1027 réponses à ce sujet

[Legbiter]

Just shoot the tube.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

elitehunter34 wrote...

humes spork wrote...

Choosing refuse has a 100% chance of defeat. What part of "the Reapers cannot be defeated conventionally" do you not understand?

If the only means left to fighting the Reapers is conventional, and the Reapers cannot be defeated conventionally, the Reapers cannot be defeated. Therefore, any choice to be made that leaves only conventional fighting, such as refuse, by default ends in defeat. Period, end of goddamn line. It absolutely amazes me this singular point manages to elude people.

Prove that refuse has a 100% chance of defeat  Right now, prove to me that it is impossible to defeat the Reapers conventionally.  Opinions are not evidence.  Characters saying that we cannot defeat the Reapers conventionally are opinions, not evidence.  Stop treating it as an absolute when you have no reason to do so.  

Look, this is your argument that you made several pages back.  You said that Shepard should always use the Crucible because either it will work or it won't.  You said that Shepard should not refuse because it will only result in defeat.

Let me say it again.  You have no concrete evidence that refuse will only lead to defeat.  An extremely high chance of defeat is not a 100% chance of defeat.  Therefore your argument is invalid because Shepard now has good reason to refuse.

For someone that has criticized people in this thread for being irrational, you're being the same goddamn thing that you have criticized us for.

Prove to me that the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist. Right now. Prove it. I want evidence. Opinions are not evidence. People saying that the FSM doesn't exist are not evidence. Stop treating this as an absolute!

That's about the validity of the argument. Hackett committed the entire fleet to the battle. What are the losses? We don't know at the time. We can look and see they were getting their asses handed to them by the reapers. Hackett's battle plan was a delaying action to get the Crucible in place. He gambled everything on that. It was a full frontal assault. Bad. Industrial bases are kind of in **** right now so where are your replacements going to come from?

Sorry, but there is a 100% chance of defeat. You need to fire the Crucible. The fleet cannot win the war. Liara calculated that the war would end in defeat and would last at most 100 years.

It would take a fraking miracle to win the war without the Crucible. We just don't have the tech or the resources. But for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory I present you with the Avatar for Refusal:

[Torrible]

Zjarcal wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

This thread is going in circles. The underlying issue is, at it's core:

"Can you believe the Catalyst?"

If YES: Then the given three options are valid choices.

If NO: Then Refusal is the more valid option.

And whether you believe the Catalyst or not is a matter of personal preference.

But for TAO to make the argument that disbelieving him is the ONLY valid conclusion, and thus Refusal the only valid option, is fallacious (a false dichotomy, to be specific)

Those of us here who aren't Pro-Refusal don't care that you prefer it, that's fine. What we care about is that you present a illogical statement as FACT.

Best reply in the thread.

Going in circles over this topic is rather pointless, because as you said, the OP's statement is simply flawed.

+1. It reaffirms the aphorism that as long as one spoke with sufficient conviction, one would be believed regardless of the logic used. 

Modifié par Torrible, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:38 .

[TaradosGon]

Protheans sent out the beacons that served as a warning, but did not take into account that "communication is primitive" and Shepard could not understand it. Shepard was only able to decipher it by following in Saren's footsteps. Had the message been received earlier, or had Saren covered his tracks better, then it probably never would have been deciphered.

By the time it was deciphered it was pretty much too late. Sovereign had woken up and deemed that the current stage of the Cycle was ready to end. Shepard had 2.5 years to prepare and that whole time he was dealing with skeptics. They weren't ready. Shepard says this in some of the very first dialogue of ME3, and the rest of the game is him assembling a rag-tag fleet at the last second. But still that rag-tag fleet could inflict heavy damage on a Sovereign-class. So the Reapers were not invincible. A LOT stronger than the united fleet, but not invincible.

Who's to say what would have happened had the Protheans accounted for primitive communication and had it been discovered 10 years earlier? Would there still be the same "ah yes, 'Reapers'" skeptics?

