82210 réponses à ce sujet

[fiendishchicken]

Rathias0114 wrote...

Even with a high EMS, that casualties rate would be catastrophic. We could win without the Crucible, but at a very high cost. For me, choosing refusal is like a child's way of saying, "Well I don't like your choices so blah!" - and I don't mean for that to come across rude.

You made the Crucible for a purpose. Use it. Don't squander it and put even more lives at risk. Yes, you'll possibly lose some more individuals in it's activation, but it's small in the comparison of how many lives you'd lose in a dragged out war with the Reapers.

I don't agree with the purpose of the Crucible.

I don't care about the casualties. People are going to die. Accept it. Even if 99% of the galaxy dies, I'd still take refuse.

No cost is too great when you're fighting from extinction. People are numbers. You have to start thinking like that in war. And if I can without using the crucible, I'm going to pick that option.

[Skullheart]

The united species have like, how many? 50 Dreadnoughts?

The repars have hundreds, if not thousands of Sovereign class dreadnoughts. Every one of them more powerful than any Citadel ship.

And the reapers were nerfed in ME3. Sovereign destroyed many cruisers when he was inside the Citadel. A sovereign class reaper in ME3 is destroyed by 3 cruisers. Artistic integrity forgot how powerful a reaper was in ME1.

[fiendishchicken]

Skullheart wrote...

The united species have like, how many? 50 Dreadnoughts?

The repars have hundreds, if not thousands of Sovereign class dreadnoughts. Every one of them more powerful than any Citadel ship.

And the reapers were nerfed in ME3. Sovereign destroyed many cruisers when he was inside the Citadel. A sovereign class reaper in ME3 is destroyed by 3 cruisers. Artistic integrity forgot how powerful a reaper was in ME1.

yeah...

But it's ME3. The Reapers there should be pwned by the Quarians. 

That's how the game works. 

There has to have been a better way than the crucible. I blame Bioware.

Nukes are an option. Problem is, in a vacuum, a nukes capabilities are vastly debilitated. You'd get a 4 second fireball and that's it. But that's probably what would kill the Reapers anyway.

[Steelcan]

fiendishchicken wrote...

Skullheart wrote...
The united species have like, how many? 50 Dreadnoughts?
The repars have hundreds, if not thousands of Sovereign class dreadnoughts. Every one of them more powerful than any Citadel ship.
And the reapers were nerfed in ME3. Sovereign destroyed many cruisers when he was inside the Citadel. A sovereign class reaper in ME3 is destroyed by 3 cruisers. Artistic integrity forgot how powerful a reaper was in ME1.

yeah...
But it's ME3. The Reapers there should be pwned by the Quarians. 
That's how the game works. 
There has to have been a better way than the crucible. I blame Bioware.
Nukes are an option. Problem is, in a vacuum, a nukes capabilities are vastly debilitated. You'd get a 4 second fireball and that's it. But that's probably what would kill the Reapers anyway.

. That four second fireball should destroy any reapers in it.  Additionally the sheer amount o ships should destroy the reaper armada but we have to use the crucible to win for some reason.  As for reaper strength it iis likely that Sovereign would need to be stronger than other reapers in case in encountered resistance while separate from other reaper forces. The entire galaxy should pulverize them. But alas.  

[Steelcan]

Seriously though why no nukes? In Halo nukes are used all the time. Covenant ship, nuke it, covenant control a city, nuke it, covenant armada around a brown dwarf, nuke it till it explodes. Seriously where are the damn nukes?

[fiendishchicken]

Steelcan wrote...

Seriously though why no nukes? In Halo nukes are used all the time. Covenant ship, nuke it, covenant control a city, nuke it, covenant armada around a brown dwarf, nuke it till it explodes. Seriously where are the damn nukes?

The Reapers targeted the old silo's. They were some of the first targets.

I agree with you completely. Kinetic Barriers are useless against heat. The core of a blast is hotter than the core of the sun (though in exo-atmo. environments, as I said the yield for a blast will be significantly weaker as there is no atmospheric pressure on the fireball that boosts the yield.

[Steelcan]

fiendishchicken wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Seriously though why no nukes? In Halo nukes are used all the time. Covenant ship, nuke it, covenant control a city, nuke it, covenant armada around a brown dwarf, nuke it till it explodes. Seriously where are the damn nukes?

The Reapers targeted the old silo's. They were some of the first targets.

