3618 réponses à ce sujet

[SandTrout]

@Humanoid_Typhoon,

Impossible to say. The DA was the largest ship in the galaxy at the time, but larger doesn't always mean more powerful, especially when compared to newer ships that are being outfitted with newer technology such as Thanix cannons.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

That would be a hell of a trade-off....a fleet of shiny new Thanix-equipped dreadnaughts,but the Turians hate you,maybe the renegades will get an unforseen tactical advantage by killing the council

Modifié par Humanoid_Typhoon, 01 août 2011 - 07:03 .

[Pulletlamer]

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

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

Tell me the good things they've done besides bringing back Shepard to life to stop the Collectors. Reconstructing the Normandy and bringing part of Shepard crew back doesn't count, since that's included in Shepard mission.

By their experiments and criminal actions only bad things have happened.

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

Yes? Why are you so sure? What makes you think they won't study indoctrination, perhaps? Or try to build a Reaper of their own or some other crazy plan like that? You can't know what Cerberus it's going to do with it.

Saying: Of course Cerberus will look for military applications it's not an argument, since you don't know so much about Cerberus that you can't predict their actions at all.

[quote]
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]

I meant good things morally (as good/evil), and beneficial practically, so that we might find it actually useful.


[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]

I fail to see how my scenario was silly, it was a clever and very good comparison.

That you have an alternative and it may seem viable (you can't say it's viable for sure) doesn't mean it's the best or the only one. There's always other options.

There can also be horrible consequences if you actually do give them the Collector Base. Like: more indoctrinated people, Cerberus having more power...

By keeping the base you're not actually given a weapon of mass-Reaper destruction or something like that.

You're not giving more trouble to yourself at all. The best thing Cerberus could do with the Base was finding something that helps their own interests. Even then you're exposing people to indoctrination and other type of dangers that may become another trouble.

Not having weapons against the reapers is trouble, yes, I agree, but we actually don't know if something useful can be extracted from the base so it's still not that big of a deal. You're throwing yourself against impossible odds anyway, with base or without it. And remember that base it's not at your disposal. it's for Cerberus.

[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]

I fail to see where there's a high chance? Something useful to combat the reapers and how to actually kill them with weapons etc, (you know practical stuff) I doubt it.

Useful about indoctrination? Maybe, since during the process people can become indoctrinated from it and are more or less avaibable to study. That's all I can't think off. Some collector tech that it does not stand a chance against the Reapers. Thanix Canon > Collectors.

The Reaper Larva don't holds much information on how to defeat the Reapers, since it was in fetal status without the shell.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote..

[quote]Pulletlamer wrote...
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]

He didn't. He said using our technology. That includes all technology. Not by using the "mass relays".
The one that guessed the Mass Relays were Reaper and not Prothean technology was Shepard due to his visions and whatnot.


[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote..

[quote]Pulletlamer wrote...
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]

Why?

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

You shouldn't be so concerned, since even if they (Cerberus) found a way to stand up /defeat to the reapers in a fight by studying the base (which I doubt), they might not even not help you, but become indoctrinated or work for the enemy.

Therefore better to destroy it and be safe.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote..

[quote]Pulletlamer wrote...
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]

It never does in my book. That's why we have different opinions.


[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote..

[quote]Pulletlamer wrote...
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]


You understood wrong. The key word in that sentence is may. And I was bringing that along with my point above.

Modifié par Pulletlamer, 01 août 2011 - 07:08 .

[SandTrout]

You understood wrong. The key word in that sentence is may. And I was bringing that along with my point above.

Actually, this is one of the few things that I will claim will not happen due to Cerberus. Cerberus will not wipe out every sapient species in the galaxy. They lack both the means and the motivation. Even if they wiped out everyone expect for humanity, that's still a species better than the Reapers are planning.

[Phaedon]

[quote]SandTrout wrote...

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.[/quote]
Hint: You had no chance of winning through conventional warfare before, and you don't have, no matter the improvements that could come out of the base. 

