254 réponses à ce sujet

[AlexMBrennan]

Wiki says

A variant on the weapon, known as the Thanix missile, is seen during the final battle for Earth. It is a ground-based missile apparently based on similar principles as the starship-mounted Thanix cannon.

Your argument ("Thanix missile has 'Thanix' in the name, therefore it works exactly like a Thanix cannon") is invalid.

[RadicalDisconnect]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Wiki says

A variant on the weapon, known as the Thanix missile, is seen during the final battle for Earth. It is a ground-based missile apparently based on similar principles as the starship-mounted Thanix cannon.

Your argument ("Thanix missile has 'Thanix' in the name, therefore it works exactly like a Thanix cannon") is invalid.

The wiki isn't exactly an authoritative source. Some of the things there are just as speculative as things on BSN.

[Twinzam.V]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Wiki says

A variant on the weapon, known as the Thanix missile, is seen during the final battle for Earth. It is a ground-based missile apparently based on similar principles as the starship-mounted Thanix cannon.

Your argument ("Thanix missile has 'Thanix' in the name, therefore it works exactly like a Thanix cannon") is invalid.

The wiki isn't exactly an authoritative source. Some of the things there are just as speculative as things on BSN.

So (and this is me speculating) if the Thanix missile works like the Thanix cannon and if it might work like this .
Why not use anti-matter thats way more powerfull. It's expensive to make. Sure but there's a war out there.
Just a handfull would be enough to keep the Reapers at bay and plan a better way to deal with them.
If one missile manages to kill a Reaper, it wouldnt be necessary entire fleets to deal with them.

Modifié par Twinzam.V, 05 juillet 2012 - 11:10 .

[Gorkan86]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...


Can you tell us where in the codex it states this?

Codex/The Reaper War/The Fall of Earth. 

When the Reapers arrived, they sent a dozen capital ships as a screen to distract the Alliance fleets while the bulk of Reaper forces used the Arcturus relay to travel to Sol. Hackett was eventually forced to sacrifice the Second Fleet as a distraction to allow the Third and Fifth Fleets to flee, leaving Arcturus Station, the Alliance's capital and home to 45,000 people, to be destroyed.

Modifié par Gorkan86, 05 juillet 2012 - 11:14 .

[thisisme8]

Lot's of points being made here...

Someone said cannons have more range because in space the missile wouldn't have enough fuel... I just wanted to point out that in space once something is moving it doesn't stop unless stopped. I think there's even a famous rule about that.

Another point was made about why missiles when we have cannons because cannons are better for some reason. That is a false assumption. Missiles have advantages that cannons don't have and vice versa.

Someone referred to needing a stream of particles to qualify as Thanix and that is another false assumption. According to both codices (2 and 3) Thanix refers to the deployment of liquid metals at near light speeds - nothing about a stream.

The last thing, a Thanix missile is not a missile filled with liquid metal. The warhead would contain a small core filled with liquid alloy of iron, uranium, and tungsten suspended in an electromagnetic field powered by element zero. Upon reaching its target, the core then charge the liquid, sending it out at high velocity in every direction.

The classification of Thanix doesn't mean it has to operate to the same degree of the cannon, only has to use the same concept to deliver the intended effect. This is true in many weapon naming conventions.

[v TricKy v]

Twinzam.V wrote...

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Wiki says

A variant on the weapon, known as the Thanix missile, is seen during the final battle for Earth. It is a ground-based missile apparently based on similar principles as the starship-mounted Thanix cannon.

Your argument ("Thanix missile has 'Thanix' in the name, therefore it works exactly like a Thanix cannon") is invalid.

The wiki isn't exactly an authoritative source. Some of the things there are just as speculative as things on BSN.

So (and this is me speculating) if the Thanix missile works like the Thanix cannon and if it might work like this .
Why not use anti-matter thats way more powerfull. It's expensive to make. Sure but there's a war out there.
Just a handfull would be enough to keep the Reapers at bay and plan a better way to deal with them.
If one missile manages to kill a Reaper, it wouldnt be necessary entire fleets to deal with them.

Now that you mention it. I think the only time anti-matter weapons get mention are on Noveria if I remember correctly

[RadicalDisconnect]

Gorkan86 wrote...

