2463 réponses à ce sujet

[sponge56]

Saphra presents a logical argument, however I don't agree with it and would probably rather die than live as a slave. I will also add a Churchill quote 'A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty'. Victories in war are alot easier when people are telling each other they can win it, rather than telling each other they will lose-even if defeat is the only option.

[Master Wolf]

Arijharn wrote...
Hmm, not really. Yes I used the words 'pissed off' but it was more to do with language short hand (much apologies for not making that clear), in other words its striking in such a way where a Reaper would be forced to reply in some way to ensure it's own survival with the eventual goal of  it marshalling its allies with the aim to permanently cease the guerilla style war.

Oh ok I understand now, althought guerilla style war needs to do considerable damage in short and fast strikes and after see what happened in the Baatle of the Citadel,an entire fleet against one Reaper and still not being able to penetrate his shields, I don't know if it will exist the means for that. Unless they are able to salvage the weapon that destroyed the Derilect Reaper and modify it to be placed in a ship the ability to one shoot a Reaper would make that kind of strategy possible.

Arijharn wrote...
But, I'm not sure how much emotions it doesn't or does know. For example; I think Legion shows emotional sides with it's eye flap movement, certain conversations and vocal inflections "Why didn't you use something else to repair your chest? -- No data available)  and mirroring Shephard mannerisms despite apparently being just a machine and having no need for it, and I think we've seen evidence of hubris on the part of the Reapers. Also, if we're marching eventually on Earth then we've must have had progress in engaging and defeating Reaper forces on the way.

I understand what you mean, althought  I don't know if what we have seen can be called hubris, IMO is more a statistical analysis of organic species against them is a cold observation not one based on pride.

[LOLandStuff]

Saphra and Fixers, always with the doom cloud looming over their heads spreading misery and despair at every thunder strike. Only Zulu is missing.

[Arijharn]

Master Wolf wrote...
I understand what you mean, althought  I don't know if what we have seen can be called hubris, IMO is more a statistical analysis of organic species against them is a cold observation not one based on pride.

Be that as it may, we've still stopped one (not counting the larva) in a battle that it itself chose to fight (even if it was rushed and driven by desperation.).

If we are striking with flotilla wolfpacks for example made up of frigates (equipped with Thanix), then since Earth is practically the end point (aka, we've successfully driven them out of other systems, we've successfully gathered our allies) our combat knowledge would also have increased, coupled with other details we've gleaned from other sources no matter what they are.

The Reapers would be fools to just dismiss that. I find it unlikely that the Reapers would wish to remain in close orbit or be stationary targets on Earth if we can strike from orbit committing essentially orbital bombardment against their positions. Hence, making do of our previous knowledge of Reaper combat + information on schematics and the sophistication of targetting, it's easily possible to make pinpoint strikes as needed to destroy Reapers but not to the point where we're making them detonate in such a way to rain shrapnel and dust form element zero all over the place. 

Now, I'm not saying that Earth will get away scott free, of course not, but that's not the same as saying you can't take steps (like the ones I've mentioned here and elsewhere) to mitigate the risks. It's not insurmountable.

[Master Wolf]

Arijharn wrote...

The Reapers would be fools to just dismiss that. I find it unlikely that the Reapers would wish to remain in close orbit or be stationary targets on Earth if we can strike from orbit committing essentially orbital bombardment against their positions. Hence, making do of our previous knowledge of Reaper combat + information on schematics and the sophistication of targetting, it's easily possible to make pinpoint strikes as needed to destroy Reapers but not to the point where we're making them detonate in such a way to rain shrapnel and dust form element zero all over the place. 

Now, I'm not saying that Earth will get away scott free, of course not, but that's not the same as saying you can't take steps (like the ones I've mentioned here and elsewhere) to mitigate the risks. It's not insurmountable.

True unless they have prepared for such possibility and while Shepard was gathering alies they were mounting defenses against orbital bombardments, like shields and such what would force an land invasion wich would give the Reapers a huge advantage since most of the ships the other species have can't land on a planet surface while the ground invasion take place the ships in orbital would be exposed to enemy fire without the posibility to retaliate.

One other problem that Earth safety will face is that although humans will as carefull as possible to not cause major damage to their home planet the other species will not have the same concern  they priority will be to eliminate the Reaper threat and as consquence they will not be very inclined to hold back for Earth sake.

But in the end all of this will depend on wich kind of defense the Reapers wich to adopt if they decide to take a more agressive defense Earth might even be close to the batle since they will go to the incounter of the enemy, and this possibility is also very likely.

[flunkyShepard]

I think what OP is saying is that he wants the ME trilogy to end like a Rockstar game.

[Zulu_DFA]

@Saphra

For a guy who thinks that Humanity cannot continue without the Earth, you are quite quick to think that Humanity can continue in the Reaper form. Where is logic? Consistensy?

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 27 juillet 2011 - 12:57 .

[Bogsnot1]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Bogsnot1 wrote...

