440 réponses à ce sujet

[Last Vizard]

incinerator950 wrote...

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.  

Doesn't the codex say Humans have tons of Carriers because theres no law limiting the number? Turians built some of these Human type ships and didn't like them because in a ship to ship battle a Dreadnaught will destroy a Carrier... silly Turians thinking its about guns and not fighter/bombers

[Last Vizard]

incinerator950 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....

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

Okay, changed my mind... I like how you think, Alderon here we come

[fatalfeline]

Oh come on, you HAVE to save it. Just for the satisfaction of rubbing the Reapers in the Council's faces.

[Last Vizard]

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 :/

that my boy, is the future of space shrinky growy combat

[ParagonForLife]

Last Vizard wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

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.  

Doesn't the codex say Humans have tons of Carriers because theres no law limiting the number? Turians built some of these Human type ships and didn't like them because in a ship to ship battle a Dreadnaught will destroy a Carrier... silly Turians thinking its about guns and not fighter/bombers

yea I was saying this in another thread theres a 5:3:1 ratio Turians have 5 Asari 3 and Humans 1 so humanity builds carriers like crazy as you said no limit on them

[Last Vizard]

Blacklash93 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
If 8 cruisers make no difference (and they would in the battle agaisnt Sovereign), then those 3 airheads make even less of a difference. The council would be replaced nad hte galaxy would move on.

And it precisely because everyone would be attacked by the reapers that the relations don't matter much - everyone will have to band together, wether they like it or not.

Shepard never really specifies whether the cruisers were lost against the Geth or Sovereign. Sovereign destroys 4 in a matter of seconds.

And the point in saving the council is so aliens will trust humanity when the Reapers come and offer help more readily in the battle to take back Earth. Everyone will be brought together before it's too late. You can't band together quickly and efficiently without trust.

Robot death machines flying around and the ONLY citadel species doing anything about them was Humans... yeah I think the people of each species will be behind Shep either way while out for blood against their own leadership

[Last Vizard]

ParagonForLife wrote...

Last Vizard wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

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.  

Doesn't the codex say Humans have tons of Carriers because theres no law limiting the number? Turians built some of these Human type ships and didn't like them because in a ship to ship battle a Dreadnaught will destroy a Carrier... silly Turians thinking its about guns and not fighter/bombers

yea I was saying this in another thread theres a 5:3:1 ratio Turians have 5 Asari 3 and Humans 1 so humanity builds carriers like crazy as you said no limit on them

yeah, wonder if Human Admirals are laughing their asses off while the Turians are telling us "bad humans, you can only have one Dreadnaught to every five Turian Dreadnaughts". 

Edit: sorry abou the spamming of replies however I'm reading the extra pages since I last posted and its all very interesting

Modifié par Last Vizard, 27 janvier 2012 - 06:59 .

[ParagonForLife]

Last Vizard wrote...

ParagonForLife wrote...

Last Vizard wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

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.  

Doesn't the codex say Humans have tons of Carriers because theres no law limiting the number? Turians built some of these Human type ships and didn't like them because in a ship to ship battle a Dreadnaught will destroy a Carrier... silly Turians thinking its about guns and not fighter/bombers

yea I was saying this in another thread theres a 5:3:1 ratio Turians have 5 Asari 3 and Humans 1 so humanity builds carriers like crazy as you said no limit on them

yeah, wonder if Human Admirals are laughing their asses off while the Turians are telling us "bad humans, you can only have one Dreadnaught to every five Turian Dreadnaughts". 

yea the other races dont see the need for carriers as they can build alot more dreadnoughts meanwhile a single carrier can own a dreadnought lol 

[Last Vizard]

@Paragonforlife

should click on my Renegade for life link in my sig, BW did say that ME was like WW2 in space if I remember correctly... I think the other advanced species never had something like WW1-WW2 right before they went into their space age.

[ParagonForLife]

Last Vizard wrote...

@Paragonforlife

should click on my Renegade for life link in my sig, BW did say that ME was like WW2 in space if I remember correctly... I think the other advanced species never had something like WW1-WW2 right before they went into their space age.

yea thats what ive thought they belive in the power of the battleship while the Alliance has Carriers supporting front line ships 

[Last Vizard]

ParagonForLife wrote...

Last Vizard wrote...

