440 réponses à ce sujet

[Dewart]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Dewart wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Wasting time and ships on rescusing a damaged, fleeing ship is a redicolously stupid gamble.

a damaged fleeing ship with a big *** gun on it. don't forget that.

lol I joke

[xentar]

Given my style in strategy games, I'd rather have an extra fleet of cruisers.

[incinerator950]

xentar wrote...

Given my style in strategy games, I'd rather have an extra fleet of cruisers.

I'd opt the same route, but the last ship game that involved that course was small, so we were allowed to either take smaller compliments, a handful of cruisers, or a Dreadnought.  Given the range capacity, Dreadnoughts were usually more successful, but cost more, and took more resources and ship capcities.  Also, specilist ships will provide better roles, but you cannot forsake behemoths unless efficiency and economy clears out.  The Alliance saw the reason to even make Dreadnoughts, also the reason why Carriers are roughly the same size as Dreads.

So, let the ME universe take its course and we can vote on whats better when ME 3 is done.  

[Dewart]

why do people insist on bringing up ships/fighters that we use today in earth as basis for their arguments. We are talking a fictional space setting that is almost 200 years into the future. I really fail to see how you can think arguments based on tech from today is a good argument.

Comparing warships of today to warships in a fictional future is like comparing apples to my left thumb. We all know what apples look like but none of you know any solid details about my left thumb.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Dewart wrote...

why do people insist on bringing up ships/fighters that we use today in earth as basis for their arguments. We are talking a fictional space setting that is almost 200 years into the future. I really fail to see how you can think arguments based on tech from today is a good argument.

Comparing warships of today to warships in a fictional future is like comparing apples to my left thumb. We all know what apples look like but none of you know any solid details about my left thumb.

Ratios my boy.
Spaceships will become bigger and more expnsive, but so will fighters.

Also, cost effectiveness. This is the prime rule of combat. If something isn't cost effective - NO ONE WOULD USE IT.  And if you can show why it isn't cost effective....

[incinerator950]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Dewart wrote...

why do people insist on bringing up ships/fighters that we use today in earth as basis for their arguments. We are talking a fictional space setting that is almost 200 years into the future. I really fail to see how you can think arguments based on tech from today is a good argument.

Comparing warships of today to warships in a fictional future is like comparing apples to my left thumb. We all know what apples look like but none of you know any solid details about my left thumb.

Ratios my boy.
Spaceships will become bigger and more expnsive, but so will fighters.

Also, cost effectiveness. This is the prime rule of combat. If something isn't cost effective - NO ONE WOULD USE IT.  And if you can show why it isn't cost effective....

Then call it a Death Star, paint it like the moon, and fire it at the nearest planet of hippies. 

[Aimi]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Ratios my boy.
Spaceships will become bigger and more expnsive, but so will fighters.

Also, cost effectiveness. This is the prime rule of combat. If something isn't cost effective - NO ONE WOULD USE IT.  And if you can show why it isn't cost effective....

But, uh, you can't show why it isn't cost effective if you just persist in comparing dissimilar things. Which is all you've been doing.

[Dewart]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Dewart wrote...

why do people insist on bringing up ships/fighters that we use today in earth as basis for their arguments. We are talking a fictional space setting that is almost 200 years into the future. I really fail to see how you can think arguments based on tech from today is a good argument.

Comparing warships of today to warships in a fictional future is like comparing apples to my left thumb. We all know what apples look like but none of you know any solid details about my left thumb.

Ratios my boy.
Spaceships will become bigger and more expnsive, but so will fighters.

Also, cost effectiveness. This is the prime rule of combat. If something isn't cost effective - NO ONE WOULD USE IT.  And if you can show why it isn't cost effective....

just want to point out during the cutscene for saving the DA you can see the normandy flying beside alliance cruisers and the normandy is well over half the size of these cruisers. yes these are classed as cruisers not frigates which some people seem to believe. the exact same ship can be collected as a model in ME2 and it is clearly called alliance cruiser.  the turian cruisers are also seen during the cutscene and are of comparable size to the alliance cruiser. that ratio is a little different then what we see today.

[Dewart]

now compare that to the collector cruiser and we see a huge difference in size between the alliance cruiser and collector cruiser

[Dewart]

warships of today just simply do not apply to the warships in a fictional futuristic space oriented realm

[hawat333]

xnoxiousx wrote...

If you save council your cold heated. You risked lives of everyone for a small group of people. You should be ashamed.

You forget to count in the ship's crew, that's about ten thousand.

But I agree, you risk hell of a lot more, if the Reapers come around. Well, the player obviously knows that he can 'win' the game, but Shepard, standing there, doesn't. The priority for him/her is to stop the Reapers.

