403 réponses à ce sujet

[TheZyzyva]

War is all about responding to the tactics of the enemy. Unmanned drones sound great until the enemy figures out how to hack their targeting. Missile bus' are great until the enemy figures out how to hit them before they dump their payload.

The carriers worked because they were innovation and surprise. Turians thought the Humans were bring knives to a gunfight, til we launched dozens of them like boomerangs.

Believing there is only one ideal way to fight a war completely ignores what war is, and is the exact reasons Humans got the better of the Turians.

[Keatons]

I have to backtrack on a few things I have said about the FCW . After reading the beginning of Revelation again, Grisom says three lines to Anderson that changes the FCW considerably. "...Grisom told him. "Technologically, they seem to be on about the same level as us."  "How do we know that?" "Because the ships Shanxi sent out to engage them the next day had enough firepower to wipe out their whole patrol"" Followed after by saying that the Turians had sent reinforcements and that those reinforcements had been the ones to capture and occupy Shanxi.

As for fighters, the codex says that their light weight and powerful eezo cores allow them to be capable of 'greater acceleration and shaper maneuvers than starships.' Also, most conventional missiles would be defeated by a ships kinetic barrier, which is where the short-range disruptor torpeo comes in, allowing fighters to knock out an opponents shields, opening them up for attack with Mass Accelerator cannons of other starships, which is essential when taking on a dreadnoguht and you don't have one of your own to punch through their shields with it's main gun.

[EternalPink]

Vengeful Nature wrote...

EternalPink wrote...

An expensive fighter would still be less expensive than an actual capital ship and you need less crew since fighters are generally 1 or 2 man crew whereas frigates have double digit crews. So you are able to put more fire power in space with less risk to your actual fleet assets since replacing a cruiser/carrier/dreadnought would be a lot more expensive than replacing every single fighter on board.

Except that more firepower equals more mass for the fighter to lug around. Remember, in space, maneuverability is not an issue because all ships are operating in the same medium with the same laws of the preservation of mass and all that, so the only thing that changes is the scale of your ship, and therefore the scale of your weapons. A bigger ship with a bigger engine = more firepower, at the same level of maneuvarability than your fighter, which will be firing BBs at an elephant, so to speak.

Why? What are we basing this on other than your assumption? We are told directed energy weapons are impractical for large scale use so they are mainly used for guardian systems and have a range of 4 to 6km, why can we not fit a laser weapon to a fighter? The gun we upgrade the normandy with in ME2 says in the codex it can be used by fighters, that seems quite a lot of punch for a fighter. So where in the ME universe does it says that missiles are better?

As somebody else mentioned, fighters can return to carrier if they are not destroyed, missiles never return. So once you've shot all your missiles how are you going to resupply if your in hostile territory? how are you going to resupply if your own supply lines are endangered? A missile boat is great until all the missiles are gone, then you have a target

So number one winning tactic for a carrier vrs a missile boat, keep all fighters on close defense shooting down missiles until all the missiles are gone then laugh and swarm the missile boat

Far better to make your fighter a missile itself, which carries other missiles. More bang for your buck. Or at least make your fighters unmanned so they can carry more missiles and you can afford more of them, if you intend to recover them at all.

Except we are explicity told in the codex that VI's are profoundly limited which is why mechs suck so unless you intend to develop a illegal AI for your fighter missiles they would not be able to cope with the fluidity of battle nor complex orders and tactics such as a actual pilot could do

We are told by the codex that missiles are ineffective due to GUARDIAN systems its only in huge numbers that fighters and missiles would get through to inflict damage, if you've got a bunch of fighters that are in-close and have just launched there first salvo which target are you going to go for? the fighters so they can't fire any more salvo's although that means accepting the damage from the first strike OR target the incoming missiles allowing another salvo to be shot at you?

Yes, we're told that missiles are shot in swarms to overwhelm GUARDIAN systems. But tell me, what's more effective; launching a squadron of fighters that shoot missiles themselves, or just shooting more missiles. Unless your fighters are also missiles carrying smaller missiles, which is what a missile bus is. Think of it in terms of proportions; if a single fighter gets destroyed, you've lost a significant proportion of your attack power. If a single missile gets destroyed, you've lost only a tiny proportion of it. With the mechanics of how it works in the ME universe, the most effective tactic will be to shoot missile buses at an enemy ship, which in turn shoot swarms of smaller missiles to overwhelm the ship's GUARDIAN system and burn it out, at which point the missile bus hits and causes even more damage.