RadicalDisconnect wrote...


Can you tell us where in the codex it states this?

Codex/The Reaper War/The Fall of Earth. 

When the Reapers arrived, they sent a dozen capital ships as a screen to distract the Alliance fleets while the bulk of Reaper forces used the Arcturus relay to travel to Sol. Hackett was eventually forced to sacrifice the Second Fleet as a distraction to allow the Third and Fifth Fleets to flee, leaving Arcturus Station, the Alliance's capital and home to 45,000 people, to be destroyed.

And nowhere does it say that the Reapers lost capital ships.

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 05 juillet 2012 - 11:16 .

[Barnzy]

v TricKy v wrote...

Twinzam.V wrote...

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Wiki says

A variant on the weapon, known as the Thanix missile, is seen during the final battle for Earth. It is a ground-based missile apparently based on similar principles as the starship-mounted Thanix cannon.

Your argument ("Thanix missile has 'Thanix' in the name, therefore it works exactly like a Thanix cannon") is invalid.

The wiki isn't exactly an authoritative source. Some of the things there are just as speculative as things on BSN.

So (and this is me speculating) if the Thanix missile works like the Thanix cannon and if it might work like this .
Why not use anti-matter thats way more powerfull. It's expensive to make. Sure but there's a war out there.
Just a handfull would be enough to keep the Reapers at bay and plan a better way to deal with them.
If one missile manages to kill a Reaper, it wouldnt be necessary entire fleets to deal with them.

Now that you mention it. I think the only time anti-matter weapons get mention are on Noveria if I remember correctly

I believe you are correct, so they do exist within the ME universe. However, I would assume that an antimatter filled missile would be very destructive. It would probably destroy a reaper, but it would also annihilate the area surrounding the reaper as well. and as Twinzam mentioned, it may be too expensive to make during war times. Not to mention it'll be rather high maintainence, as if the antimatter were to touch any matter at all, it would pretty  much go boom ... i think.

Modifié par Barnzy, 05 juillet 2012 - 11:20 .

[thisisme8]

v TricKy v wrote...

Twinzam.V wrote...

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Wiki says

A variant on the weapon, known as the Thanix missile, is seen during the final battle for Earth. It is a ground-based missile apparently based on similar principles as the starship-mounted Thanix cannon.

Your argument ("Thanix missile has 'Thanix' in the name, therefore it works exactly like a Thanix cannon") is invalid.

The wiki isn't exactly an authoritative source. Some of the things there are just as speculative as things on BSN.

So (and this is me speculating) if the Thanix missile works like the Thanix cannon and if it might work like this .
Why not use anti-matter thats way more powerfull. It's expensive to make. Sure but there's a war out there.
Just a handfull would be enough to keep the Reapers at bay and plan a better way to deal with them.
If one missile manages to kill a Reaper, it wouldnt be necessary entire fleets to deal with them.

Now that you mention it. I think the only time anti-matter weapons get mention are on Noveria if I remember correctly

Your sig should say, "Refuse, not letting the lives of trillions of other people compromise who I am."

[Tritium315]

thisisme8 wrote...

Lot's of points being made here...

Someone said cannons have more range because in space the missile wouldn't have enough fuel... I just wanted to point out that in space once something is moving it doesn't stop unless stopped. I think there's even a famous rule about that.

Another point was made about why missiles when we have cannons because cannons are better for some reason. That is a false assumption. Missiles have advantages that cannons don't have and vice versa.

Someone referred to needing a stream of particles to qualify as Thanix and that is another false assumption. According to both codices (2 and 3) Thanix refers to the deployment of liquid metals at near light speeds - nothing about a stream.

The last thing, a Thanix missile is not a missile filled with liquid metal. The warhead would contain a small core filled with liquid alloy of iron, uranium, and tungsten suspended in an electromagnetic field powered by element zero. Upon reaching its target, the core then charge the liquid, sending it out at high velocity in every direction.

The classification of Thanix doesn't mean it has to operate to the same degree of the cannon, only has to use the same concept to deliver the intended effect. This is true in many weapon naming conventions.

