742 réponses à ce sujet

[Prince of Kemet]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Prince of Kemet wrote...

I hear what you're saying Zulu but, remember what Admiral Hackett said about Cerberus in "Arrival." For those that didn't play...he said that he would "Play fair.....for now." This indicates that if Cerberus goes to far, he would take action. I think that the only reason he hasn't made a move yet was because they brought Shepard back. It will be interesting to see what Hackett does in ME3 after learning that Cerberus is hunting Shepard. Zulu, my question to you is, if Hackett does decide to make a move against Cerberus....does he deserve to die like you say Anderson does? Does he deserve to be charged with treason?  

Why would Hackett move against Cerberus, the organization that provides him with top notch intelligence, research, operational support, and full deniability?

Things change Zulu. I asked my questions based on what he said in Arrival. What do you interpret...."Play fair...for now" means?

[Zulu_DFA]

Prince of Kemet wrote...

What do you interpret...."Play fair...for now" means?

I interpret it so that he is bulsh*tting you all the way. Starting with the idea that you'll need to go to Earth (why the fuсk Earth?????????) to trial for this Bahak affair, when he is the only one who can implicate you and says he's on your side...

[didymos1120]

Prince of Kemet wrote...

Things change Zulu. I asked my questions based on what he said in Arrival. What do you interpret...."Play fair...for now" means?

You should know the answer: in any way that doesn't force him to alter his pet theory.

[Prince of Kemet]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Prince of Kemet wrote...

What do you interpret...."Play fair...for now" means?

I interpret it so that he is bulsh*tting you all the way. Starting with the idea that you'll need to go to Earth (why the fuсk Earth?????????) to trial for this Bahak affair, when he is the only one who can implicate you and says he's on your side...

Think so? Hmm, interesting. I guess we'll have to wait eight or nine more months to find out.

[commandoclone87]

@ Zulu

Cerberus is no longer a part of the Alliance military forces. As such, they only ever provided information to Hackett if it furthered their current plans or their overall goal of a human dominated galaxy. While Hackett and Anderson, may have been willing to work with Cerberus directly throughout the events of Mass Effect 2, that was for Shepard's sake only as they could not let themeselves been seen publicly supporting Shepard.

What we do know from Gameinformer, is that between the end of Mass Effect 2 and the beginning of Mass Effect 3, something happens between Shepard and Cerberus that causes TIM to start hunting him down. Maybe it was the destruction of the Collector Base or the fact that you run off with a multi-billion credit frigate and a Cerberus crew and basically give it to the Alliance.

Since TIM is hunting Shepard, Hackett and Anderson (whom are both very loyal to Shep) break any and all ties with Cerberus and will do what they can to protect the Commander, including a very public hunt for Cerberus.

As for the trial on Earth. Shepard is being tried on Earth, because the events of Arrival are between the Batarians and the Alliance and does not involve the other races. The Alliance is putting on a show for the Batarians to prevent a war.

Modifié par commandoclone87, 21 avril 2011 - 06:52 .

[CroGamer002]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

That TIM doesn't want to kill Shepard, perhaps?

Guess he just forgot to tell that guy on the left, eh?

Guy on the left is shooting stun rounds. And is aiming for Shep's legs. I can tell by the flash.

Since when weapons that use Thermal clips can use stun rounds?


And since when SHOTGUNS use stun ammo?!

[Zulu_DFA]

didymos1120 wrote...

Prince of Kemet wrote...

Things change Zulu. I asked my questions based on what he said in Arrival. What do you interpret...."Play fair...for now" means?

You should know the answer: in any way that doesn't force him to alter his pet theory.

Ok, so how do you interpret it? How can one "play fair" with terrorists? Or how can one "play unfair" with them?

[Seboist]

Mesina2 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

That TIM doesn't want to kill Shepard, perhaps?

Guess he just forgot to tell that guy on the left, eh?

Guy on the left is shooting stun rounds. And is aiming for Shep's legs. I can tell by the flash.

Since when weapons that use Thermal clips can use stun rounds?


And since when SHOTGUNS use stun ammo?!

www.smh.com.au/nsw/big-shock-tactics-pumpaction-stun-gun--shoots-30m-20100715-10bur.html

[didymos1120]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Ok, so how do you interpret it? How can one "play fair" with terrorists? Or how can one "play unfair" with them?

I don't interpret it at all, because that's not what Hackett actually says.  Which is this:

"So for now... I can be friendly."

[CroGamer002]

Seboist wrote...

www.smh.com.au/nsw/big-shock-tactics-pumpaction-stun-gun--shoots-30m-20100715-10bur.html

Oh.

But still this weapons use Thermal clips, how will they work with stun ammo?

[Zulu_DFA]

commandoclone87 wrote...

Hackett and Anderson (whom are both very loyal to Shep)

I will comment only on this one.

Anderson, as a civilian, can feel loyal to whomever he likes (and most of all he likes Kahlee Sanders, I guess).

But Hackett is top brass Alliance and he can't be "loyal to Shep" by definition. Shepard is his subordinate in the Alliance, not the other way around. As such, Shepard is just a pawn to him, just like to TIM.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 21 avril 2011 - 07:02 .

[Prince of Kemet]

didymos1120 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Ok, so how do you interpret it? How can one "play fair" with terrorists? Or how can one "play unfair" with them?

I don't interpret it at all, because that's not what Hackett actually says.  Which is this:

"So for now... I can be friendly."

Thanx for the correction didy...I was attempting to quote from memory. I haven't played in a while..

[Zulu_DFA]

Nevermind.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 21 avril 2011 - 07:08 .

