3618 réponses à ce sujet

[SandTrout]

[quote]That said, you deny the fact that giving power, tech and/or weapons to a xenophobic criminal organization in exchange for a promise that they may aid you against the reapers is more a risk than anything else.[/quote] This is a false statement. The anihilation of our species by the Reapers is more risk, and more likely, than anything else. That said, any harm that TIM might reasonably do is dependent on defeating the Reapers, as long as you don't base your decision off of meta-gaming. The delusion, which you are exemplifying, is that a Cerberus rise to power is worse than a Reaper victory.

[quote]No, you're wrong. In fact I read all your quotes and answered them the best I could (I do mistakes, I'm human, and I don't usually write huge posts). You just reduced yourself to saying: You're wrong and your arguments are ludicrous. That's the best you can do? What an argument.

And that doesn't nullify my point by any means. I'm not saying there's no evidence that suggests the contrary of what I said (that there's no guarantee of Cerberus aiding you, etc etc) it's a fact.

You are giving power to Cerberus in exchange for a promise. You don't have any guarantee of anything.[/quote] When in life do you ever have a true garauntee of anything. Here's a hint: Unless you're dealing with science, there aren't many times. Instead, we base our judgments off of reasonable expectations. At the time of the decision, the reasonable expectation is that TIM would use the CB to fight the Reapers, even if for no other reason than to save his own skin.

[quote]I understood your point perfectly. Maybe you don't understand mine?[/quote] Actually, we have illustrated your point far more clearly than you have, so I am beginning to wonder how much you understand your own argument.

@Phaedon,

[quote]Nothing advantageous can come out of it, since it practically can only cause harm to organic fleets, not Reaper ones. Unless you are suggesting that the base will somehow make every single vessel in the galaxy as powerful as a Reaper, and somehow produce thousands of new ships.[/quote] You base this statement on the premise that no amount of firepower can destroy a Reaper, which is both false and not in keeping with experience.

[quote]You mean greater practical evil, right? For all we know the Reapers are only trying to do this to survive.[/quote] The only basis you have for this statement is Harbinger's line "We are your salvation through destruction", which is open to all sorts of wild interpretation. Meanwhile, the fundamental mission of Cerberus is to ensure the survival and advancement of the Human species, from which you interpret the worst possible scenario, while granting the Reapers the best possible scenario. This is also know as 'delusions'.

[quote]What do you mean by that? If we start making our own Reapers, then we are no better, how can you claim otherwise?[/quote] We're not talking about making our own Reaper, we're talking about using select systems from the Reapers, that are outside of their planned path of technological progression, in order to improve our fleet.

[quote]A) You didn't pay attention to the Collector General and how he worked at all.
You missed a very small part about the databases...



...the one that it was a trap.[/quote] Also an ineffective trap that still allowed us to gain key strategic information about the Collectors, you know, like where their base was located? [sarcasm]Oh, and 'enlighten' us about how the Collector General works, because it's so much more efficient to run an operation from networked data while keeping 0 storage locally.... [/sarcasm] Hell, you counter your own argument there with the example of the Collector vessel, which obviously had large amounts of data on-board, as well as EDI actually being able to collect some data from the CB itself during the suicide mission.

[quote]Experience? Yeah, right.
Logic? If you can't provide reasonable arguments then it's not logic, obviously. You are still repeating "There has to be somewhere in there, even if I can't think of something!". You also state that there is any chance that the CB will let us help the base.[/quote] Lets see, an industrial complex that produces advanced weapons technology.... Yeah, pretty logical that we can get something of use from it. Your entire basis for this argument is the same that I addressed above, regarding no amount of firepower will stop the Reapers. If we accept this premise, then it doesn't matter what we give to Cerberus anyways, because we'll all be dead, Cerberus included.

[quote]
It's a terrible logical mistake of your part, which wouldn't have happenned if you really thought before giving the base to TIM.

You do realize that the Reapers have several thousands ships, correct? And that a single one is more powerful than two major fleets?

And that all of the allied fleets combined would probably hardly make over 1000 ships, correct? (Hint: Read the codex entry about the Alliance).

In what way would Cerberus gaining the base make around 1000 vessels destroy the multiple thousands of much more powerful Reapers?[/quote] Then your solution is .... what, exactly? By your reasoning (which isn't entirely unfounded), we may as well just surrender to the Reapers and let ourselves get slushied. We're looking for a solution here, you've already been defeated. I'm honestly starting to wonder if Phaedon and Saphra Deden aren't just 1 person with 2 handles....

[quote]Oh wait, even that's wishful thinking. Why would Cerberus share their tech with aliens or the Alliance?[/quote] Because they have a history of sharing technology with the Alliance. Where do you think a lot of our biotic amp technology came from?

[quote]
Why is that one of the two scenarios? Why is it even a scenario? Where is the "logic and experience" behind it?[/quote] Because we acknowledge the fact that we may not get anything useful from the base in time to stop the Reapers. We are know that we are gambling. We even acknowledge that either decision can be consider reasonable, even if we don't necessarily agree. Again, we are pointing out flawed arguments, rather than flawed decisions, in this case. On the other hand, you 'know' that you are correct, and that there can be no other way to see things, and keep repeating the same flawed arguments.

[quote]Again, baseless wishful thinking with a huge flaw in logic.

The scientists in the Reaper IFF managed to do nothing before getting indoctrinated.[/quote] Dude, you're messing with us, right? You mean other than find and salvage the Reaper IFF, right? You mean other than their primary objective right? You mean other than providing an absolutly necessary piece of equipment for defeating the Collectors, not to mention understanding the Mass Relays in general, right? I'm just going to go ahead and assume you just threw that argument in there for the lulz.

[quote]I don't know what your beef is with people having morals, but it is to
the point of considering upholding your ethical code as an intuition,
and suggesting the lack of a realistic way of thinking. Basically, you
are being blinded, for a reason which I don't understand. Is being
immoral and amoral edgy or cool or something? I must have missed it.[/quote] We can see and undestand why the other side might make a decission, and even acknowledge that there are valid reasons to blow or keep the base, and we're the ones that are blind. Fortunately, I don't think that anyone who matters will fall for this piece of role reversal.

