444 réponses à ce sujet

[humes spork]

kaztas wrote...

If conventional means is impossible then why does the Galaxy at War MP screen at 100% readiness say "Allied Forces are holding steady and winning in key locations." That's conventional fighting.

There is such a thing as "winning the battles but losing the war", you know. The allied forces may be scoring victories on the operational or tactical level, but those victories still only amount to delaying total loss on the strategic level.

Hell, on the operational level the turians were beating the Reapers' ass straight out of the Trebia system. They were successfully holding the mass relay and enjoying a great big ol' Reaper Turkey Shoot as they entered the system. That is, until the Reapers got enough destroyers through the blockade to threaten Palaven and forced the turians to cede the relay to defend civilian populations. Series of massive tactical victories, but still a decisive operational loss.

[A0170]

humes spork wrote...

kaztas wrote...

If conventional means is impossible then why does the Galaxy at War MP screen at 100% readiness say "Allied Forces are holding steady and winning in key locations." That's conventional fighting.

There is such a thing as "winning the battles but losing the war", you know. The allied forces may be scoring victories on the operational or tactical level, but those victories still only amount to delaying total loss on the strategic level.

Hell, on the operational level the turians were beating the Reapers' ass straight out of the Trebia system. They were successfully holding the mass relay and enjoying a great big ol' Reaper Turkey Shoot as they entered the system. That is, until the Reapers got enough destroyers through the blockade to threaten Palaven and forced the turians to cede the relay to defend civilian populations. Series of massive tactical victories, but still a decisive operational loss.

That readiness rating basically says your gettting your @ss kicked only 6 days a week not all 7, and you're only winning small, relatively minor battles. Just saying

Exactly. And Sammantha Carter pics? Nice 

Modifié par A0170, 20 avril 2012 - 04:31 .

[MyChemicalBromance]

Good post A0170.

I think at this point, most people don't want to hear it, even if it has been a plot point established since ME1. I'll have a new post up tomorrow or Saturday that should make the ending a little easier to stomache.

[Orthodox Infidel]

Ariq wrote...

Vormaerin wrote...

This myth of the Thanix cannon is getting really tiresome. Its an improvement over the weapons we had before. Its not an uberweapon. It results in starship armament with superior shield penetration over straight kinetic energy weapons.

There's no evidence that thanix cannons are some one size fits all device. A fighter doesn't produce nearly the energy output that a larger ship does. The engineers mention that the thanix you install on the Normandy (by space magic with no need for refit time) increase the draw on the main power. The Normandy is repeatedly declared to be unable to face heavier ships in straight up combat (like the cerberus cruiser, for instance).

Maybe a large swarm of fighters could wear down the shields of a large sovereign class reaper, but we have no evidence that is true. Their tiny thanix cannons may not produce enough energy to do anything, just like the 5" guns of a destroyer in WW were not a significant threat to a battleship, while the 18" guns of the battleship could tear the destroyer to pieces.

This. And again: this.

I don't know where the idea of the Thanix cannon being a magic super gun even comes from. They're an upgrade, like going from a musket to a rifle. It's a good upgrade. Very good, in fact, game changing for the time frame of the shift. Still won't shoot through a tank's armor though.

Not to mention that the Thanix cannon is a plot device. People complain about the Crucible being a plot device, but want it to go away by replacing it with many hundreds of smaller plot devices. 

And, as I've pointed out in my own thread, Thanix cannons are already widely used and didn't amount to anything. It's time for people to Shut up about Thanix Cannons.

[A0170]

MyChemicalBromance wrote...

Good post A0170.

I think at this point, most people don't want to hear it, even if it has been a plot point established since ME1. I'll have a new post up tomorrow or Saturday that should make the ending a little easier to stomache.

Thanks! Can't wait to read it!

[A0170]

Orthodox Infidel wrote...

Ariq wrote...

Vormaerin wrote...

This myth of the Thanix cannon is getting really tiresome. Its an improvement over the weapons we had before. Its not an uberweapon. It results in starship armament with superior shield penetration over straight kinetic energy weapons.

There's no evidence that thanix cannons are some one size fits all device. A fighter doesn't produce nearly the energy output that a larger ship does. The engineers mention that the thanix you install on the Normandy (by space magic with no need for refit time) increase the draw on the main power. The Normandy is repeatedly declared to be unable to face heavier ships in straight up combat (like the cerberus cruiser, for instance).

