3618 réponses à ce sujet

[BlueMagitek]

In a futile attempt to change the subject; how about that Aria? Is it better to keep her in power (stable, past actions allow her to be predictable) or to let a certain someone get some information which could rock the foundations of Omega? That would decrease Aria's influence in the Terminus systems and lead to more instability, at least for a time.

[Someone With Mass]

With an attitude like that, Shepard would've gone through the Omega 4 relay alone and without the Reaper IFF, because almost no-one on the squad have shown that Shepard can trust them, and Shepard certainly wouldn't put his faith in Reaper technology.

It's a chance some have to take, with the profits one can achieve in mind.

It's like when you're constantly babbling about the "infinite" benefits everyone can get from saving the Collector base. You don't have any real reason to believe in that either, since TIM hasn't shown or said anything which shows that you can completely trust him and his abilities, yet you do it.

So why can't I do the same with a different subject?

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 10 août 2011 - 02:26 .

[Kaiser Shepard]

TMA LIVE wrote...

I got Mac to comment on two things:

http://twitter.com/#...032766250033152

TMA: Would you say Cerberus is after you for different reasons, depending on the ending of ME2? Or is it the same reason?

MAC: I'm not sure I would say #Cerberus is after you at all. Though #Shepard and the #IllusiveMan clearly don't see eye to eye in #ME3.

This could mean that Cerberus is more of fighting Shepard because he's in the way of something. Though it's vague.

And about the date:

TMA: Also, is there a specific date for when ME3 takes place?

MAC: We've narrowed it down to a fairly specific point in time. Yes.....

http://twitter.com/#...032977508737024

And it seems we're not going to get any more then that for now.

By Jubileus, PLEEEEAASE let there be a power struggle within Cerberus.

If it is 2186, then Arrival was setup to be after ME2 in an alternate canon as Cerberus News suggests. Either way, that's all I'll see it as. An alternate canon.

Wait, what? Where did you get that from?

[TMA LIVE]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

If it is 2186, then Arrival was setup to be after ME2 in an alternate canon as Cerberus News suggests. Either way, that's all I'll see it as. An alternate canon.

Wait, what? Where did you get that from?

If Cerberus News is taken as official canon no matter what, and take place within ME2's timeline, then that means Arrival happened after a new year. And if ME2 took place in 2185, then the new year is now 2186. Making Arrival happening in that timeline. And if ME3 starts June, 2186, then Arrival happened roughly 5 or 6 months ago.

At least that's the assumption, since none of the news reports are given a date.

Modifié par TMA LIVE, 10 août 2011 - 04:08 .

[TMA LIVE]

BlueMagitek wrote...

In a futile attempt to change the subject; how about that Aria? Is it better to keep her in power (stable, past actions allow her to be predictable) or to let a certain someone get some information which could rock the foundations of Omega? That would decrease Aria's influence in the Terminus systems and lead to more instability, at least for a time.

Depends who you consider a better replacement to rule a station run by mercs and criminals. Patriarch?

Modifié par TMA LIVE, 10 août 2011 - 04:12 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...
With an attitude like that, Shepard would've gone through the Omega 4 relay alone and without the Reaper IFF, because almost no-one on the squad have shown that Shepard can trust them, and Shepard certainly wouldn't put his faith in Reaper technology.

So your solution is a polar Shep what changes his criteria randomly?

If you claim that the situation is so dire that one cannto take any chances, then one shouldn't be taking any chances with the Rechnii or the Geth - as they are both more dangerous than Cerberus.

It's a chance some have to take, with the profits one can achieve in mind.

It's like when you're constantly babbling about the "infinite" benefits everyone can get from saving the Collector base. You don't have any real reason to believe in that either, since TIM hasn't shown or said anything which shows that you can completely trust him and his abilities, yet you do it.

So why can't I do the same with a different subject?

Because, my fine freind, I have reason to belive in Collector Base benefits. Why? Because it's advanced reaper technolgoy there.
That scientists can find revolutionary knowledge in there is not a question of possibility at all, but rather time.

Regardless of who ends up with the base, some knowledge - possibly critical knowledge - will come out of this. It will end up in the hads of someone I can bribe, kill, threaten or convince to part with it.

TIM and Cerberus - I never trusted them fully. But that was unnecessary to begin with.
What they did show however, was their dedication to fighting the reapers and their dedication to their goal of protecting humanity.


The point is that the central question becomes Cerberus, when the central question should be Reapers.

[GreenDragon37]

Someone With Mass wrote...

With an attitude like that, Shepard would've gone through the Omega 4 relay alone and without the Reaper IFF, because almost no-one on the squad have shown that Shepard can trust them, and Shepard certainly wouldn't put his faith in Reaper technology.

It's a chance some have to take, with the profits one can achieve in mind.