What, exactly, are the advantages of a missile.

[Funkdrspot]

Tritium315 wrote...

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.

Sure, to the ignorant. ill try to dig up the actual thread where this guy explains it but he goes in detail to explain thats what we already use but just a much lower tech version. take a look at the game, the stream doesnt need to be very consistent for it to do damage. it basically bypasses shields. Taking a 2 second blast pretty much KOs a dreadnaught. What a thanix missle does is allow for a quick hit and run with maximum damage, minimum risk and without requiring that the dreadnaught get in close enough for a reaper to hit the

[Gorkan86]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

Gorkan86 wrote...

RadicalDisconnect wrote...


Can you tell us where in the codex it states this?

Codex/The Reaper War/The Fall of Earth. 

When the Reapers arrived, they sent a dozen capital ships as a screen to distract the Alliance fleets while the bulk of Reaper forces used the Arcturus relay to travel to Sol. Hackett was eventually forced to sacrifice the Second Fleet as a distraction to allow the Third and Fifth Fleets to flee, leaving Arcturus Station, the Alliance's capital and home to 45,000 people, to be destroyed.

And nowhere does it say that the Reapers lost capital ships.

Well, i already said that reapers loses a capital ships is not from Codex. One guy from this forum said that, but he didn't mentioned where did he find that information. So i can't find it.
But i showed you the info about  dozen of sov. class ships. 

[Barnzy]

Tritium315 wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

Lot's of points being made here...

Someone said cannons have more range because in space the missile wouldn't have enough fuel... I just wanted to point out that in space once something is moving it doesn't stop unless stopped. I think there's even a famous rule about that.

Another point was made about why missiles when we have cannons because cannons are better for some reason. That is a false assumption. Missiles have advantages that cannons don't have and vice versa.

Someone referred to needing a stream of particles to qualify as Thanix and that is another false assumption. According to both codices (2 and 3) Thanix refers to the deployment of liquid metals at near light speeds - nothing about a stream.

The last thing, a Thanix missile is not a missile filled with liquid metal. The warhead would contain a small core filled with liquid alloy of iron, uranium, and tungsten suspended in an electromagnetic field powered by element zero. Upon reaching its target, the core then charge the liquid, sending it out at high velocity in every direction.

The classification of Thanix doesn't mean it has to operate to the same degree of the cannon, only has to use the same concept to deliver the intended effect. This is true in many weapon naming conventions.

What, exactly, are the advantages of a missile.

A cheap means of delivering a load of molten metal to a reaper without  the need to utilise highly sought after eezo, if it works how i think it does.

[Tritium315]

Funkdrspot wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

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.

Sure, to the ignorant. ill try to dig up the actual thread where this guy explains it but he goes in detail to explain thats what we already use but just a much lower tech version. take a look at the game, the stream doesnt need to be very consistent for it to do damage. it basically bypasses shields. Taking a 2 second blast pretty much KOs a dreadnaught. What a thanix missle does is allow for a quick hit and run with maximum damage, minimum risk and without requiring that the dreadnaught get in close enough for a reaper to hit the

Except that unless your missile has a mass effect drive in it then a cannon will not only hit faster, it'll do it from much farther away too. Not to mention anything fired in atmosphere at near the speed of light will turn into molten metal just from the friction with the air.

[Twinzam.V]

Barnzy wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

Lot's of points being made here...

Someone said cannons have more range because in space the missile wouldn't have enough fuel... I just wanted to point out that in space once something is moving it doesn't stop unless stopped. I think there's even a famous rule about that.

Another point was made about why missiles when we have cannons because cannons are better for some reason. That is a false assumption. Missiles have advantages that cannons don't have and vice versa.

Someone referred to needing a stream of particles to qualify as Thanix and that is another false assumption. According to both codices (2 and 3) Thanix refers to the deployment of liquid metals at near light speeds - nothing about a stream.

The last thing, a Thanix missile is not a missile filled with liquid metal. The warhead would contain a small core filled with liquid alloy of iron, uranium, and tungsten suspended in an electromagnetic field powered by element zero. Upon reaching its target, the core then charge the liquid, sending it out at high velocity in every direction.

