676 réponses à ce sujet

[irishScott3]

TK514 wrote...

The reason people believe conventional victory is possible is because otherwise the main plot of the game makes no sense and is a waste of time.

Remember, we're trying to unite the galaxy to "Take back Earth", not to "Escort the Crucible".

If we are supposed to believe that a conventional victory is impossible, then the whole "Get the Salarians to help the Krogan so the Krogan will help the Turians so the Turians will help with Earth" series of events is a colossal waste of time, and makes no logical sense. Really, if the galaxy is pinning its hopes on the 'We don't know how it works, what it does, or how to find the key to start it' Crucible (which frankly stretches credulity well beyond the breaking point), then leaving the militaries of the galaxy right where they are, pinning down Reaper forces while we build the thing, is the best possible use of the galaxy's armed forces. All you'd need to do then is get out the key personnel and resources to build your hail mary. If conventional victory is impossible, you can ignore the Turians and Krogan altogether, and go straight to the Salarians and Quarians/Geth, then pick up a few Asari when you get the chance.

That's why people want to believe conventional victory is possible. Because the alternative is that you just spent 40 hours or whatever watching your character waste 3/4ths of it initiating and pursuing the stupidest sequence of actions they could have chosen to reach the intended outcome. An outcome which is, itself, not internally consistent with the rest of the narrative, starting way back in ME1.

Actually, escorting the crucible is exactly what you're uniting the galaxy to do.  Rallying the other forces is a combination of delaying action and mustering the necessarry forces to actually get the crucible where it needs to go.

You guys are just thinking about this in too binary a way.

Small conventional victories are possible, much like the small conventional victories of the Taliban over US forces in Afghanistan.  But full conventional victory just isn't doable.  Just because the Turians were good enough to take out 4 Reaper Capital ships doesn't mean everyone else can take out 400.

Your suggestion of going straight to the Salarians and Quarians/Geth is ludicrious given the odds they would face.  The crucible would never make it to the citadel and would be wiped out en-route.  Remember the crucible is analagous to the Atomic bom in WWII.  By your logic the Enola Gay should have just been flown unescorted through the heart of Japanese AA defenses because hey, we've got the bomb!

[Biotic Flash Kick]

Because if a magical DXM can fused metal to flesh without harm
i should be able to shoot reapers in the face with an armada of thanix cannons and missiles

ONE CAIN SHOT = DEAD REAPER

Modifié par Biotic Flash Kick, 03 juillet 2012 - 09:21 .

[PinkysPain]

D24O wrote...

I think people keep insisting a conventional victory is possible because over the course of 3 and the ending, they are reduced to a mad AI's slaves.

Them and us.

[irishScott3]

Biotic Flash Kick wrote...

Because if a magical DXM can fused metal to flesh without harm
i should be able to shoot reapers in the face with an armada of thanix cannons and missiles

ONE CAIN SHOT = DEAD REAPER

That wasn't a full reaper, that was an artillary piece.  You might as well say "I took out a Howitzer with an RPG.  One RPG = dead Aircraft Carrier".

Also, chemotherapy can sometimes cure many cancers.  We have computers that can do trillions of computations per second.  We've landed on the moon.  But we still can't cure the common cold.

Modifié par irishScott3, 03 juillet 2012 - 09:23 .

[irishScott3]

Bleachrude wrote...

Zero132132 wrote...

moater boat wrote...

Zero132132 wrote...


That's impossible. We never see more modern tech like the Thanix cannon against a Reaper. Making any claims about the Reaper war being winnable or unwinnable without ME3 basically means you headcanon everything.

EXACTLY!

Based off what we know from ME1 and ME2 it would have been completely possible for the writers to write ME3 to have a plausible conventional victory. Thank you for proving my point. The reason that a conventional victory is not possible in ME3 right now is because the writers made it that way. All the people that wanted a conventional victory are saying Bioware could have and should have written the game so that a conventional victory can happen instead of the crapfest we got.

It still would have stretched credibility, since this enemy has defeated more than 10,000 cycles before us, and based on Sovereign in ME1, they have the numbers to "darken the sky of every world." Since in ME2, the Normandy can beat the Collector ship without the Thanix canon, it doesn't seem like it's that much stronger than what we already have. The only Reaper we see is in ME1, and several fleets firing at Sovereign at once had no effect at all until his shields went down, and that was only because of Shepard. The only Reaper seen in the series prior to ME3 seems to literally be indestructable as long as the shields remain up. He basically ignored the entire fleet, even ran right through a sizeable ship without it doing any damage to him. If anything, the Reapers seem more conventionally destructable in ME3 than ME1.  

