So given the flood of threads recently about Sheps rocky history with the big three (Alliance/Council/Cerberus) through ME1, ME2 and the ME3 Trial....Does your Shep still hold any allegiance to any of these three?...If so why? And if not does your Shep hold allegiance to anybody...who and why?
Alliance/Council/Cerberus/Other? Sheps Allegiance
Débuté par
Golden Owl
, sept. 21 2011 07:05
Retour en haut
#2
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 07:07
Leonia
-
- Members
- 9 496 messages
Turian Hierarchy. Because.. well, I'll have to finish my fanfiction to explain that one.
#3
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 07:10
SandTrout
-
- Members
- 4 171 messages
Traitor.
Alliance here, due to it being best placed to protect Humanity and ensure its survival.
Alliance here, due to it being best placed to protect Humanity and ensure its survival.
#5
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 07:13
Leonia
-
- Members
- 9 496 messages
All of those groups (Cerberus, Alliance, Council) have failed and/or betrayed Shepard in one form or another, just keep that in mind.
#6
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 07:13
Golden Owl
-
- Members
- 4 064 messages
No need to get titchy, replies would be a lot more interesting without a flame war.SandTrout wrote...
Traitor.
Alliance here, due to it being best placed to protect Humanity and ensure its survival.
#7
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 07:14
Biotic Sage
-
- Members
- 2 842 messages
I think at this point my Shep only has 100% credibility with the Strippers' Union of the Milky Way (SUMWAY). He's a very generous omni-tipper.
#8
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 07:14
Guywhoiam
-
- Members
- 603 messages
I am going with Alliance. Why? No other reason except I like Admiral Hackett.
#9
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 07:15
Golden Owl
-
- Members
- 4 064 messages
Are you going to post it on the Forum when it's done?...I would love to read it.leonia42 wrote...
Turian Hierarchy. Because.. well, I'll have to finish my fanfiction to explain that one.
#10
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 07:21
HogarthHughes 3
-
- Members
- 431 messages
The Alliance and Cerberus to a slightly lesser extent. Their goals align with his: "The advancement & preservation of humanity." Never had any loyalty to the Council, though that could change if they better represent human interests in ME3 (human Council if successful will ultimately be the Alliance anyways).
I didn't always think that sacrificing the Council was the best decision, but after reading up a bit more on their history involving non-Council species (not to mention their behavior in ME1+ME2) I've come around.
I didn't always think that sacrificing the Council was the best decision, but after reading up a bit more on their history involving non-Council species (not to mention their behavior in ME1+ME2) I've come around.
Modifié par HogarthHughes 3, 21 septembre 2011 - 09:49 .
#11
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 07:24
Leonia
-
- Members
- 9 496 messages
Golden Owl wrote...
Are you going to post it on the Forum when it's done?...I would love to read it.leonia42 wrote...
Turian Hierarchy. Because.. well, I'll have to finish my fanfiction to explain that one.
Maybe, we'll see.
But the general premise is this: turians would have a lot of respect for Shepard after what she accomplished in ME1, she's a warrior and she brought down a turian Spectre that had betrayed the whole galaxy. And the Hierarchy doesn't deal with BS, they just act.. honestly, if they were in charge of the council instead of the councillors, the galaxy would a much safer place but that's a theory I'll save for a blog entry in the future.
Then again, its no secret which species I prefer most in Mass Effect so there is some bias involved.
Everyone else has let Shepard down at every turn or tried to exploit her efforts or manipulate her for their own gain.. a species that values honour, duty, and combat skill is going to treat her with the respect she deserves (provided she didn't sacrifice their councillor in ME1).
I think you could also argue the salarians and krogan would have similar respect for Shepard and the quarians too. It's ironic that humanity hasn't always supported their champion.
Respect alone doesn't merit Shepard's allegiance but wouldn't you rather work with the people who support you all the way than those who don't?
