676 réponses à ce sujet

[moater boat]

LiarasShield wrote...


It simple because the council is still denieing the reapers existence and only pining the geth for it they keep trying to say that it was a collison accident with the geth instead of owning up to it and saying it was the reapers so no in those two years we really don't have any inclination of them preparing for the reapers espically since the council and probably the higher ups of the alliance are denieing the reapers even exist

First, I don't remember if the council says anything about the reapers in ME2, but whatever they say, it doesn't matter because Shepard is working for cerberus so the council isn't going to tell him anything important.

Second, even if they DO think it was just a Geth attack, that doesn't mean they aren't going to beef up their military. Regardless of what they believe, they KNOW that SOMETHING attacked the citadel and mopped the floor with the citadel fleet. To suggest that the governments and militiaries of the galaxy would not be beefing up their militaries after the battle of the citadel is just silly and illogical.

[humes spork]

LiarasShield wrote...

But not in mass because the council kept denieing the reapers existence and only kept trying to blame the geth and pirates for what happended on the citadel

The closest you get in ME2 is if you let the Council die, which causes the turians to back out of the Treaty of Farixen and initiate an arms race with the Alliance. Other than that, the game clearly exposits the Citadel fleet was reinforced and strengthened, and security was increased.

That's it.

Modifié par humes spork, 03 juillet 2012 - 04:29 .

[pseudonymic]

vixvicco wrote...

Bioware decides whether or not a convention victory is possible. Even if we think they're wrong or right. I think with the highest possible EMS, done all the side-mission and imported at least one save from a previous game (owing the fact that I am a PS3 gamer), conventional victory should have been made an option for at least those/us people.

overall, the groundwork for it to be possible is/was there. they just decided not to use it.

[Norwood06]

They keep insisting on this because the alternative is neither satisfying, logical, or fun to them. And I have yet to see any person who insists on this to change their mind, regardless how much time and effort you put into arguments. 

Modifié par Norwood06, 03 juillet 2012 - 04:34 .

[LiarasShield]

moater boat wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...


It simple because the council is still denieing the reapers existence and only pining the geth for it they keep trying to say that it was a collison accident with the geth instead of owning up to it and saying it was the reapers so no in those two years we really don't have any inclination of them preparing for the reapers espically since the council and probably the higher ups of the alliance are denieing the reapers even exist

First, I don't remember if the council says anything about the reapers in ME2, but whatever they say, it doesn't matter because Shepard is working for cerberus so the council isn't going to tell him anything important.

Second, even if they DO think it was just a Geth attack, that doesn't mean they aren't going to beef up their military. Regardless of what they believe, they KNOW that SOMETHING attacked the citadel and mopped the floor with the citadel fleet. To suggest that the governments and militiaries of the galaxy would not be beefing up their militaries after the battle of the citadel is just silly and illogical.

But their not going to prepare as much if the think the threat is a simple fix or that won't destroy the galaxy so of course they won't prepare as much as they should

[pseudonymic]

moater boat wrote...
even if they DO think it was just a Geth attack, that doesn't mean they aren't going to beef up their military. 

which is contradicting, to say the least, considering the very nature of the council and how each species had their very secrets - i.e. turians responsible for tuchanka bomb, asari withholding prothean information. you'd think cohesiveness would've ensured that the council actually prepared for something out of skepticism.

[Lord_Frostwind]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

-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?

That last part is essential to the idea that Conventional Victory is utterly impossible. Even if the Sword Fleet managed to break the Reaper fleet guarding the Citadel and Earth, the other thousand Reapers across the galaxy would start sending in reinforcements and crush the allied fleet.

It's like trying to beat an eldritch abomination, and no this isn't world of warcraft, Cthulhu doesn't get killed by a bunch of ragtag heros. You can't beat something that powerful, or numerous with any kind of conventional method.

[Zero132132]

moater boat wrote...

Zero132132 wrote...

I would have, if the Reapers were actually defeated in Shepard's lifetime. That would have been stupid as hell. If the game was a setup for a really long war, I might have bought it, but only if everyone did a complete 180 as soon as ME2 ended and started preparing every single ship in the galaxy for war against the Reapers. That's the only way it wouldn't stretch credibility, and in that case, what exactly are you giving Shepard to DO during the game? What's his role in the plot? Discovering other ancient weapons that are more powerful? Wouldn't have minded going back to the planet that the derelict reaper (and the moon Major Kyle was on) and finding some trace of the weapon they used to take down one Reaper, since it was strong enough to **** up the planet, but a victory within the span of one game wouldn't make any sense without some variant of 'space magic.'

