676 réponses à ce sujet

[BerzerkGene]

humes spork wrote...

BerzerkGene wrote...

Dude, one fleet beat sovereign.

One fleet destroyed Sovereign when it was already incapacitated from its assuming direct control over Saren.

Meanwhile, twelve Sovereign-class Reapers destroyed Arcturus station and routed three of the Alliance's eight fleets complete with post-Sovereign upgrades, including Thanix Cannons!, to the point one fleet was sacrificed in its entirety to screen for the other two's full retreat.

Thanix cannons are never mentioned at all. The fact they're never used should give you a good idea of how it was so easy to destroy three entire fleets.
They're never mentioned because it would give a realk chance. If we saw them, and there were effective, but still not at the required power, still taking out  reapers, but far less efficeintly than say, i think.. Then at least we would know. Their complete, utter and insane abscence makes it seem as though everyone dropped the most advanced weapons tech availiable for no reason.

humes spork wrote...

JediMike2372 wrote...

Thanix cannon.  I keep seeing a lot about that and what did it do?

People around here think they're space magic guns that kill Reapers in one shot in combat, and shoot food, war materiel and a limitless supply of soldiers outside combat.

In "reality" they're a gun upgrade reverse engineered from Sovereign's hulk that a good chunk, but nowhere near all, the naval forces in the galaxy have. Thanix cannons give organic ships the monstrous advantage over what they had before of actually being able to dent Reaper kinetic barriers. No, that last bit is not facetiousness. All thanix cannons allow organic races to do above what they could before is actually damage a Reaper.

It became notorious for disabling and not even destroying outright a heavy transport that looks to be MacGuyvered out of an asteroid, scrap metal, and duct tape, that gets utterly annihilated even without Thanix Cannons! by a light cruiser designed for stealth recon opposed to actual combat.

Thanix cannons and reaper guns ignore kinetic barriers. Thats why they're so powerful. Its why the Normandy could damage the collector crusier without having to be right on top of it. Even then it used specially designed torpedos. It also doesn't get annihlated, it gets annihlated with the cannon, without it just gets destroyed. It also appears to have a reaper cannon on it too, although it seems to be less accurate. The Normandy is still classed as a frigate
We never said that guns can shoot supplies...That could still be a problem. The point is moot since we don't know.

[Zero132132]

BerzerkGene wrote...

Thanix cannons are never mentioned at all. The fact they're never used should give you a good idea of how it was so easy to destroy three entire fleets.
They're never mentioned because it would give a realk chance. If we saw them, and there were effective, but still not at the required power, still taking out  reapers, but far less efficeintly than say, i think.. Then at least we would know. Their complete, utter and insane abscence makes it seem as though everyone dropped the most advanced weapons tech availiable for no reason.

Repost from before, but the prevalence of this nonsense is starting to annoy me:

I wrote...

So what? What evidence do you have from ANY of the games that Thanix canons make amazingtastic Reaper killers? The only relevant codex entry says that we have better luck with Thanix canons, but there's no information on either thier prevalence or their actual success.
That aside, there's a logistical problem with making very many of them. The actual amount of platinum required in ME2 is unitless, only given as 15,000. However, this is the entirety of the platinum on most platinum rich planets/moons (some actually have less), and there are a grand total of 34 of these in ME2. You're not scouring the whole galaxy, but you're seeing a fair chunk of it that's close to any relays. How many of these, realistically, can we even BUILD in the galaxy?

[humes spork]

BerzerkGene wrote...

Homeworld 2.

Yes, I'm a fan of the Homeworld series. Homeworld 2 is a game-long MacGuffin hunt, too, that culminates in using said plot device to make the enemies go bye-bye without which you can't win. Also, well...the Hiigarans kind of pick the fight with the Keepers, and the Keepers might've gone away if the Hiigarans ditched the Progenitor dread and just kept its IFF which is all they needed the whole time.

Not to mention the Pride of Hiigara (later, Sajuuk) is a ship designed for the singular purpose of waging and sustaining a war effort, being a mobile command center, transport, refinery, and production facility in one. Not too many of those in the ME universe.

