440 réponses à ce sujet

[RedPhoenix 96]

i always save the council but thats just me

[AlexXIV]

Barquiel wrote...

If Admiral(!) Hackett would have thought it was a bad idea to save the Destiny Ascension, then he would not have given the order to save the asari dreadnought. That is good enough for me.

Hacket doesn't know about Reapers and the Citadel being a relay for Reapers to swoop in and wipe out the galaxy. For everyone aside from Shepard, Sovereign is a geth ship.

[AlexXIV]

xnoxiousx wrote...

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

Just that everyone in ME disagrees. Almost everyone appreciates that you saved the DA.

[TGraptor]

This thread is full of "because either way" and "because in ME2" when really, i think Bioware screwed up a bit in making one choice para and the other rene. Both choices have tactical thoughts and reasons behind them. Make the choice your own, and just play. I felt there was no right or wrong in either choice based on how you role played. It's what bioware wanted, and they did it well with this series.

Make your own choice, not based off what you know will happen, but what you feel YOU would do. That's what role playing is about.

[hawat333]

Haasth wrote...

I really play Paragon/Neutral almost all the time, but even if I wouldn't I would still save it. From a tactical perspective I don't see a reason to let it be blown up and then it really just comes down to "Well, the council were ****s to me." which I don't really value as all that valid.

Tactically, I think, it makes more sense to concentrate all firepower on Sovereign (at that pont Shepard doesn't know if they can defeat it at all, they have to throw everything in). It's also hinted that it's more risky to launch the attack before the Citadel's arms are fully opened.
On the other hand, if Shepard is confident enough in defeating Sovereign, you are right, the Destiny Ascension is worth saving.

[nelly21]

Izhalezan wrote...

I usually save them because I can't help but think that once the geth finish them off they're gonna just turn around and shoot the 5th fleet in the back

 They can, but only after defeating the Council fleet which is still giving them a fight. And unless you metagame, you don't know that Sovereign can take the punishment it does and deliver the damage it does. You would be thinking that 200 ships all firing at the same target would obliterate that target in a few minutes.

[Zkyire]

I save the Council every time because simply, I play Paragon Shep. And it was the Paragon choice.

But were I actually in Shepard's shoes? I would not have saved the Council.

Wasting ships fighting the Geth when Sovereign is seconds away from bringing the entire Reaper Fleet in to annihilate the galaxy? No, screw 'em. Galactic survival is more important than galactic stability.

But we know that Sovvie is stopped either way so I go the 'paragon' route.

[Haasth]

Do you actually gain anything at all if you let the DA get destroyed? I can't remember honestly, but is there an actual real positive consequence to letting it get destroyed? (Other than maybe in your mind thinking "Oh, well I didn't risk it!") A conversation? People appreciating not taking the risk? etc?

[nelly21]

TGraptor wrote...

This thread is full of "because either way" and "because in ME2" when really, i think Bioware screwed up a bit in making one choice para and the other rene. Both choices have tactical thoughts and reasons behind them. Make the choice your own, and just play. I felt there was no right or wrong in either choice based on how you role played. It's what bioware wanted, and they did it well with this series.

Make your own choice, not based off what you know will happen, but what you feel YOU would do. That's what role playing is about.

THIS!!!!!

[atheelogos]

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

Just replayed through ME1... and I don't get that choice at all, it just seems completely ****ing dumb for the alliance fleet, with nothing bigger than frigates, to let that massive space station which probably made up the other half of Citadel defense is on to be blown up. I know that having the council go down with it is a very renegade thing to do, but Bioware tried to convince me, against all of my senses and the intuition I've picked up from my time paying Real Time Strategy games, that helping the citadel fleet would actually make it harder to take down sovereign. I shouldn't have to explain the advantages of surprise reinforcements and the numbers advantage, and the fact that the alliance hadn't brought anything bigger than a frigate while the citadel had capital ships and the ascension.

In summary, I sincerely doubt that the alliance holding back could have had any advantages, and I'm sure if it weren't for video game logic that shepard would have been rightfully court martialed and executed if he hadn't let the alliance help.

I couldn't disagree more. I let them die. Not because I wanted to, but because I thought it was the logical thing to do.

First let me start off by saying that I gave bioware too much credit. I thought u could fail that last mission if you made the wrong decision.

So why did they have to die? Because I couldn't have known how many ships I would have lost trying to save them. I saw what the Geth and Sov did in the first wave of attack and I knew that if I was to have any hope of winning I would have concencrate everything I had on Sovereign.


"explain the advantages of surprise reinforcements and the numbers advantage " They were already beaten and they knew it. That's why the surviving ships didn't help after they we're saved.

Modifié par atheelogos, 25 janvier 2012 - 10:19 .

[WizenSlinky0]

I never really considered it a paragon/renegade decision personally. The paragon choice was very much a high risk-high reward situation (as it was presented to you), a risk my characters chose to take.