First let me address the idea that a succesful war against the Reapers would have to take several decades. While the cycle ending wars normally take a long time, over a century for the Protheans I believe, the reason is because the Reapers are winning, and it takes a long to time scrub the galaxy clean. To say that this means that it would also take several decades to kill all the Reapers is a massive failure of logic. If a conventional victory did happen, and it became obvious to the Reapers that continuing the war would not work, there is no reason to think that they wouldn't retreat into dark space and begin to try and develop some other plan. Fighting to the death, while noble to organics, would be considered very illogical by machines.

Now let's talk about that 180 you claim is required for preparing for the Reapers. My question is what information do you have from ME2 that indicates that preperations are NOT being made? Sure Anderson doesn't flat out tell Shepard "By the way, we are building up a huge fleet because the Citadel battle really lit a fire under our butt." But Shepard is working for Cerberus and he has been dead for 2 years. He has no idea what state the galactic militaries are in. All that he knows is that there are some new weapons, shield, and armor developments that he can put in the Normandy, that alone is pretty strong evidence of the galaxy making a serious effort to increase military strength.

You ask what Shepard would do if the crucible wasn't being built. Just about anything the writers want to write and the players want to do. Things like curing the genophage and making peace between the quarians and the Geth would still be great additions to the story, but I think we can all agree that there was no shortage of mission opportunities in the game that didn't pan out, like all the fetch quests.

I say this because the rest of the council is denying that the Reapers exist in ME2. The Illusive Man also put as much into the new Normandy as he could. The improvements had to be discovered from VERY recent (and classified) technology. Updating the entirety of galactic civilization's fleets would take a long time, and more resources than they'd be willing to use if the threat weren't being taken seriously.

The other thing is that you're assuming that the Reapers aren't a large force, but they've done this cycle thing a ****LOAD of times (probably around 20k, as I stated above), and if each species harvested only makes one Capitol Reaper, they're adding more than one each cycle, so losing one or two in some cycles (it's pretty rare to discover remnants of Reapers; we know of only 2 so far) wouldn't really stop them from growing. Meanwhile, we have less than one hundred dreadnoughts (39 Turian, 20 Asari, 16 Salarian, 9 Human, 1 Volus, 85 total) and four are required for a single reaper capitol ship.

We don't know how many Frigates and Cruisers we have, and according to codex entries, Thanix cannons can be mounted on them, but we also don't know how many need to concentrate thanix cannon fire on one Dreadnought to take it down, so it's a lot of unknowns. Either way, the Reapers outnumber our dreadnoughts by a wide margin, and that's only the Capitol ships. Destroyers still handle a fair amount of firepower in the game (the cain was used on a Hades Cannon, not a Destroyer), so they can't be ignored, and since they're the ones that are going to be targetting civilian populations, they can't really be ignored while we try to clear out the Capitol ships.

If beating them was going to be a thing, it would have stretched credibility to think we could do it in a couple of months while no species has for nearly a billion years (at minimum). Since we devoted a lot of resources to the Crucible and most of the fleet wasn't doing well, I don't think we could realistically have won after making the 'Refuse' ending. The sort of victory people are talking about would probably have required that we truly give up hope for Earth.

[LiarasShield]

It is mistaken arrogance and ignorance to what is going on around them if they saw the reapers as a galactic threat like shepard from his or her encounter with soverign didn't denie the reapers made the whole galaxy well aware of them spent the entire time preparing for them both while shepard was dead and alive and if they kept preparing during all of me3 then relying on some power space magic reaper weapon yes I do believe they could've won and I will alaways believe that if they took the threat truely serious or actually listened to shepard that we could've standed on equal terms to the reapers

[moater boat]

humes spork wrote...

inko1nsiderate wrote...

I think it is because they haven't actually studied real war. Ever.

The more I participate in these conventional victory threads the clearer this becomes.

