444 réponses à ce sujet

[soulprovider]

Averdi 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.

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.

There is no evidence to support that the reapers own weapons were adapted for organics use in previous cycles, given that the collector ship was using repear tech its safe to assume that the normandies version of the thanix cannons show their strength and would have given the reapes a run for their money and would have forced them to adapt, I find it hysterical that we went through the game building up their massive amounts of war assets, improving the various numbers and in both, I repeat, both versions of the ending everything looks the same except you see more scenes of the reapers tearing apart the victory fleet if your ems is low but if your EMS is high you see little in the way of any fighting, I expected more from that atleast.

Modifié par soulprovider, 20 avril 2012 - 05:57 .

[A0170]

Elyiia wrote...

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.

The Reapers controlled the Geth and their massive fleet at this point. They probably felt that would be enough ships to defend their major point on Rannoch. 

Also I remember that we had several fleets tied down at Arcturus Station, the gateway to Earth and the capital of the Alliance. If the Reapers wanted Earth, than they had to go through there first, and of course as we know it took them a couple of minutes. We also had two fleets placed in reserve in the neighboring star systems of Eden Prime and Terra Nova, its just they never had the chance to join the fight because the Reapers had struck so fast. 

So I think in total, we had 7 fleets ready to defend Earth, its just that we placed the bulk of it at the chokepoint at Arcturus.

Modifié par A0170, 20 avril 2012 - 05:57 .

[Elyiia]

A0170 wrote...

Elyiia wrote...

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.

The Reapers controlled the Geth and their massive fleet at this point. They probably felt that would be enough ships to defend their major point on Rannoch. 

Also I remember that we had several fleets tied down at Arcturus Station, the gateway to Earth and the capital of the Alliance. If the Reapers wanted Earth, than they had to go through there first, and of course as we know it took them a couple of minutes. We also had two fleets placed in reserve in the neighboring star systems of Eden Prime and Terra Nova, its just they never had the chance to join the fight because the Reapers had struck so fast. 

So I think in total, we had 7 fleets ready to defend Earth, its just that we placed the bulk of it at the chokepoint at Arcturus.

I'm talking about the Destroyer they left to guard the beam.
The Reapers basically bypassed the Alliance fleets and went straight to Earth with decoy tactics.

Tactics are everything. Ours were just dumb.

[KingZayd]

A0170 wrote...

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.

I picked the wrong word, sorry dreadnoughts.
It's not factoring the Thanix cannons in. The 4 dreadnoughts worth of kinetic impact are required to take down a reaper through its kinetic barriers. Thanix cannons are better because they're not just kinetic impact, making it easier. 

I'm not disputing the overall conclusion, that we can't win conventionally. We can't, satisfying as it would be. I just took issue with that point.

Modifié par KingZayd, 20 avril 2012 - 07:46 .

[Averdi]

A0170 wrote...

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.

That's actually not clear from the codex.  It indicates that thanix bypasses barriers to some degree, then measures reapers' barriers versus dreadnaught firepower, and indicates that thanix has better results than kinetic.

Frankly, the codex and game presentation has consistency problems on this issue.  The thanix bypasses barriers to some extent, but it's liquid metal projection cools and hardens in transit (like a more traditional slug)?  Thanix is equipped widely, but not used in any battle I saw.  A dreadnaught can't survive a sigle hit from a reaper main gun, but the one floating above Vancouver in the opening invation sequence took several hits before blowing up.  A comparison is made between reaper and dreadnaught main gun sizes, while they are ostensibly completely different types (liquid metal squirtgun versus traditional mass driver) of weapons.  Even cruiser-sized mass driver guns can blow off reapers' 'legs' in the last battle (I was honestly surprised to see this)?  These are nerdy nitpicks, but to me it sounds like the writers are trying to have it both ways - introducing cool new tech for organics that makes the war fightable, while simultaneously keeping the reapers too powerful to defeat.

[A0170]

Elyiia wrote...

A0170 wrote...

Elyiia wrote...

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.

The Reapers controlled the Geth and their massive fleet at this point. They probably felt that would be enough ships to defend their major point on Rannoch. 

Also I remember that we had several fleets tied down at Arcturus Station, the gateway to Earth and the capital of the Alliance. If the Reapers wanted Earth, than they had to go through there first, and of course as we know it took them a couple of minutes. We also had two fleets placed in reserve in the neighboring star systems of Eden Prime and Terra Nova, its just they never had the chance to join the fight because the Reapers had struck so fast. 

