434 réponses à ce sujet

[WandererRTF]

Ok, can we build a stationary fortress in the vicinity of the relay? With lot of weapons facing "in all directions".
Or a minefield?
Even if there is a drift, there still should be localized area where they arrive.

Space has lots of... space. Hence the name. All static installation gives is a target for the enemy to shoot at, they could do it from the other side of the system with mass accelerator weapons leaving the installation without any means to retaliate or even defend itself.

And mines... Unless you have infinite number of those then they are not going to work.

[Drake-Shepard]

Using the moon to mount a defensive.

If the Turians can use their moon so effectively, why can't we use ours.

I know the alliance does have a defensive outpost there that was taken out very easily but that was just lame. They got taken out so fast they couldn't even get off a proper transmission. thats 10 seconds.
Earths moon is special and has a particular phenomenon that its rotation is synced to that of Earth. The same side always faces earth.

So when it comes to military strategy this is awesome. Put a crap load of cannons on it. Done. At the very least it will slow them down

[The Night Mammoth]

WandererRTF wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Erecting useless defences is stupid positions despite having warning about the Reaper's coming is the point

Where is it stated that they were warned? By all accounts they were taken by surprise, ie. attacked without warning.

EDIT: Sure, they were warned that Reapers would attack, eventually. They had no way of knowing that Reapers could move as swiftly as they did.

Hackett had six months warning. The Alliance as a whole had an unknown amount of warning considering the Hegemony went completely dark some time before the Reapers started on the move. Hackett then had enough warning to position each fleet in a different location directly before the Reaper vanguard came through.

His fleet positioning was foolish, and it cost him. Of all military commanders with enough power to do anything about it he should have known not to split his forces and put them in stupid locations. 

[BEEF7347]

calling his character incompetent is just daft the fault lies with the writers and how his story was scripted as for the tactics in the final battle remember in just a game and this sequence was just meant to be big flashy and Hollywood esque.

[The Night Mammoth]

WandererRTF wrote...

Ok, can we build a stationary fortress in the vicinity of the relay? With lot of weapons facing "in all directions".
Or a minefield?
Even if there is a drift, there still should be localized area where they arrive.

Space has lots of... space. Hence the name. All static installation gives is a target for the enemy to shoot at, they could do it from the other side of the system with mass accelerator weapons leaving the installation without any means to retaliate or even defend itself.

And mines... Unless you have infinite number of those then they are not going to work.

You mount them with their own acceletator cannons, with fighter bays.

[Kyle Dei]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

WandererRTF wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Erecting useless defences is stupid positions despite having warning about the Reaper's coming is the point

Where is it stated that they were warned? By all accounts they were taken by surprise, ie. attacked without warning.

EDIT: Sure, they were warned that Reapers would attack, eventually. They had no way of knowing that Reapers could move as swiftly as they did.

Hackett had six months warning. The Alliance as a whole had an unknown amount of warning considering the Hegemony went completely dark some time before the Reapers started on the move. Hackett then had enough warning to position each fleet in a different location directly before the Reaper vanguard came through.

His fleet positioning was foolish, and it cost him. Of all military commanders with enough power to do anything about it he should have known not to split his forces and put them in stupid locations. 

Actually, splitting a large force can be a tactical move to flank the enemy. Stupid locations, yes stupid. But splitting? No. Hackett had no idea how the Reapers would proceed. He may have reasoned the Reapers would have to battle their way through the systems to reach Earth, as Sol can only be reached by one Relay.

Modifié par Kyle Dei, 13 mai 2012 - 05:16 .

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

Kyle Dei wrote...
Actually, splitting a large force can be a tactical move to flank the enemy. Stupid locations, yes stupid. But splitting? No. Hackett had no idea how the Reapers would proceed. He may have reasoned the Reapers would have to battle their way through the systems to reach Earth, as Sol can only be reached by one Relay.

And then he didn't use this force to actually delay them from reaching Earth. Just wonderful.

[Kyle Dei]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Kyle Dei wrote...
Actually, splitting a large force can be a tactical move to flank the enemy. Stupid locations, yes stupid. But splitting? No. Hackett had no idea how the Reapers would proceed. He may have reasoned the Reapers would have to battle their way through the systems to reach Earth, as Sol can only be reached by one Relay.

And then he didn't use this force to actually delay them from reaching Earth. Just wonderful.

Because as mentioned, the majority of the Reapers bypassed the Fleet and proceeded directly to Sol. Other Reapers remained in system to deal with Hackett's forces. They don't have supply lines so it'd be very difficult to switch tactics to guerilla warfare.