I've read Clausewitz and Sun Tzu, watched hundreds of hours of military documentaries, and read dozens of books on military history ranging from chariot warfare of ancient Egypt to modern day Iraq and Afghanistan. I come from a military family, and was in the service myself. I can't speak for everyone, but I know my military history.

[Redbelle]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Come on, people are always saying that one of the main reasons the ending is bad is because there is no option for conventional victory. Meet me halfway here.

Sry but until BW release some figures on the size of each respective force and the killing potential of the different classes of ships all I have to offer is artistic integrity argumanet of BW's vision, to which ppl are cocking their heads to one side....... mouthing the word 'artistic vision'? Then demanding the chance to jump inside of Harby to throttle his Eezo core.

I was serious about fleet numbers, the rest was a joke.

But in seriousness, the answer may lie in the Codex where strategy has been recorded, stating along the lines of.......

'The Reapers impentrable outer skin is due largely to it's mass effect field increasing it's defence by raising it mass. This reduces the Reapers ease of movement and can allow ships to slip past and attack it's stern.'

Or something along those lines. Basically if the Reaper is seemingly invincible it's mass effect field is set to defence and the allies can move around it. If the Reaper is moving like the clappers then it's field is low and is a perfect time to shoot it, provided the gunners can hit a moving target.

[Dragoonlordz]

This fanbase = Give them an inch, they take that inch then run around the world ten times before returning to you and asking for another inch.

They did not want a conventional victory and a huge amount of people actually asked not to have one while ME3 was being developed as was many threads on such; even more asking not to have a boss battle like ME1 or ME2. Bioware agreed, therefore no conventional victory and the entire story spread across the three titles was built around premise war could not be won that way. It should remain that way, reject = lose.



I am waiting for people to actually resort to fanfic ending relating to parallel universes, alternate realities they could steal resources from to try to argue should of won theories.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 03 juillet 2012 - 04:40 .

[TOBY FLENDERSON]

Conventional victory is possible, Javik points out the Protheans were powerful enough to win if the relays hadn't been shut down and their own cerberus incarnation sabotaged them. He also says that Shepard has amassed a greater fleet than the Protheans had plus destroyed cerberus. So follow the logic and we can win a conventional victory but many worlds would be destroyed.

Modifié par TOBY FLENDERSON, 03 juillet 2012 - 04:36 .

[CronoDragoon]

pseudonymic wrote...

vixvicco wrote...

Bioware decides whether or not a convention victory is possible. Even if we think they're wrong or right. I think with the highest possible EMS, done all the side-mission and imported at least one save from a previous game (owing the fact that I am a PS3 gamer), conventional victory should have been made an option for at least those/us people.

overall, the groundwork for it to be possible is/was there. they just decided not to use it.

I think the opposite groundwork was laid. Every character you meet in ME3 says they can't beat the Reapers conventionally. I mean, let's say you win the battle of Earth. You concentrated all your forces there at the expense of EVERY OTHER PLANET. You are still screwed. Earth was always use the Crucible or die.

[moater boat]

LiarasShield wrote...

moater boat wrote...

BeastSaver wrote...

They did NOTHING to prepare for the Reapers in ME 1 and 2. They were too busy being in denial...

We have no idea what preparations were made since the end of ME1 because Shepard was not involved with the galactic community. The only thing we do know is that during that time new weapons, new armor, and new shields were developed. If anything, it indicates that efforts WERE being made to prepare for a possible reaper attack.

But not in mass because the council kept denieing the reapers existence and only kept trying to blame the geth and pirates for what happended on the citadel

So you're suggesting that the Citadel attack wouldn't have changed their mind? Almost getting killed could have easily changed their outlook a little bit, don't you think? What if you let the council die? Don't you think their replacements would at least make some effort to not experience the same fate?

[LiarasShield]

LiarasShield wrote...

It is mistaken arrogance and ignorance to what is going on around them if they saw the reapers as a galactic threat like shepard from his or her encounter with soverign didn't denie the reapers made the whole galaxy well aware of them spent the entire time preparing for them both while shepard was dead and alive and if they kept preparing during all of me3 then relying on some power space magic reaper weapon yes I do believe they could've won and I will alaways believe that if they took the threat truely serious or actually listened to shepard that we could've standed on equal terms to the reapers

This why I will always believe that a victory without space magic could've been possible shrugs

[nrcrane]

Because it's a work of fiction and things can change with enough imagination and creativity.

