*reapers fly fleet to space.DarkBladeX98 wrote...
oh hai dere.
I guess that you consider a cain conventional??
Give everyone a cain, arm the fleet with thanix cannons and voila. Victory
The Mad Hanar wrote...
Keep in mind that every scene that shows a Reaper getting killed usually involves 50+ ships. To kill ONE Reaper. Do you like those odds against thousands of them?
IntoTheDarkness wrote...
zephyr2025 wrote...
IntoTheDarkness wrote...
Liber320 wrote...
Reapers depended heavily on the element of surpirse and either an non-unified or extremely centralized galaxy.
In this cycle, we:
- Were warned and found out about them before the attack
- Stopped them from using the Citadel and shutting down the Mass Relays
- Managed to destroy one of them and find another derelict one, using their technology to create shielding and weapons almost if not equal to theirs
- Had the entire galaxy (more or less) working together to stop them
So while it may be a long shot and would most definately result in an unfathomable amount of casualties, it could definately be done.
that analysis only works if there had been 2 CYCLES in the past, ours and the protheans.
there had been 2000. come on, reapers must have calculated what organics capabilities are under ideal circumstatnces. all conditions you lists could have happended in the past cycles, and even if it did not, reapers should have known the possibility and consequently prepared for such set of evensts.
Yeah, guys. Cmon. 2000 cycles. That's just a big number. Cmon! I have to be right. 2000! That's so much bigger than 2.
...seriously though, you're just making assumptions and I can just as easily make the opposite assumptions.
NO. you simply don't understand the probaililty, which is not the
same assumption you randomly made with Prothena being the most advanced.
btw I miscalculated. it's 20k now.
if you don't understand,
I suggest you start a protest against weather forecasts and any
betting/gambling companies for they are trcking people with lies.
Stygian1 wrote...
Bioware is telling us that none of the previous cycles achieved all of the current variables going for Shepard's cycle.
There is also a scene outside of the Citadel in Mass Effect 2, where they explain Newton's Laws of Motion and shooting a bullet in space means that the bullet will continue in its trajectory unless it is stopped by an outside force. I remember it quite distinctly so its sad that the writers forgot. Personally I think developers and writers to a new project should be required to play the previous games at least twice to make sure that they don't botch the big details and science.Aulis Vaara wrote...
Flextt wrote...
The actual problem with conventional battles against Reaper is that they outrange our fleets.
Fleets outranging each other, in space? This is why I very much dislike the separation of lore and cutscene space battle mechanics. If this was a real space battle as described by the lore, you would see why that statement doesn't make sense.
And please don't give me the "space battles would be less cool at a distance" line. You could make long range shots way more awesome looking than a thousand shots fired at what is basically point blank range.
Modifié par Ishiken, 02 avril 2012 - 08:19 .
Sc2mashimaro wrote...
I won't spend a bunch of time arguing about the in-game semantics of it, rather, approaching it as a writer it is clear that - if the writers wanted to write the story so the Reapers could be beat conventionally - they could write it so the Reapers can be beat conventionally. The reason is that they have already build the dramatic tension in to the the narrative. In fact, it's a main narrative theme in Mass Effect: Characters and the codex say something is impossible followed by Shepard finding a way to do it anyway. It's one of the themes the current ending violates.
It is very common in literature to have characters think, say, feel, and otherwise vocalize things which the narrative contradicts. It is a great way to add texture and conflict to a story. In other words, characters and their beliefs/information in a story are allowed to be flawed, the reality is what is SHOWN or the ACTION. For Mass Effect, this means Reapers can be killed by conventional means and, thus, it is possible to write a story where they are defeated by conventional means.
Modifié par Shallyah, 02 avril 2012 - 08:20 .
MadRabbit999 wrote...
I agree with the OP on this one:
Reapers are several millions, we only see about 2 of them dying in the cutscene? And even a dying one still takes out dozen of other ships.
Even if there were 1 billion (Which there weren't) of fighting allied ships, with a firepower and rate of 1:100000, you would at best end up killing 1000+ reapers before you run out of firepower.
Modifié par Tleining, 02 avril 2012 - 08:21 .
