925 réponses à ce sujet

[Khajiit Jzargo]

robertthebard wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Besides using the Crucible, the plan on how were defeating the Reapers is a repitition of what previous cycles did who failed.

How you ask?

No Cycle has ever been able to deploy the Crucible.
Cycles who have reason with the Reapers have failed.
Finding the Catalyst has failed.

Yet Shepard tries all these things in order to win the war even though they have fail.

So how once more I ask, can I be criticized for refusing and taking a chance with my allies because "it has failed before" even though Shepard's plans are based on doing things that have failed countless cycles?

Who else had found the Catalyst?  Before you can state that it failed, you're going to have to document that somebody actually found it.  Finding out about it is obvious, but who else found it?  If you can't document that anyone else has ever talked to SC, then the bolded part of your statement is a lie.  If that part is a lie, then I am left with no choice but to believe that the rest of your statements are also lies.  After all, I have no reason to believe you.  You make wild claims, and either don't support them, or claim that they meant something else.

Here's what's wrong with your current post:

No Cycle has ever been able to deploy the Crucible.  The problem here is that we just did.  We are standing at SC because we have deployed the Crucible.  Therefore, this statement is false, and any conclusions drawn from this statement will also be false.

Cycles who have reason with the Reapers have failed.  Document the cycles that tried to reason with the Reapers.  Before we get into the "what about people like TIM, who are indoctrinated for trying to control them that happens every cycle" arguement, all you have to do to get indoctrinated is spend sufficient time around Reapers, or Reaper tech.  However, since you claim there are cycles that did attempt this, I'd like to see your sources.

Precisely my point, something that has always failed was tried again, whether it worked or not is irrelevant, the point I'm trying to make is that the whole plan was doing something that has failed before, like refusing and fighting the Reapers.

The Prothean VI, Vendetta, clearly says that countless cycles have failed before, that the patterns repeat.

[robertthebard]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Besides using the Crucible, the plan on how were defeating the Reapers is a repitition of what previous cycles did who failed.

How you ask?

No Cycle has ever been able to deploy the Crucible.
Cycles who have reason with the Reapers have failed.
Finding the Catalyst has failed.

Yet Shepard tries all these things in order to win the war even though they have fail.

So how once more I ask, can I be criticized for refusing and taking a chance with my allies because "it has failed before" even though Shepard's plans are based on doing things that have failed countless cycles?

Who else had found the Catalyst?  Before you can state that it failed, you're going to have to document that somebody actually found it.  Finding out about it is obvious, but who else found it?  If you can't document that anyone else has ever talked to SC, then the bolded part of your statement is a lie.  If that part is a lie, then I am left with no choice but to believe that the rest of your statements are also lies.  After all, I have no reason to believe you.  You make wild claims, and either don't support them, or claim that they meant something else.

Here's what's wrong with your current post:

No Cycle has ever been able to deploy the Crucible.  The problem here is that we just did.  We are standing at SC because we have deployed the Crucible.  Therefore, this statement is false, and any conclusions drawn from this statement will also be false.

Cycles who have reason with the Reapers have failed.  Document the cycles that tried to reason with the Reapers.  Before we get into the "what about people like TIM, who are indoctrinated for trying to control them that happens every cycle" arguement, all you have to do to get indoctrinated is spend sufficient time around Reapers, or Reaper tech.  However, since you claim there are cycles that did attempt this, I'd like to see your sources.

Precisely my point, something that has always failed was tried again, whether it worked or not is irrelevant, the point I'm trying to make is that the whole plan was doing something that has failed before, like refusing and fighting the Reapers.

The Prothean VI, Vendetta, clearly says that countless cycles have failed before, that the patterns repeat.

We are currently doing something that has never been done before.  We are doing, as you pointed out a couple of posts ago, something new, because we were the first cycle in who knows how long to actually have control of the Citadel for so long into an invasion.  I would like to see the documentation on the Protheans reasoning with the Reapers.  The fact that no reasoning was possible was established in ME 1.  Vigil asks, you have to stop them, why do you need to understand them, or something to that effect.  The Reapers took the Citadel in the first wave of the attack in their cycle, we have that from Vigil, Vendetta, and Javik.  None of these sources had anything to do with each other.  Javik was never on Ilos, in his part of the cycle, Ilos was a rumor.  We don't know precisely where Vendetta is from, but the VI that worked directly with Javik was called Victory.  So none of that is substantiated.