It wasn't unthinkable or impossible, but it would still seem pretty silly that they suddenly got WAY weaker.

Exactly.

Based on ME1, the reapers actually got WEAKER in ME3. The turians took down MULTIPLE capital ships via force of arms whereas in ME1, it took a freak occurence to beat 1 single reaper DN.


Not sure where the idea comes from that ME3 made the reapers too powerful comes from...ME1, reaper was WAY stronger...

The Turians invented the thanix cannon, remember?

[babachewie]

Im playing ME3 again and both Liara and Hackett both state at the beginning that we cannot win this conventionally. I would think the Top guy in the Alliance Military would know what he's talking about.

[Biotic Flash Kick]

irishScott3 wrote...

Biotic Flash Kick wrote...

Because if a magical DXM can fused metal to flesh without harm
i should be able to shoot reapers in the face with an armada of thanix cannons and missiles

ONE CAIN SHOT = DEAD REAPER

That wasn't a full reaper, that was an artillary piece.  You might as well say "I took out a Howitzer with an RPG.  One RPG = dead Aircraft Carrier".

Also, chemotherapy can sometimes cure many cancers.  We have computers that can do trillions of computations per second.  We've landed on the moon.  But we still can't cure the common cold.

one thanix missile = dead reaper
cain > thanix missile

[Zero132132]

Biotic Flash Kick wrote...

irishScott3 wrote...

Biotic Flash Kick wrote...

Because if a magical DXM can fused metal to flesh without harm
i should be able to shoot reapers in the face with an armada of thanix cannons and missiles

ONE CAIN SHOT = DEAD REAPER

That wasn't a full reaper, that was an artillary piece.  You might as well say "I took out a Howitzer with an RPG.  One RPG = dead Aircraft Carrier".

Also, chemotherapy can sometimes cure many cancers.  We have computers that can do trillions of computations per second.  We've landed on the moon.  But we still can't cure the common cold.

one thanix missile = dead reaper
cain > thanix missile

What justification do you have for thinking the cain is better than the thanix missile? The cain is only shown destroying a Hades cannon.

That aside, it took two thanix missiles, and that was for a Destroyer, which are easier to kill than the Capitol ships: "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."

[KLGChaos]

It could be possible, if the Starchild didn't exist and the Crucible was used for one purpose-- to disable the shields of the Reapers. That is the only thing that really makes them invincible. As we saw with Sovereign, with his shields knocked out, he was taken down much easier. You use the Crucible as a weapon to disrupt their shields and suddenly, a conventional fight becomes much easier without ruining the entire purpose of the Crucible storyline.

[Calibrations Expert]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

The other thing I'd like to mention is that when you choose Refuse - Liara says that they tried to win against the reapers - but the crucible didn't work.

Then why would the next cycle even try to build it?

Well they might as well have tried their luck.

So the Reapers haven't even arrived yet, the next cycle has plenty of time and resources to make this thing, maybe they can make it better than the last cycle?

So they build it, talk to this being of light thing, then get the 3 choices. Maybe they decided to evolve and synhesize, maybe they decided to get a free robot army, or maybe they didn't have any synthetics that they particularly cared about and destroyed the reapers.

Modifié par Calibrations Expert, 03 juillet 2012 - 09:52 .

[TK514]

irishScott3 wrote...

Actually, escorting the crucible is exactly what you're uniting the galaxy to do.  Rallying the other forces is a combination of delaying action and mustering the necessarry forces to actually get the crucible where it needs to go.

Except, you know, you're not.  Not until the very end.

When you go to Palaven, you don't ask the Turians to join to you escort the Crucible.  It's never mentioned.  In fact, that's not even what you ask the Council when you show them the thing.  You ask the Turians to specifically assist you in taking back Earth.  To which they reply 'No, not until you get us some Krogan to help us on Palaven.'  Note that at no time are the Krogan going to be in a position to free up the Turian fleets to escort the Crucible.  The exact opposite is true, since now you have to scare up ships to transport the Krogan.  Ships which could be used bringing people and resources to the Crucible, if not directly escorting it.  Uniting the Krogan and the Turians to take the fight to Palaven is not only directly counter to supporting the Crucible, but indicative that we are supposed to view a conventional victory is possible. 

Moving on, Curing the Genophage is also directly counter to the Crucible project, because it costs you the Salarians.

irishScott3 wrote...