[Prince of Kemet]

I particularly like what Hackett says to Shepard about the Normandy if you destroy the Collector Base.

[Halo Quea]

I've been trying to understand this argument but it just doesn't make sense.

I guess I get what both sides are saying, but at the same time it's just ridiculous to abduct Shepard NOW. I mean TIM is going to pull this $#*t now? Seriously now? Right now? When Earth is being sucked into the Reaper vacuum cleaner?

And why be cross with Anderson NOW? Really? Now is the time to engage in illogical and petty vendettas and kill Anderson over WHAT exactly? The Reapers are turning our asses into galactic kool-aid and you guys want to stop in the middle of everything and kill just about the only person in the Alliance brass that's worth trusting?

If Anderson isn't worth trusting then who IS? Hackett? Mikhailovich? Udina?

[Seboist]

Mesina2 wrote...

Seboist wrote...

www.smh.com.au/nsw/big-shock-tactics-pumpaction-stun-gun--shoots-30m-20100715-10bur.html

Oh.

But still this weapons use Thermal clips, how will they work with stun ammo?

They set their guns to "stun" like in Star Trek.

[Zulu_DFA]

Halo Quea wrote...

I've been trying to understand this argument but it just doesn't make sense.

I guess I get what both sides are saying, but at the same time it's just ridiculous to abduct Shepard NOW. I mean TIM is going to pull this $#*t now? Seriously now? Right now? When Earth is being sucked into the Reaper vacuum cleaner?

Deniability. TIM has to imitate the feud over the "loss" of the Normandy to the Alliance.

Halo Quea wrote...

And why be cross with Anderson NOW? Really? Now is the time to engage in illogical and petty vendettas and kill Anderson over WHAT exactly? The Reapers are turning our asses into galactic kool-aid and you guys want to stop in the middle of everything and kill just about the only person in the Alliance brass that's worth trusting?

Anderson is a loose cannon and a irrational backstabber. And totally worthless in the grand scheme of things.

And he is not in the Alliance brass anymore. He betrayed the Alliance and resigned before they had to press charges against him.

Halo Quea wrote...

If Anderson isn't worth trusting then who IS? Hackett? Mikhailovich? Udina?

All of them seem so.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 21 avril 2011 - 07:23 .

[Prince of Kemet]

I don't trust Udina at all......he has his head so far up the council's ass that he knows what they had for lunch.....LAST WEEK!!!

[Prince of Kemet]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Halo Quea wrote...

I've been trying to understand this argument but it just doesn't make sense.

I guess I get what both sides are saying, but at the same time it's just ridiculous to abduct Shepard NOW. I mean TIM is going to pull this $#*t now? Seriously now? Right now? When Earth is being sucked into the Reaper vacuum cleaner?

Deniability. TIM has to imitate the feud over the "loss" of the Normandy to the Alliance.

Halo Quea wrote...

And why be cross with Anderson NOW? Really? Now is the time to engage in illogical and petty vendettas and kill Anderson over WHAT exactly? The Reapers are turning our asses into galactic kool-aid and you guys want to stop in the middle of everything and kill just about the only person in the Alliance brass that's worth trusting?

Anderson is a loose cannon and a irrational backstabber. And totally worthless in the grand scheme of things.

And he is not in the Alliance brass anymore. He betrayed the Alliance and resigned before they had to press charges against him.

Halo Quea wrote...

If Anderson isn't worth trusting then who IS? Hackett? Mikhailovich? Udina?

All of them seem so.

Zulu, could it be that the council likes Udina better because he's easier to manipulate? 

[Zulu_DFA]

Prince of Kemet wrote...

I don't trust Udina at all......

A pity.

Prince of Kemet wrote...

he has his head so far up the council's ass that he knows what they had for lunch.....LAST WEEK!!!

Such is his job, and he is very good at it!

[Nashiktal]

As much as I hate to say it, Udina might actually be one of the few people shep can trust.

At least he is predictable.

[Prince of Kemet]

[quote]Prince of Kemet wrote...

he has his head so far up the council's ass that he knows what they had for lunch.....LAST WEEK!!![/quote]
Such is his job, and he is very good at it!

[/quote]

LOL!!!........I wonder what kind of shampoo does Udina use? Head and Shoulders????? LOL!!!

Modifié par Prince of Kemet, 21 avril 2011 - 07:30 .

[Zulu_DFA]

Prince of Kemet wrote...

Zulu, could it be that the council likes Udina better because he's easier to manipulate? 

No. Simply out of the two, Udina and Anderson, Udina is the only one who can understand what's going on at the session.

[Prince of Kemet]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Prince of Kemet wrote...

Zulu, could it be that the council likes Udina better because he's easier to manipulate? 

No. Simply out of the two, Udina and Anderson, Udina is the only one who can understand what's going on at the session.

I respect your opinion Zulu but, when the chips are down and the s**t is getting thick, I want Anderson on my team......Udina can go.......flip burgers for the council...unless...they're all vegetarians...in which case he can go flip........veggie burgers.

[Zeratul20]

Look, Zulu, I don't want to be an ass here, but you're always so full of rage about this. I can understand that you favor a certain approach and that you hope/think the story will go in a certain direction. But do you always have to be so "you are fools not to accept my point of view" about it?
(Admittedly, you're much calmer in this thread than you were in the earlier ones. I'm just sayin', think about your blood pressure, man.)

(On an earlier post: you usually reference treaties and the like to support your viewpoint, but you ignore the fact that we don't have those treaties. Technically, we don't know anything about the legal system in ME, let alone the treaties themselves.)

Modifié par Zeratul20, 21 avril 2011 - 07:34 .