It's like when you're constantly babbling about the "infinite" benefits everyone can get from saving the Collector base. You don't have any real reason to believe in that either, since TIM hasn't shown or said anything which shows that you can completely trust him and his abilities, yet you do it.

So why can't I do the same with a different subject?

Because he's being a bit of a hypocrite. TIM is no-more trust-worthy than Legion or the Rachni Queen. They're all "leaps of faith". You're trusting them to do what they say. TIM is no exception. And since TIM and Cerberus are against you in ME3, well... yeah. However I always viewed them as villains. Well-intended (somewhat), but we've seen history and movies and bla bla bla.

Also, the new comic shows what happens win Cerberus uses that base's tech.

Modifié par GreenDragon37, 10 août 2011 - 04:25 .

[Someone With Mass]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Because, my fine freind, I have reason to belive in Collector Base benefits. Why? Because it's advanced reaper technolgoy there.
That scientists can find revolutionary knowledge in there is not a question of possibility at all, but rather time.

Regardless of who ends up with the base, some knowledge - possibly critical knowledge - will come out of this. It will end up in the hads of someone I can bribe, kill, threaten or convince to part with it.

TIM and Cerberus - I never trusted them fully. But that was unnecessary to begin with.
What they did show however, was their dedication to fighting the reapers and their dedication to their goal of protecting humanity.


The point is that the central question becomes Cerberus, when the central question should be Reapers.

Uh-huh...

So you're telling me that the scientists can master any kind of technology given enough time? Time which we don't have, by the way.

Also, I don't care how dedicated people are. If they can't contribute with anything good or not be of any practical use, or are just in my way and slowing me down, I'm going to let them rot. 

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

I think trust plays a major part in the human decision making process.

[alperez]

Arijharn wrote...

Why do people use meta-gaming for their arguments? Especially to retroactively argue their decisions, to me it sounds like 'justifying' something akin to occult knowledge. If that sounds ridiculous to you, then that's the point I'm trying to make.

It depends though whether your using metagaming as the reason behind why you made the choice, or using metagaming as an example that proves a statement as being wrong.

I could explain myself further only that would start a different debate, so i'll probably just create a new topic instead.

[jedierick]

Had a discussion with someone at work the other day, and he made a really god point as to why he blew up the Collector Base and how he would still have a good fighting chance.

The Geth. Plain and simple, he ended up keeping and reprogramming the heretic geth instead of destroying them. He said he did that because of what Legion said, that all their memories would become one once they rejoined the collective or whatever. He said that knowledge would for sure help defeat the reapers, the heretics were working with the reapers, they have their tech, data, lots of stuff. So with that, he thought the base was not needed, he had a contact he could talk to first hand and get data from quicker than examining the base.

[Someone With Mass]

jedierick wrote...

Had a discussion with someone at work the other day, and he made a really god point as to why he blew up the Collector Base and how he would still have a good fighting chance.

The Geth. Plain and simple, he ended up keeping and reprogramming the heretic geth instead of destroying them. He said he did that because of what Legion said, that all their memories would become one once they rejoined the collective or whatever. He said that knowledge would for sure help defeat the reapers, the heretics were working with the reapers, they have their tech, data, lots of stuff. So with that, he thought the base was not needed, he had a contact he could talk to first hand and get data from quicker than examining the base.

That's a pretty good way to see it. The heretic station should be relatively intact too.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Someone With Mass wrote...

jedierick wrote...

Had a discussion with someone at work the other day, and he made a really god point as to why he blew up the Collector Base and how he would still have a good fighting chance.

The Geth. Plain and simple, he ended up keeping and reprogramming the heretic geth instead of destroying them. He said he did that because of what Legion said, that all their memories would become one once they rejoined the collective or whatever. He said that knowledge would for sure help defeat the reapers, the heretics were working with the reapers, they have their tech, data, lots of stuff. So with that, he thought the base was not needed, he had a contact he could talk to first hand and get data from quicker than examining the base.

That's a pretty good way to see it. The heretic station should be relatively intact too.

Isn't heretic station just a refitted quarian space station?

Also good point on the geth,they had alot of contact with a reaper they should know a great deal.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

I liked Aria. She is dangerous and paranoid. Just like Shepard.

[alperez]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...


And I say bollocks.

Of course he didn't have the specific. Fro mwhere could have had it? teh base scans were aquired only after you passed the relay.
While I'm sure TIM did want to Capture Collector/Repaer technology from day 1, to assume he had a plan, when it's downright impossible to have a workable one, is preposterous.

I've always said that he didn't have the specific data, it was you who suggested that not having that data was a reason why TIM could not want to capture collector/reaper technology (capture the base) something your now saying was always his goal, he never had a specific plan in mind for the capture of the base, but it was always something he wanted to do.

Every comment i've made has been on this premise, you've either deliberately misunderstood my argument from the start or have just got so used to disagreeing with me that your in defensive mode and don't realise your arguing the wrong point.

