80611 réponses à ce sujet

[Fur28]

hukbum wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

hukbum wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Leviathan specifically stated that a SINGLE Reaper is created each cycle. Something along the lines of "Perfect in its construction, in our image".

That doesn't work. If every cycle just manage to destroy one capital ship we would only face a handfull or none of them.
This "single reaper" the Leviathans mentioned makes no sense at all.

One of the writers specifically said once that the Reapers don't usually lose even a single capital ship per cycle.

Hmm. Didn't know that. And it's kind of in direct contradiction to Palavan, where the Turian and Krogan managed to destroy "severel" (more than 2) capital ships.
And still - the factor decrease would be quite high on the numbers overall. And how the hell did they handle the first cycle with one capital ship?
One explanation could be that the first cycles where much shorter or they reaped everything that couldn't hide fast enough (synthetics destroy all organics ... sounds familiar).

Smaller time between cycles could explain the destroyers or other classes of smaller reapers

[hukbum]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Harbinger's awesome

Literal he's not. Literal he's a really crappy shooter

[BleedingUranium]

RavenEyry wrote...

I highly doubt there have never been suicide bombing tactics ever before. I said ages ago that I thought reaper numbers were unsustainable. It's a possible reason literal catalyst is so eager to change the solution because his will fail eventually.

They lose other Reaper ships, but Sovereign-class losses are unusual.

[TheProtheans]

BleedingUranium wrote...

TheProtheans wrote...

Rifneno wrote...
One of the writers specifically said once that the Reapers don't usually lose even a single capital ship per cycle.

Which is one of many, many, many reasons that people who think conventional victory is possible should have to pee in a cup.

It is also a reason why Mass effect 3 is just bad writing.
Reapers don't usually use bad tactics, in ME3 they become stupid and lose loads of Reapers.

Doesn't make any sense to do that, just bad writing.

Can you prove bad writing?

...

That's what I thought.

I don't need to prove something that is literal....

[BleedingUranium]

TheProtheans wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

TheProtheans wrote...

Rifneno wrote...
One of the writers specifically said once that the Reapers don't usually lose even a single capital ship per cycle.

Which is one of many, many, many reasons that people who think conventional victory is possible should have to pee in a cup.

It is also a reason why Mass effect 3 is just bad writing.
Reapers don't usually use bad tactics, in ME3 they become stupid and lose loads of Reapers.

Doesn't make any sense to do that, just bad writing.

Can you prove bad writing?

...

That's what I thought.

I don't need to prove something that is literal....

Bad writing is an opinion, you do have to prove an opinion.

[Fur28]

RavenEyry wrote...

I highly doubt there have never been suicide bombing tactics ever before. I said ages ago that I thought reaper numbers were unsustainable. It's a possible reason literal catalyst is so eager to change the solution because his will fail eventually.

i always believed that destroying unactivated or any mass relay could be a tactic against the reapers

[RavenEyry]

Fur28 wrote...

i always believed that destroying unactivated or any mass relay could be a tactic against the reapers

Nah, that'll just cripple our movement while they implacably advance using FTL.

[BleedingUranium]

Vigil said they're probably vulnerable while hibernating. I say that's how we beat them.

[TheProtheans]

BleedingUranium wrote...

TheProtheans wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

TheProtheans wrote...

Rifneno wrote...
One of the writers specifically said once that the Reapers don't usually lose even a single capital ship per cycle.

Which is one of many, many, many reasons that people who think conventional victory is possible should have to pee in a cup.

It is also a reason why Mass effect 3 is just bad writing.
Reapers don't usually use bad tactics, in ME3 they become stupid and lose loads of Reapers.

Doesn't make any sense to do that, just bad writing.

Can you prove bad writing?

...

That's what I thought.

I don't need to prove something that is literal....

Bad writing is an opinion, you do have to prove an opinion.

If the narrative isn't coherent I do not have to.
It is merely an observation.

[Fur28]

RavenEyry wrote...

