676 réponses à ce sujet

[Rhiens VI]

Galbrant wrote...

This is what I am thinking atm for the long term... and if all else fails... The crew of the Normandy can go back to Eden Prime and get more data on that Prothean stasis chambers and with Liara Shadow Broker skills and Tali's knack of making a Dreadnought out of scrap metal we can hide from the reapers until they finish harvesting.

Wait, that is your idea of victory? o_O

[string3r]

Because it's better than space magic.

[Galbrant]

Rhiens VI wrote...

Galbrant wrote...

This is what I am thinking atm for the long term... and if all else fails... The crew of the Normandy can go back to Eden Prime and get more data on that Prothean stasis chambers and with Liara Shadow Broker skills and Tali's knack of making a Dreadnought out of scrap metal we can hide from the reapers until they finish harvesting.

Wait, that is your idea of victory? o_O

No, I meant they harvest what we can't hide.... I.E. the Vorcha... I pretty sure no one wants to be in stasis for over a thousand years next to one.

[o Ventus]

Galbrant wrote...

Rhiens VI wrote...

Galbrant wrote...

This is what I am thinking atm for the long term... and if all else fails... The crew of the Normandy can go back to Eden Prime and get more data on that Prothean stasis chambers and with Liara Shadow Broker skills and Tali's knack of making a Dreadnought out of scrap metal we can hide from the reapers until they finish harvesting.

Wait, that is your idea of victory? o_O

No, I meant they harvest what we can't hide.... I.E. the Vorcha... I pretty sure no one wants to be in stasis for over a thousand years next to one.

They wouldn't harvest the vorcha. They are too stupid. Really, they aren't harvesting vorcha because the vorcha are too stupid.

[Galbrant]

o Ventus wrote...

Galbrant wrote...

Rhiens VI wrote...

Galbrant wrote...

This is what I am thinking atm for the long term... and if all else fails... The crew of the Normandy can go back to Eden Prime and get more data on that Prothean stasis chambers and with Liara Shadow Broker skills and Tali's knack of making a Dreadnought out of scrap metal we can hide from the reapers until they finish harvesting.

Wait, that is your idea of victory? o_O

No, I meant they harvest what we can't hide.... I.E. the Vorcha... I pretty sure no one wants to be in stasis for over a thousand years next to one.

They wouldn't harvest the vorcha. They are too stupid. Really, they aren't harvesting vorcha because the vorcha are too stupid.

Good point...  We hand  them the detonater to  a nuke and we tell them its a gun so when they see a  Reaper they would shoot it in a sense killing two birds with one stone ridding the Galaxy of  of two vermin.

[jbadm04]

The only reason a conventional victory is not possible is, becaue BioWare says so. I can live with that, as I do with the "ending" but that does not mean I can accept their flawed logic.

During ME it is NOT said the reapers are "invincible"... tough, but not invincible. During ME2 the same, at the end Shepard claims it will be hard, but they will find a ways. Only during ME3 the whole story arc turned out to have "impossible conventional victory"... in one of the first posts here someone claimed: BioWare decided this way to make the game more accessible for new players, though its just a speculation, its a better argument then anything bioware came up with to backup their "decision".

At no point during all three games the ME civiliazations made any "superior" impressions. More or less, they all appear to be like todays RL humans... powerhungry. A constant about people with power is, htey want to keep that power and even increase it. People without power want to get some. The best way to have power in this "world" is money and the best way to get money is through warfare. And what is better then a real war with a ton of corpses? Yeah, its an imaginative, very powerfull enemy. Know your politicians and the "cash elitists" and you will know what actualy SHOULD have happened in ME2. They would increase the militarization to an enormous level .... its just about "better have something and not need it, then need it and have nothing"... politicians think so. IF it would turn out the reapers are just Shepards "bad dream"... by the time the people find out, its already too late, the people who had the power and have the power are already so rich, they and their families will live for thousands of years without any trouble and nothing will happen, just like today. On the other hand, if the Reaper treat turns to be true, the galaxy is at least "prepared".