The Mad Hanar wrote...
Keep in mind that every scene that shows a Reaper getting killed usually involves 50+ ships. To kill ONE Reaper. Do you like those odds against thousands of them?
1.One Reaper can only be taken down by consentrated shots by mulitple ships.Aulis Vaara wrote...
Flextt wrote...
The actual problem with conventional battles against Reaper is that they outrange our fleets.
Fleets outranging each other, in space? This is why I very much dislike the separation of lore and cutscene space battle mechanics. If this was a real space battle as described by the lore, you would see why that statement doesn't make sense.
And please don't give me the "space battles would be less cool at a distance" line. You could make long range shots way more awesome looking than a thousand shots fired at what is basically point blank range.Grasich wrote...
Looking at it from a statistic point of view, it's impossible to win regardless of how you try.
Actually, from a statistics point of view, if we assume the chance of beating the Reapers are not zero, some cycle will eventually beat them (and giving the next cycle a chance would have actually been a very satisfying "bad" ending). If the chance is actually zero, this is a story about inevitability while constantly giving us hints that it isn't.
All in all, the story is not consistently enough written with regards to Reaper intelligence and power to give a really good estimate on if they can be defeated or not.
I still would have preferred an ending where we take them by surprise with a dark energy weapon that blows up the sun, sacrificing earth but decimating the Reapers. How it would go further from that I'm not entirely sure of, but that would've been the most believable tactic.
zephyr2025 wrote...
IntoTheDarkness wrote...
zephyr2025 wrote...
IntoTheDarkness wrote...
Liber320 wrote...
Reapers depended heavily on the element of surpirse and either an non-unified or extremely centralized galaxy.
In this cycle, we:
- Were warned and found out about them before the attack
- Stopped them from using the Citadel and shutting down the Mass Relays
- Managed to destroy one of them and find another derelict one, using their technology to create shielding and weapons almost if not equal to theirs
- Had the entire galaxy (more or less) working together to stop them
So while it may be a long shot and would most definately result in an unfathomable amount of casualties, it could definately be done.
that analysis only works if there had been 2 CYCLES in the past, ours and the protheans.
there had been 2000. come on, reapers must have calculated what organics capabilities are under ideal circumstatnces. all conditions you lists could have happended in the past cycles, and even if it did not, reapers should have known the possibility and consequently prepared for such set of evensts.
Yeah, guys. Cmon. 2000 cycles. That's just a big number. Cmon! I have to be right. 2000! That's so much bigger than 2.
...seriously though, you're just making assumptions and I can just as easily make the opposite assumptions.
NO. you simply don't understand the probaililty, which is not the
same assumption you randomly made with Prothena being the most advanced.
btw I miscalculated. it's 20k now.
if you don't understand,
I suggest you start a protest against weather forecasts and any
betting/gambling companies for they are trcking people with lies.
So we can't win because it's unlikely? I understand what a big number 20k is. How can't I since it's the only thing your argument is based on.
Why can't we say that Reapers are getting weaker each cycle? We killed 2 reapers in ME3 without the help of the entire fleet. And each cycle is getting stronger because we get help from the previous cycle?
Yeah feel free to just assume that Reapers would always know what can happen, but they didn't seem to know about illos. Protheans surprised them. Why is it so hard to think we can beat them with all the help Protheans gave us. Because 20k is such a big number?
Yes the lotto is ridiculous odds but it doesn't mean no one wins it.
But there more reaper ships then Allied ship. It takes one attack from a reaper to destroy a ship. And it takes multiple consentrated attacks from allied ships to kill one reaper.....That is not a good out look.Canis_Major wrote...
The Mad Hanar wrote...
Keep in mind that every scene that shows a Reaper getting killed usually involves 50+ ships. To kill ONE Reaper. Do you like those odds against thousands of them?
Ok, but the quarian fleet alone accounted for 50k ships. Add the Turian, Salarian, Asari & Human plus some random mercenary ships and you should be able to make some damage to reapers.
And i dont remember being on earth as many as 50k sovereing-class reapers.
IntoTheDarkness wrote...
