419 réponses à ce sujet

[Jadebaby]

I agree OP, it should have been possible. Bring on Leviathan of Dis DLC and an extended cut to refusal option!

[Armass81]

The writers decide whats in the lore ultimately. If you wanna make up your own lore, create your own universe.

Modifié par Armass81, 28 juin 2012 - 08:17 .

[IanPolaris]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Personally, I'm of the opinion that Hackett is indoctrinated. Unless you can give us evidence that there's no way for anyone (no matter how insanely high their EMS is) could ever beat the Reapers - that doesn't include Hackett or the Reapers telling you it can't be done - then there's no reason to say that it's impossible.

I've seen the EMS argument come up a fair bit, but I think from a purely optics point of view you have to be careful.

Fans were already livid with the EMS issue that required more than just the single player experience to achieve all the endings. Requiring them to grind and promote the multiplayer game so that 7 billion EMS score defeats the reapers would not at all be well received.

Again, the fans were livid not because of the EMS requirements but because:

1.  You had to do MP to do it.
2.  We were promised that we wouldn't have to.
3.  When we found out about it and pointed it out, Bioware either lied about it or stonewalled us for months.

You wonder why the fans were livid?  That's it.

-Polaris

[Jadebaby]

Armass81 wrote...

The writers decide whats in the lore unfortunately.

fixed

Too bad some players have a better understanding of the lore than they do. At least the lead writer anyway.

[warlock22]

It should have been possible, the lore backs it up, the reapers are not invincible. They even found a weakness that the reapers have, their big red eye's or whatever they are. With the army you gathered it should have been possible. Shepard has done the impossible before as we all know, he/she can do it again.

[IanPolaris]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

It's one thing to feel that a conventional victory is possible. Unlocking it due to heavy multiplayer use is something that I don't think I'd be able to get behind.

I think it's safe to say that the fans have spoken on how they feel about the multiplayer experience affecting their single player game.

I agree.  They have.  However, who decides how much assets are available?  Bioware does.  The fans don't want MP interfering with SP games, but that was made very clear many months before ME3 was even released.  See my post above about why the fans got livid afterwards.

-Polaris

[Oransel]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

It's one thing to feel that a conventional victory is possible. Unlocking it due to heavy multiplayer use is something that I don't think I'd be able to get behind.

I think it's safe to say that the fans have spoken on how they feel about the multiplayer experience affecting their single player game.

Then remove the multiplayer from it! Seriously, why all these semi-measures? If fans said multiplayer should not affect the outcome, it should not. If fans say that very high EMS should allow conventional victory, put those EMS in single player through various DLC's + simple revamp of EMS values. Rachni = 100 points? Really? It is a hard choice, make it matter 5 times more. Save Collector's base - 150 EMS? Make it 5 times more. 

I really can't understand what is holding developers back on that matter. Except, I know what it is and that's not client-friendly at all.

[the slynx]

Oransel wrote...

Proofs, please. Besides "Hackett saying..." Numbers, please. Research.

a.m.p. had an interesting thread about this a while back. If you haven't already seen it, check it out.

[IanPolaris]

Oransel wrote...

Warrior Craess wrote...

The foundations of this were set in the timeline between ME2 and ME 3.

Here is where the problems begin. ME3 plot with Crucible does not belong to the lore. That is the route of all problems, tbh.

Exactly.  Up to the point where the crucible was introduced, the game was clearly stearing us to the idea that the Reapers could be beaten on our terms (i.e. 'conventionally') but only if everyone got their act together and only at horrific cost to themselves and the galaxy as a whole.

However, somewhere along the line the idea that the Reapers were extremely powerful but beatable got morphed into the idea that they were invincible, and the entire plot of Mass Effect essentially fell to pieces.  Pro-Tip about introducing invincible enemies:

Don't do it.

-Polaris

[JPVS]

Taken from the mass effect wikia:
"In the case of a Reaper capital ship, these kinetic barriers can hold off the firepower of two dreadnoughts simultaneously, but three clearly causes strain, and four typically results in destruction. Weapons designed to maximize heat damage, such as the Thanix series, show betterresults against the Reapers than pure kinetic impacts."