[Dewart]

heck the difference in size between the first and second normandy implies that the normandy 2 is actually slightly larger than a regular alliance cruiser (not talking heavy ones we don't really know what they look like)

[incinerator950]

Dewart wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Dewart wrote...

why do people insist on bringing up ships/fighters that we use today in earth as basis for their arguments. We are talking a fictional space setting that is almost 200 years into the future. I really fail to see how you can think arguments based on tech from today is a good argument.

Comparing warships of today to warships in a fictional future is like comparing apples to my left thumb. We all know what apples look like but none of you know any solid details about my left thumb.

Ratios my boy.
Spaceships will become bigger and more expnsive, but so will fighters.

Also, cost effectiveness. This is the prime rule of combat. If something isn't cost effective - NO ONE WOULD USE IT.  And if you can show why it isn't cost effective....

just want to point out during the cutscene for saving the DA you can see the normandy flying beside alliance cruisers and the normandy is well over half the size of these cruisers. yes these are classed as cruisers not frigates which some people seem to believe. the exact same ship can be collected as a model in ME2 and it is clearly called alliance cruiser.  the turian cruisers are also seen during the cutscene and are of comparable size to the alliance cruiser. that ratio is a little different then what we see today.

I'm watching on youtube where the Alliance Fleet drops out of the Relay, the Normandy SR-1 is clearly less than half the size of a Alliance Cruiser. 

[Dewart]

incinerator950 wrote...

I'm watching on youtube where the Alliance Fleet drops out of the Relay, the Normandy SR-1 is clearly less than half the size of a Alliance Cruiser. 

I am watching it right now as well and though I may have said well over half it is probably closer to slightly over half. watch it ag ain and pause if you have to. just after they drop out of ftl you can get a few angles and later on in the battle you can get the other angles needed to see how big they are in relation. also you get a really nice fly by of the DA where if you compare the normandy to it you see that the DA is really not  as big as we all make it out to be in relation.

edit: you can't just watch the dropping out of ftl from the relay and make your assumption solely on one angle watch for a couple different angles.

Modifié par Dewart, 26 janvier 2012 - 02:43 .

[jaza]

Mr Massakka wrote...

Save them!
You have to gather the galaxy together in ME3. Not just that the trust in humans courage is a lot higher, you sacrificed human lives to save them. They owe you their assistance for defending earth.

Because politicians ALWAYS pay up their debts and do the right thing. Which is why they gave us their unqestioned support in ME2!

Oh wait a minute...

<_<

[incinerator950]

Dewart wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

I'm watching on youtube where the Alliance Fleet drops out of the Relay, the Normandy SR-1 is clearly less than half the size of a Alliance Cruiser. 

I am watching it right now as well and though I may have said well over half it is probably closer to slightly over half. watch it ag ain and pause if you have to. just after they drop out of ftl you can get a few angles and later on in the battle you can get the other angles needed to see how big they are in relation. also you get a really nice fly by of the DA where if you compare the normandy to it you see that the DA is really not  as big as we all make it out to be in relation.

edit: you can't just watch the dropping out of ftl from the relay and make your assumption solely on one angle watch for a couple different angles.

I am, bow to stern and the overall narrow profile and size of the vessel is small comparibly.  

[Dewart]

actually if you then watch the sovy get taken out cutscene the cruisers are all of a sudden almost 1/4 of sovereign and the normandy is less then 1/6 of a cruiser lol. so basically the whole scaling in ME is messed up as ships shrink and grow during combat :/

[Lotion Soronarr]

daqs wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Ratios my boy.
Spaceships will become bigger and more expnsive, but so will fighters.

Also, cost effectiveness. This is the prime rule of combat. If something isn't cost effective - NO ONE WOULD USE IT.  And if you can show why it isn't cost effective....

But, uh, you can't show why it isn't cost effective if you just persist in comparing dissimilar things. Which is all you've been doing.

12000 Fighters vs. stealth frigate.
The cost effectivness difference is obvious.

[Dewart]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

daqs wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Ratios my boy.
Spaceships will become bigger and more expnsive, but so will fighters.

Also, cost effectiveness. This is the prime rule of combat. If something isn't cost effective - NO ONE WOULD USE IT.  And if you can show why it isn't cost effective....

But, uh, you can't show why it isn't cost effective if you just persist in comparing dissimilar things. Which is all you've been doing.