[BerzerkGene]

Zero132132 wrote...

BerzerkGene wrote...

Zero132132 wrote...

So what you're saying is, putting all of our ships together, each of which the Reapers can take out with one single shot, is going to be better than the standard hit-and-run tactics that have successfully repelled, in the real world, enemies that are more advanced technologically? You're essentially advocating symmetric warfare against an enemy that, by every realistic standard, is much stronger than us. Even if this isn't your intentional, naval assymetrical warfare generally uses surroundings to their advantage, but space is almost entirely empty, with a few asteroids, planets, and stars in between. There really aren't surroundings to USE to your advantage. A principle is often to use smaller ships, since they're harder to target, but the Reapers are basically aimbots, and their shots seem to travel quickly enough that evading a direct hit is difficult. The sort of weapons capable of actually beating them aren't things we can fit on small ships, either. From the codex entry on Reaper vulnerabilities: "In the case of a Reaper capital ship, these kinetic barriers can hold off the firepower of two dreadnoughts simultaneously, but three clearly causes strain, and four typically results in destruction. Weapons designed to maximize heat damage, such as the Thanix series, show better results against the Reapers than pure kinetic impacts."

It takes four of our most powerful ships to take down one Reaper. This would be fine if they were spread out enough that we could send four or five dreadnoughts after single Reapers, but they usually overwhelm a planet in force. Taking them on one-at-a-time isn't an option.

From the codex.
"The Thanix's core is a liquid alloy of iron, uranium, and tungsten 
suspended in an electromagnetic field powered by element zero. The 
molten metal, accelerated to a significant fraction of the speed of 
light, solidifies into a projectile as it is fired, hitting targets with
enough force to pierce any known shield or armor. The gun can fire 
reliably every five seconds. 
The weapon's relatively small size allows it to be mounted on most 
fighters or frigates. It is now widely used by the Alliance military and
is the primary weapon on the refurbished Normandy SR-2. "
So...we can put them on FIGHTERS. Dreadnought scaled ones would be scaled up or use many more, resulting in a far more deadly ship. Tactially, using smaller ships would be the most intelligent, because Reaper guns don't really seem that adept at hitting moving targets. I mean during that cutscene, the opening salvo from a reaper completely misses a ship, which is moving painfully slow. Also the moon would make a good surrounding to make use of.

You're right, they even miss Shepard on the ground, so their aim isn't fantastic. But we still don't actually ever hear about HOW effective the thanix cannon is. Since it still requires four dreadnoughts to bring down a Reaper, considering how many there are (they usually enter without resistance, and since the oldest one we know of is nearly a billion years old, even assuming one per cycle (which I reject, since they're still trying to harvest humanity after building a fair chunk of the human reaper), that's a bit under 20k capitol ships overall. Some have probably been destroyed in the past, but since they usually eliminate the heart of galactic civilization first, shut down the relay network, and take worlds one by one, I honestly don't think there are going to be less than 10k of the capitol ships, and probably many more destroyers.

Well, I'm not sure about Harbinger, he was not the Reaper i loved to fight anymore. Although dropping out of the sky to annihlate everyone is in-character
Yeah, like i've said, basically retconned Thanix Cannons cause their presence means its possible to take out a Reaper relatively easy. Well, compared to other methods.
As for the Capitol ships, we don;t know if a species is always made into one, the Protheans, for example, were not. I doubt that was a one time thing. But i agree theres a few thousand at least. Not sure about destroyers. You only see a few, like 7 different ones. They're prettymuch always alone too. Maybe they only go after the easy targets? How many are taken out seems to be something to ponder. There was that derelict reaper, it was apparently destroyed by one enormous gun. That looked sovereign class. We could probably assume as many are destroyed are made each cycle, especially for technologically better civs, like Protheans.
The thing is if they had that many, the Catalyst is the boss, why would he possibly risk himself if he has thousands more reapers to call upon? Nothing stopping a bunch of errant bombs hitting the Citadel. A total shield wall of them would seem pragmatic. Then again, his logic makes my head hurt with how wrong it is...so i dunno.

Zero132132 wrote...
The notion of a conventional victory is still objectively wrong, since the game shows us the outcome if we choose not to use the Crucible.