But when it comes to the Crucible, each cycle added something. The Protheans never got around to incorporating the Catalyst, so the Crucible didn't work. In Shepard's cycle, they incorporated the Catalyst, but it didn't work (from Liara's perspective, if you Refuse).

The next Cycle will probably follow the Crucible's plans up to that point and try to figure out what went wrong. But if they get up to THAT point, that is the point at which the Catalyst made his appearance and made an offer. Perhaps the next Cycle will just get the exact same offer that Shepard did. And if they finish the Crucible early enough, then maybe they will confront the Catalyst before the Reapers actually invade, which could put him at a disadvantage. But in the end, Shepard's refusal this cycle might just be postponing the decision to the next cycle. If Shepard goes down defiantly, that doesn't mean that whomever stands before the Catalyst the next time might just say "Synthesis doesn't sound too bad."

Modifié par TaradosGon, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:41 .

[Legbiter]

I take Hackett at his word when he says there's no way we'll defeat the Reapers conventionally.

[elitehunter34]

humes spork wrote...

elitehunter34 wrote...

Prove that refuse has a 100% chance of defeat.

First, I'd go digging through the game's codex which clearly demonstrates that no strategy or tactic attempted by organics during "this" or "the previous" (i.e. the protheans') cycle managed any result greater than a wholesale strategic loss. The single greatest 'victory' outlined in the codex is the Battle for Palaven, in which the turians managed to hold their relay against the Reapers for a very short time before being overwhelmed by sheer force of numbers. Moreover, the 'desperate measures' codex entry reinforces the notion that even tactics that cross the boundary into unconventional are still guaranteed failures, with the best hope being pyhhric victories that result in the end of galactic civilization anyways.

Then there is also the argument that after a billion years' the Reapers still have yet to be defeated; at some point the laws of probability and large numbers would have kicked in and some cycle would have been able to defeat them. That is "this" cycle, the only one able to score an unconventional victory predicated upon the protheans' actions disabling the Citadel relay in the previous cycle to date, demonstrating those laws are in effect.

Add to that the fact that in the context of the game itself, the greatest strategic minds the galaxy has to offer -- Hackett, Anderson, Victus, Garrus, arguably Shepard, directly -- cannot conceive of a means by which conventional victory is possible. To wit, this is said, multiple times throughout the course of the game, unambiguously, by several of those individuals. In fact, this is a constant throughout the ME trilogy -- to wit, the very last words said by Shepard in ME1 very heavily indicate the Reapers cannot be defeated conventionally.

If none of this qualifies as "proof" to you, you are denying explicit, unambiguous and most importantly canonical points that support the conclusion conventional victory is indeed impossible, and nothing I can say will convince you.

Yes that is all proof of the Reapers having an extremely high chance of victory.  Look, I have absolutely no problem with Refusal leading to defeat.  Absolutely none at all.  What I have a problem with is you saying that there is a 100% chance of something happening when that is infact impossible to prove.  If you were to simply say there is a 99.99999999....% chance of victory than I would happily agree with you.  But you seem unwilling to say that.  All I ask is that you stop saying that Refusal has a 100% chance of defeat.

[The Heretic of Time]

Ryzaki wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Blablablablabla.

I've yet to hear you answer my questions on to why you wouldn't at least take a look at the Crucible and try to figure it out. The damn thing is handed to you on a silver plate! All you have to do is take a look at it and see whether it can be fixed and used or not. Any reasonable person sees this, even you, you just don't want to admit it.

Yup keep putting that head of yours in the sand and ignoring the fact that the Crucible is a one shot deal you keep doing that. Clearly that makes sense to you. Me? I'll build the guns and ships that manage to take some out thx.

Hahahaha! The only person putting his head in the sand is you obviously.

Winning the war with guns and ships? Hahahaha! Yeah, we have all seens how perfectly that worked out for our cycle or any previous cycle. We had Thanix Canons that rivaled the guns of the reapers for god sakes! And we STILL couldn't win this war conventionally.