#12
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 07:29
SandTrout
-
- Members
- 4 171 messages
Largely irrelevant. This only comes into play in a rational thought process as likelihood of them betraying/abandoning you again, and the Alliance and Council did have a nominally understandable reason for leaving you out to dry.leonia42 wrote...
All of those groups (Cerberus, Alliance, Council) have failed and/or betrayed Shepard in one form or another, just keep that in mind.
If you're vindictive against them because of past conflicts, they you are acting emotionally, rather than rationally. This is not an effective decision making process because the instincts that drive the emotional response are not applicable to the overall situation of complex political maneuvering.
@Golden Owl,
Leonia is already well aware of my reasoning behind the accusation, as we have discussed it in other threads at length. I was primarily stating my position there to remind her that I still view siding with other species against your own as a whole to be intrinsically treasonous.
#13
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 07:32
JeffZero
-
- Members
- 14 400 messages
My main MaleShep holds out hope for both the Alliance and the Quarian Flotilla. Few others, really.
My main FemaleShep only deals with a select few within the Alliance at this point -- namely Anderson and Hackett, obviously. And like MaleShep, she's got higher opinions of a few of the alien races than she does many of her own people-in-power. In her case it's a bit more turian-influenced, though.
My main FemaleShep only deals with a select few within the Alliance at this point -- namely Anderson and Hackett, obviously. And like MaleShep, she's got higher opinions of a few of the alien races than she does many of her own people-in-power. In her case it's a bit more turian-influenced, though.
#14
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 07:33
JeffZero
-
- Members
- 14 400 messages
Both my main Shepards are guilty as charged regarding a few emotional decisions over logical ones, so I can't argue with SandTrout's point.
My tertiary Shepard, a work-in-progress, is far and away the most... Vulcan. And he has nothing against the Council or the Alliance.
My tertiary Shepard, a work-in-progress, is far and away the most... Vulcan. And he has nothing against the Council or the Alliance.
#15
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 07:35
Leonia
-
- Members
- 9 496 messages
I wouldn't say it's vindication so much as.. not being able to trust them, how will they exploit Shepard after the war? During the war? She's just one person trying to save the galaxy but the galaxy is more interested in protecting their self-interests instead of cooperation. Emotion does play a role though, that's the fun of not using meta-game knowledge, you sometimes have to make choices on the fly and Shepard can only judge anyone based on what she has seen already, she's not a mind-reader.
I also see how one who is not pro-humanity can be seen as being anti-humanity (in my case, that's probably true, actually) and a traitor but I don't make a habit of assuming everyone's views based on their stance regarding the Alliance and/or Cerberus. Often those views aren't quite as crystal clear as we'd like them to be. Pro-humanity can mean a lot of different things based on the poster in question.
I also see how one who is not pro-humanity can be seen as being anti-humanity (in my case, that's probably true, actually) and a traitor but I don't make a habit of assuming everyone's views based on their stance regarding the Alliance and/or Cerberus. Often those views aren't quite as crystal clear as we'd like them to be. Pro-humanity can mean a lot of different things based on the poster in question.
Modifié par leonia42, 21 septembre 2011 - 07:36 .
#16
Guest_laecraft_*
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 07:41
Guest_laecraft_*
Guest_laecraft_*
-
- Guests
The Earth. No faction is to be trusted. Each time Shepard allies with someone, it always ends up with them trying to kill him for the greater good.
It doesn't matter what he does, it doesn't matter how much he helps them, it doesn't matter how much he agrees with their goals, it doesn't matter how much more he benefits them alive than dead. They can't help themselves, they need to kill Shepard.
The Council sends him to hunt "the geth" even though they know well enough that it won't be geth that he'll find there. But the hero has done his job, the hero needs to be gone. They need to silence the one who won't shut up about "The Reapers are coming!" They need to get rid of that symbol of humanity before they take control of the human Councilor and slowly strip humanity of their nominal position of power to regain their status quo again.
The Alliance is sacrificing him to appease an alien aggressor who has has already cost humanity millions of lives.
And Cerberus...but I won't say anything about this.
Even when he came to Purgatory and entered a business deal, they attempted to sell him into slavery for the good of the galaxy.
