274 réponses à ce sujet

[spiriticon]

eye basher wrote...

You do know the normandy just barely beat the collector ship.

It still has a high probability of defeat. I'm one of those who believe the Reapers can't be beat without the use of a superweapon, Crucible or not.

But I'm just thinking about what tech we have that can actually match or outmuscle the Reapers, and the Normandy is the only thing which is reproducible on a massive scale.

[eye basher]

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

eye basher wrote...

You do know the normandy just barely beat the collector ship.

Last Time I played Mass Effect 2, the Normandy demolished the Collector Ship with minimal damage. 

Did you not buy the Thanix Cannon?

2 hits with the strongest weapon we got to kill something that's not even a reaper and they don't go down in one hit our ships do is like putting battleship guns on a cruise liner sure you can do damage but they only need to hit you once to sink you.

[Tritium315]

spiriticon wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

The gun was foreshadowed a bit in ME1 'cause Klendagon was a planet you could read the description for and it specifically talked about the rift and the possibility of it being caused by a mass accelerator round.

Also it'd prolly be better for the galaxy as a whole to have a stretch of it ****ed up (of course they could try and engage the Reapers so the sun or some other star would be directly behind them) than the alternative.

Like I said earlier though, this is just brainstorming. If one actually had to write the story for a AAA game one would probably put some thought into it and figure out a way to explain these things in the story. Or maybe they'd just wing it and leave a bunch of plot holes; apparently that's acceptable too.

That's fair enough. We're all here to speculate.

Using these guns would amount to genocide of the universe. Modifying them to target only reapers gives them the 'space magic gun' feel (even then they shoot THROUGH the reaper and creates craters in the next planet).

May as well use the Crucible plot device then.

A possible solution for a conventional victory, IMO, is to have every ship built to Normandy specification. Out maneuvre the Reapers and hit on the flank, and run away. Use speed to counter strength. Obviously if the Reapers shut the Mass Relays we're probably screwed, but hey.

 This cycle has no time to do it so Bioware's ending is probably the most realistic. But it doesn't stop the future cycles from building massive fleets of Normandies. The biggest gift in Liara's time capsule in Refusal is not the Crucible designs, but the Normandy's blueprints

As long as the people operating the guns are careful it wouldn't be nearly as bad as you're describing. Just make sure everytime you engage there a clean shot to an important planet behind the Reaper(s), and if there is then engage from a different angle; it's a 3d galaxy after all. I'm pretty sure the rounds wont blow up stars so aiming them in their direction would be fine too.

If the round escapes our galaxy it might suck for some other poor soul in a different galaxy in a couple million years but what the hell, **** happens.

[The_Crazy_Hand]

spiriticon wrote...

eye basher wrote...

You do know the normandy just barely beat the collector ship.

It still has a high probability of defeat. I'm one of those who believe the Reapers can't be beat without the use of a superweapon, Crucible or not.

But I'm just thinking about what tech we have that can actually match or outmuscle the Reapers, and the Normandy is the only thing which is reproducible on a massive scale.

The Turian bomb?  I'm pretty sure it can be reproduced.

[Hanabii]

Let me say this.

3-4 Dreadnaughts isn't the same as a dreadnaught vs a reaper, it's 4 vs 1 and the reaper still takes out some with it.
You also must take into account technological advancement. Firing strategies.

When fighting each other Dreadnaughts are NEVER allowed to fire in the direction of a planet, not so on the battle against the reapers. There were also a hell of a lot more dreadnaughts and dreadnaught class weapons in the opening part.

Conventional victory is impossible, but the vast amount of fleets allowed for basically a quick stab with the proverbial spear to inject shepard, the catalyst and the tool they were gambling everything upon to activate and keep it safe.

If you have low EMS the Crucible gets damaged, your forces get decimated and you barely make it and burn your own world.

High EMS means they held them at bay long enough to do what needed to be done as intended. The reason you can't win conventionally isn't forces alone, but strategy. The crucible IS the strategy and EVERYTHING is invested in it. If conventional victory was the stratagy there would be no Shield Fleet, there would be a different Ratio, ship formation drive, there would be a different overall approach to the battle. Less head to head and more hit and run?

[The_Crazy_Hand]

Hanabii wrote...

Hi, I'm going to ignore the thanix weaponry, the fact that the turian bomb exists, the fact that the fleets at earth were a small fraction of the millions of ships the galaxy likely had to offer, the fact the you can fire a warp bomb into any hole a reaper gets in it and destroy it.

...........

People do get tired of repeating themselves so you know.  You should probably read the entirety of what your opposition is saying before trying to debunk it.

[RadicalDisconnect]

The_Crazy_Hand, as I said, I doubt suicide bombing will work twice. The reapers surely learn from their mistakes. In addition, while the turian bomb has an enormous yield, delivering that explosion close to the reapers is a whole other matter. Such a large bomb can't be concealed, and the reapers are likely to destroy it before it even approaches them.