The classification of Thanix doesn't mean it has to operate to the same degree of the cannon, only has to use the same concept to deliver the intended effect. This is true in many weapon naming conventions.

What, exactly, are the advantages of a missile.

A cheap means of delivering a load of molten metal to a reaper without  the need to utilise highly sought after eezo, if it works how i think it does.

They're also lighter compared to cannons, but it lacks destructive power due to its core (molten metal), as opposed to a nuclear weapon.

Modifié par Twinzam.V, 05 juillet 2012 - 11:35 .

[Tritium315]

Barnzy wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

Lot's of points being made here...

Someone said cannons have more range because in space the missile wouldn't have enough fuel... I just wanted to point out that in space once something is moving it doesn't stop unless stopped. I think there's even a famous rule about that.

Another point was made about why missiles when we have cannons because cannons are better for some reason. That is a false assumption. Missiles have advantages that cannons don't have and vice versa.

Someone referred to needing a stream of particles to qualify as Thanix and that is another false assumption. According to both codices (2 and 3) Thanix refers to the deployment of liquid metals at near light speeds - nothing about a stream.

The last thing, a Thanix missile is not a missile filled with liquid metal. The warhead would contain a small core filled with liquid alloy of iron, uranium, and tungsten suspended in an electromagnetic field powered by element zero. Upon reaching its target, the core then charge the liquid, sending it out at high velocity in every direction.

The classification of Thanix doesn't mean it has to operate to the same degree of the cannon, only has to use the same concept to deliver the intended effect. This is true in many weapon naming conventions.

What, exactly, are the advantages of a missile.

A cheap means of delivering a load of molten metal to a reaper without  the need to utilise highly sought after eezo, if it works how i think it does.

Except the armor on Reaper ships is probably as advanced as everything else about them (unless they decided, for whatever reason, that they don't need to develop that one key aspect of their technology); in which case any munition that's not traveling at relativistic velocities or has a huge nuclear payload is probably not going to do much.

Of course maybe they designed their **** the same way the Independence Day aliens did; in which case we should Shepard should have recruited Jeff Goldblum to write a virus instead of worrying about all this crucible bull****.

Modifié par Tritium315, 05 juillet 2012 - 11:36 .

[Twinzam.V]

Tritium315 wrote...

Except the armor on Reaper ships is probably as advanced as everything else about them (unless they decided, for whatever reason, that they don't need to develope that one key aspect of their technology); in which case any munition that's not traveling at relativistic velocities or has a huge nuclear payload is probably not going to do much.

Of course maybe they designed their **** the same way the Independence Day aliens did; in which case we should Shepard should have recruited Jeff Goldblum to write a virus instead of worrying about all this crucible bull****.

The only way i see the best way to use the Thanix missile is putting it in spacefighters and for ground troops.
Capital ships should stick with the cannons.

[Barnzy]

Tritium315 wrote...

Barnzy wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

Lot's of points being made here...

Someone said cannons have more range because in space the missile wouldn't have enough fuel... I just wanted to point out that in space once something is moving it doesn't stop unless stopped. I think there's even a famous rule about that.

Another point was made about why missiles when we have cannons because cannons are better for some reason. That is a false assumption. Missiles have advantages that cannons don't have and vice versa.

Someone referred to needing a stream of particles to qualify as Thanix and that is another false assumption. According to both codices (2 and 3) Thanix refers to the deployment of liquid metals at near light speeds - nothing about a stream.

The last thing, a Thanix missile is not a missile filled with liquid metal. The warhead would contain a small core filled with liquid alloy of iron, uranium, and tungsten suspended in an electromagnetic field powered by element zero. Upon reaching its target, the core then charge the liquid, sending it out at high velocity in every direction.

The classification of Thanix doesn't mean it has to operate to the same degree of the cannon, only has to use the same concept to deliver the intended effect. This is true in many weapon naming conventions.

What, exactly, are the advantages of a missile.

A cheap means of delivering a load of molten metal to a reaper without  the need to utilise highly sought after eezo, if it works how i think it does.

Except the armor on Reaper ships is probably as advanced as everything else about them (unless they decided, for whatever reason, that they don't need to develop that one key aspect of their technology); in which case any munition that's not traveling at relativistic velocities or has a huge nuclear payload is probably not going to do much.