So, alliances simply don't work. It always comes down to shooting bullets. If he lets them close, that would just make him vulnerable, and he would be greatly shaken in the crucial moment when they stab him in the back - like it happened on Horizon.
My Shepard will never place his trust into anyone again. He'll just work with them as he would work with neutral hostiles - use them for resources they offer him. Use them for his fight for the Earth. Discard them as tools when he doesn't need them anymore. Detached. Cold. Professional. Focused on the mission. Yeah.
No one but humanity anymore.
...Oh, who am I kidding. My loyalty is to Cerberus, of course. Always will be.
And maybe the krogan. I'm very hopeful about them. Got a close krogan liaison, visited their homeworld, had a strong connection to his own past through their rite of passage when he fought a thresher maw for survival once again, experienced an epiphany: survival is not enough, being on the run and on defensive is not enough, you need to be aggressive and to destroy your enemy, you need advancement to truly ensure your suvival. And headbutting a krogan was just pure gold. Maybe we can forge an alliance between the krogan and humanity.
My Shepard identifies himself more as krogan than a human, anyway. He loves fighting, just like they do. They know everything about fighting for survival.
It doesn't matter what he does, it doesn't matter how much he helps them, it doesn't matter how much he agrees with their goals, it doesn't matter how much more he benefits them alive than dead. They can't help themselves, they need to kill Shepard.
The Council sends him to hunt "the geth" even though they know well enough that it won't be geth that he'll find there. But the hero has done his job, the hero needs to be gone. They need to silence the one who won't shut up about "The Reapers are coming!" They need to get rid of that symbol of humanity before they take control of the human Councilor and slowly strip humanity of their nominal position of power to regain their status quo again.
The Alliance is sacrificing him to appease an alien aggressor who has has already cost humanity millions of lives.
And Cerberus...but I won't say anything about this.
Even when he came to Purgatory and entered a business deal, they attempted to sell him into slavery for the good of the galaxy.
So, alliances simply don't work. It always comes down to shooting bullets. If he lets them close, that would just make him vulnerable, and he would be greatly shaken in the crucial moment when they stab him in the back - like it happened on Horizon.
My Shepard will never place his trust into anyone again. He'll just work with them as he would work with neutral hostiles - use them for resources they offer him. Use them for his fight for the Earth. Discard them as tools when he doesn't need them anymore. Detached. Cold. Professional. Focused on the mission. Yeah.
No one but humanity anymore.
...Oh, who am I kidding. My loyalty is to Cerberus, of course. Always will be.
And maybe the krogan. I'm very hopeful about them. Got a close krogan liaison, visited their homeworld, had a strong connection to his own past through their rite of passage when he fought a thresher maw for survival once again, experienced an epiphany: survival is not enough, being on the run and on defensive is not enough, you need to be aggressive and to destroy your enemy, you need advancement to truly ensure your suvival. And headbutting a krogan was just pure gold. Maybe we can forge an alliance between the krogan and humanity.
My Shepard identifies himself more as krogan than a human, anyway. He loves fighting, just like they do. They know everything about fighting for survival.
Modifié par laecraft, 21 septembre 2011 - 07:48 .
#17
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 07:48
SandTrout
-
- Members
- 4 171 messages
I practice non-metagaming logic in my primary Shepard. Available data plus existing premise results in the decision that apears best at the time. Instincts have a place, especially in inter-personal relations(noticing lies, for instance), but when it comes down to choosing an alligence, the scope becomes far broader than emotional instincts are designed to deal with. The only 'betrayal' that you suffer from the Alliance is the backlash from the Arrival incident, and not getting overt support against the Collectors, which are opperating outside of official Alliance authority anyways. The fact that they call you to task for Arrival and are covertly supporting Terminus colonies is evidence to me that they are acting in humanity's best interests.leonia42 wrote...