And if they dodge/evade those missiles, FTL for 0.00001 sec to change position or use whatever tactic to fool your missile swarm whats your next plan? it would take quite a while and be crew intensive to reload all those missile tubes for volley two and your enemy is not going to wait for that to happen, fighters until they are all dead are a constant threat since they change there tactics, missiles can't

What we are told is that fighers get in close, by the swarm, and launch their missiles when they are close enough. We are never told that these fighters are manned. Given the presumably attrotious casualty rates of this kind of tactic, it's logical to assume that these fighter's aren't manned and are therefore more expendable, because you don't have to worry about human loss of life. Who would sign up to a mission in which a very large percentage of people die in every such mission? No-one that didn't live pre-World War 1, that's who. Plus, unmanned fighters have the benefit of being cheaper, since you don't have to pay to train new pilots every time they get blasted to vapour.

We have ejector seats now for when things go wrong in a fighter so there is the possibility of recovering escape pods (or there fighter analogy) and if they are not manned then who is flying them? As i've already mentioned we are told that VI's are not capable of that task (if they can't handle more than basic functions in a 2D enviroment how can you expect them to be able to do it in a 3D enviroment?)

Shooting missiles at extreme ranges would give the GUARDIAN systems, fighter/interceptor cover, frigate picket fleets plenty of time to target them and since the missiles we are told about in the codex all have mass effect fields to increase mass so they can not be blocked by kinetic barriers they would have very little manuverability to try and dodge fire

No, only Javelin and Disruptor missiles have mass effect fields, and these are more weapons of choice than swarm missiles, kind of like Tomahawks compared to MRLS missiles. And if there are enough of these swarm missles compared to point defense lasers, a defending ship won't have enough laser pew pew to shoot down every micro-missile that comes it's way.

So we are not actually staying in the ME universe then we are including all sci-fi, cool well my fighters have deflector shields and the force to guide them so they never get hit.

The only other sort of missiles we are told about other than javelin and disrupter are the planet killers that we have to stop in one mission so unless i've missed something please provide the entries where it tells us about other sort of ME missiles otherwise my deflector shielded force guided x-wings have won.

Modifié par EternalPink, 10 août 2011 - 10:08 .

[Iakus]

Abraham_uk wrote...

Comander Shepherd is from a race that is trumped by other races. Humans make their foothold in the Citadel, not by being "special" but through sheer strength of will and a great deal of force and determination. This is humanity's real life strengths. We are overpowering, cocky and abrasive. This makes us strong.

The other races didn't fight hard enough to join the council. The Volus deserved to be , but didn't fight hard enough. They simply complained about their situation but didn't take action. The Vorcha accepted their situation.

The Asari, Turians, and Salarians probably played a bigger role in fending off the Reaper threat. This is Comander Shepherd's story. A human story (so we can relate to it.)

Humanity doesn't have any particular strengths except willpower. In many ways that is the greatest strength of them all. It wouldn't surprise me if this actually happens in the future.

Think about it this way. If humanity is so special, why does Comander Shepherd enlist the help of other species? Why was the fleet that defended the Citadel multi-species? Like the other Council races, Humans are made up of strong forceful personalities but they still need help and they still eventually realise that they are not as amazing as they once thought.

All quite cool, in and of itself.

What I think has people uneasy is all this talk of human beging so "genetically diverse" and having just the right "essence", or whatever the Reapers are looking for to create more of their own.  Humans having a strong will is special, but no  more special than, say asari being all biotic, or salarians having a high metabolism, or quarians having an affinity for machines.  But humanity having some genetic quirk that could make them the salvation or destruction (or both?) of the galaxy?  Not for being who they are but what they are?  I think that's the sticking point.

I don't know if that's where the story is headed, but ME2 did seem to be pointing that way.

[Iakus]

Keatons wrote...

I have to backtrack on a few things I have said about the FCW . After reading the beginning of Revelation again, Grisom says three lines to Anderson that changes the FCW considerably. "...Grisom told him. "Technologically, they seem to be on about the same level as us."  "How do we know that?" "Because the ships Shanxi sent out to engage them the next day had enough firepower to wipe out their whole patrol"" Followed after by saying that the Turians had sent reinforcements and that those reinforcements had been the ones to capture and occupy Shanxi.

That I think is part of the "trap" the Reapers left for other races.  In becoming dependant on the relay network and "Prothean" technology, the races tend to stagnate after a certain point.  There's little point to advancing when you can just reverse-engineer what someone else already invented.  Humans are starting to reach that point as well, probably.  The geth appear to be the only spacefaring race still seriously interested in improving themselves.  I'm willing to bet the Council races hadn't advanced significantly since the Krogan Rebellions.