Of course maybe they designed their **** the same way the Independence Day aliens did; in which case we should Shepard should have recruited Jeff Goldblum to write a virus instead of worrying about all this crucible bull****.

Which i think may be why one soldier resported via radio that the Thanix missile he fired had no impact. It was only when shep aimed the Thanix missile towards the reapers "weak spot" when it was firing, was it able to be destroyed. So its not too far fetched to believe that the Thanix missile is only effective at this weak spot.

Modifié par Barnzy, 05 juillet 2012 - 11:42 .

[Tritium315]

Barnzy wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

Barnzy wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

Lot's of points being made here...

Someone said cannons have more range because in space the missile wouldn't have enough fuel... I just wanted to point out that in space once something is moving it doesn't stop unless stopped. I think there's even a famous rule about that.

Another point was made about why missiles when we have cannons because cannons are better for some reason. That is a false assumption. Missiles have advantages that cannons don't have and vice versa.

Someone referred to needing a stream of particles to qualify as Thanix and that is another false assumption. According to both codices (2 and 3) Thanix refers to the deployment of liquid metals at near light speeds - nothing about a stream.

The last thing, a Thanix missile is not a missile filled with liquid metal. The warhead would contain a small core filled with liquid alloy of iron, uranium, and tungsten suspended in an electromagnetic field powered by element zero. Upon reaching its target, the core then charge the liquid, sending it out at high velocity in every direction.

The classification of Thanix doesn't mean it has to operate to the same degree of the cannon, only has to use the same concept to deliver the intended effect. This is true in many weapon naming conventions.

What, exactly, are the advantages of a missile.

A cheap means of delivering a load of molten metal to a reaper without  the need to utilise highly sought after eezo, if it works how i think it does.

Except the armor on Reaper ships is probably as advanced as everything else about them (unless they decided, for whatever reason, that they don't need to develop that one key aspect of their technology); in which case any munition that's not traveling at relativistic velocities or has a huge nuclear payload is probably not going to do much.

Of course maybe they designed their **** the same way the Independence Day aliens did; in which case we should Shepard should have recruited Jeff Goldblum to write a virus instead of worrying about all this crucible bull****.

Which i think may be why one soldier resported via radio that the Thanix missile he fired had no impact. It was only when shep aimed the Thanix missile towards the reapers "weak spot" when it was firing, was it able to be destroyed. So its not too far fetched to believe that the Thanix missile is only effective at this weak spot.

Which begs the question of why the Normandy didn't just park itself in low orbit and blast the destroyer the second it opened its eyeball (and why it didn't do this on Rannoch and Tuchanka either). Especially now that EC has shown us that the Normandy can show up at a moment's notice to pick up people from the battlefield.

****ing Bioware.

[Gorkan86]

Reapers can destroy ships with tentacles. I think it means that they have strong armor. (Unlike the combined fleet ships)
Because the ships are sometimes explode with such handling. And this explosion can be very strong. And to sustain such an explosion reapers should have a strong structure.

[Barnzy]

Tritium315 wrote...

Barnzy wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

Barnzy wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

thisisme8 wrote...

Lot's of points being made here...

Someone said cannons have more range because in space the missile wouldn't have enough fuel... I just wanted to point out that in space once something is moving it doesn't stop unless stopped. I think there's even a famous rule about that.

Another point was made about why missiles when we have cannons because cannons are better for some reason. That is a false assumption. Missiles have advantages that cannons don't have and vice versa.

Someone referred to needing a stream of particles to qualify as Thanix and that is another false assumption. According to both codices (2 and 3) Thanix refers to the deployment of liquid metals at near light speeds - nothing about a stream.

The last thing, a Thanix missile is not a missile filled with liquid metal. The warhead would contain a small core filled with liquid alloy of iron, uranium, and tungsten suspended in an electromagnetic field powered by element zero. Upon reaching its target, the core then charge the liquid, sending it out at high velocity in every direction.

The classification of Thanix doesn't mean it has to operate to the same degree of the cannon, only has to use the same concept to deliver the intended effect. This is true in many weapon naming conventions.

