3618 réponses à ce sujet

[Kaiser Shepard]

Skirata129 wrote...

...and the alternative is fighting the rhino barehanded?

Of course not.

Knifing it is the other option.

But the picking up a gun/whatever analogy isn't really correct, as the game has you hand said gun over to a known criminal.

Modifié par Kaiser Shepard, 30 juillet 2011 - 05:46 .

[Phaedon]

Skirata129 wrote...

I kept it. why? because when you have an angry rhino charging at you and a gun on the floor made by slave labor, you don't stop to question the moral implications of your usage of it. You pick up the ***ing gun and waste the rhino.

Not really. And it has nothing to do with moral implications.

If all you can get from a metal box is a slingshot, which can hurt the bird that you are friendly with, but can't touch the rhino, you won't be giving the slingshot to a person with strong anti-avian beliefs.

This is what can NOT come out from the Cerberus Base:

• Blueprints. Not how Collectors and Harbinger work.
• Something that has more firepower than a Reaper. The Collectors were designing a Reaper using knowledge and technolodgy known for billions of years. And they weren't even done that. No chance Cerberus will be able to make better than that, should they even have the chance to conduct engineering with Reaper tech, should they be able to recreate a Reaper without comitting genocide.

This is the best case scenario from saving the base:

• A Reaper. Should by a magical plot device Cerberus be able to reverse engineer the Reaper, the base only has materials for one, and it is very questionable whether you have the time to build a single one.
• Reproducing weapons to retrofit every vessel in the galaxy in order to have Reaper firepower. Well, guess what, you are still grossly outnumbered.

You can only produce something harmful to aliens from the Base.

And we are talking only in the case that we didn't view the E3 demo, there is no logic behind defending keeping the base anymore really.

[Skirata129]

still, you have to admit the risks of using it are outweighed by the potential benefits. even at the risk of personal injury and failure, you still have a better chance than fighting with the knife and probably a slightly smaller chance of dying. think about it, humans and every other species have spent thousands of years developing down the reaper's "intended" path of tech development, given the choice between going a step farther than was intended before our destruction or sticking to our current tier of development, or trying to develop new tech not in any way related to previous tech, I'll take the tech we were never supposed to have access to.

Modifié par Skirata129, 30 juillet 2011 - 05:54 .

[FoxShadowblade]

Phaedon wrote...

Not really. And it has nothing to do with moral implications.

If all you can get from a metal box is a slingshot, which can hurt the bird that you are friendly with, but can't touch the rhino, you won't be giving the slingshot to a person with strong anti-avian beliefs.

This is what can NOT come out from the Cerberus Base:

• Blueprints. Not how Collectors and Harbinger work.
• Something that has more firepower than a Reaper. The Collectors were designing a Reaper using knowledge and technolodgy known for billions of years. And they weren't even done that. No chance Cerberus will be able to make better than that, should they even have the chance to conduct engineering with Reaper tech, should they be able to recreate a Reaper without comitting genocide.

This is the best case scenario from saving the base:

• A Reaper. Should by a magical plot device Cerberus be able to reverse engineer the Reaper, the base only has materials for one, and it is very questionable whether you have the time to build a single one.
• Reproducing weapons to retrofit every vessel in the galaxy in order to have Reaper firepower. Well, guess what, you are still grossly outnumbered.

You can only produce something harmful to aliens from the Base.

And we are talking only in the case that we didn't view the E3 demo, there is no logic behind defending keeping the base anymore really.

TIM dancing, why should anyone keep the base after that?!

On a serious note: Your post is completely and totally correct.

[Phaedon]

Skirata129 wrote...

still, you have to admit the risks of using it are outweighed by the potential benefits. even at the risk of personal injury and failure, you still have a better chance than fighting with the knife and probably a slightly smaller chance of dying. think about it, humans and every other species have spent thousands of years developing down the reaper's "intended" path of tech development, given the choice between going a step farther than was intended before our destruction and sticker to a prior tier or trying to develop new tech not in any way related to previous tech, I'll take the tech we were never supposed to have access to.

No, I am afraid I can't admit that.

I sat down for 5 minutes calculating how ME3 would play out and what the risks of both actions are, during my first playthrough and I have concluded since that there is no risk from destroying the base, and a huge risk for not.

Based on that hypothesis, nothing potentially harmful against the Reapers can come out of the base. For the aliens, it's the Pandora's Box. And for my Shepard as well. I had no intention of stickying around with TIM for ME3.

Therefore, there is no percentage of chance added against the defeating the Reapers, but a lot against defeating Shepard or the aliens or even the Alliance.

And luckily I never had second thoughts from the point TIM basically let slip out of the line "Secure human dominance against the Reapers and beyond".

