254 réponses à ce sujet

[Tritium315]

Funkdrspot wrote...

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

To people who ask why incorporate thanix tech in missle form...that was also answered in the same thread by the same person who slapped The Angry One down. Its because a missle allows for a better hit and run strat against the reapers than a continuous beam. And better range

Seriously? That's the best you got? The cannon, in space, has infinite range until it hits something. The missle can't. It doesn't have the fuel for that.

Also, cannons allow faster hit and run tactics because you don't have to worry about jamming (see Priority Earth) and you don't have to wait for them to lock on to fire. Just turn the cannon and fire!

So, that person who "slapped" TAO down is a moron.

a traditional canon has infinite range but is too weak to be used. the guy explained it as providing maximum firepower in as little time as possible and he was incredibly thorough in his explanation. stop your TAO worship.

A missile can't provide more firepower than a cannon unless it's a giant nuke. Every cannon in the mass effect universe delievers nuke like force, and the Thanix cannon is the equivalent of a stream of nukes. Not to mention a cannon will hit the target much faster and require much less time to fire and is way more compact than jamming a **** load of nukes onto a ship.

[The Angry One]

Barnzy wrote...

I admit, a missle filled with molten metal may have less of an impact than a weapon firing molten metal out of a mass accelerator cannon. However, like i said, perhaps they has no access to a significant ammout of eezo to produce a Thanix cannon due to the needs of the Crucible project. As a result they had to rely on conventional means to deal damage to the enemy. Besides, as shown by the thought behind the modern day Magneto Hydrodynamic Explosive Munition project, molten metal within a missle could be a viable means to do some damage.

All you need is an Eezo core. Makos already have Eezo cores, and there are fighter-portable thanix cannons. So why not install them on Makos?

[Tritium315]

Barnzy wrote...


I admit, a missle filled with molten metal may have less of an impact than a weapon firing molten metal out of a mass accelerator cannon. However, like i said, perhaps they has no access to a significant ammout of eezo to produce a Thanix cannon due to the needs of the Crucible project. As a result they had to rely on conventional means to deal damage to the enemy. Besides, as shown by the thought behind the modern day Magneto Hydrodynamic Explosive Munition project, molten metal within a missle could be a viable means to do some damage.

I can't really argue with that point, but if that is their actual reasoning then it's beyond contrived. It's up there with "I spent 2 billion credits rebuilding you shepard, now go risk your life for chump change so you can afford a 7000 credit fish."

Edit: Although, do mass accelerators even use eezo cores? I'm pretty sure every rifle/pistol/shotgun/smg/whatever doesn't have a tiny eezo core in it.

Modifié par Tritium315, 05 juillet 2012 - 09:54 .

[DMWW]

Maybe it's just a trade name?

After all, javelin missiles aren't literally javelins. Viper rifles aren't literally snakes.

[Funkdrspot]

The Angry One wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

nope. the guy explained that to you too. he knew technical knowledge of warheads and explained to you that the basic tech is already being used and that they could have a thanix charge but carried by missle. you then left the thread entirely when he rebutted your every point.

And whoever that was claimed that it could be accelerated to near the speed of light somehow by an eezo core, at which point I there, like here, pointed out that this would be a weapon of mass destruction and totally illegal even if it were possible.

This STILL doesn't satisfy one of the defintions of thanix, which is to form a sustained beam with the molten metal.
A missile carrying molten metal and thanix are two different technologies. The end.

Now kindly stop posturing, it is somewhat irritating.

at this point youve admitted its possible but youre hanging onto debating semantics to save any shred or credibility. you did the same when i had to explain how you were wrong about protein chirality and gravity in orbit

[Tritium315]

DMWW wrote...

Maybe it's just a trade name?

After all, javelin missiles aren't literally javelins. Viper rifles aren't literally snakes.

I would so buy that sniper rifle.