[The Night Mammoth]

Kyle Dei wrote...


Actually, splitting a large force can be a tactical move to flank the enemy. Stupid locations, yes stupid. But splitting? No. Hackett had no idea how the Reapers would proceed. He may have reasoned the Reapers would have to battle their way through the systems to reach Earth, as Sol can only be reached by one Relay.

The point being more that any chance he might have had of delaying or stopping a Reaper invasion force would require much greater strength than he positioned at any of these points. Single fleets in strong positions maybe, but single fleets in stupid locations, like on the other side of a Relay, spells doom. 

[WandererRTF]

You mount them with their own acceletator cannons, with fighter bays.

That sure works wonders, and what would they shoot at? As a 'static' target it can be targeted from the next system if needs be. The shooting platform (ship) itself can just gracefully move away from the spot. Station will never hit its target from the ranges they are able to hit the station. Face it - stationary/static station is nothing but huge target.

EDIT: That is MACs have no 'maximum range'.

Hackett had six months warning. The Alliance as a whole had an unknown amount of warning considering the Hegemony went completely dark some time before the Reapers started on the move. Hackett then had enough warning to position each fleet in a different location directly before the Reaper vanguard came through.

His fleet positioning was foolish, and it cost him. Of all military commanders with enough power to do anything about it he should have known not to split his forces and put them in stupid locations.

Did Hackett know he had six months? Did any one know when the Reapers would come? And how do you figure that Hackett had enough time? Hackett's fleets were still mobilizing (as per intro sequence) by the time Reapers attacked so their positioning was not up to him yet at that point. Batarians were never forthcoming with information or even access to their space, so comms black out was not exactly something which would have caused huge alarm.

Modifié par WandererRTF, 13 mai 2012 - 05:24 .

[Kyle Dei]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Kyle Dei wrote...


Actually, splitting a large force can be a tactical move to flank the enemy. Stupid locations, yes stupid. But splitting? No. Hackett had no idea how the Reapers would proceed. He may have reasoned the Reapers would have to battle their way through the systems to reach Earth, as Sol can only be reached by one Relay.

The point being more that any chance he might have had of delaying or stopping a Reaper invasion force would require much greater strength than he positioned at any of these points. Single fleets in strong positions maybe, but single fleets in stupid locations, like on the other side of a Relay, spells doom. 

I can certainly agree with you on that point.
Humanity had already shown the ability of unconventional thinking. They did create the Carriers to bypass the law on Dreadnoughts, why weren't more unconventional ideas used?
A minefield, ok it's static but sensors detect other vessels through heat. A mine 'should' be cold in space until detonation.
Wasn't the space station 'Jump Zero' positioned near the relay? If it was never moved, why wasn't it used as a staging ground for the fleet?

Too many questions.

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

Kyle Dei wrote...

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Kyle Dei wrote...
Actually, splitting a large force can be a tactical move to flank the enemy. Stupid locations, yes stupid. But splitting? No. Hackett had no idea how the Reapers would proceed. He may have reasoned the Reapers would have to battle their way through the systems to reach Earth, as Sol can only be reached by one Relay.

And then he didn't use this force to actually delay them from reaching Earth. Just wonderful.

Because as mentioned, the majority of the Reapers bypassed the Fleet and proceeded directly to Sol. Other Reapers remained in system to deal with Hackett's forces. They don't have supply lines so it'd be very difficult to switch tactics to guerilla warfare.

... and so his "clever tactics" was a spectacular fail.
But, it was clever, so that's all that matters, right? Shame he didn't think at all that situation like that could happen. This will require too advanced tactical knowledge, not taught in Alliance academies.

[Chaoswind]

1. Alliance sents the Normandy to scout the Batarian space
2. Confirm reaper threat.
3. Profit?

Again alliance command is beyond stupid (who wrote them?) the alliance is supposed to have the second highest number of stealth ships (behind the salarians) yet they use none of them to scout the batarians?

****... The more I think about this whole situation the worse it gets...

[Kyle Dei]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Kyle Dei wrote...

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Kyle Dei wrote...
Actually, splitting a large force can be a tactical move to flank the enemy. Stupid locations, yes stupid. But splitting? No. Hackett had no idea how the Reapers would proceed. He may have reasoned the Reapers would have to battle their way through the systems to reach Earth, as Sol can only be reached by one Relay.

And then he didn't use this force to actually delay them from reaching Earth. Just wonderful.