Maybe a large swarm of fighters could wear down the shields of a large sovereign class reaper, but we have no evidence that is true. Their tiny thanix cannons may not produce enough energy to do anything, just like the 5" guns of a destroyer in WW were not a significant threat to a battleship, while the 18" guns of the battleship could tear the destroyer to pieces.

This. And again: this.

I don't know where the idea of the Thanix cannon being a magic super gun even comes from. They're an upgrade, like going from a musket to a rifle. It's a good upgrade. Very good, in fact, game changing for the time frame of the shift. Still won't shoot through a tank's armor though.

Not to mention that the Thanix cannon is a plot device. People complain about the Crucible being a plot device, but want it to go away by replacing it with many hundreds of smaller plot devices. 

And, as I've pointed out in my own thread, Thanix cannons are already widely used and didn't amount to anything. It's time for people to Shut up about Thanix Cannons.

+1. Great point about the Thanix cannon in itself being a plot device. And yes, I agree about the Thanix Canon's limits. Dreadnoughts and Cruisers are already equipped with Thanix cannons and yet look how the they've been faring? The Reapers have still managed to conquer most of the galaxy in spite of them. Also, the Reaper's have a fleet of ships that uses the original tech, and its far superior to what we have been able to reverse engineer. Not to mention the advantages they have in shield and armor tech. 

It's certainly helped, and it does give us a chance in combat, but that still means we have to have our ships outnumber theirs everytime in order to have a chance at victory.

Modifié par A0170, 20 avril 2012 - 05:00 .

[Warrior Craess]

A0170 wrote...

Tleining wrote...

4 Dreadnoughts can take down one Reaper Capital Ship. Thanix gets better Results.
Let's assume that each Carrier has 85 Fighters on Board (Niemitz-class Aircraft Carrier). So if each of those has a Thanix, how many Fighters would it take to take down one Capital Ship? You don't need the Dreadnoughts to take down a Capital-class-Reaper.

Destroyers: Give Groundtroops a couple of Cains. 4 Soldiers firing their Cains at the same time when the Reaper is firing should be more than enough. (Baby-Reaper took 2 Shots)

Yes, I said that 4 dreadnoughts could take down a capital ship. But I also stated how risky that is. Even if you were to get in good firing range, you'd lose a ton of escort ships in the process, maybe a dreadnought or two. Now if they're at least a hundred Reaper capitals, and if you lose 1-4 dreadnoughts taking down each capital, then it will eventually pile up. At best, and by that I'm considering the average loss of 2 dreadnoughts per 1 Reaper capital destroyed ratio, with all your dreadnoughts destroyed, you'll end up with around 42 Reaper capital ships destroyed if you do the math. That leaves you with around 58 Reaper capital ships and no dreadnoughts.

As for fighters, I also mentioned how it would take "many", proably a couple of squadrons, to take down one destoryer judging by the Codex and what we have seen. How many would it take with a Reaper Capital, with at least hundreds of Occuli defending it? An air wing of around 85 fihgters would be hard pressed to take them down, even if they're all armed with Thanix cannons. And if they do, how many fighters will they lose?

Also, Occuli have power lasers derived from the Reaper main gus too. Considering your argument about how effective an Alliance air wing armed with Thanix cannons would be, imagine hundreds of Occuli descending upon the Alliance ships? The Alliance fleets would be devastated.

As for Cains, that might work if you can produce enough. But what if they just stay in orbit, blasting us from above and dropping in husks to do the dirty work?

you think like someone who expects the fights to be stand up and fire at each other.  In that case you're right we'd lose a conventional war.  However as has been proven by the american revolution, the french revolution, The Veitnam war, the Russion occupation of Afgahnistan and numerous other wars and conflicts, unconventional tactics can work. 

The reason we can't win a conventional war is simple. We squandered our opportunity to prepare and plan. We allowed the reapers to reduce our infrastructure to almost nothing. The Alliance may be able to retake earth, but it can not replace the lost warships.  

Who knows how it may have turned out if the counsil had acknowledged the threat. It is possible to beat the reapers conventionally.. just not this cycle. 

[Eterna]

I think people are just arguing for the sake of arguing. There are supposedly thousands of reaper ships, not including occuli, the fleet we brought to earth at the end would never ever be enough.

[Warrior Craess]

MyChemicalBromance wrote...

Good post A0170.

