249 réponses à ce sujet

[Geneaux486]

Ytook wrote...

Me, what is the point in building up forces if the strength of your forces doesn't matter, even of the crucible resolution had been good it would still make building up forces irrelevant, without a conventional victory then there is no sensical way of having a 'sliding scale' ending which me3 direly needs in my opinion.

Your forces completely matter.  You need them not only to construct the Crucible, but to move it into place.  The bulk of your forces you need to keep the Reapers at bay while the Crucible is moved into position.  That's the reason you build up those forces.

[httinks2006]

If space magic could happen then definitely the Crucible could have been some kind of weaken device, or kept the fire bay doors open etc etc ...

[boardnfool86]

The Angry One wrote...

boardnfool86 wrote...

Stop lying? Soveriegn wrought havoc upon the Citadel fleet and the Alliance fleet. That was one Reaper. Now there are hundreds, maybe thousands. You have brought the entire might of the galaxy and are fighting a losing battle against a portion of the foe, their largest portion sure, but still just a portion. I am not lying, I am telling it how it is. At no point in the entire series is conventional victory thought to be possible. The only ray of hope is the Crucible, and every species comes to realize that for a reason. But I am sure you'll just stay angry and insist I am lying, even though Hackett points out what Soveriegn did in ME1 and also points out that is just 1 Reaper. At the end of 2 when you see the Reaper fleet, if that didn't look impossible I don't know what to tell you.

Sovereign plus the Geth.

You know, the Geth. That are now on our side. Also, the fleets now have much improved technology. Stop pretending it's the same situation.

Right and now for every Geth ship add 10 Reapers, and thats conservative. I am not, its not the same situation, its 1,000 times worse.

[gloom13]

A convential victory obtained by a united galaxy that you worked so hard to acvhieve. Combine that with the subversion of the Illusive Man's attempt at Reaper control tech and make it into a useful weapon or signal. This then could be distributed by the bastardization/utilization of the Reaper's own technology (Citadel and Mass Relays). It could shut down their Indoctrination control or their shields or whatever you like - making the Reapers more vulnerable to the united forces of the Galaxy...

[Jayleia]

Optimystic_X wrote...

SoloPala wrote...

If a giant worm and some ground based missiles kill a reaper, conventional victory isn't a crazy idea, especially with the revelation that reapers are vulnerable when firing their main weapon, and the addition of reaper based weapon tech on ships from studying Sovereign, while denying them control of the relays and the citadel which they always did previously.

They needed "the mother of all thresher maws" and an orbital strike just to kill two Destroyers.

And according to the Codex 2:1 dreadnoughts against Sovereigns should be a roughly even fight, and a 4:1 results in dead Sovvy's...landing on planets also forces them to use energy to reduce mass at the expense of their shields.  Therefore, even a few armed merchant ships should have been able to pound the shields down eventually.

It switches rapidly from them being all-knowing gods, to being defeatable, to being gods, to becoming godlike morons to make good cinematics that, as long as you don't lock yourself into a formula, make good cinematics (fairly inconsistent, but FUN), and good gameplay...I refuse to acknowledge the existence of Priority: Earth.

[ediskrad327]

well people would complain that the Reapers were nerfed, but Nerfed victory against teh Reaper > space Magic that destroys the Galaxy

Modifié par ediskrad327, 04 mai 2012 - 05:59 .

[Rabid Rooster]

The Angry One wrote...

I'd have liked whoever wrote the Reaper war related entires in the codex to write the ending, because whoever it was knew how this damn fight should go. Proper tactics and application of new technologies against a seemingly superior foe leading to victory.

Instead we got depressing, defeatist nonsense that just doesn't fit the last two games.

Just to show what the disconnect is:

ME1:
Alliance guy: "Sovereign's too strong! We need to fall back!"
Hackett: "Negative. Take that monster down."

ME3:
Hackett: "Reapers are unstoppable! We need a deus ex machina or we're all going to die! Hold me mommy!"

Agreed.

[AppealToReason]

 Hell no. I expecting that once I discovered the Crucible. "Oh okay, so this is a big gun and I'm gonna shoot it and kill everything bad and I gotta go get resources to help make the big gun"

What I got was a pleasant surprise as it caught me completely off guard and I liked that.