[thatguyhasgone]

lovgreno wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

self-hating liberal guilt

Or perhaps realisticly realising that you can't be best at everything as we are not infailiable gods.

Well so far all that is known from the trailers & updates (well that i know of) is that you are on trial on earth when the reapers attack earth & have to escape. Granted that reapers take centuries to extinguish life, i doubt that the game will
A) have the reapers at earth for long, especially if they get wind of some deus ex machina weapon to destroy them
have the game wrapped up so fast that you return to earth in blazing glory to blow the reapers up towards the end.
It also seems highly unlikely that all the reapers will go to earth as that would be weak, seeing as most people deny them it'd be more effecient for them to spread out & suprise attack various places so as to gain control before the other races can scramble together to fight. So more than likely you will encounter reapers along the way in some form of rallying your enemies & not have earth as the main focus

[TheZyzyva]

Iakus,
I'm pretty sure the biggest problem most people have is that we went from ME1, where humans were still finding their way, generally disliked, and still near the bottom of the totem pole, but still found a way to persevere and save the entire galaxy, to ME2, where humans are now the bulk of the military, have a heavy influence, and no longer have to struggle for attention. Add in that for the most part the goal is saving humans and humans alone and it leaves a little bit of a sour taste for a lot of people.

Now ME3 looks to be human centric as well, which to most would be ME2 all over again. I know that other places are going to get touched on, and I hope that it's simply the marketing that makes it look like humans are the focus. Any way it goes I'm still going to play it and love it, but I won't be able to think of what could have been. I guess that's just the problem with something like a trilogy though.

[Iakus]

[quote]TheZyzyva wrote...

Iakus,
I'm pretty sure the biggest problem most people have is that we went from ME1, where humans were still finding their way, generally disliked, and still near the bottom of the totem pole, but still found a way to persevere and save the entire galaxy, to ME2, where humans are now the bulk of the military, have a heavy influence, and no longer have to struggle for attention. Add in that for the most part the goal is saving humans and humans alone and it leaves a little bit of a sour taste for a lot of people.[/quote]

While all this is true, I would content that soem of the changes are understandable.  The Battle of the Citadel was in many ways a game changer, so to speak.  The Arcturus fleet riding in to engage the geth showed the galaxy that the human military was not to be trifled with.   I can definitely see humanity becoming more integrated in Council space affairs due to either goodwill on the other races' parts or by filling a power vacuum.  For example, I believe Bailey explains the increased number of human C-Sec officers reflects the casualties suffered from the Citadel fight.  C=Sec could no longer be so exclusive towards humans.


Now ME3 looks to be human centric as well, which to most would be ME2 all over again. I know that other places are going to get touched on, and I hope that it's simply the marketing that makes it look like humans are the focus. Any way it goes I'm still going to play it and love it, but I won't be able to think of what could have been. I guess that's just the problem with something like a trilogy though.[/quote]

I do agree that human influnce seems oddly pervasive through ME2 even with the prestige of the Council.  (Founding the Blue Suns?  Really?)  And the whole take back Earth thing in ME3 is most likely due to the whole "Humans are perfect Reaper-making product" deal mentioned before.  Humans are special just because they're humans.

Modifié par iakus, 11 août 2011 - 04:15 .

[LucidStrike]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Goneaviking wrote...
Humans discover alien species and within 30 years are militarily on par with the mightiest fleet in the known galaxy. The other races have had thousands of years of space travel, and our technology was already on par with theirs in a fraction of the time and with no contact with theirs whatsoever? Batarians abuse and practice aggression against every other species for literally thousands of years and then go into hiding the minute humanity begins establishing colonies on worlds that they've been eyeing off instead of actively challenging them?

The reapers decide that plucky humanity is the best breeding stock for superior reaper babies. Humanity gets an embassy on the citadel in less than a third of the time of virtually any other race, and gets a seat on the council almost as quickly.

That's fan-****** on par with Tolkien and his elves. It's been mitigated so far because the games have been entertaining, the characters engaging and the story intriguing; but it doesn't need to be compounded by making Earth the central focus of final game to the detriment of the other homeworlds. Especially if we wind up recruiting other races to help us save our homeworld at the cost of their own.

Which is the ultimate "humans are spechul" trope, if you ask me. 

What puts humanity above every other race? Don't they have a right to exist too?

Humanity also gets a Spectre with their second attempt without barely trying. It just feels so undramatic when they can get anything they want and are getting away with almost anything. Not to mention that it makes me care less about them when they claim that they're fighting for their "rightful place" in the galaxy.

