541 réponses à ce sujet

[hoodaticus]

American soldiers can be destroyed by Estonians. That doesn't mean Estonia can defeat America.

[ld1449]

hoodaticus wrote...

American soldiers can be destroyed by Estonians. That doesn't mean Estonia can defeat America.

They said roughly the same about the Vietnamese back in the day. Look how that turned out.

People can surprise you.

[hoodaticus]

ld1449 wrote...

hoodaticus wrote...

American soldiers can be destroyed by Estonians. That doesn't mean Estonia can defeat America.

They said roughly the same about the Vietnamese back in the day. Look how that turned out.

People can surprise you.

So that explains why there are no Americans anymore, and Vietnam rules the world (in keeping with the analogy).

OT: America did not defeat North Vietnam.  But I don't recall President Nixon signing our surrender in Saigon in either.  Like the Battle of Tours, the foreign power just lost interest.

Modifié par hoodaticus, 14 juillet 2012 - 02:29 .

[ld1449]

hoodaticus wrote...

Snip*

Back in Vietnam's opening days it was basically summed up as thus.

We have more men. They're better trained, better armed. We have air superiority armor superiority and naval superiority. This conflict will barely be a hiccup.

And then we see how it all came off at the seams when our troops were bogged down in enough guerilla warfare to put the american revolution to shame.

All I'm saying is that declaring something an absolute certainty (It is impossible to beat the reapers or be beaten by X) has proven time and time again to come back and bite the declarant in the ass. Nothing, is impossible. Low probability? Sure I can get behind that. But to declare anything impossible is to make the same mistake as Vietnam and Germany in WW2 against Russia, Or the arabic cities/nations against the Mongols, or the Babilonians against the Greeks under Alexander, or the British against the Americans (both occasions)

[Galbrant]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

Everyone forgets about indoctrination, and FTL.

If your enemy can teleport around the galaxy, without you able to follow them, and has vast fire power and the ability to make you all kill each other you can't beat them.

I do agree Indoctrination is one of the major dilemma that comes with fighting the Reapers, but depending on the players actions during Mass Effect, I believe they could have created a situation where the Galaxy can develop an defense or a counter measure against the Reapers.  For example if you saved the Shiala and colonists on Zhu Hope on Feros, Shiala her self is still indoctrinated and she can hear the Reapers voices, but her Thorian connection with the colonist keeps her in control not the Reapers, I wouldn't put it pass me that Admiral Hackett would send a team of scientist (depending on who and what species you recruited) to the colony to study the effects on Shiala and study her and test methods on resisting indoctrination.  

I was going to suggest Rana Thanoptis as one of the scientist,  but she was indoctrinated, killed some Asari officials and commited suicide. So I volunteer Mordin is alive he could lead the team himself, but if he dies then it can be placed upon Padok Wiks, giving those who would never let Mordin die in ME2 a chance to see this delightful character in action. Also after the assault on Cerberus Base/Horizon assuming TIM didn't delete the data on the experiments on indoctrination, that could benefit the team on their quest to an Anti-Indoctrination defense. And if you rewritten the Heretic Geth they may also have data on reaper indoctrination.  

It would also be a nice place for Mass Effect 1 fans a chance for some  nostalgia, on Feros. Hell some missions on the planet could place Shepard in charge of gathering data from an ExoGeni Labs on Feros to help Mordin/Padok Wiks develop his Anti- Indoctrination device.  Something to do for everybody!

Modifié par Galbrant, 14 juillet 2012 - 02:44 .

[The_Crazy_Hand]

 Don;t forget we can get the cerberus technology from sanctuary to make it so that Husks attack the reapers, and the ground forces can focus on turning big guns on the reapers, instead of stagnating against husks.

[Tealjaker94]

Just saying the Vietnam analogy is terrible. The Reapers don't have to deal with public opinion. The Americans won basically every battle of the Vietnam War, but withdrew due to overwhelming dissatisfaction back in the US coupled with the different foreign policy ideas brought in by the Nixon administration.

[ld1449]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Just saying the Vietnam analogy is terrible. The Reapers don't have to deal with public opinion. The Americans won basically every battle of the Vietnam War, but withdrew due to overwhelming dissatisfaction back in the US coupled with the different foreign policy ideas brought in by the Nixon administration.

Added a whole bunch of other ones a little after that.

