Aller au contenu

Photo

Is conventional victory possible?


531 réponses à ce sujet

#351
Bigdoser

Bigdoser
  • Members
  • 2 575 messages

wantedman dan wrote...

Bigdoser wrote...

Yup I still have that empty feeling even with the EC the spark I had when playing the me3 games is gone. Worse is that I can't even hit the new game button and bioware is rubbing salt in the wound when I found out the next cycle used the crucible. 


I know that feeling.

After finishing my ultimate playthrough, I realized it would be my last. I calmly stood up, walked over to the Xbox, took out the disc, and put it--and the Mass Effect series--away.

To collect dust.

And it hurt me to do so.

Right now I am uninstalling the game i haven't done a new playthrough I have no desire to play again me1 and me2 soon as I finished i played the game again I can't with me3 lets not forget the fact your choices are not mattering.

Right now I am just playing skyrim and if bioware keep trying to develop games in 1.5-2 year cycles I will no longer throw money at bioware but at bethesda. In my opinion you can't make good rpg's in 1.5-2 year cycles you can see it in me3 less dialouge choices and various conversation glitches. Lets not forget about bioware lying to us saying that you do not need to play multiplayer to get all the endings. All of that just created a giant hole in my love for bioware games and mass effect.

Heck you did not even see your war assets in action.

As long as the star brat and his retarded logic is there I can't play it.

Modifié par Bigdoser, 28 juin 2012 - 03:30 .


#352
Dresden867

Dresden867
  • Members
  • 646 messages

grey_wind wrote...

There were lots of plot points that the writers could have exploited to make a conventional victory not only possible, but believable as well.
Instead, every single plot point in ME1 and 2 that could have allowed for a conventional victory is undermined, ignored or outright retconned into uselessness.


this argument is not relevant to the question. The writers could also have chosen a plotline where victory is assured by means of say, unicorns.

We can only have a relevant discussion about the possibility of conventional victory within the framework -in which the game is presented-.  Other frameworks are not relevant to a discussion about the actual game that we all experienced.

#353
Scolai

Scolai
  • Members
  • 29 messages
You could possibly defeat them conventionally...you'd just need to try something unconventional to do it: destroy the Citadel. If the starchild is to be believed, he is in essence the control module of the Reapers. Destroy his hardware and he stops functioning. You could do so by, say, overloading the Catalyst. You're not using it for what it was meant to do, instead blowing it up to take the Citadel, and starchild, with it.

This alone wouldn't defeat the Reapers. They would go on. However, without their primary motivating source, they would lose the coordination they have previously had, and who knows what other effects killing the little snot might have on them. They could all go insane for all we know. However, assuming it would weaken them and throw them into disarray, you can then start fighting back against them and score actual victories. You may even have some Reapers deserting, running back to Dark Space, or simply refusing to fight given that the primary shackle on them is removed. They may even try to kill themselves if they finally realize just what they are (think Dr. Who and Cybermen who have their emotion inhibitors removed...)

It may take centuries, much as it did when the Protheans were fighting...but in the end, you could possibly beat them without use of "space magic"...that is, no more space magic than blowing up the jerk who started the cycles in the first place.

(Granted, Destroy is a way more efficient means of achieving essentially the same goal...but this is just a thought experiment anyway).)

#354
ThatDancingTurian

ThatDancingTurian
  • Members
  • 5 110 messages

ZerebusPrime wrote...

So a large part of the Refuse option (ie conventional victory) problem is leaving Shepard standing there instead of, say, having him radio the fleet and say that the Reaper super AI resides in the Citadel. Then, depending on your EMS you might actually be able to blow up the Citadel or directly fry the "Catalyst" by overloading the Crucible. How would that affect the Reapers? Hard to tell. But at least it would have been something.

This is an idea I could get behind.

#355
dreman9999

dreman9999
  • Members
  • 19 067 messages

Oransel wrote...

Hudathan wrote...

Oransel wrote...

Hudathan wrote...

No.


Yes.

Prove it.


You first.

* points to refusal ending.
There, That end this arguement.

#356
dreman9999

dreman9999
  • Members
  • 19 067 messages

Aris Ravenstar wrote...

ZerebusPrime wrote...

