95 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

78stonewobble wrote...
Well back to reapers. Since danger is somewhat dependent on time and potential for damage for an entire reaper vessel is so large: I suggest the following.

1. Cut the reaper into many smaller parts.
2. People working on the reaper only works with it for xx minutes or hours and then gets sent to a specifik colony where they could do no harm. In the beginning people only work on the reaper once.
3. Via increasing the time you could eventually establish a "safe" limit on exposure to reaper material and indoctrination.
4. Parts of reaper tech are studied separately.
5. People with authority on the project are never allowed near the reaper objects themselves.

Well that's how I would do it.

At last someone is thinking of practical solutions. I'd add using robotic equipment to minimize exposure of organics to the stuff until it is established that this particular piece does not indoctrinate. One of the most important parts of the search should be to identify the indoctrination sources and if possible, separate them from the rest and study them in an extra-secure facility.

[General User]

The thing that has always struck me about Reaper technology is how spectacularly "unadvanced" it is. There is no technology or ability that the Reapers possess that the galactic tech-base isn’t capable of replicating, just to a lesser degree.

The Reapers use kinetic barriers for defense, so do we, theirs are just a great deal stronger. And the Reapers’ weapons, so fearsome at the Battle of the Citadel, took turian military engineers a grand total of six months to put into production starting from shattered wreckage.

Reapers have indoctrination, we have implantable control chips.

Harbinger controls his minions from across the galaxy, we have QE communicators.

The Reapers drive their ships using powerful mass effect fields, so do we. Infact the Normandy is the first galactic starship capable of propelling itself exclusively using mass effect fields, ie no thrusters, just like a Reaper

The Reapers build mass relays, we build mass-produce FTL comm. buoys, which are described as “mini-mass relays.” So even that technology is far from a complete mystery to our side.

All this paints a picture that galactic technology, while not the equal of Reaper technology by any means, is at least within shouting distance. Just a mull-worthy line of thought.

Modifié par General User, 26 juin 2011 - 11:37 .

[78stonewobble]

The manhattan project was an example of research of dangerous technology under severe time pressure.

Plenty mistakes were made but we didn't die.

Today we atleast have the option of producing power via nuclear fission (also to blow ourselves up but going out with a bang aint bad).

Now the real life example of nuclear fission as power... We might decide upon not using it due to dangers or other considerations but I find it silly to not continue research to see if the obstacles might be removed or find out about the dangers about allready existing technology.

I kinda think of reaper technology in the same way. We need to understand as far as possible something to properly make the most informed decision about it.

How did the shrink in sunshine put it? 

[Comsky159]

Sure your points are undeniably logical. But this technology is too powerful to give to one party because it's potential implications are too significant, particularly in the hands of the ambitious. The technology should be shared indiscriminately, and certainly not pioneered by a terrorist organisation.

[Dexi]

78stonewobble wrote...
Well back to reapers. Since danger is somewhat dependent on time and potential for damage for an entire reaper vessel is so large: I suggest the following.

1. Cut the reaper into many smaller parts.

It's easy to put it there. But how do you suggest doing that? 

[Dean_the_Young]

Comsky159 wrote...

Sure your points are undeniably logical. But this technology is too powerful to give to one party because it's potential implications are too significant, particularly in the hands of the ambitious. The technology should be shared indiscriminately, and certainly not pioneered by a terrorist organisation.

In an ideal setting in which you could share it, that might be true. You are not in an ideal setting, nor can you enforce sharing it. Not letting anyone have it may see everyone die.

Nor is there any real threat of an enduring monopoly. After the war, everyone's already going to be able to recover the scraps and fragments of Reapers anyway: Cerberus is being given first and best, but the Collector Base is hardly the only source of Reaper technology for the post-Reaper world.

[Medhia Nox]

And how do we even know that the Reapers are all that advanced?

Indoctrination is their only - "out there" - technology. ((That we have seen.)) We only assume they've got magic... err... technology, that is "out there" because they told us they do.

They have advanced mass effect field technology - we don't understand it, but that's because we just started using it.

They have giant cuttlefish space-ships. Hardly an "advance".

They've got metal alloys as of yet unheard of (the Mass Relays are made of it) - but it's obviously not indestructible.