[Ticonderoga117]

humes spork wrote...
*awesome history snip*

True, and true, except for one thing in my opinion: The cost of war.

Granted, this is based on assumption. I'm assuming you mean the material cost of war since you mentioned the democracy and morale bits.

You can still destroy enough stuff through guerilla raids to hamper Reaper forces. It's mentioned that there are camps where beings await huskification. Hit those. Remove thier source of ground troops. Will this be a deciding factor? Not really, but it helps.

The big thing to defeat the Reapers is to use tactics that put fast, quick strikes as a main focus. Also, build tech that can bypass kinetic barriers (Lasers, particle beams, nukes).

Oh well. *shrug* Loved that little fact about the Seven Years War though. :happy:

[Zero132132]

Can someone from the "It's totally possible to beat the Reapers without space magic!" camp at least admit that people arguing with them have made a lot of good points that at least make it incredibly unlikely? It seems like everyone else is basically doing the functional equivalent of beating their heads against a wall for as much as your side has budged.

[TookYoCookies]

Zero132132 wrote...


Something tells me that you're not the planning type.

"Oh, a set of rational reasons that we shouldn't pursue combat in a specific way, since we'll probably all die? **** THAT! Quit being such a ****! Try punching the Reapers in the face instead of being a whiny baby about it!"

This sort of thinking (that you attack regardless of reason) is usually the reason that wars are lost.

Im most definitely the planning type, Hence why id rather not rely on some plot enforced McGuffin that we're just now learning about.

You forgot the most important line of my post "When was the last time any war was won conventionally?" honestly when?

"we cant win this conventionally." 
that is the most "No-sh*t-sherlock" statement i ever heard in Mass Effect. It should go with out saying, we arent trying to march up to the reapers in formation revolutionary war style, which cracks me up because thats what our fleets do... 

I never gave any specfic plan to fighting the reapers, as any 1 plan would be retarded. Combat is dynamic. Your actions, strategies need to be dynamic. Complaining and being a huge P*ssy, is a waste of time, and wasting time will lose more wars than fighting your enemy ever will.

[thefallen2far]

Because it's fiction. Conventional victory is as "impossible" as omnipotent "god-like" enemy that can't just win without 1. controlling the Mass Relays 2. building concentration camps and torturing victims for information, 3. relies on Indoctrination for subterfuge 4. relies on surprise attack by wiping out all evidence of its existence before the next "cycle" 5. has forge allies within the beings of the cycles like the keepers, the collectors, the Krogan, the Racchni, the Geth and Saren. 6. creates infighting within the resistance by making them think the Reapers could be controlled. ,7. has to assault them before there's actually the conflict they're trying to prevent. [the smart thing to do, if they were omnipotent and their goal was as simple as wiping out all advanced civilizations before they can create AI that will destroy all organics.... is by waiting for AI to start to wipe out organics and then destroy all the machines and the organics, and relent the assault if there is a peace struck between them] These are tactics of a beatable enemy.

However, the plot armor the writers wanted was "they can't be beaten without this contrived plot device that makes no sense". Some people like the "ominpotent God enemy". Some people don't. It's fiction, so arguing this is as pointless as saying who would win a fight, Abraham Lincoln the Vampire hunter or the real George Washington. [happy 4th of July, everyone.]

[Ticonderoga117]

Zero132132 wrote...
Can someone from the "It's totally possible to beat the Reapers without space magic!" camp at least admit that people arguing with them have made a lot of good points that at least make it incredibly unlikely? It seems like everyone else is basically doing the functional equivalent of beating their heads against a wall for as much as your side has budged.

And will one of them admit that it's also plausible to beat them conventionally if the leaders had a brain and add in a dash of luck?

[Zero132132]

TookYoCookies wrote...

Im most definitely the planning type, Hence why id rather not rely on some plot enforced McGuffin that we're just now learning about.

You forgot the most important line of my post "When was the last time any war was won conventionally?" honestly when?

"we cant win this conventionally." 
that is the most "No-sh*t-sherlock" statement i ever heard in Mass Effect. It should go with out saying, we arent trying to march up to the reapers in formation revolutionary war style, which cracks me up because thats what our fleets do... 