@Paragonforlife

should click on my Renegade for life link in my sig, BW did say that ME was like WW2 in space if I remember correctly... I think the other advanced species never had something like WW1-WW2 right before they went into their space age.

yea thats what ive thought they belive in the power of the battleship while the Alliance has Carriers supporting front line ships 

The Reapers have the galaxy outmatched when it comes to Dreadnaught class with big guns... maybe Carriers is just what we need. 

[ParagonForLife]

Last Vizard wrote...

ParagonForLife wrote...

Last Vizard wrote...

@Paragonforlife

should click on my Renegade for life link in my sig, BW did say that ME was like WW2 in space if I remember correctly... I think the other advanced species never had something like WW1-WW2 right before they went into their space age.

yea thats what ive thought they belive in the power of the battleship while the Alliance has Carriers supporting front line ships 

The Reapers have the galaxy outmatched when it comes to Dreadnaught class with big guns... maybe Carriers is just what we need. 

yea use waves of bombers to destroy them lets hope the alliance has a few of them left 

[Mr. Gogeta34]

smaller, agile fighters with big (thanix-level) firepower would be more ideal (as far as I'm concerned) than a dreadnaught (unless that dreadnaught manages to get a more powerful weapon than even that).

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 27 janvier 2012 - 07:32 .

[Last Vizard]

ParagonForLife wrote...

Last Vizard wrote...

ParagonForLife wrote...

Last Vizard wrote...

@Paragonforlife

should click on my Renegade for life link in my sig, BW did say that ME was like WW2 in space if I remember correctly... I think the other advanced species never had something like WW1-WW2 right before they went into their space age.

yea thats what ive thought they belive in the power of the battleship while the Alliance has Carriers supporting front line ships 

The Reapers have the galaxy outmatched when it comes to Dreadnaught class with big guns... maybe Carriers is just what we need. 

yea use waves of bombers to destroy them lets hope the alliance has a few of them left 

Damn pearl harbour... err sneak attack by Reapers, now the only thing that can beat the Reapers is deus ex machina

[ParagonForLife]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

smaller, agile fighters with big (thanix-level) firepower would be more ideal (as far as I'm concerned) than a dreadnaught (unless that dreadnaught manages to get a more powerful weapon than even that).

yea but a bomber has the ability to take down a capital ship with minimal loss you lose a dozen bombers/fighters thats only a dozen lifes while on the other hand if you lose a Dreadnought your talking about thousands of lifes lost

[Inquisitor Recon]

ParagonForLife wrote...
yea I was saying this in another thread theres a 5:3:1 ratio Turians have 5 Asari 3 and Humans 1 so humanity builds carriers like crazy as you said no limit on them

Shouldn't that provision have changed with humanity becoming a council race? Thus they can build three for every five the turians build.

[Last Vizard]

ReconTeam wrote...

ParagonForLife wrote...
yea I was saying this in another thread theres a 5:3:1 ratio Turians have 5 Asari 3 and Humans 1 so humanity builds carriers like crazy as you said no limit on them

Shouldn't that provision have changed with humanity becoming a council race? Thus they can build three for every five the turians build.

only in the last two years though

[angry_peon]

Ice Cold J wrote...

See, I figured the exact opposite. I thought that I'd lose too many ships if I didn't have them focus on Sovereign, so I let the Ascension go.
Funnything is, you figured they'd help you, I figured they'd take off (like they did).
In the end, however, you made the "right" choice.

Well I can definitely see the tactical validity of the instant strike at Sovi, I just thought that perhaps a little more firepower would be the safer bet. By the way, I was not talking  about the DA, but the rest of the Citadel Fleet helping me out. And tbh, the way the sequence plays out, I'm not even sure if they join the Alliance on Sovi or not (I like to think they do, even if not present in the first assault, that leads to immediate success, why wouldn't they?), because Joker just blows the damn thing with his beefed up frigate cannons. Anyway, after knowing that saving the DA works, I can't really convince myself that the other option is really the better one. 

[Sinnerj117]

The way I view it is this. If you save the council, the galactic community may understand that humanity is worth saving and may not be so hesitant to help humanity. Killing the council may reflect poorly on humanity and may jeopardize any and all chances at gaining a species favor in the war against the reapers.