So a large part of the Refuse option (ie conventional victory) problem is leaving Shepard standing there instead of, say, having him radio the fleet and say that the Reaper super AI resides in the Citadel. Then, depending on your EMS you might actually be able to blow up the Citadel or directly fry the "Catalyst" by overloading the Crucible. How would that affect the Reapers? Hard to tell. But at least it would have been something.

This is an idea I could get behind.

No, that clearly would be the same thing the crusible would do.

#357
grey_wind

grey_wind
  • Members
  • 3 304 messages

Dresden867 wrote...

grey_wind wrote...

There were lots of plot points that the writers could have exploited to make a conventional victory not only possible, but believable as well.
Instead, every single plot point in ME1 and 2 that could have allowed for a conventional victory is undermined, ignored or outright retconned into uselessness.


this argument is not relevant to the question. The writers could also have chosen a plotline where victory is assured by means of say, unicorns.

We can only have a relevant discussion about the possibility of conventional victory within the framework -in which the game is presented-.  Other frameworks are not relevant to a discussion about the actual game that we all experienced.

Fair enough. So now I propose this:

Catalyst: I am the Collective Consciousness of every Reaper.
Shep: Really? Change of plans, Hackett. Blow the Citadel to hell.
Catalyst: Wait, what are you doing?
Shep: See, I'm aware of what happens when a Reaper pours its consciousness into something and that something is destroyed. And if you're the Collective Consciousness of every single Reaper.... see where I'm going with this?

After your army blows the Catalyst into whatever black hole of sh!tty writing that he crawled out of, and the Reapers' shields have failed, your victory is determined by your EMS.

#358
dreman9999

dreman9999
  • Members
  • 19 067 messages

IanPolaris wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

The most important question that should be asked on this thread--I don't f*cking care if it's been asked before or not--is "why does our EMS number not affect whether we can defeat the Reapers conventionally?"

It is mind-numbingly absurd that this was not considered by Bioware.


A lot of us are asking this question but keep at it.  It's a very important question.

-Polaris

This is not clear? EMS controls how well the fleets and hold back the reapers and how functional the crusible is. It was never about the fleets taking down the reapers in a straight fight, just how long they can endure till the crusible was used. Low ems has the crusible less functional and focused on everything instead of synthetics. High ems focus it on synthetics only.

Modifié par dreman9999, 28 juin 2012 - 03:44 .


#359
Allan Schumacher

Allan Schumacher
  • BioWare Employees
  • 7 640 messages

Lwyn wrote...

The DLC limitations are a fair point, but I'd then ask: Can the refuse ending (and possible variations therein) be included in any future DLC that might affect it? To my knowledge it wasn't very long, was very light on cutscenes and those were done exclusively in-engine. Feasible?

If I sound desperate, it's because I am. I could not and still can't accept the notion that conventional victory is not realistic but synthesis is.

On the second point, I feel that the endings after the EC are complete and adequate enough to warrant putting extras in paid DLC. As a side point if the rumored Leviathan DLC ends up giving me +100 EMS and nothing else, I'll be very disappointed.


Actually you know what, given that there seems to be some sort of Leviathan DLC type stuff, maybe it is more plausible than I originally thought?

It's probably best no one take anything I say on the topic to heart in retrospcet :lol:

#360
Zine2

Zine2
  • Members
  • 585 messages
Like I said in other threads I'm okay with EMS not being enough to kill the Reapers conventionally. Let's be honest: The galaxy messed up trying to fight the Reapers. They ignored the signs in ME1 and 2. We were still dealing with the bloody Quarian-Geth war when Palaven was already burning.

It was not an ideal war situation.

#361
dreman9999

dreman9999
  • Members
  • 19 067 messages

grey_wind wrote...

Dresden867 wrote...

grey_wind wrote...

There were lots of plot points that the writers could have exploited to make a conventional victory not only possible, but believable as well.
Instead, every single plot point in ME1 and 2 that could have allowed for a conventional victory is undermined, ignored or outright retconned into uselessness.


this argument is not relevant to the question. The writers could also have chosen a plotline where victory is assured by means of say, unicorns.

We can only have a relevant discussion about the possibility of conventional victory within the framework -in which the game is presented-.  Other frameworks are not relevant to a discussion about the actual game that we all experienced.