The Reapers will always have more firepower, more numbers, better technolodgy, and will of course be more experienced and intelligent.

[quote]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.[/quote]
Good attempt (not really, it was bad, I am just being sarcastic) to flame there, but unless you have a factbook which says that Reaper industrial complexes store data, I am going to go ahead and say that that is wishful thinking.

Oh and OK then, let's say that there is plenty of data. How will it help? You do realize that the Reapers have quickly and efficiently rendered an entire race's navy go in the run in less than a week? Or that they overwhelmed the entire Prothean empire within hours?



[quote]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.[/quote]You do realize how bad admitting what I exactly said after debating against it, makes you look right:
[quote]You mean greater practical evil, right? For all we know the Reapers are only trying to do this to survive.[/quote]

The Reapers are the greater practical evil, but for all we know Cerberus is morally as evil or worse than the Reapers.
[quote]Then why do you keep bringing it up?[/quote]It may  have something to do with me:

[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]
Asking for clarification and pointing out that we are no better than the Reapers if we do follow some parts of their tech that we shouldn't. 

You were the one who argued against it for reasons that are beyond me.

[quote]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.[/quote]
Ah, thanks for that, you just proved your exact previous post wrong.

If recovering the IFF was their primary objective, then why did they not learn that such a thing existed until after Shepard went to the Collector Vessel? And why did TIM say "we want that IFF" when they couldn't have had the IFF already?

My argument remains. It's naive or worse to consider the two alternatives of giving the base to Cerberus, a) there is nothing to find, Cerberus finds everything, and Shepard takes the data back.

You have no idea how Cerberus is going to study indoctrination (did you recover Saren's files over indoctrination?) and you can't just assume that Cerberus will be able to do an in depth study of the base before getting indoctrinated or start attacking you.

What is even worse is that once again, someone assumes that the tech will remain idle, in the Collector Base, for months. Chances are that if Cerberus gets their hands on the base and they don't get indoctrinated, you will never be able to learn where they have relocated the various CB tech scattered around their research bases.



[quote]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.[/quote]
Yeah, so EDI wouldn't tell you anything else that would be important? Such as the location of the CB? And no, you are wrong, EDI didn't get that data from hacking into the databanks. Shepard uploaded data from a terminal next to an autopsy table. 

Which shows that the Collectors ran genetic material comparison tests. Yes, last time I checked, they needed machines to do that. Which store recent memory and previous entries for later comparison.

Please, be reasonable here and realize that if they stored their own data in databanks, then they would also have stored the exact location of the Collector Base. EDI doesn't detect that until just before they find it.

[quote]So you admit that this is just a hypothesis? Please stop citing it as fact, then.[/quote]Hurr durr, excellent rebuttal. Would calling it a "law" make you feel better? 

It applies perfectly for conventional warfare.

The Reapers have much more advanced firepower than we have.
They also have much better defences than we do.

Are you assuming that the unfinished HR would help with that, at all? Guess what. Sovereign's main gun was recovered. And all it turned out was the Thanix canon, which is really not that impressive. HR's lack of main gun would boost up our firepower?

The HR lacks an exoskeleton. Sovereign doesn't. A huge part of his exoskeleton was located at the Council Chambers last time I checked, however.

OK, then, let's assume that no matter these problems, we manage to get as good firepower as the Reapers have. Hey who knows, maybe we are smarter than the Reapers and detect a weakness of theirs based on their own data. Let's also assume that we have as good protection as the Reapers do. Sure, maybe we can't retrofit every single ship in the galaxy, but let's just assume that, it sounds like a good idea to do so.

Well, there is still a problem, the Reapers are several thousands, the Alliance Navy only has 200 vessels, and yes, fighters and carriers probably count. Add all of the allied forces together, at best you have what, 1500 ships? Looks like we are outnumbered, but we have ships as powerful as them... maybe if we try to outsma-

Oh wait, they are an ancient race with telepathic capabilities. So what if they have more experience than us, or they outsmart us, or they outnumber us, we still have a chance, though, right, right?

