338 réponses à ce sujet

[Sc2mashimaro]

Keldaurz wrote...

I don't know what game you were playing pal, but it's already said plenty times on ME3. Hell aside from "Hackett out" the other thing Hacket says more time than anything is "we can't win this war conventionally". 

In Literature, if you have a character repeat it as often as they have Hackett says it, then it is often false. Not always, but certainly often.

[SiberETP]

IntoTheDarkness wrote...

No.

We are on different sides of argument but you presented your point with clarity and supporting reasons.

It was a compliment because I spent 2 hours on this thread arguing with someone who kept throwing mockeries and counterarguments made of 1 line. I just felt it's good to have someone who present their case with logical supportings, that's all.

I'm glad! The sentiment is returned. A lot of people on both sides of these issues do their positions a great disservice. I'm glad to not be one of them.

[Keldaurz]

Sc2mashimaro wrote...

Keldaurz wrote...

I don't know what game you were playing pal, but it's already said plenty times on ME3. Hell aside from "Hackett out" the other thing Hacket says more time than anything is "we can't win this war conventionally". 

In Literature, if you have a character repeat it as often as they have Hackett says it, then it is often false. Not always, but certainly often.

And often, it's true aswell. And how is presented on the ending and how every conflict is turning (palaven, thessia, etc,etc), it's true.

[IntoTheDarkness]

And I want to rebut a statement, "This cycle is special. The catalyst said that Shepard is the first organic to make it this far."

No, it's the catalyst that allowed this to happen.

Only if the catalyst activated the citadel relay when Soveregin sent a signal...

Only if the catalyst left Shepard to rot on the platform...

Only if the catalyst, or the reapers, shut down the relays when they took the control of the citadel...

Only if the reapers brought the citadel to someplace else other than earth where the whole allied fleets were preparing to attack...

I think Shepard made it that far because for some stupid reasons the catalyst was siding with the organic and the reapers were gladly aiding their own destruction.

Modifié par IntoTheDarkness, 02 avril 2012 - 11:43 .

[xJohnsen]

If the fleet had even tried to aim and use tatics during the final battle over earth we could have easily won.

[SiberETP]

I'd like to address the idea of the reapers advancing too. It seems possible, but problematic. If they have been advancing technologically at a steady rate for even 200 cycles, and the mass relays were around for the first cycle for people to base their technology on, and the reapers were able to defeat the first galactic civilization after they arose without great difficulty, then I would expect the reapers to be of such great advancement now that one single Sovereign sized reaper would be able to engage effectively unlimited numbers of modern warships.

The comparison I would make would be a modern day premier naval warship, be it battleship, aircraft carrier, or submarine, against triremes. No number of triremes is going to win that fight, and the only threat to the modern ship is exhausting its supplies. And that's likely only a fraction of the difference we'd be dealing with.

Reapers are destroyable by massed council warship fire, even when not caught unawares, disabled, or landed. Reapers have occasionally been taken out by past cycles too. Explaining this requires that either the remains of each civilization has left enough to build on for galactic technology to keep up with the reapers, which I find pretty unlikely seeing as this cycle has not significantly surpassed the Protheans, though they've arguably caught up or gotten close in places, in 50k years since the protheans have been defeated. The other two options that present themselves are that the Reapers are stagnant in thought, which is plausible to me if the goal of the Reapers is to elevate and preserve organic life at its peak. If it is still evolving, it is not preserved. The second option is that there is a technological plateau, where there either is no more advancement to be made or advancement becomes exponentially harder and slower.

Whatever the reason why, the evidence suggests to me that the Reapers are what they claim to be, unchanging and eternal. Which is to say, not a moving target.

[Athro]

xJohnsen wrote...

If the fleet had even tried to aim and use tatics during the final battle over earth we could have easily won.

This is the thing. We even see that a single ship is capable of doing serious damage to a Reaper, but the fleet shows no tactical planning beyond "fire at everything!"

We've seen time and time again that the Reapers are formidable opponents, but not unstoppable. Their tactics rely on division and fear. They have never fought a straight out face-to-face war with a unified galaxy before. We know this from the Prothean VIs and Javik who all point out that the Reapers isolated systems and picked off races - and it still took around 100 years for the Reapers to succeed.