I wouldn't say it's vindication so much as.. not being able to trust them, how will they exploit Shepard after the war? During the war? She's just one person trying to save the galaxy but the galaxy is more interested in protecting their self-interests instead of cooperation. Emotion does play a role though, that's the fun of not using meta-game knowledge, you sometimes have to make choices on the fly and Shepard can only judge anyone based on what she has seen already, she's not a mind-reader.
Having a conflicting view on the Alliance and/or Cerberus is different than siding with an alien nation, though. Even if you don't like the governmental structure of the Alliance, the Turians actively attempted to conqure our species by force, not to long ago, which is definitely not in any group within humanity's interests. If you're looking for an alternative to siding with the Alliance, you could nominally pledge your alligence to Humanity in general, as I do. As I stated, siding with the Alliance is primarily motivated on my part from a desire to protect my species, and therefor myself.I also see how one who is not pro-humanity can be seen as being anti-humanity (in my case, that's probably true, actually) and a traitor but I don't make a habit of assuming everyone's views based on their stance regarding the Alliance and/or Cerberus. Often those views aren't quite as crystal clear as we'd like them to be. Pro-humanity can mean a lot of different things based on the poster in question.
#18
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 07:53
Leonia
-
- Members
- 9 496 messages
Well, I see humanity as being the ignorant aggressors in the FCW so that probably colours my views a bit.. turians were at the top of the pyramid before humanity swooped in and assumed everything was theirs.
The turians also have a history of working well with the our species, why does humanity have to try to off-set that balance? Besides, if you spare the Council, it is implied an alliance between the Hierarchy and Alliance has formed (and even if you don't, there are CDN entries that imply they are working towards an alliance and getting over past differences). The FCW was so brief that it is hardly relevant any more, reparations were made, the Council even felt comfortable using Nihlus as their candidate to test Shepard for Spectre status.
And, admittedly, I don't really support human interests because they tend to be at the expense of the other species (which was already doing fine before humanity showed up). If humanity was willing to work within the already established galactic civilisation as opposed to trying to shake things up and bully their way through, I might support my own species a bit more.
Basically, I support the status quo as it was pre-Charon Relay activation.
The turians also have a history of working well with the our species, why does humanity have to try to off-set that balance? Besides, if you spare the Council, it is implied an alliance between the Hierarchy and Alliance has formed (and even if you don't, there are CDN entries that imply they are working towards an alliance and getting over past differences). The FCW was so brief that it is hardly relevant any more, reparations were made, the Council even felt comfortable using Nihlus as their candidate to test Shepard for Spectre status.
And, admittedly, I don't really support human interests because they tend to be at the expense of the other species (which was already doing fine before humanity showed up). If humanity was willing to work within the already established galactic civilisation as opposed to trying to shake things up and bully their way through, I might support my own species a bit more.
Basically, I support the status quo as it was pre-Charon Relay activation.
Modifié par leonia42, 21 septembre 2011 - 07:57 .
#19
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 07:54
TobyHasEyes
-
- Members
- 1 109 messages
Council first and foremost, because they represent the most beings, and they represent the kind of co-operation my Canon Shepard sees as important
Beyond that.. I dunno. Allegiance is a strange word for my Canon Shepard; when you are trying to save everyone, and you are not prioritising any one race to any real degree, then I am not sure it as a concept fits that situation
Beyond that.. I dunno. Allegiance is a strange word for my Canon Shepard; when you are trying to save everyone, and you are not prioritising any one race to any real degree, then I am not sure it as a concept fits that situation
#20
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 07:55
TobyHasEyes
-
- Members
- 1 109 messages
leonia42 wrote...
Well, I see humanity as being the ignorant aggressors in the FCW so that probably colours my views a bit.. turians were at the top of the pyramid before humanity swooped in and assumed everything was theirs. T
he turians also have a history of working well with the our species, why does humanity have to try to off-set that balance? Besides, if you spare the Council, it is implied an alliance between the Hierarchy and Alliance has formed (and even if you don't, their CDN entries that imply they are working towards an alliance and getting over past differences). The FCW was so brief that it is hardly relevant any more, reparations were made, the Council even felt comfortable using Nihlus as their candidate to test Shepard for Spectre status.