Oh wait, no we don't. Not a single of these steps can be completed, and yet even if they are, we still have massive disadvantages.


[quote]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.[/quote]


[quote]If you, as a player who destroys the base, switch to argument III-(1) to support your decision after having read this post, then you will thereby have proven that you're using after-the-fact reasoning, that the argument follows the decision and not the other way round, and that the decision itself is based on something else but arguments. Namely, a moral intuition. [/quote]

This says that you are both wrong about who this argument is directed to when it comes to...moral intuition, but she also claims that switching to "arguments of some weight" means that we are just blind. Bravo.

And don't even bother playing the "but she said after!" card. You can perfectly have valid arguments for destroying the base and still learn of new ones.

[/quote]

Modifié par Phaedon, 01 août 2011 - 07:18 .

[Aumata]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

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.

If Bioware didn't make them the enemy for Mass Effect 3 right off the bat, then this debate might not have swing one sided towards destroying the base.  My Paragon Shepard kept the base though, I did it for the same reason as Ultimate Nick Fury kept a part of Ga Lak Tus, who does the same thing similar, mind wipe, destroy all life on a planet, hell a single piece can spell doom for the planet.  Nick kept the scrap because it can still be useful.

[Pulletlamer]

SandTrout wrote...

@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.


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

Well there's plenty of reasons, I already gave them, don't make me repeat them every post. And I'm already right since they do indeed work against you on ME3.

Well, you want reasons, where do I begin?

Why wouldn't they help Shepard or be against him:

-First off, because they don't owe Shepard anything not are in debt on him for giving them the base.

-They are not obliged to keep his promise of aiding you.

-They have their own interests.

-They usually work on their own, against governements. Wouldn't be surprised if they worked their own way to reach their goals (TIM goals, in fact).

-They having advanced technology means more power to them and more possibilities to grow as an organization, not needing help from Shepard or any other governement.

-They are xenophobes and wouldn't dare to exterminate the other alien species. Shepard (in theory, although you can be extremely renegade) is supposed to be the saviour of the galaxy, which contradicts their plans.

-They can see Shepard as a nuissance.

-They can become indoctrinated from the technology of the base or become huskified and work for the Reapers.

-They want human to secure dominance. That means there's a high probability they could make a "deal with the Reapers in order to secure human preseverance in the galaxy.

Can't think more now, I'm sure there are some.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also I don't think it's worth the risk giving the lesser evil power. Think about it this way:

If the reapers win? Did it matter at all giving them the base? No. It didn't matter.

If the reapers loose? You have given a dangerous organization a lot of power and now you have to deal with yet another problem.

Destroying the base is the "to be safe" and responsible choice in my opinion. Safety first.

Modifié par Pulletlamer, 01 août 2011 - 07:34 .

[Pulletlamer]

HomelessGal wrote...

Pulletlamer wrote...
He didn't. He said using our technology. That includes all technology. Not by using the "mass relays".
The one that guessed the Mass Relays were Reaper and not Prothean technology was Shepard due to his visions and whatnot.

Actually, Sovereign's quote is "Your civilization is based on the technology of the mass relays, our technology. By using it, your society develops along the paths we desire".

I apologize for my lack of memory, then.

Phaedon wrote...

The Reapers are the greater practical evil, but for all we know Cerberus is morally as evil or worse than the Reapers.

Quoted for thruth. It's the same I'm saying.

Besides it's not like having a greater evil justifies giving a potential threat (Cerberus) reaper technology and other kind of advanced tech.

I mean really, why would you give support (and tech) to someone that can become a danger, tied-in and so great as the Reapers in their (evil) plans for human dominance, or even worse?

Modifié par Pulletlamer, 01 août 2011 - 07:46 .