[Tealjaker94]

ld1449 wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Just saying the Vietnam analogy is terrible. The Reapers don't have to deal with public opinion. The Americans won basically every battle of the Vietnam War, but withdrew due to overwhelming dissatisfaction back in the US coupled with the different foreign policy ideas brought in by the Nixon administration.

Added a whole bunch of other ones a little after that.

None of those were wars of extermination fought against machines thousands of years more advanced than ourselves. Is conventional victory technically possible? Of course, it doesn't break any laws of the universe. It still would seem out-of-place and silly.

[Ticonderoga117]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

None of those were wars of extermination fought against machines thousands of years more advanced than ourselves. Is conventional victory technically possible? Of course, it doesn't break any laws of the universe. It still would seem out-of-place and silly.

Still better than GlowBoy imho.

[ld1449]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Just saying the Vietnam analogy is terrible. The Reapers don't have to deal with public opinion. The Americans won basically every battle of the Vietnam War, but withdrew due to overwhelming dissatisfaction back in the US coupled with the different foreign policy ideas brought in by the Nixon administration.

Added a whole bunch of other ones a little after that.

None of those were wars of extermination fought against machines thousands of years more advanced than ourselves. Is conventional victory technically possible? Of course, it doesn't break any laws of the universe. It still would seem out-of-place and silly.

Not any more out of place than glow boy, who comes completely out of left field. Not any sillier than his flawed and completely asinine logic that doesn't hold up to a lick of scrutiny.

Mass effect has always ended on a "Victory!!!" Note, the "King of the hill" scene after beating Saren, the charge through the colector base while the whole thing was blowing up. It always ended on a High note. Now from out of nowhere it introduces a DEM with a giant Reaper off switch (that they basically said wouldn't happen) and three flavors of bitter sweet bordering on bitter/nonsensical (Renegade Control and Synthesis respectively)

[Tealjaker94]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

None of those were wars of extermination fought against machines thousands of years more advanced than ourselves. Is conventional victory technically possible? Of course, it doesn't break any laws of the universe. It still would seem out-of-place and silly.

Still better than GlowBoy imho.

I respect your opinion and ld1449's as well, but I don't see the point in replacing starchild with another ending that doesn't make sense.

Modifié par Tealjaker94, 14 juillet 2012 - 03:06 .

[ld1449]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

None of those were wars of extermination fought against machines thousands of years more advanced than ourselves. Is conventional victory technically possible? Of course, it doesn't break any laws of the universe. It still would seem out-of-place and silly.

Still better than GlowBoy imho.

I respect your opinion and ld1449's as well, but I don't see the point in replacing starchild with another ending that doesn't make sense.

I can see the analogy of "Why replace crap with more crap"

To me and to many others however, this flavor of "crap" doesn't invalidate ME1 just by existing and doesn't break off from key thematic elements present throughout the previous two games and most of the third.

So it is far more acceptable if needing just a bit more suspension of disbelief.

[Kamfrenchie]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Just saying the Vietnam analogy is terrible. The Reapers don't have to deal with public opinion. The Americans won basically every battle of the Vietnam War, but withdrew due to overwhelming dissatisfaction back in the US coupled with the different foreign policy ideas brought in by the Nixon administration.

Added a whole bunch of other ones a little after that.

None of those were wars of extermination fought against machines thousands of years more advanced than ourselves. Is conventional victory technically possible? Of course, it doesn't break any laws of the universe. It still would seem out-of-place and silly.

there was the eastern front in WW2, ad it was pretty much a war of extermination, since well each soldier knew he wouldn't live old if he was captured

[Ticonderoga117]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

I respect your opinion and ld1449's as well, but I don't see the point in replacing starchild with another ending that doesn't make sense.

Because it can make sense. A better plot device that just uses Reaper frequencies found from the Horizon mission to dirupt Reaper tech and communications or something. Or have the trial at the beginning of the game allowing the chance of the Alliance and possibly the galaxy spending the six or so months prepping.

This is far closer to jiving with the rest of the franchise than "I'm fixing a non-existant problem in a stupi manner suddenly".

[Ghost]

Chaoswind wrote...

...

Let's do this:

Reapers
1.Don't sleep.
2.Are faster and more agile that all organic ships besides maybe frigates and fighters.
3.Have superior everything (weapons/armor/shields)
4.Don't consume fuel and have no need of supply lines.
5.Use enemy troops to replenish their numbers.
6.Have the numerical advantage.
7.Known everything about their enemy.

How are we supposed to win again?