Now, you do not have Thanix series in the dreadnaughts or cruisers. Plus, if the organics had even 50 dreadnaughts left that would be too much (remember how every race was losing ships after ships? Now remember the codex in ME1 that pointed to less than a 200 dreadnaughs from all races combined (due to the laws and conventions)). Even if some were built during ME 2, you won't have more than 50 in the battle for Earth.
What you have most are cruisers but a cruiser is what? 10% of a dreadnaugh?
So you may have a 2000 ships (I'm over-estimating) and were facing only 300 reapers (300 Reapers = at least 900 dreadnaughts = at least 9000 cruisers), you'd still not have enough firepower to defeat them. There was enough to damage them, sure, but that was obvious in the cinematics.

The Leviathan of Dis was a Reaper body the Batarians were researching and that eventually indoctrinated all of the batarian's leaders and greatest minds (you get this information from Balak). Why even bring it up in a DLC?

Modifié par JPVS, 28 juin 2012 - 08:20 .

[Armass81]

warlock22 wrote...

It should have been possible, the lore backs it up, the reapers are not invincible. They even found a weakness that the reapers have, their big red eye's or whatever they are. With the army you gathered it should have been possible. Shepard has done the impossible before as we all know, he/she can do it again.

The lore also gives us a pretty clear picture how many reapers there are, just check the galaxy map before you go to sol. Theyre all over. And the fleet even at its max was wrecked badly around earth. Even after sol would be cleaned up youd have to deal with those left, and theres alot of them.

Theyve been reaping over a billion years, aeons the catalyst says. They turn a single species into capital ships and all others into destroyers per cycle. Thats thousands of capital ships and ten times as much destroyers with estimates at least, even taking into count they might lose some during some cycles and not find suitable species. Its ridiculous to think that a cycle that was pretty much caught with its pants down would manage to defeat this billions of years of force in gathering.

Modifié par Armass81, 28 juin 2012 - 08:31 .

[SoldierGryphon]

Simply put, the Reapers cannot be defeated by conventional means. They are more numerous and more technologically advanced. Even if they had somehow pulled a miracle at Earth, there are still the Reapers attacking several other homeworlds that would come and finish them off.

[Jadebaby]

JPVS wrote...

Taken from the mass effect wikia:
"In the case of a Reaper capital ship, these kinetic barriers can hold off the firepower of two dreadnoughts simultaneously, but three clearly causes strain, and four typically results in destruction. Weapons designed to maximize heat damage, such as the Thanix series, show betterresults against the Reapers than pure kinetic impacts."

Now, you do not have Thanix series in the dreadnaughts or cruisers. Plus, if the organics had even 50 dreadnaughts left that would be too much (remember how every race was losing ships after ships? Now remember the codex in ME1 that pointed to less than a 200 dreadnaughs from all races combined (due to the laws and conventions)). Even if some were built during ME 2, you won't have more than 50 in the battle for Earth.
What you have most are cruisers but a cruiser is what? 10% of a dreadnaugh?
So you may have a 2000 ships (I'm over-estimating) and were facing only 300 reapers (300 Reapers = at least 900 dreadnaughts = at least 9000 cruisers), you'd still not have enough firepower to defeat them. There was enough to damage them, sure, but that was obvious in the cinematics.

The Leviathan of Dis was a Reaper body the Batarians were researching and that eventually indoctrinated all of the batarian's leaders and greatest minds (you get this information from Balak). Why even bring it up in a DLC?

Because someone datamined the EC and there are hidden conversation in there with a rogue reaper. The Leviathan of Dis.

All the crucible had to do was bring down those Reaper barriers and the galaxy could finish the Reapers off. Once and for all.

[Warrior Craess]

Horaciuss wrote...

MadRabbit999 wrote...

Nope... in ME 1 it takes an insane amount of ships (All those available) to kill 1 reaper, and in ME we have about 10000+ reapers?

It is the equivalent of 10.000 man against 1 billion mosquitos... yes they will annoy, sting, and maybe even kill a person or 2, but no way they can win, it is physically impossible.

At least that is my opinion.