That level of funding being a few billion, which is pittance in galactic terms.
As I said before, the comparison between the SA and Cerberus in terms of funding and resources is similar to US and Blackwater.
Now, a few billion is a lot of money, but Cerberus is constantly investing in very large and expensive projects, and by it's very nature of being a rougle Black ops faction which values secrecy, their numbers will be limited. EDI claims Cerberus consists of 150 operatives. Could be more.
But the crux of the matter reamins the same - their numbers and size will be limited by their very nature.

The level of funding is from the same source that claims the level of operatives, you accept now that EDI's claims on the number of operatives could be wrong (not is but could) so why could this not be the same for funding.

But that's not even the actualy point, its the assertion that they are just a rogue black op's organisation which up to this point may have been the case, in the scenario's i've presented (and in what you now know to be the case, even if it is metagaming) they are no longer just that, they aren't bound by secrecy anymore, they would be out in the open actively pursuing whatever agenda they pursue.

Whatever they may have been or whatever organisational structure they may have possessed, would be completely different once they themselves stepped out of the shadows, when you add in a possible tech advantage and the facts of when they may be attacking, the threat they possess increase in line with how big an advantage that tech gives them and how much weaker the forces they face may be.

What part of "metagaming does tho belong here" do oyu have trouble comprehending. Shepard doesn't have acess to that knowledge. PERIOD. Not a single iota of that knowledge can be used to form a IC decision.

Not to mention that I already eplxained that the gamplay numebrs are rubbish, as they have always been in the history of games, since they almost always conflict with lore.

Firstly i'll present my argument in any damn way i choose, so don't tell me what does and doesn't belong in my argument and i won't tell you what does and does not belong in yours.

Secondly, i've used the metagaming argument for one reason and one reason only, to disprove the notion you keep claiming that they are not a threat because the numbers they have don't add up, i've specified that this is the only reason i've used it and also gone on to explain why in game reasoning could lead you to the conclussion that your knowledge about the numbers or strength of cerberus could be way off.

What Lore? information you've received thus far can turn out to be wrong or incomplete and that doesn't conflict with any lore argument, me1 cerberus to me2 cerberus doesn't conflict with lore in terms of how many people or what strength they may possess, lore expands based on whatever the writers decide of it.

If they suddenly decide that all along TIM's been building an army with thousands of troops but until now hasn't unleashed that army because it was his "other plan" then how exacly does this go against lore?

And turst really shouldnt' be a factor, since you really have no reason to trust anyone.
Legion, the Rachni queen or Cerberus.
And I notices you didn't say what you did in regards to those decisions in your playtrough.

Trust though is a factor, i claim its the main one, you can disagree if you wish, if you don't trust your potential allies then you have a serious problem especially in the upcoming war with the reapers.

What i did with other choices has no bearing on what i did with the base, as i've explained there are seperate reasons why you may do one thing and another, but to keep you happy.

I saved the rachni queen not just because she may be a potential ally in the reaper war but to doom a species to extinction because of the actions of that species thousands of years before is not something i believe is the right thing to do. Could this choice bite me in the ass later, of course it could, but to not allow a sentient lifeform the opportunity to atone for past mistakes by killing off the entire species is something that i couldn't do.

I rewrote the geth even though the choices they made were of their own free will when they joined sovereign, simply because the other option i had was to destroy them, i also believe a stronger geth is a better ally than a weaker one although it could also be a stronger enemy.

In terms of trust though i trusted the rachni queen because she gave me no reason not to, she herself didn't fight in the rachni wars and her explanation of why that happened was plausible enough to me for it to be truthful.

I trusted legion because his explantion about the heretic geth makes sense of why they fought me in me1, his explanations regarding the geths intentions also make sense and up to this point i have no other reasons to distrust him.

In terms of cerberus and the base though, i distrust TIM, i don't believe what he tells me is the whole truth and i have evidence that proves this to be the case, the explanations i'm given don't fit into the things i've seen and while they claim rogue elements, or cells going to far, i refuse to believe that anything that happens in cerberur is against what TIM want's to happen.

There are other reasons i've gone into details here before, but unlike the rachni situation where if i distrust the queen my option is to destroy a species, or the geth where if i don't believe the explanations or reasoning the only course of action i have open to me is destroying them, with cerberus i'm not destroying them by not giving them the base.

What i am doing though is not making a potential enemy stronger, which is why i in the end choose what i choose.

Trust is extreemly subjective, flawed and biased, and as such should have minimal impact on decision making when faced with a problem of such importance and magnitude.

What reason do you have to trust the Rachni queen? Just her words, nothing more.
Legion? Again, his words. and that he works for You.
Cerberus? Their words and their actions.