OP made the exact same thread in the ME2 forums, and 42 page and 4 months later, still refuses to accept any rational argument that was put forward by anybody, and just stuck to the "I'm right, you're all wrong" schtick.
http://social.biowar...5/index/6892620

Nobody has put forward a rational argument.

It's amazing we went over 40 pages with nobody actually managing to hold an argument with me.

Can't say I'm surprised though. I didn't come to this conclusion on a whim.

There were a few rational arguments put forward, in that thread, and in this one.
You are just determined to stick your fingers in your ears and shout "LALALALALALALALALALA....I'M RIGHT YOU'RE WRONG"

Case in point. 
You wont even accept an argument about evolutionary processes.

Saphra Deden wrote...

Reptillius wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...
You're basically saying if I leave a bunch fo white people in the tropics for a couple of decades that they'll turn black. They won't.

no. But they'll tan quite well... which is a small first step in the process...

Tanning is not healthy.

Your logic is flawed, your arguments are flawed, and your thought processes are flawed.

[Arijharn]

Bogsnot, the part you bolded isn't what Saphra said... I'm confused. Maybe I should crash for the night then?

[Bogsnot1]

The bolded part was the argument Reptilius was making about tanning being the first step in the evolutionary process from turning white to black.

[Arijharn]

Oh, now I'm with you... yeah. I think I'm going to crash now. G'nite whoever reads this next!

[DJRackham]

Saphra Deden wrote...
**snipped words**

ThanesSniper wrote...

I'd argue that being extinct is better than being a Reaper.

Then you're a lunatic.

You'll die, you'll all die. Everyone you've ever met, anyone you've ever loved!

There are worse things than death.

[LOLandStuff]

DJRackham wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...
**snipped words**

ThanesSniper wrote...

I'd argue that being extinct is better than being a Reaper.

Then you're a lunatic.

You'll die, you'll all die. Everyone you've ever met, anyone you've ever loved!

There are worse things than death.

Saphra wants to be crammed in one giant Reaper like in a rush-hour bus. Must be a weird fetish to be squeezed like a sardine and have all kind of weirdos touch and and do things to you and all that.

[Someone With Mass]

I hope you do realize that the Reapers will melt you down into a pool of protein and other genetic materials. That means you won't be conscious, i.e. it doesn't matter if you fight or give up to serve them, because if they get their hands on you, you're as good as dead.

There's nothing glorious about it.

Humanity won't live on if they submit to the Reapers' words. They'll be transformed into soulless husks/drones or material they have no control over. Because that's what the Reapers have done for millions of years.

[Gixxer6Rdr]

"I suspect I need to spell it out anyway."


YES!! Tell us idiots, oh wise, great at a party type person!

[Someone With Mass]

Gixxer6Rdr wrote...

"I suspect I need to spell it out anyway."


YES!! Tell us idiots, oh wise, great at a party type person!

Don't you know? He's always playing the superiority act.

"Oh, I am so much more intelligent than you mere peasants, even if I haven't uttered a single sentence that proves this, but I don't expect you to understand, anyway. Let me be angry at your ignorance some more."

Always that role. Even if it's like beating a dead horse.

And I've already pointed out my opinion on the matter, so I'll leave now. Bye.

[General User]

Some look at the umpteen-million years the Reapers have been repeating the extinction cycle and are impressed. I am not. I see nothing but a race of tin-can gods stagnating in a system they have long since lost either the will or the ability to break out of. Humanity seems to favored in that we have been choosen to be the instruments of the Reapers destruction. But by us or by others, the Reaper's doom is assured.

[Rahmiel]

Saphra Deden wrote...
Ultimately there is a lot we don't know about Reapers so we have to make at least some assumptions.

So why do you assume the worst then?

My assumptions however take into account what we know about space combat in general as well as what we know about the Reapers themselves. Limited as that information might be.

So what we do know about space combat with reapers (Sovereign, derelict reaper) is that they blow up, and no eezo is spilt.  So it's safe to assume that Earth will not be poisoned by Reapers.

Sure, maybe not every single one of them will explode, but at least some of them will and their mass effect cores are massively powerful. They are so powerful that a mile long ship like Sovereign was able to land on a planet. That is a feat no organic built ship could achieve. The same with Sovereign's maneuverability. There's a lot of eezo in there.

So now you're making more assumptions based on what we know about reapers.  I don't see how you figure "at least some of them will".  What are you basing that on.  Every confrontation with a reaper has ended up with a dead reaper and no side effects.

In addition, it won't just be Reapers blowing up around the Earth. It will be Alliance and turian and other organic ships blowing up as well. Each of those will be releasing eezo into the atmosphere and contaminating the planet. After all, it was organic ships (much smaller than Reapers) which poisoned Einganna.

This is where I admit you may be correct.  However these are ships of ancient design, perhaps though, given human (and galactic) responsibility, steps are taken to prevent such things.  If you look at the Candu reactors, they're designed specifically to prevent meltdowns.  It is 100% impossible for these reactors to meltdown.  It's the way they're designed.

Why is it irresponsible to say that we should not attack the Reapers within or around Earth? I'm trying to avoid poisoning the environment. If I suggested it was a bad idea to blow up an oil tanker would you say I was being irresponsible? I'm at a loss here.

