529 réponses à ce sujet

[nitefyre410]

AlexXIV wrote...


It is not even about the trojan horse (I suppose you are talking about indoctrination). You have to trust Cerberus. And you really only have the base for three months. There is probably not much to get that you don't have already. We already have new weapons based on Reaper tech. I would guess the Thannix cannon for example is powerful enough to be a threat to reapers. And if you are realistc, even upgrading every ship in the fleet with Thannix cannon will be impossible because it is too expensive and takes too long. And then putting effort in research that will probably not yield viable tech in time before the Reapers attack? If you asked me there are still too many things speaking against it. It is a far better choice than the Council one though. Still I would blow it up.

Indoctrination and what ever other nasty things that a  eons old race of the Giant talking Robotic Space squid can come up with.  The trojan horse was just a simplification  and easy to use image of my reasoning for not keeping that base with falls in line with yours.  

Trust Cerberus... be exactly what they are...snakes. Usefully snakes but still in the end snakes.

As  for  Thannix Cannon  I have yet to see it work on a Reaper... a  Collector ship yes but not a Reapoer. Not sold on it  yet.  I think  the key to being the Reapers lies with Protheans and some how we are going to end up on the Prothean homeworld in  climax of ME 3 but thats just a hunch and nothing more.

[AlexXIV]

THANK YOU! YOU FINALLY UNDERSTAND!

Sorry, that might sound rude, but I mean it. I'm really happy that you finally realize this. 

Well don't get me wrong. I will still save the council. Simply because I am not going to punish me (or my Shepard) for Bioware's bad writing. Paragon is the good ending. And probably your good reasoning for the neutral decision will not be recognized in the game. That's why roleplaying in singleplayer games sometimes requires metagaming to not ruin your own gaming experience. Imo.

Also I think both, paragon and renegade should go wrong. Not necessarily with a game over screen, but something that carries over to ME3 in any way. The neutral choice should be the one that leads to the best result in ME3. At least as one of many decisions that lead to the best possible result. But don't hold your breath. It would be like Bioware openly admitting their bad writing. You're not going to see that happen.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 29 décembre 2011 - 04:28 .

[AlexXIV]

nitefyre410 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...


It is not even about the trojan horse (I suppose you are talking about indoctrination). You have to trust Cerberus. And you really only have the base for three months. There is probably not much to get that you don't have already. We already have new weapons based on Reaper tech. I would guess the Thannix cannon for example is powerful enough to be a threat to reapers. And if you are realistc, even upgrading every ship in the fleet with Thannix cannon will be impossible because it is too expensive and takes too long. And then putting effort in research that will probably not yield viable tech in time before the Reapers attack? If you asked me there are still too many things speaking against it. It is a far better choice than the Council one though. Still I would blow it up.

Indoctrination and what ever other nasty things that a  eons old race of the Giant talking Robotic Space squid can come up with.  The trojan horse was just a simplification  and easy to use image of my reasoning for not keeping that base with falls in line with yours.  

Trust Cerberus... be exactly what they are...snakes. Usefully snakes but still in the end snakes.

As  for  Thannix Cannon  I have yet to see it work on a Reaper... a  Collector ship yes but not a Reapoer. Not sold on it  yet.  I think  the key to being the Reapers lies with Protheans and some how we are going to end up on the Prothean homeworld in  climax of ME 3 but thats just a hunch and nothing more.

Well the Alliance fleet did already harm Sovereign with their old weapons. And the Thannix cannon is an upgrade. It may not be that strong that they can one-shot Reapers. But better than what we had before. Maybe comparable to the Reaper's red death beam.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 29 décembre 2011 - 04:29 .

[AlexXIV]

Luc0s wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

*blablabla*

Wut?

What is this...this paragraph is broken in so many ways I don't even know where to begin. Or what your'e trying to say exactly.

Oh Irony. Thy name is AlexXIV.

Someone take over temporarily for me. I'm getting a brain anurysm....

Don't worry bro, I just took over. I can fully understand that you need your break. I had my break yesterday, but I'm back to fight the good fight. So off you go, I'll take over for now. 

Btw I am not getting angry either. But I can get defensive. Especially if you jump in the fray like that when I am already having a heated discussion with Lotion. And boy, Lotion can tick me off like no other.

[nitefyre410]

AlexXIV wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...


It is not even about the trojan horse (I suppose you are talking about indoctrination). You have to trust Cerberus. And you really only have the base for three months. There is probably not much to get that you don't have already. We already have new weapons based on Reaper tech. I would guess the Thannix cannon for example is powerful enough to be a threat to reapers. And if you are realistc, even upgrading every ship in the fleet with Thannix cannon will be impossible because it is too expensive and takes too long. And then putting effort in research that will probably not yield viable tech in time before the Reapers attack? If you asked me there are still too many things speaking against it. It is a far better choice than the Council one though. Still I would blow it up.