 It's also something as humans that a lot of times decides how we make our choices, we're not machines, we can't rely on logic or completely analyse a decision without letting emotion play a part, if you dislike someone then more times than not you'll disagree with them (even when they're right) its for lack of a better word human nature.

You suggest that emotions such as trust should have minimal impact in your decision making, but considering that your are in fact trusting yourself in making those decisions, even on a subconscious level it plays the biggest part of all.

Legion, cerberus and the queen i've explained above.

If you condemn cerberus because of potential negative consequence,s but spare the Rachni even tough their negatives could be far worse, they yes..that is hypocritical.

Do i get the option to wipe cerberus off the map completely, to doom them into nothingness, no i don't, the option i'm given is to give them the base (which may have positive or negative consequences) or not, with the queen the only option i have to avert potential negative consequences is to exterminate her and doom a species, its completely different if you can't see that then so be it.

I let the queen live i don't give her potential weapons she could then use against me, with TIM he lives no matter what all i'm doing is not handing him something he can use against me, its a completely different scenario with completely different reasons behind why you may choose one way or another.

And you happen to be wrong..again.

And your opinion that i'm wrong happens to be wrong.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

@Alperez,another thing about trusting legion and the Geth is,they are pure logic,they know if they don't cooperate they will have a much bigger fight

Paraphrasing "Cooperation furthers mutual goals"

[alperez]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

@Alperez,another thing about trusting legion and the Geth is,they are pure logic,they know if they don't cooperate they will have a much bigger fight

Paraphrasing "Cooperation furthers mutual goals"

I was actually going to try and put something about that in my post, the problem i had was i came up with "Do machines lie" which led me to "Do androids dream of electric sheep" which now has me wanting to watch Blade Runner.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Well,I think Legion is capable of telling a fib,but seeing as how he spent 2 years,and got shot looking for Shepard,just to tell him a lie about needing organics to help the true Geth,well....illogical.

[TMA LIVE]

alperez wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

@Alperez,another thing about trusting legion and the Geth is,they are pure logic,they know if they don't cooperate they will have a much bigger fight

Paraphrasing "Cooperation furthers mutual goals"

I was actually going to try and put something about that in my post, the problem i had was i came up with "Do machines lie" which led me to "Do androids dream of electric sheep" which now has me wanting to watch Blade Runner.

Good book. Though now dated.

Modifié par TMA LIVE, 10 août 2011 - 09:07 .

[alperez]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Well,I think Legion is capable of telling a fib,but seeing as how he spent 2 years,and got shot looking for Shepard,just to tell him a lie about needing organics to help the true Geth,well....illogical.

To me though its not so much if legion is capable of lying but more is there anything that he's done or shown you that may make you think he is.

Like you say, he's spent 2 years following Shepard's trail (something we can prove by the armour), he helps shepard out and then nothing he says is at this point something we can say is not the truth or half truths with parts kept back until it suits him.

In TIm's case we know he only tells us what he wants to, so there is a genuine reason to disbelieve him that we're shown in game.

[alperez]

TMA LIVE wrote...

Good book. Though now dated.

I was thinking more about the movie, which while also dated does have the added bonus of Rutger Hauer.

[Lotion Soronarr]

[quote]alperez wrote...

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...


And I say bollocks.

Of course he didn't have the specific. Fro mwhere could have had it? teh base scans were aquired only after you passed the relay.
While I'm sure TIM did want to Capture Collector/Repaer technology from day 1, to assume he had a plan, when it's downright impossible to have a workable one, is preposterous.
[/quote]

I've always said that he didn't have the specific data, it was you who suggested that not having that data was a reason why TIM could not want to capture collector/reaper technology (capture the base) something your now saying was always his goal, he never had a specific plan in mind for the capture of the base, but it was always something he wanted to do.

Every comment i've made has been on this premise, you've either deliberately misunderstood my argument from the start or have just got so used to disagreeing with me that your in defensive mode and don't realise your arguing the wrong point.[/quote]

No, you are now twisting things.

You have been saiyng that TIM "witholding" the base capture plan was due to his scheeming, and waiting with the plan to put Shep on the spot.
I said nothing about with WANTING, I said about thim HAVING a PRACTICAL, WORKABLE plan to do it. And since by your own admission, TIM coudlnt' have had a practical plan untill AFTER he had the base scans, you now basicly prove my point.
That there was nothing suspicious in TIM telling you when he did.




[quote][quote]

That level of funding being a few billion, which is pittance in galactic terms.
As I said before, the comparison between the SA and Cerberus in terms of funding and resources is similar to US and Blackwater.
Now, a few billion is a lot of money, but Cerberus is constantly investing in very large and expensive projects, and by it's very nature of being a rougle Black ops faction which values secrecy, their numbers will be limited. EDI claims Cerberus consists of 150 operatives. Could be more.
But the crux of the matter reamins the same - their numbers and size will be limited by their very nature.
[/quote]

The level of funding is from the same source that claims the level of operatives, you accept now that EDI's claims on the number of operatives could be wrong (not is but could) so why could this not be the same for funding.