Fair enough. So now I propose this:

Catalyst: I am the Collective Consciousness of every Reaper.
Shep: Really? Change of plans, Hackett. Blow the Citadel to hell.
Catalyst: Wait, what are you doing?
Shep: See, I'm aware of what happens when a Reaper pours its consciousness into something and that something is destroyed. And if you're the Collective Consciousness of every single Reaper.... see where I'm going with this?

After your army blows the Catalyst into whatever black hole of sh!tty writing that he crawled out of, and the Reapers' shields have failed, your victory is determined by your EMS.

Your forgetting the point that citadel would be easy to be blow up that way and the reaper would just over while the fleet and the conversation you have with the star child is on the crucible, you would be blowing up the only means to kill the reapers.

#362
ArchDuck

ArchDuck
  • Members
  • 1 097 messages
Should it have been possible? Yes.

Yes for many reasons. Because the games have been about doing the impossible, because Shepard has been a hero that finds a way to do it no matter what others say, because they developed weapons that can hurt & destroy Reapers, because TIM developed tech to scramble Reaper communication, because everyone was united, because the codex had entries describing tactics that was allowing the destruction of Sovereign class reapers (some without taking any return casualties), and mainly because the games were supposed to be about player choice.

Why take the choice of going "conventional" against the Reapers away? Make it harder? Sure. Make it require 3 games of choices? Sure. Make it completely impossible? Petty and against what the series originally stood for: Player choice/agency & doing the impossible.

Modifié par ArchDuck, 28 juin 2012 - 03:49 .


#363
wantedman dan

wantedman dan
  • Members
  • 3 605 messages

dreman9999 wrote...

This is not clear? EMS controls how well the fleets and hold back the reapers and how functional the crusible is. It was never about the fleets taking down the reapers in a straight fight, just how long they can endure till the crusible was used. Low ems has the crusible less functional and focused on everything instead of synthetics. High ems focus it on synthetics only.


You don't question much do you?

#364
Zelto

Zelto
  • Members
  • 121 messages

Dresden867 wrote...

grey_wind wrote...

There were lots of plot points that the writers could have exploited to make a conventional victory not only possible, but believable as well.
Instead, every single plot point in ME1 and 2 that could have allowed for a conventional victory is undermined, ignored or outright retconned into uselessness.


this argument is not relevant to the question. The writers could also have chosen a plotline where victory is assured by means of say, unicorns.

We can only have a relevant discussion about the possibility of conventional victory within the framework -in which the game is presented-.  Other frameworks are not relevant to a discussion about the actual game that we all experienced.


That is what the question needs slightly more defining
Is it possible to win convensionally given how everything stood at the end of ME 2: IMO yes definitly
Is it possible to win by the beginning of Priority: Earth: No because the writers just spend an entire game pushing everything to make sure it was impossible, including IMO ignoring some things suggested in ME 1 & 2.

#365
Hulk Hsieh

Hulk Hsieh
  • Members
  • 511 messages

Zine2 wrote...

Like I said in other threads I'm okay with EMS not being enough to kill the Reapers conventionally. Let's be honest: The galaxy messed up trying to fight the Reapers. They ignored the signs in ME1 and 2. We were still dealing with the bloody Quarian-Geth war when Palaven was already burning.

It was not an ideal war situation.


I agree.
The Galaxy wasted 3 years fighting each other when they could combine their strength prepare the war.
This serves them right.

#366
OnlyHazeRemains

OnlyHazeRemains
  • Members
  • 124 messages
Rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble
No!

Modifié par Samurai_Smartie, 28 juin 2012 - 04:30 .


#367
jokey javik

jokey javik
  • Members
  • 256 messages
I thought refusal should have been well a neutral option so to speak just having Shepard say "you speak in absolutes there are no such things as absolutes not even this one"

Paragon: Freedom is the right of all sentient beings even the reapers we could improve the galaxy if we lay down our arms once and for all no one else will die because of your cycles.

Catalyst: You stay with your morals as the protheans would say you are the avatar of your cycle you may choose what I do with the reapers as my gift to you.

Paragon: Let the reapers help society and reseed worlds
Neutral: Keep them in dark space
Renegade: Take the reapers to dark space and detonate or deactivate

I think these would be pretty good follow ups to refusal to have the Catalyst give you at least these choices seem to be alright enough.

you can have the reapers help you or go back into dark space where they can have a society of their own with out focusing on the cycles or leave them deactivated for another time to figure out what to do with them.

detonation just being well just that send them a safe distance away and blow them up but remember they are entire species you would be committing mass genocide.

and reconciliation to get the reapers to stop harvesting and start reseeding and maybe they could share some of there knowledge or say "we will let you progress on your own all indoctrinated have been released from our control".