Not really, it cuts to black, theres no going down in a blaze of glory, you have no goddamn idea what happens. A bit like the treatment of Me2 romanceable scenes. If we had been shown WHY we lose, tons more reapers jump in, suddenly all reaper forces get much more aggressive, something. Then i would say alright, because i would know WHY. Right now i have no damn clue other than "because Bioware says so." Which is a terrible reason. Avoiding logic at all costs led to the Dark ages Not really relvavent .

[codie928]

You are not taking into consideration a few things. Numbers for one don't matter, if you read the codex entries about palaven, you see that when the krogans arrive, they end up turning the tide due to using unconventional tactics, such as fake transmissions and acting like ships are crippled when they are not. There is also proof that if you are ballsey enough that you could fire at a reaper and immediatly warp out before it fires upon you, while its risky its still doable, especially by nimble ships. Also, you are forgetting the morale that bringing a whole galaxy together would mean. Think of it this way, just because i have 1 million people and im fighting 100,000 doesnt mean im always going to win that fight. If my soldiers rely on strength and technology alone whilst the 100,000 deal in guerilla tactics and hit and run operations they can widdle down my forces enough to create doubt in our minds, and while the reapers wouldn't have doubt, they would still be able to see that they were losing forces at a more alarming rate. And dealing with your first point, the geth armada was the reason the alliance lost a lot of ships, not Sovereign

[LiarasShield]

moater boat wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

moater boat wrote...

BeastSaver wrote...

They did NOTHING to prepare for the Reapers in ME 1 and 2. They were too busy being in denial...

We have no idea what preparations were made since the end of ME1 because Shepard was not involved with the galactic community. The only thing we do know is that during that time new weapons, new armor, and new shields were developed. If anything, it indicates that efforts WERE being made to prepare for a possible reaper attack.

But not in mass because the council kept denieing the reapers existence and only kept trying to blame the geth and pirates for what happended on the citadel

So you're suggesting that the Citadel attack wouldn't have changed their mind? Almost getting killed could have easily changed their outlook a little bit, don't you think? What if you let the council die? Don't you think their replacements would at least make some effort to not experience the same fate?

Not really if the new coucil agreed with the old councils methods

[Redbelle]

moater boat wrote...

humes spork wrote...

inko1nsiderate wrote...

I think it is because they haven't actually studied real war. Ever.

The more I participate in these conventional victory threads the clearer this becomes.

I've read Clausewitz and Sun Tzu, watched hundreds of hours of military documentaries, and read dozens of books on military history ranging from chariot warfare of ancient Egypt to modern day Iraq and Afghanistan. I come from a military family, and was in the service myself. I can't speak for everyone, but I know my military history.

Oooh oooh, there is a series called the lost fleet which is all about space warfare, laid out in practical terms and very well described. It doesn't just talk about 'Fire phasers.......... fire some more'. It refers to how ships moving at speeds create relative distortion which mucks up targeting, and using ball bearings fired through railguns, (cough) plus phasers or hell lances as their called (cough).

But it;s not just about the weaponary. It's also about how it's employed in a 3 dimensional arena where time lag has to be factored into the decision making process. I'd recommend a read to see why it is possible for a superior force to be outfought by an inferior force......... just a note, when I say inferior, if the forces are balanced but one has one less ship than the other, that's the inferior force. On paper it looks significant  but depending on the guy controlling the fleet it may not be a disadvantage that would net a defeat.

Modifié par Redbelle, 03 juillet 2012 - 04:43 .

[BerzerkGene]

Redbelle wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Come on, people are always saying that one of the main reasons the ending is bad is because there is no option for conventional victory. Meet me halfway here.

Sry but until BW release some figures on the size of each respective force and the killing potential of the different classes of ships all I have to offer is artistic integrity argumanet of BW's vision, to which ppl are cocking their heads to one side....... mouthing the word 'artistic vision'? Then demanding the chance to jump inside of Harby to throttle his Eezo core.

I was serious about fleet numbers, the rest was a joke.

But in seriousness, the answer may lie in the Codex where strategy has been recorded, stating along the lines of.......

'The Reapers impentrable outer skin is due largely to it's mass effect field increasing it's defence by raising it mass. This reduces the Reapers ease of movement and can allow ships to slip past and attack it's stern.'