I think at this point, most people don't want to hear it, even if it has been a plot point established since ME1. I'll have a new post up tomorrow or Saturday that should make the ending a little easier to stomache.

there isn't really anyway to look at the ending in a positive light. It was terrible. 

[MyChemicalBromance]

Warrior Craess wrote...

MyChemicalBromance wrote...

Good post A0170.

I think at this point, most people don't want to hear it, even if it has been a plot point established since ME1. I'll have a new post up tomorrow or Saturday that should make the ending a little easier to stomache.

there isn't really anyway to look at the ending in a positive light. It was terrible. 

Let me be clear; it's not actually about the ending.

It makes the ending easier to stomache in a "we're not doomed" way. It's a solution to the discharge problem that doesn't require canon-busting tech (ie linkless relays), and it makes sense that the galaxy didn't develop it yet (and that I, being a 21st century monkey, can see it). It also inadvertently solves the dark energy problem (if it exists), as well as the fuel problem.

I know, I wouldn't believe me either.

[Averdi]

Vormaerin wrote...

This myth of the Thanix cannon is getting really tiresome. Its an improvement over the weapons we had before. Its not an uberweapon. It results in starship armament with superior shield penetration over straight kinetic energy weapons.

There's no evidence that thanix cannons are some one size fits all device. A fighter doesn't produce nearly the energy output that a larger ship does. The engineers mention that the thanix you install on the Normandy (by space magic with no need for refit time) increase the draw on the main power. The Normandy is repeatedly declared to be unable to face heavier ships in straight up combat (like the cerberus cruiser, for instance).

Maybe a large swarm of fighters could wear down the shields of a large sovereign class reaper, but we have no evidence that is true. Their tiny thanix cannons may not produce enough energy to do anything, just like the 5" guns of a destroyer in WW were not a significant threat to a battleship, while the 18" guns of the battleship could tear the destroyer to pieces.

The thanix is essentially a less powerful version of the reapers' main armament, and a paradigm shift from the types of weapons in general use.  It's not a superweapon, but it's implied (via it's actual performance and by extrapolation of the power of reaper weaponry) to be far more powerful.  I'm confident swarms of fighters with small thanix wouldn't destroy a reaper, but I can't see why concentrated fire from ally captial ships couldn't.

As for why the Normandy can't take out the Cerberus cruiser......either said cruiser also had thanix, or I'm going to call that a plot hole.

Ariq wrote...

This. And again: this.

I don't know where the idea of the Thanix cannon being a magic super gun even comes from. They're an upgrade, like going from a musket to a rifle. It's a good upgrade. Very good, in fact, game changing for the time frame of the shift. Still won't shoot through a tank's armor though.

The Normandy tossed a conventional balistic shell through Soverign without its barriers, so their armor alone doesn't seem to be all that formidable.  Thanix has much higher performance via barriers than mass drivers.  If 10+ cruisers with sizable thanix armaments latched onto a reaper, I'd expect them to torch it in a reasonably short time.

As far as the Thanix is concerned, the great rift in Klendagon is the result of a
massive mass accelerator weapon, one not created by the Reapers. This weapon is
orders of magnitude more powerful than any Thanix weapon, and disabled at least
one Reaper. But even this was not enough to save this particular species from
extinction, and they were definitely far more advanced that we were.

1) I doubt that race had many of those huge mass drivers.  A big virtue of thanix is that it isn't overly large, which makes for greater quantity.  2) It's not clear that they were indeed, more advanced; they just had a huge mass driver.  How many races that faced the reapers were able to salvage tech from a destroyed one, and had the time to develop/adapt it?  My presumption is not many, if any; the Soverign situation was unique.  Even where races had taken out individual reapers before, unless they actually won the battle, such victories didn't yield them any tech advances.

Look, thanix isn't a magic wand that one-shots reapers left and right, but it at least has the potential to put ally ships on roughly even footing with reapers, at least with respect to offensive power.  That's huge.  Reapers will still be tougher and individually more powerful, and allies will still suffer from the fact that their ships weren't made with thanix in mind, which could limit how powerful the ones they retro fit can be, but we're at least in shouting distance, rather than off the map.  Whether widespread use of thanix would win the war seems far more dubious given resource limitations, but with good fire concentration victories in individual battles are more than possible.

EDIT: Regarding the point that thanix is in widespread use among ally ships, that doesn't jive with the presentation of the final battle.  Either the codex seems wrong, or everyone forgot where the trigger was, but thanix wasn't used once that I saw.  That's the frustration I mentioned earlier - I think they intentionally didn't use it because, by virture of what they created the thanix to be, they'd have to make the battle more equitable, or even presupose an ally victory.  Can't have that with the crucible on the way!