The fleet massively outnumbered the Reapers, which is the big advantage they had. Ultimately, the only real immunit that the Reapers had was plot immunity. Which was inconsistent with the codex and scenes we've seen before in the series.

It doesn't mean that the cost wouldn't have been massive - the Reapers are technologically superior. But they aren't impossible to defeat. A conventional war ending would have been completely plausible based on the given facts regarding the Reapers.

[MaximusRex]

In this cycle a more conventional war is possible, as is beating the Reapers, but at the loss of Earth. Had they decided to destroy the Charon Mass Relay, the majority of the Reaper Fleet would have been destroyed, possibly allowing the combined allied fleets to do a system by system conventional purge of remaining forces, or at least very strong hit and run attacks, putting the remaining Reapers in the dilemma of staying split up and getting picked off over time, or regrouping and getting mass annihilated via destruction of the local mass relay.

[Keldaurz]

Why the "they didn't face a unified galaxy before". The protheans unified (their way) the galaxy before against the machines. This cycle isn't special on that way.This cycle is special (withouth any speculation) because we finished the crucible.

And even that ship that put a dent on one reaper, wasn't really one ship, and the reaper destroyed it anyways.

[IntoTheDarkness]

SiberETP wrote...

I'd like to address the idea of the reapers advancing too. It seems possible, but problematic. If they have been advancing technologically at a steady rate for even 200 cycles, and the mass relays were around for the first cycle for people to base their technology on, and the reapers were able to defeat the first galactic civilization after they arose without great difficulty, then I would expect the reapers to be of such great advancement now that one single Sovereign sized reaper would be able to engage effectively unlimited numbers of modern warships.

The comparison I would make would be a modern day premier naval warship, be it battleship, aircraft carrier, or submarine, against triremes. No number of triremes is going to win that fight, and the only threat to the modern ship is exhausting its supplies. And that's likely only a fraction of the difference we'd be dealing with.

Reapers are destroyable by massed council warship fire, even when not caught unawares, disabled, or landed. Reapers have occasionally been taken out by past cycles too. Explaining this requires that either the remains of each civilization has left enough to build on for galactic technology to keep up with the reapers, which I find pretty unlikely seeing as this cycle has not significantly surpassed the Protheans, though they've arguably caught up or gotten close in places, in 50k years since the protheans have been defeated. The other two options that present themselves are that the Reapers are stagnant in thought, which is plausible to me if the goal of the Reapers is to elevate and preserve organic life at its peak. If it is still evolving, it is not preserved. The second option is that there is a technological plateau, where there either is no more advancement to be made or advancement becomes exponentially harder and slower.

Whatever the reason why, the evidence suggests to me that the Reapers are what they claim to be, unchanging and eternal. Which is to say, not a moving target.

This is what I thought, or at least like to believe. It's not too odd since Bioware used this analysis to explain why SWTOR has the simular level of technology as in the movie which is set 4000 years later. For example, it might take hundreds, if not thousands, years to develop a defense technology that can endure a nuclear bomb's impact. I like to see it in a way that the reapers are much more advanced than we are, but they still can be taken down because the technology gap, despite the reapers being many years ahead, don't make them invincible.

Geth evolved on their own even when they were originally designed to be a slave race. I find it difficult to believe that the reapers, who exist like the organics since one reaper is a nation independent of each other, can't evolve on their own.

The cycle occurs when organics are advanced enough to space travel, and mass relay/citadel are their to make harvest easier, right? This means the reapers harvest organics that is fully evolved in terms of brain capability. Because the organics would develop further technology if reapers leave them, rendering their quote, "harvest at the apex their glory" meaningless.

If the reapers wipe out organics out of fear that they might surpass them in the future because reapers are stupid old machines that can't evolve on their own, let's just say I will start feeling a sympathy for the poor reapers. (in fact I already do after a superweapon to wipe them out was introduced in ME3.)

but the analogy you brought up is convincing, too. let' just say the evolution of reapers is what I like to believe for the reapers to remain as ultimate, cool villains.

Modifié par IntoTheDarkness, 03 avril 2012 - 12:06 .

[SiberETP]

Keldaurz wrote...