As for the Collector base... it's just an asteroid converted into a space-ship. And it's filthy with insect-based decor... it might be impossible to retrofit the stupid thing to support human living. Honestly - the Warhammer 40K orks build space ships out of asteroids all the time... they're called "Roks" and they're (the orks) are hardly noted for how "advanced" they are.

But I suppose we could gobble up... umm.. cocoon technology.

Mordin has likely cracked their little paralyzing bug tech.

====

The Reapers are like the Europeans who came over to the Americas. They're more advanced... but hardly the gods they were believed to be.

They're about as moral as the Europeans were too.

And some of you people and your blind worship of technology and superiority over other people prove to me that science is not a solution to what really troubles humanity.

"Technological progress is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal." - Albert Einstein

[78stonewobble]

Dexi wrote...

78stonewobble wrote...
Well back to reapers. Since danger is somewhat dependent on time and potential for damage for an entire reaper vessel is so large: I suggest the following.

1. Cut the reaper into many smaller parts.

It's easy to put it there. But how do you suggest doing that? 

First! ... Kill it with fire...

Then chop it up with even more fire.

Ahem more specifically it's just a question of making a flame hot enough. Well atleast so far we can make a flame around 7000 degrees hot... Or diamond covered saws. I'm pretty much sure that some of a reaper is destructible.

Otherwise the point is moot and we can't win over indestructabilty.

[Ieldra]

Medhia Nox wrote...
The Reapers are like the Europeans who came over to the Americas. They're more advanced... but hardly the gods they were believed to be.

Exactly.

And some of you people and your blind worship of technology and superiority over other people prove to me that science is not a solution to what really troubles humanity.

Not quite sure where you're going with this, but it is not wrong to want to be powerful and not wrong to want to be more powerful than others. For a moral assessment, it matters only what you do with the power you've got.

[Purge the heathens]

Medhia Nox wrote...

And how do we even know that the Reapers are all that advanced?

Well, they built the mass relays which allow instant travel between star systems and have become the basis for galactic civilization. "Current" FTL drives, in contrast, enable ships to traverse about 12 light years in a day. The Citadel relay already connects to a point outside the Milky Way. Relays have been spread all across the galaxy and a distribution this wide is already quite a feat apart from the relays themselves. Also, when the Alpha relay was destroyed, it took an entire star system with it. All that energy must have come from somewhere (dark energy/matter?) and the Reapers, then, are obviously able to tap and use it in such amounts. Aside from that, the Alpha relay was also much more capable at the right setting than any other relay, connecting to at least 16 other relays as well as the Citadel. As such, normal relays and even the Alpha, Omega and Citadel versions might not represent the pinnacle of what the Reapers can do with FTL travel.

They were also able to turn an existing species (Protheans) into a completely new one (Collectors). Not to mention whatever the Keepers once were. Dragon's teeth are able to turn humans and, presumably, any other organic species into husks so whatever means are used in there (I'll say "nanotechnology", it's the magic of SciFi after all) can almost instantly adapt to any physiology. I'd assume they have mastered cybernetics and genetic engineering.

Also, you can't hide from them. Just ask Joker how the Normandy's stealth system worked against the Collector cruiser. If we are willing to speculate, they should also be able to build computers with impressive processing power: assuming that a Reaper's mind is made up of many others, they'd be able to run billions of those on a single ship.

What I want to say is, don't just look at the obvious, think about the implications, too.

And I wouldn't hold the Collector base against them. It's not supposed to be comfortable or suitable for human living. Also, advanced technology doesn't necessarily equal "sleek and clean." The Collectors were, after all, just a servant species for the Reapers. Maybe even mere pets for Harbinger and Harbinger alone, somewhat useful to have around, but not all that great in the end.

[Ieldra]

@Purge the heathens:
You miss the point. It was never in question that the Reapers are much more advanced than galactic civilization. The question is: are they so advanced or so different that we, meaning the organic minds of the galaxy, are intrinsically incapable of understanding the principles their technology works on? Because only then it would make no sense to study their technology. And we will not get any information about that unless we make the attempt to study it.

[Purge the heathens]

Ieldra2 wrote...

It was never in question that the Reapers are much more advanced than galactic civilization.