I never gave any specfic plan to fighting the reapers, as any 1 plan would be retarded. Combat is dynamic. Your actions, strategies need to be dynamic. Complaining and being a huge P*ssy, is a waste of time, and wasting time will lose more wars than fighting your enemy ever will.

You may have thought that was the most important line of your post, but that post (and this one) has one message: that you don't care what the capabilities of the enemy are. You call it "complaining," but acknowledging the strengths of your enemy isn't being a ****, it's actually completely necessary if you're going to form any sort of competent strategy towards beating them. If the conclusion of this process is that victory currently isn't possible, then we need to work out a different plan of attack.

Given the entirely rational information he'd put in his post, what would your "dynamic plan" be for defeating the Reapers? Or do you genuinely just believe that refusing to acknowledge the strengths of your enemy is actually a GOOD idea?

[o Ventus]

JediMike2372 wrote...

Asharad Hett wrote...

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.

Thanix cannon.  I keep seeing a lot about that and what did it do?  Nothing.  Personally I believe that they are not one-shot-one-kill weopons.  I think they are powerful, but as far as I was aware, only the Normandy had a Thanix.  And there is no way one ship is going to take out the entire Reaper fleet.

And Dave Mustaine rulz!  

Almost every ship in the human and turian fleets were outfitted with Thanix cannons. Hell, the volus dreadnought Kwunu is outfitted ONLY with Thanix cannons.

[Zero132132]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Zero132132 wrote...
Can someone from the "It's totally possible to beat the Reapers without space magic!" camp at least admit that people arguing with them have made a lot of good points that at least make it incredibly unlikely? It seems like everyone else is basically doing the functional equivalent of beating their heads against a wall for as much as your side has budged.

And will one of them admit that it's also plausible to beat them conventionally if the leaders had a brain and add in a dash of luck?

I have said it's possible, but you need more than a dash of luck. Based on everything in the series, I'd still put it well below a 10% chance of an actual victory, and it's definitely a 0% chance of destroying the entire Reaper force in a single game without using the Crucible, or a nearly identical plot device.

[humes spork]

BerzerkGene wrote...

Thanix cannons are never mentioned at all. The fact they're never used should give you a good idea of how it was so easy to destroy three entire fleets.

The codex states Thanix Cannons! are prevalent in the Alliance fleet and that most Alliance ships have been retrofitted to include them. Are you seriously suggesting the Alliance put all the ships that don't have Thanix Cannons! into three fleets and proceeded to use those fleets to guard its own center of government?

Because, that's what it takes to suggest Thanix Cannons! weren't used at that point.

Thanix cannons and reaper guns ignore kinetic barriers. Thats why they're so powerful. Its why the Normandy could damage the collector crusier without having to be right on top of it. Even then it used specially designed torpedos. It also doesn't get annihlated, it gets annihlated with the cannon, without it just gets destroyed. It also appears to have a reaper cannon on it too, although it seems to be less accurate. The Normandy is still classed as a frigate

Okay, first, Thanix Cannons! don't "ignore" barriers, as bypassing that level of protection altogether as if it were a phasic round from ME1. The nature of the weapon is such that it overloads the kinetic barriers of its target. Moreover, the codex exposits that it does so of any known kinetic barrier, that is to say any kinetic barriers developed and used by organics. The effect of Thanix Cannons! on Reaper barriers and armor is, as of the beginning of ME3, an unknown as they had never before been used against Reapers in combat . And given the power of Reaper kinetic barriers as depicted in ME1 and exposited in ME3 to completely ignore any "conventional" organic weapon, to say that a Thanix Cannon! can penetrate Reaper kinetic barriers at all is a very tall order. The exposition of the power level of Thanix Cannons! in the codex is comparative to organic weapons, barriers and armor.

Second, Thanix Cannons! are powerful for the fact they're thermal and kinetic energy weapons opposed to more conventional kinetic (mass drivers) or dark energy (javelin missiles, disruptor torpedoes) weapons known to organics. That's explicitly and abundantly clear in the ME2 codex entry on Thanix Cannons!.