Because as mentioned, the majority of the Reapers bypassed the Fleet and proceeded directly to Sol. Other Reapers remained in system to deal with Hackett's forces. They don't have supply lines so it'd be very difficult to switch tactics to guerilla warfare.

... and so his "clever tactics" was a spectacular fail.
But, it was clever, so that's all that matters, right? Shame he didn't think at all that situation like that could happen. This will require too advanced tactical knowledge, not taught in Alliance academies.

All of the forces he'd have faced before the Reaper invasion would require supply lines, until you've faced an enemy you don't know how they will proceed. With the Black Out from the Batarians and no sharing of intelligence, Hackett only had rumours or no knowledge of how reapers progress. Sovereign required the Geth to do anything after all. "A plan never survives contact with the enemy." You can only prepare, with scenarios of how this or that could work if nut or bolt failed.

Hackett says so himself, he presided over the worst military defeat ever. He knows he got it wrong.

[Kyle Dei]

Chaoswind wrote...

1. Alliance sents the Normandy to scout the Batarian space
2. Confirm reaper threat.
3. Profit?

Again alliance command is beyond stupid (who wrote them?) the alliance is supposed to have the second highest number of stealth ships (behind the salarians) yet they use none of them to scout the batarians?

****... The more I think about this whole situation the worse it gets...

The Normandy was getting a retrofit. However if the Alliance had another stealth frigate in the 2 years since the Normandy was built, I agree!

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

Kyle Dei wrote...
Hackett says so himself, he presided over the worst military defeat ever. He knows he got it wrong.

As people above pointed out, and I agree, if he's truly admits it, he should've stepped down and nominated more competent tactician to head the operations.

[Drake-Shepard]

The Angry One wrote...

Then we have this from the same entry, Battle of Palaven:
Knowing that the Reapers' weapons had a longer effective range than
any of his own, Coronati made a short, daring FTL jump--landing his
dreadnoughts in the middle of the Reaper fleet. The dreadnoughts then
turned to line up their main guns on the Reapers, which also needed to
turn to fire on the turians. This ploy used the Reapers' size against
them--because they could turn faster, and their concentrated firepower
downed several Reaper capital ships.

Sorry if this has already been mentioned.

Looks like they have not been consistent on reaper weaknesses

joker on virmire ''that thing just pulled a turn that would sheer any of our ships in half''

  4th minute

the reaper may be only able to shoot from its mouth but it can angle it a significant amount. A quick turn and boom.

Also..i can't find the link but i am sure EDI tells you 'the reapers are anticipating flight manoeuvres even when chosen at random' or something like that

So your telling me these reapers are so clever and calculating they can anticipate all opponent moves but the same Turian FTL tactic worked several times. You would think they would angle a few reaper ships in such a pattern that this tactic wouldn't work over and over again. 

It is nitpicking but don't emphasis reaper tactical strength only to explain an easy tactic against them (which relies on them being stupid and slow to turn- which is contradicting previos lore)....then to ignore said tactic in the earth battle.

Modifié par Drake-Shepard, 13 mai 2012 - 05:42 .

[Kyle Dei]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Kyle Dei wrote...
Hackett says so himself, he presided over the worst military defeat ever. He knows he got it wrong.

As people above pointed out, and I agree, if he's truly admits it, he should've stepped down and nominated more competent tactician to head the operations.

I think the only problem there, is most of them got blown up on Earth or on Arcturas station. Would you really choose one of the defence commity to take Hackett's place?

[The Night Mammoth]

WandererRTF wrote...

You mount them with their own acceletator cannons, with fighter bays.

That sure works wonders, and what would they shoot at? As a 'static' target it can be targeted from the next system if needs be. The shooting platform (ship) itself can just gracefully move away from the spot. Station will never hit its target from the ranges they are able to hit the station. Face it - stationary/static station is nothing but huge target.

EDIT: That is MACs have no 'maximum range'.

Put them on the other side of a Relay, locations where the enemy will be in range, above planets or on the ground, around Arcturus. Any range that a moving ship is at where they can spot and target the platform will be within range of the MAC guns. Coordinate with mobile ships in the meantime, to harass the enemy. 

Another point being that Reapers don't use MAC rounds. They use lasers with a specific maximum range. Get them within that range. 

Hackett had six months warning. The Alliance as a whole had an unknown amount of warning considering the Hegemony went completely dark some time before the Reapers started on the move. Hackett then had enough warning to position each fleet in a different location directly before the Reaper vanguard came through.

His fleet positioning was foolish, and it cost him. Of all military commanders with enough power to do anything about it he should have known not to split his forces and put them in stupid locations.