Modifié par SandTrout, 01 août 2011 - 05:46 .

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Aye,it's always nice to see s.o.s. drop the text walls,good healthy reading.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Again, how could one go about it?


It's not TIM's fault the team got indoctrinated. There's no defense agaisnt that.
Any team, sent by anyone, would end up indoctrinated. And you can't afford NOT to send a team.

Here's the point, though. They know a Reaper can indoctrinate. 

And they were given several hints at that the indoctrination machine/whatever inside the Reaper was still functioning, as it takes days, if not weeks to be indoctrinated. And yet, they remained inside.

So why not send in mechs instead? Well, that would be a logical choice, and Cerberus and logic mix just as well as alkali metals and water.

It is their fault.

You cannot really research well without hands-on experience - especially if we're talking about indoctrination. Whos' exact range we don't even know.
Mechs? They can be taken over by a reaper.

And no, when the team went in they didn't know the indoctrination device was functioning.

[RynJ]

Both arguments have good points. My Shepard destroyed the base, but it had nothing to do with morality. In her opinion that tech will fall into the wrong hands unless she keeps it for herself, whether that is with Cerberus or the Alliance (which is seeming more and more shady). That or trying to look into the tech will end up backfiring due to inexperience. She's not about to keep something that could be a huge risk over something that *may* be beneficial later on, it's not worth it.

Both might even mean well, I'm not sold on Cerberus being some random evil organization, but that kind of technology could be a lot more than humanity or any race would know how to handle correctly. It might even end up being counterproductive in the end whether that be from indoctrination, simple misunderstanding of the tech, or a Reaper failsafe.

But honestly, there's probably going to be a way to stop the Reapers no matter what choice you made. I can see this being the difference between a couple missions panning out one way or in a different way depending on what you chose. I don't think many players would be happy if one of those choices = you die no matter what.

Both choices should ideally end up having benefits and downsides in your playthrough. Just do what you think is best and look forward to how it may tweak certain aspects of the game!

[Lotion Soronarr]

TobyHasEyes wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
I would argue that the positive results are greater then the negative, as Cerberus cannot have as big an negative impact as it could have a positive one.

 I would disagree, and with ieldra2, on the point that the positive necessarily outweighs the negative, though I don't think your position is 'delusional' (an overly harsh term for a discussion like this)

 Possible positive impacts;
 Technology which aids the anti-Reaper effort but isn't decisive
 Technology which aids the anti-Reaper effort and wins the war

 Possible negative impacts;
 Rogue army / backfire which harms the anti-Reaper effort but not decisively
 Rogue army / backfire which harms the anti-Reaper effort sufficiently as to render the effort hopeless

 Obviously that last point is the clincher, to which I would say that a rogue army used tactically well could wipe out (especially using the technology in Arrival) entire star systems, and turn the tide in key combat areas. That or a technology backfire could cause untold damage, be that tech access, to the Reapers, of all anti-Reaper comms and plans. Or more damagingly, something on the scale of the technology apocalypse Overlord could have  created

 I am aware I referenced the Overlord scenario very frequently, however in my playthrough my ParaShep played through Overlord very shortly before facing that Collector ship decision. Such a potentially catastrophic lack of research security tipped the balance in my reasoning

Anti-reaper efforts are allready described as hopeless.

Pretty much everyone tells you the galaxy isn't ready - and realisticly, given what we know about the reapers and with things as they are, chances of victory are almost zero.

In that light, negative effects become irrelevant.
Unless you find some way to even the odds, it won't matter.

[Someone With Mass]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

You cannot really research well without hands-on experience - especially if we're talking about indoctrination. Whos' exact range we don't even know.
Mechs? They can be taken over by a reaper.

And no, when the team went in they didn't know the indoctrination device was functioning.

Eh, we're still talking about the Reaper that was practically brain dead, right? It can't take over mechs, and even if it did, there's no harm in that. Just blast the thing with an EMP and the mech problem is over.

Hands-on experience won't do you any good if the people in question are babbling nutjobs. Not to mention that it's so pointless when you don't know what's causing it to begin with.

[SandTrout]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

You cannot really research well without hands-on experience - especially if we're talking about indoctrination. Whos' exact range we don't even know.
Mechs? They can be taken over by a reaper.

And no, when the team went in they didn't know the indoctrination device was functioning.

Eh, we're still talking about the Reaper that was practically brain dead, right? It can't take over mechs, and even if it did, there's no harm in that. Just blast the thing with an EMP and the mech problem is over.

Hands-on experience won't do you any good if the people in question are babbling nutjobs. Not to mention that it's so pointless when you don't know what's causing it to begin with.

We had no more reason to think that Indoctrination was still functioning than to assume that the Reaper could hack or corrupt mechs.

[Someone With Mass]

SandTrout wrote...
We had no more reason to think that Indoctrination was still functioning than to assume that the Reaper could hack or corrupt mechs.

Always assume the worst, or take the fall.

And as I've said before, they must've spent entire days inside that thing for indoctrination to take effect, and absolutely no-one noticed that something weird was going on and reported it?

Then they're so dumb and oblivious that they deserve to be indoctrinated.

And if Cerberus can't even handle a disbled Reaper, what chances do they have with a fully functional base? 

None.

[SandTrout]

@Someone With Mass,

You see, that is a valid argument regarding your decision to destroy the CB, and one that has been acknowledged.

I actually blew the base for similar reasons, and I never had to ret-con my reasons, either

Modifié par SandTrout, 01 août 2011 - 06:06 .

[Phaedon]

SandTrout wrote...
 You base this statement on the premise that no amount of firepower can destroy a Reaper, which is both false and not in keeping with experience.

Uh, nope? I explain exactly why in the paragraph that you are quoting. Even if the base makes every single military ship around the galaxy as powerful as a Reaper , you are still outnumbered and outsmarted. And to expect every single military ship to be as powerful as a Reaper is just a ridiculous expectation.