Another couple of hints: Wing Commander Prophecy, Freespace 1+2, Imperium Galactica, GalCivIi Twiligt of Arnor, Babylon 5 (just to name a few). What have 'these' in common? Anwer: one enigmatic, mysterious, invincible enemy that came out of nowhere (exclude B5). All were about losing on every front, evacuation, rear-guard battles... and eventuely they shot down an enemy, reverse-engineered "help tech". This pretty much is the same with Reapers... Thanix, the Armor... will this give us an edge? No, but it will certainly help. WIth the proper preparation (that just dont happen because of bioware) there would be enough ships to even lose a couple of dreadnoughts for every "Sovvy". (The reject ending seems to say it: the crucible didnt work, so do oyu think the new cycle would build it? No, the new cycle just prepare and defeat the reapers with sheer numbers... and to paraprase starship troopers "with implicit violence". Just a speculation).

The "Reapers" are nothing new in our SciFi... just how we deal with them... but if an unconventional aka deus ex machina aka crucible victory is better.... I dont know. It seems even people at bioware do not concur with each other. In ME2 the thanix canon fired by a frigate rips through a reaper tech enhanced cruiser with one shot, imagine how powerful it would be when fired by a dreadnought? Codex says a Sovvy would rip through a dread with one shot, yet in the videos we see Reapers exchanging shots with even cruisers and frigates. We read a Sovvy cant withold the fire of 4 dreads. We get news how inspiring (in my words easy) it is for turian and krogan ground troops to take out reaper destroyers, yet Shepard have so much troubles with them...

Whatever, I live with BioWare decision, but still its crap.

[Han Shot First]

o Ventus wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

Bleachrude wrote...

re: Thanix weaponry

Er, why would the galactic alliance be kitted out with Thanix? The first that ANYONE heard aboutt he Thanix is roughly 6-9 months before the Reaper invasion....How the hell would you retool thousands of ships that quickly?

This.

For gameplay reasons we just press a button and the Normandy gets upgraded in Mass Effect 2, but that isn't how it would happen storywise.
 
A ship would have to go into the space equivalent of drydock and spend weeks or months getting retrofitted. Add to that the fact that you've had a lot more ships than shipyard space, and the complete ovehaul of entire fleets would take years.

They made it a point to mention that almost every Alliance vessel and turian ship now has Thanix cannons.

Thanix cannoms aren't the only upgrades out there however. There was also the new Asari armor plating and the improved shielding, which presumably hasn't been installed on most ships.

Also the Thanix cannos were scaled down and inferior weapons to what the Reapers possess. They are an upgrade to what the Citadel fleets had previously, but are not yet on par with the weaponry Reaper vessels are outfitted with.

In order for a conventional victory to have been possible, Mass Effect 2 would have had to have been a very different game, where the galaxy manages to level the technological playing field. Going into Mass Effect 3 it is too late, and the only avenue for victory is a superweapon.

[SpamBot2000]

Answer to OP's title question: Because they have been diverted by the wrong question.

[Helios969]

Conventional victory not possible. You haven't been fighting a conventional war from the start. Shepard, the Normandy and its crew are unconventional military assets. Unconventional victory (without crucible) could be possible.

[egnit]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

egnit wrote...

First: Yes, we do have FTL, but it is extremely inefficient and would exhaust eezo supplies and take decades to get someplace in a hurry. The species of the galaxy have come to rely on the technology of the relays, its something the reapers count on. Without the relays, organics are sunk.

 

Decades works to our advantage. And we wouldn't have mass commerce, so that would stretch out any eezo supply. 

egnit wrote... 

Second: The Protheans built one relay. A single one-way relay. I'm certain the species could build relays, but that would require massive efforts in man and material that, without the current mass relays, isn't getting anywhere anytime soon.

The Protheans who built the one relay were a small band of scientist refugees. And yes, relays would have to be built strategically - not looking to replace the current relay network. 

egnit wrote... 

Third: Quantum Entaglement is a great method of communication, provided everyone has it, and they don't. To comunicate on that scale every supply world would have to have one. Every foundry. Every research station. There just aren't that many in the galaxy, and I think most of them are actually with the fleets at Earth.

Again, not rebuilding galactic civilization - only coordinating military activities. One per region should be fine. Then they could communicate more locally. 

egnit wrote... 

Fourth: With the geth and AI, yeah, you have a valid point. I think an organic would be better, but I will concede that uploading Geth to ships would work. Just have to hope you didn't kill them all off and nix that option.

The Geth are convenient but not vital. We are quite capable of building advanced AIs. We simply don't because they scare us. The Reapers would scare us more, I think.

egnit wrote...  