So I think in total, we had 7 fleets ready to defend Earth, its just that we placed the bulk of it at the chokepoint at Arcturus.

I'm talking about the Destroyer they left to guard the beam.
The Reapers basically bypassed the Alliance fleets and went straight to Earth with decoy tactics.

Tactics are everything. Ours were just dumb.

I know, sorry I wasn't clear. I meant they only needed the one Destroyer to control the massive Geth fleet in orbit.

And you're right. They did in a way bypass the Sixth and Seventh fleets around Eden Prime and Terra Nova. As for the fleets guarding Arcturus, the gateway to Earth, the Reapers did send a decoy fleet but it still annihilated what we had there. The entire 2nd fleet was sacrificed so that the 3rd and 5th could escape with heavy losses.

How many ships made up this Reaper decoy fleet? Twelve, and I'm stressing that to everyone because thats all it took to destroy our defenses at Arcturus and wipe the floor with three of the Alliance's top fleets.
 
The 1st fleet, waiting on the other side of the Sol Relay was slaughtered when the rest of the Reaper fleet came in. The 1st only escaped after their commanding Admiral sacrificed a tenth of the fleet to save the rest. The 4th fleet meanwhile, stationed right next to Earth was quickly turned into a meteor shower. 

I don't agree that their tactics were stupid however. They just followed what their established defense plans for an invasion that would've fared much better against the Batarians for example. I guess you could say how the Alliance brass's underestimation of the Reapers as stupidity though. But remember, they had never faced an enemy like the Reapers before.

For me, their biggest act of stupidity would be how they just sat around doing nothing for six months.


Source: http://masseffect.wi...e_Fall_of_Earth

Modifié par A0170, 20 avril 2012 - 06:27 .

[Elyiia]

A0170 wrote...

I know, sorry I wasn't clear. I meant they only needed the one Destroyer to control the massive Geth fleet in orbit.

And you're right. They did in a way bypass the Sixth and Seventh fleets around Eden Prime and Terra Nova. As for the fleets guarding Arcturus, the gateway to Earth, the Reapers did send a decoy fleet but it still annihilated what we had there. The entire 2nd fleet was sacrificed so that the 3rd and 5th could escape with heavy losses.

How many ships made up this Reaper decoy fleet? Twelve, and I'm stressing that to everyone because thats all it took to destroy our defenses at Arcturus and wipe the floor with three of the Alliance's top fleets.
 
The 1st fleet, waiting on the other side of the Sol Relay was slaughtered when the rest of the Reaper fleet came in. The 1st only escaped after their commanding Admiral sacrificed a tenth of the fleet to save the rest. The 4th fleet meanwhile, stationed right next to Earth was quickly turned into a meteor shower. 

So while I don't agree that their tactics were stupid, they did after all follow what their established defense plans for an invasion that would've fared much better against the Batarians for example, I do believe that the Alliance brass dropped the ball when they just sat around doing nothing for six months


Source: http://masseffect.wi...e_Fall_of_Earth

Twelve Capital ships who had the jump. That's one of their main strengths, a strong offensive.
With proper tactics we could fight a winning war. It would be long and there would be many, many losses but we could win.

Hell, even if they group up somewhere we can't blow a relay we could fire ships into the middle at near FTL speeds. Yes I know the codex says it's not possible to override the FTL drive, but there's evidence of it happening so that doesn't make sense.

[A0170]

Elyiia wrote...

A0170 wrote...

I know, sorry I wasn't clear. I meant they only needed the one Destroyer to control the massive Geth fleet in orbit.

And you're right. They did in a way bypass the Sixth and Seventh fleets around Eden Prime and Terra Nova. As for the fleets guarding Arcturus, the gateway to Earth, the Reapers did send a decoy fleet but it still annihilated what we had there. The entire 2nd fleet was sacrificed so that the 3rd and 5th could escape with heavy losses.

How many ships made up this Reaper decoy fleet? Twelve, and I'm stressing that to everyone because thats all it took to destroy our defenses at Arcturus and wipe the floor with three of the Alliance's top fleets.
 