What, exactly, are the advantages of a missile.

A cheap means of delivering a load of molten metal to a reaper without  the need to utilise highly sought after eezo, if it works how i think it does.

Except the armor on Reaper ships is probably as advanced as everything else about them (unless they decided, for whatever reason, that they don't need to develop that one key aspect of their technology); in which case any munition that's not traveling at relativistic velocities or has a huge nuclear payload is probably not going to do much.

Of course maybe they designed their **** the same way the Independence Day aliens did; in which case we should Shepard should have recruited Jeff Goldblum to write a virus instead of worrying about all this crucible bull****.

Which i think may be why one soldier resported via radio that the Thanix missile he fired had no impact. It was only when shep aimed the Thanix missile towards the reapers "weak spot" when it was firing, was it able to be destroyed. So its not too far fetched to believe that the Thanix missile is only effective at this weak spot.

Which begs the question of why the Normandy didn't just park itself in low orbit and blast the destroyer the second it opened its eyeball (and why it didn't do this on Rannoch and Tuchanka either). Especially now that EC has shown us that the Normandy can show up at a moment's notice to pick up people from the battlefield.

****ing Bioware.

This is the problem with trying to explain away plot holes and inconsistencies in ME3; for each one you attempt to explain, another one will just take its place

[Tritium315]

Barnzy wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

Which begs the question of why the Normandy didn't just park itself in low orbit and blast the destroyer the second it opened its eyeball (and why it didn't do this on Rannoch and Tuchanka either). Especially now that EC has shown us that the Normandy can show up at a moment's notice to pick up people from the battlefield.

****ing Bioware.

This is the problem with trying to explain away plot holes and inconsistencies in ME3; for each one you attempt to explain, another one will just take its place

Pretty much, yea.

[RadicalDisconnect]

Gorkan86 wrote...

Reapers can destroy ships with tentacles. I think it means that they have strong armor. (Unlike the combined fleet ships)
Because the ships are sometimes explode with such handling. And this explosion can be very strong. And to sustain such an explosion reapers should have a strong structure.

The closest thing I've seen to that is Sovereign ramming a cruiser back in ME1. We only saw a capital ship latch onto a cruiser in ME3 EC, but it didn't look like it was getting destroyed by the tentacles, and we don't know if the cruiser blows up.

Reaper hulls may be strong, but that seems to be a moot point. Sovereign went down very quickly when its shields were down. It looked like a single missile from the Normandy was able to completely blow Sovereign up.

Tritium315 wrote...

Barnzy wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

Which begs the question of why the Normandy didn't just park itself in low orbit and blast the destroyer the second it opened its eyeball (and why it didn't do this on Rannoch and Tuchanka either). Especially now that EC has shown us that the Normandy can show up at a moment's notice to pick up people from the battlefield.

****ing Bioware.

This is the problem with trying to explain away plot holes and inconsistencies in ME3; for each one you attempt to explain, another one will just take its place 

Pretty much, yea.

 

Normandy didn't even bother engaging Cerberus cruisers at Grissom Academy and Tuchanka. I might buy it if they said something along the lines of the Normandy's Thanix Cannons not being operational due to incomplete overhaul, but this was never stated. <_<

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 06 juillet 2012 - 01:34 .

[Apocaleepse360]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

"Thanix kills Reapers. I need missiles that kill Reapers. Therefore, Thanix missiles! I'm an artist! Wait, what's Thanix?"

^
That's how.

Basically, I just have to stop thinking and look at the art? Okay...

That's pretty much what BioWare wanted you to do throughout the entire final mission.

[Tritium315]

Apocaleepse360 wrote...

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

"Thanix kills Reapers. I need missiles that kill Reapers. Therefore, Thanix missiles! I'm an artist! Wait, what's Thanix?"

^
That's how.

Basically, I just have to stop thinking and look at the art? Okay...

That's pretty much what BioWare wanted you to do throughout the entire final mission.

"Excuse me Bioware, how does this wo-"

"ART, MOTHER****ER; NOW SPECULATE!"

Modifié par Tritium315, 06 juillet 2012 - 01:09 .