As for millions of ships, do remember that most of them aren't military warships. The vast majority are merchant vessels that the reapers will squash like bugs, even if outfitted with weaponry. In terms of warships, I believe the reapers outnumber our forces by far.

[Zardoc]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

The_Crazy_Hand, as I said, I doubt suicide bombing will work twice. The reapers surely learn from their mistakes. In addition, while the turian bomb has an enormous yield, delivering that explosion close to the reapers is a whole other matter. Such a large bomb can't be concealed, and the reapers are likely to destroy it before it even approaches them.

As for millions of ships, do remember that most of them aren't military warships. The vast majority are merchant vessels that the reapers will squash like bugs, even if outfitted with weaponry. In terms of warships, I believe the reapers outnumber our forces by far.

They didn't in ME2. 

Let's face it, the only reason (people think) conventional victory isn't possible is because BioWare just massively buffed the Reapers, just as they did Cerberus. And with the pre-ME3 Reapers, conventional victory would've been more than possible.

And btw, if they actually were outnumbering us by that much, how come we were able to resist (and win) at all?

Modifié par Zardoc, 13 juillet 2012 - 04:58 .

[The_Crazy_Hand]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

The_Crazy_Hand, as I said, I doubt suicide bombing will work twice. The reapers surely learn from their mistakes.

But where did I say suicide bombing would work twice?  I didn't, I said if any reapers get holes in them that you can fire a warp bomb or nuke into them from outside and destroy them that way. 

RadicalDisconnect wrote... In addition, while the turian bomb has an enormous yield, delivering that explosion close to the reapers is a whole other matter. Such a large bomb can't be concealed, and the reapers are likely to destroy it before it even approaches them.

Unless they don't know about the payload, and while you can't conceal it on a fighter, a cruiser or dreadnought would do it easily.  Sure it's large, but it's not exactly the size of a skyscraper, or even a small shack.  And while they can shoot the bomb, that would cause it to explode, dooming them either way.

RadicalDisconnect wrote... As for millions of ships, do remember that most of them aren't military warships. The vast majority are merchant vessels that the reapers will squash like bugs, even if outfitted with weaponry. In terms of warships, I believe the reapers outnumber our forces by far.

.........

No that's not what I mean.  What I mean is that each population likely has a military hundreds of millions, if not billions strong.  The space division is just a fraction of that, sure, but it's more than enough to account for millions of military ships existing.  I wasn't at all referring to non-military ships.  They only possibly outnumber us, and this is just a maybe, if, and only if you count occulli.  Capitol Ships and Destroyers would not have those kind of numbers by most accounts.

Modifié par The_Crazy_Hand, 13 juillet 2012 - 05:08 .

[v3paR]

Sion1138 wrote...

I guess that's why a dreadnought was shown blowing of a Reapers arm with a single shot.

and yet the same Reaper without one arm blasted that dreadnought into pieces. good luck
look at ME1 ending cinematics when Sovereign basicaly destroy everything on its way just by hiting it.

[RadicalDisconnect]

You have to remember the range of reaper weapons. Their magnetic-hydrodynamic cannons outrange dreadnought main guns, which have ranges of up to 100,000 km. A bomb can't possibly have that kind of blast radius. I suppose you might be able to FTL into their formation and detonate it, but that is exceedingly difficult. In any case, we're not sure if a simple bomb blast can harm the reapers. Such a bomb in space won't produce shrapnel, and we don't know if that bomb will release energy in the form that will be effective against reaper kinetic barriers, i.e. heat.

[Gorkan86]

According to Codex a dozen of reapers capital ships can destroy a single Alliance fleet. (Codex/The Reaper war/Fall of Earth)

[RadicalDisconnect]

Zardoc wrote...

They didn't in ME2. 

Let's face it, the only reason (people think) conventional victory isn't possible is because BioWare just massively buffed the Reapers, just as they did Cerberus. And with the pre-ME3 Reapers, conventional victory would've been more than possible.

And btw, if they actually were outnumbering us by that much, how come we were able to resist (and win) at all?

Just because they outnumber us doesn't mean they can suppress all resistance. As an analogy, think of the War in Afghanistan. US and Coalition forces outnumber the Taliban and al-Qaeda, but we weren't able to crush all resistance immediately. Even 10 years later, there are still areas like the Helmand Province that are being fought over.

Again, what makes you think that the reaper fleet that's caught on camera at the end of ME2 is the entire fleet?

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 13 juillet 2012 - 05:22 .