It appears to me that for some people, the Reapers are just a little bit more advanced than galactic civilization. I felt the need to point out some things that, as I see it, had not been considered in making that assessment. You could see it as an argument for what we have to gain from the Reapers. We could finally rid Joker of his Vrolik's syndrome. Or, thinking back to the assignment "Family Matter" (whether or not to use gene therapy on a baby), completely eliminate all chances of side effects.

Ieldra2 wrote...

The question is: are they so advanced or so different that we, meaning the organic minds of the galaxy, are intrinsically incapable of understanding the principles their technology works on?

Unless it operates on a completely different set of physics than the rest of the galaxy, we should be able to understand Reaper technology. The Protheans were able to build the Conduit, after all, and were perfectly organic as far as we know. I have nothing against studying Reaper tech and as I mentioned on page two, what remains of the Thorian could be useful in devising a cure for indoctrination.

Modifié par Purge the heathens, 26 juin 2011 - 06:58 .

[Hydralisk]

Maybe the Reapers are not the first Reapers.
Maybe every million cycles one galatic society stops the reapers, but uses there tech and ascends to Reapers in there own free will.
A cycle with-in a cycle!
Edit: This is my reason for not using Reaper tech! Using there tech in the first place is why they are able to harvest us.

Modifié par Hydralisk, 26 juin 2011 - 07:16 .

[In Exile]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Ieldra, you forgot one additional important argument:

"Even if I pass up indoctrination technology, others won't."

Council Spectres, Noveria or Illium 'unregulated' corporations, Terminus non-Council groups, Krogan/Quarian/Rachni non-Council species, or just plain groups like Cerberus.

Even if you, personally take a moral stand against using Reaper technologies... others won't. And they'll use it against you.

Or they'll self-destruct in the most hilariously embarassing way, with their minds melted into mush waiting for a reaper overlord to guide them.

That using this technology will end well isn't any different than the wishful thinking that saving the rachni will end well, or not focusing on Sovereign will end well.

[In Exile]

GodWood wrote...


These two responses (that they actually say when at the base) are far more in character than the bullsh*t reasonings they give when back on the Normandy.

Other than the fact that it is convenient for you, why is Legion's justification for rejecting the reapers (which he pointed out in the past the majority of geth already did) OOC and why is Mordin's lecture on technology (which he already gave about why the Collectors are vile and the salarians failed with the krogan) OOC?

[George-Kinsill]

To everyone debating achieving technology on your own versus taking it from the Reapers:
The main argument so far by people believing in inventing Reaper like tech on their own have used the example of humans first developing space flight before they could use the Prothean tech as humans earning the right to use this advanced technology. However, the OP specifically states researching and using the Reaper tech after they are all killed. So doesn't killing the thousands or millions of Reapers give us the right to use it? If simply flying to a neighboring planet gives us the right to use Mass Relay, travel at FTL, and everything else, then stopping an invasion of the most advanced starships in the galaxy (possibly universe) that have destroyed thousands of galactic civilizations with only a few casualties over the billions of years is definitely earning the right to use the technology.

[Purge the heathens]

Hydralisk wrote...

Maybe the Reapers are not the first Reapers.
Maybe every million cycles one galatic society stops the reapers, but uses there tech and ascends to Reapers in there own free will.
A cycle with-in a cycle!
Edit: This is my reason for not using Reaper tech! Using there tech in the first place is why they are able to harvest us.

I've always interpreted Sovereign saying the Reapers are eternal this way: at some point, species will take direct control of their evolution and enter a state similar to the Reapers. I consider this desirable, just without forcing others to go the same way. But limiting yourself to existing as a ship of 2km at most seems cheap.

Now I wonder. Maybe there's a massive megastructure in dark space, like the Dyson sphere the geth are after. The Reapers "waking up" at the end of ME2 is actually them downloading their minds from there into their fleet. Perhaps they have a backup copy of Sovereign out there...

[Ieldra]

@George Kinsill:
That's what I said before in my long answer. But note that the argument that we need some kind of merit to study Reaper technology is flawed. It makes no difference if we find it floating around somewhere and get it for free, or take it as spoils of war. The only difference is that in the latter case, we might have proven something to ourselves. But for being able to study the stuff it makes no difference if the culture is otherwise identical.

[In Exile]

Ieldra2 wrote...
It is desirable because
(a) It will let us understand and master that which we have until now only used, namely mass portals.

How would reverse engineering mass relays relate to "proper" reaper technology, e.g. pieces of Sovereign?