The 1st fleet, waiting on the other side of the Sol Relay was slaughtered when the rest of the Reaper fleet came in. The 1st only escaped after their commanding Admiral sacrificed a tenth of the fleet to save the rest. The 4th fleet meanwhile, stationed right next to Earth was quickly turned into a meteor shower. 

So while I don't agree that their tactics were stupid, they did after all follow what their established defense plans for an invasion that would've fared much better against the Batarians for example, I do believe that the Alliance brass dropped the ball when they just sat around doing nothing for six months


Source: http://masseffect.wi...e_Fall_of_Earth

Twelve Capital ships who had the jump. That's one of their main strengths, a strong offensive.
With proper tactics we could fight a winning war. It would be long and there would be many, many losses but we could win.

Hell, even if they group up somewhere we can't blow a relay we could fire ships into the middle at near FTL speeds. Yes I know the codex says it's not possible to override the FTL drive, but there's evidence of it happening so that doesn't make sense.

They didn't exactly have the jump as we were expecting them. We just didn't expect how powerful that they'd be. And no, I've already outlined how proper tactics wouldn't work. Regualr style fleet battles would result in us losing far more ships than they would, according to the codex. And because it would take at least 4 dreads to take down one Sovereign class, hit and run tactics would mean we'd have to send out our dreads either alone, or with their escorts, just to do some damage. This complicates things even more if the Sovereign classes have escorts too, increasing the already slim chances that such an op would succeed and that much of the strike force would return.

We'd also have to find the perfect location, the right time, and the right intel. This is certainly possible, but waiting for such an opportunity to arise would take too long. And there's also the risk of faulty info being leaked, leading to them ambushing us.  

There's also the struggle for resources. Either way we have to have a supply base, and with the Reapers in control of most of the homeworlds and colonies of each major race, supplying the Allied war effort is already difficult enough. We'd have to defend the supply base, while making sure we have enough ships to retake a world or two. Add the mounting casualty count for ships and men for these ops and the need to further spread out your forces to defend the area you just took, and the logistics of maintaining a proper war effort becomes increaslingly difficult. Plus the Reapers can always come back and take the world we just took, which would be all the more easier with our defences spread out.

Modifié par A0170, 20 avril 2012 - 06:43 .

[A0170]

Modifié par A0170, 20 avril 2012 - 06:42 .

[Elyiia]

A0170 wrote...

They didn't exactly have the jump as we were expecting them. We just didn't expect how powerful that they'd be. And no, I've already outlined how proper tactics wouldn't work. Regualr style fleet battles would result in us losing far more ships than they would, according to the codex. And because it would take at least 4 dreads to take down one Sovereign class, hit and run tactics would mean we'd have to send out our dreads either alone, or with their escorts, just to do some damage. This complicates things even more if the Sovereign classes have escorts too, increasing the already slim chances that such an op would succeed and that much of the strike force would return.

We'd also have to find the perfect location, the right time, and the right intel. This is certainly possible, but waiting for such an opportunity to arise would take too long. And there's also the risk of faulty info being leaked, leading to them ambushing us.  

There's also the struggle for resources. Either way we have to have a supply base, and with the Reapers in control of most of the homeworlds and colonies of each major race, supplying the Allied war effort is already difficult enough. We'd have to defend the supply base, while making sure we have enough ships too retake a world or too. Add the mounting casualty count for ships and men for these ops and the need to further spread out your forces to defend the area you just took, and the logistics of maintaining a proper war effort becomes increaslingly difficult. Plus the Reapers can always come back and take the world we just took, which would be all the more easier with our defences spread out.

We're using different meaning for proper. I'm using it to reference intelligent ways to win, not just straight head on fights.

As for intel, I forget where but there's a Crucible asset that gives us access to the Reapers intel iirc. Along with the Reaper code you can give to the Asari strategist.

As for supplies, I never said it would be easy, but having a working relay network works in out favour.

It has less to do with safety systems and more to do with the fact
that FTL in ME is achieved by dramatically reducing the mass of an
object to make it go faster. What's the difference between a high-mass
object and a low-mass object?

Impact. The faster a vessel goes
with ME FTL, the less impact it has upon collision. A ship travelling at
or near the speed of light with a FTL drive will do little to no
detectable damage to a Reaper.

Mass is multiplative, velocity is calculated with an exponentional factor. It's a net gain.

[kingscawt]

Good post, great read.

[Rabid Rooster]

Ericus wrote...