Third, yes, I'd consider destroying the Collector cruiser with minor, largely cosmetic damage and the loss of one hand annihilating the damn thing. Especially for having taken a glancing blow from a weapon which, if you're correct in your assumption, destroys dreadnoughts in one shot. And, the SR-2 would be a frigate for its designated role; in terms of displacement, armor and armament (the relevant factors here) it's right there with cruisers.

We never said that guns can shoot supplies...That could still be a problem. The point is moot since we don't know.

I don't know when you came into this thread or whose posts you have or haven't been paying attention too, but just speaking for myself my entire point revolves primarily around logistics and conventional victory being impossible due to the unsustainability of the war effort. In this thread and others.

Modifié par humes spork, 04 juillet 2012 - 04:46 .

[Ticonderoga117]

Zero132132 wrote...
I have said it's possible, but you need more than a dash of luck. Based on everything in the series, I'd still put it well below a 10% chance of an actual victory, and it's definitely a 0% chance of destroying the entire Reaper force in a single game without using the Crucible, or a nearly identical plot device.

Which game? ME3? The game where we get hammered over the head with that message?

I'd put it at 50/50 at the end of ME2.

Also, some plot devices are ok. The Cruicible is not, especially with GlowBoy crowbarred into the whole ending.

[BerzerkGene]

[quote]Zero132132 wrote...

[quote]marcustheMezz wrote...

2. They have thanix cannons, which are basically a version of the same weapon the reaper ship uses, which they got from studying sovereign's remains. No other cycle could have had these.[/quote]

So what? What evidence do you have from ANY of the games that Thanix canons make amazingtastic Reaper killers? The only relevant codex entry says that we have better luck with Thanix canons, but there's no information on either thier prevalence or their actual success.

That aside, there's a logistical problem with making very many of them. The actual amount of platinum required in ME2 is unitless, only given as 15,000. However, this is the entirety of the platinum on most platinum rich planets/moons (some actually have less), and there are a grand total of 34 of these in ME2. You're not scouring the whole galaxy, but you're seeing a fair chunk of it that's close to any relays. How many of these, realistically, can we even BUILD in the galaxy?[/quote]
Amazing tastic reaper killers, doubtful. But the codex states they smash right through any known barrier and armour. That includes reapers.
We're not given proof of their success OR failure because they're not mentioned or used at all. The codex seems to be inconflict with itself, it says they fair better, while also saying they basically ignore all known barriers and armour.

Logistically, you can't compare things that happen in gameply to story. Gameplay usually only means how fast you can accomplish something. Shooting all my ammo into the ground to make the normandy appear faster on earth does not mean its a good idea storywise. Aside from that, it takes more than platnium to make the gun, it also requires iron, uranium, and tungsten suspended in an electromagnetic field powered by element zero. The ablative armour for the Normandy probably requires more or something differen than just iridium. Its implied the resources are in payment, rather than money. But really, if gameplay was the same as story, Kai Lame would have died on the citadel to a black widow round in the back of his head while he was fleeing.

[quote]marcustheMezz wrote...
3. Sovereign barely participated in the attack on the citadel, did no one see the tons of geth ships that were doing all the work? Watch the ME1 citadel invasion cutscene again, Sovie kills all of 2 ships itself.
[/quote]
[quote]Zero132132 wrote...
The issue isn't how killtacular he was, the issue is exactly that he WASN'T participating much. He basically docked with the Citadel and didn't even notice that an entire fleet was firing at him at the same time. Since all 5 fleets actually lose war asset points if they participate, it was more than that, and that's discounting non-human forces. He withstood a ****LOAD of firepower, and when he did take out ships, he did it with no effort; single laser beam, and the ship's dead.
[quote]
Actually, the point is he wasn't being focussed on at all. Only ONE fleet loses assets, namely the fifth Alliance fleet.
The whole beam thing is valid, but there was no room to manouvere an entire fleet in an enclosed space. dodging was not really an option when you could collide.

