.

Didn't play Bring Down the Sky DLC did you?

The Batarians attempted just that against Terra Nova.  They set an asteroid on a collision course with the planet that would have caused an Extinction Level Event.  Nothing would've survived the impact, not even wildlife.

They have already demonstrated both a willingness and an ability to launch genocidal attacks on humanity.

That was a terrorist organisation not a government arm of the Batarians. Also I suspect saying nothing would've survived impact is not that accurate. Where did you get that from?

[jamesp81]

Nyoka wrote...

James2912 wrote...

uhh the aliens in mass effect are practically human they act just like humans, they just reflect different parts of us. They are as imperfect as we are. While your busy chiding Saphra on morality you are advocating for the extinction of billions of people because of a few bad apples. Please don't act like you have any sort of moral high ground its insulting to your intelligence.

It's not a few bad apples.

It's every time in history, every place on this planet. Everywhere. Everytime. Since the beginning of the human race. Someone did something wrong at the very start of this business and that error has been carried over and over throughout generations. This planet is simply not worth it. There are no innocent people here. Nobody is innocent, not me, not you, not one damn person.

I'd rather let humanity as a race start over in the Exodus cluster. Maybe this time things will turn out well.

If humanity is not worth it, neither are the aliens.  They aren't any better or worse.  Following your logic, we should let the aliens all be killed down to almost nothing as well.

[aimlessgun]

Saphra Deden wrote...

aimlessgun wrote...

But you're arguing that stability is their only, primary goal. Wiping out the humans and krogan would have been trivial, and would minimize risk. Why take any risks if all you care about is stability?

Humans are more useful alive than they are dead. If we're dead we can't help them stabilize the Skyllian Verge or Attican Traverse.

I don't think the risk/reward ration on the gambit is too good. Using dangerous races as tools didn't exactly work out too well with the Krogan. You'd think the council would learn from that. But then again, they have a proven track record of incompetence.

[Almostfaceman]

Malanek999 wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...
Yes, you made statements in your previous post wihout asking yourself first the obvious questions I then asked.  You can't say the batarians aren't that bloodthirsty when they are obviously shown to be that bloodthirsty.  I knew you couldn't have an answer to why they aren't "that bloodthirsty" because you certainly couldn't get that answer from the game.

The Batarians have never attempted to commit genocide. It would actually be exceptionally unusual for a species, with a cultural structure similar to what they have, to develop to the point of star travel if they were as bloodthirsty as you are making out. They would have destroyed themselves earlier.

Almostfaceman wrote...
How, exactly, would humans financially support the Alliance without most of their resources?   Most of the financial wealth for humanity flows through Earth.  There are plenty of nations that exist on this very planet at this very moment that don't have worthwhile forces since they simply can't afford to maintain them.

Thus genocide is not a requirement for the Alliance to be destroyed.

Galatically invested credits. Cerberus for instance is extremely wealthy. Humanity would still own the raw resources as well. I want to make this clear, I never stated this wouldn't be bad, just that humans would not become an endangered species.

Almostfaceman wrote...
The batarians could simply take over our colonies.  If Earth is still habitable - the batarians could grab it as well.  Or any number of Terminus forces could do the same - or join up the the Terminus forces to do the same.  

I suspect invading colonies would be a clear breach of galactic law. Pirates and slavers get away with it because they are difficult to stop not because they are legal....and they don't have to colonise and deal with the consequences.

Almostfaceman wrote...
So then what are these humans parked in Alliance vehicles parked in Council space going to do?  I'll tell you what they'll do - they'll scatter and make the best of what they can with what they can.

Hit and run tactics.

Almostfaceman wrote...
I'm curious as to how much fleet you think there will be left after a war with the Reapers.  More than likely, ALL of the Council races will be hurting.

That's really beyond the scope of this discussion. None of us know how ME3 is going to play out. The Batarians are actually more likely to take a beating than the council races because the Reapers appear to be coming from that direction. Unless they ally themselves with the reapers, but then all the other species are even more likely to support humanity against them.

Almostfaceman wrote...
I see the remaining humans that aren't enslaved by the batarians or other hostiles scattering amongst friendly races and moving forward slowly from that point.

And even in this case humanity still wouldn't be an endangered species.

Why in the case of the batarians do you keep insisting that I'm saying that they will wipe us out?  I've said repeatedly they'll enslave us.  Address that please and quit it with "I don't think the batarians will commit genocide" bit - it's not relevent to the discusion you and I are having.

Galactic investments for the most part will evaporate - along with the governments/corporations/humans on Earth that evaporate.  Person A's investments do not continue to exist is Person A is dead and all Person A's inheritors are dead.

With regards to "galatic law" - the batarians are not part of the council - they are a law unto themselves.  No galactic law kept the batarians and humans from fighting in the past.

Hit and run tactics require an infrastructure that no longer exists and that will be under attack by enemies like the batarians.

If fragments of the human race are scattered amongst friendly species territory - WHY are they not an endangered species?

I say they are endangered since now they're competing for galactic resources from a greatly weakened position.  Any number thing could go wrong and with a greatly reduced population it just makes it harder for humanity to bounce back.

Modifié par Almostfaceman, 06 avril 2011 - 01:37 .

[Inquisitor Recon]

Almostfaceman wrote...
Military assets do not exist in a vacuum - they need an infrastructure.  The vast majority of that infrastructure disappears if Earth's population is gone.  Are you- reading - the other posts in this thread?  Or do you and I need to just echo stuff that's already being said here?

We've seen in various side-missions that said infrastructure exists on other planets. Do you really think all of the major shipyards and such are on earth? Logistically that is problematic when you need to send so many resouirces back there. And why exactly are the other races going to go off on an extermination campaign again?