These work for me at least, anyone else agree on any of these ideas.

#368
Oransel

Oransel
  • Members
  • 1 160 messages

Samurai_Smartie wrote...

Rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble
No!


troll

#369
Dilandau3000

Dilandau3000
  • Members
  • 2 489 messages
Conventional victory may have been possible if radically different tactics had been employed. It may have been possible if they'd spent the last three years preparing rather than procrastinating.

First, the lack of preparation screwed us up. Most militaries were taken completely by surprise and hugely reduced in numbers before the war even properly started. The reapers opened up many fronts at once to prevent a coordinated counterattack.

Second, the Crucible destroyed any hope of conventional victory. By choosing to build the Crucible, a lot of resources that could've gone into regular strengthening of our forces were used otherwise. Then, a choice was made to commit almost all military resources on a gambit to get the Crucible to earth and use it. Attacking the Reapers head-on like that was a terrible choice if you wanted to win conventionally. Even if victory could've been scraped by on earth, not enough of our side would've remained to deal with the Reapers elsewhere.

Attacking earth in that fashion only makes sense because it was done to deploy the Crucible. That choice made the Crucible the only option for victory. If the Crucible didn't work, losses from the assault on earth would've destroyed any hope of conventional victory.

In simple terms: by the time Shepard chooses to refuse to use the Crucible, it's too late for conventional victory (if it was ever possible at all). And he couldn't have chosen earlier, since nobody really knew what it did. Everyone just assumed it was a point-and-click kill the Reapers weapon.

You know what they say about placing all your eggs in one basket...

Modifié par Dilandau3000, 28 juin 2012 - 05:30 .


#370
cavs25

cavs25
  • Members
  • 521 messages
The writers should have watched braveheart and 300 before doing the "refuse" ending.

#371
Rustedness

Rustedness
  • Members
  • 257 messages
No. The writers made certain it was not possible.

I had hoped differently. Due to pre-release comments (amongst them this - “In Mass Effect 3, you know you need to take back Earth, but the path to victory is less clear at the outset. You won’t just find some long-lost Reaper “off” button; says Hudson"), I had assumed that a conventional victory may be possible (silly to make assumptions, yes I know).

I thought that the fact that this Cycle was anomalous pointed to such a victory. The Reapers' vanguard had never been destroyed, they'd never been denied access to the Cital or relay network, and seemingly no other race had ever possessed the knowledge of Reapers before this one. Then there was the technologly found within Sovereign's corpse. All because the Reapers got greedy and let the Protheans advance just that bit too far before harvesting them.

My thought was that the Reapers' downfall would be their hubris, their unwillingness to believe that they could be defeated, perhaps peppered with a bit of uncertainty. I mean, you follow the same plan of action for millions of years, you're gonna get stuck in a rut, new ideas don't come easy in old age. That as menacing powerful and horrifically unknowable as they are, that they would still prove mortal.

...sorry, I think I babbled...

#372
Spartas Husky

Spartas Husky
  • Members
  • 6 151 messages
Course it is. We dont see 2 fleets fighting, the geth and rachni. And those are the size of the galactic community put together.

#373
XFeroxX

XFeroxX
  • Members
  • 147 messages
 Well lets hash out numbers. The Codex says 1 well handled cruiser or a very good fighter wing is able to take down 1 Destroyer and 2 dreadnoughts will have trouble with a Sovereign class Reaper but 3 can take it down with ease. Now the ME wiki states

  " As of 2185, the dreadnought count was 39 turian, 20 asari, 16 salarian, and 8 human. By 2186, humans construct a ninth dreadnought, and the volus have built a single dreadnought of their own."

Thats 77 dreadnoughts, Plus 3 Quarian Liveships, and the Geth Armada (if i remember correctly from the codex) has TENS of dreadnoughts besides the one Shepard Destroys, which are 30% larger than Everest Clss Dreadnoughts. So if you dont mind we'll round it to an even 100 dreadnoughts to account for those possibly lost in action over the course of the war before the battle. 