[DxWill10]

A lot of people chose to keep the base. It's ironic the Geth favor the 'choosing our own path', and even went to war with the reapers and heretics to do it. While the Geth would go through all that to avoid using reaper technology to advance.
So, Shepard ignores Legion's advice and the Geth's cultural mindset, and decides to keep the base. heh

[Drake-Shepard]

Everytime cerberus investigate something they get indoctrinated. Without fail. (i think) lol. How many times can the illusive man let his troops get indoctrinated because he thinks the risk is worth it without changing strategy. He saw super fast indoctrination in mass effect evolution and still proceeds with the same strategy. Its just not rational at all.

I forget what my point is... oh yes, they will probably even find a way to indoctrinate themselves on the collector ship (i kept the ship anyway with my canon shep)

Wasn't the reaper ship where you got your IFF disabled by some super mass accelerator weapon (maybe in one shot)? And in the codex did it say something about a giant crater on a planet from some super old mass accelerator weapon surely these are much much for valuable to aim resources at

[Sisterofshane]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...


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

But remember said Reaper required an entire Fleet of Geth,  and managed to take our fleets by surprise.  They had the advantage in technology, tactics and numbers and we still won.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
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.

This is a good point.  We only had access to pieces of Sovereign, and presumably the Turians came up with Thannix Cannons, and Ceberus was able to delevop EDI.  Both were instrumental in taking down the Collectors.

But Remember these advances didn't occur overnight.  It took two years for each to be developed to a point that they were useful.  We don't have that kind of time.  We have a best, six months.  We need to find something that we can implement right away, and be able to integrate into existing systems.

And remember, I said that the Protheans had more knowledge then we could ever hope to gain before the Reapers arrive, and they still failed to survive.  There is no guarantee that knowledge, in and of itself, will be enough to defeat the Reapers.  Unless they keep detailed plans of how to completely and easily disable a Reaper on the Collector Base.  If so, then I made a really bad decision (LOL).

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
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.

It's not so much that we delayed the cycle, but how the cycle was delayed.  Reapers Plan of Attack A (take control of the citadel) and plan B (travel to Alpha Relay, access all systems) have failed, mostly because of one human.  One person has managed to thwart the attempts of galactic extinction twice, with minimal help, and no galactic support ( remember nobody believes Shepard about the reaper invasion).  I think Shep deserves a little pat on the back.

Also, Cerberus wasn't responsible for the technology of the Normandy.  Essentially, they stole the schematics from the Alliance and rebuilt it with a few modifications.  As for the IFF, the mission to install it nearly ended in disaster, if it wasn't for Luck (i.e. Shepard and the whole crew being gone, Joker being able to give control of the ships systems to EDI), the mission would have ended right there.

About the only truly useful things Cerberus has done (that we know about) are rebuilding Shepard (again, almost a disaster, because of the attack on the facility) and create EDI.  I don't have a lot of faith in them to help much.

Plus, I always got the feeling that TIM was holding out on us.  He picks and chooses what information to give us, blatantly sends us into a trap, lies about having the information (how many of us truly believe that he didn't know what Kaidan/Ashley was up to, but knew enough to leak information in order to use them as collector bait on Horizon), and yet he has an infiltration network and resources to rival that of the Shadow Broke, and he uses it to exclusively fight the Reapers and secure Cerberus' dominance in the galaxy.  How do we know that he doesn't already have the information he needs, and wants to keep the collector base for some alterior motive (remember he says that it would be the key to establishing human dominance in the galaxy, and NOT JUST FROM THE REAPERS).  Would we really expect him to limit himself to just defeating the Reapers, or would he also use the technology to undermine the power of the other races in the galaxy (which, given his track record, I fully expect him to do)  And wouldn't undermining other species ultimately weaken the galaxy against a Reaper Invasion?

There is such a small chance that the base would do any good at all, but a very large one that it will do harm. IMO, the Base would have to definitively contain a sure-fire way to destroy the Reapers once and for all for me to even consider that all of the negative repurcussions would be worth it.

[Phaedon]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
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.