An indoctrinated splinter group does not represent the cycle as a whole, as a lot of Cerberus Sympathizers here can attest.  So again, you are making things up to support an unsupportable position, which isn't that you chose Refusal, but that everything we are trying has failed.  You have submitted that the Catalyst has lied to Saren, and TIM, and then had to retract it, because you couldn't document where the Catalyst had any contact with either of them.  You have submitted that the Crucible has failed before, even though we are the first cycle, as far the information we have goes, that has ever successfully deployed it.  You have submitted that the Protheans attempted to reason with the Reapers, even though we have no evidence to support such a claim.  These are the issues I have, and you cannot, or will not address them, but instead say "That's my point, it's all failed in the past.", with no evidence to support it.

Vendetta states that patterns repeat in the cycles, and we see those patterns, AI/Organic conflict has repeated, in 2 cycles that we know of, the Metacon war in Javik's cycle, and the Morning War in ours, Quarian/Geth.  Indoctrinated splinter cells.  We know from Javik that that added to their defeat.  However, we also know that the war of attrition failed because they didn't have communication, no system knew what the other was doing because the Reapers took the Citadel and then the Relays.  We know that, according to Vigil, after the Reapers returned to Dark Space, that some Prothean Scientists went to the Citadel via the Conduit, and sabatoged the Keepers, to buy our cycle time, and we know that data archives were scattered throughout the systems by the Protheans, to give us early warning about the Reapers, and to give us time to prepare.  This is what was supposed to be our edge, and it really was, the extinction was delayed.  It was delayed, by some estimates, by about 2,000 years.  We do know that we thwarted Sovereign 3 years back.  These are all things that did not happen in previous cycles, according to what we know.  This can all be documented in game via codex, and dialog.  None of the claims you make can be.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

robertthebard wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Besides using the Crucible, the plan on how were defeating the Reapers is a repitition of what previous cycles did who failed.

How you ask?

No Cycle has ever been able to deploy the Crucible.
Cycles who have reason with the Reapers have failed.
Finding the Catalyst has failed.

Yet Shepard tries all these things in order to win the war even though they have fail.

So how once more I ask, can I be criticized for refusing and taking a chance with my allies because "it has failed before" even though Shepard's plans are based on doing things that have failed countless cycles?

Who else had found the Catalyst?  Before you can state that it failed, you're going to have to document that somebody actually found it.  Finding out about it is obvious, but who else found it?  If you can't document that anyone else has ever talked to SC, then the bolded part of your statement is a lie.  If that part is a lie, then I am left with no choice but to believe that the rest of your statements are also lies.  After all, I have no reason to believe you.  You make wild claims, and either don't support them, or claim that they meant something else.

Here's what's wrong with your current post:

No Cycle has ever been able to deploy the Crucible.  The problem here is that we just did.  We are standing at SC because we have deployed the Crucible.  Therefore, this statement is false, and any conclusions drawn from this statement will also be false.

Cycles who have reason with the Reapers have failed.  Document the cycles that tried to reason with the Reapers.  Before we get into the "what about people like TIM, who are indoctrinated for trying to control them that happens every cycle" arguement, all you have to do to get indoctrinated is spend sufficient time around Reapers, or Reaper tech.  However, since you claim there are cycles that did attempt this, I'd like to see your sources.

Precisely my point, something that has always failed was tried again, whether it worked or not is irrelevant, the point I'm trying to make is that the whole plan was doing something that has failed before, like refusing and fighting the Reapers.

The Prothean VI, Vendetta, clearly says that countless cycles have failed before, that the patterns repeat.

We are currently doing something that has never been done before.  We are doing, as you pointed out a couple of posts ago, something new, because we were the first cycle in who knows how long to actually have control of the Citadel for so long into an invasion.  I would like to see the documentation on the Protheans reasoning with the Reapers.  The fact that no reasoning was possible was established in ME 1.  Vigil asks, you have to stop them, why do you need to understand them, or something to that effect.  The Reapers took the Citadel in the first wave of the attack in their cycle, we have that from Vigil, Vendetta, and Javik.  None of these sources had anything to do with each other.  Javik was never on Ilos, in his part of the cycle, Ilos was a rumor.  We don't know precisely where Vendetta is from, but the VI that worked directly with Javik was called Victory.  So none of that is substantiated.