[The_Crazy_Hand]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

You have to remember the range of reaper weapons. Their magnetic-hydrodynamic cannons outrange dreadnought main guns, which have ranges of up to 100,000 km. A bomb can't possibly have that kind of blast radius. I suppose you might be able to FTL into their formation and detonate it, but that is exceedingly difficult. In any case, we're not sure if a simple bomb blast can harm the reapers. Such a bomb in space won't produce shrapnel, and we don't know if that bomb will release energy in the form that will be effective against reaper kinetic barriers, i.e. heat.

Well there's the fact that you can protect the ship with the payload, and also, if it were a normal bomb Id agree,  But I'm pretty sure that if it can destroy a planet, it can destroy a few reapers at once, in space or not.  And mind you, this bomb wasn't designed to destroy it from the core, but from the surface, which would take exponentially more power to do. Yeah they have range, but evidently they like to wait till you're close

Well, actually, they might hold off until the fleets are close to ensure that they can't run away so easily, it'd explain why they didn't exploit their range against the sword fleets.  You can also gaurd against the possibility of them shooting the ship by having several with such bombs per fleet.  Which would have the added bonus of making more potential to destroy more reapers.

Gorkan86 wrote...

According to Codex a dozen of reapers capital ships can destroy a single Alliance fleet. (Codex/The Reaper war/Fall of Earth)

 

A single fleet, unprepared, without thanix weaponry, that deliberately sacrificed itself to let the others get away.

Modifié par The_Crazy_Hand, 13 juillet 2012 - 05:19 .

[RadicalDisconnect]

Gorkan86 wrote...

According to Codex a dozen of reapers capital ships can destroy a single Alliance fleet. (Codex/The Reaper war/Fall of Earth)

Because an Alliance fleet doesn't have that many ships. The wiki (if the information is accurate) states that the Alliance has just over 200 warships spread over 8 fleets. Let's be generous and assume there are 240 ships total.  Remember, only 9 of those ships are dreadnoughts. This means that there are only 30 ships, and 1 dreadnought, per fleet. If you look at it this way, then there's no reason the reapers can't win. We're much less powerful.

I think people are overstating both the strength of the reapers and the strength of the resistance.

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 13 juillet 2012 - 05:24 .

[Conniving_Eagle]

The conclusion is that conventional victory both is, and isn't possible. Judging from the information in the games, it is clear that the writers had conflicting ideas about the Reapers, ME3, and the ending.

[The_Crazy_Hand]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

Gorkan86 wrote...

According to Codex a dozen of reapers capital ships can destroy a single Alliance fleet. (Codex/The Reaper war/Fall of Earth)

Because an Alliance fleet doesn't have that many ships. The wiki (if the information is accurate) states that the Alliance has just over 200 warships spread over 8 fleets. Let's be generous and assume there are 240 ships total.  Remember, only 9 of those ships are dreadnoughts. This means that there are only 30 ships, and 1 dreadnought, per fleet. If you look at it this way, then there's no reason the reapers can't win. We're much less powerful.

I think people are overstating both the strength of the reapers and the strength of the resistance.

If that's cannon then no wonder it was written like that.  IRL though, there'd be millions if not billions of warships per race.  Third world countries have warships numbering that small, it's rediculously low.

The Marauder Shields game will be ignoring that little tidbit eithr way though.

Modifié par The_Crazy_Hand, 13 juillet 2012 - 05:28 .

[RadicalDisconnect]

The_Crazy_Hand wrote...

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

Gorkan86 wrote...

According to Codex a dozen of reapers capital ships can destroy a single Alliance fleet. (Codex/The Reaper war/Fall of Earth)

Because an Alliance fleet doesn't have that many ships. The wiki (if the information is accurate) states that the Alliance has just over 200 warships spread over 8 fleets. Let's be generous and assume there are 240 ships total.  Remember, only 9 of those ships are dreadnoughts. This means that there are only 30 ships, and 1 dreadnought, per fleet. If you look at it this way, then there's no reason the reapers can't win. We're much less powerful.

I think people are overstating both the strength of the reapers and the strength of the resistance.

If that's cannon then no wonder it was written like that.  IRL though, there'd be millions if not billions of warships per race.  Third world countries have warships numbering that small, it's rediculously low.

Yeah, I think a lot of people here overestimate how many ships we have. Even if the 200 warship number isn't accurate, the fact that we only have 9 dreadnoughts, while the reapers have hundreds of capital ships, is telling.

In addition, most of the Migrant Fleet's 50,000 warships are civilian ships. To give an idea of their military strength, their naval power is roughly equal to the turians when all their civilian ships are armed. They have fewer dreadnoughts than the turians, who have 39 (not counting attrition).

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 13 juillet 2012 - 05:31 .

[Gorkan86]

The_Crazy_Hand wrote...
A single fleet, unprepared, without thanix weaponry, that deliberately sacrificed itself to let the others get away.

Yes a whole fleet, not a single Dreadnought.
No thanix weaponry? Can you prove it?