[quote]marcustheMezz wrote...
5. The citadel's mass relay(how reapers got to the universe from dark space) was disabled, the reapers would use it to hit civilizations where they were most vulnerable before they even knew they were under attack, thus sending their fleets into chaos. With an intact military network, this changes the odds against the reapers greatly.
[/quote]
[quote]Zero132132 wrote...
The simple truth is that regardless of any point made, the Reapers aren't approaching this war the way we'd have to. They don't have their own worlds or supply lines. Their ground forces are assimilated from the population of their victims. Through indoctrination, they can learn of any plan presented, while there's absolutely no way to figure out what THEIR plans are. They have no supply lines or specific modes of production, so there's no way to attack them in any position that will be more meaningful than any other. Conversely, our own resources are open to siezure or destruction.

More than this, the way we fight wars is to just make it so costly that the opponent eventually gives up. The reapers don't have a "give up" option. If they retreated back to dark space, then what? What happens next? Doing so would give the galaxy more time to prepare, pursue them, and would provide no benefit towards their ultimate goal, which is to destroy galactic civilization. They have no reason to flee, even if they may face extinction; fleeing guarantees loss, and they have no other purpose than victory.

No. Just... no. They aren't like any enemy in any war in the real world, so examples of asymmetric warfare don't really have any relevance.
[/quote]
It doesn't matter how they're fighting the war. If the rules no longer apply, YOU CHANGE THE RULES. ground forces are more or less neglible in the conflict unless the Reapers have landed. While has shown to be a mistake on their part.
The indoctrination thing is bull. The crucible is built entirely in secret and it takes TIM to actually let them know whats happening. Why they don't simply know from his indoctrination...possibly cause the reaper that indoctrinated him is dead. Thats not really explained properly. Since indoctrination basically gives them full control and knowledge about a person.
Theres always another way. Worst case scenario is you blow up a sun. While not easy, its not like the reapers can stop a supernova. Luring them into a dogfight near a blackhole would also work. Their enormous size would put them at a major disadvantage.
The reapers don't care about our supplies, they roll in and blow up stuff. Not everyone wars until someone gives up. In this case it would be useless. You would have to fight smart. Sneaky. Use tactics never considered.
As for if they would ever retreat. That is an unknown. The Catalyst seems to regard every civilisation as precious, but doesn't bat an eye at the beaths of a half dozen reapers. So probably no retreat.

[Ticonderoga117]

humes spork wrote...
*post snip*

Just a note: As I understood the tech, the "neat" thing of Thanix cannons was the fact that the heat of the beam does bypass kinetic barriers.

Lasers also do the same thing.

[Zero132132]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Zero132132 wrote...
I have said it's possible, but you need more than a dash of luck. Based on everything in the series, I'd still put it well below a 10% chance of an actual victory, and it's definitely a 0% chance of destroying the entire Reaper force in a single game without using the Crucible, or a nearly identical plot device.

Which game? ME3? The game where we get hammered over the head with that message?

I'd put it at 50/50 at the end of ME2.

Also, some plot devices are ok. The Cruicible is not, especially with GlowBoy crowbarred into the whole ending.

No. Before ME3, I would have put it at 0%, because the only exposure we have to an actual Reaper is Sovereign, and he completely ignores all the ships shooting at him. Doesn't even flinch until Shepard kills Saren, taking his shields down. Even though he didn't bother to shoot enemies much, every time he does, it's a one-shot kill.

The only actual Reaper we see in ME2 is the derelict reaper, and it was DISABLED (not destroyed) by a weapon with such devastating power that it scarred the face of a planet nearby with a glancing blow. That's how much power it apparrently takes to even HURT (not destroy) one. Since it was 37 million years ago, the civilization that created this ridiculously powerful weapon couldn't actually win with it; the Reapers are still around, and have apparently completed around 700 cycles since then.

They were implied to be nearly invincible. ME3 was a substantial downgrade for the Reapers. Four dreadnoughts couldn't **** up the surface of a planet like that, and they actually DESTROY reapers rather than just damaging them. ME3 is the only reason that victory is even seen as a possibility. Sort of why I knew they'd resort to some sort of 'Reaper off switch' despite claiming they wouldn't.

[Ticonderoga117]

Zero132132 wrote...
No. Before ME3, I would have put it at 0%, because the only exposure we have to an actual Reaper is Sovereign, and he completely ignores all the ships shooting at him. Doesn't even flinch until Shepard kills Saren, taking his shields down. Even though he didn't bother to shoot enemies much, every time he does, it's a one-shot kill.