The only basis you have for this statement is Harbinger's line "We are your salvation through destruction", which is open to all sorts of wild interpretation. Meanwhile, the fundamental mission of Cerberus is to ensure the survival and advancement of the Human species, from which you interpret the worst possible scenario, while granting the Reapers the best possible scenario. This is also know medically as 'delusions'.

Wrong assumption, again. I do so on the basis that EDI speculates that harvesting organics is how Reapers reproduce. Who is to say that Reapers don't eventually die?

Worst case scenario? Cerberus? Wrong. Cerberus has already done several immoral actions even under utilitirianist criteria. Not only do they not work for the greater good as they claim, but they work only for humanity's good, and that is very debatable. Also, abducting children and experimenting on them forcefully is NOT a noble or justifiable goal under utilitarianist criteria.

We're not talking about making our own Reaper, we're talking about using select systems from the Reapers, that are outside of their planned path of technological progression, in order to improve our fleet.

I fail to see how that is a problem. There is no moral or practical problems unless it is connected to harvesting, indoctrination, huskification.

Also an ineffective trap that still allowed us to gain key strategic information about the Collectors, you know, like where their base was located? [sarcasm]Oh, and 'enlighten' us about how the Collector General works, because it's so much more efficient to run an operation from networked data while keeping 0 storage locally.... [/sarcasm] Hell, you counter your own argument there with the example of the Collector vessel, which obviously had large amounts of data on-board, as well as EDI actually being able to collect some data from the CB itself during the suicide mission.

You do realize that Collectors have the intelligence of animals?

And don't try to be smart and tell the Reapers what's the more efficient way to direct their troops. You have never worked with a species such as the Protheans or the Collectors. And you have no idea how easy or not it is for Reapers to control the Collector General, and micromanage.

Their trap is ineffective? Big woop. That doesn't stop it from being a trap. TIM does say that the Collectors couldn't have anticipated EDI.

Also, data lots of it?

According to EDI, she only found a) the turian distress call, how to navigate the Omega 4 Relay, both of which could be products of the ship's history log. Later, TIM confirms that it was just that the CB uses a Reaper IFF to get past the CB, which is perfectly detectable, because it is a signal generator and it is wired to te ship's network.

Otherwise, why didn't she find anything else? The Collector Vessel came and went from the CB and back, but you only learn it's location by detecting something close to the accretion disk when you get there, or something along these lines.

EDI hacked the entire systems, and only found data concerning the vessel's communication logs, two signals in fact, but yeah, sure lots of data. Because you say so.

Lets see, an industrial complex that produces advanced weapons technology.... Yeah, pretty logical that we can get something of use from it. Your entire basis for this argument is the same that I addressed above, regarding no amount of firepower will stop the Reapers. If we accept this premise, then it doesn't matter what we give to Cerberus anyways, because we'll all be dead, Cerberus included.

Again, you are wrong about my original argument, even if somehow you manage to get every ship in the galaxy be as powerful as a Reaper, you still can't win because you are outnumbered and outsmarted.

And yes, thaaaank you for repeating, "It is logical", would you mind stating an example of what it is logical that we will get, or do we have to stick to the "But omg, there are infinite possibilities!" punchline?

Then your solution is .... what, exactly? By your reasoning (which isn't entirely unfounded), we may as well just surrender to the Reapers and let ourselves get slushied. We're looking for a solution here, you've already been defeated. I'm honestly starting to wonder if Phaedon and Saphra Deden aren't just 1 person with 2 handles....

Except that if you read my previous posts, I have proposed two different plans to cause damage to the Reapers, and proposed 2 other things that we should investigate.

It's just both theoretically and practically impossible to win with conventional warfare. This will just not work out.

Because they have a history of sharing technology with the Alliance. Where do you think a lot of our biotic amp technology came from?

Cronnix or what their name is? Unless you have some sort of source?
The Alliance has the Ascension program for biotics, it is obviously good, or Cerberus wouldn't try so hard to infiltrate it.

Share tech? Not really, they just get Alliance tech before it gets mass produced.

Because we acknowledge the fact that we may not get anything useful from the base in time to stop the Reapers. We are know that we are gambling. We even acknowledge that either decision can be consider reasonable, even if we don't necessarily agree. Again, we are pointing out flawed arguments, rather than flawed decisions, in this case. On the other hand, you 'know' that you are correct, and that there can be no other way to see things, and keep repeating the same flawed arguments.

I have elaborated my hypothesis a few hundrend times, if you don't want to read it, then that's not my problem. We can't win the Reapers with conventional warfare, and the CB only proposes improvements on it.

Dude, you're messing with us, right? You mean other than find and salvage the Reaper IFF, right? You mean other than their primary objective right? You mean other than providing an absolutly necessary piece of equipment for defeating the Collectors, not to mention understanding the Mass Relays in general, right? I'm just going to go ahead and assume you just threw that argument in there for the lulz.

Yes, bravo, the Cerberus scientists collected the Reaper IFF, this is why Shepard had to go there and...uh...no, not resalvage it, that can't be the right word, can it.

Providing with a what? Shepard found out about the Reaper IFF, and Shepard was the one to collect it, in the end. As I said, they got indoctrinated before they could even get the Reaper IFF, how can you assume that they will understand much more complex tech such as a Reaper's mind for example without getting indoctrinated.

We can see and undestand why the other side might make a decission, and even acknowledge that there are valid reasons to blow or keep the base, and we're the ones that are blind. Fortunately, I don't think that anyone who matters will fall for this piece of role reversal.

Do yourself a favor and realize that you are defending a poster that says that any counter-argument to her post must begin out of "moral intuition". She also claims that this "moral intuition" is just wishful thinking, and not "logic or experience". Oh no, that line has to be used only for renegades.

[Lotion Soronarr]

[quote]Pulletlamer wrote...
Still I consider that from what you learn from Cerberus along the game and their plans, it's still possible that:


- Even if something good came from it, Cerberus used it to actually do good things. Based on what we know from them, it's very probable that wouldn't happen.

I'd disagree here. Cerberus can very well do good things and has done good things.


- Even assuming that good things came from it, they would actually be useful to use against the Reapers.

enhanced tech of any kind should find some use. Of course, you can bet Cerberus will be looking for tech with military applications.

