249 réponses à ce sujet

[The Angry One]

Optimystic_X wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Of course I knew someone like you would deliberately misinterpret the thematic argument I was making just to defend this ending.
It's a shame that BioWare has come to solely appeal to people like you.

You mean the "theme" that someone might react differently to impossible odds?
Oh that horrible mean Hackett, not letting us throw our lives away.

The theme of never giving up even if the odds seem impossible, and at that point killing Sovereign seemed impossible. Doesn't matter if there was 1 of him or 1 million.

Oh and yeah Hackett didn't needlessly throw lives away... oh, except he threw everyone's life away, and the galaxy's future by building a device nobody had any clue what it did, and hey look it destroyed the galaxy's infrastructure permanently.

Modifié par The Angry One, 03 mai 2012 - 03:56 .

[DazenCobalt17]

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!"

I swear every post I see from you is so full of win.

[bluewolv1970]

If the Mass Effect Writers (those who wrote the ending) had written WWII they would have used Space magic to explain how The British outlasted the ****'s...conventional victory...unpossible...

[PsyrenY]

The Angry One wrote...

The theme of never giving up even if the odds seem impossible, and at that point killing Sovereign seemed impossible. Doesn't matter if there was 1 of him or 1 million.

Who ever said "killing Sovereign was impossible?" He's one bloody ship. There is simply no way you can try to create equivalency between the two situations.

The Angry One wrote...

Oh and yeah Hackett didn't needlessly throw lives away... oh, except he threw everyone's life away, and the galaxy's future by building a device nobody had any clue what it did, and hey look it destroyed the galaxy's infrastructure permanently.

It's not permanent ffs.

Modifié par Optimystic_X, 03 mai 2012 - 03:58 .

[Pottumuusi]

A conventional victory would make the reapers look extremely stupid, but that's okay, since that's what they look like now.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 I don't believe it's possible, never did over the length of the series. And based on info I used from the ME3 Codex, # of dreadnoughts between council races (plus another half to account for other recruited support) and how many can take down a Captial Ship, my calculations come out to 150 dreadnoughts taking out 160 Capital Ships before all those dreadnoughts go down (it takes four per CS).

...

It depends on how many Reapers you think are out there, and they obviously never made this clear. But I believe the figure is in the tens of thousands. So based on what I figured, conventional warfare is not going to cut it.

...

Adding on to this, the Codex speculates that 1 Captial Ship is created every cycle. Let's say this is true...

Earth is 4.1 billion years old. A Reaper cycle occurs, supposedly, every 50,000 years. 4.1 bil / 50 k = 82,000 Captial Ships. And, Earth is not likely even the oldest planet in the ME universe either...

Yeah, I wouldn't count on conventional victory any time soon.

[b2smooth]

I would take conventional defeat over what we got.

[tetsutsuru]

tilusN7 wrote...

I see no real reason that a conventional victory isn't possible.

The thanix cannon (yes I brought it up) was retrofitted onto the Normandy, and according to the codex, most other ships in the fleet that went to Earth.

Said weapon destroyed a collector cruiser, barriers and all in two, yup two, shots.

Let's say for lack of a firm number that the quarians brought as little as 5% of their fleet, and that the combined fleets of the rest of the galaxy brought enough to equal the quarians. That's 5000 ships with thanix cannons equipped. (Also note that the geth if you saved them aren't bound by the treaty of farixen and according to the codex have as many dreadnoughts as the Turians did pre-war)

I find it hard to believe that that mount of firepower couldn't seriously screw with the reapers in conventional space combat. Even if you had 20 ships focusing a single sovereign class reaper (codex says it takes roughly 5 dreadnoughts to take down 1 sovereign class reaper), you could still fight up to 250 sovereigns at a time.

Conventional victory in my opinion is entirely possible, it'd be costly as hell, but doable.

My sentiments exactly.  Specially your last statement.

And as Shepard said, "... we all went into this knowing it wouldn't be easy".  There's a big chance we'll lose and be wiped out.  But since there's a chance that we can win, that's why we fight.

Modifié par tetsutsuru, 03 mai 2012 - 03:58 .

[The Angry One]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Who ever said "killing Sovereign was impossible?" He's one bloody ship. There is simply no way you can try to create equivalency between the two situations.

"Sovereign's too strong!"

It's not permanent ffs.

10,000 year dark age might as well be. Whatever comes out after that will not be Mass Effect.

[Pottumuusi]

bluewolv1970 wrote...