Why the "they didn't face a unified galaxy before". The protheans unified (their way) the galaxy before against the machines. This cycle isn't special on that way.This cycle is special (withouth any speculation) because we finished the crucible.

Wrong. The protheans had a unified galaxy, but the reapers attacked them by suprise when they came through the citadel relay. They shut down the relay network, destroyed the prothean citadel fleet, killed the prothean leadership, and were then able to destroy the prothean empire world by isolated world. The protheans had no oppertunity to gather their forces for a true fight.

[TheRealMithril]

Athro wrote...

xJohnsen wrote...

If the fleet had even tried to aim and use tatics during the final battle over earth we could have easily won.

This is the thing. We even see that a single ship is capable of doing serious damage to a Reaper, but the fleet shows no tactical planning beyond "fire at everything!"

We've seen time and time again that the Reapers are formidable opponents, but not unstoppable. Their tactics rely on division and fear. They have never fought a straight out face-to-face war with a unified galaxy before. We know this from the Prothean VIs and Javik who all point out that the Reapers isolated systems and picked off races - and it still took around 100 years for the Reapers to succeed.

The fleet massively outnumbered the Reapers, which is the big advantage they had. Ultimately, the only real immunit that the Reapers had was plot immunity. Which was inconsistent with the codex and scenes we've seen before in the series.

It doesn't mean that the cost wouldn't have been massive - the Reapers are technologically superior. But they aren't impossible to defeat. A conventional war ending would have been completely plausible based on the given facts regarding the Reapers.

^^^^ Finally, someone who gets it. 

[Emerald69]

Couldn't they send small strike teams to land on the reapers surface, plant nukes and take off, while the dreadnoughts keep the reapers attention.

[IntoTheDarkness]

TheRealMithril wrote...

Athro wrote...

xJohnsen wrote...

If the fleet had even tried to aim and use tatics during the final battle over earth we could have easily won.

This
is the thing. We even see that a single ship is capable of doing
serious damage to a Reaper, but the fleet shows no tactical planning
beyond "fire at everything!"

We've seen time and time again that
the Reapers are formidable opponents, but not unstoppable. Their tactics
rely on division and fear. They have never fought a straight out
face-to-face war with a unified galaxy before. We know this from the
Prothean VIs and Javik who all point out that the Reapers isolated
systems and picked off races - and it still took around 100 years for
the Reapers to succeed.

The fleet massively outnumbered the
Reapers, which is the big advantage they had. Ultimately, the only real
immunit that the Reapers had was plot immunity. Which was inconsistent
with the codex and scenes we've seen before in the series.

It
doesn't mean that the cost wouldn't have been massive - the Reapers are
technologically superior. But they aren't impossible to defeat. A
conventional war ending would have been completely plausible based on
the given facts regarding the Reapers.

^^^^ Finally, someone who gets it. 

Allow to be sarcastic.

They should have muted Sovereign and Harbinger so they didn't sound like unbeatable gods in ME1 and ME2....

Modifié par IntoTheDarkness, 03 avril 2012 - 12:10 .

[Sc2mashimaro]

Keldaurz wrote...

Sc2mashimaro wrote...

Keldaurz wrote...

I don't know what game you were playing pal, but it's already said plenty times on ME3. Hell aside from "Hackett out" the other thing Hacket says more time than anything is "we can't win this war conventionally". 

In Literature, if you have a character repeat it as often as they have Hackett says it, then it is often false. Not always, but certainly often.

And often, it's true aswell. And how is presented on the ending and how every conflict is turning (palaven, thessia, etc,etc), it's true.

My point is not they "can" or "cannot", only that either can be true according to the writing at the ending. The lead up (Palaven, Thessia, etc.) does not indicate invincibility, only which side is winning, giving a sense of hopelessness, and raising the stakes. The ending alone has the final word and, as it stands, the Reapers cannot be beaten conventionally, but there is also no reason that this should be sacrosanct if the endings are revised.

[TheRealMithril]

IntoTheDarkness wrote...

TheRealMithril wrote...

Athro wrote...

xJohnsen wrote...

If the fleet had even tried to aim and use tatics during the final battle over earth we could have easily won.

This
is the thing. We even see that a single ship is capable of doing
serious damage to a Reaper, but the fleet shows no tactical planning
beyond "fire at everything!"