Fur28 wrote...

i always believed that destroying unactivated or any mass relay could be a tactic against the reapers

Nah, that'll just cripple our movement while they implacably advance using FTL.

well our cycle could become desperate in the decades to come,
and they could try blowing up a mass relay from a lost sector, while they´re fleeing

[BleedingUranium]

TheProtheans wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Bad writing is an opinion, you do have to prove an opinion.

If the narrative isn't coherent I do not have to.
It is merely an observation.

And from a point of view different than yours, the narrative is perfectly coherent. Once again, opinion and point of view. You're going to find that many of the truths you cling to depend greatly on your own point of view.

Modifié par BleedingUranium, 11 décembre 2012 - 01:03 .

[gunslinger_ruiz]

Rifneno wrote...

hukbum wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Leviathan specifically stated that a SINGLE Reaper is created each cycle. Something along the lines of "Perfect in its construction, in our image".

That doesn't work. If every cycle just manage to destroy one capital ship we would only face a handfull or none of them.
This "single reaper" the Leviathans mentioned makes no sense at all.

One of the writers specifically said once that the Reapers don't usually lose even a single capital ship per cycle.

Which is one of many, many, many reasons that people who think conventional victory is possible should have to pee in a cup.

Can't remember what writer said that but I know they did. Kind of cool to know our cycle can sort-of  take down capital ships.

As for potential Reaper numbers, my math has always been horrible so correct me if I'm entirely wrong with these estimates. Note: according to google the Milky Way is roughly 13.Something Billion years old in estimation so lets start there.

# of years divided by 50,000 years (1 cycle) = # of Reapers.

13 billion years/50,000 years =  260,000 Reaper capital ships

10 billion/50,000 = 200,000 Reaper capital ships

5 billion/50,000 = 100,000 Reaper capital ships

1 billion/50,000 = 20,000 Reaper capital ships

500 Million years/50,000 = 10,000 Reaper capital ships

100 Million/50,000 = 2,000 Reaper capital ships

It takes four of our Dreadnoughts to take down one of theirs successfully, we have a little over 100 if you do everything right, even if the Reapers have been running their harvests for only 100 million years we are still hilariously outgunned and outnumbered in terms of direct firepower. Even accounting for the occaisional lost Reaper ship during their cycles or a species being incapable of becoming a Reaper that still puts there numbers to at least 1,800-1,990 at most 254,000-259,000 (just guessing on these).

That's not including Destroyers or allied Cruisers or other allied ship classes. In theory, given the power of Dreadnoughts based on size, I submit its possible for 16 Cruisers to take down a Reaper capital ship, but given that a Sovereign class can mow down a Cruiser with one blast we'll likely run out of Cruisers before they run out of capital ships. Even then we are STILL hilariously outgunned.

[Fur28]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Vigil said they're probably vulnerable while hibernating. I say that's how we beat them.

do they hibernate while they´re in dark space?
because in the citadel DLC we could learn how the door to dark space was opened before our cycle

[estebanus]

BleedingUranium wrote...

hukbum wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

hukbum wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Leviathan specifically stated that a SINGLE Reaper is created each cycle. Something along the lines of "Perfect in its construction, in our image".

That doesn't work. If every cycle just manage to destroy one capital ship we would only face a handfull or none of them.
This "single reaper" the Leviathans mentioned makes no sense at all.

One of the writers specifically said once that the Reapers don't usually lose even a single capital ship per cycle.

Hmm. Didn't know that. And it's kind of in direct contradiction to Palavan, where the Turian and Krogan managed to destroy "severel" (more than 2) capital ships.
And still - the factor decrease would be quite high on the numbers overall. And how the hell did they handle the first cycle with one capital ship?
One explanation could be that the first cycles where much shorter or they reaped everything that couldn't hide fast enough (synthetics destroy all organics ... sounds familiar).

Harbinger's awesome

That's one of the things that makes me suspicious of Leviathan, though.

The leviathans said that the intelligence constructed an army of machines that defeated the leviathans. Harbinger was the first true reaper. Afterwards, the army of machines probably decreased with each new reaper constructed.