An indoctrinated splinter group does not represent the cycle as a whole, as a lot of Cerberus Sympathizers here can attest.  So again, you are making things up to support an unsupportable position, which isn't that you chose Refusal, but that everything we are trying has failed.  You have submitted that the Catalyst has lied to Saren, and TIM, and then had to retract it, because you couldn't document where the Catalyst had any contact with either of them.  You have submitted that the Crucible has failed before, even though we are the first cycle, as far the information we have goes, that has ever successfully deployed it.  You have submitted that the Protheans attempted to reason with the Reapers, even though we have no evidence to support such a claim.  These are the issues I have, and you cannot, or will not address them, but instead say "That's my point, it's all failed in the past.", with no evidence to support it.

Vendetta states that patterns repeat in the cycles, and we see those patterns, AI/Organic conflict has repeated, in 2 cycles that we know of, the Metacon war in Javik's cycle, and the Morning War in ours, Quarian/Geth.  Indoctrinated splinter cells.  We know from Javik that that added to their defeat.  However, we also know that the war of attrition failed because they didn't have communication, no system knew what the other was doing because the Reapers took the Citadel and then the Relays.  We know that, according to Vigil, after the Reapers returned to Dark Space, that some Prothean Scientists went to the Citadel via the Conduit, and sabatoged the Keepers, to buy our cycle time, and we know that data archives were scattered throughout the systems by the Protheans, to give us early warning about the Reapers, and to give us time to prepare.  This is what was supposed to be our edge, and it really was, the extinction was delayed.  It was delayed, by some estimates, by about 2,000 years.  We do know that we thwarted Sovereign 3 years back.  These are all things that did not happen in previous cycles, according to what we know.  This can all be documented in game via codex, and dialog.  None of the claims you make can be.

Ah, It's like going to a circle with you...

You keep bringing up the that the Crucible was never used but once more, that is irrelevant. I'm not talking about the Crucible or whether it will work or not even though I believe reasoning with the Reapers is wrong. What I've been trying to explain to you this whole time is that you criticize me for doing something that has failed before, when building the crucible, the essence of your plan, is doing something that has failed before. So you criticizing me is hypocrisy.

Now that you want to bring up using the Crucible we can discuss about it, but don't use to ignore what I keep saying. Building the Crucible is doing something that has failed multiple times, even though it's build now, you still did something that failed before, just like fighting the Reapers, so building the crucible is no more moronic than trying to defeat the Reapers without the use of the Crucible.

Now the Crucible, even though it's true it has never been used and has never failed, reasoning with the Reapers has, the same thing you do when using the Crucible.  
Saren wants to reason with the Reapers, he becomes indoctrinated. The splinter groups who wanted Control who later became indoctrinated did reason with the Reapers, by seeing a future with them and wanting to co-existing with them. Reasoning has always failed, yet your doing it. 

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

And yet destroying the Reapers by "reasoning" with them seems to work just fine...

I find myself preferring the option that not only kills the Reapers but also saves most of the races of this cycle.

Call me a monster if you wish I know I won.

[Goneaviking]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Precisely my point, something that has always failed was tried again, whether it worked or not is irrelevant, the point I'm trying to make is that the whole plan was doing something that has failed before, like refusing and fighting the Reapers.

The Prothean VI, Vendetta, clearly says that countless cycles have failed before, that the patterns repeat.

It was never possible before, so it was never tried before. The Crucible requires an open door on the Citadel, which only became possible for the first time in this cycle. There was no guarantee it was going to work, but it's never failed before because no one ever had a chance at implementing it

[robertthebard]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Ah, It's like going to a circle with you...

You keep bringing up the that the Crucible was never used but once more, that is irrelevant. I'm not talking about the Crucible or whether it will work or not even though I believe reasoning with the Reapers is wrong. What I've been trying to explain to you this whole time is that you criticize me for doing something that has failed before, when building the crucible, the essence of your plan, is doing something that has failed before. So you criticizing me is hypocrisy.

Now that you want to bring up using the Crucible we can discuss about it, but don't use to ignore what I keep saying. Building the Crucible is doing something that has failed multiple times, even though it's build now, you still did something that failed before, just like fighting the Reapers, so building the crucible is no more moronic than trying to defeat the Reapers without the use of the Crucible.

Now the Crucible, even though it's true it has never been used and has never failed, reasoning with the Reapers has, the same thing you do when using the Crucible.  
Saren wants to reason with the Reapers, he becomes indoctrinated. The splinter groups who wanted Control who later became indoctrinated did reason with the Reapers, by seeing a future with them and wanting to co-existing with them. Reasoning has always failed, yet your doing it. 