- Also assuming that good things can come from it and can actually be beneficial, it's wishful thinking too. That's not an argument to defend the opposite opinion, since same rules can apply.

I'd say good things are by defenition also beneficial..at least in that context.
Is your use of the word "good" refferencing a molar kind of good, or the practical kind.
And good for whom?

[/quote]




[quote]
They can be considered evil or not, that's debatable. What we know is that they make morally questionable (very questionable in my opinion) experiments and are not afraid of using force or any other means to obtain what they want. Also they well consider they crew/scientist or operatives expendable and are willing to sacrifice them to reach their goal.


- Having a greater evil doesn't mean you should focus on it or invalidate a lesser one. By that rule when there's a serial killer the police should only focus on capturing it, while leaving lesser crimes be commited on the streets. I'm sorry but that's in fact very stupid.

That is a rather silly scenario you got there.

- They may well become the greater evil if you give them enough power. Why would I give power to someone that may become my enemy during or after the reaper threat? Seems unreasonable to me. It would be similar to the example I used above.You give guns to criminal so they help you catch a serial killer. Giving power to dangerous people just to help you defeat a more dangerous threat it's still a bad idea.

In the absence of a viable alternaive? And with far more horrible consequnces if you don't?
Not at all.

- Plus you're just giving yourself (Shepard) trouble. If you destroy the base you don't have to worry so much about the possibilities of Cerberus having so much power and potential. We know they get reaper tech anyway, so they may get power regardless of the choice, but that doesn't mean we should put things easy to them.

You're also reducing your options and throwing away your only trump card... if you find nothing else to even the palying field with the reapers, then you are giving yourself a LOT more trouble.
[/quote]



[quote]
[quote](3) "There must another way". Wishful thinking again. Imagine acting like this in Arrival. The result: a game over screen. Sometimes, we have no choice but to resort to unpleasant means or suffer an even more unpleasant fate.[/quote]
Again, you're also thinking wishfully. What makes you think that keeping the base guarantees you something?Or that it is the unpleasant mean to have success?

You're giving advanced technology to Cerberus, you're not guaranteed that they might help you or anything. Also Shepard breaks all relations with Cerberus at the end of ME2, so nothing guarantees you they are by your side, or working to defeat the reapers. It's all a possibility based on speculation and your hopes for that to happen.[/quote]

Not quite.

The base is there. There is a high chance something usefull may come from it. And you got plenty of reasons to believe Cerberus will help you (it's in their best interest too). So you got good grounds to hope for good results fro mthe base. You can actually base that hope on something.

But hoping that something else will turn up. On what do you base that? Nothing.
Hence wishfull thinking.





[quote]
No one said it's evil, but it's just common sense. Having tech that indoctrinates people or turns them into husks that all work for the greater evil that's coming is bad. Therefore, it's not an assumption is evil, it's a fact.

I don't know what the reapers want, we are all making assumptions on that topic here. Therefore all your arguments can be ignored since they are assumptions and speculation. I could assume the contrary and be right.

You can doubt what you want, doesn't change the fact reaper tech is dangerous, and by having and keeping it, you are doing what the reapers expect (and want) to happen.[/quote]

Sovereign quite clearly said MASS RELAYS.
That's the parth they desire..for us to be dependant on the mass relays, thus enabling them to lock us out, and take us out, isolated and alone.
No sane person would belive they want us to get our hands on their core technolgoy. By killing Sovereign ,we already started diverging from that path.



[quote]
Yes it is. A reasonable expectation based on experience and logic? What logic? You're interpreting that the most logical thing is keep the base. You are being biased here. Do you mean the logical thing to do is keep the base?

For the same reason I could say it's reasonable to destroy the base, based on experience (What Shepard learns about Cerberus along the game) and logic (that taking into account all the bad things Cerberus has done with it, the most practical solution is destroying it).[/quote]

And this would actually be a less optimal solution.




[quote]
I never based my defense around that, because that could be well considered as metagaming. I'm just going to give my point of view, that is that the most responsible choice is destroying the base so you don't have headaches nor have to care about people getting indoctrinated (by it) because you saved it.[/quote]

I'm more concerend about headaches for not being able to stand up to the reapers...



[quote]
[quote](4) "There is no evidence that keeping the base won't result in a even bigger catastrophe". A bigger catastrophe than what? The extinction of all intelligent organic life in the galaxy? (That was indeed the context of the original argument). There are always infinite possibilities. The question is which of them are reasonable expectations. A bigger catatrophe than extinction of all intelligent organic life in the galaxy isn't exactly a reasonable expectation. It's just something to frighten people into going along with you.[/quote]
Sorry I'm tired of bringing my point. Giving tech to a xenophobic organization with fame of being terrorists (whether or not they actually fit in the definition is debatable, you can call them criminals if you prefer, doesn't change their actions)even assuming they are willing to help you and aid you against the reapers, isn't justificable by any means. You're still giving power to criminals. Also the end doesn't justify the means.[/quote]

Except when it does.



[quote]
They may become a greater threat or cause a bigger cathastrophe than the Reaper threat, yes.[/quote]

LOL!
You cannot possilby be serious here...




[quote]
[quote]( Cerberus becomes indoctrinated and ends up helping the Reapers [/quote]
Or we defeat the reapers and Cerberus guess what? They still have power while other forces and governments in the galaxy are weaker.
[/quote]

Assumption. Cerberus would fight to, and take looses too, regardless of which side it takes.
Also, whatever tech advantage they have, would melt really quick.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 01 août 2011 - 06:19 .

[Pulletlamer]

SandTrout wrote...
]This is a false statement. The anihilation of our species by the Reapers is more risk, and more likely, than anything else. That said, any harm that TIM might reasonably do is dependent on defeating the Reapers, as long as you don't base your decision off of meta-gaming. The delusion, which you are exemplifying, is that a Cerberus rise to power is worse than a Reaper victory.

It's not false. It's a risk. It's still a risk no matter if there's Reapers or not. If there were no Reapers it would be a risk. If there's reapers, it's still a risk. You're giving them advanced tech and you in exchange get a promise.