As for cruisers we see for ourselves there are thousands in the final battle seen so if you'll allow me to be liberal about it we can effectively say that each fleet has thousands of them and that each dreadnought has an attendant fleet of tens of them each, plus battle groups without a dreadnaught. 

The Quarians did not use the full extent of their 50,000 ships, the codex says the civilian fleet stayed behind, but The heavy and patrol fleet number in the thousands. The Geth have their own massive fleet of frigate sized vessels as well that at least equal the size of the quarian fleet. 

Now you have the Turian Fleet, the largest military force in the galaxy, likely thousands of ships, the Systems Alliance Fleet, crippled in the initial battle but according to the Normandy's Command center and footage of the battle they make up the bulk of Sword and Sheild Fleets. The Asari give at least 3 fleets, as do the Salarians, and you can have Hanar, Volus, Elcor, Batarian, and Terminus Contingents. 

Now I know I've made a lot of assumtpions but bear with me. This could equal on the low side of 20,000  vessels to, assuming every avilable resource, 100,000 vessels of frigate strength and higher plus fighters. I don't think there's any possible way to count the ships in the cutscenes and likely they don't represent every single ship there as its a game and they can only render so many ships.

Now say the Reapers have been operating for 1 Billion to 2 billion years, likely more, and make a baby every 50,000 years. That means 20,000-40,000 Soveriegn class ships plus many many more desteroyers. This is likely an underestimate but hey, thats still a lot, more than enough to darken the skies of Earth. I could be wrong and they could have not been around tht long or been around longer but theres evidence in game of a 1 billion year old Reaper

With a maxed out EMS, and assuming every possible ship available fights, with the Reapers having numbers on the low end those numbers are pretty much 5-1 or 2.5-1 excluding destroyers, which is said to make up the bulk of the fleet. 

With Thanix series canons, and the myriad technical improvments made since Soveriegn attacked I'd say this stakcs up to even even fight given that

1) The attack is done with EVERY available resource all at once, not holding back to protect the Crucible 
2) It is executed PERFECTLY with perfect coordination between ships to focus on capital ships and slowly decimate thier forces 
3)We are lucky and the Reapers have lower numbers than expected or have been operating at right around 1 billion years, the lowest known number. 

It can be done, But at massive massive losses on both sides and little forces enough to protect the rest of the galaxy from the remaining Reapers spread out across the Milky Way, But It can be done, Hackett may not think so but he may consider a Pyrrhic Victory (and this could only be one) an impossible to fathom loss anyways. If you can edit this analysis to make it more exact with any numbers or corrections you say fit, just please don't tear it apart, I figure it makes good sense. We could win, just at a great cost. If we are very lucky, the Reapers, caught up in their arrogance will simply lose sight of what is truly happening, not give it their all thinking they've won and then be crushed worse than allied fleets would be. They have a tendnecy to underestimate just how good this cycle can be.


 

Modifié par XFeroxX, 28 juin 2012 - 05:59 .


#374
Peranor

Peranor
  • Members
  • 4 003 messages

wantedman dan wrote...

Bigdoser wrote...

Yup I still have that empty feeling even with the EC the spark I had when playing the me3 games is gone. Worse is that I can't even hit the new game button and bioware is rubbing salt in the wound when I found out the next cycle used the crucible. 


I know that feeling.

After finishing my ultimate playthrough, I realized it would be my last. I calmly stood up, walked over to the Xbox, took out the disc, and put it--and the Mass Effect series--away.

To collect dust.

And it hurt me to do so.



Same here Image IPB
Unless some DLC is released that is more then just a random mid-game mission I'm done with Mass Effect.
I feel so sad about this whole thing. I want to love Mass Effect but I just can't bring myself to play it anymore. The spark isn't there. I've lost all interest.

#375
Spartas Husky

Spartas Husky
  • Members
  • 6 151 messages
You forgot. The Aria's fleet. BLue Suns fleet, private military contractors ships. Eclipse, Blood pack. The Rachni. Cerberus deserters Citadel fleets deploy carriers. Which turn out to be very effective as well. batarians, the terminus systems. There are **** load of dreadnaughts sitll unaccounted for. Because reapers didn't attack the terminus systems in force, they jumped from batarian to citadel space. So that is another double size of your current estimates.

Modifié par Spartas Husky, 28 juin 2012 - 06:12 .