[DrowVampyre]

I sure would have. And I have no idea where people are getting this idea that there are tens of thousands of Reapers. There aren't - if there were, we couldn't possibly do anything about it, and we wouldn't have had the months to build the fleets and the Crucible in the first place. And as for their "OMGWTFBBQPOWAH!!"...overrated. The asari were beating them until they sent more ships than the asari had.

From the codex: "By engaging in guerilla strategies--blast a Reaper ship, then jumping to FTL where they could not be tracked--the asari forced the Reapers to remain on the defensive.
Unfortunately, the Reapers' greater numbers allowed them to accept certain losses, so they soon ignored the attacks against them and began orbital bombardment of Thessia."

They had the Reapers on the defensive until they pulled a zerg rush and just took their losses. For reference, the asari have at most 20 dreadnoughts. What's that mean? Well, that means that either non-dreadnoughts can kill Reapers ships faster than they themselves can be destroyed, or that dreadnoughts can jump in, nuke a Reaper, and jump out before the Reapers can even react. If they had the tens of thousands of ships some people are claiming, and sent even a tenth of that force to asari space, then you're basically saying that asari ships are way, way more powerful than Reapers because they're keeping a force that drastically outnumbers them on the defensive until they outnumber them even beyond that.

Keep in mind that these Reapers weren't magically weakened, they wouldn't have been "stunned" into having their shields dropped a la Sovereign...they were either overpowered or caught utterly by surprise on a regular basis and destroyed before they could metaphorically blink...and then, somehow, the asari ships that destroyed them got away (again regularly) without a trace...how could they do that if there's tens of thousands, even a thousand - hell, even hundreds of Reapers in their sector?

No, the Reapers aren't nearly as numerous nor powerful as people are thinking...they have damn good PR. They're the pirates of the ME universe - sneak up on you, hit you when you're vulnerable, do horrible things to you once you're beaten, but even though they do have a bad bite (I'm not saying they don't! ), their bark is much, much worse.

That said...if you want to have some special Reaper-weakening thingie, fine. Have the Crucible (or better yet, the geth or EDI) send out a galaxy-wide signal of some sort that does it. You need the Citadel because it's already got all the infrastructure to send that sort of signal everywhere in the galaxy. Have the signal disrupt the Reapers' oneness...de-unify those millions of minds that were all melted and turned into the thing that melted them. You want to take their bite away completely? There you go.

(EDIT: I should note, when referencing Reapers, I'm talking capital ships, not destroyers. Destroyers push their numbers up, to be sure, but are also much easier to destroy and much less dangerous...and even so, if they had the numbers people are claiming, it still would have been a one-day war.)

Modifié par DrowVampyre, 04 mai 2012 - 07:25 .

[DJBare]

The Angry One wrote...

I'd have liked whoever wrote the Reaper war related entires in the codex to write the ending, because whoever it was knew how this damn fight should go. Proper tactics and application of new technologies against a seemingly superior foe leading to victory.

Instead we got depressing, defeatist nonsense that just doesn't fit the last two games.

Just to show what the disconnect is:

ME1:
Alliance guy: "Sovereign's too strong! We need to fall back!"
Hackett: "Negative. Take that monster down."

ME3:
Hackett: "Reapers are unstoppable! We need a deus ex machina or we're all going to die! Hold me mommy!"

[daecath]

There aren't a lot of things that I wouldn't have preferred over the ending we have. Shepard dressing up in a chicken suit to try and distract them maybe... nope, still would have preferred that to the ending we have.

[DrowVampyre]

daecath wrote...

There aren't a lot of things that I wouldn't have preferred over the ending we have. Shepard dressing up in a chicken suit to try and distract them maybe... nope, still would have preferred that to the ending we have.

Hmm...
...
...
*considers*
...
...
Y'know...
...
...
Yep, still better. It makes as much sense, but at least might get a chuckle and could be mixed with the Benny Hill song for a better laugh. ^_-

[daecath]

AppealToReason wrote...

 Hell no. I expecting that once I discovered the Crucible. "Oh okay, so this is a big gun and I'm gonna shoot it and kill everything bad and I gotta go get resources to help make the big gun"

What I got was a pleasant surprise as it caught me completely off guard and I liked that.

I will admit, it caught me completely off guard too. Of course, if someone came up to me and kicked me in the crotch, that would catch me off guard too. And I'd probably find that more enjoyable than the ending was.

[DJBare]

Let my Shepard wake up, grab his gun and say "screw this, I'm going after Harbinger, Joker prep the Normandy!!"