Although Shepard had more knowledge of the reapers than anyone, within the framework you're given (without taking into account sequels which would break character) there's no real way of knowing that the back-up plans for the reapers would take so ungodly long to be put into effect (in human years. anyway).

So it's basically a decision between long-term gain/short-term risk vs short-term gain/long-term risk. By concentrating on Sovereign, you preserve your fighting strength, and come out of any battle stronger (assuming victory). But this is at the cost of broken racial unity and tensions that can effect how the galaxy responds to a counter attack. The council is a symbolic asset that carries great weight. Sure, warships and personnel are the first things we think about when facing an enemy but the "symbol" they rally behind can at times make great things of meager forces.

But, you're betting on this being a "war" whether with the geth or the reapers, that will last long enough for symbolic assets to come into play. It's risky. But what's a protagonist without a little risk, eh?

[Barquiel]

AlexXIV wrote...

Barquiel wrote...

If Admiral(!) Hackett would have thought it was a bad idea to save the Destiny Ascension, then he would not have given the order to save the asari dreadnought. That is good enough for me.

Hacket doesn't know about Reapers and the Citadel being a relay for Reapers to swoop in and wipe out the galaxy. For everyone aside from Shepard, Sovereign is a geth ship.

It doesn't matter if Hackett thinks Sovereign is a geth ship or a reaper. Sovereign can't control the Citadel from the outside (that's why it resurrected Saren...Sovereign needs an inside man to open the portal).

[Lotion Soronarr]

Poison_Berrie wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

The DA wont' help wiht anything. It was retreating. It is damaged. It's drives are off-line.
and geth aren't a rpoblem as they are busy with the Citadel fleet.

Meanwhile you lost several fresh and undamaged ship, and only got a dead weight..

This makes the assumptions that
1) All Geth ships had the Citadel fleet to content with and non to spare on the human fleet. 
2) That taking quite a few Geth ships doesn't make things easier on the Citadel fleet.
3) Crippled engine and failing barriers mean the DA can no longer deploy it's weaponry.

- if they weren't fighting the Citadel fleet, what were those ships doing? No one expected the 5th fleet. The geth and Soy weren't prepared for that. Even if a few geth try to take on the alliance fleet, it still doesn't matter. They'd be cought between two fleets.

- Which is irrelvent. No matter what happens to the Citadel fleet, it's stoping Sovereign that's important. And the Citadel fleet is busy.

- that makes it a sitting duck that can't manouver properly to make use of it's main gun OR evade/escape enemy reurn fire. And a vessel with compromised defenses. You think it would have survived a hit from sovereign in that state?

[Lotion Soronarr]

nelly21 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

nelly21 wrote...

Bioware made it so both decisions made sense. Saving the Council is the better strategic choice. It means that you will be able to form a more organized and cohesive defensive force to fight the reapers even if you fail to stop Sovereign.

If you fail to stop sovereign, your "more organized and cohesive defensive force" is worth nothing.

I agree with you, but remember we had no idea how many reapers were coming through in ME 1. Sovereign said legions but it may have been a bluff. A living Council would be able to quickly organize the fleets to meet the reaper invasion. A dead council means there is a leadership vacuum and the galaxy falls into panic and is unable to meet the reapers head on. Both of theses scenarios are based on failing to beat Sovereign and the reapers coming through the Citadel relay.

Given that even a single reaper can take on a fleet, even a few would be able to mop the floor with whatever you can organize in the quicky. It's obvious Sovereign is far more pwoerfull than any other ship in the galaxy long before the Battle of the Citadel.

and gambling that your enemy is weaker than you think is never a good idea.
Prevention is always better.

[Lotion Soronarr]

AlexXIV wrote...

xnoxiousx wrote...

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

Just that everyone in ME disagrees. Almost everyone appreciates that you saved the DA.

But they don't know what Sovereign was...Hence, whey they can't judge accurately.

[Habs25]

I think in the end the decision was either: sacrifice human lives to save the council, or use all the human force to take down Sovereign.
I don't think either decision really affected your shot at victory, but it just reflects humanity's stance - cooperation, or humans first. In the end, humans first is not a viable long term outlook and only hurts humanity in the long run.

[Icemix]

Barquiel wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Barquiel wrote...

If Admiral(!) Hackett would have thought it was a bad idea to save the Destiny Ascension, then he would not have given the order to save the asari dreadnought. That is good enough for me.

Hacket doesn't know about Reapers and the Citadel being a relay for Reapers to swoop in and wipe out the galaxy. For everyone aside from Shepard, Sovereign is a geth ship.

It doesn't matter if Hackett thinks Sovereign is a geth ship or a reaper. Sovereign can't control the Citadel from the outside (that's why it resurrected Saren...Sovereign needs an inside man to open the portal).