12000 Fighters vs. stealth frigate.
The cost effectivness difference is obvious.

correction
12000 fighter drive cores vs 1 stealth frigate drive core. slight difference

[incinerator950]

Dewart wrote...

actually if you then watch the sovy get
taken out cutscene the cruisers are all of a sudden almost 1/4 of
sovereign and the normandy is less then 1/6 of a cruiser lol. so
basically the whole scaling in ME is messed up as ships shrink and grow
during combat :/

Of course.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

daqs wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Ratios my boy.
Spaceships will become bigger and more expnsive, but so will fighters.

Also, cost effectiveness. This is the prime rule of combat. If something isn't cost effective - NO ONE WOULD USE IT.  And if you can show why it isn't cost effective....

But, uh, you can't show why it isn't cost effective if you just persist in comparing dissimilar things. Which is all you've been doing.

12000 Fighters vs. stealth frigate.
The cost effectivness difference is obvious.

Edit:  I stand corrected, Tantalus Mk I Drive core, to twelve thousand Alliance Fighter Drive Cores.

Modifié par incinerator950, 26 janvier 2012 - 02:59 .

[GroverA 125]

Destroying it gives humanity a superior position, but then it makes everyone else hate you, while letting them live gives the alien and humans combined forces more oomph in the long run. I always save them because I don't like watching a friendly ship get torn in two.

[Dewart]

incinerator950 wrote...

Dewart wrote...

actually if you then watch the sovy get
taken out cutscene the cruisers are all of a sudden almost 1/4 of
sovereign and the normandy is less then 1/6 of a cruiser lol. so
basically the whole scaling in ME is messed up as ships shrink and grow
during combat :/

Of course.

since the cutscenes arn't exactly consistent we really can't scale the ships. tis unfortunate. it would be nice if Bioware could give us some scale representations in the lore (hint hint ME3)

[Stalker]

jaza wrote...

Mr Massakka wrote...

Save them!
You have to gather the galaxy together in ME3. Not just that the trust in humans courage is a lot higher, you sacrificed human lives to save them. They owe you their assistance for defending earth.

Because politicians ALWAYS pay up their debts and do the right thing. Which is why they gave us their unqestioned support in ME2!

Oh wait a minute...

<_<

First, the council hasn't helped you in ME2 because there was no threat in their systems. It was just human colonies being attacked, now there is a intergalactic danger (reapers) that also affects them. I expect them to act in ME3.

Second, it's not just the council. Humans as a race are now famous for their courage they proved on the Sovereign attack. Humans will likely be more supported by everyone in the galaxy.

Third, saying that the ships you would have lost with saving them, will be an important assist in ME3 is closeminded. What would 8 (i think it was 8) human cruisers make a difference? There are thousands of ships that you need to defend the galaxy with. 
You loose like 0.01% of the overall fleet that the Mass Effect galaxy has to offer. That's maybe 5% of the alliance fleet.

Modifié par Mr Massakka, 26 janvier 2012 - 03:07 .

[Dewart]

GroverA 125 wrote...

Destroying it gives humanity a superior position, but then it makes everyone else hate you, while letting them live gives the alien and humans combined forces more oomph in the long run. I always save them because I don't like watching a friendly ship get torn in two.

agreed . destroying it seems like the best idea for a lot of reasons but I can never do so for the exact same reason as yourself.

[Poison_Berrie]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Again, manouvering.
By the time tehy destroy the DA and change course, pick up enough speed to catch up - tehy are either destroyed by fire from otehr friendly ships or probably too late to have any significant impact.

The take out the DA, but waht about it's escort? What about other citadel ships?

If their escorts aren't overrun why does the DA need our help? It doesn't so we have to take into account that the escort is badly outnumbered as well.

As for being open to other citadel ships, if they are free to persue these ships, why aren't they helping the DA in the first place? 

And it's a qeustion whether they would be too late. Since there are no organics on board a Geth ships could push it's acceleration beyound that of the human ships.

But you do loose ships. 
The flank is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

Only if you are expecting to destroy Sovreign in little time.
 

nonono..the main drives are offline.

Adn it's not uncommon for ships to not have redudancy of everything. Take any WW2 warship. They don't have extra engines.
Also, DA was evacuating...fleeing. You think the Council will agree to attack Sovereign in a damaged ship?

Space lost can be a lot worse than sea lost and I don't think sea lost is any thing to write home about.
If your engine gives out in space and you can't repair it, you'll be happy you'll have an ion drive to limp you home. Not to mention that a drive for millitary maneuvering would require a lot a thrust and it's perhaps efficient to have a more economic engine when you're just doing regular accelerations and decelerations. 
And in vacuum your simple thruster can bring you pretty far (not fast, though).
As for the second point someone posted a link in which Hackett confirms that the DA was used in defeating Sovreign.