It is, and here's why:  again, Saren didn't want to reason with Reapers, he wanted to serve them.  He didn't arrive at this conclusion on his own, he was allowed have the delusion of reaching it on his own by Sovereign.  Read up on it, read up on indoctrination.  I would do the research for you, but since we've covered this pages ago, it seems, and it's back, I'm not wasting my time doing the work for you.  Maybe actually having to find the references, and then read them will do more for you than somebody handwalking you through the process.

The reason it seems circular to you is because I'm trying to hold you to a standard, and you keep dodging and weaving to avoid it, going in circles with points, such as Saren "reasoning" with the Reapers.  While you dodge and weave, I'm trying to stay consistent, and this consistency will seem circular, when you keep going in circles trying to prove what can't be proven.  You claim that, standing in SC's chamber, that only exists because we managed to deploy the Crucible, so far as we know, doesn't matter.  This is the whole point to the dialog, you can't make a choice, or choose to not make a choice if you're not standing there.  The Crucible is 1,000s of times more relevent than Saren's indoctrination.  You go on and on about how building it has failed in other cycles, and I guess in a rather direct way, choosing to refuse to use it is a self fulfilling prophecy, since if you don't use it, it would seem like it failed.  Liara will say that it did fail, in fact.  I wonder if she knew it failed because you failed to use it if she'd regret saving your corpse from the Collectors?

So yes, while you run around in circles like a chicken with it's head cut off trying to avoid the crux of the dialog, and the topic of this thread, it will seem like I'm going in circles.  It's that some of your logic is so out there that I have, in order to hold on to some semblence of what the topic is about, stopped chasing you, and now you're coming back around to what the whole point of the discussion actually is about.  How can the Crucible be irrelevent if you can't choose any options, including to refuse to choose any of them, if the Crucible isn't deployed?

[Boydsan]

ZerebusPrime wrote...

There needed to be a Destroy-Refuse option.  And I don't mean conventional victory.  I mean...

"So that's the thing over there that will destroy you?"
"Yes, it is, but our destruction will solve noth-"
"Ok thanks done talking now." *BLAM BLAM BLAM*

The REFUSE option is the option for conventional warfare.  Sadly, we do not win, though.  The Reapers are too large and too powerful of a threat to be killed by conventional matters.  IT was mentioned... SEVERAL times in 2 and 3.  If you refuse the help of the Catalyst then you let nature decide it's course and the Reapers eventually overpower and destroys the advance species.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Goneaviking wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Precisely my point, something that has always failed was tried again, whether it worked or not is irrelevant, the point I'm trying to make is that the whole plan was doing something that has failed before, like refusing and fighting the Reapers.

The Prothean VI, Vendetta, clearly says that countless cycles have failed before, that the patterns repeat.

It was never possible before, so it was never tried before. The Crucible requires an open door on the Citadel, which only became possible for the first time in this cycle. There was no guarantee it was going to work, but it's never failed before because no one ever had a chance at implementing it

You're still not getting it, I'm saying building the crucible to Shepard's knowledge was something that always failed, yet he proceeded to do it.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

robertthebard wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Ah, It's like going to a circle with you...

You keep bringing up the that the Crucible was never used but once more, that is irrelevant. I'm not talking about the Crucible or whether it will work or not even though I believe reasoning with the Reapers is wrong. What I've been trying to explain to you this whole time is that you criticize me for doing something that has failed before, when building the crucible, the essence of your plan, is doing something that has failed before. So you criticizing me is hypocrisy.

Now that you want to bring up using the Crucible we can discuss about it, but don't use to ignore what I keep saying. Building the Crucible is doing something that has failed multiple times, even though it's build now, you still did something that failed before, just like fighting the Reapers, so building the crucible is no more moronic than trying to defeat the Reapers without the use of the Crucible.

Now the Crucible, even though it's true it has never been used and has never failed, reasoning with the Reapers has, the same thing you do when using the Crucible.  
Saren wants to reason with the Reapers, he becomes indoctrinated. The splinter groups who wanted Control who later became indoctrinated did reason with the Reapers, by seeing a future with them and wanting to co-existing with them. Reasoning has always failed, yet your doing it. 

It is, and here's why:  again, Saren didn't want to reason with Reapers, he wanted to serve them.  He didn't arrive at this conclusion on his own, he was allowed have the delusion of reaching it on his own by Sovereign.  Read up on it, read up on indoctrination.  I would do the research for you, but since we've covered this pages ago, it seems, and it's back, I'm not wasting my time doing the work for you.  Maybe actually having to find the references, and then read them will do more for you than somebody handwalking you through the process.