( Increased understanding of scientific and technological principles is, as a rule, always desirable. Exceptions need justification.

Science doesn't work that way. To make sense of information you need a theoretical framework. Even if we can reverse engineer reaper technology, all we would have is an advance in engineering.

Science would actually work backwards - we'd find out technology works, and we'd have to invent explanations for it. The problem is underdetermination of theory by evidence. We can easily come up with plausible sounding explanations for why things work. The problem is prediction. With reaper tech, we'd start in the middle (like giving a nuclear engine to a 15th century philosopher). You have to invent theory for why it works, and we'd have no basis to justify it.

© it will help protect from further threats of the same kind.

Well, no. We'd invent theory that explains current uses, and we'd rely on those theories which would have some predictive validity outside of the current uses. But if there are unpredictable uses (that we don't discover) we wouldn't be able to protect ourselves from those threats.

A good example was the discovery that smoking increased cancer risk. And then our subsequently discover that that risk depends on the presence or absence of oncogenes.

(a) after the war the galaxy will be littered with Reaper debris, some faction will eventually understand and master it. It is undesirable that another faction gains that understanding and yours does not.

That's a ridiculous assumption. It may well be impossible to understand any part of reaper tech that isn't highly similar to our own and (for example) 10 years more advanced than current galactic tech. It may be that by the time reaper tech is uncovered, anti-reaper tech we developed in the interrim outpaces it.

We're talking absurd hypotheticals here.

Besides, this argument can be raised as an objection to everything we develop. For instance, It is not yet decided if the development of the combustion engine was something too dangerous in the long run. The plain fact is: we do not know. That has never stopped us, since we know: once an idea is realized, it is not possible to put it back into the box. The same goes with Reaper technology. Refusing to deal with it will only increase the danger, the only way to retain some modicum of control is to master it ourselves.

No, it can't. Technology we develop is buttressed by a huge theoretical framework - the framework we discovered it under. New medication (for example) relies on pathways and mechanisms we know, so to some extent we can predict side effects. But if we gave chemical formulas to a 12th century population, they might use them therapeutically without even having the most basic idea of how to test their toxicity.

You could come back and say that the 12th century would be greatly improved with modern medical advances - but we know our modern medical advances are on balance a net positive for organic life. We don't know what consequences reaper tech has, and we can't even predict those.

But as a weapon of subversion it has several disadvantages: it is 100% lethal. Once applied, the victim will die or end as a very obbvious husk. It may takes days or weeks, but the victim will end as a husk.

Saren was fine after months or years, even with Sovereign modifying him. As the scientist on Virmire says, indoctrination can be nothing more than a nudge. We can look at it as Legion's example with the geth: a small runtime error to a different conclusion.

What if Coca-Cola gets a hold of this, and nudges us to like food with 0.005% more sugar content, so we like Coke more than Pepsi? And the government uses it to discount the future at 0.003% instead of 0.00029%, so that we vote slightly more for one party than the other, dramatically changing our society?

You're discounting population effects from very slight changes.

Also it apparently requires a combination of nanites injected into the body or inhaled, and electromagnetic radiation or sound. Which means it is not so easily applied unless the victim stays in the vicinity of the source. I submit that the scientists of Dr.Chandana's team would have been perfectly able to protect themselves from it, had they only been as security-conscious as would befit their mission. 

And I submit that with wishful thinking and enough hard work, humanity could design a super-perfect anti-reaper weapon that would win the war with 0 casualties and within 15 seconds.

In the end it all amounts to this: at the end of the war, Reaper technology will be widely available. Should it prove as powerful as it appears now, it will likely transform our societies in the long run . The only question is, will we retain some measure of control over the process by understanding and mastering the stuff, or will we refuse to acknowledge the necessity, stick our heads into the sand and be driven by it to an unknown end?

Or, will we strive to eradicate it wherever it appears, taking every single piece of a reaper and throwing it into the sun. And maybe the technology is so explosive, whoever uses it just ends up transformed into mindless husks, essentially letting these dangerous groups solve eliminate themselves.

See? I can make unjustified claims based on nothing more than wishful thinking too.

[atheelogos]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I'd like to open a matter for debate.

From the first time when my Shepards met a Reaper, it has always been their secondary goal that humanity - or whichever faction they happened to feel allegiance to - should gain understanding and mastery of the Reapers' technology in the end.