I have to agree that a conventional victory is impossible, if for no other reason than the fact that no cycle ever managed it over millions of years. If the current cycle actually pulled it off, it would only be 'just barely'.  And even that would only be thanks to the Prothean sabotage of the Citadel at the end of the last cycle.

No other cycle pulled it off becasue the Reapers took control of the citadel and shut down the relays cutting everyone off form one another making their job easier going system by system. Shepards's cycle is different because the Reapers failed to do so and are for the first time facing a united galaxy. I disagree that a military victory is not possible, would there be heavy losses, sure.

[A0170]

Averdi wrote...

A0170 wrote...

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.

That's actually not clear from the codex.  It indicates that thanix bypasses barriers to some degree, then measures reapers' barriers versus dreadnaught firepower, and indicates that thanix has better results than kinetic.

Frankly, the codex and game presentation has consistency problems on this issue.  The thanix bypasses barriers to some extent, but it's liquid metal projection cools and hardens in transit (like a more traditional slug)?  Thanix is equipped widely, but not used in any battle I saw.  A dreadnaught can't survive a sigle hit from a reaper main gun, but the one floating above Vancouver in the opening invation sequence took several hits before blowing up.  A comparison is made between reaper and dreadnaught main gun sizes, while they are ostensibly completely different types (liquid metal squirtgun versus traditional mass driver) of weapons.  Even cruiser-sized mass driver guns can blow off reapers' 'legs' in the last battle (I was honestly surprised to see this)?  These are nerdy nitpicks, but to me it sounds like the writers are trying to have it both ways - introducing cool new tech for organics that makes the war fightable, while simultaneously keeping the reapers too powerful to defeat.

Yes, they're certainly a high amount of inconsistencies. The dreadnought above Vancouver/Seattly is actually supposed to be a cruiser for example, it was just a mixup in dialogue. I remember the codex also stating that even if the liquid metal projection from a Reaper gun doesn't pass through the barrier of a ship, it still overheats the hull of ship, causing catastrophic damage. 

As for the thanix cannons, it does say that quote,

"By the time of the Reaper invasion of the galaxy in 2186, the Thanix and its variations have seen widespread use among Alliance fleets and beyond."

Source: http://masseffect.wi...com/wiki/Thanix

So it does appear that thanix cannons are common enough among the Alliance navy, and as such we can imagine that such powerful weapons would be equipped on the most powerful ships of the fleet. Even with all that firepower though, the Codex entry aout Reaper vulnerabilities does state directly the need for there to be at least 4 dreadnoughts in play to take down a Sovereign class.

Also, I didn't notice the leg being blown off by a cruiser, I'm kind of bummed that I missed it. So there's one example of the power of whatever gun that cruiser was using. But remember the destroyer on Rannoch and how many orbital bombardments it took to take it down? Maybe the leg shot was a lucky one, or maybe its just another example of how inconsistent everything is?

Modifié par A0170, 20 avril 2012 - 06:59 .

[A0170]

kingscawt wrote...

Good post, great read.

Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it!

[Elyiia]

A0170 wrote...

Yes, they're certainly a high amount of inconsistencies. The dreadnought above Vancouver/Seattly is actually supposed to be a cruiser for example, it was just a mixup in dialogue. I remember the codex also stating that even if the liquid metal projection from a Reaper gun doesn't pass through the barrier of a ship, it still overheats the hull of ship, causing catastrophic damage. 

As for the thanix cannons, it does say that quote,

"By the time of the Reaper invasion of the galaxy in 2186, the Thanix and its variations have seen widespread use among Alliance fleets and beyond."

Source: http://masseffect.wi...com/wiki/Thanix

So it does appear that thanix cannons are common enough among the Alliance navy, and as such we can imagine that such powerful weapons would be equipped on the most powerful ships of the fleet. Even with all that firepower though, the Codex entry aout Reaper vulnerabilities does state directly the need for there to be at least 4 dreadnoughts in play to take down a Sovereign class.

Also, I didn't notice the leg being blown off by a cruiser, I'm kind of bummed that I missed it. So there's one example of the power of whatever gun that cruiser was using. But remember the destroyer on Rannoch and how many orbital bombardments it took to take it down? Maybe the leg shot was a lucky one, or maybe its just another example of how inconsistent everything is?

The entry about needing four dreadnoughts talks about when they used kinetic weapons. The thanix canons should do far more damage with less dreadnoughts needed.