Indoctrination and what ever other nasty things that a  eons old race of the Giant talking Robotic Space squid can come up with.  The trojan horse was just a simplification  and easy to use image of my reasoning for not keeping that base with falls in line with yours.  

Trust Cerberus... be exactly what they are...snakes. Usefully snakes but still in the end snakes.

As  for  Thannix Cannon  I have yet to see it work on a Reaper... a  Collector ship yes but not a Reapoer. Not sold on it  yet.  I think  the key to being the Reapers lies with Protheans and some how we are going to end up on the Prothean homeworld in  climax of ME 3 but thats just a hunch and nothing more.

Well the Alliance fleet did already harm Sovereign with their old weapons. And the Thannix cannon is an upgrade. It may not be that strong that they can one-shot Reapers. But better than what we had before. Maybe comparable to the Reaper's red death beam.

 

I think the Red beam = the  Thannix Cannon...

yeah they have 5 of them in each appendage...  correct me if  I'm wrong its been while sense I fired up the game and read the Codex and  such.

[AlexXIV]

nitefyre410 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...


It is not even about the trojan horse (I suppose you are talking about indoctrination). You have to trust Cerberus. And you really only have the base for three months. There is probably not much to get that you don't have already. We already have new weapons based on Reaper tech. I would guess the Thannix cannon for example is powerful enough to be a threat to reapers. And if you are realistc, even upgrading every ship in the fleet with Thannix cannon will be impossible because it is too expensive and takes too long. And then putting effort in research that will probably not yield viable tech in time before the Reapers attack? If you asked me there are still too many things speaking against it. It is a far better choice than the Council one though. Still I would blow it up.

Indoctrination and what ever other nasty things that a  eons old race of the Giant talking Robotic Space squid can come up with.  The trojan horse was just a simplification  and easy to use image of my reasoning for not keeping that base with falls in line with yours.  

Trust Cerberus... be exactly what they are...snakes. Usefully snakes but still in the end snakes.

As  for  Thannix Cannon  I have yet to see it work on a Reaper... a  Collector ship yes but not a Reapoer. Not sold on it  yet.  I think  the key to being the Reapers lies with Protheans and some how we are going to end up on the Prothean homeworld in  climax of ME 3 but thats just a hunch and nothing more.

Well the Alliance fleet did already harm Sovereign with their old weapons. And the Thannix cannon is an upgrade. It may not be that strong that they can one-shot Reapers. But better than what we had before. Maybe comparable to the Reaper's red death beam.

 

I think the Red beam = the  Thannix Cannon...

yeah they have 5 of them in each appendage...  correct me if  I'm wrong its been while sense I fired up the game and read the Codex and  such.

I am not big in codexes either. If I don't get the info in-game I basically don't know of it

I don't read the books either.

[AlexXIV]

jreezy wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
It would be like Bioware openly admitting their bad writing. You're not going to see that happen.

They have actually.

Really? Do you have the link? Or quote?

[AlexXIV]

Luc0s wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

THANK YOU! YOU FINALLY UNDERSTAND!

Sorry, that might sound rude, but I mean it. I'm really happy that you finally realize this. 

Well don't get me wrong. I will still save the council. Simply because I am not going to punish me (or my Shepard) for Bioware's bad writing. Paragon is the good ending. And probably your good reasoning for the neutral decision will not be recognized in the game. That's why roleplaying in singleplayer games sometimes requires metagaming to not ruin your own gaming experience. Imo.

Also I think both, paragon and renegade should go wrong. Not necessarily with a game over screen, but something that carries over to ME3 in any way. The neutral choice should be the one that leads to the best result in ME3. At least as one of many decisions that lead to the best possible result. But don't hold your breath. It would be like Bioware openly admitting their bad writing. You're not going to see that happen.

I also saved the Council in my other playthroughs for the same reason as you. But in my "canon playthrough" (my first playthrough ever) I sacrificed the Council and I'll stick to that. I'm curious if sacrificing the Council will bite me in the ass in ME3. We'll see.

But I still stand firm behind my original "canon" playthrough. I love my Vanguard "Paragade" Shepard. He's my original and first character ever. He was my first ME1 character, I used him for my first ME2 playthrough and I'm really looking forward to use him for my first ME3 playthrough. 

Well I don't have that kind of nostalgia. I played with different classes, but always the same choices. So they are all canon playthroughs. Just some (earlier) playthroughs missed some quests. Because the first playthrough I am usually racing to the endgame, while in later playthroughs I go exploring and stuff. It never made sense to me to go exploring when the main storyline suggests your time is running out. My canon class is paragon Infiltrator. I started with soldier for coolness factor, played biotic users for the lulz but infil seems the most reasonable if you are fighting machines. I want to crawl into a reaper head and destroy it from inside. Like a virus. Or like Reaper-cancer

Modifié par AlexXIV, 29 décembre 2011 - 04:54 .