Fifth: Construction of a car is extremely difficult. It requires multiple factories all building pieces in tande, to be assembled. It can take several years to build a seaworthy ship and that's a hundred times more complicated. Imagine how long it would take to build a dreadnaught? With the relays intact and no galactic war straining things it took the Alliance years to build a dreadnaught. They would have a) gather all the resources they need to fabricate the construction facilities, ship, and maintanace for the drones that will build the ship. Actually travel, at FTL, to this location, c) Build a plant to contruct the parts d) build the ship itself. They have to do all that and then wait for the ship to not only be constructed, but for it to travel back to the fleet. What you suggest is a logistical nightmare, and that's even without taking into account indoctrinated spies or even building the machines that will operate on their own to build the ships.

You are thinking in 20th century peace-time terms. The Soviet Union in 1940 produced about 3000 fighting vehicles, mostly light vehicles. In 1943 it produced 35 000 vehicles, mostly medium and heavy tanks. And that's using just human labour. 

As long as you have the resources to bootstrap production, you're away to the races. It doesn't take people. Set up your artifical intelligences. You have 100 billion stars in the Milky Way and hundreds of billions of planets. Resources are effectively limitless. The places to hide are limitless. 

egnit wrote...  

Yes, the galaxy is huge beyond reason. Its even larger when you have to travel at FTL. Alpha Centari is our closest neigbbor at around 4 light years away. According to the Mass Effect Wiki : "The exact FTL speeds at which starships of the modern galaxy travel are unknown. It is noted, however, that Reapersare believed to be capable of traveling nearly 30 light-years within a
24-hour period, and that this rate is roughly twice wha tCitadel starships are capable of traveling." 
That means travelling at 15 light years in 24 hours, it would take about 6 hours to get to the next system.

Without the relays to ease logistics, its almost a forgone conclusion that the reapers win. With the Mass relays, the galaxy has a chance.

The mass relays mean that the Reapers can move through the galaxy much more quickly. Cut off a region from mass relay traffic and it now takes the Reapers years to get there. The diameter of the milky way is 100 000 ly. Make the Reapers fly a mere 3000 ly and it takes them 300 days to get to a location - if they even know where to go to find you. In 300 days, we'll have a massive fleet.

Again, logistics isn't so much the problem since there are no real borders and supply lines.  The galaxy is so massive, retreating and rebuilding is simple. It all comes down to production capacity.  And since the Reapers can't replicate those tactics (indoctrinated minions soon go all brain dead and the Reapers themselves are unable to effectively procreate), they are doomed.

Of course, we don't HAVE to destroy the relays. We could just move them around to places REALLY inconvenient for a Reaper to jump in. That's assuming they can track the location of the relays with the citadel - which is not a forgone conclusion. If not, we could just move them and the Reapers won't be able to find them.  We can use QC to coordinate their new locations and use them as we need. 

Logistics are key. There would have to be supply lines. You can't just build a factory on an isolated world and expect all the materials you need to build a ship to be there. You would have to transport material, and without the relays, you'd have to do it in FTL. You'd have to defend those convoys from predation. You'd have to feed the people operating the ships. Unless they're all automated which makes it easier for the reapers to take control of them. You don't take into account the ability of the reaper cyberwarfare. You don't take into account indoctrinated agents.

I'm thinking in realistic terms. The Soviet Union was facing **** Germany on a single front. An enemy that was engaged on multiple fronts and spread very thin. The Soviet Union was able to continue producing material because: a) Germany posessed zero strategic bombing capability (Hitler demanded all his bombers be able to dive bomb) The Soviet Union had railroads and infrastructure behind their front lines that allowed them to move material to the fronts.

What you advocate is this:

We can build ships anywhere we please because the galaxy is huge.
We can do it fairly quickly and secretly.
We can do this using artificial intelligence.
We can do this while avoiding the reapers completely.
We can do this without having to transport supplies/material quickly.
We can do this without the ability to exchange data in real-time.
We can do this despite the fact that, with our best ships, it would take 19 years to cross the Milky Way.

If you can't see that what you suggest is the literal definition of improbable beyiond comprehension, then I really don't think there's any more point to the conversation. What you suggest is literal insanity, and that is no way to win a war. Just how will you attack the reapers? Spend a few years getting into position, the reapers will see them coming literally months away.

No Relays means no logistics.

[Eire Icon]

Allot of ME fans believe that because they want something to be possible, it therefore should be possible.

