144 réponses à ce sujet

[Someone With Mass]

Mesina2 wrote...

Why do many people still talk like everyone knows about the Reapers?

If they don't, they will soon enough.

[Moiaussi]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

At the time when Shepard made the decision to kill 300k people neither he nor anyone else had any evidence for an imminent Reaper invasion other than visions from a *Reaper* artefact. The fact that the *player* knows that the Reapers will arrive a few hours after that decision is irrelevant when judging Shepard's decision. The fact that it saved lives does *not* mean that it was the right decision.

He only had *visions* from a Reaper artefact and decided to nuke a relay and 300k baterians. That isn't going to look good to anybody else other than *him* (since he had these visions and believes them) and the *player* (omniscient viewpoint again).

The Consort (and presumably other Asari) have acurate prophetic visions all the time. Of course Shepard will be accused initially because there is no proof of the accuracy of his visions, but I am pretty sure that the Reapers showing up over Earth mid trial will count as such proof, even if it technically shouldn't.

There are precidents. Regardless, soldiers have to make RL decisions all the time. When the decision was made to drop bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, noone could be certain it would have ended the war. That decision is still being debated, mostly because despite good arguements in favour noone can be sure what would have happened if that route hadn't been taken. Often with military decisions, results are considered proof even when they may have been incidental.

[Homebound]

BlackwindTheCommander wrote...

 So I've been thinking, are the events of Arrival really something we have to worry about going to war with the Batarians over? 

Granted, 300,000+ civillian casuallities is horrific, but Batarian extremists tried to kill 4.4 million human colonists by doing the same exact thing. Did the humans declare war on the Batarian government? Nope.

I think the Batarians can suck it up, especially since there are bigger baddies to worry about come ME3.

lets put it this way, if 300,000 humans died in a percieved directed attack by a known enemy nation, would your government not care to do anything?

Modifié par Hellbound555, 26 mai 2011 - 04:57 .

[CroGamer002]

Moiaussi wrote...

The Consort (and presumably other Asari) have acurate prophetic visions all the time. Of course Shepard will be accused initially because there is no proof of the accuracy of his visions, but I am pretty sure that the Reapers showing up over Earth mid trial will count as such proof, even if it technically shouldn't.

That's metagaming, arguement is invalid.

There are precidents. Regardless, soldiers have to make RL decisions all the time. When the decision was made to drop bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, noone could be certain it would have ended the war. That decision is still being debated, mostly because despite good arguements in favour noone can be sure what would have happened if that route hadn't been taken. Often with military decisions, results are considered proof even when they may have been incidental.

This argument has nothing to do with this thread topic.

[lolwut666]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

Why do many people still talk like everyone knows about the Reapers?

If they don't, they will soon enough.

But they don't, and that's what matters.

[Moiaussi]

Hellbound555 wrote...

lets put it this way, if 300,000 humans died in a percieved directed attack by a known enemy nation, would your government not care to do anything?

It would depend on which nations and how they died. I am not sure what would happen if the US killed 300,000 Canadians and claimed it was necessary but not an act of war. We don't have the military strength or population level to have much of a chance against the US in direct warfare.  Frankly, assuming no actual mobilization against us the best we would likely hope for is some sort of monetary compensation.

[lolwut666]

Moiaussi wrote...

Hellbound555 wrote...

lets put it this way, if 300,000 humans died in a percieved directed attack by a known enemy nation, would your government not care to do anything?

It would depend on which nations and how they died. I am not sure what would happen if the US killed 300,000 Canadians and claimed it was necessary but not an act of war. We don't have the military strength or population level to have much of a chance against the US in direct warfare.  Frankly, assuming no actual mobilization against us the best we would likely hope for is some sort of monetary compensation.

Redundant, because the batarians have the means to go to war.

[Moiaussi]

Mesina2 wrote...

That's metagaming, arguement is invalid.

The arguement as I understood it was 'even if you believe in the Reapers, Shepard had insufficient information.' My counter was 'no he didn't, he just has a problem proving that.' Just because you don't agree with my arguement doesn't make it invalid.

And as for metagaming the OP asked if war with the Batarians was something we had to worry about. The OP didn't ask if it was something the Council had to worry about or the Alliance had to worry about or even if either had reason to worry.

