434 réponses à ce sujet

[MetioricTest]

If it meant dozens, it would've said dozens.

Not necessarily. It just implies under a 100.

If I had 34 oranges and said I had "More Than A dozen" would you blink twice?

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

matthewmi wrote...

So you want Hackett to put the entire alliance fleet in one place? That seems to be the tactic being suggested, yeah nothing bad can happen with that plan.

I believe they wanted more of the hit-and-run tactics? Well, at least to actually *fight* Reapers instead of hiding.

[The Angry One]

MetioricTest wrote...

You don't seem to realize that "It never says otherwise" =/= "I can make things up and say they happened."

Explain why Hackett thinks it takes a whole fleet to kill one capital ship then and has no hope for a fleet vs. fleet battle.

Because they are the most militarily powerful race in the universe who had time to prepare, and they were still losing badly. This isn't knocking Hackett at all if anything it's praising him.

Alright I've had enough of this argument. The Alliance had time to prepare. The Turians did not have significantly more time.
If you make this argument one more time I will confirm you as a troll and ignore you.

It's bad extrapolation. That's the problem. "Over a dozen means 16" for example, is bad extrapolation. "The game is just wrong when they treat Hackett as the real deal." is bad extrapolation.

The former, that's your claim based on nothing except your assumption that the writer won't say dozens when they mean dozens.
The latter is not proven by any in-game evidence, the only tactics he does demonstrate, in the final battle, are laughable.

So you're saying

"I'm not wrong the game is wrong and makes no sense because my baseless fiction is correct."

instead of

"Yeah I'm wrong my baseless fiction must not be accurate because the game says otherwise."

Hell this is the same codex that mentions Palin.

No, I'm saying the plot is inconsistent with the codex and biased into only giving us a ridiculous space magic solution.

[The Angry One]

Wulfram wrote...

Considering it does say dozens later, I think it's reasonable to assume that the number of Reapers attacking Arcturus, rather than passing through to Earth, was between 13 and 23 Capital Ships. With, i'd assume, an unknown number of Destroyers in support.

Which is certainly more than enough to take on the 3-4 Dreadnoughts in the Arcturus Fleet.

It does not say dozens more later. IT SAYS DOZENS MORE ARE GOING TO EARTH.

matthewmi wrote...

So you want Hackett to put the entire
alliance fleet in one place? That seems to be the tactic being
suggested, yeah nothing bad can happen with that plan.

As opposed to what, each fleet fighting the Reapers individually and getting annihilated?
With a consolidated fleet, and proper tactics, Hackett would be able to repel the screening force long enough to save the people on Arcturus Station and all of the fleets, being able to make an orderly retreat without losing half his ships.

Modifié par The Angry One, 13 mai 2012 - 03:23 .

[The Night Mammoth]

WandererRTF wrote...

He could have lessened his losses, inflicted damage on the Reapers, and evacuated Arcturus.

Instead, he lost several fleets, the rest of which were badly damaged, incurred no significant losses on his enemy, and caused the entirety of the Alliance government to be killed.

How exactly? All those goals are either mutually exclusive or then plainly impossible.

I don't see how those goals are impossible. He could have chosen which is more important and run with it, but he fails to even remotely achieve any of them. 

As seen from what happened with Turians and Asari there is nothing Citadel races can do to stop Reapers from reaching their static targets.

Then don't try to stop them from reaching the target. Let them get there, and then deal with the problem. There was no way a single fleet or even two would have been able to stop a Reaper invasion force of such size, but Hackett tries to anyway, and goes about it in the worst way possible: by splitting his forces up into ineffectual chunks. 

Losses were likely as low as they could be, mind you Turians et al had been warned by what happened at Earth.

Of the five fleets he had, two were lost and none of the rest got out without significant losses. The Turians were already under attack within a few days, maybe even simultaneously. They Turians were warned by Garrus, and were at least prepared for it. 

Reaper invasion to Batarian homeworld happened first but no one had any idea of Reaper lack of need for logistics or of their ability to rapid jump relays.