Your suggestion of going straight to the
Salarians and Quarians/Geth is ludicrious given the odds they would
face.  The crucible would never make it to the citadel and would be
wiped out en-route.  Remember the crucible is analagous to the Atomic
bom in WWII.  By your logic the Enola Gay should have just been flown
unescorted through the heart of Japanese AA defenses because hey, we've
got the bomb! [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/whistling.png[/smilie]

So, not having the Turian fleet = 'flying unescorted'.  Sure thing.    I guess the first and third largest fleets in the galaxy (not counting the Geth) were just sitting around at high anchor watching the Turians do all the work.

Modifié par TK514, 03 juillet 2012 - 10:16 .

[PinkysPain]

Maybe the people in the next cycle think it's a good idea to connect a doomsday weapon they don't understand to a known trap device from the Reapers they also don't understand? The only reason anyone would think that is more realistic than conventional victory in this cycle has internalized the colour choices and Starchild as the true protagonist. You make Walters proud :/

Modifié par PinkysPain, 03 juillet 2012 - 10:21 .

[Ticonderoga117]

Sorry for being late to the party, just wanted to pitch in my 2 cents here.

The Mad Hanar wrote...

I'm willing to listen if you're willing to look at the evidence that it's extremely unlikely...

-It took a good chunk of the Alliance fleet to take down Sovereign, while he wasn't fighting back

-It took a good chunk of the Quarian fleet to take down the Rannoch Reaper, while he wasn't fighting back

-It took the galaxy's biggest Thresher Maw and a good amount of luck to take down the Tuchanka Reaper, and it was a small one.

-The galaxy's best military, the Turians, were being decimated, so much so that Palaven had to be fully evacuated.

-Hammer was being overrun on Earth. It would also take just a few Reapers to decimate the ground forces, really.

-The Migrant Fleet is made up of mostly civilian ships

-The Alliance Fleet was weakened during the Sovereign/Geth attack

-It's been said or implied many times that the Salarians and Asari aren't built for conventional war.

-The Reaper force at Earth wasn't the entire Reaper force, and they were still winning.

-It takes one Reaper to take out 10 of our ships and it takes ten of our ships to take out a Reaper...

Well guys?

1. True. However, this was before the galaxy at large knew anything at all about the Reapers. Tech developed from Soverign has helped bridge the gap.

2. Meh. The gameplay evidence does not back this up that "The entire fleet" was firing at the Destroyer. At best, I'd say, about 5-10 ships were firing. Any more and Shepard, Tali, and Legion (or thier stunt doubles) would be toast from the sheer amount of energy released.

3. True. However, this is only one way. See Rannoch and Citadel battles.

4. True. However, they were holding the line and kicking butt for most of the game. Also, even though they fell back from Palaven, this does not mean that thier fleet was decimated. Look at the Alliance.

5. With using tactics such as "Run straight at the enemy", I'm not surprised this occured. Anderson may be badass, but he's Navy. Why is a Navy Admiral running ground ops? Where's a general? I need a general!

6. And imagine what pure military ships would be capable of. If 5 civvy ships can take out a Destroyer on Rannoch on the ground, one Alliance cruiser should be able to easily match it.

7. 8 cruisers. That's it. Shepard can name each and every one of them off the top of his head. This isn't even near Wolf 359 losses.

8. True, which means they would do deep strikes behind the lines while the Turians/Humans/Krogan/Geth hit the front. An excellent combo.

9. True, but it was most.

10. The ratio given via codex is 4 to 1. However, that's in a standup fight, the last tactic we should be using against these guys. Un-conventional is the key word here.

[BerzerkGene]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 Where a fanbase decries "suspension of disbelief is broken!" when they get anything they think cheapens the plot, what could possibly cheapen the Reapers more than to have them lose conventionally to a galaxy that has already sustained heavy losses? The galaxy is big, but it does not have unlimited supplies or military forces. The Reapers have been straining everyone's resources long before the fight for Earth as well.

Sovereign took multiple fleets to bring down. It had geth aid, but that has been more than made up for with even more Destroyers and countless Oculi. The only way conventional victory is remotely possible is if the galaxy has more ships than Reapers do. Sovereign-class Reapers alone would put that number in the tens of thousands, if you go by 50,000 year periods for creating one and take the age of our own planet. Destroyers are probably even greater in number. And then there's the Oculi. You think the fleets you brought can out-might the Reapers? I think you should be laughed at.

