2463 réponses à ce sujet

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

And then there was 1.

[Sisterofshane]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

According to this, it says that Harbinger is the largest ship, at 2 km long. To put this into perspective, the destiny ascension was roughly 3.5 km long. So unless the Reapers have a huge amount of ships in general, there's no reason to assume that they are any larger then ships in the galaxies' fleet.

Interestingly enough, despite it's siz eand power, the DA was crippled (or destroyed), because it wasn't prepared or made for close-range combat. The biggest of guns is useless if you can't aim it at your target.

Not only this, but the Galactic Fleet was spread to other Relays that link to the citadel, because the council thought that Saren would be forced to use one of these in order to orchestrate an attack.
Turns out he had a back door and he took in an entire fleet of Geth along with Sovereign  against only a fraction of the Fleet.

[LTiberious]

We can win this war, thats what me3 is for

even if earth is doomed -who actually gives a ****, colonise another planet - terramorph it, and live...

[LTiberious]

By the way, from where did the wiki take info on things that happened before the protheans? and the names of races.. heh

[Pockles]

Sisterofshane wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

According to this, it says that Harbinger is the largest ship, at 2 km long. To put this into perspective, the destiny ascension was roughly 3.5 km long. So unless the Reapers have a huge amount of ships in general, there's no reason to assume that they are any larger then ships in the galaxies' fleet.

Interestingly enough, despite it's siz eand power, the DA was crippled (or destroyed), because it wasn't prepared or made for close-range combat. The biggest of guns is useless if you can't aim it at your target.

Not only this, but the Galactic Fleet was spread to other Relays that link to the citadel, because the council thought that Saren would be forced to use one of these in order to orchestrate an attack.
Turns out he had a back door and he took in an entire fleet of Geth along with Sovereign  against only a fraction of the Fleet.

Far more than a fraction, I suspect. The turian councilor states that "patrols" were stationed at the relays that link Citadel space with the Terminus systems. I'm no strategist, but I think it makes sense to screen the relays with scouts and keep the majority of the fleet around the Citadel itself, sending out reinforcements as necessary, as opposed to spreading out the entire fleet piecemeal.

[Sisterofshane]

Pockles wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

According to this, it says that Harbinger is the largest ship, at 2 km long. To put this into perspective, the destiny ascension was roughly 3.5 km long. So unless the Reapers have a huge amount of ships in general, there's no reason to assume that they are any larger then ships in the galaxies' fleet.

Interestingly enough, despite it's siz eand power, the DA was crippled (or destroyed), because it wasn't prepared or made for close-range combat. The biggest of guns is useless if you can't aim it at your target.

Not only this, but the Galactic Fleet was spread to other Relays that link to the citadel, because the council thought that Saren would be forced to use one of these in order to orchestrate an attack.
Turns out he had a back door and he took in an entire fleet of Geth along with Sovereign  against only a fraction of the Fleet.

Far more than a fraction, I suspect. The turian councilor states that "patrols" were stationed at the relays that link Citadel space with the Terminus systems. I'm no strategist, but I think it makes sense to screen the relays with scouts and keep the majority of the fleet around the Citadel itself, sending out reinforcements as necessary, as opposed to spreading out the entire fleet piecemeal.

More than a fraction is equal to a whole.  I never said that the Fleet was spread out piecemeal, although I can see where it is inferred that is what I meant.  My point was to illustrate that only a portion of our Fleet was against the entire Fleet of Geth, which gave Sovereign and the Geth an advantage in the battle, allowing them to cripple the Destiny Ascension.

Besides, we know from Joker that the Entire Alliance Fleet was not present at the initial invasion.  They were stationed at the Arcturus Relay.  And (depending upon if Shep is feeling like a paragon at the moment), The Alliance Fleet is enough to turn the tide of the war and save the Destiny Ascension.  So we know that whatever was left to defend the citadel was just not enough to stand up to Sovereign and the Geth.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Does Murphy's law apply to the reapers?

Or the whole "best laid plans of mice and men"

Modifié par Humanoid_Typhoon, 01 août 2011 - 08:23 .

[SandTrout]

I think ME3 is a fine example of Murphy's Law applying to the reapers, humanoid.

Edit: More precisely, the fact there IS an ME3.

Modifié par SandTrout, 01 août 2011 - 08:35 .

[Pockles]

Sisterofshane wrote...

Pockles wrote...