Also:

Pulletlamer wrote...

Having a greater evil doesn't mean you should focus on it or invalidate a lesser one. By that rule when there's a serial killer the police should only focus on capturing it, while leaving lesser crimes be commited on the streets. I'm sorry but that's in fact very stupid.

They may well become the greater evil if you give them enough power. Why would I give power to someone that may become my enemy during or after the reaper threat? Seems unreasonable to me. It would be similar to the example I used above.You give guns to criminal so they help you catch a serial killer. Giving power to dangerous people just to help you defeat a more dangerous threat it's still a bad idea.

When in life do you ever have a true garauntee of anything. Here's a hint: Unless you're dealing with science, there aren't many times. Instead, we base our judgments off of reasonable expectations. At the time of the decision, the reasonable expectation is that TIM would use the CB to fight the Reapers, even if for no other reason than to save his own skin.

Well I agree on part with the first sentence. In life you have low guarantees that things will go how you want and/or well.

Still throwing yourself blindly onto the darkness just because you don't have light or are guaranteed to find it anytime soon . Just because you have a small chance of surviving by doing it (and zero expecationsto survive if you don't) doesn't mean it's the only (or right) option. There's always alternatives.

Also we're talking about the most advanced technology in the galaxy, something that can make someone very powerful. You have to think two times before doing the choice. And considering that there's more probabilities of Cerberus not helping you, I choose destroy.

It's the most responsible choice in my opinion. You can be partially sure that Cerberus won't become a huge threat.

What I mean is that giving the base to Cerberus in my opinion it's not worth the risk. Here is where we disagree. You think that giving it to Cerberus is better than not having anything to combat the Reapers. I don't think so. In fact I prefer destroying it rather than giving it to someone who in case of that it helps you against the reapers etc etc (since I think I already said various times that is all a possibility) may become a dangerous enemy or turn the back on me.

And I disagree with your reasonable expectations. I think the opposite. Do you think the most reasonable expectation for Cerberus would be to help you against the Reapers? I base on what I know about him from the game, and the answer is NO. Also just because that's what you consider a reasonable expectation doesn't mean you can base your arguments all on it. You could be wrong.

My most reasonable expectation is that they whether end up indoctrinated, become a huge treat hard to deal with, or end up helping the Reapers anyway.

Actually, we have illustrated your point far more clearly than you have, so I am beginning to wonder how much you understand your own argument.

No offense but I don't know what you're talking about.

First, that was directed to Ieldra2. Second, I don't see how you could have illustrated my point far more clearly than me, since that was one of the first times I give my opinion and write a post about it, and I'm the one I defending my point after all. And third, I know what I say, but thanks for bringing that up.

Modifié par Pulletlamer, 01 août 2011 - 06:31 .

[TobyHasEyes]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

TobyHasEyes wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
I would argue that the positive results are greater then the negative, as Cerberus cannot have as big an negative impact as it could have a positive one.

 I would disagree, and with ieldra2, on the point that the positive necessarily outweighs the negative, though I don't think your position is 'delusional' (an overly harsh term for a discussion like this)

 Possible positive impacts;
 Technology which aids the anti-Reaper effort but isn't decisive
 Technology which aids the anti-Reaper effort and wins the war

 Possible negative impacts;
 Rogue army / backfire which harms the anti-Reaper effort but not decisively
 Rogue army / backfire which harms the anti-Reaper effort sufficiently as to render the effort hopeless

 Obviously that last point is the clincher, to which I would say that a rogue army used tactically well could wipe out (especially using the technology in Arrival) entire star systems, and turn the tide in key combat areas. That or a technology backfire could cause untold damage, be that tech access, to the Reapers, of all anti-Reaper comms and plans. Or more damagingly, something on the scale of the technology apocalypse Overlord could have  created

 I am aware I referenced the Overlord scenario very frequently, however in my playthrough my ParaShep played through Overlord very shortly before facing that Collector ship decision. Such a potentially catastrophic lack of research security tipped the balance in my reasoning

Anti-reaper efforts are allready described as hopeless.

Pretty much everyone tells you the galaxy isn't ready - and realisticly, given what we know about the reapers and with things as they are, chances of victory are almost zero.

In that light, negative effects become irrelevant.
Unless you find some way to even the odds, it won't matter.

 Have anti-reaper efforts been described as hopeless in-game? I am not referring to plans such as 'present a united fleet and straight up attack', I do mean more creative and covert efforts

 Realistically, in game at this point we know too little to say with any certainty that chances are almost zero.

 If you are referring to out of game comments, and as such are proposing a meta-gaming approach, then I can say with some confidence that I can guarantee the Collector Ship decision will not be decisive

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

You cannot really research well without hands-on experience - especially if we're talking about indoctrination. Whos' exact range we don't even know.
Mechs? They can be taken over by a reaper.

And no, when the team went in they didn't know the indoctrination device was functioning.

Eh, we're still talking about the Reaper that was practically brain dead, right? It can't take over mechs, and even if it did, there's no harm in that. Just blast the thing with an EMP and the mech problem is over.

Hands-on experience won't do you any good if the people in question are babbling nutjobs. Not to mention that it's so pointless when you don't know what's causing it to begin with.

Actually it will. It takes time for people to get indoctrinated, and tehy are still doing their job. Cerberus scientists made reports and did their research, as is evident.
And yes, to know what's causing it, you need ot know its' hapenign in the firt place, and how. You cannot study the effects of indoctrination on the human brain without exposing a human brain to indoctrination.


And they did find the reaper IFF. You dont' think that's a big deal? Then start thiking.
An alien ship, 2KM long..filled with stuff. You need to find one specific component. You dont' understand the technolgoy and the purposes of the devices. GO!
The scientists had to go trough the ship, identifiying and analzying variosu devices, determining the purpose, and so forth.