We've seen time and time again that
the Reapers are formidable opponents, but not unstoppable. Their tactics
rely on division and fear. They have never fought a straight out
face-to-face war with a unified galaxy before. We know this from the
Prothean VIs and Javik who all point out that the Reapers isolated
systems and picked off races - and it still took around 100 years for
the Reapers to succeed.

The fleet massively outnumbered the
Reapers, which is the big advantage they had. Ultimately, the only real
immunit that the Reapers had was plot immunity. Which was inconsistent
with the codex and scenes we've seen before in the series.

It
doesn't mean that the cost wouldn't have been massive - the Reapers are
technologically superior. But they aren't impossible to defeat. A
conventional war ending would have been completely plausible based on
the given facts regarding the Reapers.

^^^^ Finally, someone who gets it. 

Allow to be sarcastic.

They should have muted Sovereign and Harbinger so they didn't sound like unbeatable gods in ME1 and ME2....

I'll note that as the reapers being arrogant, because they are convinced they will win. That is usually the time when fate slams the door shut in your face. 

[Sc2mashimaro]

IntoTheDarkness wrote...

SiberETP wrote...

IntoTheDarkness wrote...

SiberETP wrote...

Great counterargument.

This is the internet, so I have to check. Sarcasm Y/N?

No.

We are on different sides of argument but you presented your point with clarity and supporting reasons.

It was a compliment because I spent 2 hours on this thread arguing with someone who kept throwing mockeries and counterarguments made of 1 line. I just felt it's good to have someone who present their case with logical supportings, that's all.

Yeah, there are a lot of those hanging around here. That guy was getting personal with you too. Not cool.

[Keldaurz]

SiberETP wrote...

Keldaurz wrote...

Why the "they didn't face a unified galaxy before". The protheans unified (their way) the galaxy before against the machines. This cycle isn't special on that way.This cycle is special (withouth any speculation) because we finished the crucible.

Wrong. The protheans had a unified galaxy, but the reapers attacked them by suprise when they came through the citadel relay. They shut down the relay network, destroyed the prothean citadel fleet, killed the prothean leadership, and were then able to destroy the prothean empire world by isolated world. The protheans had no oppertunity to gather their forces for a true fight.

They were taking by surprise exactly the same we did, we were lucky they didn't get the citadel, but they still controlled it and moved it wherever they wanted to, so where is really the difference ? when both cycles were :

A - Attacked by surprise.
B - Citadel captured by the reapers.
C - Relay network was heavily under control.

Delaying the reapers didn't mean anything because noone did anything to prepare against the reapers.

I know you want to prove me wrong, but just chill out a bit and let's have a discussion

[TheDarkDefender]

Well I think you have to take into consideration that it is hinted at that Sovereign started The Rachni Wars, he probably did this because he discovered the Keepers would not respond to his signal. So lets assume that the Reapers were actually supposed to attack 2250 years ago or round about. At this point the only species that were a threat to the Reapers were the Asari and Salarians - the Volus, Elcor, Batarians and Quarians had only just discovered the relays, the Krogan were yet to be up-liffted and the Turians and Humans haven't discovered the relays yet. The extra 2000-and-something years obviously allowed them to develop more advanced technology and maybe the Protheans were the most advanced civilization the Reapers had ever fought (current technology in Mass Effect being about 200 years behind them I'd say) and maybe the Reapers only won because they took them by suprise, destroyed their government, got details on all their colonies and shut down the relays. If this is all true, then I'd say it was entirely possible that they could beat them conventionally. Anyway, The Crucible has to be a Reaper trap, it makes no sense that the one piece of infomation that always gets past down every cycle is a weapon that just so happens to be the only way of destroying the Reapers. Surely if it was genuine the Reapers would have hunted down all infomation regarding it and destroyed it, never mind the fact that which ever civilization first invented the Crucible would have had to have known about god-boy and it says Shepard is the first to discover it. Sorry if this got a bit long lol

[Keldaurz]

Sc2mashimaro wrote...

Keldaurz wrote...

Sc2mashimaro wrote...

Keldaurz wrote...