This. At the point when you have to make the choice, Saren is presumed dead, Shepard has full control of the CItadel and it comes down to keeping the fleet back so you don't waste any ships fighting the Geth and thus increasing the chance of killing Sovereign, or saving the DA, the most powerful ship among the Citadel races ( almost as much fire power as the entire Asari fleet combined ), with a crew of 10000 and the Council onboard, but losing some ships in the process.
So don't come up with the argument that if you waste time saving the DA, all the Reapers are going to come in from the relay, since obviously  Sovereign has no control over the Citadel w/o a puppet to do it for him. 

[andy6915]

Save it. I just finished my latest playthrough just today (over a dozen playthroughs, I've lost count), and saved it with this reasoning, with no meta gaming and just pure roleplay-

1.The heads of government are on that ship, and losing them could cause bad destabalization throughout Citidel space. That, and saving them makes humanity look good, and good PR is always something you want.

2.The DA is the absolute best ship we have in sheer firepower. Period. That thing might be useful later.

3.Once the Geth are done with the DA, they will be behind the Aliance fleet. That would cause our fleet to get squeezed between a geth fleet and a capital class Reaper, leaving them to get hammered on both sides. That... Is an extraordinarily bad situation to be in. Losing the entire Aliance fleet would be quite possible in that scenario.

[Lotion Soronarr]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

I never really considered it a paragon/renegade decision personally. The paragon choice was very much a high risk-high reward situation (as it was presented to you), a risk my characters chose to take.

More like extreeme-risk, negligible reward.

So it's basically a decision between long-term gain/short-term risk vs short-term gain/long-term risk. By concentrating on Sovereign, you preserve your fighting strength, and come out of any battle stronger (assuming victory). But this is at the cost of broken racial unity and tensions that can effect how the galaxy responds to a counter attack. The council is a symbolic asset that carries great weight. Sure, warships and personnel are the first things we think about when facing an enemy but the "symbol" they rally behind can at times make great things of meager forces.

Pft...racial tension = militarization = better army to fight Repers with.

Symbolism is useless agaisnt hte reapers. And heads of state can be easily replaced.

[Sasie]

I don't think saving the council is even a good long term investment as long as the humans go for Sovereign and let the other aliens choose a new council instead of trying to dominate the galaxy. Why? Well the old Council was flawed and cared more about political backlash instead of focusing on real stability and security.

Now a new Council would most likely lead to a few months of instability but we already have that no matter what, Now the Reapers want to take out the galactic goverment but killing the leaders alone will hardly destroy everything when the entire system around them is saved.

I imagine it would be a simple process for the Asari/Turians and Salarians to pick a new representative and if the humans don't try to take over I believe they could all be willing to accept that the loss of a ship and three people was a small price to pay all things considered.

There is also a possibility that the new Councilors would learn from their predecessors failure and do more to prevent this from happening again.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Barquiel wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Barquiel wrote...

If Admiral(!) Hackett would have thought it was a bad idea to save the Destiny Ascension, then he would not have given the order to save the asari dreadnought. That is good enough for me.

Hacket doesn't know about Reapers and the Citadel being a relay for Reapers to swoop in and wipe out the galaxy. For everyone aside from Shepard, Sovereign is a geth ship.

It doesn't matter if Hackett thinks Sovereign is a geth ship or a reaper. Sovereign can't control the Citadel from the outside (that's why it resurrected Saren...Sovereign needs an inside man to open the portal).

Sovereign alread WAS in and attached to the citadel, assuming control, when you get to the choice.

Vigils fall STALLED sovereign. It didn't stop it. It was nothing more than a buffer - Vigil explicitly warns you about that. Sarens work was done.

[ReallyRue]

I usually saved the Council/Ascension. With both renegons and paragades. It just made sense. If nothing else, I remembered Vigil's "the Reapers wiped out our government first, and without leadership we all went nuts" line. Or something to that effect. I wasn't sure how long stopping Sovereign would delay the Reapers for, so I thought having a government (not to mention all those ships and the Ascension) about would be helpful. I killed them once on my pure renegade playthrough, and oh my does ME2 hammer home in a slightly anvilicious way what a bad decision that was.

[CannonO]

This sums up the decisions:

www.youtube.com/watch

I think it is supposed to feel like both choices have a tragic consequence.


And god I miss when ME trailers had that kind of sleek futuristic mood.

Modifié par CannonLars, 25 janvier 2012 - 10:39 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Icemix wrote...
This. At the point when you have to make the choice, Saren is presumed dead, Shepard has full control of the CItadel and it comes down to keeping the fleet back so you don't waste any ships fighting the Geth and thus increasing the chance of killing Sovereign, or saving the DA, the most powerful ship among the Citadel races ( almost as much fire power as the entire Asari fleet combined ), with a crew of 10000 and the Council onboard, but losing some ships in the process.

No. The underlined is false.
Shep has only temporary control. Sovereign in the process of taking it back.


Gezze, dont' any of you people read the dialogue?????