[AlexXIV]

jreezy wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

jreezy wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
It would be like Bioware openly admitting their bad writing. You're not going to see that happen.

They have actually.

Really? Do you have the link? Or quote?

http://www.neoseeker.com/news/17886-mass-effect-3-sees-return-to-citadel-revives-canceled-mass-effect-2-mission/

Ah right, thank you.

But that's not really an apology for bad writing. He just says they made it hard for themselves to deal with the choices of the suicide mission in ME3. I thought more about something along 'Guys, you remember this last decision at the Citadel in ME1? We ****ed it up, sorry.'

I mean for example they could write ME3 in a way that people who picked the neutral choice get their due reward. But I personally guess that everyone who didn't save the Council gets a set back of some sort in ME3.

[nitefyre410]

AlexXIV wrote...


I am not big in codexes either. If I don't get the info in-game I basically don't know of it

I don't read the books either.

*GASP *

I love in game codexes  I usually read them on my second play though. 


Like how the ships are nameed... only those little nuggets are found in the codexes.

[AlexXIV]

jreezy wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
Ah right, thank you.

But that's not really an apology for bad writing. He just says they made it hard for themselves to deal with the choices of the suicide mission in ME3. I thought more about something along 'Guys, you remember this last decision at the Citadel in ME1? We ****ed it up, sorry.'

I mean for example they could write ME3 in a way that people who picked the neutral choice get their due reward. But I personally guess that everyone who didn't save the Council gets a set back of some sort in ME3.

Is the neutral option ever rewarded in any way in Mass Effect so far? I can't recall anything. 

Not in the big decissions, no. But it should at times. It would be a refreshing change to paragon auto-win.

[Yezdigerd]

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

A simple example - sound in space. There's none. ME condex acknowledges this. Yet in cutscenes there is sound. It's there for dramatic effect. It's there to create atmoshpere and paint the happening with sound as well visuals, and to give the viewer a refference point (sicne we know guns make souns in atmosphere)

Would you argue that the codex is wrong? That there is sound in space in ME? No?[/quote]

A fair point, but still of the mark. Sounds obviously are there to illustrate the story, much like we can see the flagbridge on the DA even though it makes no sense that Shepard could have access to this observation.
Your claim is that what we actually see in the cutscenes is erronous based on understanding of the codex.
and that in order to make an justified decision Bioware expects you to read codex and realize that their artistic license otherwise would mislead you into a tragic misstake. I find that...absurd, especially since there is no hint of it being required in game.


[quote]Same thing here. Cinematics have their own "thing" and things are down is specfiic ways too present things to the audiance and create tension and awe. The Codex explain space combat - the ranges, speeds and distances involved. The cinematic is in conflict with this.[/quote]

I don't see how it contradicts the codex. Battles typically play out as artillery duels fought at ranges measured
in thousands of kilometers, though assault through defended mass relays often occur at "knife fight" ranges as close as a few dozen kilometers.
It doesn't say anything about it being physically impossible for you to fight closer, and the Citadel is a few dozen kilometers long.



[quote]Delta-V. Read up on movement in space.[/quote]

You really think an understanding of Delta-V is required to make an informed decision about whether to save the Council or not?

[quote]ME follows Newtnian movement.[/quote]

So does Star Trek, doesn't stop either of them from breaking the rules of real physics, as we know it, six ways to sunday.


[quote][quote][quote]
If the side of the ship gives the enemy the best opportunity to hurt you, wouldn't it follow that that exposing the rear is preferable to exposing the side?
[/quote]

[quote]Well, the sides make it easier to hit you since the surface area is bigger.
But damage to engines means you won't be moving at all wich also make you far easier to hit (and prevents you from reaching your objective)
Also at bigger distances it's easier to hit a target moving away from you, since the movement deviation is smaller

[/quote]

Still doesn't make sense, either the side of the ship is the preferred target or it isn't, Maybe the lesser profile presented offset the potential greater damage a hit would cause in the tailpipe or maybe the chance to damage the engines is about as potent or more so by the broadside.  Whatever the reason, if the rear was the more vulnerable target it would be the one you tried to line up, the codex says it isn't.
[/quote]

Both are preffered target, since both raise chances of hiting and damaging ships. If ME ships had turreted guns, then the side of the ship wouldn't be optimal.