But I agree, the amount of stuff that was retconned between ME2 and 3 has so many incosistancies.

[A0170]

Elyiia wrote...


We're using different meaning for proper. I'm using it to reference intelligent ways to win, not just straight head on fights.

As for intel, I forget where but there's a Crucible asset that gives us access to the Reapers intel iirc. Along with the Reaper code you can give to the Asari strategist.

As for supplies, I never said it would be easy, but having a working relay network works in out favour.

Yes, we are more creative, but the Reapers have the intelligence and processing power of an enitre species in each capital ship. Also, the manner in which we were able to creatively destroy some Reapers in game are either highly one off instances or instances where we still suffered major casualites. The Destroyer on Tuchanka for example involved the one of a kind, mother of all Thresher Maws. The Reaper on Rannoch? It involved Shepard personally dodging a Reaper laser at point blank range just to get a lock on. And he had to do it several times too. Not only is this a significant risk to whatever brave soul that volunteers for this, the Migrant Fleet also lost several ships in orbit while waiting for the targeting signal to lock. True, there were fighting the Geth fleet at the same time, but we must assume that the Reapers will probably have some sort of orbital presence where they have a destroyer deployed so that the situations in such a case would be similar. Besides, why did the Quarians, with all their tech, have a laser guided orbital bombardment option available that was unable to be implemented without requiring the user to face a destroyer up close and personal? Was it logistics, or maybe the Destroyer had some sort of inexplicable countermeasure? The Destroyer on Earth meanwhile? It ended up in the destruction of most of Hammer, and thats with Sword fleet in orbit, highlighting how calling in orbital strikes with your forces nearby could cause some serious friendly fire/collateral damage if the Destroyer is not in a good targetting position.

My point is, creativity and intelligent can work to a point, but in the end that means very little if destroying your enemy will cost you just as much if not more so in the end. Maybe we can come up with more effective tactics, but then how long will be able to use them before, again, our resources run out? We can't hold our supply bases/planets while launching major offenses at the sametime without leaving another area of ours undefended. The Reapers will be able to take back whatever we gain as a result. Coupled with the battle losses sustained, intelligence matters little if we don't have the ships and resources to implement it.

Also, the Reapers control the Citadel remember? It'll be a matter of time before they reprogram so that they can shut off the relay network like they did with the previous cycles. Or Starkid can climb out of his plothole and do it himself.

[A0170]

Elyiia wrote...

A0170 wrote...

Yes, they're certainly a high amount of inconsistencies. The dreadnought above Vancouver/Seattly is actually supposed to be a cruiser for example, it was just a mixup in dialogue. I remember the codex also stating that even if the liquid metal projection from a Reaper gun doesn't pass through the barrier of a ship, it still overheats the hull of ship, causing catastrophic damage. 

As for the thanix cannons, it does say that quote,

"By the time of the Reaper invasion of the galaxy in 2186, the Thanix and its variations have seen widespread use among Alliance fleets and beyond."

Source: http://masseffect.wi...com/wiki/Thanix

So it does appear that thanix cannons are common enough among the Alliance navy, and as such we can imagine that such powerful weapons would be equipped on the most powerful ships of the fleet. Even with all that firepower though, the Codex entry aout Reaper vulnerabilities does state directly the need for there to be at least 4 dreadnoughts in play to take down a Sovereign class.

Also, I didn't notice the leg being blown off by a cruiser, I'm kind of bummed that I missed it. So there's one example of the power of whatever gun that cruiser was using. But remember the destroyer on Rannoch and how many orbital bombardments it took to take it down? Maybe the leg shot was a lucky one, or maybe its just another example of how inconsistent everything is?

The entry about needing four dreadnoughts talks about when they used kinetic weapons. The thanix canons should do far more damage with less dreadnoughts needed.

But I agree, the amount of stuff that was retconned between ME2 and 3 has so many incosistancies.

Edit: Good catch! I see what you mean.

"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 better results against the Reapers than pure kinetic impacts."

This article refers to the vulnerabilities we learned about the Reapers during the war taking place in 2186. As stated in the article about Thanix cannons in 2186, "By the time of the Reaper invasion of the galaxy in 2186, the Thanix and its variations have seen widespread use among Alliance fleets and beyond."