And, admittedly, I don't really support human interests because they tend to be at the expense of some other species (which was already doing fine before humanity showed up). If humanity was willing to work within galactic civilisation as it was established prior to their involvement as opposed to trying to shake it up and bully their way through, I might support my own species a bit more.
Agreed
#21
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 08:18
SandTrout
-
- Members
- 4 171 messages
Wait, What? Humanity was certainly NOT the aggressor in the FCW. The Turians opened hostilities against an exploration flotila and conquered one of our worlds before even ATTEMPTING to open up diplomatic channels. We only responded after being attacked. Sorry, but this point is just 100% false.leonia42 wrote...
Well, I see humanity as being the ignorant aggressors in the FCW so that probably colours my views a bit.. turians were at the top of the pyramid before humanity swooped in and assumed everything was theirs.
The Turians also have a history of using force to get their way, though. They were unified through war. They earned their council seat through war and utilizing a biological weapon, and they instigated a war against a species at first contact. The Alliance, on the other hand, while we have a much more brief history, unified through diplomacy, earned our territory in the Traverse primarily by expanding peacefully and defending our holdings with force from Batarian instigated aggression, and gained our Council seat through war. Really, Turians don't have that great of a record of playing well with others, compared to Humanity, though we are not spotless on that point, eitherThe turians also have a history of working well with the our species, why does humanity have to try to off-set that balance? Besides, if you spare the Council, it is implied an alliance between the Hierarchy and Alliance has formed (and even if you don't, their CDN entries that imply they are working towards an alliance and getting over past differences). The FCW was so brief that it is hardly relevant any more, reparations were made, the Council even felt comfortable using Nihlus as their candidate to test Shepard for Spectre status.
No, the galaxy wasn't doing that great before Humans showed up. The Rachni Wars resulted in the near conquest of all of Citadel space, and were only saved by the intoduction of the Krogan, resulting in the extinction of the Rachni(justified, but still). The Krogan started their own rebellions a couple of centuries later, wiping out several planets in the process. The Krogan Rebellions were ended by the introduction of the Genophage. 300 years ago, the Quarians were wiped out to about 1% of their previous population by the Geth and were kicked off the Citadel and left to die for it. The Council refused to respond to the Geth invasion of Eden Prime, even though the Geth were a very real threat to all Council space, regardless of Saren's involvement.And, admittedly, I don't really support human interests because they tend to be at the expense of some other species (which was already doing fine before humanity showed up). If humanity was willing to work within galactic civilization as it was established prior to their involvement as opposed to trying to shake it up and bully their way through, I might support my own species a bit more.
The Council has a history of repeatedly sacrificing 'lesser' species because it is convenient to their interests at the time. To expect them to act with anyone's interests, except their own, in mind is an exercise in naivety. They have been advancing themselves at everyone else's expense for the last several millennium.
#22
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 08:18
Lotion Soronarr
-
- Members
- 14 481 messages
Humanity...
The galaxy
Life in general.
The galaxy
Life in general.
#23
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 08:30
Leonia
-
- Members
- 9 496 messages
Besides Shanxi, who have the turians "conquered" since the Krogan Rebellions (of which they well deserved their council seat for stopping)? Humanity made no attempt at diplomacy with the turians, they fought back against a completely unknown enemy instead of going "Oh crap, this is your territory? Our bad. Let's talk about this..". Thankfully the Council stepped in and resolved it quickly (hey they aren't completely useless..). They have worked well with the asari, the salarians, the volus, all the other species.. what's the point in conquering when you can work with everyone?
The quarians deserved to be kicked out after meddling with AI and nearly endangering the galaxy, those geth on Eden Prime? Quarians fault. But I digress.. this makes me sound like I support the Council which in general I don't. It's not a fair system, the elcor and the volus should have more representation.. in fact every species should have equal representation. Three species controlling things doesn't seem fair at all.