The Second Fleet was ordered to hold the reapers. 12 Reapers was ordered to shield a bulk of their fleet.
Who's whom underestimated, i wonder.

[RadicalDisconnect]

Gorkan86 wrote...

The_Crazy_Hand wrote...
A single fleet, unprepared, without thanix weaponry, that deliberately sacrificed itself to let the others get away.

Yes a whole fleet, not a single Dreadnought.
No thanix weaponry? Can you prove it?

The Second Fleet was ordered to hold the reapers. 12 Reapers was ordered to shield a bulk of their fleet.
Who's whom underestimated, i wonder.

Lets be optimistic. Second, third, and fifth fleet have a total 90 ships, including 4 dreadnoughts. Most of those ships are cruisers and frigates. The capital ships also have the element of surprise and weapon range superiority. If you look at it this way, the Alliance fleet at Arcturus isn't all that impressive.

12 capital ships is a conservative number. The exact statement is "over a dozon Reapers."

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 13 juillet 2012 - 05:37 .

[The_Crazy_Hand]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

Yeah, I think a lot of people here overestimate how many ships we have. Even if the 200 warship number isn't accurate, the fact that we only have 9 dreadnoughts, while the reapers have hundreds of capital ships, is telling.

In addition, most of the Migrant Fleet's 50,000 warships are civilian ships. To give an idea of their military strength, their naval power is roughly equal to the turians when all their civilian ships are armed. They have fewer dreadnoughts than the turians, who have 39 (not counting attrition).

They're probably overestimating it because if those are the actual numbers, then they're damned idiotic, even discounting an enemy like the reapers you'd want a massively larger military than that.  Having a military that small and weak is tantamount to surrendering before the battle even begins.

[RadicalDisconnect]

The_Crazy_Hand wrote...

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

Yeah, I think a lot of people here overestimate how many ships we have. Even if the 200 warship number isn't accurate, the fact that we only have 9 dreadnoughts, while the reapers have hundreds of capital ships, is telling.

In addition, most of the Migrant Fleet's 50,000 warships are civilian ships. To give an idea of their military strength, their naval power is roughly equal to the turians when all their civilian ships are armed. They have fewer dreadnoughts than the turians, who have 39 (not counting attrition).

They're probably overestimating it because if those are the actual numbers, then they're damned idiotic, even discounting an enemy like the reapers you'd want a massively larger military than that.  Having a military that small and weak is tantamount to surrendering before the battle even begins.

Unfortunately, as far as I can tell, those are the actual numbers. Both the reaper and friendly fleets are smaller than we think.

EDIT: I can't find where the 200 ships number came from, but apparently it was found in some dialogue or codex regarding the First Contact War. I don't know how many ships the Alliance would have by 2186. Needless to say though, I can't imagine that number being any more than 400 or 500, especially considering that even by 2186, humans only had 9 dreadnoughts.

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 13 juillet 2012 - 07:17 .

[Brovikk Rasputin]

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

But there are statistics to prove it - www.google.com/imgres

Do you want the Facebook one, too?

Please don't tell me you consider yourself in the majority.

That's a poll on a website for hardcore fans with arond 25000 votes. For a game that sold more than 1½ million copies. That poll is useless. I need something with more than 1 million votes. If not, it's just not accurate.

There's not just a 'few' who are fine with the endings. If you take a look in the non-spoiler section on here, there are many people who have no problems with the endings. Also, I made a thread on here a while back for people who liked the ending, and besides the usual haters, many people posted in there. Many people that are not usually seen on here, because they can't be bothered with all the constant whining.

v3paR wrote...

Sion1138 wrote...

I guess that's why a dreadnought was shown blowing of a Reapers arm with a single shot.

and yet the same Reaper without one arm blasted that dreadnought into pieces. good luck [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/whistling.png[/smilie]
look at ME1 ending cinematics when Sovereign basicaly destroy everything on its way just by hiting it.

Exactly. If all those things aren't proof enough, I don't know what is. 

Modifié par Brovikk Rasputin, 13 juillet 2012 - 08:37 .

[Jackums]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

A conventional victory would NEVER be possible! Period.

[spiriticon]

The_Crazy_Hand wrote...

The Turian bomb?  I'm pretty sure it can be reproduced.

You're just gonna board a Reaper and install the bomb on it? This is another weapon that destroys planets. YOu can't just fire it around like pistols. You'd kill more of your own people through friendly fire than Reapers.

I'm not sure about using these megaweapons as arguments for a conventional victory. It's pretty unconventional, just replacing the Crucible with another Crucible like device. Worse, You'd be committing genocide on a scale far more than just  EDI and the Geth.

Besides, you could you know, just use the Crucible at low EMS if you want to obliterate everything in sight.

Modifié par spiriticon, 13 juillet 2012 - 10:57 .