[BleedingUranium]

Fur28 wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Vigil said they're probably vulnerable while hibernating. I say that's how we beat them.

do they hibernate while they´re in dark space?
because in the citadel DLC we could learn how the door to dark space was opened before our cycle

Yeah, that's what he was talking about. I agree, I hope the Citadel DLC involves the dark space relay. And the EvilCitadel on the other side.

[estebanus]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Vigil said they're probably vulnerable while hibernating. I say that's how we beat them.

And how would you defeat them while they're hibernating? You don't even know where they are! Dark space it too big an areal to accurately sweep.

[TheProtheans]

BleedingUranium wrote...

TheProtheans wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Bad writing is an opinion, you do have to prove an opinion.

If the narrative isn't coherent I do not have to.
It is merely an observation.

And from a point of view different than yours, the narrative is perfectly coherent. Once again, opinion and point of view. You're going to find that many of the truths you cling to depend greatly on your own point of view.

It's not a opinion, it's an observation on the game.
One who would inspect Mass effect 3 would find nothing really adds up.
While you may have an opinion that is is perfect, it goes against logic and I would debate with you until you saw reason.

[hukbum]

gunslinger_ruiz wrote...
Can't remember what writer said that but I know they did. Kind of cool to know our cycle can sort-of  take down capital ships.

As for potential Reaper numbers, my math has always been horrible so correct me if I'm entirely wrong with these estimates. Note: according to google the Milky Way is roughly 13.Something Billion years old in estimation so lets start there.

# of years divided by 50,000 years (1 cycle) = # of Reapers.

13 billion years/50,000 years =  260,000 Reaper capital ships

10 billion/50,000 = 200,000 Reaper capital ships

5 billion/50,000 = 100,000 Reaper capital ships

1 billion/50,000 = 20,000 Reaper capital ships

500 Million years/50,000 = 10,000 Reaper capital ships

100 Million/50,000 = 2,000 Reaper capital ships

It takes four of our Dreadnoughts to take down one of theirs successfully, we have a little over 100 if you do everything right, even if the Reapers have been running their harvests for only 100 million years we are still hilariously outgunned and outnumbered in terms of direct firepower. Even accounting for the occaisional lost Reaper ship during their cycles or a species being incapable of becoming a Reaper that still puts there numbers to at least 1,800-1,990 at most 254,000-259,000 (just guessing on these).

That's not including Destroyers or allied Cruisers or other allied ship classes. In theory, given the power of Dreadnoughts based on size, I submit its possible for 16 Cruisers to take down a Reaper capital ship, but given that a Sovereign class can mow down a Cruiser with one blast we'll likely run out of Cruisers before they run out of capital ships. Even then we are STILL hilariously outgunned.

And now run the numbers with 0,5 or 0,8 and you'll see a huge decrease in the numbers.
I have no problem with the numbers (we don't know them) of this cycle, I have some problem with the early cycles where they didn't have the numbers to act like that.
Cycle one had one capital ship ...


Edit: A little cleanup ...

Modifié par hukbum, 11 décembre 2012 - 01:11 .

[BleedingUranium]

estebanus wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Vigil said they're probably vulnerable while hibernating. I say that's how we beat them.

And how would you defeat them while they're hibernating? You don't even know where they are! Dark space it too big an areal to accurately sweep.

They'd obviously hibernate beside the partner to the Citadel relay, which most likely also serves as a dock for the Collector Black Arks.

An idea I had was that we open the Citadel relay and sent the whole Earth fleet through, forcing the Reapers to follow, and be on the defensive for once. We then board the EvilCitadel and activate the hibernation signal/command/thing, powering down all the Reapers. We could then choose to keep the sleeping Reapers and station for study, or destroy the EvilCitadel (which is a mass relay) and the explosion would destroy all the Reapers that were at Earth, which was most of them.

[BleedingUranium]

TheProtheans wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

TheProtheans wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Bad writing is an opinion, you do have to prove an opinion.

If the narrative isn't coherent I do not have to.
It is merely an observation.