Catalyst says "You are VASTLY outnumbered, and you used all your resources to get here" meaning, that the war effort was only to grant a shield, nothing more, they were never meant to win.

ehmmm no:huh: Even ingame codex saying opposite.

Although clearly technologically superior to the Citadel forces, the
Reapers have experienced casualties in the battles across the galaxy.
This indicates that, theoretically, with the right intelligence,
weapons, and strategy, the Reapers could be defeated.

In the case of a Reaper capital ship, these kinetic barriers can hold
off the firepower of two dreadnoughts simultaneously, but three clearly
causes strain, and four typically results in destruction. Weapons
designed to maximize heat damage, such as the Thanix series, show better
results against the Reapers than pure kinetic impacts.

The barriers of a Reaper destroyer are less formidable than those of a
capital ship. It is possible for a single cruiser or many fighters to
disable or demolish a destroyer if they can get within range before they
are themselves destroyed.

There is more, but you can read it there alone;)

And how exactly are we going to repair the damaged ships from sword and hammer fleet?  

lets do some relative mathmatics here, just so you can grasp the numbers of reapers available.  Per anderson they are hitting all the major cities. So lets just limit that to the cities of 10 mil or more for arguments sake (though Vancouver holds only 2.5 mil currently and is the 184 most populated city in the world - which means either it either exploded in size, or importance for the game). At this moment in time in the real world there are 40 cities approaching the 10 mil mark in population. Again for arguments sake let's say that those 40 are all that reach the critical number for reapers to attack it.

In the start you can see several reaper capital ships landing in vancouver,  lets say 10 total (including those you don't see)... thats 400 reaper capital ships on earth alone, or 5 times more reaper capital ships than there are dreadnoughts in the galaxy combined. (currently codex lists only 85).  This is just on earth alone.  now multiply that by all the other homeworlds.... and you get a conventional war that is not winnable against the reapers. 

[Dot.Shadow]

Here's what I wish Mass Effect 3 was:

Depending on your choices made in the previous two games, as well as the ones made in the third, you would have vary amounts of soldiers, ships and equipment available for your army. Didn't save the Rachni Queen? Too bad, you don't get a huge army of ground soldier Rachni. Destroyed the Collector base because the TIM isn't trustworthy? Too bad, you don't get a giant Reaper gun converted into a Reaper killer which could be fitted on the Destiny Ascension if you have that around. The list goes on.

In the end, all of these things should result in a wide array of endings.

Amongst the worst, you lack serious firepower, your ground armies are small and your tech is poor. Your fleets will be crushed under the heel of the Reapers, Shepard and everyone dies. The cycle continues.

Better - You have some of the things you need, but not all. Sure you didn't get the hordes of soldiers you needed, but your fleet is strong. Your fleet smashes against the Reaper front, initially catching them off guard. Several Reapers go down, but Harbinger and his ilk sweep in, punches a hole in your armada. Fighting goes on, every last man, woman and hanar gives everything they've got and you all go down with a blaze of glory. The cycle continues, but will be severely more difficult for the Reapers.

Almost there - Your armies are strong, your fleets have their numbers but you're lacking a bit of the tech. Again, your fleet smashes through the brunt of the Reaper front, doing serious damage to them. You land an impressive force on the ground on Earth, fighting valiantly but taking moderate losses. Losses are of course still sustained. Some plan is devised to take out the Reapers by Shepard and his squadmates. After a while the plan progresses, but to pull it off the ultimate sacrifice is required not only by Shepard, but the Normandy and everyone aboard. Shepard and his LI just barely arms whatever device just in time to save the fleets, but as they activate it the building or whatever they're in blows up. The game fades out with Shepard and his LI kissing as everything explodes around them, eventually killing them. The cycle is ended, the Reapers gone but the costs were high.

The best ending - Your fleets are strong, your armies are numerous and they're all equipped with the newest high end tech converted from the Collector base and various other things around the galaxy. Your fleet crushes the Reapers in the initial assault, the armies land with only low to average casualties. Your plan to activate the doomsday device which destroys the Reapers goes off with some hitches here and there initially. The Reapers launch a massive counter attack, but your fleet holds strong enough for you and your squad to get in there, activate the device, clear out in time. The devices goes off, kills the Reapers. There would of course be a chance, or several things, that could influence whether or not someone dies or a race gets an especially hard time which could potentially end in their extinction. In the end, it is a glorious victory.

