371 réponses à ce sujet

[TheWerdna]

Wulfram wrote...

TheWerdna wrote...

Meh, atleast she didn't steal the Tantalus drive, that was what was really important about the Normandy's design. The stealth systems were both less expensive and less secret.

The Tantalus drive is a necessary part of the stealth system isn't it?  Regular thrusters would give you away.

Nope, quite the opposite. The Stealth drives don't work at all when the ship is at FTL speeds (In ME1 Engineer Adams says that puts off way too much energy to hide), so stealth systems would have nothing to do with the Drive Core. The Tantalus drive core simply allows the Normandy to reach much higher FTL speeds and maintain FTL speed for longer then other ships.

The stealth system is just simply having heat sinks to capture the heat put off by the Normandy's engines so the ship is harder to pick up on scanners. Its not really a complex concept in terms of design, rather more simply expensive design (you need to have a layer of the hull that captures the heat and transfers it to the heatsinks)

Modifié par TheWerdna, 01 août 2012 - 10:45 .

[Wulfram]

TheWerdna wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

The Tantalus drive is a necessary part of the stealth system isn't it?  Regular thrusters would give you away.

Nope, quite the opposite. The Stealth drives don't work at all when the ship is at FTL speeds (In ME1 Engineer Adams says that puts off way too much energy to hide), so stealth systems would have nothing to do with the Drive Core. The Tantalus drive core simply allows the Normandy to reach much higher FTL speeds and maintain FTL speed for longer then other ships.

Codex says

The Tantalus drive generates mass concentrations that the Normandy
"falls into", allowing it to move without the use of heat-emitting
thrusters.

[krukow]

Why is anyone suprised? Tali makes you cover up war crimes. It's not like she's the most honest person ever...

[Ranger Jack Walker]

TheWerdna wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

TheWerdna wrote...

Meh, atleast she didn't steal the Tantalus drive, that was what was really important about the Normandy's design. The stealth systems were both less expensive and less secret.

The Tantalus drive is a necessary part of the stealth system isn't it?  Regular thrusters would give you away.

Nope, quite the opposite. The Stealth drives don't work at all when the ship is at FTL speeds (In ME1 Engineer Adams says that puts off way too much energy to hide), so stealth systems would have nothing to do with the Drive Core. The Tantalus drive core simply allows the Normandy to reach much higher FTL speeds and maintain FTL speed for longer then other ships.

The stealth system is just simply having heat sinks to capture the heat put off by the Normandy's engines so the ship is harder to pick up on scanners. Its not really a complex concept in terms of design, rather more simply expensive design (you need to have a layer of the hull that captures the heat and transfers it to the heatsinks)

In ME3 Adams says that when Cerberus rebuilt the ship, they improved the Tantulus Drive Core so much that they can use the stealth systems when entering or exiting FTL too.

[TheWerdna]

Wulfram wrote...

TheWerdna wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

The Tantalus drive is a necessary part of the stealth system isn't it?  Regular thrusters would give you away.

Nope, quite the opposite. The Stealth drives don't work at all when the ship is at FTL speeds (In ME1 Engineer Adams says that puts off way too much energy to hide), so stealth systems would have nothing to do with the Drive Core. The Tantalus drive core simply allows the Normandy to reach much higher FTL speeds and maintain FTL speed for longer then other ships.

Codex says

The Tantalus drive generates mass concentrations that the Normandy
"falls into", allowing it to move without the use of heat-emitting
thrusters.

Looked it up, apparently we are both partially correct. The Normandy uses a combination of both methods (the Tantalus Drive core and Heat sinks) to mask the heat emmisions. The heat sink method would normally only function while the Normandy is not moving,  the Tantalus drive core overcoming this drawback by allowing non-FTL movement without producing heat.

Though my point still stands, as the description of the quarian ship in question does not give any mention of using a Tantalus drive or the ability to stay in stealth mode while moving. All that is states is that it uses heatsinks to reduce heat emmisions (and was not moving at that time).

Only the heat sinks were mentions, with no indication that the ship has the capabilites to move while stealthed. So untill proven otherwise, it seems that the only tech that was "stolen" was that of using heat sinks to store exess heat and radiation (which isn't all that secret or complex, just expensive).

Modifié par TheWerdna, 01 août 2012 - 11:04 .

[RadicalDisconnect]

krukow wrote...

Why is anyone suprised? Tali makes you cover up war crimes. It's not like she's the most honest person ever...

I never really understood why covering up Rael'Zorah's experiments was considered a "good" thing to do in ME2. If the quarians want to go to war with that, then it makes them even more retarded than they currently are.

EDIT: Screwed up. I meant "good" instead of "bad."

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 02 août 2012 - 06:16 .

[Bill Casey]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

krukow wrote...

Why is anyone suprised? Tali makes you cover up war crimes. It's not like she's the most honest person ever...

I never really understood why covering up Rael'Zorah's experiments was considered a "bad" thing to do in ME2. If the quarians want to go to war with that, then it makes them even more retarded than they currently are.

It's not bad, it just makes Tali hate you...
Which is logical...

[D24O]

Inb4 people start calling her a national socialist.

[Wulfram]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

It's not labelled as "good" or "bad". You make the choice, and the inevitable consequences of your choice occur. That's all there is to it.

Well, it's labeled "Renegade".  And the game does it's best to make you feel like a total jerk for doing it. 

And it'll potentially screw up your chances for peace in ME3.  Despite giving a political victory to the leading advocate for peace in the Quarian fleet.

Modifié par Wulfram, 01 août 2012 - 11:34 .