And from a point of view different than yours, the narrative is perfectly coherent. Once again, opinion and point of view. You're going to find that many of the truths you cling to depend greatly on your own point of view.

It's not a opinion, it's an observation on the game.
One who would inspect Mass effect 3 would find nothing really adds up.
While you may have an opinion that is is perfect, it goes against logic and I would debate with you until you saw reason.

We looked at the same thing and saw two different things. As of right now, neither of us are right. Bad writing remains your interpretation of Mass Effect 3, no more valid than mine.

[archangel1996]

Hello good people, how are ya(yeah, i am badasser than you *_*) today?
Something new?

[RavenEyry]

TheProtheans wrote...

While you may have an opinion that is is perfect, it goes against logic and I would debate with you until you saw reason.

But you don't debate. You just go 'Nuh-uh' and BleedingUranium goes 'Uh-huh'.

[estebanus]

BleedingUranium wrote...

estebanus wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Vigil said they're probably vulnerable while hibernating. I say that's how we beat them.

And how would you defeat them while they're hibernating? You don't even know where they are! Dark space it too big an areal to accurately sweep.

They'd obviously hibernate beside the partner to the Citadel relay, which most likely also serves as a dock for the Collector Black Arks.

An idea I had was that we open the Citadel relay and sent the whole Earth fleet through, forcing the Reapers to follow, and be on the defensive for once. We then board the EvilCitadel and activate the hibernation signal/command/thing, powering down all the Reapers. We could then choose to keep the sleeping Reapers and station for study, or destroy the EvilCitadel (which is a mass relay) and the explosion would destroy all the Reapers that were at Earth, which was most of them.

The keepers are the only ones who can open the relay, as far as we know. Not only that, but there is no such thing as an Evil Citadel. The Reapers probably simply have a Mass relay there. 

Also, the Reapers are already there. Why would some be sleeping in Dark Space? 

[Rifneno]

RavenEyry wrote...

I highly doubt there have never been suicide bombing tactics ever before. I said ages ago that I thought reaper numbers were unsustainable. It's a possible reason literal catalyst is so eager to change the solution because his will fail eventually.

I agree, it seems odd that they wouldn't usually lose even ONE capital ship per cycle.  Our cycle started about 6,000 years ago when the asari found the Citadel.  So there's the potential for upto another 44,000 years of technological advancement before the Reaper invasion.  That's a LOT of advancement.  When you think about it, our cycle has to be one of the weaker ones.  While it's true we got a huge advantage in avoiding the Citadel trap, it's not THAT much of an advantage.

Which is why I've been toying with the idea that they might keep backups of Reapers' minds.  Think about it.  There's cut dialogue with EDI in ME2 where she basically says that after the information from the organic goo is uploaded as data to the Reaper.  Cut dialogue isn't exactly canon but it does show writer's intent.  And their intent there showed that the Reapers' minds aren't necessarily that slop, and in fact the slop is probably thrown out after it's copied.  Also explains why they didn't find organic remains in Sovereign.  It's just data.  Data can be backed up.  Perhaps if they lose a Reaper, they simply make a new body for it and slap in the backup of its mind.

[Fur28]

BleedingUranium wrote...

estebanus wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Vigil said they're probably vulnerable while hibernating. I say that's how we beat them.

And how would you defeat them while they're hibernating? You don't even know where they are! Dark space it too big an areal to accurately sweep.

They'd obviously hibernate beside the partner to the Citadel relay, which most likely also serves as a dock for the Collector Black Arks.

An idea I had was that we open the Citadel relay and sent the whole Earth fleet through, forcing the Reapers to follow, and be on the defensive for once. We then board the EvilCitadel and activate the hibernation signal/command/thing, powering down all the Reapers. We could then choose to keep the sleeping Reapers and station for study, or destroy the EvilCitadel (which is a mass relay) and the explosion would destroy all the Reapers that were at Earth, which was most of them.

That sounds like the final decision of ME2, 
if we choose keep the reapers TIM will be so happy