If the Mass Effect Writers (those who wrote the ending) had written WWII they would have used Space magic to explain how The British outlasted the ****'s...conventional victory...unpossible...

**** Germany vs The United Kingdom is obviously a valid comparison to the Reaper situation.

(Wow, is that really cencored?)

Modifié par Pottumuusi, 03 mai 2012 - 04:00 .

[boardnfool86]

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!"

It is made clear at the beginning that conventional victory is impossible. You're fleet is getting smashed to pieces when you board the Citadel. You manage to defeat lone reapers, but fleets dominate space. Its mentioned on a few occassions that bogging the Reapers down in ground wars is the only way to slow them down. Space ships are slow and the Reapers can take them out with one direct hit. I wish William Wallace got to live at the end of Braveheart, but thats not how his story plays out. Conventional victory was ruled out in ME1, you may want to replay the series.

Also, @ OP, a Deus Ex Machina cannot be introduced at the beginning of a story. It has to be a contrived out of no where solution at the end.

[lordnyx1]

The alliance lost what less than a dozen ships taking down the geth fleet and a pissed off sovereign, who only killed in screen a single turian ship on its way in..hip. So yeah with the info gained from the collector base and the time from arrival I assumed we'd kick the reapers in the daddy bags and back into dark space, with their rachni and geth plans I assumed the reapers generally divided and conquered the galaxy preciously which this cycle managed to avoid..

[The Angry One]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Adding on to this, the Codex speculates that 1 Captial Ship is created every cycle. Let's say this is true...

Earth is 4.1 billion years old. A Reaper cycle occurs, supposedly, every 50,000 years. 4.1 bil / 50 k = 82,000 Captial Ships. And, Earth is not likely even the oldest planet in the ME universe either...

Yeah, I wouldn't count on conventional victory any time soon.

And yet, the Reapers do not have the numbers to take Kahje if it's orbital defences are up, overrun Salarian defences or destroy the Turian's major fuel refinery.

The Reapers don't have anywhere near these numbers. Hell, the Prothean cycle was a dud cycle for them, no capital ships at all.

[PsyrenY]

The Angry One wrote...

"Sovereign's too strong!"

That means "he's wiping out our best ships" not "we can't destroy him." Recall that he can tear through the Destiny Ascension in seconds if you don't sacrifice half a fleet saving it. 

The Angry One wrote... 
10,000 year dark age might as well be. Whatever comes out after that will not be Mass Effect.

Where is that figure coming from (besides your posterior?)

[The Angry One]

boardnfool86 wrote...

It is made clear at the beginning that conventional victory is impossible. You're fleet is getting smashed to pieces when you board the Citadel. You manage to defeat lone reapers, but fleets dominate space. Its mentioned on a few occassions that bogging the Reapers down in ground wars is the only way to slow them down. Space ships are slow and the Reapers can take them out with one direct hit. I wish William Wallace got to live at the end of Braveheart, but thats not how his story plays out. Conventional victory was ruled out in ME1, you may want to replay the series.

Also, @ OP, a Deus Ex Machina cannot be introduced at the beginning of a story. It has to be a contrived out of no where solution at the end.

No, it is not getting smashed to pieces. It is taking losses, but at max EMS even with the garbage tactics used by the fleet, they are still wrecking Reaper capital ships. The fleet is still organised and fighting by the time you make it to the Citadel.
Conventional victory if the Reapers are delayed and don't take the Citadel was never ruled out in ME1, you may wish to stop lying.

[TookYoCookies]

Optimystic_X wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

The theme of never giving up even if the odds seem impossible, and at that point killing Sovereign seemed impossible. Doesn't matter if there was 1 of him or 1 million.

Who ever said "killing Sovereign was impossible?" He's one bloody ship. There is simply no way you can try to create equivalency between the two situations.

The Angry One wrote...

Oh and yeah Hackett didn't needlessly throw lives away... oh, except he threw everyone's life away, and the galaxy's future by building a device nobody had any clue what it did, and hey look it destroyed the galaxy's infrastructure permanently.

It's not permanent ffs.

The back peddling begins..

[patpatrik]

Order to "fall back" was a war crime. Leaving the Earth without fight in the beginning - another Hackett war crime. In times WW2 he would be executed immediately after brief war trial. If our forefathers fought so cowardly like this ****** from the future, they never would have won the Naz*s.

Modifié par patpatrik, 03 mai 2012 - 04:06 .

[The Angry One]

Optimystic_X wrote...