Also, what part of: the reapers will come to harvest your ass before you have enough firepower to defeat them did you not understand?

I hoped that by now it would have been clear to you that this war can't be won conventionally. This has been said over and over and over again. By the characters in-game, by the writers of the game and by us. But you rather stick your head in the sand and don't listen. Fine, I'm done arguing with you.

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:42 .

[xefiroEA]

Irrefutable proof that refuse is the only choice unless you meta-game: how does Shep know to activate the crucible? The Catalyst never says to jump into the beam, shoot the pipe or grab the electrical outlet. The players sees a cinematic, and forces Shepard to do something that is nonsensical as far as Shepard knows.

Refusal is the only choice that Shepard can take without magic player knowledge.

[Ryzaki]

TaradosGon wrote...

Protheans sent out the beacons that served as a warning, but did not take into account that "communication is primitive" and Shepard could not understand it. Shepard was only able to decipher it by following in Saren's footsteps. Had the message been received earlier, or had Saren covered his tracks better, then it probably never would have been deciphered.

By the time it was deciphered it was pretty much too late. Sovereign had woken up and deemed that the current stage of the Cycle was ready to end. Shepard had 2.5 years to prepare and that whole time he was dealing with skeptics. They weren't ready. Shepard says this in some of the very first dialogue of ME3, and the rest of the game is him assembling a rag-tag fleet at the last second. But still that rag-tag fleet could inflict heavy damage on a Sovereign-class. So the Reapers were not invincible. A LOT stronger than the united fleet, but not invincible.

Who's to say what would have happened had the Protheans accounted for primitive communication and had it been discovered 10 years earlier? Would there still be the same "ah yes, 'Reapers'" skeptics?

But when it comes to the Crucible, each cycle added something. The Protheans never got around to incorporating the Catalyst, so the Crucible didn't work. In Shepard's cycle, they incorporated the Catalyst, but it didn't work (from Liara's perspective, if you Refuse).

The next Cycle will probably follow the Crucible's plans up to that point and try to figure out what went wrong. But if they get up to THAT point, that is the point at which the Catalyst made his appearance and made an offer. Perhaps the next Cycle will just get the exact same offer that Shepard did. And if they finish the Crucible early enough, then maybe they will confront the Catalyst before the Reapers actually invade, which could put him at a disadvantage.

Sadly this assume the Catalyst is dormant the whole time (which I don't prescribe too). If he's not dormant and is watching seeing a crucible like object being dragged to the Citadel again will lead to a hasty attack. (Granted they'd have at least 2 years (assuming the Reapers don't simply build a new relay in darkspace leading to the Citadel after the fiasco that was Shep's cycle). Which...is actually kind of likely TBH.

Actually the whole thing is so blank that thankfully you can interpret whatever happened you wanted.

It's why I saw the twitter thing as completely unnecessary. It just serves as a "FU reject players! Next cycle used the Crucible anyway. Deal with it." just felt petty and silly.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:45 .

[Ryzaki]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...
Hahahaha! The only person putting his head in the sand is you obviously.

Winning the war with guns and ships? Hahahaha! Yeah, we have all seens how perfectly that worked out for our cycle or any previous cycle. We had Thanix Canons that rivaled the guns of the reapers for god sakes! And we STILL couldn't win this war conventionally.

Also, what part of: yhe reapers will come to harvest your ass before you have enough firepower to defeat them did you not understand?

I hoped that by now it would have been clear to you that this war can't be won conventionally. This has been said over and over and over again. By the characters in-game, by the writers of the game and by us. But you rather stick your head in the sand and don't listen. Fine, I'm done arguing with you.

You mean when the turian fleet (despite being outnumbered and outgunned) managed to take out several Sovereign class Reapers in one attack? LIKE THAT? Yes I'm laughing very hard at you now.

But by all means keep insisting that people facing inevitable extinction will go with the one superweapon that they have no guarantees will work vs building an army capable of defeating the Reapers when they have knowledge of reaper weaknesses and war tactics.