But that's not even the actualy point, its the assertion that they are just a rogue black op's organisation which up to this point may have been the case, in the scenario's i've presented (and in what you now know to be the case, even if it is metagaming) they are no longer just that, they aren't bound by secrecy anymore, they would be out in the open actively pursuing whatever agenda they pursue.

Whatever they may have been or whatever organisational structure they may have possessed, would be completely different once they themselves stepped out of the shadows, when you add in a possible tech advantage and the facts of when they may be attacking, the threat they possess increase in line with how big an advantage that tech gives them and how much weaker the forces they face may be.[/quote]

No, you don't know that's not the case any more. Cerberus sending a commando team after you suddenly proves they are not a small organization?  Since when and how?
This line of reasoning makes no sense. And what does "stepping out of the shadows" have to do with anything?
While Cerberus attacks Shep openly in ME3, thy did engange in open attacks before in their past, so why exactly would that mean that tehy suddenly shed of their secrecy is beyond me.
Furthermore, even if we assume what you said is correct, they would be limited by their secrecy up to the point of their  ending the secrecy, which would still limit their numbers. If they had 1000 soldeirs once they stepp out of the shadows that number won't sudddenly grow to 5000. From where and how?




[quote][quote]
What part of "metagaming does tho belong here" do oyu have trouble comprehending. Shepard doesn't have acess to that knowledge. PERIOD. Not a single iota of that knowledge can be used to form a IC decision.

Not to mention that I already eplxained that the gamplay numebrs are rubbish, as they have always been in the history of games, since they almost always conflict with lore.
[/quote]

Firstly i'll present my argument in any damn way i choose, so don't tell me what does and doesn't belong in my argument and i won't tell you what does and does not belong in yours.

Secondly, i've used the metagaming argument for one reason and one reason only, to disprove the notion you keep claiming that they are not a threat because the numbers they have don't add up, i've specified that this is the only reason i've used it and also gone on to explain why in game reasoning could lead you to the conclussion that your knowledge about the numbers or strength of cerberus could be way off.

What Lore? information you've received thus far can turn out to be wrong or incomplete and that doesn't conflict with any lore argument, me1 cerberus to me2 cerberus doesn't conflict with lore in terms of how many people or what strength they may possess, lore expands based on whatever the writers decide of it.

If they suddenly decide that all along TIM's been building an army with thousands of troops but until now hasn't unleashed that army because it was his "other plan" then how exacly does this go against lore?[/quote]

So you're basicly banking on the card that everything we've been told so far about Cerberus in the game is a lie? You honestly trying to argue that route?
And you honestly trying to reason that small black ops organizations THAT TRY TO STAY HIDDDEN can recruit thousands easily? Oh, it's not like they are wanted and there's probably spies and double agents, and the more peopel there are, the greater the chances of some of them slipping trouhg, no?

You fixated on the 40% of enemies is Cerberus as an argument, when history is shown that that doesn't work that way.  
I  ask you agaia - explain to me the discrepency between the number of mages in DA as you play, and thair supposed rarity in the setting.
Once you answer that question, you'll also know whey there's so many Cerberus enemies. And why there's usually so many enemies of nay kind in any Bio game. Becasue the player needs obstables and the game needs padding.





[quote][quote]
And turst really shouldnt' be a factor, since you really have no reason to trust anyone.
Legion, the Rachni queen or Cerberus.
And I notices you didn't say what you did in regards to those decisions in your playtrough.
[/quote]

Trust though is a factor, i claim its the main one, you can disagree if you wish, if you don't trust your potential allies then you have a serious problem especially in the upcoming war with the reapers.[/quote]

Trust a main factor? And this is where it all breaks down. Survival should be the main factor.
you yoursaid siad that we we HAVE to band together to fight the reapers. Any remotely retional being should understand that. Great trust is not really necessary. The desire to survive and the will to fight is.

[quote]
What i did with other choices has no bearing on what i did with the base, as i've explained there are seperate reasons why you may do one thing and another, but to keep you happy.[/quote]

And I say it has a bearing. If you dispaly double standards for the choices you take, then that makes you a hypocrite.


[quote]
I saved the rachni queen not just because she may be a potential ally in the reaper war but to doom a species to extinction because of the actions of that species thousands of years before is not something i believe is the right thing to do. Could this choice bite me in the ass later, of course it could, but to not allow a sentient lifeform the opportunity to atone for past mistakes by killing off the entire species is something that i couldn't do.[/quote]

A highly emotional decision, as it ignores the potential devastating consequences. Concequences far worse than anything Cerberus can do. So why do you trust her? Based on what?
Because if trust is suddenly NOT a main factor, then you are indeed conflicting yourself and are showing a double-standard. If trust is rellevant for Cerberus, but not here, you got a problem.