Who gets holed and killed by the one weapon the Normandy had in one shot after his shields crapped out. That doesn't scream to me indestructible at all.

[thefallen2far]

Zero132132 wrote...

No. Before ME3, I would have put it at 0%, because the only exposure we have to an actual Reaper is Sovereign, and he completely ignores all the ships shooting at him. Doesn't even flinch until Shepard kills Saren, taking his shields down. Even though he didn't bother to shoot enemies much, every time he does, it's a one-shot kill.

Oh, my god.  When was the last time people played Mass Effect 1?  Sovereign didn't go toe to toe with the fleet, he suprise attacked the fleet with an ARMADA of Geth ships.  Saren even says that the reason he didn't just fly into the Citadel himself is because if he did it without the massive Geth fleet he'd been building for 10 years, he'd have been annihilated.  Do people just forget that the Reapers were imposing, but not omnipotent?  I mean, if controlling a dead body of a traitor [which gets killed by 3 people in the citadel] was all that was keeping him from having  "unbeatable god" shields, why do it in the first place?   It was a last ditch effort from a dying Reaper that needed to open the portal to dark space so that the Reapers could get through.  You stop him from doing that and Joker kills him with one blast.

So to conclude   

1. Armada of ships built in secret for 10 years.
2. Converted enemy and subterfuge to bypass control.
3. Suprise attack with controlling and preventing any reinforcements of your enemy.
4. Had a blizing all out assult with a simplified objective that could be achieved through opening a door.

All this and he still fails.  [not to mention that you could save the Ascention meaning there were no character casualties]  What part of this makes you think they're omnipotent.

Modifié par thefallen2far, 04 juillet 2012 - 05:15 .

[BerzerkGene]

Zero132132 wrote...

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Zero132132 wrote...
I have said it's possible, but you need more than a dash of luck. Based on everything in the series, I'd still put it well below a 10% chance of an actual victory, and it's definitely a 0% chance of destroying the entire Reaper force in a single game without using the Crucible, or a nearly identical plot device.

Which game? ME3? The game where we get hammered over the head with that message?

I'd put it at 50/50 at the end of ME2.

Also, some plot devices are ok. The Cruicible is not, especially with GlowBoy crowbarred into the whole ending.

Snip

The only actual Reaper we see in ME2 is the derelict reaper, and it was DISABLED (not destroyed) by a weapon with such devastating power that it scarred the face of a planet nearby with a glancing blow. That's how much power it apparrently takes to even HURT (not destroy) one. Since it was 37 million years ago, the civilization that created this ridiculously powerful weapon couldn't actually win with it; the Reapers are still around, and have apparently completed around 700 cycles since then.

They were implied to be nearly invincible. ME3 was a substantial downgrade for the Reapers. Four dreadnoughts couldn't **** up the surface of a planet like that, and they actually DESTROY reapers rather than just damaging them. ME3 is the only reason that victory is even seen as a possibility. Sort of why I knew they'd resort to some sort of 'Reaper off switch' despite claiming they wouldn't.

That weapon was a one shot cripple. It basically sent the reaper from full power to drifting around a star without any consciousness. Who says that was the only shot? While ridiculously powerful, it may have been the only one. We don't know.
Implied in Me1, yes. In ME2, the fact you can kill a baby reaper with small arms fire to weak points make them seem somewhat less powerful.
Dreadnoughts "Each slug has the kinetic energy of 38 kilotons of TNT, enough to destroy the infrastructure of a mid-sized city and kill half a million people.
" So yeah 4 dreadnoughts could probably do as much damage, although probably not as fast, they would have to shoot at least twice each.

[Gamedwarf24]

humes spork wrote...

Gamedwarf24 wrote...

Besides, one of the largest themes of the ME franchise was Shepard overcoming impossible odds when people were telling him its impossible. Saren and Sovereign said that their victory was inevitable. Shepard beat them.

Name one "impossible" task in the entire trilogy Shepard was able to accomplish alone. One of the major underlying themes of the trilogy is also that no person, group, or even species is an island. You're expecting Shepard to have sole, direct agency over the final outcome of a galaxy-wide war.