Additionally there should be side stories which should result in endings such as Control and Synthesis. The Control ending would easily be connected to a story where a player choose to maintain his allegiance with Cerberus on the sideline. An epic adventure could be embarked upon where you start off working with TIM, but eventually you see that Indoctrination has overtaken him, and you have to topple him, and take control of Cerberus on your own. You weave your hidden plan of controlling the Reapers into the aforementioned scenarios, and just when everyone thinks the Reapers are about to blow up, Shepard assumes direct control of them and wields power he perhaps should not control.

I don't know how you'd weave Synthesis into it all, as I consider it to be a truly ridiculous ending which makes no sense at all, but I'm sure someone who's more fond of that is capable of producing something fitting.


Take note that I didn't mention a catalyst or crucible once, but rather a doomsday device. It doesn't really have to be anything like that, but it could also be something similar to what we already have. The Starbrat could be the collective mind of the Reapers, and destroying him could disable all the Reapers. This is something which could be revealed early on the game, thus setting a tangible, sensible goal - Kill the super AI controlling the Reapers. This would keep things on track with the original plot, and it is simple. And simple is always good. Conventional victory is thus not only possible, but also probable if the story was set up in such a way that it was sensible and that the Reapers did after all have one weakness.

Modifié par Dot.Shadow, 28 juin 2012 - 08:27 .

[Doom972]

I can't bring any numbers or research, but it is stated by various allied characters that all the allied forces can do is to buy time for the crucible to be built, armed, and used.
By looking at the cinematics, you can see that every big reaper is tough to battle, since they have very small weak spots and energy beams that easily tear through spacecrafts.

[dreman9999]

Oransel wrote...

Warrior Craess wrote...

The foundations of this were set in the timeline between ME2 and ME 3.

Here is where the problems begin. ME3 plot with Crucible does not belong to the lore. That is the route of all problems, tbh.

The crucible was hinted at from Lotsb. And we are going by lore, a coventional victory would be ageinst lore any way.

[Hendrik.III]

OP, play the game again and see the actual odds. There is a sh*tload of Reaper ships, equal to or even more than the united races can muster. Look at what it took to take down Sovereign! In ME3 we've only managed to destroy a couple of smaller ones.

Most of the fleets are far below strength from Sovereign, isolated Reaper attacks and the batarians harldy exist anymore to begin with. No, conventional victory is impossible.

BW's solution to this problem is poor though, I can imagine people wanting to go down fighting.

[Busternated]

Oransel wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Personally, I'm of the opinion that Hackett is indoctrinated. Unless you can give us evidence that there's no way for anyone (no matter how insanely high their EMS is) could ever beat the Reapers - that doesn't include Hackett or the Reapers telling you it can't be done - then there's no reason to say that it's impossible.

I've seen the EMS argument come up a fair bit, but I think from a purely optics point of view you have to be careful.

Fans were already livid with the EMS issue that required more than just the single player experience to achieve all the endings. Requiring them to grind and promote the multiplayer game so that 7 billion EMS score defeats the reapers would not at all be well received.

I somewhat agree, but here is the thing. Fans can go 2 ways to win. Grind their teeth to get those insane numbers of EMS and win conventionally OR take the easy route and shoot the Crucible. Both ways end in victory, but perspective is slightly changed.

I agree. This cycle is different than many other cycles before it in that the people in the universe have multiple advantages:
- They already killed Harbinger and used the remains to research Thanix weapons and probably other weapons/armor/shields.
- The reapers are late thanks to the failing of Harbinger. The galaxy had, in fact, time to prepare in the sense of research.
- The reapers did NOT seize the Citadel, the main point of government in the universe, first. This is what they normally do when they start their invasion.
- As Javik says, we have many different tactics to the diversity of the races all working TOGETHER thanks to the point above.