The Reapers are going to kill everyone.  That's a guarantee.  It's not a guarantee that your environment poisoning theory is a guarantee.  How many space conflicts have there been?  Many more than the one around Eingana.  How many planets in the galaxy that we have visited, have been irrevocably damaged by such events?  1?

So you're willing to write off the entire human race based on what exactly?  A low probability.  To me, that's irresponsible, however I did not explain myself clear enough.

Maybe ginger bread men will enter the galaxy through a golden arch and usher in a new era of peace and prosperity for all. I can play the maybe game forever if you want.

How about this: maybe they don't have any kind of system in place to prevent their eezo cores from exploding when their ships are violently torn apart by hostile fire.

How do you design a ship not to explode when it contains within it tons of energy and is being ripped apart by an enemy? That energy has to go somewhere. Relays after all don't have any means of preventing this other than being very sturdy in the first place. We were still able to brute force our way through one though.

True, ginger bread men could enter the galaxy and save us all.  This would mean that you're wrong as well.  I don't subscribe to that theory though, but your point is not lost.

How do you design a ship not to explode?  I'm not entirely sure, considering I don't know what current designs for Mass Effect universe ships are.  But neither do you.  So saying they will 100% leave a poisoned atmosphere in a raging space battle, seems premature to me.  If I *had* to hazard a guess though, I'd have a system designed around the mass effect core.

There are systems out there today that react in milliseconds or even smaller.  We could design a system such that the mass effect core erects a mass effect field around itself to prevent such disasters.  How long could such a field be kept up?  I do not know.  But I believe (and perhaps you do not and that's fine) that such precautions could be devised to be harvested after the battle.  This assumes we win.  So.. if we don't win, eventually these fields give out and the cores poison the environment, but we've lost so we're not around.  Or, we win, we secure/remove these cores from the environment before the fields give out, thus saving the environment.  We win and Earth is saved.  Bam!

It's not the fact you believe it could happen I have a problem with.  Again, I say you bring up good points, but I disagree with all the assumptions you've made getting there.  The problem I have, and I believe most people have, is that you have decidedly said that we can't save Earth.  Well, I think you're setting yourself up for a great big disappointment in ME3.  I'm open to the idea that the Earth cannot, or will not be saved in ME3.  You're closed off to the idea that the Earth can be saved.

There's a big difference there.  You're not saying it's a possibility, you're saying it's a certainty.  In which case, you'll be posting about how b.s. ME3 is for saving Earth.  I will agree with you from another thread though.  Without Earth, humanity will fall and not be saved.  The human race may live on, but humanity will be dead.  But Shepard's tale will be about humanity surviving, so if humanity lives, Earth will live.  Therefore, I say you are dead wrong, and we will save the Earth, and we *WILL* beat the reapers.

[Rahmiel]

Also, we *do* know that the Normandy SR1 exploded near a planet and made planetside within 2 years (if not sooner). We also know that there is no hazard, so this lends credence to "modern" starships exploding due to space conflict and not leaving tons of eezo everywhere.

[Sgt Stryker]

Memmahkth wrote...

There's a big difference there.  You're not saying it's a possibility, you're saying it's a certainty.  In which case, you'll be posting about how b.s. ME3 is for saving Earth. 

I, for one, look forward to see what this forum turns into once March rolls around. Much popcorn will be consumed on those days.

[Rahmiel]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

Memmahkth wrote...

There's a big difference there.  You're not saying it's a possibility, you're saying it's a certainty.  In which case, you'll be posting about how b.s. ME3 is for saving Earth. 

I, for one, look forward to see what this forum turns into once March rolls around. Much popcorn will be consumed on those days.

I'm more interested in playing ME3 repeatedly, as I will most doubtedly be disappointed with it like I was ME2.  That's not to say it won't be the greatest game of all time.  Simply, with all this time to think about the Reapers, motivations, plans, theories, etc. I'll be disappointed with how it turns out since it won't live up to my dreams/expectations.  Once that fades and I'm able to accept ME3 for what it is, and the series for what it accomplishes, I'll be happy.

Then I'll come to the boards and find other people's interpretations, etc. and decide from there if they have good points, or bad points, wrong conclusions, erroneous assumptions, or just poor comprehension.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Nashiktal wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Sounds like someone's been indoctrinated...

We can destroy a Reaper without blowing them up.... //looks at Derelect Reaper

You mean the last hurrah of a civilization before being destroyed? They got lucky.

That gun must have been a massive project. It must have been an incredible undertaking, with all the resourced they could muster (while being reaped) to even create the gun, and they only got one shot.

They "killed" a single reaper, then got wiped out. Likely the remaining people were used to make another reaper to replace the one that "died."

The reaper was caught off guard by a fast moving object in another part of the galaxy! Unless you propose making a fleet of those giant guns, its unlikely we can win using a similar tactic.

*Looks at UNSC fleet*

[Omega Torsk]

Well, we're not going to win with that attitude!