[George-Kinsill]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@everyone else:
Regarding my argument III-(1), it was not my intention to claim that conclusively, the chance of finding a decisive advantage against the Reaper on the base outweighs the risk of Cerberus helping the Reapers by getting indoctrinated etc... I only find it more plausible to assume that the effects of an indoctrinated Cerberus are not that big a help for the Reapers if Cerberus does get indoctrinated. You may weigh the risks and chances differently and come to a different conclusion. That's OK. I would like to see everyone's arguments in that case and see where it leads.

What I do claim conclusively, however, is the invalidity of the arguments of group I and II for destroying the base (see the previous page).

At this point, it's impossible to know the effects of an indoctrinated Cerberus, but here are some ideas if the collector base is kept.

1) A loss of time in saving humanity. The Collector Base is instrumental in producing Reapers, and without it, the Reapers could have all the billions of humans on earth, but they couldn't reproduce, as they don't have the base on hand if its destroyed. If the base is destroyed, they eill spend a decent amount of time having to reconstruct a base, and the ships to collect humans. This will cause the Reapers to just have a bunch of humans in stasis, instead of making them into slushies, for a time, giving Shepard and the rest of the galaxy time to find a way to destroy them, and save the humans in stasis, saving humanity.
If cerberus is left with the base, they can either easily be indoctrinated and essentially become the new collectors, or just easily be wiped out by invading reapers at ease. This would then allow the Reapers to go back on schedule making a human Reaper, allowing them to immediately harvest humans. Thus, time is lost, and there is less of a chance to garuntee the Reapers are in some way delayed.

2) Cerberus with super anti planet/Reaper weapons. In ME2 when TIM gives Shep the mission to go aboard a direlect Reaper, he mentions that he found the weapon that destroyed the Reaper, and destroyed much of Klendagon. If cerberus is indoctrinated, they have this key piece of weaponry, and will either destroy it to protect the Reapers, or use it on alien planets, destroying them with ease.
While the gun itself I doubt can be spammed,to destroy the entire Reaper fleet with ease, a few well placed shots with it in the decisive battle over earth could prove the factor that wins the battle, with possible snipes taking out leading Reapers. With an indoctrinated cerberus (and before knowing the events of ME3 as to not metagame) they could destory this gun, destroying one of the few non-Reaper technology ways to combat them effectively. This gun is a concept of what many arguing for keeping the CB have in mind of finding, so loosing this gun by hoping to find something similar on the CB could prove disasterous. Added with Cerberus using this gun on let's say Thessia, allies could be wiped out on a whim from a great distance. All in all, the Klendagon gun in an indoctrinated Cerberus's hands is not a good thing.

3)Technological apocolypse. This would be only a threat for those who went all renegade, keeping the base and giving david to his brother in Overlord. Dr. Archer almost caused the end of galactic life as we know it by simply connecting an autistic savant to a computer, almost doing the Reapers' job for them. If cerberus is to be indoctrinated by keeping the CB (again, knowing only the events of ME2 as to not metagame) they will have a means to turn all technology in the galaxy against organics. This will leave defenseless the rest of the galaxy, if not destroy it entirely.

So essentailly, there are some very disasterous things cerberus could do with the CB's influence.

[SandTrout]

First off, even if we are still outgunned, increasing our firepower still improves our chances, which are admittedly not good. Your basis of argument is that it wont be enough on its own, and therefor we shouldn't try. This is suicidal stupidity.

Industrial complexes have data stored locally. Note the lack of some qualifier such as 'most' or 'many' in this statement of fact. The fact that you are claiming that some don't reveals that you should probably consider professional help, because I am not qualified in medical psychology.

Worst case scenario? Cerberus? Wrong. Cerberus has already done several immoral actions even under utilitirianist criteria. Not only do they not work for the greater good as they claim, but they work only for humanity's good, and that is very debatable. Also, abducting children and experimenting on them forcefully is NOT a noble or justifiable goal under utilitarianist criteria.

No one is stating that Cerberus is 'good'. We are stating that they are an asset against a much worse fate than a few biotic children undergoing horrific experiments.

I fail to see how that is a problem. There is no moral or practical problems unless it is connected to harvesting, indoctrination, huskification.

Then why do you keep bringing it up?

Yes, bravo, the Cerberus scientists collected the Reaper IFF, this is why Shepard had to go there and...uh...no, not resalvage it, that can't be the right word, can it.

Providing with a what? Shepard found out about the Reaper IFF, and Shepard was the one to collect it, in the end. As I said, they got indoctrinated before they could even get the Reaper IFF, how can you assume that they will understand much more complex tech such as a Reaper's mind for example without getting indoctrinated.

Actually, TIM(Cerberus) found the Derelict Reaper. The research team located and removed it from the DR's systems in a format that Shepard was able to just grab-and-go with on the fly. Try going onto a foreign (not even alien) military vessel with the vague order of 'retrieve their encryption technology', and no other data. It will take you a whole lot longer than the brief mission that Shepard goes on, and that is with the benefit of keeping with human Naval conventions, if you are familiar with them.

We know for certain that EDI got more than just the navigational and communications data, she also got some of their genetic research data from the experiments that they were running on the colonists. She may have also gotten more data that just isn't relevant to the immediate mission, though we cannot be certain of that. Also, the ship, by necessity and practicality, would not have as much data on board as the CB.

I have elaborated my hypothesis a few hundrend times, if you don't want to read it, then that's not my problem. We can't win the Reapers with conventional warfare, and the CB only proposes improvements on it.

So you admit that this is just a hypothesis? Please stop citing it as fact, then.

Do yourself a favor and realize that you are defending a poster that says that any counter-argument to her post must begin out of "moral intuition". She also claims that this "moral intuition" is just wishful thinking, and not "logic or experience". Oh no, that line has to be used only for renegades.

False. She is pointing out that a lot of arguments are irrational and illogical, but she does not ever make the claim that everyone on one side or the other is making these arguements. Hell she even presents those arguments that do actually hold some sort of weight in the debate, even for the opposing decision.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

It is kind of..ugh...iffy...(can't think of a better word I'm sure one of you will call me dumb and put a smart word)that the biggest last decision you make in ME2 from a metagaming perspective,probably won't have any *serious* repercussions,you learn Cerberus is a major antagonist anyway and it is a little disheartening,but I'm sure BW will work their magic.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Sisterofshane wrote...
It's a great argument, but you go based on the assumption that without any extra knowledge of Reaper Technology, it will be impossible to defeat the Reapers.  There is evidence that this is not true.  Humanity has defeated a Reaper and Reaper Technology (Collectors Base) before, with almost NO knowledge to draw upon.