Also about Hackett, why should he be indoctrinated? Any sensible person has some kind of fear at that point. Ask any world war 2 veteran and he'll tell you it wasn't all grand war tales. People were in fact in fear. People are dying out there, ofcourse some people will say we're not going to make it.

Starchild, why would he be any different? Why would he say, okay Shepard, listen up, you're about to defeat us but that doesn't matter so here are the 3 options, good luck and have fun. No ofcourse he's going to "force" you to pick.

Allan, the reason why a lot of us hated the multiplayer influence was the following: for each and every one of us who picked destroy, we could not let Shepard live UNLESS we played multiplayer. In this case, if the refusal ending had it that the universe would win, Shepard would survive (he's on the Citadel, why wouldn't he), and we had a lot of casualties but we'd see the light of day, great.

Shepard could still live on destroy, so if you weren't in to playing Multiplayer, you can still get an absolutely great ending because the Extended Cut improved them a lot, don't get me wrong. But if you were playing multiplayer, you could really have everyone working together (commando's clearing out a lot of enemies) thus winning conventionally.

But yeah that's just my opinion. Perhaps you can even add it later if you have more DLC. When someone plays all DLC and gets the points from that, give them the ending.

Modifié par Busternated, 28 juin 2012 - 08:31 .

[Allan Schumacher]

EDIT: n/m

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 28 juin 2012 - 08:33 .

[BCMakoto]

I don't know how to explain my thought exactly, but I will try.

I think that, even if the Reapers are a big enemy, are still somewhat seen as "Gods", as in they are unbeatable without the crucible. Like in a Fantasy RPG the sword to kill the big evil demon. I think that this is not accurate.

If you take into account that you have, in the best possible way, all fleets united: Geth, Turian, Quarrian, Alliance, freelancers, Asari etc. then that is a hell of firepower. If you now remember that Garrus gave you the shematics of the Thanix cannon, I assume that the Turians have some ships equipped with it, and it does hell of a damage to reapers.

It is also shown that, in best case, an alliance ship can withstand a single Reaper beam, even not one more. I also take into account that reapers have one fundamental weakness: They are slow. And I mean really slow. Their upper/behind part is vastly undefended. If the fleets would manage to place themselves atop and behind a reaper, they could potentially deal a lot of damage before the Reaper can fire at them. We see in the space battle that a Reaper turning around into that angle can take some time.

Another thing I often hear is: "The Protheans weren't able to do this! How can we?". The Protheans, so their whole Empire, was overwhelmed as soon as the Reapers took the Citadel. Infrastructure broke up, communication lost, there was never such a huge fleet at all. By the time such a fleet could have been assembled, it was all hit and run. That was , going by Javiks speech, their tactic. Hit and run. I don't think they were able to try a frontal assault at once in such huge numbers. Also, every species in this cycle works on it's own, not like in Javiks cycle, where all species were under one strategem. They became confused and failed.

I don't see conventional victory as possible at low EMS. But if everything was done properly, at 5000+ EMS like the best possible destroy ending, maybe even 5500+ EMS, then I see it as possible. And I don't think that, even if the galaxy map is full of them, that there are too many. I think most of them were dispatched to protect the citadel. Under no circumstances they didn't call for more Reapers. They are advanced and brilliant strategists. But so are the citadel races.

The integration of MP into SP is already there. Maybe with the Leviathan DLC, more war assets could be added, or the scale altered a bit. The additional knowledge of the renegade Reaper could proof usefull for the races and lead to a possible advantage. Not so much MP would be required, or with the 5500 EMS for a conventional win, it would be as it is now.

And whoever tossed in the 100000 Reapers. I don't think that is possible. I think we are facing a rough number of 2.000 - 3.000 Reapers. 100.000 seems like an astronomic sum, and that would mean that the cycle has been repeated for the past 5 billion years. Unlikely no civilization like Prothean or Human came earlier who stood a chance.

Modifié par LPKerberos, 28 juin 2012 - 08:34 .

[Warrior Craess]

IanPolaris wrote...

Oransel wrote...

Warrior Craess wrote...

The foundations of this were set in the timeline between ME2 and ME 3.