This would implicate that because the Thanix series was in widespread usage by the time the Reapers invaded, the Dreadnoughts would surely have used them in battle. But would that still mean you need Four dreads or can you get away less? Hmmm.

Ship casualties would still presumably be high though. You would need to get the Dreads into range, and their escorts would need to hold off the large amount of Reaper escorts coming at them. Also don't the Reapers have greater range than our guns do too? 

Modifié par A0170, 20 avril 2012 - 07:36 .

[Elyiia]

A0170 wrote...
Yes, we are more creative, but the Reapers have the intelligence and processing power of an enitre species in each capital ship. Also, the manner in which we were able to creatively destroy some Reapers in game are either highly one off instances or instances where we still suffered major casualites. The Destroyer on Tuchanka for example involved the one of a kind, mother of all Thresher Maws. The Reaper on Rannoch? It involved Shepard personally dodging a Reaper laser at point blank range just to get a lock on. And he had to do it several times too. Not only is this a significant risk to whatever brave soul that volunteers for this, the Migrant Fleet also lost several ships in orbit while waiting for the targeting signal to lock. True, there were fighting the Geth fleet at the same time, but we must assume that the Reapers will probably have some sort of orbital presence where they have a destroyer deployed so that the situations in such a case would be similar. Besides, why did the Quarians, with all their tech, have a laser guided orbital bombardment option available that was unable to be implemented without requiring the user to face a destroyer up close and personal? Was it logistics, or maybe the Destroyer had some sort of inexplicable countermeasure? The Destroyer on Earth meanwhile? It ended up in the destruction of most of Hammer, and thats with Sword fleet in orbit, highlighting how calling in orbital strikes with your forces nearby could cause some serious friendly fire/collateral damage if the Destroyer is not in a good targetting position.

My point is, creativity and intelligent can work to a point, but in the end that means very little if destroying your enemy will cost you just as much if not more so in the end. Maybe we can come up with more effective tactics, but then how long will be able to use them before, again, our resources run out? We can't hold our supply bases/planets while launching major offenses at the sametime without leaving another area of ours undefended. The Reapers will be able to take back whatever we gain as a result. Coupled with the battle losses sustained, intelligence matters little if we don't have the ships and resources to implement it.

Also, the Reapers control the Citadel remember? It'll be a matter of time before they reprogram so that they can shut off the relay network like they did with the previous cycles. Or Starkid can climb out of his plothole and do it himself.

I dunno about that, the Reapers have several derp moments. The Destroyer not simply flying up to avoid Kalros and the Destroyer missing Shepard three times in near point blank range come to mind.

It really depends on whether or not you're talking from the start of the Reaper war, or at the point where we lose the Citadel. They should have realised it was probably the most important thing we have. The leadership has been hit with the stupid stick.

But again, with the point about the Destroyer, why use a Destroyer if you have that many Capital ships? There's no way a Destroyer would be better defending than a Capital ship.

Personally, I think Bioware felt the Reapers were too strong in ME1 and made them too weak in ME2 with the thanix canon so we end up with so many inconsistancies and retcons it makes any real theorycraft impossible.

[Allan Schumacher]

I've never understood the counterpoint of "Plot armor" as a reason why the Reapers cannot be defeated with conventional weapons.

If they could, couldn't one simply state that it's "Plot weakness?" It would seem that "Plot Armor" could be used for any defense of a story playing through in a way a person doesn't want since ultimately it's up to the writers to lay out the narrative?

[Elyiia]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I've never understood the counterpoint of "Plot armor" as a reason why the Reapers cannot be defeated with conventional weapons.

If they could, couldn't one simply state that it's "Plot weakness?" It would seem that "Plot Armor" could be used for any defense of a story playing through in a way a person doesn't want since ultimately it's up to the writers to lay out the narrative?

Random question, do you have any contact with the ME team? Can you ask them what happens if Javik touches a Reaper? I'd make a Twitter account to bug them but I don't want to make a Twitter account :3

[Faenshaer00]

But that's the whole point of plot armor. It protects the plot worthy things like how only the nameless red shirts in star trek end up dead.

[A0170]

Elyiia wrote...