That means "he's wiping out our best ships" not "we can't destroy him." Recall that he can tear through the Destiny Ascension in seconds if you don't sacrifice half a fleet saving it.

Alright, this is where you go and replay ME1, or watch videos and learn to know what you're talking about.
The Destiny Ascension is destroyed by the Geth. By the time the fleet arrives, Sovereign is already inside the closed Citadel.

And no, the guy saying Sovereign is too strong is calling for a retreat. Hackett denies this.

Where is that figure coming from (besides your posterior?)

The script notes for the epilogue. 10,000 years later. No star travel.

[PsyrenY]

The Angry One wrote...

Alright, this is where you go and replay ME1, or watch videos and learn to know what you're talking about.
The Destiny Ascension is destroyed by the Geth. By the time the fleet arrives, Sovereign is already inside the closed Citadel.

Point.

The Angry One wrote... 
And no, the guy saying Sovereign is too strong is calling for a retreat. Hackett denies this.

You would want to retreat from a laser that can cut through your ship with one shot too. That doesn't mean you can't destroy the thing firing it, it means you're scared.

The Angry One wrote... 
The script notes for the epilogue. 10,000 years later. No star travel.

Where do you get "no star travel" from that scene? Did he say "we have no ships?"
You are speculating as much as any "pro-ender," just negatively.

Modifié par Optimystic_X, 03 mai 2012 - 04:07 .

[JabberJim]

I wanted a main Reaper Mother ship. One with a central brain Shepard has to infiltrate to disable in order to take out the entire Reaper armada. An epic battle. A tried and true intergalactic, against impossible odds kind of ending.

Not red, green, blue

[SpartanCommander]

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.

That's what I was betting on right as soon as I got the game.  The Reapers likely have some kind of weakness to something.  Which I noted in the previous games it seemed to point toward that they seem to rely on shields for most protection and once that's eliminated their combat ability is drastically diminished.  Since they couldn't even get through the ship's barriers before and as soon as they were down the Reaper was killed in a matter of seconds in one volley.  That says something.  I would have expected their to be a mission to find a way to drastically lower Reaper shields.

The next game showed a reaper was disabled with a powerful Mass Accelerator weapon.  Which lead me to realize that the Tech of that kind of weapon is distinctly differenf from weapons you see in ME.  Which means that Reapers rely so much on other races using Mass Effect Fields in their weapons that it's likely all their defences are centralized around protection against weapons and tech that use Mass Effect Fields.

It would explain why the Reapers quickly destoryed all Nuklear missle silo's from Earth since no other race seems to even be mentioned having them and their is no mention of them clearing away strategic missile area before.  Which would mean the Reapers may have recognized those weapons to be a threat since a Nuclear Missle doesn't use anything to do with ME fields.  


From what I can tell the Best way to fight the Reapers is to use tech and weapons the Reapers didn't supply in their plans of control.  (They fed everyone ME field tech to control how the races develop meaning their defences are likely designed to combat those weapons the most effectivly.  )  IT's even possible that the Radiation fallout from a Nuke may actually cause carm to a Reapers internal systems even with it's barriers up.

[Pottumuusi]

patpatrik wrote...

Order to "fall back" was a war crime. Leave the Earth without fight in the beginning - another Hackett war crime. In times WW2 he would be executed immediately after brief war trial. If our forefathers fought so cowardly like this ****** from the future, they never would have won the Naz*s.

I think that this is actually known as strategy.

It was actually the Naz*s(god, I can't believe that's cencored) that had their officers executed for ordering their men to fall back. Remember how that turned out for them?

[soulprovider]

 I fully expected it, everything from the first game and the second game led up to shepard taking on the reapers full on and yet the entirety of ME3 threw that out the window. Even the second game with the turian fleet and the Alliance adapting reaper weaponry put them on even footing and the armor system that created a better sheild matrix for the normandy. All of that showed that a unified galaxy could hold their own against the reapers, but all of that was thrown out in favor of the crucible amd that horrible storyline.

I even held hope that at the final earth mission was going to be a semi rts game where shepards decisions determined whether they won the battle and drove the reapers back to dark space or shepard failed and the reapers wooped the vicort fleet but then priority earth happened....

Modifié par soulprovider, 03 mai 2012 - 04:12 .

[ahandsomeshark]

I don't think it's limited to either extremes. I think there could have been a victory that mixed the crucible plot line with conventional (or creative) warfare. (like the crucible destroyed their ability to communicate or took down their barriers/shields or something)

Modifié par ahandsomeshark, 03 mai 2012 - 04:09 .