It's so distant from the real humanity as we know it, that I don't feel compelled to have any sympathy for them when it finally goes badly in one direction.

This pretty much.

[Seboist]

I don't know if humans are special but I do know that a galaxy without humans is not a galaxy worth saving.

[Weskerr]

Goneaviking wrote...

My point is that many of the factors that lead to the impressive progress of the Japanese weren’t directly related to pure R&D. Without a number of benefits lacking from the Alliance the Japanese would have been a non-starter in a war against the Western powers in the Pacific.

You're skipping over 30 years of history that directly contributed to Japan's rising militarism in the 1930s (approximately 1900-1930). First, Japan's defeat of the Russian Navy in the Russo-Japanese War established them as a significant world naval power. Second, during WWI, Japan responded to requests for help from the British to stop German raiders in and around Chinese waters, which they did and succeeded. They also successfully seized and occuppied German colonies on the islands of Mariana, Caroline, and Marshal Islands in the Pacific. They were also the first nation to launch naval air raids against an enemy target (specifically against lands held in China by the Germans). They made a treaty with Russia in which neither country was to sign a peace agreement with Germany, and both countries would come to each other's assistance if either's territory were threatened.  
A little later in the war, the British requested naval assistance from them again to escort troop-transpot ships from Malta containing a total of about 700,000 troops and protect them from submarine attacks by the Germans. They succeeded in this too (they even saved about 7,000 soldiers from damaged or sinking ships).

All in all, WWI led to an industrial boom in Japan which led to a sharp increase in inflation which led to a recession and rice riots. This, in turn, led to political instability in the 1920s. Japan's millitary victories over the past 20 years combined with their political instability due to the recession brought about Japan's militarism in the 1930s (their expansionist policies and massive military buildup).

To Summarize:

1. The Japanese navy defeated the Russian navy in 1905, gaining world recognition as a significant naval power.

2. In WWI, Brittain requested naval assistance from the Japanese to eliminate German influence and military power in East Asia and then again to protect British troop-transports in Malta (located in the Medditeranian Sea) from German submarine attacks. The Japanese succeeded in both.

3. The Japanese navy was the first in history to carry out naval-based air attacks against military targets demonstrating their ingenuity.

4. The temporary economc boom in Japanese industry (as a result of WWI) and the resulting recession afterwards (which led to internal political instability) along with the apparent ease of Japanese military victories of 1904-05 and 1914-1919, led to Japanese militarism in the 1930s.

Conclusions:

1. With the same access to knowledge of naval tactics and technology, Russia and Japan fought a naval war that the Japanese won. (Most people believed the Russians would be victorious because they were already considered to be a world military power and had more experience in fighting modern wars).

2. The British considered the Japanese navy to be strong enough to request their help, and they were proven right.

3. The Japanese didn't just adopt western technology. They also devised new ways of applying it in battle.

4. Japanese hostilities with the United States in the Pacific was the result of Japanese military confidence in expansionist policies (which was at odds with American interests) and political instability (caused by an economic recession in Japan which was exacerbated by The Depression in 1929).

In short, the Japanese were able to transform from a technologically backwards nation into a significant military power because of their intelligence, ingenuity, and adaptability.

Goneaviking wrote...
Not the least of which was their long military campaign which was carving a bloody swathe through Asia for years before the outbreak of violence in Europe. The war gave them accurate and reliable information to refine their technology and just as importantly their supply lines, their strategic doctrines and specific tactics, the organisational structure of their military and the support structure within the society needed to maintain it. Without those that experience the Japanese wouldn’t have had half the success they had once they pre-emptively attacked the Western powers.

You mean after WWI and before WWII when referring to Japan's military campain in Asia, correct? I'm not so sure that played much of a factor. Fighting a haphazard force of Chinese guerillas doesn't give you the same experience as fighting modern military world powers.  I also agrue with your assertion that Japan's pre-emptive attack on Pearl Harbor had much success to begin with. Strategically, it was a disaster for Japan because they based their attack's success on dissuading the Americans from any longer interferring with their expansionist military policy. Far from dissuading the Americans from interferring, it provoked an all out war. Tactically, it was not much of a success. Not only did Japan not destroy any of America's aircraft carriers (most were elsewhere at the time), but the Americans were able to replace and even increase in number the ships, planes, and soldiers they had lost in an amazingly short amount of time.
The only western power they pre-emptively attacked was the United States. While they were technically at war with America's allies after that, America was the only western power whose military they engaged (also the Australians to a very small degree) in WWII.

Goneaviking wrote...
Everything that the Alliance had to work with was guesswork.