86 dreadnoughts + what you get from the Quarians and Geth (minus the ones lost in battles before Earth) vs at the VERY least 200 capital ships + the destroyers (and they probably have much more than that).

Having proof that most codex entries are propaganda, you can guess that most if not all reaper defeats in the codex have been grossly exaggerated.

Taking all that into account, a war was impossible, the only choices are to hide in bunkers and wait for the **** storm to pass and not see you, or using the crucible, nothing else to do.

I like this human!

He understands!  

[Ticonderoga117]

Ghost1017 wrote...

Chaoswind wrote...

...

Let's do this:

Reapers
1.Don't sleep.
2.Are faster and more agile that all organic ships besides maybe frigates and fighters.
3.Have superior everything (weapons/armor/shields)
4.Don't consume fuel and have no need of supply lines.
5.Use enemy troops to replenish their numbers.
6.Have the numerical advantage.
7.Known everything about their enemy.

How are we supposed to win again?

86 dreadnoughts + what you get from the Quarians and Geth (minus the ones lost in battles before Earth) vs at the VERY least 200 capital ships + the destroyers (and they probably have much more than that).

Having proof that most codex entries are propaganda, you can guess that most if not all reaper defeats in the codex have been grossly exaggerated.

Taking all that into account, a war was impossible, the only choices are to hide in bunkers and wait for the **** storm to pass and not see you, or using the crucible, nothing else to do.

I like this human!

He understands!  

Then the game would always end in failure because the Cruicible wouldn't have a snowball's chance to reach the Citadel.

[Ghost]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Ghost1017 wrote...

Chaoswind wrote...

...

Let's do this:

Reapers
1.Don't sleep.
2.Are faster and more agile that all organic ships besides maybe frigates and fighters.
3.Have superior everything (weapons/armor/shields)
4.Don't consume fuel and have no need of supply lines.
5.Use enemy troops to replenish their numbers.
6.Have the numerical advantage.
7.Known everything about their enemy.

How are we supposed to win again?

86 dreadnoughts + what you get from the Quarians and Geth (minus the ones lost in battles before Earth) vs at the VERY least 200 capital ships + the destroyers (and they probably have much more than that).

Having proof that most codex entries are propaganda, you can guess that most if not all reaper defeats in the codex have been grossly exaggerated.

Taking all that into account, a war was impossible, the only choices are to hide in bunkers and wait for the **** storm to pass and not see you, or using the crucible, nothing else to do.

I like this human!

He understands!  

Then the game would always end in failure because the Cruicible wouldn't have a snowball's chance to reach the Citadel.

Not all reapers are at Earth. 

[Ticonderoga117]

Ghost1017 wrote...
Not all reapers are at Earth. 

But most... and since they knew about the Crucible, as soon as it entered the system, they would've attacked that wih EVERYTHING, since that was the whole poitn of moving the Citadel to the Sol system... keep those two devices from docking.

Alas, it still made it. Thus, we can hold off a superior Reaper force with little difficulty, thus conventional victory is possible, with heavy casualities.

[Joccaren]

Ghost1017 wrote...

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Ghost1017 wrote...

Chaoswind wrote...

...

Let's do this:

Reapers
1.Don't sleep.
2.Are faster and more agile that all organic ships besides maybe frigates and fighters.
3.Have superior everything (weapons/armor/shields)
4.Don't consume fuel and have no need of supply lines.
5.Use enemy troops to replenish their numbers.
6.Have the numerical advantage.
7.Known everything about their enemy.

How are we supposed to win again?

86 dreadnoughts + what you get from the Quarians and Geth (minus the ones lost in battles before Earth) vs at the VERY least 200 capital ships + the destroyers (and they probably have much more than that).

Having proof that most codex entries are propaganda, you can guess that most if not all reaper defeats in the codex have been grossly exaggerated.

Taking all that into account, a war was impossible, the only choices are to hide in bunkers and wait for the **** storm to pass and not see you, or using the crucible, nothing else to do.

I like this human!

He understands!  

Then the game would always end in failure because the Cruicible wouldn't have a snowball's chance to reach the Citadel.

Not all reapers are at Earth. 

There are at least 200 Capital Ships at Earth [Counted from Cinematic, probably closer to 300]. According to most sources, this would obliterate our entire Sword Fleet. Apparently it didn't.
Many people are under the impression that 1 Reaper Capital ship could wipe most of the Galaxy's fleets out, unless they had 4 Dreadnoughts with them, whilst this is blatantly untrue.