As someone with a little bit of common sense left, let me tell you this.
Datamining means **** if there isn't any data to mine.

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.

By searching you mean being attacked by a Collector virus?

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.

Uh, no you haven't.

You have yet to reply to my last post.

Being moronic has nothing to do with it, you just use it for cheap drama. MIssiles can be cloaked, the technolodgy is simple, it's cloaking bigger things that is the problem, uninterceptable? If they don't have any emissions and they aren't visible, then yes. Being cheap has nothing to do about it. Cloaking happens all the time in the MEverse, and yes, they will do significant damage.

They are atomic bombs that blow up when they get past the Reaper's shields. 

Multiple times the damage that could have been done by the remains of the Arcturus fleet firing.

Cronnix or what their name is? Unless you have some sort of source?

Talk to Kaidan, it's Cronnix or Cronnatix, I don't even remember.

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

Source?

Incorrect.

Yes, one of most excellent rebuttals you are known for.

You have yet to reply to my previous post, so your lack of arguments, once again isn't that surprising.

I actually find it a bit amusing that you can think that you can hold an argument by saying "Incorrect."

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

Developing mini-missiles with cloaking tech that happen to be WMDs is not, by any definition of the term conventional warfare.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Interesting posts.

I look at it this way. I'm just going by what I saw in ME1 and ME2 here. Every single Cerberus operation I've seen in the game save the Lazarus project has been a giant Charlie Foxtrot where the sh** has hit the fan; OR where they have tortured and killed innocents; OR where they sacrificed colonists. The derelict Reaper was also a CF. It's pretty obvious that staff needs to be rotated quite regularly and kept out of Reaper indoctrination range. Organics can only stay in areas of Reaper indoctrination for very short periods of time without becoming indoctrinated. Maybe tinfoil hats would help?

The derelict reaper is gone, thus still no proof of the existance of the Reapers.

So given say over a 90% CF rate, what are the chances that Cerberus would not have another CF at the Collector base? 10% right? And if the 90% holds true, and they have another massive CF at the CB, we're all in deep do do.

Can't turn it over to the Alliance. Can't turn it over to the Council. Must either blow it up or turn it over to Cerberus. So I blew up the base in most playthroughs -- kept it a couple times to see what happens.

So this brings us to Arrival. Here Shepard wipes out an entire system and destroys a mass relay to stop an immediate Reaper invasion... so now you've got a system gone, 300,000 Batarians vaporized, and no proof of the existance of the Reapers. --- not until ME3.

Until then Shepard is a war criminal, completely isolated from all
factions, but I guess Shepard can always end up on Omega..., but blew up
the base... and Cerberus is going to be going through to retrieve
parts, bet on it.... so ... hmmm... maybe Tuchanka and ask Wrex for
asylum.

Cerberus would be after Shepard for 1) blowing up the base, and 2) stealing the Normandy II. TIM would want him/her dead just for that. However, if Shep kept the base, then (s)he would still consider TIM an ally.

[Phaedon]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Interesting posts.

I look at it this way. I'm just going by what I saw in ME1 and ME2 here. Every single Cerberus operation I've seen in the game save the Lazarus project has been a giant Charlie Foxtrot where the sh** has hit the fan; OR where they have tortured and killed innocents; OR where they sacrificed colonists. The derelict Reaper was also a CF. It's pretty obvious that staff needs to be rotated quite regularly and kept out of Reaper indoctrination range. Organics can only stay in areas of Reaper indoctrination for very short periods of time without becoming indoctrinated. Maybe tinfoil hats would help?

Just wait until the Cerberus fanboys swarm you and tell you that they are failed operations because you have heard about them, ignoring the SB files, the fact that you also mention the death and torture of innocents,etc.

[SandTrout]

Hint: You had no chance of winning through conventional warfare before, and you don't have, no matter the improvements that could come out of the base.

The Reapers will always have more firepower, more numbers, better technolodgy, and will of course be more experienced and intelligent.