Did Hackett know he had six months? Did any one know when the Reapers would come?

Irrelevant. He knew the Reapers were coming after Arrival. If it were days or weeks or even years doesn't matter, he had warning and he failed to use it. 

And how do you figure that Hackett had enough time? Hackett's fleets were still mobilizing (as per intro sequence) by the time Reapers attacked so their positioning was not up to him yet at that point.

I'll concede this. Five were in specific locations whilst the other three were out-system. 

Batarians were never forthcoming with information or even access to their space, so comms black out was not exactly something which would have caused huge alarm.

It seems strange that no one took it as a warning. Never forthcoming, sure, but when literally everything stops and refugees start pouring into other locations, after Hackett learns the Reapers are coming, you'd have thought perhaps something was amiss. 

[Drake-Shepard]

Chaoswind wrote...

1. Alliance sents the Normandy to scout the Batarian space
2. Confirm reaper threat.
3. Profit?

Again alliance command is beyond stupid (who wrote them?) the alliance is supposed to have the second highest number of stealth ships (behind the salarians) yet they use none of them to scout the batarians?

****... The more I think about this whole situation the worse it gets...

it's frightening....

[The Night Mammoth]

Drake-Shepard wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Then we have this from the same entry, Battle of Palaven:
Knowing that the Reapers' weapons had a longer effective range than
any of his own, Coronati made a short, daring FTL jump--landing his
dreadnoughts in the middle of the Reaper fleet. The dreadnoughts then
turned to line up their main guns on the Reapers, which also needed to
turn to fire on the turians. This ploy used the Reapers' size against
them--because they could turn faster, and their concentrated firepower
downed several Reaper capital ships.

Sorry if this has already been mentioned.

Looks like they have not been consistent on reaper weaknesses

joker on virmire ''that thing just pulled a turn that would sheer any of our ships in half''

  4th minute

the reaper may be only able to shoot from its mouth but it can angle it a significant amount. A quick turn and boom.

We've been over this. To pull off a turn like that they have to lower their shields, giving the dreadnaughts ample opportunity to pick them off when weakened before running away. 

[Mr.House]

I miss the ME Hackett. Only good thing about ME3 Hackett was Lance.

[The Night Mammoth]

Kyle Dei wrote...
I can certainly agree with you on that point.
Humanity had already shown the ability of unconventional thinking. They did create the Carriers to bypass the law on Dreadnoughts, why weren't more unconventional ideas used?
A minefield, ok it's static but sensors detect other vessels through heat. A mine 'should' be cold in space until detonation.
Wasn't the space station 'Jump Zero' positioned near the relay? If it was never moved, why wasn't it used as a staging ground for the fleet?

Too many questions.

There are too many. 

Another being how the Reapers can outrange guns without a maximum range when their guns are clearly point to point rather than projectiles. 

[Drake-Shepard]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Drake-Shepard wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Then we have this from the same entry, Battle of Palaven:
Knowing that the Reapers' weapons had a longer effective range than
any of his own, Coronati made a short, daring FTL jump--landing his
dreadnoughts in the middle of the Reaper fleet. The dreadnoughts then
turned to line up their main guns on the Reapers, which also needed to
turn to fire on the turians. This ploy used the Reapers' size against
them--because they could turn faster, and their concentrated firepower
downed several Reaper capital ships.

Sorry if this has already been mentioned.

Looks like they have not been consistent on reaper weaknesses

joker on virmire ''that thing just pulled a turn that would sheer any of our ships in half''

  4th minute

the reaper may be only able to shoot from its mouth but it can angle it a significant amount. A quick turn and boom.

We've been over this. To pull off a turn like that they have to lower their shields, giving the dreadnaughts ample opportunity to pick them off when weakened before running away. 

ok but what about the 2nd part of my argument;

Also..i can't find the link but i am sure EDI tells you 'the reapers are anticipating flight manoeuvres even when chosen at random' or something like that

So your telling me these reapers are so clever and calculating they can anticipate all opponent moves but the same Turian FTL tactic worked several times. You would think they would angle a few reaper ships in such a pattern that this tactic wouldn't work over and over again.  

you can do that to 1 reaper..but in the middle of a reaper fleet? more then once?

[Ingvarr Stormbird]

How reapers could anticipate FTL jumps? By definition, nothing could warn you against FTL jump, unless you prescient.
You can't hear supersonic aircraft until it hits you.

Modifié par Ingvarr Stormbird, 13 mai 2012 - 05:54 .