Many also forget what Thanix means.

Now, some math:
Conventional weaponry vs Reapers:
4 Dreadnoughts > 1 Capital Ship
1 Dreadnought approx= 4 Cruisers [1Km vs 250m ship size, and ergo firepower]
Therefore 4*4 Cruisers > 1 Capital Ship
or 16 Cruisers > 1 Capital Ship

Thanix weaponry increases the firepower of a fighter to that of a Cruiser.
Evidence [Kwunu, Reapers] shows that Thanix firepower scales with size.

Therefore, Thanix Weaponry vs Reapers: [C-Dread = Conventional Dreadnought. C-Cruise = Conventional Cruiser. T-Fighter = Thanix Fighter]
4 C-Dread > 1 Capital
16 C-Cruise > 1 Capital
16 T-Fighter > 1 Capital

Aka: 16 Thanix Fighter ships can take down a Reaper Capital ship.

Going by the most generous estimates of numbers for Reapers, they would have 20,000 Capital Ships.
Thereby we would need 16*20,000 = 320,000 Fighters to defeat the Reapers.
Obviously this is unrealistic, however it does not count either Cruisers or Dreadnoughts nor Destroyers. 1 Fighter can defeat 1 Destroyer, so Destroyers are basically obselete for the Reapers. This leaves 20,000 Capital Ships vs all the Cruisers and Dreadnoughts in the Galaxy. Whilst we have no idea how powerful each is, but that seems like an alright matchup now agaisnt the largest Reaper Fleet Conceivable.

[spiriticon]

Kamfrenchie wrote...

And about Indoctrination, well if you get the chance, don't stay near a reaper for long periods... Shepard got exposed to plenty of reaper stuff and wasn't indoctrinated. Only real cases of indoctrination that have afaik happened were people exposed directly for prolonged time to reaper tech or reaper themselves (ie, spitting rang of a reaper or reaper device)

How are we meant to fight a war conventionally against an enemy we can't even get near for fear of indoctrination....? Besides, every husk,ravager, banshee, brute is Reaper tech. Reaper tech is all over the place.

Shepard is Shepard.  If he has plot armor, great, but that doesn't extend to the rest of the Alliance forces. And he might even be indoctrinated, if you believe half the theories here.

[dirty console peasant]

Joccaren wrote...

Ghost1017 wrote...

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Ghost1017 wrote...

Chaoswind wrote...

...

Let's do this:

Reapers
1.Don't sleep.
2.Are faster and more agile that all organic ships besides maybe frigates and fighters.
3.Have superior everything (weapons/armor/shields)
4.Don't consume fuel and have no need of supply lines.
5.Use enemy troops to replenish their numbers.
6.Have the numerical advantage.
7.Known everything about their enemy.

How are we supposed to win again?

86 dreadnoughts + what you get from the Quarians and Geth (minus the ones lost in battles before Earth) vs at the VERY least 200 capital ships + the destroyers (and they probably have much more than that).

Having proof that most codex entries are propaganda, you can guess that most if not all reaper defeats in the codex have been grossly exaggerated.

Taking all that into account, a war was impossible, the only choices are to hide in bunkers and wait for the **** storm to pass and not see you, or using the crucible, nothing else to do.

I like this human!

He understands!  

Then the game would always end in failure because the Cruicible wouldn't have a snowball's chance to reach the Citadel.

Not all reapers are at Earth. 

There are at least 200 Capital Ships at Earth [Counted from Cinematic, probably closer to 300]. According to most sources, this would obliterate our entire Sword Fleet. Apparently it didn't.
Many people are under the impression that 1 Reaper Capital ship could wipe most of the Galaxy's fleets out, unless they had 4 Dreadnoughts with them, whilst this is blatantly untrue.

Many also forget what Thanix means.

Now, some math:
Conventional weaponry vs Reapers:
4 Dreadnoughts > 1 Capital Ship
1 Dreadnought approx= 4 Cruisers [1Km vs 250m ship size, and ergo firepower]
Therefore 4*4 Cruisers > 1 Capital Ship
or 16 Cruisers > 1 Capital Ship

Thanix weaponry increases the firepower of a fighter to that of a Cruiser.
Evidence [Kwunu, Reapers] shows that Thanix firepower scales with size.