[daecath]

DrowVampyre wrote...

daecath wrote...

There aren't a lot of things that I wouldn't have preferred over the ending we have. Shepard dressing up in a chicken suit to try and distract them maybe... nope, still would have preferred that to the ending we have.

Hmm...
...
...
*considers*
...
...
Y'know...
...
...
Yep, still better. It makes as much sense, but at least might get a chuckle and could be mixed with the Benny Hill song for a better laugh. ^_-

www.youtube.com/watch
It does help.

[Baronesa]

The Angry One wrote...

I'd have liked whoever wrote the Reaper war related entires in the codex to write the ending, because whoever it was knew how this damn fight should go. Proper tactics and application of new technologies against a seemingly superior foe leading to victory.

Instead we got depressing, defeatist nonsense that just doesn't fit the last two games.

Just to show what the disconnect is:

ME1:
Alliance guy: "Sovereign's too strong! We need to fall back!"
Hackett: "Negative. Take that monster down."

ME3:
Hackett: "Reapers are unstoppable! We need a deus ex machina or we're all going to die! Hold me mommy!"

So much of THIS!

[httinks2006]

There's always a way if you don't give up , submit and listen to people telling you can't do it, you're not strong enough , smart enough , fast enough you don't have enough help , they will never work together as a team to get the job done .................

[Sepharih]

Geneaux486 wrote...
But they didn't retcon it to anything, they filled in what was previously a blank space in our knowlege of the Reapers.
The atrocity thereof is a matter of opinion, one I happen to disagree with. 

They did retcon it.  It fits the defintion of a retcon, and  arguing it isn't at this point is nothing but semantics anyway.

Citing something as being a "matter of opinion" doesn't exactly do a lot for an argument.  The quality of the matrix sequels is a matter of opinion.  The side which says they're atrocious tends to have more amunition though.

Also, whether or not you actually liked the catalyst...can you at least admit that having the reapers be the servants of a godchild doesn't do them any favors in terms of their percieved threat?  Don't you think they were scarier when they were more mysterious and unknowable?

Geneaux486 wrote...

Ytook wrote...

Me, what is the point in building up forces if the strength of your forces doesn't matter, even of the crucible resolution had been good it would still make building up forces irrelevant, without a conventional victory then there is no sensical way of having a 'sliding scale' ending which me3 direly needs in my opinion.

Your forces completely matter.  You need them not only to construct the Crucible, but to move it into place.  The bulk of your forces you need to keep the Reapers at bay while the Crucible is moved into position.  That's the reason you build up those forces.

Whether you favor a conventional victory or not, I think the biggest problem with War assets goes back to the biggest and most consistent problem the ending has.
First rule of storytelling in my book is show, don't tell....and the final mission and ending sequence of this game break that rule a lot.

The codex, radio chatter, holocommunicator (wrong word?) may tell you that all those war assets are actually out there doing something....but all of it feels unimportant and meaningless because it's all treated as unimportant meaningless throwaway dialogue from the writers and developers trying to tie up the final act in their story.
I still favor conventional victory.....but even with the crucible plotline where their role would have boiled down to glorified escort duty.....it would have been much more satisfying to have seen any payoff for these things rather than being told somewhere in the codex that it actually really does all matter despite your lying eyes.

[Subguy614]

First of all, @Jayleia I freaking love your sig!

OK, I proposed this in another thread somewhere, but :

If the crucible took out ALL kinetic barriers....our and the reapers....that puts us on an even footing, since our dreadnaughts are one hit killed by reapers main weapon (as things are now). This allows strength of fleets (War Assets) to determine on a sliding scale, the outcome of the game.

[Sepharih]

Subguy614 wrote...

First of all, @Jayleia I freaking love your sig!

OK, I proposed this in another thread somewhere, but :

If the crucible took out ALL kinetic barriers....our and the reapers....that puts us on an even footing, since our dreadnaughts are one hit killed by reapers main weapon (as things are now). This allows strength of fleets (War Assets) to determine on a sliding scale, the outcome of the game.

^Would be an improvement.

That said, any conclusion to the story that hinges on a plot device like the crucible is bound to be somewhat underwhelming to me.  Having thought about it, the only way I would have liked the crucible at all is if it had A) been a reaper trap, or turned out to fit its namesake and not actually done anything but served as a trial to unite the races together.