Asking about our worries means the question itself is metagaming. Unless of course you really believe you are the Council, even though you don't even play them in the game.....

Modifié par Moiaussi, 26 mai 2011 - 05:11 .

[lolwut666]

"Insufficient information", "insufficient proof"... That's just semantics. In practice, they're the same thing.

[Moiaussi]

lolwut666 wrote...

Redundant, because the batarians have the means to go to war.

Actually we don't know about that. Their government has backed down and let others fight for them every chance and the only major operations were all failures.

[lolwut666]

We do know that because the game said so.

[Moiaussi]

lolwut666 wrote...

"Insufficient information", "insufficient proof"... That's just semantics. In practice, they're the same thing.

Innocent people have occasionally been convicted over circumstantial evidence. Someone can be innocent, know they are innocent and not be able to prove it, especially if they are the only surviving witness to the alleged crime.

[lolwut666]

But they were convicted, which is the point. They couldn't prove they're innocent, just like Shepard can't. We all know he had good reasons to blow up the relay, but the public does not, and that's what matters in the end.

[Moiaussi]

lolwut666 wrote...

We do know that because the game said so.

No, the Council says so. That is not the same thing. Cite me anything in the codex, games or books proving the Batarians are really a threat.

[lolwut666]

Now you're just in denial. C'mon...

[Moiaussi]

lolwut666 wrote...

But they were convicted, which is the point. They couldn't prove they're innocent, just like Shepard can't. We all know he had good reasons to blow up the relay, but the public does not, and that's what matters in the end.

First of all, I never disputed that without the Reapers showing up that Shepard would be convicted. I said that based on what Shepard knew, he was justified. That is a different statement.

Second, the OP didn't ask or say anything about whether Shepard would be convicted. The OP was asking if there would be concern of war with the Batarians. My opinion is 'no there isn't.' The Batarians have backed down every  time so far and in this case will be likewise too busy with Reapers to care. There is a caveat there though that the Batarian leadership might already be infiltrated/indoctrinated, in which case all bets are off.

Modifié par Moiaussi, 26 mai 2011 - 05:24 .

[Moiaussi]

lolwut666 wrote...

Now you're just in denial. C'mon...

Now you are trolling. Either defend your statements or back down.

[lolwut666]

If the Council, who are the main political power in the galaxy, thinks the batarians are a threat, then they are a threat.

And yet, you refuse to acknowledge it.

That's denial 101.

[CroGamer002]

Moiaussi wrote...

No, the Council says so. That is not the same thing. Cite me anything in the codex, games or books proving the Batarians are really a threat.

Batarian Hierarchy is there since 200 BCE( Council was made in 500 BCE) and it was very aggressive with the Council even after they got embassy in around 100 BCE.

I'm pretty sure in almost 2 400 years they build sufficient fleet to fight against Alliance.
Also I'd like to note that Alliance only has 200 ships in only 50 years of space colonizations.

[Moiaussi]

lolwut666 wrote...

If the Council, who are the main political power in the galaxy, thinks the batarians are a threat, then they are a threat.

And yet, you refuse to acknowledge it. That's denial 101.

The Council think the Terminus systems are a threat even though their best effort was to attack a small colony (Elysium) and utterly fail. They had a chance on the ground but in space they were totally routed.

The Council didn't even want to take a blatant (and much more successful) Geth invasion seriously over fear of the Terminus systems. Their comments are either ignorant or political rhetoric to excuse not wanting the related fuel, maintenance and danger pay expenses.

[Moiaussi]

Mesina2 wrote...

Batarian Hierarchy is there since 200 BCE( Council was made in 500 BCE) and it was very aggressive with the Council even after they got embassy in around 100 BCE.

I'm pretty sure in almost 2 400 years they build sufficient fleet to fight against Alliance.
Also I'd like to note that Alliance only has 200 ships in only 50 years of space colonizations.

Not this again. The Batarians met the Council races in 200 BCE. That is NOT the same as claiming the Verge. 2,400 years doesn't mean that they built any ships at all. If the Batarians have such an amazing navy, why didn't they even so much as posture against the Alliance? Note that they could have lost every ship they had in the Rachni war and/or Krogan rebellions and decided after the latter that having a big navy wasn't working for them.