Don't know about relay jumps, but logistics are are irrelevant in an initial attack.

So Alliance fleets were caught with their pants down, was it Hacketts fault, no.

They weren't. Hackett knew what was coming. If they were indeed surprised then it is his fault as head of the fleet, who had six months warning. 

Hackett chose to preserve as much of his assets as possible, hence the sacrifice of the single fleet.

Tried to after he was already engaged. He shouldn't have ended up in that position.

Likely had he tried to evacuate Arcturus there would not have been anything to evacuate any body with.

And failed, leaving the Alliance government and 45,000 people to die. 

And same goes with 'to damage' the Reapers, stand up fight with the Reapers is suicidal.

Then don't do that. My god, that's the point. Conventional tactics largely don't work, so don't use conventional tactics, like Coronati. 

[TookYoCookies]

MetioricTest wrote...

If it meant dozens, it would've said dozens.

Not necessarily. It just implies under a 100.

If I had 34 oranges and said I had "More Than A dozen" would you blink twice?

 

Ummm Yea lol. 

Little more than a dozen = 34, is like saying Losing a couple fleets, your CO's, main BOO (base of operations), and sacrificing one fleet to save your own ass makes you a fantastic canidate for Command! 

Their both f*cking stupid.

[The Night Mammoth]

MetioricTest wrote...

If it meant dozens, it would've said dozens.

Not necessarily. It just implies under a 100.

If I had 34 oranges and said I had "More Than A dozen" would you blink twice?

No. 

If you told by me you had more than a dozen I would think that you had about 14. 

If you then revealed 34 oranges I would think you mislead me. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 13 mai 2012 - 03:24 .

[Wulfram]

The Angry One wrote...

It does not say dozens more later. IT SAYS DOZENS MORE ARE GOING TO EARTH.

Calm down, I was agreeing with you on that.  Hackett was facing less that 24 reapers

Modifié par Wulfram, 13 mai 2012 - 03:24 .

[MetioricTest]

March 2011 - Week Five


03/28/2011 - Systems Alliance Reverses Stance on Turian Dreadnought Construction

“In a surprise move, respected Systems Alliance admiral, Steven Hackett, testified today before the Citadel Council that the Joint Chiefs of the Alliance have relaxed their attitude toward the increased construction of turian dreadnoughts. "The Alliance is behind our councilor one hundred percent," the admiral said, a significant departure from the Chiefs' protests of the past. "Having recently  conducted significant joint operation exercises with the turians, as  well as smaller efforts with salarians and asari, the Alliance Navy feels the threats of the 22nd and 23rd centuries [Earth standard] will be external to the signatories of the Treaty of Farixen." Batarian ambassador Nel'Tarras Tilshan reacted vehemently. "The humans appear to be falling into a bloody-minded course, and we hope they turn back. Dreadnoughts are not for peacekeeping, they are for devastating planets! Hackett now sides with those who are a direct threat to the batarian  people."”



How incompetent! He helped those Turians have the ability they need to fight back extensively!

Gwash what a fool.

Modifié par MetioricTest, 13 mai 2012 - 03:26 .

[The Angry One]

Wulfram wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

It does not say dozens more later. IT SAYS DOZENS MORE ARE GOING TO EARTH.

Calm down, I was agreeing with you on that.  Hackett was facing less that 24 reapers

I am calm, I honestly don't know why people think all caps reflects emotion rather than attempts clarity/possible control assumed by Harbinger.
I'm just dealing with some deliberately obtuse people who are making the same arguments (Earth had no warning, dozens of Reapers were at Arcturus) over and over.

Still, apologies if I misinterpreted your post.

Modifié par The Angry One, 13 mai 2012 - 03:28 .

[The Night Mammoth]

MetioricTest wrote...