If reaper weaponry is powerful, then so should be the thanix.  Anything else is an inconsistency.

Modifié par Averdi, 20 avril 2012 - 05:19 .

[Scalabrine]

They can't be beat conventionally, anyone who disputes this is clearly clinically retarded.

You have a species that has existed for millions of years with the sole purpose of erradication. If any i think Bioware made them too weak as their history should suggest. The technological advantage is unimaginable and just overwhelming plain and simple.

Imagine living for millions of years perfecting one thing. They can't be beat and they shouldn't have been beaten.

Modifié par Scalabrine, 20 avril 2012 - 05:17 .

[Averdi]

Scalabrine wrote...

They can't be beat conventionally, anyone who disputes this is clearly clinically retarded.

You have a species that has existed for millions of years with the sole purpose of erradication. If any i think Bioware made them too weak as their history should suggest. The technological advantage is unimaginable and just overwhelming plain and simple.

Imagine living for millions of years perfecting one thing. They can't be beat and they shouldn't have been beaten.

For most of their existence, they hibernate in dark space.  The extent to which they're technologically improving themselves between cleaning cycles is unclear.  Given that they guide the path of organics' technological development and reap at regular intervals, it may be that the organics they harvest have nothing new to offer them and their technology, while more advanced than organics, has plateaued.

I see the destruction of Soverign and organics' ability to study its tech and having the time to adapt it as a watershed event.  I didn't notice evidence that such a thing had happened before, did anyone else (I didn't have the from ashes dlc)?  Reapers had been lost before, but not have their tech co-opted.

Modifié par Averdi, 20 avril 2012 - 05:26 .

[A0170]

Warrior Craess wrote...

A0170 wrote...

Tleining wrote...

4 Dreadnoughts can take down one Reaper Capital Ship. Thanix gets better Results.
Let's assume that each Carrier has 85 Fighters on Board (Niemitz-class Aircraft Carrier). So if each of those has a Thanix, how many Fighters would it take to take down one Capital Ship? You don't need the Dreadnoughts to take down a Capital-class-Reaper.

Destroyers: Give Groundtroops a couple of Cains. 4 Soldiers firing their Cains at the same time when the Reaper is firing should be more than enough. (Baby-Reaper took 2 Shots)

Yes, I said that 4 dreadnoughts could take down a capital ship. But I also stated how risky that is. Even if you were to get in good firing range, you'd lose a ton of escort ships in the process, maybe a dreadnought or two. Now if they're at least a hundred Reaper capitals, and if you lose 1-4 dreadnoughts taking down each capital, then it will eventually pile up. At best, and by that I'm considering the average loss of 2 dreadnoughts per 1 Reaper capital destroyed ratio, with all your dreadnoughts destroyed, you'll end up with around 42 Reaper capital ships destroyed if you do the math. That leaves you with around 58 Reaper capital ships and no dreadnoughts.

As for fighters, I also mentioned how it would take "many", proably a couple of squadrons, to take down one destoryer judging by the Codex and what we have seen. How many would it take with a Reaper Capital, with at least hundreds of Occuli defending it? An air wing of around 85 fihgters would be hard pressed to take them down, even if they're all armed with Thanix cannons. And if they do, how many fighters will they lose?

Also, Occuli have power lasers derived from the Reaper main gus too. Considering your argument about how effective an Alliance air wing armed with Thanix cannons would be, imagine hundreds of Occuli descending upon the Alliance ships? The Alliance fleets would be devastated.

As for Cains, that might work if you can produce enough. But what if they just stay in orbit, blasting us from above and dropping in husks to do the dirty work?

you think like someone who expects the fights to be stand up and fire at each other.  In that case you're right we'd lose a conventional war.  However as has been proven by the american revolution, the french revolution, The Veitnam war, the Russion occupation of Afgahnistan and numerous other wars and conflicts, unconventional tactics can work. 

The reason we can't win a conventional war is simple. We squandered our opportunity to prepare and plan. We allowed the reapers to reduce our infrastructure to almost nothing. The Alliance may be able to retake earth, but it can not replace the lost warships.  

Who knows how it may have turned out if the counsil had acknowledged the threat. It is possible to beat the reapers conventionally.. just not this cycle. 