I agree with you completely. Kinetic Barriers are useless against heat. The core of a blast is hotter than the core of the sun (though in exo-atmo. environments, as I said the yield for a blast will be significantly weaker as there is no atmospheric pressure on the fireball that boosts the yield.

. They are mentioned through out the game but never used militarily against the reapers, and I do not know why.  Every Alliance ship should have some on board

[Stalker]

Steelcan wrote...

  Seriously though why no nukes? In Halo nukes are used all the time. Covenant ship, nuke it, covenant control a city, nuke it, covenant armada around a brown dwarf, nuke it till it explodes. Seriously where are the damn nukes?

Nukes are not really effective in that situation.

1st: You are defending. If you completely destroy what you are supposed to defend, there is no sense in victory. 

2nd: Nukes are not very useful against such armored targets. You would need one or two nukes for every single Reaper... and that would probably burst Earth and the whole allied fleet back into stone age.

Modifié par Mr Massakka, 10 septembre 2012 - 03:16 .

[Taboo]

OH GOD NUKES.

They are never portrayed accurately in fiction.

They are horrid, horrid devices.

[Steelcan]

Mr Massakka wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

  Seriously though why no nukes? In Halo nukes are used all the time. Covenant ship, nuke it, covenant control a city, nuke it, covenant armada around a brown dwarf, nuke it till it explodes. Seriously where are the damn nukes?

Nukes are not really effective in that situation.

1st: You are defending. If you completely destroy what you are supposed to defend, there is no sense in victory. 

2nd: Nukes are not very useful against such armored targets. You would need one or two nukes for every single Reaper... and that would probably burst Earth and the whole allied fleet back into stone age.

. Not if used in space?  And blowing up half a reaper I'd just as good as killing it outright.  And if used in space that radiation will not be very damaging to planets.  And environmental or technological collapse is preferable to extinction

Modifié par Steelcan, 10 septembre 2012 - 03:27 .

[Steelcan]

Taboo-XX wrote...

OH GOD NUKES.

They are never portrayed accurately in fiction.

They are horrid, horrid devices.

. That can be used to fight the reapers, use everything

[Stalker]

Steelcan wrote...

Mr Massakka wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

  Seriously though why no nukes? In Halo nukes are used all the time. Covenant ship, nuke it, covenant control a city, nuke it, covenant armada around a brown dwarf, nuke it till it explodes. Seriously where are the damn nukes?

Nukes are not really effective in that situation.

1st: You are defending. If you completely destroy what you are supposed to defend, there is no sense in victory. 

2nd: Nukes are not very useful against such armored targets. You would need one or two nukes for every single Reaper... and that would probably burst Earth and the whole allied fleet back into stone age.

. Not if used in space

What "not in space"?

[Taboo]

Nukes do a lot more than go boom. They blind people from miles away. They cause burns from miles away. Used too often they'll ruin the atmosphere.

I haven't been big on nukes since I watched Peter Watkin's "The War Game".

[Steelcan]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Nukes do a lot more than go boom. They blind people from miles away. They cause burns from miles away. Used too often they'll ruin the atmosphere.

I haven't been big on nukes since I watched Peter Watkin's "The War Game".

. Use them in space is what I'm saying.  Terrible yes, useful also yes

[Lawrence0294]

[Ieldra]

Nukes are hugely ineffective in space. Do some research.

[Taboo]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Nukes are hugely ineffective in space. Do some research.

Nukes are horrid devices. I wish people would do more research about that first.

[hot_heart]

Oh, yeah. Miranda.

[Taboo]

hot_heart wrote...

Oh, yeah. Miranda.

I agree.

BUT IS THIS OOC?

[Lawrence0294]

Taboo-XX wrote...

hot_heart wrote...

Oh, yeah. Miranda.

I agree.

BUT IS THIS OOC?

WHY ARE YOU YELLING ?

great GIF though 

[Taboo]

I love yelling.

How about this?

[hot_heart]

Taboo-XX wrote...
BUT IS THIS OOC?

[Taboo]

OH A GIF WAR? I'D BETTER SUIT UP.

[Steelcan]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Nukes are hugely ineffective in space. Do some research.

. Don't assume I do not know what I am talking about.  Yes nukes are less powerful in a vacuum due to absence of an atmosphere that allows a shockwave to occur.  That said they still produce massive amounts of energy and heat that would be effective on a limited radius

[Lawrence0294]

Taboo-XX wrote...

OH A GIF WAR? I'D BETTER SUIT UP.
*GIF*

YOU CANNOT WIN