The grand irony here is that which everyone complains about -- the Crucible -- is a plot device solely constructed to ensure Shepard, and the player, that agency. No matter how you construct it, "conventional victory" endings would have constituted a loss of that direct agency.

Correct...Shepard didn't do it alone. Not my point? Don't see yours.

Of course Shepard can't do much of ANYTHING if people don't follow him/her. But they do, and the ones that didn't evenutally do. Being that this is Shepards story, and he/she is made out to be the ultimate (and frankly, unstoppable) hero up to this point, Shepard is a conduit which all major events of the story flow. Regardless of whether or not he just ends up being a soldier in the end, it's Shepard who united the galaxy to take down the reaper threat. That is the "agency" of Shepard and its a damn good and satisfying one, that didn't need to be replaced by this "pick a color" catalyst nonsense.

As far as climactic influence goes, there's plenty of tried and true ways that would have been far more satisfying than the ending we got. Conventional victory is one of those ways (in my opinion) with Shepard playing a huge role in the final battle. It was good enough for Dragon Age, Kotor, Jade Empire, and Mass Effect 1 and 2. See my point?

[Zero132132]

thefallen2far wrote...
Oh, my god.  When was the last time people played Mass Effect 1?  Sovereign didn't go toe to toe with the fleet, he suprise attacked the fleet with an ARMADA of Geth ships.  Saren even says that the reason he didn't just fly into the Citadel himself is because if he did it without the massive Geth fleet he'd been building for 10 years, he'd have been annihilated.  Do people just forget that the Reapers were imposing, but not omnipotent?  I mean, if controlling a dead body of a traitor [which gets killed by 3 people in the citadel] was all that was keeping him from having  "unbeatable god" shields, why do it in the first place?   It was a last ditch effort from a dying Reaper that needed to open the portal to dark space so that the Reapers could get through.  You stop him from doing that and Joker kills him with one blast.

So to conclude   

1. Armada of ships built in secret for 10 years.
2. Converted enemy and subterfuge to bypass control.
3. Suprise attack with controlling and preventing any reinforcements of your enemy.
4. Had a blizing all out assult with a simplified objective that could be achieved through opening a door.

All this and he still fails.  [not to mention that you could save the Ascention meaning there were no character casualties]  What part of this makes you think they're omnipotent.

You're missing the point. I don't give a **** AT ALL that he wasn't attacking the alliance ships. If anything, that's my point; he was so unconcerned with the massive amount of fire heading his way that he didn't even bother fighting back. If I get bit by an ant, I squish it; he didn't even go that far. It isn't that he was SOOO badass at killing ****. I mean, the one-hit-KO weapon is kickass, but the main point is that the shields are so powerful that he doesn't even bother fighting back while ships shoot at him.

Also, I'm 90% sure that it was Vigil, not Saren, that said he would be destroyed.

So is your point that an entire fleet of Reapers would be worse than one Reaper and a fleet of geth? I'm kind of confused about the message you're trying to send.

[Ticonderoga117]

Zero132132 wrote...
*snip*

But he did... because he brought the Geth as a distraction. Otherwise, he would've opened the Citadel much earlier.

[humes spork]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

You can still destroy enough stuff through guerilla raids to hamper Reaper forces. It's mentioned that there are camps where beings await huskification. Hit those. Remove thier source of ground troops. Will this be a deciding factor? Not really, but it helps.

Well, that's the problem. In this case the Reapers' supplies are your own citizens. It's not exactly couth to go nuking your own populations willy-nilly.

And, about the Seven Years' War...aw, screw it. This thread's just going in circles at this point anyways. Story time, it's relevant to today (you'll see why in the long run).

In 1754, tensions had been running high between the Brits and the Colonials, and the French and Canadians, over land rights and claims in the American frontier. At the time, a colonel in the Virginia militia by the name of George Washington was out in the butt end of nowhere (now known as the suburbs of Pittsburgh) because lol, military bureaucracy, under explicit orders to not provoke the French.