Yes you're right about us squandering our chances. And I've been saying all along that we'd be able to give them a good fight, maybe even give the Yahg a chance in the next cyle. But as I've said before, even if we fight unconventionally, we won't be able to hold out very long. Again, they have the homeworlds of most of the major races of the galaxy under their control. They also have a bunch of our colonies in their hands to boot. That means we're going to be low on resources, if not now than later as this war drags on. Even an insurgency needs supplies. Without food or the proper resources to rearm, we'll run out of options quick. 

We could just try and run from system to system, using hit and run tactics along the way. But what good would that do? We'd lose more men and more ships, and eventually we'll run out of places to hide, regroup, and recover. 

That means that we'd have to tie down our forces somewhere to hold some positions, in order to ensure some sort of resources. Or left with dwindling options, we will evenutally be forced to try and retake some worlds and their resources, but we'll need a massive/or at least a sizable fleet to do it. Not to mention troops as well. All this requires the establishment of supply lines too, which the Reapers don't need. See the logistical problems already arising? 

Add the mounting casualties, and the massive amount of men, ships, and war material lost in order to defend or retake some of these worlds and what you're left with is a crumbling war effort. We'd also have to station more ships and troops to guard this newly won territority as well, but that would mean lessening the defense of another world we already have. It also lessens our capabilities to put together another campaign to retake the next homeworld on the list. With our forces getting stretched thinner and thinner, the Reapers will easily be able to move in and retake what we fought so hard to gain. Like I keep having to say, we can win some battles, we can retake some territorities, but we'll never be able to hold onto them for long.

Every race too, will eventually demand that their homeworld be retaken. Sure, they can wait, but how long will they be willingly to commit their forces to a costly guerrila campaign that would go nowhere while there homeworlds burn? 

So my point is, at some point you will be forced to fight conventionally, if not for the resources, than for the frail political alliance keeping our war effort together. By the time you do, you're find yourself getting bogged down in one theater to the next, with less supplies and reinforcements coming in day after day. 

Modifié par A0170, 20 avril 2012 - 05:31 .

[MakeMineMako]

Scalabrine wrote...

They can't be beat conventionally, anyone who disputes this is clearly clinically retarded.

You have a species that has existed for millions of years with the sole purpose of erradication. If any i think Bioware made them too weak as their history should suggest. The technological advantage is unimaginable and just overwhelming plain and simple.

Imagine living for millions of years perfecting one thing. They can't be beat and they shouldn't have been beaten.

Slurring off on those that disagree with a point that you hold is a bit overboard. And age doesn't determine your ability to win wars. Innovation, tactics, and strategy wins wars.

If the writers decided that a "conventional" victory was possible, it would be. But instead, we get sci-fi's biggest Rube Goldberg device (whose whole story defies suspension of disbelief) and the Deus Ex Machina (the Star Child coming out of nowhere).

[Warrior Craess]

MyChemicalBromance wrote...

Warrior Craess wrote...

MyChemicalBromance wrote...

Good post A0170.

I think at this point, most people don't want to hear it, even if it has been a plot point established since ME1. I'll have a new post up tomorrow or Saturday that should make the ending a little easier to stomache.

there isn't really anyway to look at the ending in a positive light. It was terrible. 

Let me be clear; it's not actually about the ending.

It makes the ending easier to stomache in a "we're not doomed" way. It's a solution to the discharge problem that doesn't require canon-busting tech (ie linkless relays), and it makes sense that the galaxy didn't develop it yet (and that I, being a 21st century monkey, can see it). It also inadvertently solves the dark energy problem (if it exists), as well as the fuel problem.

I know, I wouldn't believe me either.

Don't get me wrong I;m sure I'll read it once you post it, and I'll probably enjoy it.  Chances that it'll make the results of the ending more palatable is well unknown at this point.  Chances it'll allow me to accept the ending? 0...

[mauro2222]

If someone used the Thanix...

[humes spork]

Orthodox Infidel wrote...

And, as I've pointed out in my own thread, Thanix cannons are already widely used and didn't amount to anything. It's time for people to Shut up about Thanix Cannons.

I wouldn't necessarily say they amounted to nothing...for the lack of context during those ending sequences, those thanix cannons could have meant the difference between complete, utter ruination and the successful landing of Hammer and the Crucible's very deployment.

[KingZayd]

A0170 wrote...