Stygian1 wrote...
Again, @IntoTheDarkness, regardless of the numbers, BioWare is telling us that none of the previous cycles achieved all of the current variables going for Shepard's cycle. Whether its logical to think that or not, BioWare TELLS us that. The goddamn Star Child tells us that, Mr. King of All Reapers.
20,000 means nothing when the lore also tells us that we are special, unless the lore is lying, our cycle is special...
Yeah, I see your point. (did you post something along the line before this? I didn't see your previous post.)
however, It's plain stupid since our circumstances could have been so much better. You know, a spectre Saren was indoctrinated, the council ignored the warning, races had grudges against each other, races refused to unite unless Shepard solve their problem... and to say despite all these shortcomings we were in the best circumstances out of 20,000 cycle sounds unplausible. Well it's a fact if BW claimed so, but still stupid.
That has nothing to do with beating the reapers with force alone.ReggarBlane wrote...
There's a line between unconventional and ridiculous.
The Catalyst as a child and colored endings is ridiculous.
Tleining wrote...
MadRabbit999 wrote...
I agree with the OP on this one:
Reapers are several millions, we only see about 2 of them dying in the cutscene? And even a dying one still takes out dozen of other ships.
Even if there were 1 billion (Which there weren't) of fighting allied ships, with a firepower and rate of 1:100000, you would at best end up killing 1000+ reapers before you run out of firepower.
MILLION?????
How did you come up with that Number? Even if they have existed since the Big Bang (13.7 billion years (unlikely) and have created one every 50.000 Years without ever loosing one, you would be at 274.000 Reapers. Big Number, but not Millions.
And we see Sovereign, Destroyers on Tuchanka, Rannoch and Earth die. Two of those were on foot, one was killed by a worm.
@ Stygian1
those were Cruisers not Dreadnoughts.
Modifié par MadRabbit999, 02 avril 2012 - 08:32 .
IntoTheDarkness wrote...
Sc2mashimaro wrote...
I won't spend a bunch of time arguing about the in-game semantics of it, rather, approaching it as a writer it is clear that - if the writers wanted to write the story so the Reapers could be beat conventionally - they could write it so the Reapers can be beat conventionally. The reason is that they have already build the dramatic tension in to the the narrative. In fact, it's a main narrative theme in Mass Effect: Characters and the codex say something is impossible followed by Shepard finding a way to do it anyway. It's one of the themes the current ending violates.
It is very common in literature to have characters think, say, feel, and otherwise vocalize things which the narrative contradicts. It is a great way to add texture and conflict to a story. In other words, characters and their beliefs/information in a story are allowed to be flawed, the reality is what is SHOWN or the ACTION. For Mass Effect, this means Reapers can be killed by conventional means and, thus, it is possible to write a story where they are defeated by conventional means.
except 20k cycles and 20k victories on the reapers is a tad bit more than characters calling impossible..
Modifié par ForceXev, 02 avril 2012 - 08:27 .
Modifié par Ishiken, 02 avril 2012 - 08:31 .
dreman9999 wrote...
But there more reaper ships then Allied ship. It takes one attack from a reaper to destroy a ship. And it takes multiple consentrated attacks from allied ships to kill one reaper.....That is not a good out look.Canis_Major wrote...
The Mad Hanar wrote...
Keep in mind that every scene that shows a Reaper getting killed usually involves 50+ ships. To kill ONE Reaper. Do you like those odds against thousands of them?
Ok, but the quarian fleet alone accounted for 50k ships. Add the Turian, Salarian, Asari & Human plus some random mercenary ships and you should be able to make some damage to reapers.
And i dont remember being on earth as many as 50k sovereing-class reapers.
Guest_holysmite2_*
dreman9999 wrote...
1.One Reaper can only be taken down by consentrated shots by mulitple ships.
Reapers can take down one allied ship with one shot.
There's no match up at all.
2.You forgetting this is a force mass enough to attack and hold ground on nearly every zone in the galxey. And when everyone joins up as an allied force....they already lost more then half their ships.
Modifié par Tleining, 02 avril 2012 - 08:29 .
Retour en haut