Modifié par Moiaussi, 26 mai 2011 - 05:43 .

[Dean_the_Young]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Trying to detonate a WMD is trying to detonate a WMD. It is not, however, detonating a WMD, which has far higher consequences in and of itself.

That's naive.

If you take such a stance in determining your reaction, then you are basicly inviting people to go ahead and attempt to use WMDs against you untill they suceed.

Someone pulls a gun to your face and pulls the trigger.

a) he kills you, dead. Tough luck for you. As far as you are concerned at this point, any consequences done to guy pulling the gun is meaningless for you.

his gun jams, you survive. Your luck, but doesn't change that if the guy had had things go as he wanted to, you'd be dead. Any consequences done to the guy means you need to ensure he, or others, doesn't attempt the same thing again, unless you fancy being dead, ofc. (hey, some people are like that).

Whether you consider it naive or not, attempted murder and murder are crimes nearly universally distinguished by all major judicial systems on Earth at this time. Now, you could argue that 'justice' as a concept is naive: I really couldn't argue with your opinion on that matter, since it's your personal stance. But naive or not, it is a fact.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 26 mai 2011 - 05:43 .

[CroGamer002]

Moiaussi wrote...

First of all, I never disputed that without the Reapers showing up that Shepard would be convicted. I said that based on what Shepard knew, he was justified. That is a different statement.

Unless Shepard pledges insanity, I don't think his act of genocide can be justified.

Nobody believes in Reapers and only proof Shepard has is Prothein visions and Object Rho vision which he/she didn't had more then once.

Second, the OP didn't ask or say anything about whether Shepard would be convicted. The OP was asking if there would be concern of war with the Batarians. My opinion is 'no there isn't.'

This is great excuse for Batarain Hierarchy to invade Alliance without Council intervention, unless Alliance scapegoats Shepard.

The Batarians have backed down every  time so far

They never had a chance to attack openly Alliance without Council intervention.

and in this case will be likewise too busy with Reapers to care.

Metagaming.

There is a caveat there though that the Batarian leadership might already be infiltrated/indoctrinated, in which case all bets are off.

Baseless speculation.

[lolwut666]

Moiaussi wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

Batarian Hierarchy is there since 200 BCE( Council was made in 500 BCE) and it was very aggressive with the Council even after they got embassy in around 100 BCE.

I'm pretty sure in almost 2 400 years they build sufficient fleet to fight against Alliance.
Also I'd like to note that Alliance only has 200 ships in only 50 years of space colonizations.

Not this again. The Batarians met the Council races in 200 BCE. That is NOT the same as claiming the Verge. 2,400 years doesn't mean that they built any ships at all. If the Batarians have such an amazing navy, why didn't they even so much as posture against the Alliance?

The aliens who opposed humanity in the Skyllian Blitz did not represent the full power of the Batarian army. They were mostly mercenaries that were sent there under batarian orders. There were plenty of other aliens there, including some humans (you kill one of the mercs who attacked Elysium in one of the side missions in ME1).

We don't know how strong the batarians really are. We can only take the Council's word for it.

[AlexMBrennan]

Re Moiaussi
Firstly, visions form the object are completely different from asari prophetic visions - the former are induced by a piece of technology not designed for humans (science), the latter is metaphysics (and silly). The accuracy (or lack thereof) of the consort's predictions is immaterial here.

Moiaussi wrote...
My counter was 'no he didn't, he just has a problem proving that.'

I don't agree that he had the information - all he had is an ambiguous vision from object rho*.
Since this is a video game *we* know that it's both accurate, immediately important and related to what we're currently doing. But *Shepard* doesn't have that information

* One could question why the Reapers would leave valuable intel like that lying around if they didn't want it to be found and acted on. Similarly, one could question why the Reapers would leave a working IFF lying around if they didn't want us to get to the Collector base (current, 21st century humans use certificates that expire after a reasonable time combined with certificate revocation lists - I'm sure the Reapers will come up with something much better)

Modifié par AlexMBrennan, 26 mai 2011 - 05:49 .