Far more than a fraction, I suspect. The turian councilor states that "patrols" were stationed at the relays that link Citadel space with the Terminus systems. I'm no strategist, but I think it makes sense to screen the relays with scouts and keep the majority of the fleet around the Citadel itself, sending out reinforcements as necessary, as opposed to spreading out the entire fleet piecemeal.

More than a fraction is equal to a whole.  I never said that the Fleet was spread out piecemeal, although I can see where it is inferred that is what I meant.  My point was to illustrate that only a portion of our Fleet was against the entire Fleet of Geth, which gave Sovereign and the Geth an advantage in the battle, allowing them to cripple the Destiny Ascension.

Besides, we know from Joker that the Entire Alliance Fleet was not present at the initial invasion.  They were stationed at the Arcturus Relay.  And (depending upon if Shep is feeling like a paragon at the moment), The Alliance Fleet is enough to turn the tide of the war and save the Destiny Ascension.  So we know that whatever was left to defend the citadel was just not enough to stand up to Sovereign and the Geth.

You're right, of course. I had a less technical definition in mind when I read your post, I generally interpret a fraction of something as being equivalent to a small portion. That said I'm not certain what the argument is about, I just couldn't resist an opportunity to be an insufferable know-it-all.

[SJK93]

I don't know why this thread is still here.

[Destroy Raiden_]

That could be so but perhapse only certain areas will be effected more then others so we may still be able to support reasonable life in some parts of the world if we had to kill vast amounts of reapers inside Earth or in near orbit to it.

But I think we'll try to lure as many of them as possible off the planet surface and deal with them in their own element in space.

There is also the possibility that we go all ID4 on them and just give them a virus that kills them w/o exploding them.

[NugatRevolution]

Problem with your original logic -

Assuming Eezo acts like other compounds, the massive heat-energy discharged from a Reaper dying a firey, explodey death will most certainly change the Compound in some way. That, or the Eezo would just blow up.

Saying any Reaper Corpse produces a toxic wasteland is a stretch at the very least.

[Sisterofshane]

Pockles wrote...


You're right, of course. I had a less technical definition in mind when I read your post, I generally interpret a fraction of something as being equivalent to a small portion. That said I'm not certain what the argument is about, I just couldn't resist an opportunity to be an insufferable know-it-all.

Forums wouldn't exist without "insufferable know-it-alls" :happy:

And it takes a lot of courage to admit that you were wrong, or misunderstood someone else.  So, you're okay in my book.

[Sisterofshane]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Also @Sisterofshane

Your examples of accidents on Earth don't apply because they are not on the same scale as the disaster I'm talking about.

Eingana is the only example that even compares.

You however think that because you were able to put out a few stove fires by yourself that you're equipped to handle a 300 acre forest fire alone.

Scale is only important as it gives us an "adjustable" idea on the size and scope of a situation. Hence the term "scale".  The idea that "scale" can be RELATIVE means that I can take something else and relate it to the "scaled" item.

To think that Eingana is the only answer that "compares" is fallacial reasoning.  Everything compares, because using math one can adjust the scale of the comparable object to match the original object in question.

And yes, it would be stupid to think that I could fight a forest fire on my own.  The ratio of 1 person to every three stove fires is NOT EQUAL to the ratio of one person to three hundred acres of fire. But it's not impossible to imagine that, knowing that first ratio, that I couldn't use math to determine around how many people I would need in order to fight a forest fire.  I might have to adjust it slightly based on real-world conditions (which is something I have shown myself to do and that you refuse to do), but the number would be mostly accurate.

Scale is what makes the idea of maps and models possible!  I can use a scaled representation to reasonably determine the size the sun compared to the Earth, even though I have never actually seen the Entirety of either right next to each other in real life.

And really, that's what my examples offered -- a scaled down model of how toxic spills and exposures have in our history been dealt with.  And I would rather have hundreds of scaled down models to draw my hypothesis from the one example of an entirely different planet and circumstance of which "size" is the only comparison.

[robarcool]

Well, we can't save the earth, we can't beat the reapers iff Bioware creates a game that can't be beaten and is happy with low sales! Not gonna happen.

[Sisterofshane]

Besides Saphra, going by your logic, size is the most important factor we can talk about here.

But using the codex knowledge we can see that *GASP*, the Surface Area of Eingana is about One hundred billion km squared LESS then Earth!