I've read the Codex entries. They prove next to nothing. Four dreadnoughts with Thanix cannons can take down a Capital Ship with Thanix cannons? Cute, but circumstances are not always going to be ideal in accomplishing that. Dreadnoughts are a liability in close combat, so if a Capital Ship brings in Destroyer/Oculus reinforcements, now you need to bring in support of your own to counter that, and will likely lose a few ships in the process. Suddenly, the notion of 4 Dreadnoughts > 1 Captial Ship is a bit misleading. And how many dreadnoughts are there, anyway? Less than 150, going by the Wiki. Assuming circumstances are always ideal and only one dreadnought is lost in a fight with a Capital Ship, that's about enough power to take out approximately 160 Capital Ships, if my math is correct (but again, I was being VERY generous). That is figure is pitiful if you plan to put all your chips into conventional-victory.

And for as long as the Reapers are still alive out there, the ground forces are going to be getting decimated. Indoctrination and husks will wipe out the ground underneath you. Any planetside facilities being relied on will go dark. Hammer Team doesn't last more than a few minutes before Anderson tells you "we're being overrun at every turn!" and that's even in a high-EMS scenario.

I mean, can people really not see the dissonance in their statements when they say, "the catalyst cheapens the Reapers! We need to go back to when Sovereign sounded scary and unbeatable... then defeat them all conventionally and ride off into the sunset!" 

Here's another good one, "the Crucible/Catalyst are stupid because it's a magical macguffin and a deus ex machina... we can beat the Reapers, because we have the Thanix cannon!" It's not a deus ex machina if you approve of it, apparently.

Dude, one fleet beat sovereign.

Anything from fighters to dreadnoughts can be mounted with thanix cannons. They smash through any known barrier or armour, including reaper ones. Which would mean you could have fast ships like frigates, ala the Normandy taking down reapers together.

Using when a planet forms as a basis? Just...no.

Anderson says that yes. But you never see anything. Especially when things like the rachni, geth and anything else are not factored in. Aside from that i have no idea who decided to fly straight into air air range and then land. Make a lot more sense to fly straight from space to that forward base. Risk would be minimal because your force would be constantly growing. Also Shepard is meant to be going through the really tough part, and thats only a about 70 enemies taken out by 3 people. Your former crew are pretty much all pitching in and they're all similarly skilled.

Honestly sovereign was not unbeatable...I don't want it to go back to him, he was not scary, arrogant, perhaps. Harbinger was more my style. He recognised the threat. He put a rather lage amount of effort into killing one person. But both all their dialogue is entirely negated by the Catalyst.

A Thanix cannon is not a deus ex machina because for 1- The cannons alone would not resolve the entire plot.
2- It would still be hard to take out all the Reapers.
3- Its not ripping of deus ex.
4- The crucible is a macguffin because victory is supposedly impossible without it, you need to get it and it will solve everything with space magic. Plus the plans come from an already long looted and therefore-such-plans-should-have-already-been-found archive.
5- It breaks establshed lore and plot.

[Kamfrenchie]

irishScott3 wrote...

TK514 wrote...

The reason people believe conventional victory is possible is because otherwise the main plot of the game makes no sense and is a waste of time.

Remember, we're trying to unite the galaxy to "Take back Earth", not to "Escort the Crucible".

If we are supposed to believe that a conventional victory is impossible, then the whole "Get the Salarians to help the Krogan so the Krogan will help the Turians so the Turians will help with Earth" series of events is a colossal waste of time, and makes no logical sense. Really, if the galaxy is pinning its hopes on the 'We don't know how it works, what it does, or how to find the key to start it' Crucible (which frankly stretches credulity well beyond the breaking point), then leaving the militaries of the galaxy right where they are, pinning down Reaper forces while we build the thing, is the best possible use of the galaxy's armed forces. All you'd need to do then is get out the key personnel and resources to build your hail mary. If conventional victory is impossible, you can ignore the Turians and Krogan altogether, and go straight to the Salarians and Quarians/Geth, then pick up a few Asari when you get the chance.

That's why people want to believe conventional victory is possible. Because the alternative is that you just spent 40 hours or whatever watching your character waste 3/4ths of it initiating and pursuing the stupidest sequence of actions they could have chosen to reach the intended outcome. An outcome which is, itself, not internally consistent with the rest of the narrative, starting way back in ME1.

Actually, escorting the crucible is exactly what you're uniting the galaxy to do.  Rallying the other forces is a combination of delaying action and mustering the necessarry forces to actually get the crucible where it needs to go.

You guys are just thinking about this in too binary a way.