This is not the case. Conincidently I've also noticed these fans choose the Refusal ending allot also

[Whatever42]

Logistics is important, of course. Factories and fleets need to be supplied. I'm saying that in a galaxy of a million stars and only a few hundred/thousand Reapers, logistics won't be a problem.

However, you're thinking of this all wrong. The point is not to save galactic civilization, it would be to kill Reapers. We aren't fighting over Earth. We aren't fighting over any fixed point until we have the production capacity to defeat the Reapers in battles. At that point, we could simply launch an attack against the Citadel. Even if it took us 10 years to get there, the Reapers would have to fight us.

You can't just build a factory on an isolated world and expect all the materials you need to build a ship to be there. You would have to transport material, and without the relays, you'd have to do it in FTL. You'd have to defend those convoys from predation."

 

Travelling within local clusters is relatively simple. There are parts of the galaxy where there are high radiation levels and dense star clusters. Without worrying about colonization, only building automated production, we could easily find locations with resources within easy reach, that would be very hard to find. The Reapers would have to painstakingly scan millions of systems to find our facilities.

 You'd have to feed the people operating the ships. Unless they're all automated which makes it easier for the reapers to take control of them.

 

Reapers don't easily take control of Geth or artificial intelligence. They *can*, yes, and we can adapt. The Reapers corrupted the heretics but the Geth know how that happened now. And if they adapt, I think we've proven that we're even more adaptable. And if we deem crews as necessary, we could keep them small and in command & control functions.

 You don't take into account the ability of the reaper cyberwarfare. You don't take into account indoctrinated agents.

 

You're getting down to details now. We have several ways to tackle that. First, we know about indoctrination and we know about how they took over the heretics. We'd be on guard. We'd have multiple controls. We'd probably even be able to screen for it - that has to be physiological changes, given the effects. Not to mention, when there are trillions of people, including likely millions in very important positions, its hard to control indoctrination. When you have only a few million, however, its much easier.

Besides, it wouldn't be too difficult to control communication. The QC would be limited and relay FTL communication would be inaccessible, most likely.

 We can build ships anywhere we please because the galaxy is huge.

  
Yes. The galaxy is 100 billion stars. And many of those stars are in dense, dust heavy, radiation heavy clusters that are rich in resources and very hard to search, even for Reapers.

 We can do it fairly quickly and secretly.

 

Yes. There are many places in the galaxy where it would be very hard to find us.

 We can do this using artificial intelligence.

  
AIs would certainly help, yes. If we're worried about viruses, we could certainly put in multiple levels of command and control. But AIs allow us to bootstrap a production facility and then let it build itself. AIs could manage those logistics with no problem. Heck, just look at the Geth.

 We can do this while avoiding the reapers completely.

  
Of course not. However, hide a thousand factory worlds in a thousand dense star clusters, full of radiation to obscure searching, they wouldn't find most of them before it was too late.

 We can do this without having to transport supplies/material quickly.

  
Material would only have to be transported within the local star cluster. We could transport within clusters quickly. Clusters often have dozens of stars all within 1 ly. 

 We can do this without the ability to exchange data in real-time.

  
We have the ability to exchange data in real time. We wouldn't need this for production purposes but we would need it to know of Reaper movements and coordinate battle later on, of course.

 We can do this despite the fact that, with our best ships, it would take 19 years to cross the Milky Way.

 

Why are we crossing the Milky Way? It only takes hours and days to travel around within a star cluster and only days and weeks to travel between star clusters. Eventually, we'd have to rally forces in central locations, yes. It might take years to rendevous. Or maybe we'll use relays once we're ready to attack. We certainly wouldn't have to destroy all the relays. There are many options there.

There are several ways of doing that. My favourite would be to move the relays. Without knowing the location, you can't jump there (as we know from ME1, not even Sovereign could find the missing relay). Or we could leave some relays intact in areas where we have no production.

Again, I don't think you're evaluating the goals properly here. This is space guerilla warfare until we have the capacity for stand-up battles. This is Vietnam versus the French. The Soviets moving all their production out of reach and just harrying and distracting the Germans until they can bring overwhelming force. This is the long game and it means letting most of your civilizations go down the tubes and rebuilding later.

Modifié par Whatever666343431431654324, 04 juillet 2012 - 01:56 .

[Kamfrenchie]

Han Shot First wrote...