So why should we limit our options? We don't know what we'll need against them, so it is reasonable to grab anything we can use. We don't loose anything to 'non-conventional' tactics against the Reapers by accessing Collector technology. We're not trading the base for any advantages anywhere else, only sacrificing those possible advantages that it might provide.

Oh and OK then, let's say that there is plenty of data. How will it help? You do realize that the Reapers have quickly and efficiently rendered an entire race's navy go in the run in less than a week? Or that they overwhelmed the entire Prothean empire within hours?

Difficult to say what specifics we can get from the base, but you said it yourself that we have already lasted weeks while the Protheans were essentially taken in a matter of hours, excepting clean-up. We're already doing better than the Protheans, and we're still in the fight. Note that Germany took France in a matter of weeks as well in WW2, due to superior tactics and technology. They were a tough enemy, but insurmountable? Hardly.

The Reapers are the greater practical evil, but for all we know Cerberus is morally as evil or worse than the Reapers.

So, what your saying, is that your morals don't actually translate into practical matters. I agree.

What do you mean by that? If we start making our own Reapers, then we are no better, how can you claim otherwise?


Asking for clarification and pointing out that we are no better than the Reapers if we do follow some parts of their tech that we shouldn't.

You were the one who argued against it for reasons that are beyond me.

Your claiming that we (or Cerberus) is no better than the Reapers if we start trying to make our own Reaper, and then you imply that using any Reaper technology is the same thing as making a Reaper. This is a straw-man argument because no one is talking about making a Reaper, and the problem we have with making the Reaper is the means to do so, not the technology itself, which has no moral weight.

Ah, thanks for that, you just proved your exact previous post wrong.

If recovering the IFF was their primary objective, then why did they not learn that such a thing existed until after Shepard went to the Collector Vessel? And why did TIM say "we want that IFF" when they couldn't have had the IFF already?

Hell, TIM stated as good of reasons as there are IN GAME, so I'm not going to repeat them. I'll just point out that the Research Team had been on-board the DR since before the Collector Vessel mission. Also, I have not contradicted anything that I have stated. Yeah, **** went south, but they did achieve a primary objective in locating and isolating the IFF.

Yeah, so EDI wouldn't tell you anything else that would be important? Such as the location of the CB? And no, you are wrong, EDI didn't get that data from hacking into the databanks. Shepard uploaded data from a terminal next to an autopsy table.

She got it from on-board data storage, which was my point.

Hurr durr, excellent rebuttal. Would calling it a "law" make you feel better?

It is not a law, principal, truism, or anything. It is your own speculation regarding the relative might of the Reaper fleet renders any conventional conflict null and void, which has not been universally true in history. Could this position be applied accurately to some historical conflicts, yes, but it could not be applied broadly with any sort of accuracy.

Are you assuming that the unfinished HR would help with that, at all? Guess what. Sovereign's main gun was recovered. And all it turned out was the Thanix canon, which is really not that impressive. HR's lack of main gun would boost up our firepower?

The HR is not the only piece of technology available, and there are probably tactical limitations to the Thanix which may or may not apply to other technology that is discovered in the CB. Also, the Thanix is impressive if it gives a Fighter similar firepower as a cruiser.

All of your reasons that we "don't stand a chance" do not nullify the effectiveness of the CB tech in concert with any other tactics/advantages that we may develop. Your point continues to be that because the CB will not solve the Reaper problem on its own, that it provides nothing to the overall effort. Again, you persist with suicidal stupidity.

"If you, as a player who destroys the base, switch to argument III-(1) to support your decision after having read this post, then you will thereby have proven that you're using after-the-fact reasoning, that the argument follows the decision and not the other way round, and that the decision itself is based on something else but arguments. Namely, a moral intuition."

This says that you are both wrong about who this argument is directed to when it comes to...moral intuition, but she also claims that switching to "arguments of some weight" means that we are just blind. Bravo.