Small conventional victories are possible, much like the small conventional victories of the Taliban over US forces in Afghanistan.  But full conventional victory just isn't doable.  Just because the Turians were good enough to take out 4 Reaper Capital ships doesn't mean everyone else can take out 400.

Your suggestion of going straight to the Salarians and Quarians/Geth is ludicrious given the odds they would face.  The crucible would never make it to the citadel and would be wiped out en-route.  Remember the crucible is analagous to the Atomic bom in WWII.  By your logic the Enola Gay should have just been flown unescorted through the heart of Japanese AA defenses because hey, we've got the bomb!

the comparison wit the atomic bombb is actualy a terrible one. It was invented by humans, who knew what thy were doing, and they weren't forced to use it in a desperate situation. Japan was fubar even without th bombs

[BerzerkGene]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

I will end debate about whole our ships vs their ships this way. In reject ending as example skip ahead to 12:50 and keep watching to 13:20. Watching out window you can clearly see the entire armarda you assembled with all your allies and all your dvantage of surprise attack is all pretty much wiped out and Reapers are merely strolling through at that stage picking them off at leasuire the remaining ones. Fleets vs fleets you lose and is shown.

Clearly my arse. You see a badly animated scene where you can see alliance ships and reapers PASSING each other. As if they were on the freeway. Saying its shown when it isn't shown, barely anything at all is shown regarding assets, with entire fleets being absent.

Surprise attack? No, TIM told them what the plan was Why would they assume you simply give up?

[Kamfrenchie]

babachewie wrote...

Im playing ME3 again and both Liara and Hackett both state at the beginning that we cannot win this conventionally. I would think the Top guy in the Alliance Military would know what he's talking about.

hackett is a tool.
History is full of incompetent generals.
Just look at ww1 or the allies at beginning of ww2, or the russians generals after the purge, or the generalsn in vietnam and indochin, or the corrupt guys who support bad weapon projects.

or just look at th  amirals/defense committee at the bginning of me3.
bunch of tools


As for the on that get killed by a cain, it is a reaper, with a hades canon mounted on it. The hades canon is an AA gun that can be mounted on the back of a destroyer sized reaper.

Modifié par Kamfrenchie, 03 juillet 2012 - 10:56 .

[Ghost]

Kamfrenchie wrote...

babachewie wrote...

Im playing ME3 again and both Liara and Hackett both state at the beginning that we cannot win this conventionally. I would think the Top guy in the Alliance Military would know what he's talking about.

hackett is a tool.
History is full of incompetent generals.
Just look at ww1 or the allies at beginning of ww2, or the russians generals after the purge, or the generalsn in vietnam and indochin, or the corrupt guys who support bad weapon projects.

or just look at th  amirals/defense committee at the bginning of me3.
bunch of tools


As for the on that get killed by a cain, it is a reaper, with a hades canon mounted on it. The hades canon is an AA gun that can be mounted on the back of a destroyer sized reaper.

Do not insult Lance Henriksen.

[babachewie]

Kamfrenchie wrote...

babachewie wrote...

Im playing ME3 again and both Liara and Hackett both state at the beginning that we cannot win this conventionally. I would think the Top guy in the Alliance Military would know what he's talking about.

hackett is a tool.
History is full of incompetent generals.
Just look at ww1 or the allies at beginning of ww2, or the russians generals after the purge, or the generalsn in vietnam and indochin, or the corrupt guys who support bad weapon projects.

or just look at th  amirals/defense committee at the bginning of me3.
bunch of tools


As for the on that get killed by a cain, it is a reaper, with a hades canon mounted on it. The hades canon is an AA gun that can be mounted on the back of a destroyer sized reaper.

What a stupid and baseless response with no evidence to back it up. So just because you have the history channel you know a thing or two about war or decision making right? Well I was in the military and served under great leadership. I think I know a thing or two about spoting a good leader who knows what he's doin. Also if they could be beaten conventionally then they would of be been beaten conventionally. Especially after the refuse ending. I dont see how thats not understood. You can write all the fan fiction you want and come up with all kinds of bogus bullcrap reasons like incomptent generals or whatever lame and sad excuse, but whatever bioware says can happen is what can happen. If they created it so that they could of been beaten that way, it would of been in there.

[Ghost]

babachewie wrote...

Kamfrenchie wrote...

babachewie wrote...