Guesswork in terms of understanding and replicating the Prothean technology found on Mars or in terms of the tactics they used when fighting the Turians? Whether your answer is "yes" to one of the two or "yes" to both, I disagree. The Alliance had their own technology to compare the Prothean technology to. It wasn't guesswork, but most likely experimentation and theorizing that allowed them to understand the gap in advancement between their own technology and the Prothean technology. Once they understood the connection, they could then engineer ships with mass effect technology. I also don't think it was Alliance guesswork that allowed them to beat the Turians in battle. For the most part, you win wars or battles through strategy and tactics, something which humanity didn't lack knowledge or understanding of. This is shown from the time that "The Art of War" was written all the way to the present day.

I'll respond to your arguments concerning israel a little later. What I already wrote took me a long time.

[Goneaviking]

Weskerr wrote...

You're skipping over 30 years of history that directly contributed to Japan's rising militarism in the 1930s (approximately 1900-1930). First, Japan's defeat of the Russian Navy in the Russo-Japanese War established them as a significant world naval power. Second, during WWI, Japan responded to requests for help from the British to stop German raiders in and around Chinese waters, which they did and succeeded. They also successfully seized and occuppied German colonies on the islands of Mariana, Caroline, and Marshal Islands in the Pacific. They were also the first nation to launch naval air raids against an enemy target (specifically against lands held in China by the Germans). They made a treaty with Russia in which neither country was to sign a peace agreement with Germany, and both countries would come to each other's assistance if either's territory were threatened.  
A little later in the war, the British requested naval assistance from them again to escort troop-transpot ships from Malta containing a total of about 700,000 troops and protect them from submarine attacks by the Germans. They succeeded in this too (they even saved about 7,000 soldiers from damaged or sinking ships).

All in all, WWI led to an industrial boom in Japan which led to a sharp increase in inflation which led to a recession and rice riots. This, in turn, led to political instability in the 1920s. Japan's millitary victories over the past 20 years combined with their political instability due to the recession brought about Japan's militarism in the 1930s (their expansionist policies and massive military buildup).

To Summarize:

1. The Japanese navy defeated the Russian navy in 1905, gaining world recognition as a significant naval power.

2. In WWI, Brittain requested naval assistance from the Japanese to eliminate German influence and military power in East Asia and then again to protect British troop-transports in Malta (located in the Medditeranian Sea) from German submarine attacks. The Japanese succeeded in both.

3. The Japanese navy was the first in history to carry out naval-based air attacks against military targets demonstrating their ingenuity.

4. The temporary economc boom in Japanese industry (as a result of WWI) and the resulting recession afterwards (which led to internal political instability) along with the apparent ease of Japanese military victories of 1904-05 and 1914-1919, led to Japanese militarism in the 1930s.

Conclusions:

1. With the same access to knowledge of naval tactics and technology, Russia and Japan fought a naval war that the Japanese won. (Most people believed the Russians would be victorious because they were already considered to be a world military power and had more experience in fighting modern wars).

2. The British considered the Japanese navy to be strong enough to request their help, and they were proven right.

3. The Japanese didn't just adopt western technology. They also devised new ways of applying it in battle.

4. Japanese hostilities with the United States in the Pacific was the result of Japanese military confidence in expansionist policies (which was at odds with American interests) and political instability (caused by an economic recession in Japan which was exacerbated by The Depression in 1929).

In short, the Japanese were able to transform from a technologically backwards nation into a significant military power because of their intelligence, ingenuity, and adaptability.

None of which undermines my point that the rise of Japan's technical and tactical prowess came not simply from pure R&D but from a number of other important factors.

For instance the rapid and astounding transformation of Japan from a medieval feudal society to a modern industrial nation, the conscious decision to send students abroad to receive foreign training that they could , and did, bring back with them to help create a modern Japanese state which could compete with its western rivals.

They also brought in foreign advisors to help get them up to scratch including Klemens Meckel of Prussia who advised them that Korea under Chinese domination was "a dagger pointed at the heart of Japan" and encouraged them to do something to change that situation. They based their navy on the British navy, and their army at first upon the French and later on the Prussian model.

As early as the 1870s they were pushing their interests aggressively in Asia, such as forcing a treaty on Korea that opened them to trade with Japan and caused them to declare independence from China in its foreign relations. Japan projected its growing military power toward Korea in the 1880s before the first Sino-Japanese war broke out in 1894.

As for the 1905 war with Russia, when I studied it in high school my teacher taught us that the Russians were using antiquated ships, their modern military vessels having been based closer to their European rivals as the Russians, like virtually all western powers at the time, didn't consider asians to be credible rivals and certainly not to be compared to the British.