[The Angry One]

Funkdrspot wrote...

at this point youve admitted its possible but youre hanging onto debating semantics to save any shred or credibility. you did the same when i had to explain how you were wrong about protein chirality and gravity in orbit

I've admitted nothing of the sort. I've flat out said that a missile cannot meet all of the definitions of thanix. It can theoretically meet one of them but only as a weapon of mass destruction which nobody would ever be stupid enough to build, and in any case is made obsolete by the cannons themselves.

[v TricKy v]

Funkdrspot wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

nope. the guy explained that to you too. he knew technical knowledge of warheads and explained to you that the basic tech is already being used and that they could have a thanix charge but carried by missle. you then left the thread entirely when he rebutted your every point.

And whoever that was claimed that it could be accelerated to near the speed of light somehow by an eezo core, at which point I there, like here, pointed out that this would be a weapon of mass destruction and totally illegal even if it were possible.

This STILL doesn't satisfy one of the defintions of thanix, which is to form a sustained beam with the molten metal.
A missile carrying molten metal and thanix are two different technologies. The end.

Now kindly stop posturing, it is somewhat irritating.

at this point youve admitted its possible but youre hanging onto debating semantics to save any shred or credibility. you did the same when i had to explain how you were wrong about protein chirality and gravity in orbit

Chill dude
Are you the internet police or what?

[Barnzy]

The Angry One wrote...

Barnzy wrote...

I admit, a missle filled with molten metal may have less of an impact than a weapon firing molten metal out of a mass accelerator cannon. However, like i said, perhaps they has no access to a significant ammout of eezo to produce a Thanix cannon due to the needs of the Crucible project. As a result they had to rely on conventional means to deal damage to the enemy. Besides, as shown by the thought behind the modern day Magneto Hydrodynamic Explosive Munition project, molten metal within a missle could be a viable means to do some damage.

All you need is an Eezo core. Makos already have Eezo cores, and there are fighter-portable thanix cannons. So why not install them on Makos?

True true, Well my only answer to that would be that the Mako would not be able to store both molten metal and contain a small operating crew without subjecting the crew to some danger. After all only a tiny ammount of solid metal is needed to infict damage in convention mass accelerator weaponry. Given the amount of liquid metal seen projecting out of the Thanix Cannon in ME2, its possible the Mako simply couldnt store that amount to deal a sidnificant  and continuous amount of damage before its supplies were depleted.

[Tritium315]

Barnzy wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Barnzy wrote...

I admit, a missle filled with molten metal may have less of an impact than a weapon firing molten metal out of a mass accelerator cannon. However, like i said, perhaps they has no access to a significant ammout of eezo to produce a Thanix cannon due to the needs of the Crucible project. As a result they had to rely on conventional means to deal damage to the enemy. Besides, as shown by the thought behind the modern day Magneto Hydrodynamic Explosive Munition project, molten metal within a missle could be a viable means to do some damage.

All you need is an Eezo core. Makos already have Eezo cores, and there are fighter-portable thanix cannons. So why not install them on Makos?

True true, Well my only answer to that would be that the Mako would not be able to store both molten metal and contain a small operating crew without subjecting the crew to some danger. After all only a tiny ammount of solid metal is needed to infict damage in convention mass accelerator weaponry. Given the amount of liquid metal seen projecting out of the Thanix Cannon in ME2, its possible the Mako simply couldnt store that amount to deal a sidnificant  and continuous amount of damage before its supplies were depleted.

As opposed to only storing two missiles. Also if that was the case I'm pretty sure a traditional mass accelerator cannon would do more damage than a missile filled with molten metal.

[Gorkan86]

The Angry One wrote...
All you need is an Eezo core. Makos already have Eezo cores, and there are fighter-portable thanix cannons. So why not install them on Makos?

Fighter's thanix cannons is useles against ordinary Destroyers.  I think there needs dreadnought's thanix cannons to  kill it fast..

[Barnzy]

Tritium315 wrote...

Barnzy wrote...


I admit, a missle filled with molten metal may have less of an impact than a weapon firing molten metal out of a mass accelerator cannon. However, like i said, perhaps they has no access to a significant ammout of eezo to produce a Thanix cannon due to the needs of the Crucible project. As a result they had to rely on conventional means to deal damage to the enemy. Besides, as shown by the thought behind the modern day Magneto Hydrodynamic Explosive Munition project, molten metal within a missle could be a viable means to do some damage.