Modifié par Phaedon, 30 juillet 2011 - 05:56 .

[ThanesSniper]

If you blow up the base, you get a blue star. If you keep it, you get a red star.

Now, as we all know from the Planck equation, E=hf, energy (E) equals the frequency of light (f) multiplied by Planck's constant (h). Blue light has a shorter wavelength than red light, and thus a greater frequency so that it can satisfy the speed of light equation, c=f(lambda). Because it has a higher frequency than red light, it has more energy per photon. Assuming the stars in the cutscene at the end have the same surface area, it can be concluded that the blue star has a higher energy output than the red star.

Thus proving that blowing up the base is better than keeping it.

Modifié par ThanesSniper, 30 juillet 2011 - 06:13 .

[SandTrout]

ThanesSniper wrote...

 If you blow up the base, you get a blue star. If you keep it, you get a red star.
Now, as we all know from the Planck equation, E=hf, energy (E) equals the frequency of light (f) multiplied by the Planck's constant (h). Blue light has a shorter wavelength than red light, and thus a greater frequency so that it can satisfy the speed of light equation, c=f(lambda). Because it has a higher frequency than red light, it has more energy per photon. Assuming the stars in the cutscene at the end have the same surface area, it can be concluded that the blue star has a higher energy output than the red star.

Thus proving that blowing up the base is better than keeping it.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Offtopic:that kitten...lol

[Kaiser Shepard]

ThanesSniper wrote...

If you blow up the base, you get a blue star. If you keep it, you get a red star.

Now, as we all know from the Planck equation, E=hf, energy (E) equals the frequency of light (f) multiplied by Planck's constant (h). Blue light has a shorter wavelength than red light, and thus a greater frequency so that it can satisfy the speed of light equation, c=f(lambda). Because it has a higher frequency than red light, it has more energy per photon. Assuming the stars in the cutscene at the end have the same surface area, it can be concluded that the blue star has a higher energy output than the red star.

Thus proving that blowing up the base is better than keeping it.

Ah yes, science. At least it isn't used to prove what Tali's sweat tastes and smells like this time.

[ThanesSniper]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

ThanesSniper wrote...

If you blow up the base, you get a blue star. If you keep it, you get a red star.

Now, as we all know from the Planck equation, E=hf, energy (E) equals the frequency of light (f) multiplied by Planck's constant (h). Blue light has a shorter wavelength than red light, and thus a greater frequency so that it can satisfy the speed of light equation, c=f(lambda). Because it has a higher frequency than red light, it has more energy per photon. Assuming the stars in the cutscene at the end have the same surface area, it can be concluded that the blue star has a higher energy output than the red star.

Thus proving that blowing up the base is better than keeping it.

Ah yes, science. At least it isn't used to prove what Tali's sweat tastes and smells like this time.

Well, this is real physics. This is actually how the luminance of stars is calculated. Also, it's purely in jest. That other guy's post was full of speculation and assumptions and was really, REALLY odd.

[Kaiser Shepard]

HomelessGal wrote...

Wait, Kaiser wasn't joking? This damn board.

Shocking suggestion! Would never dream... of mockery.

[InkognitoY]

ThePwener wrote...

InkognitoY wrote...

How come nobody remembers the fact that Harbinger has direct terminal access to the entire station? That alone is reason enough to get rid of it.

WRONG

Harbinger had direct access through the Collectors, or more specifically, the Collector General, and they're all dead. Otherwise, he'd had used Reaper nanotech technology to control everything, like they did with Greyson, but he didn't, and that way it was more efficient. This hints to the base not having any Reaper tech and it's all Collector bug technology. This also points to Casey's quote on "Cerberus LOOKS like they are working with the Reapers" and don't seem to be indoctrinated, but doing something else.

Source? Just out of curiosity. 

Sorry, I don't know a lot about ME lore, I said what I said because at the end when you destroy it, you see a hologram of Harbinger, so that's what led me to believe that he was linked to the station, and not the Collector general itself. 

[ME-ParaShep]

strive wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

I just don't see where everyone instantly thinks:

Wow, this thing's sole purpose is for storing species and making coolatta's out of the stored species.

There must be uber-win weapon schematics on here!!

What?

=====

Gutting the ship of all those stupid cocoons alone would take huge amounts of manpower and time.

Not to mention human livable quarters (mess hall, med bay, sleeping quarters, bathrooms), bridge for piloting (instantly recognizable controls - controls that don't answer to Collector DNA)

It's like if I tried to live in a Nautilus shell using the logic - well, a nautilus lived in that shell, so surely I must be able to!