Im playing ME3 again and both Liara and Hackett both state at the beginning that we cannot win this conventionally. I would think the Top guy in the Alliance Military would know what he's talking about.

hackett is a tool.
History is full of incompetent generals.
Just look at ww1 or the allies at beginning of ww2, or the russians generals after the purge, or the generalsn in vietnam and indochin, or the corrupt guys who support bad weapon projects.

or just look at th  amirals/defense committee at the bginning of me3.
bunch of tools


As for the on that get killed by a cain, it is a reaper, with a hades canon mounted on it. The hades canon is an AA gun that can be mounted on the back of a destroyer sized reaper.

What a stupid and baseless response with no evidence to back it up. So just because you have the history channel you know a thing or two about war or decision making right? Well I was in the military and served under great leadership. I think I know a thing or two about spoting a good leader who knows what he's doin. Also if they could be beaten conventionally then they would of be been beaten conventionally. Especially after the refuse ending. I dont see how thats not understood. You can write all the fan fiction you want and come up with all kinds of bogus bullcrap reasons like incomptent generals or whatever lame and sad excuse, but whatever bioware says can happen is what can happen. If they created it so that they could of been beaten that way, it would of been in there.

[savionen]

Hackett lost 2 fleets without a confirmed kill. If that's not incompetence I don't really know what is.

Another General used hit-and-run tactics to kill a dozen capital ships.
Miracle of Palaven lead to a lot of dead reapers, too.

[Dusen]

It's been shown countless times throughout history that a smaller, underequipped force can still fight a successful guerilla campaign against a larger, more advanced foe and not be decimated. I don't think most supporters of a conventional defeat of the Reapers are really arguing a "conventional war", they just don't believe that a hideous deus ex machina was needed. An unconventional war using conventional weapons in unconventional ways could have defeated the reapers imo.

EDIT: During the American Revolutoin, the British outclassed the Americans in every way early on and yet still lost several battles. This was due to the use of guerilla tactics by the Americans, since they couldn't face the Brits head on. It's similiar in the Reaper War in that if Hackett and others had chosen more advanced tactcs beyond simply lining their ships up in a row and attacking the Reapers in a full frontal assault, they might have stood a better chance in a war utilizing conventional weaponry. The codex even mentioned the Turians gaining ground against the reapers by using unconventional tactics. If during each engagement the entire fleet targeted one reaper, destroyed it and then exited the system they could easily come out of the battle with at least a pyrrhic victory if nothing else. The main reason past cycles were wiped out so easily is because they didn't have free use of the relays, and their leadership was severed early on.

Modifié par Dusen, 03 juillet 2012 - 11:35 .

[Asharad Hett]

The Mad Hanar wrote...
-It took a good chunk of the Alliance fleet to take down Sovereign, while he wasn't fighting back

 
He let GETH do his fighting.  Also, we weren't in a state of military readiness (technically, we never were thanks to BW's plot handling).

The Mad Hanar wrote...
-It took a good chunk of the Quarian fleet to take down the Rannoch Reaper, while he wasn't fighting back
-The Migrant Fleet is made up of mostly civilian ships

You just said the Quarians are mostly a civilian fleet... sooooo the first point is poorly made.

The Mad Hanar wrote...
-It took the galaxy's biggest Thresher Maw and a good amount of luck to take down the Tuchanka Reaper, and it was a small one.

 
Luck?  That reaper never stood a chance. 

The Mad Hanar wrote...
-It's been said or implied many times that the Salarians and Asari aren't built for conventional war.

 
Krogan and Rachni are.  And they just joined the fight.

The Mad Hanar wrote...
-The Reaper force at Earth wasn't the entire Reaper force, and they were still winning.

 
- They threw most of their forces at Earth and Palaven, not as much force elsewhere.
- They didn't know they would need to fight the Geth, because they controlled them.
- They thought the Geth would eradicate the Quarians, so they didn't bother with them.
- They apparently thought the Krogan would not be in the fight, because they didn't send many forces to Tuchanka.
- The Yahg would join the ground forces, if we invited them.
- The Rachni were just joining the battle (I'm disappointed with BW for abusing that race).

The Mad Hanar wrote...
-It takes one Reaper to take out 10 of our ships and it takes ten of our ships to take out a Reaper...

The Normandy never fired it's cannon, and this is another asset neglected by BW.  The cannon should have been in the game, and should have been used often. 




I will concede that we cannot win conventionally.  Not because we lack the resources, but because of bad writting.

Modifié par Asharad Hett, 03 juillet 2012 - 11:35 .

[Dusen]

Asharad Hett wrote...

I will concede that we cannot win conventionally.  Not because we lack the resources, but because of bad writting.

This.