I wish to discuss the proposition that this is (a) a desirable goal and ( a necessary goal.

It is desirable because
(a) It will let us understand and master that which we have until now only used, namely mass portals.
( Increased understanding of scientific and technological principles is, as a rule, always desirable. Exceptions need justification.
© it will help protect from further threats of the same kind.

It is necessary because
(a) after the war the galaxy will be littered with Reaper debris, some faction will eventually understand and master it. It is undesirable that another faction gains that understanding and yours does not.

Since I can already hear the assertions reflexively raised against this proposition, I will deal with two common counterarguments first.

(A) "Nothing good can come of it".
This is an assertion based on the moral intuition that something that has been used for such "evil" cannot be good for something desirable. It should be obivous that there is no basis for such an assertion but wishful thinking. Even should it be true in some cases, the argument is usually made from a position of ignorance. When it comes up, you do not yet know. The plain fact is, apart from a few things we have tried, we do not know which good and bad will come from understanding and mastering it. We don't even know if indoctrination will continue to be a danger once we understand how it works. We will not know until we have tried. And then, of course, it will be too late. However, in this specific case, the argument is very obviously wrong. A great good has already come of it, since...

Reaper technology has saved your ass in ME2.
I'm talking about EDI, who has built-in parts from the wreck of Sovereign which have enabled her to interface with the Reaper IFF and the Collector base. Without EDI, the Normandy would have never made it through the Omega-4 relay, the SR2 might not even have survived the Collector attack after the Reaper IFF was installed. To the best of our knowledge, without the bits of Reaper technology incorporated into EDI, Shepard's mission in ME2 would have failed.

( "It is too dangerous to deal with"
This argument, too, is made from a position of ignorance. Of course new technologies are often dangerous. The first cars were deemed so dangerous that there was a time when a runner with a black flag was required to run in front of every car as a warning to others. We laugh about that today and tend to forget that cars costs thousands of lives per year. Still, we have deemed it worth it, have we not?
The scientists who discovered radioactivity died from cancer. For dangers like this the principle applies that understanding brings control: we now know when how much radioactivity the human body can absord without permanent damage, and how to protect ourselves against it to some degree. It may not be perfect, but it's certainly better than it would be had we not gained the understanding of what it is. 
Besides, this argument can be raised as an objection to everything we develop. For instance, It is not yet decided if the development of the combustion engine was something too dangerous in the long run. The plain fact is: we do not know. That has never stopped us, since we know: once an idea is realized, it is not possible to put it back into the box. The same goes with Reaper technology. Refusing to deal with it will only increase the danger, the only way to retain some modicum of control is to master it ourselves.

Indoctrination:
But as a weapon of subversion it has several disadvantages: it is 100% lethal. Once applied, the victim will die or end as a very obbvious husk. It may takes days or weeks, but the victim will end as a husk. Also it apparently requires a combination of nanites injected into the body or inhaled, and electromagnetic radiation or sound. Which means it is not so easily applied unless the victim stays in the vicinity of the source. I submit that the scientists of Dr.Chandana's team would have been perfectly able to protect themselves from it, had they only been as security-conscious as would befit their mission. 

I agree with most of what you said except some of the above.

100% lethal? Not even. You make it sound like a disease.

"or end as a very obbvious husk. " You mean empty in the head and not the husk we fight ingame right?

[shadowreflexion]

Ieldra2 wrote...

This is going to be daunting. I keep coming back to this thread reading through it so here it goes. I'm going to answer in accordance to how it's written.

It's strictly a desirable goal, people won't use the Reaper tech because they believe it to be necessary because frankly they don't know what they're really dealing with. So we can throw the necessary goal out the window. Human discovery is based on curiousness and desire. As far as anyone collecting the tech and mastering it, I don't think that would happen simply because the Reapers have been doing what they've been doing for years and we can only assume that if any other species tries to understand what tech they have, they would have to go back to the very fundamentals of that tech. Humans will find something and try to improve on it right? So they would also have to try to understand the groundwork behind the tech. So again, it comes down to desire.

"Nothing good can come of it"
For this, I agree. People won't be hindered by the moral standpoint. This is going to be about discovery and understanding. Still not necessary but acted upon out of desire.