The Collectors had weapons, shields, unique infastructure, gentetic knowledge, and apparently it isn't that hard to understand since EDI can datamine it fairly rapidly. The Codex it self says, if given ample samples and time Collector technology can be reversed engineered and boost technology by decades. That base is a potential gold mine to give the races an unexpected tech boost the Reapers aren't anticipating.

The thing is: We're fighting Reapers. Collector tech won't dent their armor and pierce their shields. The Collector tech would help in fighting infantry like husks, but it's not necessary to invest research and resources to reverse engineer plus mass produce their weaponry when the galaxy is at war. In addition, current weapons are effective against husks. In short, even if we do scour the base for advanced tech, we would have no use for it because war with the Reapers is imminent. It would take months upon months to study and procure the best results and to mass produce the weapons. Don't forget that the weapons themselves are futile against Reapers themselves as well.

If Collectors were created through the fusion of Reaper tech and Prothean DNA then purposed as pawns then that only means the Collectors are Reaper tech as well. Using everything "Collector" would mean using the Reapers tech which would only bolster Sovereign's statement of space faring species using the Reapers technology to follow along the paths they desire. Using Reaper tech (including the Thanax Cannon even though it's reverse engineered Reaper weaponry) would still leave the Reapers in the advantage field. The Reapers created their own tech and thus it's safe to assume that they know how to counter their own tech.

I believe that investing resources into any tech that's Reaper related is irrelevant to the war cause. Anyone that does so is only wasting time, money, labor, and resources.

[Ausstig]

So people who blew up the base, how do you plan to fight the reapers? Do you have a better option?
OR is it just................
I don't know blind faith that the game will give you something? what?

[SandTrout]

The premise that Collector tech will not harm the Reapers is false. Modern weapons, in large enough quantities, are capable of taking down a Reaper. Collector weaponry is described as significantly superior to most modern tech (Thanix excluded), therefore it could be useful against the Reapers by increasing the overall kill:death ratio of allied forces.

Just because Collector technology is not equal to Reaper tech does not mean that it is completely ineffective against Reapers.

[didymos1120]

SandTrout wrote...

Modern weapons, in large enough quantities, are capable of taking down a Reaper.

Well, we've only seen them work against a fully-fledged Reaper after the kinetic barriers were taken down.  Before that they did precisely jack...and that was an entire fleet's worth of firepower.   You're correct though that whether Collector-tech-derived weaponry is more effective is still an open question.

[SandTrout]

Modern weapons do all of jack---- against modern ships until after barriers are down as well. I am of the group that views the destruction of Reaper-Saren as dramatic coincidence with the breakthrough of Sovereign's shields, rather than a cause-effect relationship.

Also, based on the speed with which the SR1 was crippled by the collector cruiser, as well as statements about the advanced nature of Collector tech, I consider it a reasonable conclusion that collector weapons are superior.

[didymos1120]

SandTrout wrote...

Also, based on the speed with which the SR1 was crippled by the collector cruiser, as well as statements about the advanced nature of Collector tech, I consider it a reasonable conclusion that collector weapons are superior.

Yeah, of course they're better.  Not my point.  My point is, we still don't know that, when it comes to Reapers, they're good enough.

Modifié par didymos1120, 30 juillet 2011 - 08:22 .

[SandTrout]

Oh, in that case, we are in agreement. I just felt compelled to debunk a bad string of logic that collector tech will be useless against the Reapers.

[bucyrus5000]

destroying the base is only the right decision because of what your squad says after. To me, such decisions can be summed up in the allied choice to preserve Doctor Mangela's research. Preserving and using such info makes us always remember the mistakes made and evil deeds.

[Nashiktal]

bucyrus5000 wrote...

destroying the base is only the right decision because of what your squad says after. To me, such decisions can be summed up in the allied choice to preserve Doctor Mangela's research. Preserving and using such info makes us always remember the mistakes made and evil deeds.

1. Squadmates have not played ME3, nor do they have any foreknowledge of what is to come. They are mostly just agreeing with your choice, and in fact a few of the squadmates even support keeping the base until you destroy it.

2. Metagaming is a dubious thing to bring to this discussion, as it misses the point entirely.

[Pride Demon]

Neither choice is morally superior to the other, since there is not a fixed universal definition of what is moral, so one could argue each of the sides is the moral one...
Neither choice is tactically superior to the other, since both choices address a part of the problem leaving another one hanging dangerously in the wind...

In the end, I merely take the choice I think my current Shep, with his/her morals, would take...

[Praetor Knight]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Ausstig wrote...

So people who blew up the base, how do you plan to fight the reapers? Do you have a better option?
OR is it just................
I don't know blind faith that the game will give you something? what?

They know Bioware will come along and save them.

If that ends up being the case, I hope not.