Yeah, in the distant past the galaxy has had its hiccups, that's to be expected, but in general they were doing alright when humanity came onto the scene. All humanity had to do was integrate into that newfound society and everything would have been fine. It might have taken longer to get a council seat or to be trusted by the other species, but at least they would have been playing by the rules that had already been in existance for hundreds of years. But the events of ME1 sped things up a bit, and ok, that's fine.. look at how the salarians and turians earned their council seats.
It's questionable how humanity will react in the future, especially with an all-human council.
The quarians deserved to be kicked out after meddling with AI and nearly endangering the galaxy, those geth on Eden Prime? Quarians fault. But I digress.. this makes me sound like I support the Council which in general I don't. It's not a fair system, the elcor and the volus should have more representation.. in fact every species should have equal representation. Three species controlling things doesn't seem fair at all.
Yeah, in the distant past the galaxy has had its hiccups, that's to be expected, but in general they were doing alright when humanity came onto the scene. All humanity had to do was integrate into that newfound society and everything would have been fine. It might have taken longer to get a council seat or to be trusted by the other species, but at least they would have been playing by the rules that had already been in existance for hundreds of years. But the events of ME1 sped things up a bit, and ok, that's fine.. look at how the salarians and turians earned their council seats.
It's questionable how humanity will react in the future, especially with an all-human council.
#24
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 08:32
Golden Owl
-
- Members
- 4 064 messages
I'm a Hackett-o-phile too...weirdopo wrote...
I am going with Alliance. Why? No other reason except I like Admiral Hackett.
....But my Shep's allegiance is to Hackett, not the Alliance, his had enough of the big three himself.
#25
Posté 21 septembre 2011 - 08:35
TobyHasEyes
-
- Members
- 1 109 messages
@ Sandboy
It is a matter of interpretation as to whether you regard the actions of the Council as 'sacrificing lesser species because it is convenient to their interests at the time' or whether you consider them as a group which attempts to avoid all-out war, sometimes to the extent of being overly comfortable with not responding to aggression
Was Eden Prime a case of the Council abandoning humanity to the Geth? Or was it a reluctance to be drawn into a conflict which occured when the Alliance colonised areas they had been warned about?
Is the fate of the Quarians a case of the Council being pleased with the loss of the Quarian power base, and simply kicking them when they are down? Or is it a refusal to get drawn into a war of the Quarian's own creation? (though even I would concede that they could have done more to aid the Quarians finding a new home)
Was the use of the Krogan in the Rachni Wars simply a 'human' shield so that the Council races wouldn't have to commit numbers in combat? Or was it a decision reached after many Council forces had given their lives to the cause, and one based on the Krogan ability to handle the conditions necessary to reach the Rachni Queens?
I am not saying that they have a perfect history, nor am I saying that a more generous interpretation is in each case the right one. I just object to the idea that anyone who sees the Council any differently to the skeptical interpretation is being naive to the extreme
It is a matter of interpretation as to whether you regard the actions of the Council as 'sacrificing lesser species because it is convenient to their interests at the time' or whether you consider them as a group which attempts to avoid all-out war, sometimes to the extent of being overly comfortable with not responding to aggression
Was Eden Prime a case of the Council abandoning humanity to the Geth? Or was it a reluctance to be drawn into a conflict which occured when the Alliance colonised areas they had been warned about?
Is the fate of the Quarians a case of the Council being pleased with the loss of the Quarian power base, and simply kicking them when they are down? Or is it a refusal to get drawn into a war of the Quarian's own creation? (though even I would concede that they could have done more to aid the Quarians finding a new home)
Was the use of the Krogan in the Rachni Wars simply a 'human' shield so that the Council races wouldn't have to commit numbers in combat? Or was it a decision reached after many Council forces had given their lives to the cause, and one based on the Krogan ability to handle the conditions necessary to reach the Rachni Queens?
I am not saying that they have a perfect history, nor am I saying that a more generous interpretation is in each case the right one. I just object to the idea that anyone who sees the Council any differently to the skeptical interpretation is being naive to the extreme