They had multiple wars which gave them opportunities to develop insights from field experience, this allowed them to refine technologies and gain practical experience in emerging trends in warfare that were important in helping them to develop their strategic doctrines. Alongside this they had a steadily increasing exposure to western thinking and technologies as their students returned from abroad to share what they'd learned and with the foreign advisors they imported to teach them.

You mean after WWI and before WWII when referring to Japan's military campain in Asia, correct? I'm not so sure that played much of a factor. Fighting a haphazard force of Chinese guerillas doesn't give you the same experience as fighting modern military world powers.  I also agrue with your assertion that Japan's pre-emptive attack on Pearl Harbor had much success to begin with. Strategically, it was a disaster for Japan because they based their attack's success on dissuading the Americans from any longer interferring with their expansionist military policy. Far from dissuading the Americans from interferring, it provoked an all out war. Tactically, it was not much of a success. Not only did Japan not destroy any of America's aircraft carriers (most were elsewhere at the time), but the Americans were able to replace and even increase in number the ships, planes, and soldiers they had lost in an amazingly short amount of time.
The only western power they pre-emptively attacked was the United States. While they were technically at war with America's allies after that, America was the only western power whose military they engaged (also the Australians to a very small degree) in WWII.

The German Reich used its experiences in the Spanish Civil War to field test new technologies and tactics which allowed them to refine them and iron out flaws before the war started in 1939. The end result of this field testing was that the German military machine steamrolled their enemies consistently during the early stages of the war. That they were up against a ragtag bunch of geurillas didn't impede their developments in the slightest.

Japan's increasing military engagements in Asia allowed them to develop capabilities I've previous mentioned such as their ability to handle logistics and get their industrial base in-line to support ongoing military expansion. These are crucial factors in a long war, and they were also elements they definitely needed to develop over time.

The period after the Pearl Harbour didn't exactly provide an immediate and total collapse of Japan's military capability. They continued to progress through asia afterwards, their military took Singapore and reached all the way down to Papua New Guinea and Allied military plans included contingencies incase Japan managed to start an invasion of Australia. Obviously our commanders had reason to believe the Japanese remained a significant threat.

Australia's role in the war in the Pacific wasn't as great as the United States given the disparity in populations but try not to understate it, we had more involvement than you seem to credit us with.

Guesswork in terms of understanding and replicating the Prothean technology found on Mars or in terms of the tactics they used when fighting the Turians? Whether your answer is "yes" to one of the two or "yes" to both, I disagree. The Alliance had their own technology to compare the Prothean technology to. It wasn't guesswork, but most likely experimentation and theorizing that allowed them to understand the gap in advancement between their own technology and the Prothean technology. Once they understood the connection, they could then engineer ships with mass effect technology. I also don't think it was Alliance guesswork that allowed them to beat the Turians in battle. For the most part, you win wars or battles through strategy and tactics, something which humanity didn't lack knowledge or understanding of. This is shown from the time that "The Art of War" was written all the way to the present day.

There wasn't simply a gap between human and prothean technologies, the two were completely alien to each other. Human tech didn't start to be based off of reaper tech until the Mars base, whereas prothen tech had been developing along that path for thousands of years. The theories and ideas of the two would have been completely different, and incompatible in such a short period. Add to that our awareness that the technology had been in disuse for tens of thousands of years and it becomes even more of a stretch that they decoded it so quickly... they couldn't exactly just plug it into our wall sockets to activate them.

So far as I know the games' lore doesn't include vast amounts of spacewarfare that would allow humanity to refine their strategies convincingly. Even wargaming is of limited value since the participants would be operating off of similar theories on how war should be conducted and also because such activities are inherently politicised for an infamous example check this link: http://www.guardian....sa.julianborger

An excerpt:
When Gen Van Riper agreed to command the forces of an unnamed Middle
Eastern state - which bore a strong re semblance to Iraq, but could have
been Iran - he thought he would be given a free rein to probe US
weaknesses. But when the game began, he was told to deploy his forces to
make life easier for US forces.

I'll respond to your arguments concerning israel a little later. What I already wrote took me a long time.

I look forward to it, this is fun.

Modifié par Goneaviking, 11 août 2011 - 02:38 .

[wetnasty]

It did always strike me a bit odd that humans were one of the last to join up with everyone else, yet they all had to adapt to *our* primary language.

[Urazz]

iakus wrote...

Abraham_uk wrote...

Comander Shepherd is from a race that is trumped by other races. Humans make their foothold in the Citadel, not by being "special" but through sheer strength of will and a great deal of force and determination. This is humanity's real life strengths. We are overpowering, cocky and abrasive. This makes us strong.