And what part of The reapers will come and harvest your ass before you finish the Crucible do you not understand? That "they're watching!" arguement goes both ways kiddo.

I hoped by now you'd realize what's true for Shep's cycle doesn't hold for others. That you'd realize what Shep's cycle did wrong (and boy did they do a lot of things wrong) and realize that all cycles wouldn't do that if given the same opportunities (though to be fair Shep's cycle was pretty boned with the Prothean warnings all they managed to do was delay the cycle.)

Modifié par Ryzaki, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:46 .

[elitehunter34]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Prove to me that the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist. Right now. Prove it. I want evidence. Opinions are not evidence. People saying that the FSM doesn't exist are not evidence. Stop treating this as an absolute!

That's about the validity of the argument. Hackett committed the entire fleet to the battle. What are the losses? We don't know at the time. We can look and see they were getting their asses handed to them by the reapers. Hackett's battle plan was a delaying action to get the Crucible in place. He gambled everything on that. It was a full frontal assault. Bad. Industrial bases are kind of in **** right now so where are your replacements going to come from?

Sorry, but there is a 100% chance of defeat. You need to fire the Crucible. The fleet cannot win the war. Liara calculated that the war would end in defeat and would last at most 100 years.

It would take a fraking miracle to win the war without the Crucible. We just don't have the tech or the resources. But for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory I present you with the Avatar for Refusal:

You're analogy is completely meaningless.  You cannot prove a negative.  I am not asking anyone to prove a negative.  I'm asking him to prove his claim that there is a 100% chance of defeat if you choose refuse.  I do not hold the burden of proof; he does.  If you don't understand this concept go throw your stupid pictures somewhere else.  It's not needed.

Modifié par elitehunter34, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:47 .

[RiouHotaru]

Ryzaki wrote...

Sadly this assume the Catalyst is dormant the whole time (which I don't prescribe too). If he's not dormant and is watching seeing a crucible like object being dragged to the Citadel again will lead to a hasty attack. (Granted they'd have at least 2 years (assuming the Reapers don't simply build a new relay in darkspace leading to the Citadel after the fiasco that was Shep's cycle).

Actually the whole thing is so blank that thankfully you can interpret whatever happened you wanted.

It's why I saw the twitter thing as completely unnecessary. It just serves as a "FU reject players! Next cycle used the Crucible anyway. Deal with it." just felt petty and silly.

Petty?  Someone asked a legitimate question, and the producer gave an honest and legitimate answer.  How is that petty?

[Jeb231]

You are not looking at this logically. They need a canon for ME4. This has nothing to do with dissing the fanbase.

[The Heretic of Time]

I wonder why these rejectists (that's what I'll call hardcore reject choosers from now on) have such a hate for the Crucible anyway. Is it because the Starbrat tells you what options the Crucible has opened up? Is it because you're so hell bend on an unrealistic happy ending where everyone lives and no sacrifices have been made? Is it because the Crucible is a horrible plot-device?

I can understand that people think the Crucible is the worst plot-device ever (I think so too), but any other reason these rejectists have given for hating the Crucible is just silly.

[Ryzaki]

RiouHotaru wrote...
Petty?  Someone asked a legitimate question, and the producer gave an honest and legitimate answer.  How is that petty?

It's petty. It pretty much nullfiies the whole point of choosing the reject option.

[Aquilas]

Reject is wholly viable if you headcanon the consequences of Shepard’s decision. I’ll post a link to this article again:
 
The Real Hero Of Mass Effect Explains How - And Why - The 'Reject Ending' Works - Forbes
 
That’s how I see Reject playing out. Note Griffiths says the allied species are defeated, destroyed, reaped if you choose Reject. I agree. The allies cannot win conventionally in Shepard’s cycle. But don’t tell me headcanon is invalid when we’re forced to accept the preposterous, ridiculous, ludicrous plot device that is Star-jar (the Catalyst).
 