Also, there is evidence that the Protheans had a more advanced knowledge and understanding of Reaper Technology than we currently have ( as evidenced by their ability to constuct a working prototype of a mass relay, and as I noticed on a recent thread, that the VI on Ilos had the ability to detect indoctrination upon an individual, whereas we don't even know what truly causes it), and they still failed in defeating the Reapers.  So to assume that any information gained from the collector base would turn the tide of the impending war, we would also then have to assume that said knowledge we find would need to be substantive enough that we could definitively defeat the Reapers in an upcoming war.  

Given that within the 2-3 years from the defeat of Sovereign (a fully functioning Reaper, not just a prototype or a partially finished one), and that within five hundred years and access (albiet limited) to Collector technology and our limited understanding of both, we have failed to come up with any viable solution to the Reaper threat, and that our time frame (roughly 6 months) til Reaper arrival, it makes it highly unlikely that even an extraordinary force of brilliant individuals would be able to find anything relevant before it would be too late, and if they did, that we wouldn't have the time to implement said tech/strategy before the reapers effectively wiped us out.

Add with that the extremely high possiblility of Ceberus screwing this up (they've screwed up everything else before, except for resurrecting Shepard, in which they very nearly screwed up), plus the idea that Humanity has already come farther than ANY OTHER CIVILIZATION in the history of the galaxy by delaying the cycle of extinction not only once, but twice on what limited knowledge we have, it's not so risky a bet to destroy the reaper base.  That's the way my Shep sees it.

1) We did take out a reaper, but it was a ahrd foguht battle with 2 fleets involved.

2) Sovereign was badly blown up (remember that th main guns on starship hit with the power of a nuke), most of it's part lost and the Turans came up with the Thanix cannon.
Give Cerberus worked on reper technology before, and given that we DON'T know when the reapers will arrive, it's  NOT safe to assume we won't be abel t oget anything from the CB in time. Such things are impossible to predict. Research may yield a new super weapons in a month..or it might take years.

3) Delying the cycle doesn't mean much. Shep can puff his chest and stroke his ego as much as he wants, humanity and he are still isnects. Without some ace up our sleeve, our chances of survival are almsot zero.
Also Cerberus doesn't have as bad a track record as you think (Normandy, EDI, IFF). Sucess of the research is determined by the data you gather.

[Sisterofshane]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...


Anti-reaper efforts are allready described as hopeless.

Pretty much everyone tells you the galaxy isn't ready - and realisticly, given what we know about the reapers and with things as they are, chances of victory are almost zero.

In that light, negative effects become irrelevant.
Unless you find some way to even the odds, it won't matter.

The Galaxy isn't ready because:
a)Leaders in the council continue to deny the presence of the Reapers.
b)The Galactic Armies are not united in such a way to defeat the Reapers.

Our odds are slighty better than other extinct civilizations, because the Reapers have been unable to cripple our transportation and gain access to all of our information, and they are not going to be able to sneak in and attack us.
That being said, giving TIM the base will have no effect upon either of those two reasons.  So if Shepard can't get the Galaxy to unite, any knowledge we gain from the CB will be rendered moot.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Phaedon wrote...

Also, data lots of it?

According to EDI, she only found a) the turian distress call, how to navigate the Omega 4 Relay, both of which could be products of the ship's history log. Later, TIM confirms that it was just that the CB uses a Reaper IFF to get past the CB, which is perfectly detectable, because it is a signal generator and it is wired to te ship's network.

Otherwise, why didn't she find anything else? The Collector Vessel came and went from the CB and back, but you only learn it's location by detecting something close to the accretion disk when you get there, or something along these lines.

EDI hacked the entire systems, and only found data concerning the vessel's communication logs, two signals in fact, but yeah, sure lots of data. Because you say so.

As someone who works on databases, let me tell you this.
Datamining means there's s***** of data, and you have to sift trough trying to find relevant data.

So yes, given how long EDI was searching, there was a massive quantity of data. Just because EDI doesn't inform you abotu every file, doesn't mean there's nothing to find /it jsut mean that it wasn't vital or relveant for the mision at the time).
The gist of datamining is to search for something specific.

Except that if you read my previous posts, I have proposed two different plans to cause damage to the Reapers, and proposed 2 other things that we should investigate.

It's just both theoretically and practically impossible to win with conventional warfare. This will just not work out.

Your plans also won't work out. I explained why before.
You assume reapers are morons, your missiles can be cloaked and are uninterceptalbe, are cheap and capable of doing any significant damage.

Because they have a history of sharing technology with the Alliance. Where do you think a lot of our biotic amp technology came from?

Cronnix or what their name is? Unless you have some sort of source?
The Alliance has the Ascension program for biotics, it is obviously good, or Cerberus wouldn't try so hard to infiltrate it.

Share tech? Not really, they just get Alliance tech before it gets mass produced.

Nah, they do share technology with the Alliance. They leak it in trough one of their military contractors.

I have elaborated my hypothesis a few hundrend times, if you don't want to read it, then that's not my problem. We can't win the Reapers with conventional warfare, and the CB only proposes improvements on it.

Incorrect.

Also, your plan still involves conventional warfare.. Only with your magic missiles.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Sisterofshane wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...


Anti-reaper efforts are allready described as hopeless.

Pretty much everyone tells you the galaxy isn't ready - and realisticly, given what we know about the reapers and with things as they are, chances of victory are almost zero.

In that light, negative effects become irrelevant.
Unless you find some way to even the odds, it won't matter.

The Galaxy isn't ready because:
a)Leaders in the council continue to deny the presence of the Reapers.
b)The Galactic Armies are not united in such a way to defeat the Reapers.