The other races didn't fight hard enough to join the council. The Volus deserved to be , but didn't fight hard enough. They simply complained about their situation but didn't take action. The Vorcha accepted their situation.

The Asari, Turians, and Salarians probably played a bigger role in fending off the Reaper threat. This is Comander Shepherd's story. A human story (so we can relate to it.)

Humanity doesn't have any particular strengths except willpower. In many ways that is the greatest strength of them all. It wouldn't surprise me if this actually happens in the future.

Think about it this way. If humanity is so special, why does Comander Shepherd enlist the help of other species? Why was the fleet that defended the Citadel multi-species? Like the other Council races, Humans are made up of strong forceful personalities but they still need help and they still eventually realise that they are not as amazing as they once thought.

All quite cool, in and of itself.

What I think has people uneasy is all this talk of human beging so "genetically diverse" and having just the right "essence", or whatever the Reapers are looking for to create more of their own.  Humans having a strong will is special, but no  more special than, say asari being all biotic, or salarians having a high metabolism, or quarians having an affinity for machines.  But humanity having some genetic quirk that could make them the salvation or destruction (or both?) of the galaxy?  Not for being who they are but what they are?  I think that's the sticking point.

I don't know if that's where the story is headed, but ME2 did seem to be pointing that way.

I don't recall it being said that human diversity would make us the salvation or destruction of the galaxy.  If anything, it's just the reason why the reapers are focusing most of their attention on humanity first instead of the rest of the galaxy.

wetnasty wrote...

It did always strike me a bit odd that humans were one of the last to join up with everyone else, yet they all had to adapt to *our* primary language.

They havent.  There are universal translators in the Mass Effect universe.

Modifié par Urazz, 11 août 2011 - 02:47 .

[wetnasty]

Urazz wrote...

They havent.  There are universal translators in the Mass Effect universe.

Where are they? Everywhere that I've ever been in the universe, even people not speaking to me have been speaking English. Is there a brain implant or something that auto-translates for you?

[Nashiktal]

wetnasty wrote...

Urazz wrote...

They havent.  There are universal translators in the Mass Effect universe.

Where are they? Everywhere that I've ever been in the universe, even people not speaking to me have been speaking English. Is there a brain implant or something that auto-translates for you?

Read the codex mate.

The aliens are still speaking their language (their lips sync to english for in game reasons) you just hear all the clicks and whistles translated to YOUR language.

[Keatons]

wetnasty wrote...

Urazz wrote...

They havent.  There are universal translators in the Mass Effect universe.

Where are they? Everywhere that I've ever been in the universe, even people not speaking to me have been speaking English. Is there a brain implant or something that auto-translates for you?

Could be Omni-Tools. On the Citadel, there's a game seller that says the worst thing about Online Gaming is when a Batarian comes in and stubbornly speaks his own language without auto-translation. While not the best example, it does show that auto-translation technology does exist in the ME universe.

[wetnasty]

Nashiktal wrote...

wetnasty wrote...

Urazz wrote...

They havent.  There are universal translators in the Mass Effect universe.

Where are they? Everywhere that I've ever been in the universe, even people not speaking to me have been speaking English. Is there a brain implant or something that auto-translates for you?

Read the codex mate.

The aliens are still speaking their language (their lips sync to english for in game reasons) you just hear all the clicks and whistles translated to YOUR language.

God knows if I could read the tiny font on the codex I would. Maybe I'll look for the article on the Mass Effect wiki. Still, is it an implant? 

Also where in the codex is this info? Now I'm really curious.

Modifié par wetnasty, 11 août 2011 - 03:24 .

[didymos1120]

wetnasty wrote...
God knows if I could read the tiny font on the codex I would. Maybe I'll look for the article on the Mass Effect wiki. Still, is it an implant? 

Also where in the codex is this info? Now I'm really curious.

Here:

Human cultures remain linguistically divided. Some converse in Spanish, others in Mandarin, Arabic, Swahili, etc. Every alien race has their own equally broad panoply of languages and dialects.

Most individuals know only their mother tongue, and rely on machine translation. Modern portable computers allow anyone with a few hundred credits of equipment to enjoy seamless real-time translation of alien languages, courtesy of handheld PDAs, computers in clothing or jewelry, or sub-dermal implants. Without fast and accurate translation, galactic trade and culture would not exist.

Governments provide subsidized software, updated through the public extranet "on the fly", often as users approach spaceport customs facilities. Even the batarians, who isolated themselves from galactic society nearly two decades ago, take pains to provide up-to-date glossaries and linguistic rules, though most suspect that this is only so they can continue exporting propaganda.