"Reaper technology has saved you a** in ME2"
Agreed. Not too much to debate there so moving on.

"It is too dangerous to deal with"
This is highly debatable. Simply because you're assuming that we can control whatever we get our hands on. Even though we can understand radioactivity, there are still many casualties when dealing with radioactive materials. When they thought about creating a hydrogen based car back in the late 80s or early 90s (I forget) to combat oil prices, they spoke of the benefits it would have and many agreed but they also spoke of the risk of the car basically being a moving bomb, causing hydrogen burns, and because hydrogen flames are hard to see, fighting them are difficult. Then came the concept of flying cars early on and even though there's tech to build a crude one, is it worth it? Some people have a hard time avoiding roadside accidents, could you imagine the carnage in the air?  And these are just a couple of things people know about that originated on earth.

Now let's look at Reaper tech. Completely alien to us and for the moment let me not mention indoctrination. What could races of the ME universe really begin to comprehend from it? All this time, no civilization has reproduced a mass relay and those are ancient and haven't evolved as the Reapers do. So understanding how to use and implement the remains of the Reapers are going to be futile at best if not taking thousands of years just to begin to understand the tech. Who also can say that even though the Reapers are overconfident that they didn't have a constingency plan if one was discovered. I'll reference "John Carpenter's The Thing" maybe every piece of a Reaper is a whole that can assimilate other tech if it has to? We don't know. So to me, attempting to "master" something that we didn't create and that wasn't a part of our world is dangerous simply because we can't understand it at its base. Now I'm not saying that we refuse to deal with the tech as it's discovered but until they figure out how to build a relay then they shouldn't touch it.

"Indoctrination"
This is the heaviest risk when dealing with Reaper tech. We know it's a signal but we still can't destroy the signal. When we board the Reaper, we discover two very unsettling things. It's over 30 million plus years old and the indoctrination signal is still working. Again, how do we even assume once a Reaper has been destroyed then all parts of it die? The basis for using the tech is shaky because no one knows (other than being away from the indoctrination signal) if they can study it simply by using protection or even by using remote robotics to do it. In which case, they have to physically move the Reaper tech which is hazardous and and place it in a containment room or field and even with that, there's been no discovery about if it can penetrate walls and shields. I would say having the tech would be fine but trying to use and understand the tech early should give all time for pause.

Here's a little speculation that I was going to PM to you. But what the hell? Think for a moment that the Reapers do have a back up and that they have been defeated before but there's no witnesses or records. What if in the reality of the game, the Reapers are us in so many words. They are the total evolution of what people may become. What if it's all a trap and either way they win by us using the tech that we salvage or by us evolving further unrestricted and without their interference? Nice topic though. And that's my two pence.

Modifié par shadowreflexion, 27 juin 2011 - 08:03 .

[atheelogos]

double post. sry bout that

Modifié par atheelogos, 27 juin 2011 - 12:41 .

[atheelogos]

"That's a ridiculous assumption. It may well be impossible to understand"

    Clearly their tech can be understood by us as evidenced by EDI and the Normandy's guns


"any part of reaper tech that isn't highly similar to our own"

    You do know that all of our tech is based on Reaper technology right? So I'd say that qualifies as similar

"and (for example) 10 years more advanced than current galactic tech. It may be that by the time reaper tech is uncovered, anti-reaper tech we developed in the interrim outpaces it."

    Highly unlikely seeing as they are millions of years ahead of us. Maybe if we had 10 million years instead of just 10.




"Or, will we strive to eradicate it wherever it appears, taking every single piece of a reaper and throwing it into the sun. And maybe the technology is so explosive, whoever uses it just ends up transformed into mindless husks, essentially letting these dangerous groups solve eliminate themselves."

    I feel as though your missing the point. All of our tech IS Reaper tech. Understanding it can and will help us in the long run. Hell to get rid of all their stuff would mean destroying the Citadel and all of its Relays. Who wants to do that?

Modifié par atheelogos, 27 juin 2011 - 12:43 .

[Yeti13]

You clearly did not play all of ME1 side missions where you find a data cache explaining that the Protheons were studying humans and were helping them survive but not just giving them laser pistols or whatever. No I don't know exactly what they were thinking but it's blatantly obvious with a bit of thinking Secondly if you just want a freaking weapon to kill reapers go find the weapon that killed the one and study and fix it.