I can't really argue with that point, but if that is their actual reasoning then it's beyond contrived. It's up there with "I spent 2 billion credits rebuilding you shepard, now go risk your life for chump change so you can afford a 7000 credit fish."

Edit: Although, do mass accelerators even use eezo cores? I'm pretty sure every rifle/pistol/shotgun/smg/whatever doesn't have a tiny eezo core in it.

I know, mass effect is full of inconsistencies and plot holes if you look hard enough (or if you just open your eyes in the case of ME3). All we can do is create headcannon to fill those holes.

On your edit, i'm fairly sure they do use a small amount of eezo.

[The Angry One]

DMWW wrote...

Maybe it's just a trade name?

After all, javelin missiles aren't literally javelins. Viper rifles aren't literally snakes.

Well I'd have to wonder why humans are using a Turian trade name then.

Gorkan86 wrote...

Fighter's thanix cannons is useles
against ordinary Destroyers.  I think there needs dreadnought's thanix
cannons to  kill it fast..

So why would a thanix missile do any better? 
Also, no. Let's stop going overboard with the "Reapers are unstoppable" thing. Destroyers can be taken down by a single cruiser.

Modifié par The Angry One, 05 juillet 2012 - 10:02 .

[RadicalDisconnect]

I think people here are overstating the firepower of Thanix cannons. According to the Codex (if we can even trust it at this point), Thanix cannons give frigates firepower comparable to cruisers. How the Normandy SR-2 using such cannons made such quick work of a Collector Cruiser that could wipe out a Turian patrol is beyond me though.

EDIT: Maybe there are different calibers of Thanix cannons?

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 05 juillet 2012 - 10:02 .

[o Ventus]

Gorkan86 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
All you need is an Eezo core. Makos already have Eezo cores, and there are fighter-portable thanix cannons. So why not install them on Makos?

Fighter's thanix cannons is useles against ordinary Destroyers.  I think there needs dreadnought's thanix cannons to  kill it fast..

A Cruiser-type ship can take out a Destroyer using solely the conventional MA weapons.

So no.

[o Ventus]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

I think people here are overstating the firepower of Thanix cannons. According to the Codex (if we can even trust it at this point), Thanix cannons give frigates firepower comparable to cruisers. How the Normandy SR-2 using such cannons made such quick work of a Collector Cruiser that could wipe out a Turian patrol is beyond me though.

The Collector Ship didn't actually wipe out any turians, it faked a turian signal.

[Funkdrspot]

tritium315, you're forgetting a unique problem that only thanix tech can solve. Reaper barriers can take kinetic damage just fine but thanix cuts through it better, which is why thanix is preferred

[RadicalDisconnect]

o Ventus wrote...

Gorkan86 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
All you need is an Eezo core. Makos already have Eezo cores, and there are fighter-portable thanix cannons. So why not install them on Makos?

Fighter's thanix cannons is useles against ordinary Destroyers.  I think there needs dreadnought's thanix cannons to  kill it fast..

A Cruiser-type ship can take out a Destroyer using solely the conventional MA weapons.

So no.

Really? When does this happen?

[o Ventus]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Gorkan86 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
All you need is an Eezo core. Makos already have Eezo cores, and there are fighter-portable thanix cannons. So why not install them on Makos?

Fighter's thanix cannons is useles against ordinary Destroyers.  I think there needs dreadnought's thanix cannons to  kill it fast..

A Cruiser-type ship can take out a Destroyer using solely the conventional MA weapons.

So no.

Really? When does this happen?

Codex.

[Barnzy]

Tritium315 wrote...

Barnzy wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Barnzy wrote...

I admit, a missle filled with molten metal may have less of an impact than a weapon firing molten metal out of a mass accelerator cannon. However, like i said, perhaps they has no access to a significant ammout of eezo to produce a Thanix cannon due to the needs of the Crucible project. As a result they had to rely on conventional means to deal damage to the enemy. Besides, as shown by the thought behind the modern day Magneto Hydrodynamic Explosive Munition project, molten metal within a missle could be a viable means to do some damage.