Our odds are slighty better than other extinct civilizations, because the Reapers have been unable to cripple our transportation and gain access to all of our information, and they are not going to be able to sneak in and attack us.
That being said, giving TIM the base will have no effect upon either of those two reasons.  So if Shepard can't get the Galaxy to unite, any knowledge we gain from the CB will be rendered moot.

The galaxy also sin't ready because the reapers overpower us by a huuge margin.

Reaper ships are bigger, better shielded and have more firepower than yours.
All the troops in the world can't help you if your navy crumbles.

[SandTrout]

@Pulletlamer

What reason would Cerberus have for not helping you? Meanwhile, they have plenty of reason to help you, primarily their own survival. For Cerberus to decide against their own survival (as an organization) would be dependent on TIM going completely bat-**** insane.

While not a universal truism, in this case, the greater evil specifically cancels out the lesser one, and is far more severe than anything that the lesser evil is capable of. Note that this is a specific situation that I am referring. Cerberus will be destroyed if the Reapers win.

What I mean is that giving the base to Cerberus in my opinion it's not worth the risk. Here is where we disagree. You think that giving it to Cerberus is better than not having anything to combat the Reapers. I don't think so. In fact I prefer destroying it rather than giving it to someone who in case of that it helps you against the reapers etc etc (since I think I already said various times that is all a possibility) may become a dangerous enemy or turn the back on me.

Fist of, I choose to destroy the base b/c I think that it will end up hindering us against the Reapers. The potential threat that Cerberus may pose in the future is irrelevant if there is no future for the species. This still begs the question as to what reason Cerberus would have to work against you when they have done everything to help you against the Reapers, including resurrecting Shepard and giving him the SR2 and all of the other resources necessary to defeat the Reapers' agents, the Collectors.

You say there is a reason that you think Cerberus will turn on you while fighting the Reapers, but you cite no actual reasons.

Modifié par SandTrout, 01 août 2011 - 06:54 .

[Ieldra]

Sisterofshane wrote...
It's a great argument, but you go based on the assumption that without any extra knowledge of Reaper Technology, it will be impossible to defeat the Reapers.  There is evidence that this is not true.  Humanity has defeated a Reaper and Reaper Technology (Collectors Base) before, with almost NO knowledge to draw upon.

Yeah.....we defeated a single Reaper with the help of several fleets, a tactical blunder on its part and a great deal of luck. Now we're facing a fleet of them. How do you like those odds?

It is a reasonable expectation that we will need more than what we currently have - in technology, in understanding - to defeat the Reapers. Impossible? Not many things are impossible. But if there is a way, we have to find it. And the best place to start as of current knowledge, now that the derelict Reaper is gone, is the Collector base.

Also, there is evidence that the Protheans had a more advanced knowledge and understanding of Reaper Technology than we currently have ( as evidenced by their ability to constuct a working prototype of a mass relay, and as I noticed on a recent thread, that the VI on Ilos had the ability to detect indoctrination upon an individual, whereas we don't even know what truly causes it), and they still failed in defeating the Reapers.  So to assume that any information gained from the collector base would turn the tide of the impending war, we would also then have to assume that said knowledge we find would need to be substantive enough that we could definitively defeat the Reapers in an upcoming war.

The Protheans were taken by surprise, as Vigil admits. They couldn't have had that knowledge at the start of the war. Also relay technology and the technology the Reapers use to build themselves are not necessarily the same. The relays exist to lure us in without giving us any chance at understanding.
Also, there is of course no guarantee that whatever we find in the base will be enough. There isn't even any guarantee that there will be anything useful at all. But I ask: Where else do we have a chance to gain such knowledge?  

Given that within the 2-3 years from the defeat of Sovereign (a fully functioning Reaper, not just a prototype or a partially finished one), and that within five hundred years and access (albiet limited) to Collector technology and our limited understanding of both, we have failed to come up with any viable solution to the Reaper threat, and that our time frame (roughly 6 months) til Reaper arrival, it makes it highly unlikely that even an extraordinary force of brilliant individuals would be able to find anything relevant before it would be too late, and if they did, that we wouldn't have the time to implement said tech/strategy before the reapers effectively wiped us out.

I am sorry, there has been exactly NO concerted effort to understand the Reapers we know of, except by Cerberus. The Reaper threat has not even been acknowledged yet by the powers that be. There have not been "five hundred years of failed efforts in view of an impending disaster", but five hundred years of complacency and wasted opportunity because people thought it wasn't that important. Complacency and stagnation in the interest of stability, with no real threat in sight.

Add with that the extremely high possiblility of Ceberus screwing this up (they've screwed up everything else before, except for resurrecting Shepard, in which they very nearly screwed up), plus the idea that Humanity has already come farther than ANY OTHER CIVILIZATION in the history of the galaxy by delaying the cycle of extinction not only once, but twice on what limited knowledge we have, it's not so risky a bet to destroy the reaper base.  That's the way my Shep sees it.

Again, we were lucky and only had to deal with a single functional Reaper and another incomplete one. Separately. A whole army of them is a different matter. Wars aren't won by heroic virtue and determination alone, but by solid strategy - in military and in technological matters. If you think that we can win against the Reapers without any additional knowledge of them - please present that way! If you think we can get that knowledge from somewhere else - tell me where! If you can't, then the decision to destroy the base is a bet against fate.

I am not saying there is no risk in keeping the base. I am saying we cannot afford to destroy it in spite of the risk.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 01 août 2011 - 06:55 .

[SandTrout]

Cronnix or what their name is? Unless you have some sort of source?
The Alliance has the Ascension program for biotics, it is obviously good, or Cerberus wouldn't try so hard to infiltrate it.

Share tech? Not really, they just get Alliance tech before it gets mass produced.

Conatix is largely speculated to be a Cerberus Front, but I was think more of the Ascension project. Cerberus oppertatives were providing technical and theoretical expertise, some of which likely came from the Pragia research, based on the journal entry that survived.

Sorry that I missed this bit on my first go through.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Quick question,when you kill the DA and the council the news reports say the Turians are building more dreadnaughts,how many dreadnaughts would it take to match the firepower of the DA,I ask cause well...a bunch of small targets if better then one huge target.