Meanwhile, a Canadian officer named Jumonville was sent on a scouting mission with some soldiers to make sure Washington wasn't doing anything stupid, like tearassing around French-claimed territory. He did, and an American frontiersman named Christopher Gist who happened to be buddies with Washington told the latter the French soldiers had threatened to shoot his cow. Washington was having none of that, so he decided the best course of action was to go tearassing around French-claimed territory provoking the French.

Washington didn't find Jumonville, but he did find a group of Mingo indians and told them Jumonville was out to kill them. So, the indians found Jumonville and with Washington, killed his and his scouting party. The French and Canadians were not happy about this, and Jumonville's brother, de Villiers, went after Washington with 700 men.

This is where the story gets bizarre.

Washington realized he did something kind of stupid, so he built a fort he named Fort Necessity. I've seen it in person...and goddamn, talk about ghetto. It's a seven-foot log fence around a hut. Emboldened by his mighty redoubt and the concept he's fighting the French, Washington rode out to find out he was actually fighting a force of 600 pissed off Canadians, 100 pissed off Indians, all led by the brother of the man he had killed...for threatening to shoot a cow.

Washington ordered his forces into full retreat. Washington also had the idea that if he ditched his force's supplies, they could retreat faster, so he did. His force made it to Fort Necessity, de Villiers surrounded and attacked...and the battle itself could only be described as a complete SNAFU. Digging trenches in the mud, wet gunpowder, musket volleys that didn't hit a thing, it was over in a matter of hours.

de Villiers sent an envoy to negotiate terms of surrender. Washington didn't know or read French, so he needed a translator. His translator, instead of actually negotiating or translating anything, went to get drunk. His translator brought back a document, which Washington quickly signed. The document was actually an unconditional surrender, written confession that Washington had assassinated Jumonville and bore sole responsibility for the incident. The British weren't happy about this...and that's how the first actual world war started. We call our front the French and Indian War.

The relevance to today is this is the 258th anniversary of the surrender of Fort Necessity. Oh, and when the Seven Years' War was over, the British wanted us to pay for the war we started in the first place, so they raised our taxes. So, on July 4th, 1776...

Modifié par humes spork, 04 juillet 2012 - 05:47 .

[sugarpouring]

if we have a bomb that can destroy an entire state at this age, than i can only imagine what they have in the mass effect universe. why they never bother to use a weapon that powerful is beyond me

[Zero132132]

BerzerkGene wrote...

That weapon was a one shot cripple. It basically sent the reaper from full power to drifting around a star without any consciousness. Who says that was the only shot? While ridiculously powerful, it may have been the only one. We don't know.
Implied in Me1, yes. In ME2, the fact you can kill a baby reaper with small arms fire to weak points make them seem somewhat less powerful.
Dreadnoughts "Each slug has the kinetic energy of 38 kilotons of TNT, enough to destroy the infrastructure of a mid-sized city and kill half a million people.
" So yeah 4 dreadnoughts could probably do as much damage, although probably not as fast, they would have to shoot at least twice each.

He had no shields, which is what made Sovereign so formidable. Besides, that's like saying that because kicking an unprotected baby in the head hard enough a few times will kill it, it's easy (or feasible) to kill adults by kicking them a few times.

As for the TNT argument, the Chicxulub crater, the crater associated with the asteroid that triggered the K-T extinction event (end of the dinosaurs) was likely created by an impact equivalent to 96 teratons (96,000,000,000 kilotons) worth of TNT. This crater is 90 km radius, so a bit over 25,000 square kilometers in area. We can see that the rift created on Klendagon runs about a quarter around the planet, and it's wide enough to been seen from space:

Klendagon is about 7,400 km in diameter, so a quarter of the circumference would be over 10,000 km long. It'd have to be about 2.4 km wide to be comparable in surface displacement, which may or may not be the case (looks to be much wider), but this is a glancing blow, not a full hit. Most of the force didn't even hit the planet.

Anyways, my point is that it's absurdly unlikely that the kind of energy it takes to scar a planet's surface that drastically wouldn't be several orders of magnitude above 38 kilotons of TNT in explosive power.

Sorry for the physics lesson, but seriously, it'd take over a billion shots from a dreadnought to equal the energy output from a glancing blow with a weapon that only disabled a Reaper. They're MUCH weaker in ME3.