[quote]
I rewrote the geth even though the choices they made were of their own free will when they joined sovereign, simply because the other option i had was to destroy them, i also believe a stronger geth is a better ally than a weaker one although it could also be a stronger enemy.[/quote]

And given the danger of the reapers, we need every ship we can get. I agree on that. However, isn't the danger of the Geth turning against us ALSO far greater than anything Cerberus can do?
Do you really have any more reason to trust the geth than you have the rachnii or Cerberus? Not really. Legion could be lying to you.


[quote]
In terms of trust though i trusted the rachni queen because she gave me no reason not to, she herself didn't fight in the rachni wars and her explanation of why that happened was plausible enough to me for it to be truthful.[/quote]

In other words, you trusted her on her words only, even tough it makes perfect sense for her to lie to you.

[quote]
I trusted legion because his explantion about the heretic geth makes sense of why they fought me in me1, his explanations regarding the geths intentions also make sense and up to this point i have no other reasons to distrust him.[/quote]

He could be a heretic that is using you to help destroy the loyalists. He could be lying to you easily.


[quote]
In terms of cerberus and the base though, i distrust TIM, i don't believe what he tells me is the whole truth and i have evidence that proves this to be the case, the explanations i'm given don't fit into the things i've seen and while they claim rogue elements, or cells going to far, i refuse to believe that anything that happens in cerberur is against what TIM want's to happen.

There are other reasons i've gone into details here before, but unlike the rachni situation where if i distrust the queen my option is to destroy a species, or the geth where if i don't believe the explanations or reasoning the only course of action i have open to me is destroying them, with cerberus i'm not destroying them by not giving them the base.

What i am doing though is not making a potential enemy stronger, which is why i in the end choose what i choose.
[/quote]


So what you're actually doing is distrusting Cerberus, not because of what Cerberus actually does regarding fighting the Repaers, but because you dislike TIM and Cerberus experiments?
Regarding your ..ahem.."evidence", me and some other posters already proved that tthere are perfectly rational reasons for everytihng TIM does. Hence why claiming with certanty that TIM is going to stab you in the back is a fallacy.
TIM remains a wildcard, and unknown. But the base really doesn't. We know the reapers are coming. We know we stand almost no chance agaisnt their power. We know Cerberus fights the reapers and wants to protect humanity.
We know the base might provide the biggest technological advancmet since the discovery of the mass relays.
And yet you choose to destroy it. Even tough it might be the best chance the universe has at surviving.
And why? Because you see Cerberus as an enemy.
You don't want to make them stronger (yet makign the geth stronger is a no-brainer...they are not a potential enemy?)
F*** Cerberus. Everyone is paying more attention to them than the Reapers!


[quote]
Trust is extreemly subjective, flawed and biased, and as such should have minimal impact on decision making when faced with a problem of such importance and magnitude.

What reason do you have to trust the Rachni queen? Just her words, nothing more.
Legion? Again, his words. and that he works for You.
Cerberus? Their words and their actions.
[/quote]

 It's also something as humans that a lot of times decides how we make our choices, we're not machines, we can't rely on logic or completely analyse a decision without letting emotion play a part, if you dislike someone then more times than not you'll disagree with them (even when they're right) its for lack of a better word human nature.

You suggest that emotions such as trust should have minimal impact in your decision making, but considering that your are in fact trusting yourself in making those decisions, even on a subconscious level it plays the biggest part of all.[/quote]

Redicolous arguments. I don't trust them because it's me that made them. Heck, I made a lot of wrong decisions in my life. I trust my decisions because I analyzed them carefully and weighed them, and took pains to distance myself emotionally.
Humans are not based purely on logic, but tehy also should let their emotions and bias cloud their judgment.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 10 août 2011 - 11:03 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

I would assume Cerberus gets a good portion of its money from rich corporations on earth via various money laundering operations like human charities, and probably another portion of it from the earth government off books of course. Why not? It's the way things work today.


Now did this make 86?




Damn!

Modifié par sH0tgUn jUliA, 10 août 2011 - 11:42 .

[alperez]

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

No, you are now twisting things.

You have been saiyng that TIM "witholding" the base capture plan was due to his scheeming, and waiting with the plan to put Shep on the spot.
I said nothing about with WANTING, I said about thim HAVING a PRACTICAL, WORKABLE plan to do it. And since by your own admission, TIM coudlnt' have had a practical plan untill AFTER he had the base scans, you now basicly prove my point.
That there was nothing suspicious in TIM telling you when he did.

[/quote]

Again your mixing up what i've said to try to suit your argument, i got into this discussion at a point when you were discussing it with someone else, you suggested that TIM could not have had a plan to capture the base because of a lack of specific data.