Since space battels are USUALLY contucted at long-range, and the enmy practicly never turns it's back on you, then lining up sideways is preferable.
But in the scenario you described, range is not a problem, and enemy turning your back to you is not a problem.
And I kinda think a direct hit to the engine is worse than a side-armor hit. The engine is by necessity fully exposed from the rear, while it does have some armoring from the side.[/quote][/quote]

And the codex says nothing about the preferred firing solution changing due to distance. supposition at best.

Modifié par Yezdigerd, 29 décembre 2011 - 06:30 .

[toppot]

armass wrote...

It depends on lot of things like what the situation is and what means would we need to take to acheive the desired goal. In the end it is rarely worth it, if the damage along the way becomes unthinkable. 

I do however support "the needs of the many outweight the needs of the few" idea. If 10 people must die for 1000 to live, they would die if the choice would be mine, but ONLY if there was no other choice. Tragic, not sleeping well after that, but the alternative would have been even worse.

I know I am late in the game, but what if the 1000 are terrorist criminals and the 10 good honorable citizens. Of course it maybe obivous. Does the ends justify the means? That is something TIM would ask and answer YES. You can never please everyone, I guess the smaller amount of people who are dissatified with your actions the better.

[Yezdigerd]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Yezdigerd wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Are we playing the same game?
DA was calling for aid. It's main drive was off-line.

And kinetic barriers down 40% (whatever that means), main drive implies auxillary drives. Though what is the main drive anyway, the FTL drive core? for all I still know it's sublight speed is completely unaffected as well as weapons. It's not like Sovereign is far away, like 100 kilometers at best and I understand Dreadnoughts prefer some range.

Secondareis by definitons are onyl a fraction of the power of the main engines. And usually used just for basic manouvering. That means the DA, even if it can move, will be SLOW.

Secondly, is it's main gun operation? We don't know.
Will it join the fight? We don't know - but sice it was evacuating the council, is damaged and it's barriers are depleted - probably not.
And again, could it even get a shot from there? If it has to re-position itself then it means it's takign time.

As I say it depends on what the main drive is meant to power. the distances involved are rediciously small by starship standards so moving into a position to fire on Sovereign doesn't seem to be a problem to me. A bigger issue would be if the main drive was meant to power its mass accelerator.
but we don't know, and as long as we don't know, trying to save the DA in order to take advantage of its tremendous firepower seems to be a reasonable idea to me.

[toppot]

Dreadwing 67 wrote...

SykoWolf wrote...

In real life I would never justify my actions by the resulting outcome, its like saying "hey you murdered 70 people" " oh, but I did it to get rid of a serial killer who had the potential to kill more then 70 people"

That is counter productive......<_<

If someone say like Osama Bin Laden gave you a choice to save 70 people, or bring him down and save countless more people what would you do. I would hopefully stop him and save many more lives, but once more a complicated subject as how would I know he was going to do anything else after these 70 people that he put in mortal danger.

I would look at his past actions is this a pattern. First he targets the 70, the next time he target 180, the 3rd time targets 3500 would you let him have a opportunity for a 4th time not knowing if he will do it or not? No at least hope not or would you hope that he would come to realize I am taking way too many chances here I better stop.

I like this conversations

[AlexXIV]

Yezdigerd wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Yezdigerd wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Are we playing the same game?
DA was calling for aid. It's main drive was off-line.

And kinetic barriers down 40% (whatever that means), main drive implies auxillary drives. Though what is the main drive anyway, the FTL drive core? for all I still know it's sublight speed is completely unaffected as well as weapons. It's not like Sovereign is far away, like 100 kilometers at best and I understand Dreadnoughts prefer some range.

Secondareis by definitons are onyl a fraction of the power of the main engines. And usually used just for basic manouvering. That means the DA, even if it can move, will be SLOW.

Secondly, is it's main gun operation? We don't know.
Will it join the fight? We don't know - but sice it was evacuating the council, is damaged and it's barriers are depleted - probably not.
And again, could it even get a shot from there? If it has to re-position itself then it means it's takign time.

As I say it depends on what the main drive is meant to power. the distances involved are rediciously small by starship standards so moving into a position to fire on Sovereign doesn't seem to be a problem to me. A bigger issue would be if the main drive was meant to power its mass accelerator.
but we don't know, and as long as we don't know, trying to save the DA in order to take advantage of its tremendous firepower seems to be a reasonable idea to me.

Shepard has no clue about the status of the DA and he never asks. So that's unlikely to play a role in his choice. That's basically why I am not entering in this discussion about status of ships and battle tactics. We don't even have something like a tactical map. And Shepard only has a mike in the ear. When he says 'Save the Council at all costs' he has no clue if the DA still can help, actually he probably prefers it is in safety. Because saving the Council at all costs means to keep it out of harms way at all costs. I could imagine that Sovereign, if the DA starts shooting at him and actually has the highest firepower targests the DA first.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 29 décembre 2011 - 07:10 .