A0170 wrote...
Yes, we are more creative, but the Reapers have the intelligence and processing power of an enitre species in each capital ship. Also, the manner in which we were able to creatively destroy some Reapers in game are either highly one off instances or instances where we still suffered major casualites. The Destroyer on Tuchanka for example involved the one of a kind, mother of all Thresher Maws. The Reaper on Rannoch? It involved Shepard personally dodging a Reaper laser at point blank range just to get a lock on. And he had to do it several times too. Not only is this a significant risk to whatever brave soul that volunteers for this, the Migrant Fleet also lost several ships in orbit while waiting for the targeting signal to lock. True, there were fighting the Geth fleet at the same time, but we must assume that the Reapers will probably have some sort of orbital presence where they have a destroyer deployed so that the situations in such a case would be similar. Besides, why did the Quarians, with all their tech, have a laser guided orbital bombardment option available that was unable to be implemented without requiring the user to face a destroyer up close and personal? Was it logistics, or maybe the Destroyer had some sort of inexplicable countermeasure? The Destroyer on Earth meanwhile? It ended up in the destruction of most of Hammer, and thats with Sword fleet in orbit, highlighting how calling in orbital strikes with your forces nearby could cause some serious friendly fire/collateral damage if the Destroyer is not in a good targetting position.

My point is, creativity and intelligent can work to a point, but in the end that means very little if destroying your enemy will cost you just as much if not more so in the end. Maybe we can come up with more effective tactics, but then how long will be able to use them before, again, our resources run out? We can't hold our supply bases/planets while launching major offenses at the sametime without leaving another area of ours undefended. The Reapers will be able to take back whatever we gain as a result. Coupled with the battle losses sustained, intelligence matters little if we don't have the ships and resources to implement it.

Also, the Reapers control the Citadel remember? It'll be a matter of time before they reprogram so that they can shut off the relay network like they did with the previous cycles. Or Starkid can climb out of his plothole and do it himself.

I dunno about that, the Reapers have several derp moments. The Destroyer not simply flying up to avoid Kalros and the Destroyer missing Shepard three times in near point blank range come to mind.

It really depends on whether or not you're talking from the start of the Reaper war, or at the point where we lose the Citadel. They should have realised it was probably the most important thing we have. The leadership has been hit with the stupid stick.

But again, with the point about the Destroyer, why use a Destroyer if you have that many Capital ships? There's no way a Destroyer would be better defending than a Capital ship.

Personally, I think Bioware felt the Reapers were too strong in ME1 and made them too weak in ME2 with the thanix canon so we end up with so many inconsistancies and retcons it makes any real theorycraft impossible.

Yes I absolutely see what you mean. Having to speculate and head canon on everything is really a disservice to us all. And I would guess that they'd prefer to use Destroyers because it's less risky for the capitals, and because their more destroyers out there. The capitals seem to be like the officers and the destroyers the footsoldiers, naturally Harby would order his minions to do the dirty work on the ground while he zooms in at the last minute and zaps everything to take all the glory. Or maybe its just easier for a destroyer to operate in the atmosphere than a capital ship due to their smaller size and less strain on their eezo cores? Either way, destroyers seem to be much lower on the Reaper heirarchy scale.

[A0170]

Elyiia wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I've never understood the counterpoint of "Plot armor" as a reason why the Reapers cannot be defeated with conventional weapons.

If they could, couldn't one simply state that it's "Plot weakness?" It would seem that "Plot Armor" could be used for any defense of a story playing through in a way a person doesn't want since ultimately it's up to the writers to lay out the narrative?

Random question, do you have any contact with the ME team? Can you ask them what happens if Javik touches a Reaper? I'd make a Twitter account to bug them but I don't want to make a Twitter account :3

Hahaha nice. Someone else posted this but what would happen if Javik sat on a toliet seat? 

[Elyiia]

A0170 wrote...

Elyiia wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I've never understood the counterpoint of "Plot armor" as a reason why the Reapers cannot be defeated with conventional weapons.

If they could, couldn't one simply state that it's "Plot weakness?" It would seem that "Plot Armor" could be used for any defense of a story playing through in a way a person doesn't want since ultimately it's up to the writers to lay out the narrative?

Random question, do you have any contact with the ME team? Can you ask them what happens if Javik touches a Reaper? I'd make a Twitter account to bug them but I don't want to make a Twitter account :3

Hahaha nice. Someone else posted this but what would happen if Javik sat on a toliet seat? 

I think my question is related to the plot If Javik can get imprints from things, why not send him through the Omega 4 relay, touch things then have some Asari scientists mind meld with him and see if there's any technology we could use?