And I’m one of those who believe the next (or future) cycle(s) heeded Liara’s warning and did not use the Crucible, despite Mike Gamble’s retcon Tweet to the contrary. Liara says plainly it didn’t work and warns future Cycles not to make the same mistakes her Cycle did. She’d include info on all the time, energy, and resources her Cycle poured into the Crucible—and it didn’t work. Is it reasonable to assume a subsequent Cycle would build another Crucible? C’mon now. The only way they’d build another Crucible is if they found more data that explained explicitly how it worked, or enabled them to reverse engineer a weapon that would work another way. Whether or not they’d build it and use it if it performed as it did for Shepard is a whole nother debate.
 
However, given how drastically the ME writers break ME lore in ME3, an eventual conventional victory over the Reapers is plausible—just not in Shepard’s cycle. Consider these facts: 

 Shepard is the first organic to stand before the Star-jar in aeons. Star-jar says the entire cyclical process is invalid due to that singular, signal event. Shepard himself killed three Reapers--two of them with small arms fire. Why? Because Reapers made mistakes Shepard and his team capitalized on. Reapers were killed with Cains and Thanix missiles. We see capital ships being severely damaged in the battle above earth.

All of that data would be in Liara's data cache. It doesn't matter if the true gods of the ME universe--the writers--changed the rules in ME3 and allowed allied forces to destroy virtually indestructible Reapers with hand-held, heavy weapons and truck-mounted missiles. They did. It's possible. Shepard does it. We see it.

Consider how fast weapons technology has advanced from the Revolutionary War to the present day--from muskets and cannons to nuclear weapons. Consider how fast humans adapted Reaper tech to weapons development and manufacture.

And as preposterous as the whole scenario is, especially if you believe the Reapers are omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent--also preposterous, yet Star-jar must possess those qualities to enable RGB, but that's a whole nother thread--the allies built the Crucible in complete secrecy and deployed it in the face of a massed Reaper threat. They linked the freakin' thing directly to the Citadel in the middle of a space battle against Sovereign-class Reapers whose sole mission was to protect the damn Citadel. Good grief--I can't believe that even though I just typed it.

My point is, given Shepard's Cycle's unique status--remember, the Catalyst was surprised how resourceful organics are, since it thought the whole Crucible concept was unworkable--and Liara's data cache, it's completely plausible that the next Cycle heeded Liara's warning, didn't build a Crucible, yet continued the exponentially rapid technological advancement and engineered a way to defeat the Reapers without Star-jar's Space-Magic Wand. That would include reverse-engineering the Crucible and building a conventional super-weapon to get the job done.

Bottom line: if the ME writers could wave the Space-Magic Wand and completely shatter ME lore by creating Star-jar out of whole cloth, they could certainly stretch ME lore--stretch it a lot, granted--and enable organics, or organics and synthetics together, to build eventually a conventional weapon that'd destroy Reapers easily enough to enable conventional victory

Modifié par Aquilas, 02 juillet 2012 - 08:52 .

[Sundance31us]

RiouHotaru wrote...
Petty?  Someone asked a legitimate question, and the producer gave an honest and legitimate answer.  How is that petty?

It wasn't the answer they wanted?

[The Heretic of Time]

Ryzaki wrote...

And what part of The reapers will come and harvest your ass before you finish the Crucible do you not understand? That "they're watching!" arguement goes both ways kiddo.

LMAO!  No it doesn't, because 1 single Crucible can easily be hidden. But a massive army with superb firepower? Not so much! 

Come on man, you can't be THAT stupid that you didn't realize that yourself, can you? HAHAHAHAHA! 

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:48 .

[RiouHotaru]

The point of the Reject option was just to give you the option to say no.

It was well stated and accepted on the forums that people wanted to tell the Catalyst "No" even though they KNEW it would mean they lost.

That the next cycle wins using the method you deliberately chose not to do doesn't invalidate your decision. The Refusal Stargazer scene states that because of the previous Cycle, they won without any significant losses.