Or something along those lines. Basically if the Reaper is seemingly invincible it's mass effect field is set to defence and the allies can move around it. If the Reaper is moving like the clappers then it's field is low and is a perfect time to shoot it, provided the gunners can hit a moving target.

A good idea. Another one is to use these:
The Thanix's core is a liquid alloy of iron, uranium, and tungsten
suspended in an electromagnetic field powered by element zero. The
molten metal, accelerated to a significant fraction of the speed of
light, solidifies into a projectile as it is fired, hitting targets with
enough force to pierce any known shield or armor. The gun can fire
reliably every five seconds.
The weapon's relatively small size allows it to be mounted on
most fighters or frigates. It is now widely used by the Alliance
military and is the primary weapon on the refurbished Normandy SR-2.

[nrcrane]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

This fanbase = Give them an inch, they take that inch then run around the world ten times before returning to you and asking for another inch.

They did not want a conventional victory and a huge amount of people actually asked not to have one while ME3 was being developed as was many threads on such; even more asking not to have a boss battle like ME1 or ME2. Bioware agreed, therefore no conventional victory and the entire story spread across the three titles was built around premise war could not be won that way. It should remain that way, reject = lose.



I am waiting for people to actually resort to fanfic ending relating to parallel universes, alternate realities they could steal resources from to try to argue should of won theories.

You stated in a previous thread that the fans also asked for no reaper off switch as well.  So why was it ok to go with the off switch ending if your going off of what fans were asking for, but not the conventional ending?

[pseudonymic]

CronoDragoon wrote...

pseudonymic wrote...

vixvicco wrote...

Bioware decides whether or not a convention victory is possible. Even if we think they're wrong or right. I think with the highest possible EMS, done all the side-mission and imported at least one save from a previous game (owing the fact that I am a PS3 gamer), conventional victory should have been made an option for at least those/us people.

overall, the groundwork for it to be possible is/was there. they just decided not to use it.

I think the opposite groundwork was laid. Every character you meet in ME3 says they can't beat the Reapers conventionally. I mean, let's say you win the battle of Earth. You concentrated all your forces there at the expense of EVERY OTHER PLANET. You are still screwed. Earth was always use the Crucible or die.

true, however, i'm looking at it from this point: ultimately, reapers are machines. machines rely on something to feed them. break that and the machines will no longer function or will function the way you want them to. and the series kind of showed us that application in motion - with shepard rewriting the geth, with shepard going inside of the geth consensus, with shepard getting into david archer's reality. so oily child + RGB, to me, doesn't go along with what was presented up to the ending. 

[Dragoonlordz]

BerzerkGene wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Come on, people are always saying that one of the main reasons the ending is bad is because there is no option for conventional victory. Meet me halfway here.

Sry but until BW release some figures on the size of each respective force and the killing potential of the different classes of ships all I have to offer is artistic integrity argumanet of BW's vision, to which ppl are cocking their heads to one side....... mouthing the word 'artistic vision'? Then demanding the chance to jump inside of Harby to throttle his Eezo core.

I was serious about fleet numbers, the rest was a joke.

But in seriousness, the answer may lie in the Codex where strategy has been recorded, stating along the lines of.......

'The Reapers impentrable outer skin is due largely to it's mass effect field increasing it's defence by raising it mass. This reduces the Reapers ease of movement and can allow ships to slip past and attack it's stern.'

Or something along those lines. Basically if the Reaper is seemingly invincible it's mass effect field is set to defence and the allies can move around it. If the Reaper is moving like the clappers then it's field is low and is a perfect time to shoot it, provided the gunners can hit a moving target.

A good idea. Another one is to use these:
The Thanix's core is a liquid alloy of iron, uranium, and tungsten
suspended in an electromagnetic field powered by element zero. The
molten metal, accelerated to a significant fraction of the speed of
light, solidifies into a projectile as it is fired, hitting targets with
enough force to pierce any known shield or armor. The gun can fire
reliably every five seconds.
The weapon's relatively small size allows it to be mounted on
most fighters or frigates. It is now widely used by the Alliance
military and is the primary weapon on the refurbished Normandy SR-2.

All they have to do is release a million of those drones from ME2. You lose all tactics. You get wiped out. The End.