I suggested that he could and have argued the reasons why, my arguments have had nothing to do with the specifics of that plan which is where we seem to have got waylaid.

My point has never been that TIM witheld the info until he did because he had a plan to capture the base but rather that this is a possibility and the reasons you suggested why it couldn't have been were incorrect.

But then your last point trys to portray the same original argument you've had from the beginning, that TIM not having the specifics of a plan to capture the base precludes him always having the general plan from the beginning which it does not.

[quote]

No, you don't know that's not the case any more. Cerberus sending a commando team after you suddenly proves they are not a small organization?  Since when and how?
This line of reasoning makes no sense. And what does "stepping out of the shadows" have to do with anything?
While Cerberus attacks Shep openly in ME3, thy did engange in open attacks before in their past, so why exactly would that mean that tehy suddenly shed of their secrecy is beyond me.
Furthermore, even if we assume what you said is correct, they would be limited by their secrecy up to the point of their  ending the secrecy, which would still limit their numbers. If they had 1000 soldeirs once they stepp out of the shadows that number won't sudddenly grow to 5000. From where and how?

[/quote]
 If all they did was as you suggest then you'd be right, by the sounds of things though that's not exactly the case, they make up a large proportion of the enemies we're due to face (yes its metagaming but its used to illustrate a point).

For what seems to be the first time the gloves are off when it comes to cerberus, up to this point we've seen very little of their true strength, that looks like changing in me3 which is what i mean by out of the shadows. Up to now their actions have been covert and have only been out in the open because of the mistakes of those operations, they've been an inconvieniance galactically rather than a threat, in me3 that appears to change.

We have no idea of the numbers, all we have is a limited piece of info that may turn out to be incorrect, we don't know how many troops cereberus really have or how many they will have come me3, we don't know if for the past 2 games they've been building an army or if they're made up of just a few commandoes, what we have is limited info leading to assumptions that may or may not turn out to be incorrect, at present it looks like that is indeed the case.

[quote]

So you're basicly banking on the card that everything we've been told so far about Cerberus in the game is a lie? You honestly trying to argue that route?
And you honestly trying to reason that small black ops organizations THAT TRY TO STAY HIDDDEN can recruit thousands easily? Oh, it's not like they are wanted and there's probably spies and double agents, and the more peopel there are, the greater the chances of some of them slipping trouhg, no?

You fixated on the 40% of enemies is Cerberus as an argument, when history is shown that that doesn't work that way.  
I  ask you agaia - explain to me the discrepency between the number of mages in DA as you play, and thair supposed rarity in the setting.
Once you answer that question, you'll also know whey there's so many Cerberus enemies. And why there's usually so many enemies of nay kind in any Bio game. Becasue the player needs obstables and the game needs padding.

[/quote]
 
I'm not fixated on anything in fact if anything it seems to be you that's fixated on your own assumptions regarding cerberus, what i've said is not that what we've been told is a lie but that as yet we don't have the entire truth.

Me1 suggests cerberus to be a rogue black ops organisation gone wrong, it doesn't suggest the cerberus we encounter in me2, so is me1 lying to us?

Its giving us part of the story, not the full one, in me2 you learn that what you assumed about cerberus based on me1 may not have been the full story, they are much bigger and much better resourced than anything me1 would have led you to believe, so why could this not also be true for me3?

Do the facts you learn about cerberus in me2 have to be the complete and total facts regarding cerberus and if not then why should you trust that these facts are the complete truth when you already have the experience of me1 to me2 to show you why this may not be the case/
[quote]

Trust a main factor? And this is where it all breaks down. Survival should be the main factor.
you yoursaid siad that we we HAVE to band together to fight the reapers. Any remotely retional being should understand that. Great trust is not really necessary. The desire to survive and the will to fight is.
[/quote]

But who to trust to ensure survival?

However way you wish to phrase it trust has to be a main factor, if you cannot trust your allies then your opening yourself up to second guessing your choices and worrying about the wrong things.

Every army that has allies worries if they can trust those allies, it factors into the choices those armies make and is used as a large part of reasoning in those choices, its a basic military tactic, if you can't trust your allies are loyal or competent then your choices are always going to be made with that in mind.
[quote]

And I say it has a bearing. If you dispaly double standards for the choices you take, then that makes you a hypocrite.
[/quote]

No 2 choices are the same for a variety of reasons, you want to lump the choices together because it suits a flawed point your trying to make, when in reality each choice has to be judged on its own merits and not on a simple if i do this then i must do that sceanrio.

You claim you evalulate and then logically come up with your reasoning, but that logic is different based on the information you possess and the situation your faced with, otherwise your making choices not based on logic but on dogma.
[quote]

A highly emotional decision, as it ignores the potential devastating consequences. Concequences far worse than anything Cerberus can do. So why do you trust her? Based on what?
Because if trust is suddenly NOT a main factor, then you are indeed conflicting yourself and are showing a double-standard. If trust is rellevant for Cerberus, but not here, you got a problem.
[/quote]

Of course its an emotional decision, dooming a race to extinction should be emotional, we're not machines, its our emotions that define us in relation to every other species.