Therefore, Thanix Weaponry vs Reapers: [C-Dread = Conventional Dreadnought. C-Cruise = Conventional Cruiser. T-Fighter = Thanix Fighter]
4 C-Dread > 1 Capital
16 C-Cruise > 1 Capital
16 T-Fighter > 1 Capital

Aka: 16 Thanix Fighter ships can take down a Reaper Capital ship.

Going by the most generous estimates of numbers for Reapers, they would have 20,000 Capital Ships.
Thereby we would need 16*20,000 = 320,000 Fighters to defeat the Reapers.
Obviously this is unrealistic, however it does not count either Cruisers or Dreadnoughts nor Destroyers. 1 Fighter can defeat 1 Destroyer, so Destroyers are basically obselete for the Reapers. This leaves 20,000 Capital Ships vs all the Cruisers and Dreadnoughts in the Galaxy. Whilst we have no idea how powerful each is, but that seems like an alright matchup now agaisnt the largest Reaper Fleet Conceivable.

You make a very good point.  however you are only counting thanix cannons increasing fighters to the strength of a conventional cruiser.  What about thanix on a cruiser, or dreadnaught (Normandy, Kwunu)  I figure that if thanix upgrades a fighter to cruiser strength it should upgrade a cruiser to dreadnaught strength and a dreadnaught to at least the strength of two dreadnaughts.  For the cruiser, just look at the cinematics at the end of ME2.  The Thanix Cannon allowed the Normandy to take out the collector ship, which previously massivly outclassed it.  I do not have any in game data supporting actual dreadnaught strength, or dreadnaughts becoming twice as powerful.  However it seems likely at least IMHO.
Edit: sorry forgot that the normandy is a frigate (actually completly forgot about that classification completely) 

Modifié par Shepard Cmdr, 15 juillet 2012 - 02:44 .

[robertthebard]

Harbinger of your Destiny wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

Harbinger of your Destiny wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

  This is the 
Oculus[/b] 
http://masseffect.wi...com/wiki/Oculus 


This make any assumtion of conventional victory bunk.
Why?
Because the reapers can make an endless ammount of them and they can dive into our strongest ships and destroy them form the inside out.
The reapers have been using this and much of there husk forces to wipe the floor with us.
Get it that unlimited forces will alway trump limited forces.

And I stopped a swarm of them with literally no casualties.

No, you escaped a swarm of them by maneuvering through a debris field.

Were they or where they not stopped. Also bear in mind the normandy had absolutely no fighter support. A few fighters supporting the normandy would easily been able to defend themselves against that swarm and lets not forget this

http://masseffect.wi...om/wiki/GARDIAN

Occuli are not something to be that concerned about.

By swarm you mean 4, right, and one of them did breech the hull.  I wonder how you'd have fared against a dozen, or 100?  They didn't defend that region well because they didn't believe they had to, it was pretty self defending.

[Ghost]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Ghost1017 wrote...
Not all reapers are at Earth. 

But most... and since they knew about the Crucible, as soon as it entered the system, they would've attacked that wih EVERYTHING, since that was the whole poitn of moving the Citadel to the Sol system... keep those two devices from docking.

Alas, it still made it. Thus, we can hold off a superior Reaper force with little difficulty, thus conventional victory is possible, with heavy casualities.

Take into account that

• Most people are non-combatants.
• The Galaxy Map is covered with Reaper conquered clusters.
• The prothean VI says the Reapers are preparing to complete their harvest.

[AlanC9]

Kamfrenchie wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Just saying the Vietnam analogy is terrible. The Reapers don't have to deal with public opinion. The Americans won basically every battle of the Vietnam War, but withdrew due to overwhelming dissatisfaction back in the US coupled with the different foreign policy ideas brought in by the Nixon administration.

Added a whole bunch of other ones a little after that.

None of those were wars of extermination fought against machines thousands of years more advanced than ourselves. Is conventional victory technically possible? Of course, it doesn't break any laws of the universe. It still would seem out-of-place and silly.

there was the eastern front in WW2, ad it was pretty much a war of extermination, since well each soldier knew he wouldn't live old if he was captured

Well, a certain percentage of soldiers did survive captivity. But yeah, surrendering wasn't a very high-percentage option. And that war was fought out until one side was totally defeated.

As opposed to Vitenam, where the USA decided the war wasn't fun anymore and went home, and SVN collapsed a few years later. Or the US War of Independence, where the UK's war party collapsed in Parliament. Or Japan's wishful thinking about how WW2 was going to play out.