Again, this is a false statement. She in no means attacks people who have been arguing III-(1) from the beginning. Hell, if you check page one, you'll see that I posted my reasoning as nearly identical to III-(1) then, and have been arguing against flawed logic and false points since. Ieldra2 was pointing out that some people adopt good arguments after the point where there initial reasons are shown to be irrational, so that they do no have to admit that they are irrational.

Your libel will not go unchallenged, and you should remember that, Phaedon.

[Arcadian Legend]

There will be consequences for some decisions you make, but for the big story ones it should be so that everything balances out for both Paragons and Renegades in the interest of fairness. The paths to that balance should be different though storywise.

[alperez]

Shimmer_Gloom wrote...


Batman.  I mean, Doc Holiday.  From Tombstone.

Yep, sorry i'm so late but your cookie is well deserved.

[Ieldra]

@Pulletlamer:
Cerberus are humans who want to survive. If the Reapers win, they won't. Not without being turned into mutated slaves. Which means, that it makes strategic sense to help fight the Reapers in the end. There is no indication that a deal with them is even possible, and every indication that there isn't - see Saren.

There go about all your reasons why Cerberus will be of no help whatsoever. They might not be a help to Shepard, but hey, the only reason *you* know that Shepard and not Cerberus is the best hope for anything to survive is because you know it's a story and it's Shepard's story. From Cerberus' perspective, you can bet that they think they're helping humanity to survive. And maybe they are even right in that.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

@shotgun

*slow clap* excellent use of phonetics

[Ieldra]

@everyone:
Please note that I consider the argument "Cerberus it too incompetent to trust with the Collector base, they might become indoctrinated and help the Reapers" as valid.
Personally, I think that (a) the knowledge contained in the base is likely to be valuable enough to take that risk, and ( that an indoctrinated Cerberus would not be a great deal of help to the Reapers considering the power they already wield, so it is unlikely to be decisive, but I understand that others might weigh the risks differently.

About any other arguments, I will only answer to attempted refutations of my claim that they are invalid if any actual arguments to that effect are given, instead of baseless assertions that I'm wrong or strawman arguments rephrasing my arguments into something I never said.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 01 août 2011 - 08:13 .

[SandTrout]

-First off, because they don't owe Shepard anything not are in debt on him for giving them the base.

-They are not obliged to keep his promise of aiding you.

-They have their own interests.

These are not reasons against TIM helping the war effort. They are simply stating the absence of certain reasons that might cause him to help you. They are zeros, not negatives.

-They usually work on their own, against governements. Wouldn't be surprised if they worked their own way to reach their goals (TIM goals, in fact).

Until the Reveal of Cerberus as 40% of the enemies in ME3, those goals included stopping the Reapers and ensuring Humanity's survival.

-They having advanced technology means more power to them and more possibilities to grow as an organization, not needing help from Shepard or any other governement.

Yes, but only after the war.

-They are xenophobes and wouldn't dare to exterminate the other alien species. Shepard (in theory, although you can be extremely renegade) is supposed to be the saviour of the galaxy, which contradicts their plans.

Again, after the war. Also, Shepard is not "supposed to be the saviour of the galaxy". He is, and only ever was an exceptional soldier and specter, and if you're a renegade, your actions are very much in-line with Cerberus's desires. We're not talking about some prophesied 'Army of Light' or some-such here.

-They can see Shepard as a nuissance.

Irrelevant. Nuisances are to be dealt with after survival is ensured, not only that, but you can choose to prove a vital asset to Cerberus, if you want.

-They can become indoctrinated from the technology of the base or become huskified and work for the Reapers.

A team, might, yes, but the organization as a whole is not going to be taking vacations beyond the O4 relay, and TIM certainly isn't going to put himself anywhere near the CB. You are correct that this is one of the risks associated with the CB, though. This doesn't constitute a reason for Cerberus to turn against you of its own free will, though.

-They want human to secure dominance. That means there's a high probability they could make a "deal with the Reapers in order to secure human preseverance in the galaxy.