[Sir Fluffykins]

YES! I know from the story it'd be impossible, too many Reapers, but I'd have liked the option for a conventional victory AND a conventional failure too.

In Space-Fairy-Magic-Land where we got the endings we were promsed, we could have given choices in how the space and ground battle were handed based on the War Assets and the end - besides the final choice- would be based on EMS level, but more varied then "If you hit highest level you get terrible seconds long clip of Shepard take a breath".

If you pull it off, you win a decisive battle for Earth, retake it and Earth becomes the staging point for the "War" effort. Reapers control all of known space at this point, I'd be happy if the game ended with a "We're in a good position to win now, but it'll take time" and then because you chose Synthesis you get a creepy cliff-hanger of Shepard with Sarens eyes.

If you barely pull it off, people you know and fleets/units get hammered and the future becomes uncertain, failure on different levels would be the same with fleet losing, people dying and maybe ends with you and LI having to deal with Indoctrinated enemies in a small Shelter as the end slowly comes.

[Kr0gan]

I wish somebody would have researched the "feedback error" that Sovereign suffers when you kill Saren-Husk in ME1 so we could repeat it during the fight like a jammer to leave the Reapers vulnerable to a conventional victory (maybe use the Crucible for that).

Besides if the Reapers were undefeatable by a conventional victory they wouldn't take the effort to take the Citadel and cut access to the relays so they can exterminate organics metodically like it was stated in ME1... sadly that's another important plot point that was forgotten by the time of ME3.

[Joccaren]

CapnManx wrote...

Not really. If it was that easy, it would have been done millions of years ago; some kind of 'get out clause' was required.

I would have preferred something along the lines of a previously undiscovered weakness in the Reapers, or a way of undoing indoctrination so the Reaper troops all go nuts and start tearing the Reapers apart from the inside; but I admit, I might have found those to be predictable, while I definitely didn't see the Catalyst coming.

The Reason it was never done before: EVERY OTHER CYCLE HAD EVERY RELAY SHUT DOWN, HAD ITS FLEETS IN SHAMBLES, AND WAS WITHOUT LEADERSHIP.
There was no chance in any other cycle to mount an effective resistance as the Reapers burst through the Dark Space Relay and shut down all Relays in the Galaxy. They then went about their merry way picking off the previous races world by world, until nothing remained. This was established in ME1.

[Joccaren]

The Angry One wrote...

I'd have liked whoever wrote the Reaper war related entires in the codex to write the ending, because whoever it was knew how this damn fight should go. Proper tactics and application of new technologies against a seemingly superior foe leading to victory.

Instead we got depressing, defeatist nonsense that just doesn't fit the last two games.

Just to show what the disconnect is:

ME1:
Alliance guy: "Sovereign's too strong! We need to fall back!"
Hackett: "Negative. Take that monster down."

ME3:
Hackett: "Reapers are unstoppable! We need a deus ex machina or we're all going to die! Hold me mommy!"

Also this.

[MakeMineMako]

boardnfool86 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

boardnfool86 wrote...

Stop lying? Soveriegn wrought havoc upon the Citadel fleet and the Alliance fleet. That was one Reaper. Now there are hundreds, maybe thousands. You have brought the entire might of the galaxy and are fighting a losing battle against a portion of the foe, their largest portion sure, but still just a portion. I am not lying, I am telling it how it is. At no point in the entire series is conventional victory thought to be possible. The only ray of hope is the Crucible, and every species comes to realize that for a reason. But I am sure you'll just stay angry and insist I am lying, even though Hackett points out what Soveriegn did in ME1 and also points out that is just 1 Reaper. At the end of 2 when you see the Reaper fleet, if that didn't look impossible I don't know what to tell you.

Sovereign plus the Geth.

You know, the Geth. That are now on our side. Also, the fleets now have much improved technology. Stop pretending it's the same situation.

Right and now for every Geth ship add 10 Reapers, and thats conservative. I am not, its not the same situation, its 1,000 times worse.

The Geth Fleet, pre-war, was estimated to be at 10,000 vessels (max). I can't see the Reapers with that many Sovereign class capitals (100,000). So, if the Reaper forces had that many ships, they are likely mostly made up of Destroyers, Transports, and Processing Vessels.

And even at that, I think 100,000 is a bit too high.

Modifié par MakeMineMako, 05 mai 2012 - 05:33 .