March 2011 - Week Five


03/28/2011 - Systems Alliance Reverses Stance on Turian Dreadnought Construction

“In a surprise move, respected Systems Alliance admiral, Steven Hackett, testified today before the Citadel Council that the Joint Chiefs of the Alliance have relaxed their attitude toward the increased construction of turian dreadnoughts. "The Alliance is behind our councilor one hundred percent," the admiral said, a significant departure from the Chiefs' protests of the past. "Having recently  conducted significant joint operation exercises with the turians, as  well as smaller efforts with salarians and asari, the Alliance Navy feels the threats of the 22nd and 23rd centuries [Earth standard] will be external to the signatories of the Treaty of Farixen." Batarian ambassador Nel'Tarras Tilshan reacted vehemently. "The humans appear to be falling into a bloody-minded course, and we hope they turn back. Dreadnoughts are not for peacekeeping, they are for devastating planets! Hackett now sides with those who are a direct threat to the batarian  people."”



How incompetent! He helped those Turians have the ability they need to fight back extensively!

Gwash what a fool.

The irrelevacy is staggering. 

[MetioricTest]

Alright I've had enough of this argument. The Alliance had time to prepare. The Turians did not have significantly more time.
If you make this argument one more time I will confirm you as a troll and ignore you.

If you keep threatening to ignore people just for disagreeing with them then it shows you have a poor mind for discussion and debate.

Do you think the Turian and Asari and Salarian councilers were LYING when they repeatedly told you straight up that they would not help you because they needed the time to reinforce and grow their own defense for their own space to stand a chance?

Even Hackett says the Reapers took them by surprise and hit them too fast. Sure saying they were too near the Relay is a fair complaint but denying that The Turians had more time to prepare and much more awareness of the sheer power of the impending Reapers is just admitting you didn't pay attention to the game. They tell you this outright and the entire first main mission with the Turians is centered entirely around this.

No, I'm saying the plot is inconsistent with the codex and biased into only giving us a ridiculous space magic solution.

Has been true in every Mass Effect game and Dragon Age game and there are dozens of better examples of it that don't involve bad speculation. So if that's all you're trying to say you're going about it a very bizarre way

Modifié par MetioricTest, 13 mai 2012 - 03:33 .

[Zolt51]

Oh yeah, fantastic, yet another reason why the game sucks and is poorly written. Furthermore, it's not even something that the EC is likely to touch, so it's not something that is going to change: ever.

Don't you think it's time to move on? I hear Diablo 3 is coming out soon. I'm sure Blizzard's writers will suit your taste better!

Modifié par Zolt51, 13 mai 2012 - 03:31 .

[MetioricTest]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

MetioricTest wrote...

March 2011 - Week Five


03/28/2011 - Systems Alliance Reverses Stance on Turian Dreadnought Construction

“In a surprise move, respected Systems Alliance admiral, Steven Hackett, testified today before the Citadel Council that the Joint Chiefs of the Alliance have relaxed their attitude toward the increased construction of turian dreadnoughts. "The Alliance is behind our councilor one hundred percent," the admiral said, a significant departure from the Chiefs' protests of the past. "Having recently  conducted significant joint operation exercises with the turians, as  well as smaller efforts with salarians and asari, the Alliance Navy feels the threats of the 22nd and 23rd centuries [Earth standard] will be external to the signatories of the Treaty of Farixen." Batarian ambassador Nel'Tarras Tilshan reacted vehemently. "The humans appear to be falling into a bloody-minded course, and we hope they turn back. Dreadnoughts are not for peacekeeping, they are for devastating planets! Hackett now sides with those who are a direct threat to the batarian  people."”



How incompetent! He helped those Turians have the ability they need to fight back extensively!

Gwash what a fool.

The irrelevacy is staggering. 

Hackett being competent in a discussion about Hackett beign incompetent is irrelevant?

Hackett helping the Turians build dreadnoughts in a discussion about the Turian fleets is irrelevant?

Erm...ok.

[jeweledleah]

honestly, pretty much EVERYONE in ME3 is incompetent, including Shepard. they do ridiculous stupid, unreasonable stuff, because writers wanted to advance the plot in a certain direction, but couldn't be bothered to make it plausible. the more I try to analyze the game scene by scene, the worse it gets.

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

MetioricTest wrote...