Again i've explained this, handing a base over to cerberus or dooming a sentient species to extinction are not equal choices, the choice i have is not hand the base or kill TIM, its hand the base or don't, you seem unwilling to distinguish the difference between those 2 points.
[quote]

And given the danger of the reapers, we need every ship we can get. I agree on that. However, isn't the danger of the Geth turning against us ALSO far greater than anything Cerberus can do?
Do you really have any more reason to trust the geth than you have the rachnii or Cerberus? Not really. Legion could be lying to you.
[/quote]
 I have no evidence that legion is lying or not telling me the complete truth when i make the choice, so i either accept his word or do not.
[quote]

In other words, you trusted her on her words only, even tough it makes perfect sense for her to lie to you.
[/quote]

She has every reason to lie to me, but where is the evidence that she is lying, where is the examples that she may not be telling me the full truth, its certainly not there when you have to make the choice, all you have to go on is whether or not you trust her or not.
[quote]

He could be a heretic that is using you to help destroy the loyalists. He could be lying to you easily.
[/quote]

Indeed he could, but at the point you make the choice, do you have evidence that says this is the case, do you have examples where he hasn't been honest with you or told you the complete truth, no you don't so again you left with an option, trust or not.

[quote]


So what you're actually doing is distrusting Cerberus, not because of what Cerberus actually does regarding fighting the Repaers, but because you dislike TIM and Cerberus experiments?
Regarding your ..ahem.."evidence", me and some other posters already proved that tthere are perfectly rational reasons for everytihng TIM does. Hence why claiming with certanty that TIM is going to stab you in the back is a fallacy.
TIM remains a wildcard, and unknown. But the base really doesn't. We know the reapers are coming. We know we stand almost no chance agaisnt their power. We know Cerberus fights the reapers and wants to protect humanity.
We know the base might provide the biggest technological advancmet since the discovery of the mass relays.
And yet you choose to destroy it. Even tough it might be the best chance the universe has at surviving.
And why? Because you see Cerberus as an enemy.
You don't want to make them stronger (yet makign the geth stronger is a no-brainer...they are not a potential enemy?)
F*** Cerberus. Everyone is paying more attention to them than the Reapers!
[/quote]

I'm distrusting Cerberus based on my experiences thus far with them, TIM has shown he will tell you only what he feels he needs to, They've been shown to be reckless in their quest for exploring reaper tech and incompetent at times in their handling of it.

I have never said with certainty that TIM stabs me in the back, what i've said all along is that there remains a large possibility that he could or indeed might do so. Be it because its always been part of a larger plan of his or because the incompetance of his scientists have led to, there are examples of both that make me question whether handing the base over to him is such a wise idea.

As you say he's a wildcard and an unknown yet you believe handing the base over to him is a risk worth taking, i disagree its that simple.

The base itself is a wildcard also, your claim that it isn't doesn't really ring through, yes it could be everything you say it is, it could also be something that by its very nature leads to extremely dire consequences, the fact that even if the first part was true and the second was only a slim possibility.

Then i have to factor in that i don't actually get control over the base and must also trust cerberus with it, which makes the choice that much more complex. So i simplyfy the potential consequences vs. not just the potential benefit but in whose hands both of these things rest and i make my choice.

I see cerberus not as an enemy but as a potential one, be it through there own justifications or their own incompetance, i weigh up the pros and cons and decide how i do, you disagree with that choice and instead decide how you do.

The whole reason that you should pay attention to cerberus is the mere fact that they will be the ones in control of the base, not you, not anyone else, cerberus, you have to worry and pay attention to the reapers, but because of how the choice is presented to you, you also have to worry about cerberus also.


[quote]

Redicolous arguments. I don't trust them because it's me that made them. Heck, I made a lot of wrong decisions in my life. I trust my decisions because I analyzed them carefully and weighed them, and took pains to distance myself emotionally.
Humans are not based purely on logic, but tehy also should let their emotions and bias cloud their judgment.


[/quote]

Yes you are Lotion the worlds first emotionless man, your choices have no emotional bias whatsoever and instead deal only in logic and fact, your able to completely emotionally distance yourself from every choice you make, carefully analyse them and weigh up the pro's and cons, you are unique sir, you should pat yourself on the back (after emotionally distancing yourself of course).

While we may all claim to emotionally distance ourself and make sound choices with no emotional bias cloud our judgement, the reality is we're human, we just don't function that way (except you of course, your unique).

Modifié par alperez, 11 août 2011 - 12:23 .

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

If Legion just wanted you to rewrite the Geth to follow it wouldn't they just forget to mention the signal will kill you?