All you need is an Eezo core. Makos already have Eezo cores, and there are fighter-portable thanix cannons. So why not install them on Makos?

True true, Well my only answer to that would be that the Mako would not be able to store both molten metal and contain a small operating crew without subjecting the crew to some danger. After all only a tiny ammount of solid metal is needed to infict damage in convention mass accelerator weaponry. Given the amount of liquid metal seen projecting out of the Thanix Cannon in ME2, its possible the Mako simply couldnt store that amount to deal a sidnificant  and continuous amount of damage before its supplies were depleted.

As opposed to only storing two missiles. Also if that was the case I'm pretty sure a traditional mass accelerator cannon would do more damage than a missile filled with molten metal.

possibly! At the end of the day i think we have to assume that it was one of the writers thinking "them COD kids love their Predator Missile, how about we throw all logic out of the window and make a missile ourselves and leave it to the fans to work out how its works ... speculation for all!!!"

[Gorkan86]

o Ventus wrote...

Gorkan86 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
All you need is an Eezo core. Makos already have Eezo cores, and there are fighter-portable thanix cannons. So why not install them on Makos?

Fighter's thanix cannons is useles against ordinary Destroyers.  I think there needs dreadnought's thanix cannons to  kill it fast..

A Cruiser-type ship can take out a Destroyer using solely the conventional MA weapons.

So no.

Events on Rannoch indicate otherwise.

[o Ventus]

Gorkan86 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Gorkan86 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
All you need is an Eezo core. Makos already have Eezo cores, and there are fighter-portable thanix cannons. So why not install them on Makos?

Fighter's thanix cannons is useles against ordinary Destroyers.  I think there needs dreadnought's thanix cannons to  kill it fast..

A Cruiser-type ship can take out a Destroyer using solely the conventional MA weapons.

So no.

Events on Rannoch indicate otherwise.

A thresher maw tackles a Reaper to death.

The quarian Heavy Fleet destroys a Reaper.

Shepard 1-shots a Destroyer with the Cain.

2 Thanix missiles and "Everything you've got" destroys another Reaper.

The game itself isn't very consistent.

Modifié par o Ventus, 05 juillet 2012 - 10:11 .

[Tapkomet]

Gorkan86 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Gorkan86 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
All you need is an Eezo core. Makos already have Eezo cores, and there are fighter-portable thanix cannons. So why not install them on Makos?

Fighter's thanix cannons is useles against ordinary Destroyers.  I think there needs dreadnought's thanix cannons to  kill it fast..

A Cruiser-type ship can take out a Destroyer using solely the conventional MA weapons.

So no.

Events on Rannoch indicate otherwise.

You mean when 5 Quarian ships (frigates or cruisers?) shoot down in the atmosphere (-20% impact) and kill a destroyer while missing most shots, but managing not to kill Shepard?

[v TricKy v]

o Ventus wrote...

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Gorkan86 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
All you need is an Eezo core. Makos already have Eezo cores, and there are fighter-portable thanix cannons. So why not install them on Makos?

Fighter's thanix cannons is useles against ordinary Destroyers.  I think there needs dreadnought's thanix cannons to  kill it fast..

A Cruiser-type ship can take out a Destroyer using solely the conventional MA weapons.

So no.

Really? When does this happen?

Codex.

Yep thats right.
I always bring that up for people who are saying the ridiculous Ranoch battle is proof that reapers are unbeatable.
The fight was just dramatic and over the top.

Modifié par v TricKy v, 05 juillet 2012 - 10:11 .

[Tritium315]

Funkdrspot wrote...

tritium315, you're forgetting a unique problem that only thanix tech can solve. Reaper barriers can take kinetic damage just fine but thanix cuts through it better, which is why thanix is preferred

Except a key part of that is because it's a massive stream of particles all moving at near the speed of light. The difference between that and a missile filled with molten metal is the difference between a water balloon and a fire hose.