I don't know what game you were playing pal, but it's already said plenty times on ME3. Hell aside from "Hackett out" the other thing Hacket says more time than anything is "we can't win this war conventionally". 

In Literature, if you have a character repeat it as often as they have Hackett says it, then it is often false. Not always, but certainly often.

And often, it's true aswell. And how is presented on the ending and how every conflict is turning (palaven, thessia, etc,etc), it's true.

My point is not they "can" or "cannot", only that either can be true according to the writing at the ending. The lead up (Palaven, Thessia, etc.) does not indicate invincibility, only which side is winning, giving a sense of hopelessness, and raising the stakes. The ending alone has the final word and, as it stands, the Reapers cannot be beaten conventionally, but there is also no reason that this should be sacrosanct if the endings are revised.

It's actually a way to back up Hacket (and many others) saying you can't win this conventionally, not giving a sense, but just making clear how things stands. What i want to mean is, you can take the grain of salt whatever way you want, but just don't be surprised if at the end it isn't what you actually thought.

I have no problem with anyone who thought they could defeat the reapers on a conventional way before certain events, but at the end you can see clearly how it dismisses any hope you had for a conventional win. So you actually see it, ok. You may wanted another ending with a more conventional win/ending. Ok. But don't tell me as it stands it's possible, you may need to rewrite many things for that (not only the ending, but reapers forces at the whole galaxy, etc).

[SiberETP]

Keldaurz wrote...

C - Relay network was heavily under control.

Delaying the reapers didn't mean anything because noone did anything to prepare against the reapers.

I know you want to prove me wrong, but just chill out a bit and let's have a discussion

I'm sorry if I came off as angry, my intent was simply to be definitive. The protheans couldn't use the relay network, at all. That seems to be the key point. Even after the reapers took the citadel in this cycle, we were able to manuver with the relay network. The protheans were entirely unable to use the network, much like the reinforcement fleets were unable to in Mass Effect 1 when Sovreign temporairly controlled the citadel. If Shepard hadn't undone what Saren had been doing, nobody would have been able to get in and save the Destiny Ascenion. If the Reapers had been able to do that in ME3, the massed fleets that participated in the final attack would have been trapped far from any of the homeworlds. The Crucible, even if it had been compelted, would be far from the citadel, and if the fleet had managed to slowboat it across the distance the Reapers could just have used the relays to leave and the fleet couldn't follow. That's what losing control of the relay network meant for the Protheans, isoaltion of every star system and every fleet from all others, so the full might of the Reapers could fall upon each in turn with impunity. Even without the decapitating strike, this is a massive advantage that they lack in this cycle.

[Keldaurz]

TheDarkDefender wrote...

Well I think you have to take into consideration that it is hinted at that Sovereign started The Rachni Wars, he probably did this because he discovered the Keepers would not respond to his signal. So lets assume that the Reapers were actually supposed to attack 2250 years ago or round about. At this point the only species that were a threat to the Reapers were the Asari and Salarians - the Volus, Elcor, Batarians and Quarians had only just discovered the relays, the Krogan were yet to be up-liffted and the Turians and Humans haven't discovered the relays yet. The extra 2000-and-something years obviously allowed them to develop more advanced technology and maybe the Protheans were the most advanced civilization the Reapers had ever fought (current technology in Mass Effect being about 200 years behind them I'd say) and maybe the Reapers only won because they took them by suprise, destroyed their government, got details on all their colonies and shut down the relays. If this is all true, then I'd say it was entirely possible that they could beat them conventionally. Anyway, The Crucible has to be a Reaper trap, it makes no sense that the one piece of infomation that always gets past down every cycle is a weapon that just so happens to be the only way of destroying the Reapers. Surely if it was genuine the Reapers would have hunted down all infomation regarding it and destroyed it, never mind the fact that which ever civilization first invented the Crucible would have had to have known about god-boy and it says Shepard is the first to discover it. Sorry if this got a bit long lol

I think the same about the crucible. Gotta wait till pax to see if they solve anything ;p

[Keldaurz]