1.) First, the Codex entry on Reaper Vulnerabilites states that,

"In the case of a Reaper capital ship, these kinetic barriers can hold off the firepower of two dreadnoughts simultaneously, but three clearly causes strain, and four typically results in destruction. Weapons designed to maximize heat damage, such as the Thanix series, show betterresults against the Reapers than pure kinetic impacts."

Source: http://masseffect.wi...er_Capabilities

It takes four dreadnoughts, with Thanix weapons mind you, just to take down one Reaper capital ship (or Sovereign class). And even if those dreadnoughts manage to take down a capital ship, the other Reaper ships would just swoop in and wipe out the dreadnoughts. So for every Sovereign class Reaper we take down, we will potentially lose 4 dreadnoughts in the process.

It takes 4 destroyers to get past the kinetic barriers and destroy the Capital ship, with pure kinetic impacts. Kinetic barriers don't prevent heat damage. With Thanix cannons it is easier, maybe even reducing the number of destroyers needed. How much easier? we don't know.

[ardensia]

A0170 wrote...

6.) Which leads to my last point. How long can the races of the galaxy fight on like this? Having to constantly rebuild/train your fighter corps, repair/rebuild all the ships that have been damaged or destroyed in battle, will of course require an incredible large amount of resources. But how many resources would the Citadel races have left, with most of their homeworlds and colonies occupied and under Reaper control? Sure they could retake a planet or two, but with all the factors that have been pointed out above, the losses would be staggering. And the Reapers could always return and take back our gains. Coupled with the massive amounts of war refugees/and or that are now displaced and in need of shelter and care, then it wouldn't be long until the surviving governments of the galaxy would be strained till the limit. What's to stop the inevitable fracturing and infighting that would ensue, with some governments capitulating in order to survive, becoming indoctrinating in the process?

The Reapers, with the benefit of time and their ability to handle the massive attrition rate that we can't, would simply wait us out, taking territory after territory, sezing or destroying any usable resource until they eventually "bleed us out". Sure, we would put up a hell of a fight. We could maybe even give the Yahg or whoever takes over in the next cycle a fighting chance, but as it stands now, Hackett is right.

According to information you receive via the Spectre terminal, the Citadel races have about a year before funds to support the war effort run out. Check out the entry listed for "First Irune Financial Report."

Great post, btw.

[Elyiia]

tractrpl wrote...

Elyiia wrote...

And if they had that many Capital ships, why would they have left a single destroyer to guard the beam. If they had thousands of Capital ships, leaving one to defend wouldn't have been an issue.

They didn't need that many because Reapers are huge and it's impossible to fit a gazillion in a small space. Also, they didn't feel the need to use more because it felt protected by the beam, which through off targeting.

Also, it should be noted that the Reapers overwhelmed humanities defenses in a matter of seconds, it didn't even take them hours. You should play the beginning again.

If they had that many Capital ships, why leave a Destroyer to defend a major point? They clearly know we can take out Destroyers from the ground. Surely they can spare to station a Capital ship there instead.

Earth's defences amounted to two barely prepared fleets verses the majority of the Reapers force. Of course they were going to lose.

[A0170]

KingZayd wrote...

A0170 wrote...



1.) First, the Codex entry on Reaper Vulnerabilites states that,

"In the case of a Reaper capital ship, these kinetic barriers can hold off the firepower of two dreadnoughts simultaneously, but three clearly causes strain, and four typically results in destruction. Weapons designed to maximize heat damage, such as the Thanix series, show betterresults against the Reapers than pure kinetic impacts."

Source: http://masseffect.wi...er_Capabilities

It takes four dreadnoughts, with Thanix weapons mind you, just to take down one Reaper capital ship (or Sovereign class). And even if those dreadnoughts manage to take down a capital ship, the other Reaper ships would just swoop in and wipe out the dreadnoughts. So for every Sovereign class Reaper we take down, we will potentially lose 4 dreadnoughts in the process.

It takes 4 destroyers to get past the kinetic barriers and destroy the Capital ship, with pure kinetic impacts. Kinetic barriers don't prevent heat damage. With Thanix cannons it is easier, maybe even reducing the number of destroyers needed. How much easier? we don't know.