[F4H bandicoot]

Wulfram wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

It's not labelled as "good" or "bad". You make the choice, and the inevitable consequences of your choice occur. That's all there is to it.

Well, it's labeled "Renegade".  And the game does it's best to make you feel like a total jerk for doing it. 

And it'll potentially screw up your chances for peace in ME3.  Despite giving a political victory to the leading advocate for peace in the Quarian fleet.

Renegade does not mean bad though.

[Wulfram]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Renegade =/= "bad".

Much of the time, yeah it does.

The game doesn't show you anything that you couldn't have expected to happen when you made the choice. If you feel like a jerk for doing it, well, you should've seen it coming.

It doesn't give you a chance to adequately explain or defend your actions.  Because the game is telling you that you're an awful person to have done this.  And it invents a bunch of political ramifications out of nowhere, though those were dropped in ME3.

Also, compare what happens if you collude in the cover up.  Does anyone call you out on this?  Is there ever the meerest suggestion you might have done something resembling the wrong thing?

It doesn't hurt your chances for peace any more than the corresponding Paragon "ger Tali exiled" choice does.

It hurts your chances compared to 3/4 of the options for a cover up.

[JBPBRC]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

It's not labelled as "good" or "bad". You make the choice, and the inevitable consequences of your choice occur. That's all there is to it.

Well, it's labeled "Renegade".

Renegade =/= "bad".

It most certainly does. It may not have been intended to be that way, but that what it has evolved (or devolved) into. Victory at all costs turned into "LOLraaaagerandompunchingrandomshootingImsuchajerkdiedieDIE*

[Dried Donkey]

kill the quarians and save the geth and kill tali!!! 

[Wulfram]

Cthulhu42 wrote...


Who would possibly call you out? All the people who have no idea you covered anything up? Xen sends you an angry email, so there's something for you.

Your squadmates?  Legion?  EDI?  Even Tali herself - she should be feeling pretty awful that she's just made Shepard and her complicit in her father's crimes.

Well, blue and red options have always given superior outcomes to the regular ones; I don't see why that surprises you.

And why are both the blue and red options to cover up?  Because according to the game that's the right decision, and telling the truth is the wrong one.

[Jamie9]

It's also a possibility that the Quarians scanned the Normandy when it docked with the Migrant Fleet in ME2.

[D24O]

Jamie9 wrote...

It's also a possibility that the Quarians scanned the Normandy when it docked with the Migrant Fleet in ME2.

When all you have to go off of is 2 lines. There are a lot of possibilities.

[CaptainFlan]

Neat idea for a thread; it started out interested before degenerating into just another hate thread.

Anyway, back on topic: First, Andrew_S is right, I believe. The way I remember it is that when you recruit Tali, you explicitly ask her to go through the ship and scan everything.

Second, as for the "My/Your Ship" vs. "Cerberus' Ship" arguments, Shep's dialogue reflects that A) you're happy to have Tali aboard bc you don't trust Cerberus; and you feel that the SR2 is a "Cerberus ship" that you are just in command of to achieve your mission.

For instance, Shepard is irked that EDI is literally spying on them and relaying info back to TIM constantly. Now, you might say, "Well, that's no different than being in command of an Alliance ship and having to report to Alliance superiors." Yes, but the distinction to Shepard is that he's a reluctant cohort of Cerberus. Shepard becomes emotionally attached to his crew much sooner than he comes to any attachment with the vessel itself, if at all. (Example: Shepard deflates Joker's enthusiasm with his "There's nothing on this ship that was even a part of the original Normandy" comment.) Likewise, Shepard doesn't feel beholden to the "regulations" of Cerberus the way he would if serving on an Alliance ship. Asking Tali to familiarize herself with everything about the ship is an open invitation to, er, familiarize herself with everything about the ship. And there is no mention or implication of "classified information" then or anywhere else that I can recall.  (Unless I'm forgetting something!)

Beyond that, the fact that the description on the Quarian vessel makes specific note of its emissions being masked in a method similar to the Normandy in particular certainly justifies one in wondering, "Did they specifically get info on the Normandy's actual system from somewhere, or is it just a similar method?" The mere mention of the Normandy at all can definitely be read as intended implication of "design theft" or however you want to label it.

But in the end, it's never clearly stated anywhere one way or the other in anything less than ambiguous terms. And the wonderful and fun thing about ambiguity is that it always leaves the question to be answered in the mind of the reader.

TL;DR: Either side might be right or wrong. There's no definitive way to prove either augment yet that I've seen so far.

I would be very interested in learning if anyone finds any more references to this that may tilt the argument to one side or the other.

Modifié par CaptainFlan, 02 août 2012 - 12:49 .

[D24O]

CaptainFlan wrote...

I would be very interested in learning if anyone finds any more references to this that may tilt the argument to one side or the other.

One of the writers, Patrick Weekes, said she didn't.

[TheWerdna]

D24O wrote...

CaptainFlan wrote...

I would be very interested in learning if anyone finds any more references to this that may tilt the argument to one side or the other.

One of the writers, Patrick Weekes, said she didn't.

And since Patrick Weekes was the one did the majority of the writing for Tali, we have to defer to Word of God on this matter.

((Though do you have a source for this?))

[CaptainFlan]

D24O wrote...

CaptainFlan wrote...

I would be very interested in learning if anyone finds any more references to this that may tilt the argument to one side or the other.

One of the writers, Patrick Weekes, said she didn't.

  Thank you, D24O.  I don't suppose you have a link to that or any other writer's commentary anywhere?  Writer's insights always interest me.