It is still considered broad-minded and practical to be able to speak without machine aid. Children often take courses in alien language, and most races can speak the simplified artificial "trade tongue" with little difficulty.

Some species must rely on machine translation to interact with the rest of the galaxy. Hanar, for example, cannot reproduce the spoken language of any humanoid species, and other races cannot reproduce hanar bioluminescence without mechanical aid. Newly discovered or obscure races don't have machine translation available until the linguists have had time to study them.

[wetnasty]

didymos1120 wrote...

wetnasty wrote...
God knows if I could read the tiny font on the codex I would. Maybe I'll look for the article on the Mass Effect wiki. Still, is it an implant? 

Also where in the codex is this info? Now I'm really curious.

Here:

Human cultures remain linguistically divided. Some converse in Spanish, others in Mandarin, Arabic, Swahili, etc. Every alien race has their own equally broad panoply of languages and dialects.

Most individuals know only their mother tongue, and rely on machine translation. Modern portable computers allow anyone with a few hundred credits of equipment to enjoy seamless real-time translation of alien languages, courtesy of handheld PDAs, computers in clothing or jewelry, or sub-dermal implants. Without fast and accurate translation, galactic trade and culture would not exist.

Governments provide subsidized software, updated through the public extranet "on the fly", often as users approach spaceport customs facilities. Even the batarians, who isolated themselves from galactic society nearly two decades ago, take pains to provide up-to-date glossaries and linguistic rules, though most suspect that this is only so they can continue exporting propaganda.

It is still considered broad-minded and practical to be able to speak without machine aid. Children often take courses in alien language, and most races can speak the simplified artificial "trade tongue" with little difficulty.

Some species must rely on machine translation to interact with the rest of the galaxy. Hanar, for example, cannot reproduce the spoken language of any humanoid species, and other races cannot reproduce hanar bioluminescence without mechanical aid. Newly discovered or obscure races don't have machine translation available until the linguists have had time to study them.

Iiiinteresting. Thanks for that info!

[Elvis_Mazur]

LucidStrike wrote...
Humanity also gets a Spectre with their second attempt without barely trying. It just feels so undramatic when they can get anything they want and are getting away with almost anything. Not to mention that it makes me care less about them when they claim that they're fighting for their "rightful place" in the galaxy.

This is another problem. What "rightful place". What makes such person think they have a rightful place. Their "rightful place" is no different than the other race's. Someone has a big ego.<_<

[darth_lopez]

Keatons wrote...

wetnasty wrote...

Urazz wrote...

They havent.  There are universal translators in the Mass Effect universe.

Where are they? Everywhere that I've ever been in the universe, even people not speaking to me have been speaking English. Is there a brain implant or something that auto-translates for you?

Could be Omni-Tools. On the Citadel, there's a game seller that says the worst thing about Online Gaming is when a Batarian comes in and stubbornly speaks his own language without auto-translation. While not the best example, it does show that auto-translation technology does exist in the ME universe.

theres a codex entry in #1 about it...

[Keatons]

darth_lopez wrote...

Keatons wrote...

wetnasty wrote...

Urazz wrote...

They havent.  There are universal translators in the Mass Effect universe.

Where are they? Everywhere that I've ever been in the universe, even people not speaking to me have been speaking English. Is there a brain implant or something that auto-translates for you?

Could be Omni-Tools. On the Citadel, there's a game seller that says the worst thing about Online Gaming is when a Batarian comes in and stubbornly speaks his own language without auto-translation. While not the best example, it does show that auto-translation technology does exist in the ME universe.

theres a codex entry in #1 about it...

A tad late, but as a PS3 gamer I can't play #1 so I wouldn't know anything about its codex, now would I?

[darth_lopez]

Keatons wrote...

darth_lopez wrote...

theres a codex entry in #1 about it...

A tad late, but as a PS3 gamer I can't play #1 so I wouldn't know anything about its codex, now would I?

i noticed after posting.

My suggestion is trying to play ME 1 on your computer in any case Steam Sells digital Copies, and doesn't have a 2 year limitation on the product like origin(meaning that if you don't play the game in 2 years you lose the CD key from the sounds of the EULA)

[didymos1120]

Keatons wrote...

A tad late, but as a PS3 gamer I can't play #1 so I wouldn't know anything about its codex, now would I?

If only there were some sort of website, let's call it a "wiki", that contained that information exactly as it appeared in each game...

Modifié par didymos1120, 12 août 2011 - 07:50 .