Bleachrude wrote...

re: Thanix weaponry

Er, why would the galactic alliance be kitted out with Thanix? The first that ANYONE heard aboutt he Thanix is roughly 6-9 months before the Reaper invasion....How the hell would you retool thousands of ships that quickly?

This.

For gameplay reasons we just press a button and the Normandy gets upgraded in Mass Effect 2, but that isn't how it would happen storywise.
 
A ship would have to go into the space equivalent of drydock and spend weeks or months getting retrofitted. Add to that the fact that you've had a lot more ships than shipyard space, and the complete ovehaul of entire fleets would take years.

actually, you are very wrong on this point. Remeber we are flying a crberus ship, there is no way anyone would be willing to give rare cuttin edge tech to cerberus. If you can get 1 in ME2, it means they are already widely used

[Kamfrenchie]

Han Shot First wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Because they're mad, Hanar.

This.

The interesting thing is that some of the same people who argue for a conventional victory will then criticize other scenes as being 'unrealistic,' like the Normandy evac scene during the beam rush.

If the galaxy had managed to somehow defeat the Reapers conventionally at the end of Mass Effect 3 it would have been the most ridiculously implausible scene of the entire series.

Right, because what we have now with the cucible and the kid is so much better and more plausible

[Kamfrenchie]

Also, a fitting comparison



except we have comparable guns to theirs

Modifié par Kamfrenchie, 04 juillet 2012 - 02:47 .

[Asharad Hett]

Helios969 wrote...

Conventional victory not possible. You haven't been fighting a conventional war from the start. Shepard, the Normandy and its crew are unconventional military assets. Unconventional victory (without crucible) could be possible.

That's an interesting argument.  Why would you say that Shep and the Normandy are unconventional military assets?  They are a special team, but their qualities exist in throughout the galaxy's military forces.

Modifié par Asharad Hett, 04 juillet 2012 - 02:51 .

[ArchDuck]

avenging_teabag wrote...

The thing is, the writers were hacks who'd not thought their story out even one step ahead, so we have the current mess of contradictions between characters' opinions, ingame cinematics and the codex. It's useless to discuss it seriously.

[ArchDuck]

Asharad Hett wrote...

Helios969 wrote...

Conventional victory not possible. You haven't been fighting a conventional war from the start. Shepard, the Normandy and its crew are unconventional military assets. Unconventional victory (without crucible) could be possible.

That's an interesting argument.  Why would you say that Shep and the Normandy are unconventional military assets?  They are a special team, but their qualities exist in throughout the galaxy's military forces.

Almost nobody has actually argued that a conventional victory is possible. What as been attributed to that position is any victory not using the Reaper device (crucible). Almost every suggestion I have seen would actually lead to unconventional battle plans and tactics.

I would point out (again) that Hackett is unable to see beyond conventional redcoat tactics and is in fact a terrible strategist.

[ArchDuck]

Kamfrenchie wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Because they're mad, Hanar.

This.

The interesting thing is that some of the same people who argue for a conventional victory will then criticize other scenes as being 'unrealistic,' like the Normandy evac scene during the beam rush.

If the galaxy had managed to somehow defeat the Reapers conventionally at the end of Mass Effect 3 it would have been the most ridiculously implausible scene of the entire series.

Right, because what we have now with the cucible and the kid is so much better and more plausible

I have not really seen people argue about realism in other scenes so much as consistency. If it says X can do Y but not Z ingame then people naturally are confused and annoyed when X does Z but not Y.

Modifié par ArchDuck, 04 juillet 2012 - 02:56 .

[Baldrick67]

Maybe because Bioware was leading us to that expectation all along.

ME Trailer Anderson says "We face extinction. A rogue soldier leads an unstoppable force across the galaxy and only you stand in his way."

ME2
Opening Cinematic
TIM: Shepard remains our best hope
Miranda: But Shepard, they'll follow him. He's a hero a bloody icon. But hes just one man if we loose him humanity just might follow

ME3
Cinematic trailer has Shepard fighting reaper forces not simply choosing a colour from the allowed reaper paint scheme.
I believed just like the other two games it would be strength of will and big fracking guns that would end the war and not some last minute Deus ex machina crap.

Modifié par Baldrick67, 04 juillet 2012 - 03:25 .

[Han Shot First]

Kamfrenchie wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Because they're mad, Hanar.

This.

The interesting thing is that some of the same people who argue for a conventional victory will then criticize other scenes as being 'unrealistic,' like the Normandy evac scene during the beam rush.