First, we're using dreadnoughts, not destroyers. And they already are equipped with Thanix cannons. So from what the codex says, we need at least four of the biggest baddest ships in galaxy armed with some of the best weapons we have just to take down one Reaper capital ship. I also mention that in order for their shots to be effective, then they need to get in a good firing position. So how many escort ships would we lose just getting into position? The Reaper capital ships would presumably be protected by hundreds and/or thousands of Occuli armed with lasers powerful enough to rip through the Normandy's armors and shields (ME2 Suicde Mission), a ton of Reaper destroyers that have been shown to take down a cruiser in a couple of hits, and the other Reaper capital ships in formation. 

Even if we could take out one capital ship, we'd lose several of ours in the process. With numbers like that, every victory we have will be a pyrrhic victory. And if you check out the math, I say that there at least 100 of these Reaper capital ships (and thats a highly conservative, lowball number). How many ships would it take to take down each and single everyone? There's no way we can win, not on numbers alone.

Modifié par A0170, 20 avril 2012 - 05:49 .

[A0170]

ardensia wrote...

A0170 wrote...

6.) Which leads to my last point. How long can the races of the galaxy fight on like this? Having to constantly rebuild/train your fighter corps, repair/rebuild all the ships that have been damaged or destroyed in battle, will of course require an incredible large amount of resources. But how many resources would the Citadel races have left, with most of their homeworlds and colonies occupied and under Reaper control? Sure they could retake a planet or two, but with all the factors that have been pointed out above, the losses would be staggering. And the Reapers could always return and take back our gains. Coupled with the massive amounts of war refugees/and or that are now displaced and in need of shelter and care, then it wouldn't be long until the surviving governments of the galaxy would be strained till the limit. What's to stop the inevitable fracturing and infighting that would ensue, with some governments capitulating in order to survive, becoming indoctrinating in the process?

The Reapers, with the benefit of time and their ability to handle the massive attrition rate that we can't, would simply wait us out, taking territory after territory, sezing or destroying any usable resource until they eventually "bleed us out". Sure, we would put up a hell of a fight. We could maybe even give the Yahg or whoever takes over in the next cycle a fighting chance, but as it stands now, Hackett is right.

According to information you receive via the Spectre terminal, the Citadel races have about a year before funds to support the war effort run out. Check out the entry listed for "First Irune Financial Report."

Great post, btw.

Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it!

[soulprovider]

tractrpl wrote...

Harbinger of your Destiny wrote...

The protheans weren't prepared they were just able to last a very long time. They had no warning of the reapers we however did and acted on it. Hell we were even able to develop weapons based off of reaper design before the invasion began (thanix cannon).

You need to listen to Javik again. They were highly prepared, they were just surprised by the citadel ambush.

where does he say they were highly prepared? He does mentioned that hundreds of years of war did mess him up and his culture changed, he did say that the reason his cycle lost was because they were bound to one military doctrine and were not able to adapt once the reapers found their weakness, he did say that the reapers took control of the citadely and shut down the mass relays and all communications, then used javiks own people against him, and he did say that this cycle had a chance for a final battle unlike his cycle.

No where in any of his converstations did he make mention that the protheans were ready for the reapers, they were completely caught off gaurd, because they were fighting the metacon war and the reapers attacked them when they were winning the war. In javiks own words " thats was when we realized that machines had surpassed us in way we could never imagine"

[Scalabrine]

MakeMineMako wrote...

Scalabrine wrote...

They can't be beat conventionally, anyone who disputes this is clearly clinically retarded.

You have a species that has existed for millions of years with the sole purpose of erradication. If any i think Bioware made them too weak as their history should suggest. The technological advantage is unimaginable and just overwhelming plain and simple.

Imagine living for millions of years perfecting one thing. They can't be beat and they shouldn't have been beaten.

Slurring off on those that disagree with a point that you hold is a bit overboard. And age doesn't determine your ability to win wars. Innovation, tactics, and strategy wins wars.

If the writers decided that a "conventional" victory was possible, it would be. But instead, we get sci-fi's biggest Rube Goldberg device (whose whole story defies suspension of disbelief) and the Deus Ex Machina (the Star Child coming out of nowhere).

Yeah my bad on that butttt... Maybe age doesn't determine it but experience and overall technological advantage does. Numbers are superior and tactics are superior. There is no technological advancement that the current races could develop that the reapers either already possesed or were superior in.

A headstart of a couple millions of years on a race that's just 50,000 years old is just insourmontable. 100 years for that matter cause humans were technologically relevant just a couple years before the appearence of the reapers.

Again, i stress this. It should be impossible for them to beat the reapers.

Modifié par Scalabrine, 20 avril 2012 - 05:51 .