Earth is bigger, therefore a few hundred ships cannot poison it's eco-system.  The situation won't be exactly the same (using only your example and your logic), therefore Earth =/=Eingana.

If the only rebuttal that you can come up with is that the size of my examples are not on the scale of and Earth-wide disaster, then the only thing I have to say to you is that neither is yours..

*Snide comment*  I don't think that you appreciate the scale of one hundred billion square kilometers.

[Sisterofshane]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

Scale is only important as it gives us an "adjustable" idea on the size and scope of a situation. Hence the term "scale".  The idea that "scale" can be RELATIVE means that I can take something else and relate it to the "scaled" item.

No,
you can't. The scale doesn't match here. According to you if you grew
five times in size you'd only grow five times in weight. In truth you'd
grow about 15 times in weight.

This applies to the problem of
cleaning up Earth as well, or putting out a fire. A fire on your stove
is easily put out, but if that fire were five times as larger, covering
your whole kitchen or house, you'd need a fire truck. If that fire
covered several square miles you'd need many fire-trucks. At this point
the fire would create its own wind, spreading faster and faster.
Eventually water alone won't do the job and you may even need to fight
fire with fire just to rob it of fuel to burn.

Sisterofshane wrote...

To think that Eingana is the only answer that "compares" is fallacial reasoning.  Everything compares, because using math one can adjust the scale of the comparable object to match the original object in question.

No, Sisterofshane, it doesn't. The techniques for putting out a stove fire are not the same as the ones for putting out a forest fire. The tactics you'll need to use and the problems you'll have to overcome are much, much larger and more complex.

You are saying that a stove fire prepare you to deal with a forest fire. That's wrong.

Sisterofshane wrote...

And really, that's what my examples offered -- a scaled down model of how toxic spills and exposures have in our history been dealt with.  And I would rather have hundreds of scaled down models to draw my hypothesis from the one example of an entirely different planet and circumstance of which "size" is the only comparison.

So if you needed to put out a forest fire you'd rather have a 100 stove fires to look at instead of another forest fire?

And according to your example, observing one forest fire that was unable to be stopped would give you sufficient knowledge to reason that no forest fire could ever be stopped.  Who is being more illogical?

So what if I fail to fight my first forest fire?  Reason stands that it CANNOT LAST FOREVER, it will eventually burn out.  And then I have more relevent data of which to supplement my current data, and maybe next time (if there is a next time), I will be successful.  It makes no sense to just give up after only one instance proves that your methods may be wrong.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Ugh,let it die.

No matter how logical the argument,Eingana is always just going to be this supreme bastion of civilizations inability to clean up a planet.

Even though the planet wasn't tended to for millions of years and there was no evidence that the Eezo was explicitly to blame for the extinction events,you cannot beat this bulletproof example.

[Sisterofshane]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Ugh,let it die.

No matter how logical the argument,Eingana is always just going to be this supreme bastion of civilizations inability to clean up a planet.

Even though the planet wasn't tended to for millions of years and there was no evidence that the Eezo was explicitly to blame for the extinction events,you cannot beat this bulletproof example.

Lol! Only because Saphra, the supreme leader of all things logical says so!

[Sisterofshane]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

Besides Saphra, going by your logic, size is the most important factor we can talk about here.

YES! YES IT IS! THAT'S THE POINT! THE EARTH IS TOO BIG!

What else did you think I was talking about when I said the Earth was too big for you to clean up, when I said you had no sense of scale?

Sisterofshane wrote...

But using the codex knowledge we can see that *GASP*, the Surface Area of Eingana is about One hundred billion km squared LESS then Earth!

What are you talking about? It's almost the same size. Earth is only about a 1,000 km more in radius. That's not much. Eingana is slightly smaller than Earth and Venus (sometimes called sister planets) and larger than Mars.

We are talking about a 500 acre forest fire verses a 450 acre fire.

Again, you know nothing of math.

Radius isn't what is important to this debate, it's surface area.

Surface area is equal to four times pi times the radius squared.

Using this equation, the Surface Area of Eingana is roughly 412,813,149 km squared.
And Earth is roughly 510,926,783 km squared.
Thusly, Earth's surface area is about 100,000,000 (that's one hundred billion for the number illiterate) km squared LARGER than Eingana.

And you can't tell me that my comparisons in scale are irrelevant, and then use an example of a scale about one-hundred times smaller than any example I ever used.  That's hypocritical.