Only if they are monumentally stupid, IMO. Making human slurpies seems pretty high on the Reapers' priority list, and you cannot have human dominance in a galaxy without any humans. Granted, you may judge that Cerberus and TIM really are that dumb, but that seems a bit of a stretch, IMO. I suppose they could also take Saphra Deden's attitude that the is zero hope anyways, though.

Meanwhile, TIM does have some good reasons to fight against the Reapers, even if they're not fighting for Shepard.

- Human survival is the stated goal of Cerberus, and the Reapers' stated goal is the wipe sapient life (including Humanity) off the face of the galaxy.

-Humanity would not likely be dominant, even as Reaper, assuming that you consider being a Reaper as means of preserving Humanity. Instead, we're more likely to be at the bottom of the totem-pole again, just like we were with the Council.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Cerberus+base=Murhpy's law.


....possibly.

[alperez]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Let me summarize the most prevalent arguments that have been put forward against keeping the base.

*snip

While you as usual make some very interesting points, the inherent problem in those points is the conclussion you've come to about them.

You say the most prevalant arguments are basically broken down into the points you make, Delusional moral arguments, delusional practical arguments and arguments with some weight and you show your reasoning as to why each of these are how you say they are.

The problem of course is that you've decided that these arguments are Delusional moral, practical or arguments that have weight based on the reasoning that the arguments fail because you disagree with them.

Morality. is the hardest argument to portray this way simply because not everyone shares the same morals or considers the same things to be immoral.

Practicality. while being easier to explain away in the manner you do so also has a problem in that your conclussion of whether or not something is practical or not may not conform with someone elses.

As for the arguments with weight, well again its your own inferance that these are the only arguments worth considering which while fine for you may not actually work out the same for someone else making a judgement.

For your post to be taken as anything other than a justification for why the base should be kept or for you using your reasoning to argue why that should be the case, you may have needed to also put forward the most prevelant arguments for keeping the base imo.

By not doing so it seems your trying to justify that keeping the base is the only choice that should be made and dismissing destroying the base as an option simply because you believe it to be.

While this may or may not have been your intent, imo that's how it comes across so like everyone else who believes the base needs to be kept, your stating an opinion and tailoring the facts to suit that opinion.

Excellent post otherwise.

[alperez]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...


As I said before - everyone looks out for their own interests. To belive otherwise is to be blind to how the wrold, and politics works.

And maybe Kai Leng is simply good at what he does, so TIM tolerates him?
Really, we can go about this the whole day, but the FACT is that we saw both perfectly friendly, and very racist people in Cerberus.
And we see perfectly friendly and racists people/alines..EVERYWHERE ELSE.

It's just how things are.
I don't see why you look at the ME universe and see aliens that look out after our interestes more than their own, there are no racists alines and humantiy is a scourge.
That image is quite simply incorrect.

While everyone does to an extent look after their own interests, my response wasn't disclaiming this it ,was rather showing the simple fact that 3 seperate races working in a commitee, need to get agreement between themselves so it doesn't allow one of them to put their own race first above everyone else, simply by the nature of how the council works.

As for Kai, of course it could be that reason, it could also be the reason that he hates aliens, again that's the point i was trying to make, what apparently defines him the most is not he's good at his job, its supposedly his hatred of aliens, if that is his defining characteristic then would it not make as much sense that this is the reason TIM trusts him implicitly?

I never claimed there wasn't racist aliens, or that we haven't seen non racist cerberus, rather the fact that certain alien races already believing that humanity has been given an easier ride or getting whatever they want handed to them, doesn't mean that these are valid concerns that are not racist but political.

Again your taking what i believe about Cerberus and their idealogy and trying to fit it into a nice little box by saying because i believe this i believe humanity to be a scourge and all aliens to be fun friendly bunnies.

Cerberus are not humanity, they are however representatives of humanity with a particular idealogy that i happen to disagree with, disagreeing with them or their idealogy means only i disagree with cerberus.

To take your analogy correctly it should have been, i believe cerberus are the scourge.