Here is where the problems begin. ME3 plot with Crucible does not belong to the lore. That is the route of all problems, tbh.

Exactly.  Up to the point where the crucible was introduced, the game was clearly stearing us to the idea that the Reapers could be beaten on our terms (i.e. 'conventionally') but only if everyone got their act together and only at horrific cost to themselves and the galaxy as a whole.

However, somewhere along the line the idea that the Reapers were extremely powerful but beatable got morphed into the idea that they were invincible, and the entire plot of Mass Effect essentially fell to pieces.  Pro-Tip about introducing invincible enemies:

Don't do it.

-Polaris

Again I have to point out that ME2 laid the ground work for a conventional war being a losing proposition. You do not win against an enemy by denying said enemies very existance.  Remind me again why shepard is ok with working with Cerberus?  For ME3 to have any chance of a conventional war, then Arrival would have had to happen several years after ME2 and it didn't.  (in fact you can complete it before you do anything else in ME2 -so the time line is just a tad bit short).  not to mention that all races in the galaxy would have had to believe and start preparing for the reapers.  It's not ME3's fault that conventional warfare is a no-go. 

[Dr_Swordopolis]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

It's one thing to feel that a conventional victory is possible. Unlocking it due to heavy multiplayer use is something that I don't think I'd be able to get behind.

I think it's safe to say that the fans have spoken on how they feel about the multiplayer experience affecting their single player game.

I'm in agreement w.r.t. why a "conventional ending" with a super-high EMS would probably have as many lovers/haters as the current threads of resolution. Me personally, I love playing MP, but I know it's clearly not to everyone's taste. 

The conventional ending may then be viewed as the "best possible" outcome, and many people would be enraged that they'd have to grind through MP & apps in order to achieve it. 

I think the EMS played enough of a role in the conclusion, given that it affects how badly Earth/the galaxy is damaged by the Crucible's firing. While it doesn't necessarily tie in with the war effort, it's a "good enough" representation of readiness (i.e. a low EMS implies the Crucible was hastily built, therefore unintended but devastating side effects)

[UFGSpot]

Warrior Craess wrote...

man I kid you not, this conventional war win stuff is getting to be annoying.

but rather than repeat the same arguments as before, please explain to me, just who an unprepared, Woefully ignorant galaxy is supposed to unite in the 11th hour to defeat a foe that has numerical, technological and logistical superiority?

What preparation has been done? Where are the hidden stockpiles of weapons, food/water, medical supplies etc...? Where are the extra hidden warships (specifically dreadnoughts) that we can use to keep our fighting strength up? Where are the anti-indoctrination devices? Where is the indoctrination screening?

Conventional warfare against the reapers is a certain loss. The foundations of this were set in the timeline between ME2 and ME 3. And in the attitudes of the council and politicians of all the races.

I agree. People can't seem to seperate themselves from the story. All the top military minds in the game tell you it cannot be done conventionally. Not just Hackett, but Anderson. TIM is a genius and he knows it cannot be done either. Yet some people here are determined that it can be done based on nothing but their own speculation.

You think this was the first cycle to unite to stop them? They have NEVER been stopped, in millions of years. Maybe billions.  The Derelict Reaper has been in place for 37000000 years which was approx 740 cycles ago. And that's just as far back as we KNOW reapers have been reaping. The Leviathan of Dis was in place for 1 Billion. That's 20000 cycles. The only thing special about this cycle was we got a 2 year heads up, most of which was spent ignoring Shepard. You think that's enough time, even if it was taken seriously to prepare to conventionally stop a force that has NEVER failed to accomplish it's goals?

Modifié par UFGSpot, 28 juin 2012 - 08:35 .

[B3ckett]

It was shown on gazillion occasions, that conventionally it's hard for the fleet to kill ONE Reaper.
Just look at Rannoch...

It would be only possible with a guerilla like war, where the fleets would jump around, sneak and kill Reapers one by one.
Head-on... no chances.
Look, again, at the beggining of Earth fight. The Reapers take first shots in the chest and don't seem to be very shaken.

So I will agree with Hackett - no conventional win here.