Hackett helping the Turians build dreadnoughts in a discussion about the Turian fleets is irrelevant?

Erm...ok.

Surrely, he also did admirably with Crucible.
But I thought job description for fleet admiral is winning the battles, not acting as construction overseer. 

[The Angry One]

MetioricTest wrote...

Hackett being competent in a discussion about Hackett beign incompetent is irrelevant?

Hackett helping the Turians build dreadnoughts in a discussion about the Turian fleets is irrelevant?

Erm...ok.

I had assumed that the nature of the topic made it clear that it was "Admiral Hackett is incompetent [in ME3]".

I would change my topic title to better explain this to you, but I feel this would compromise my artistic integrity, so you'll have to settle for this post that provides clarity and context.

[MetioricTest]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

MetioricTest wrote...

Hackett helping the Turians build dreadnoughts in a discussion about the Turian fleets is irrelevant?

Erm...ok.

Surrely, he also did admirably with Crucible.
But I thought job description for fleet admiral is winning the battles, not acting as construction overseer. 

I always found the Crucible odd. They say it won't be safe for long but Hackett seems to have no problems keeping it out of the Reaper's eyesight. Where exactly is it before the Reapers get it? Do they move it around?

[Wulfram]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Surrely, he also did admirably with Crucible.
But I thought job description for fleet admiral is winning the battles, not acting as construction overseer. 

Except, no one wins battles in space against the reapers.

edit:  Except against Sovereign, I suppose.

Modifié par Wulfram, 13 mai 2012 - 03:37 .

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

MetioricTest wrote...
I always found the Crucible odd. They say it won't be safe for long but Hackett seems to have no problems keeping it out of the Reaper's eyesight. Where exactly is it before the Reapers get it? Do they move it around?

You see, we did found this odd too. And then thought - what if Crucible serves Reaper's purpose and Hacketts is indoctrinated? Huh, it suddenly explained it.

Modifié par Ingvarr Stormbird, 13 mai 2012 - 03:37 .

[The Angry One]

Wulfram wrote...

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Surrely, he also did admirably with Crucible.
But I thought job description for fleet admiral is winning the battles, not acting as construction overseer. 

Except, no one wins battles in space against the reapers.

Coronati wants a word with you.
The only reason he was forced to retreat was due to reinforcements. The Arcturus force was getting no reinforcements.

[TookYoCookies]

Wulfram wrote...


Except, no one wins battles in space against the reapers.

 

Certainly not with Hackett in command... hence the thread your in...

[MetioricTest]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

MetioricTest wrote...
I always found the Crucible odd. They say it won't be safe for long but Hackett seems to have no problems keeping it out of the Reaper's eyesight. Where exactly is it before the Reapers get it? Do they move it around?

You see, we did found this odd too. And then thought - what if Crucible serves Reaper's purpose and Hacketts is indoctrinated? Huh, it suddenly explained it.

That would also explain why the Reapers took it to Earth.

But what makes no sense is if Hackett is indoctrinated why not get the entire Alliance fleet wiped out?

[The Angry One]

MetioricTest wrote...

That would also explain why the Reapers took it to Earth.

But what makes no sense is if Hackett is indoctrinated why not get the entire Alliance fleet wiped out?

Because all of the galaxy's fleets unite under Hackett, which they wouldn't do if Hackett had no fleets.
It's the best way to keep him and the Crucible credible while at the same time brainwashing the galaxy into being convinced a conventional victory is impossible.

Modifié par The Angry One, 13 mai 2012 - 03:42 .

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

MetioricTest wrote...
That would also explain why the Reapers took it to Earth.

But what makes no sense is if Hackett is indoctrinated why not get the entire Alliance fleet wiped out?

Also you know, other people around him will get suspicious if he start doing this stuff? So he will be removed from command and most likely the whole plan will be found out.
So he had to stay inconspicious enough.
Also its very probable that Reapers needed Shepard to build and activate crucible.

Modifié par Ingvarr Stormbird, 13 mai 2012 - 03:44 .