[Poison_Berrie]

ParagonForLife wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

smaller, agile fighters with big (thanix-level) firepower would be more ideal (as far as I'm concerned) than a dreadnaught (unless that dreadnaught manages to get a more powerful weapon than even that).

yea but a bomber has the ability to take down a capital ship with minimal loss you lose a dozen bombers/fighters thats only a dozen lifes while on the other hand if you lose a Dreadnought your talking about thousands of lifes lost

I doubt a dozen bombers would ever get close enough to do some damage. Their tiny little things that can't afford to shrug of any hit. Their power plants can never be as large, their heat management would be low (perhaps one shot of that Thanix shot and you might kill the pilot with excess heat) and if your dumb enough to make them actual manned fighters you'll have to make sure there's enoug fuel to go to target and get back.

[NYG1991]

I first saved the council figuring the DA and rest of citadel fleet would help with sovereign. Alliance had the drop on the geth fleet so I figured surprise attack would kill them quickly then would have more help with the reaper

[Aimi]

ParagonForLife wrote...

yea I was saying this in another thread theres a 5:3:1 ratio Turians have 5 Asari 3 and Humans 1 so humanity builds carriers like crazy as you said no limit on them

Actually - like I said in that thread - the Alliance, as a Council member, can build three dreadnoughts to every turian five.

[jaza]

Mr Massakka wrote...

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.

So we are going to put our trust in allies who will not assist us in our hour of need and just say "Thats a human matter". One would think that when humanity gained a seat on TEH CAUNZIL and saved the original CAUNZIL, we would be entitled to some aid but NO.

And we are gonna rely on them for ME3?

I was not quesioning the cost/price of saving the DA vs saving the Alliance ships. There is no contest there. I AM however questioning the notion that just because you saved their lives the council will support you in ME3. And that even if they do, in what form and amount will it be?

I do not hate them because they're aliens or because I'm a human supremacist. I hate them for bein ineffective, status quo defending morons. Perhaps after the Reapers have been returned  to scrap heap they came from Renegades will have the option/ a hand in building a new, more equal rule.

Wishful thinking probably. Nice to dream though.

Modifié par jaza, 27 janvier 2012 - 09:52 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

ParagonForLife wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

You are beign redicolous.

Sovereign was stationary and docked. It couldn't dodge (a non-moving target it easy to hit) and it couldn't bring all of it's weapons to bear.

To say it is the "ideal location" is so stupid I cannot even beging to describe it. It's the total opposite.


And it was confirmed via Twitter that wihout shep brinign down the shields, the galaxy would have lost a LOT more ships.

it is in the ideal location....there was 0 chance of the alliance ships dodgeing the attack if your fighting an enemy that can kill you in one punch do you want to get close enough to be punched? no you want to use your speed to dodge his punches wait for an opening and strike if you remember the alliance ships didnt move either as there was just no room inside the citadel so yea sovereign had the advantage 

It can't dodge and it can't bring all of it's guns (especially the main one) to bear. How is that ideal???

Also, no - smaller, faster ships have the advantage in close range - it's in the codex.

Weapons travel so fast that unless you'r distance is measured in hunderds of kilometers you're not gonna dodge. Of course, the difference is that Sovereigs wepons are in it's "arms" so is more effective at clsoe rangethan any other DN..

Quit making a fool of yourself...

[Last Vizard]

Poison_Berrie wrote...

ParagonForLife wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

smaller, agile fighters with big (thanix-level) firepower would be more ideal (as far as I'm concerned) than a dreadnaught (unless that dreadnaught manages to get a more powerful weapon than even that).

yea but a bomber has the ability to take down a capital ship with minimal loss you lose a dozen bombers/fighters thats only a dozen lifes while on the other hand if you lose a Dreadnought your talking about thousands of lifes lost

I doubt a dozen bombers would ever get close enough to do some damage. Their tiny little things that can't afford to shrug of any hit. Their power plants can never be as large, their heat management would be low (perhaps one shot of that Thanix shot and you might kill the pilot with excess heat) and if your dumb enough to make them actual manned fighters you'll have to make sure there's enoug fuel to go to target and get back.

... we are talking about a profesional military making these things... not Russia the codex says fighters can be equiped with the thanix cannons and I'd hazard a statement that a swarm of fighters have a better chance at taking down Reapers than a few large and easy to hit Destroyers/Cruisers/Dreadnaughts...

PS. they don't have to be manned, don't know why any ships are controled by organics anyway... hey wait a sec, the enemy is super hacking ships.... might be a good thing they require pilots

Modifié par Last Vizard, 27 janvier 2012 - 10:21 .