If the galaxy had managed to somehow defeat the Reapers conventionally at the end of Mass Effect 3 it would have been the most ridiculously implausible scene of the entire series.

Right, because what we have now with the cucible and the kid is so much better and more plausible

I never said that Star Child and the Crucible was the best execution of a superweapon, but it does at least provide an explanation as to how the Reapers end up being defeated. A conventional victory in ME3 would not have any explanation as to how the civilizations of the galaxy managed to win against an enemy that is so much more technologically advanced.

Considering that an entire fleet was doing little to no damage to Sovereign prior to Shepard bringing down its shields, or that it took the entire Migrant Fleet to bring down the Rannoch Reaper, the civilizations of the galaxy simply did not possess the ability to conventionally defeat them in Mass Effect 3. In order for the writers to have gone the conventional victory route, Mass Effect 2 would have had to have been a very different game where the civilizations of the galaxy level the playing field. By the point the Reapers actually invade it is too late.

actually, you are very wrong on this point. Remeber we are flying a crberus ship, there is no way anyone would be willing to give rare cuttin edge tech to cerberus. If you can get 1 in ME2, it means they are already widely used

That isn't true at all. The Normandy SR2 despite being Cerberus, is the most advanced warship in the galaxy.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 04 juillet 2012 - 04:36 .

[Kamfrenchie]

Han Shot First wrote...

Kamfrenchie wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Because they're mad, Hanar.

This.

The interesting thing is that some of the same people who argue for a conventional victory will then criticize other scenes as being 'unrealistic,' like the Normandy evac scene during the beam rush.

If the galaxy had managed to somehow defeat the Reapers conventionally at the end of Mass Effect 3 it would have been the most ridiculously implausible scene of the entire series.

Right, because what we have now with the cucible and the kid is so much better and more plausible

I never said that Star Child and the Crucible was the best execution of a superweapon, but it does at least provide an explanation as to how the Reapers end up being defeated. A conventional victory in ME3 would not have any explanation as to how the civilizations of the galaxy managed to win against an enemy that is so much more technologically advanced.

Considering that an entire fleet was doing little to no damage to Sovereign prior to Shepard bringing down its shields, or that it took the entire Migrant Fleet to bring down the Rannoch Reaper, the civilizations of the galaxy simply did not possess the ability to conventionally defeat them in Mass Effect 3. In order for the writers to have gone the conventional victory route, Mass Effect 2 would have had to have been a very different game where the civilizations of the galaxy level the playing field. By the point the Reapers actually invade it is too late.

actually, you are very wrong on this point. Remeber we are flying a crberus ship, there is no way anyone would be willing to give rare cuttin edge tech to cerberus. If you can get 1 in ME2, it means they are already widely used

That isn't true at all. The Normandy SR2 despite being Cerberus, is the most advanced warship in the galaxy.

You miss the point. No one would hand over a rare cuting edge tech gun to what is considered to be a terrorist group. The fact tht you get 1 means they arewidely used already.

As for the other things you mention,you ar using a straw man. We aren't aying making a full frntal assault would ring victory, but that a combinison of uniting th galaxy, improving tech and weapons and using clever strategies would b better and believable.

Most of what you point has been answered but whatever.
Sovereign caught everyone with their pants down, and had a geth armada. Once his shileds were out he got toasted quickly. ME 2 and 3 present several weapons that pierce shields (thanix, javelin, lasers)

The quarian limited their firepower in order not to kill shepard along with the reaper.

They would have many way to win without an asspull if the writer had chosen to do it in ME3, but they didn't

About th tech difference, we'v already nsered that (reverse engeneernig)

+ this

[Ridwan]

Since when did the Reapers have an iddqd code?

[Apocaleepse360]

It's not the Crucible that we hate. It's the Catalyst. The Crucible would have been fine as a simple anti-Reaper weapon. Not to mention that it would have made an interesting mission aiming and firing the thing at incoming Reapers.

[Kamfrenchie]

Apocaleepse360 wrote...

It's not the Crucible that we hate. It's the Catalyst. The Crucible would have been fine as a simple anti-Reaper weapon. Not to mention that it would have made an interesting mission aiming and firing the thing at incoming Reapers.

I kinda hate th crucible too. It could be alright if it wasn't just a reaper off button, and instead was like, a "reaper shield off button"