That's hardly nullification.

[humes spork]

elitehunter34 wrote...

Yes that is all proof of the Reapers having an extremely high chance of victory.  Look, I have absolutely no problem with Refusal leading to defeat.  Absolutely none at all.  What I have a problem with is you saying that there is a 100% chance of something happening when that is infact impossible to prove.  If you were to simply say there is a 99.99999999....% chance of victory than I would happily agree with you.  But you seem unwilling to say that.  All I ask is that you stop saying that Refusal has a 100% chance of defeat.

So in other words, yes you are willing to deny canon to push your personal narrative.

What you describe is that "conventional victory is improbable" -- that despite low odds there remains potential outcomes that conclude in success. That is not what is said in-game.

What is said in-game is that "conventional victory is impossible" -- there are no potential outcomes that conclude in success. In other words, there is a 100% chance of failure.

That is canon, and by claiming canonically conventional victory is merely improbable you are denying canon since it is explicitly and unambiguously said multiple times that conventional victory is impossible.

Modifié par humes spork, 02 juillet 2012 - 07:54 .

[Ryzaki]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

And what part of The reapers will come and harvest your ass before you finish the Crucible do you not understand? That "they're watching!" arguement goes both ways kiddo.

LMAO!  No it doesn't, because 1 single Crucible can easily be hidden. But a massive army with superb firepower? Not so much! 

Come on man, you can't be THAT stupid that you didn't realize that yourself, can you? HAHAHAHAHA! 

Like I said just because you can't hide **** doesn't mean other can't.

By all means though keep laughing and insisting that any rational species would hedge all their bets (when it's unnecessary ) on a superweapon that didn't work when it was deployed and the only way to check it is to pretty much scream "ATTACK ME!" at the Reapers. 

[PoisonMushroom]

This is pretty much what I've been saying since the EC came out. Although I'm willing to believe that Shepard might have been still have chosen to destroy. At that point Shepard has no reason to believe conventional warfare would work and destroy sounds less likely to have dire and horrific consequences than the other two, so I could see why it might be worth a go.

[Ryzaki]

RiouHotaru wrote...

The point of the Reject option was just to give you the option to say no.

It was well stated and accepted on the forums that people wanted to tell the Catalyst "No" even though they KNEW it would mean they lost.

That the next cycle wins using the method you deliberately chose not to do doesn't invalidate your decision. The Refusal Stargazer scene states that because of the previous Cycle, they won without any significant losses.

That's hardly nullification.

Well it is to me.

Not to mention most people who wanted to tell the Catalyst no didn't want a loss attached to it. Not even. Some did. But not most. Most I saw wanted to say no and with extremely high EMS. Defeat them with a pyrhhic victory. Not straight up lose and then lulz next cycle used Crucible.

[Reorte]

RiouHotaru wrote...

The point of the Reject option was just to give you the option to say no.

Being generous I think that the point of the Reject option was to cover two things that people had been saying, that there should be a Reapers win option and that there should be some way of calling out the Catalyst on his nonsense. Unfortunately it wasn't thought through - someone just saw the headlines and missed the point that Reapers win should've been for hopelessly low EMS, and that exposing the Catalysts's nonsense should've been by logic and pointing out the difference between possible and certain, that friendly geth and EDI, whilst not proving that there's no chance of being wiped out by synthetics also demonstrates the possibility of peaceful coexistance.

[The Heretic of Time]

Ryzaki wrote...

Like I said just because you can't hide **** doesn't mean other can't.

Well tell me then mister genius: How would you hide the MASSIVE development of a MASSIVE fleet that rivals the Reapers both in size and firepower for more than a couple of decades/centuries?

Also, how will you account for indoctrination and huskification? For every soldier you'll lose, the Reapers will gain one (a husk). How are you going to beat those odds conventionally?

By all means, enlighten me. I can't wait to hear your genius plan. 

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 02 juillet 2012 - 08:02 .