I'm sorry if I came off as angry, my intent was simply to be definitive. The protheans couldn't use the relay network, at all. That seems to be the key point. Even after the reapers took the citadel in this cycle, we were able to manuver with the relay network. The protheans were entirely unable to use the network, much like the reinforcement fleets were unable to in Mass Effect 1 when Sovreign temporairly controlled the citadel. If Shepard hadn't undone what Saren had been doing, nobody would have been able to get in and save the Destiny Ascenion. If the Reapers had been able to do that in ME3, the massed fleets that participated in the final attack would have been trapped far from any of the homeworlds. The Crucible, even if it had been compelted, would be far from the citadel, and if the fleet had managed to slowboat it across the distance the Reapers could just have used the relays to leave and the fleet couldn't follow. That's what losing control of the relay network meant for the Protheans, isoaltion of every star system and every fleet from all others, so the full might of the Reapers could fall upon each in turn with impunity. Even without the decapitating strike, this is a massive advantage that they lack in this cycle.

Don't worry my bad english use to get that from people lol. 

Yes, i know that, what i want to explain is they were preparing for fighting machines, unifying the galaxy before. They got disrupted due to the citadel, but that's probably what made them able to still wage war centuries against the reapers while we would (through liara's estimation) be able to fight back for one century even with our "better" circustamces. 

But yes, i have to agree stopping Sovereign wasn't little, because even if the galaxy didn't prepare for the reapers at that moment, on the long run it gave us time to build the crucible.

But i still don't see how we could defeat them conventionally when there's no evidence supporting it. I understand you would like it, or enjoy it more, but i don't find anything related to how the game ends (or approaching to the end) which could back some hope on fighting toe to toe.

[SiberETP]

It is quite clear that the writer's intent was that the Reapers can't be defeated conventionally and so they wrote in an ending that enforces that. I don't think that can be argued without using Indoctrination Theory, which is a whole 'nother kettle of fish, and one I don't buy into.

What I do argue is that a conventional or partially conventional  defeat of the reapers wouldn't have been logically inconsistent with what we'd been shown of them up until ME3, or even with what was shown of them through most of the game. The fact that the game ends in failure if you don't pick one of the ending options, with the fleet destroyed, has no bearing on that.

Modifié par SiberETP, 03 avril 2012 - 12:55 .

[thefallen2far]

1. Okay, 2,000 cycles and not one of these cycles did any of them think to blow up the citadel? The variation mut not be that diverse. Control it and fly it into a star or a black hole.

2. The cycles were following a pattern that rereated because of the Reapers... but any number of posibilities could exist as to why this one is different. Perhaps the first "Sovern" was destroyed in the last push by the Prothians.... or whatever species the Keepers came from. That's why those organics survived the cullings. If Sovern failed in livng up to his responsibilities because it was outside his programing, that failure creates an opportunity others lacked.

3. The Crucible even says that because Shepard is there, it's a new scenario... meaning in the 2,000 other cycles..... no one was on that deck? I understand the citadel is big, like a planet... but NO ONE? In 2,000 cycles? No one?

4. According to evolution, they're at a huge disadvantage. Survival of the fittest is only part of Darwin's theories. The other, possibly more important part, is reproduction. The species has to recover their numbers lost. If a predator could only spawn 1 during their lifetime, that species is always limited in numbers to the point of extinction... Reapers don't reproduce conventionally. They break down matter of a species to make one reaper requires the population of Earth. As races become more defiant and fight to the last breath, limiting renewed numbers. Don't forget, 4 were already destroyed within the game.

5. The Asari cheated. Prothians advanced the Azari before their time, Asari advanced the Salarians, Salarian advanced the Turians and the Krogan to fight the Rachni which were advanced by the Prothians. A lot of species were brougt up before their time throwing the cycle out of whack. Quarians created the Geth, advanced by the Reapers who deny their masters.

6. Krogan, Rachni, Geth, Turians, Asari, Quarians, Volus, Hanar, Drell, Yahg, Salarians, Elcor ad the Humans.... you could get some Thresher Maws in there. I even got the Salarians to clone dinosaurs.... all fighting together with one purpose.... destroy reapers.... one at a time, until they're all gone.

7. If you can't fight them conventionally, fight them unconventionaly. Lead them to a Mass relay and blow it to heck... it was goingto blow up anyway.

8. It's unconventional for a boy on a horse to kill 18 Collosi, but Shadow of the Collosus still showed it, and it was AWESOME!