The reason it seems circular to you is because I'm trying to hold you to a standard, and you keep dodging and weaving to avoid it, going in circles with points, such as Saren "reasoning" with the Reapers.  While you dodge and weave, I'm trying to stay consistent, and this consistency will seem circular, when you keep going in circles trying to prove what can't be proven.  You claim that, standing in SC's chamber, that only exists because we managed to deploy the Crucible, so far as we know, doesn't matter.  This is the whole point to the dialog, you can't make a choice, or choose to not make a choice if you're not standing there.  The Crucible is 1,000s of times more relevent than Saren's indoctrination.  You go on and on about how building it has failed in other cycles, and I guess in a rather direct way, choosing to refuse to use it is a self fulfilling prophecy, since if you don't use it, it would seem like it failed.  Liara will say that it did fail, in fact.  I wonder if she knew it failed because you failed to use it if she'd regret saving your corpse from the Collectors?

So yes, while you run around in circles like a chicken with it's head cut off trying to avoid the crux of the dialog, and the topic of this thread, it will seem like I'm going in circles.  It's that some of your logic is so out there that I have, in order to hold on to some semblence of what the topic is about, stopped chasing you, and now you're coming back around to what the whole point of the discussion actually is about.  How can the Crucible be irrelevent if you can't choose any options, including to refuse to choose any of them, if the Crucible isn't deployed?

"he learned the fate of the many civilizations of eons past. Instead of using Sovereign as a weapon, as he had intended, Saren made it his goal to save the races of the galaxy by aiding the Reapers, proving the worth of organics to the Reapers so that they might be spared"

That's called, reasoning with Reaper ideals.

[Goneaviking]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
You're still not getting it, I'm saying building the crucible to Shepard's knowledge was something that always failed, yet he proceeded to do it.

If that's the way you insist on seeing it, then fine.

However creating the Crucible was a reasonably rational decision given the circumstances of the plans discovery, i.e. the rapid overwhelming attack that devastated Earth's defences and then humbled the Turian's military with a much lesser commitment (depicted as the two most powerful military forces in the game.)

Having created the Crucible, and successfully deployed it, it was a rational decision to utilitise it when given the opportunity. Don't trust the Catalyst kid? Fair enough, but you've seen the Reapers smash the ground forces that you helped land on Earth and are currently witnessing the destruction of the fleet you painstakingly assembled ever since fleeing Vancouver.

Thinking that you can somehow defeat the Reapers without using the Crucible in this cycle is irrational. All meaningful evidence is pointing to our inevitable failure.

At least one of the Catalyst's options genuinely makes no sense, and his honesty can legitimately be said to be 'doubtful'. But at least it's a chance, which is something you don't have if you choose to refuse.

[Pitznik]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

You're still not getting it, I'm saying building the crucible to Shepard's knowledge was something that always failed, yet he proceeded to do it.

Building the Crucible was never possible, until now.

Conventional victory is still impossible.

Those two aren't the same. Situation changed for the Crucible, but it didn't change for conventional victory.

[robertthebard]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Ah, It's like going to a circle with you...

You keep bringing up the that the Crucible was never used but once more, that is irrelevant. I'm not talking about the Crucible or whether it will work or not even though I believe reasoning with the Reapers is wrong. What I've been trying to explain to you this whole time is that you criticize me for doing something that has failed before, when building the crucible, the essence of your plan, is doing something that has failed before. So you criticizing me is hypocrisy.

Now that you want to bring up using the Crucible we can discuss about it, but don't use to ignore what I keep saying. Building the Crucible is doing something that has failed multiple times, even though it's build now, you still did something that failed before, just like fighting the Reapers, so building the crucible is no more moronic than trying to defeat the Reapers without the use of the Crucible.

Now the Crucible, even though it's true it has never been used and has never failed, reasoning with the Reapers has, the same thing you do when using the Crucible.  
Saren wants to reason with the Reapers, he becomes indoctrinated. The splinter groups who wanted Control who later became indoctrinated did reason with the Reapers, by seeing a future with them and wanting to co-existing with them. Reasoning has always failed, yet your doing it. 

It is, and here's why:  again, Saren didn't want to reason with Reapers, he wanted to serve them.  He didn't arrive at this conclusion on his own, he was allowed have the delusion of reaching it on his own by Sovereign.  Read up on it, read up on indoctrination.  I would do the research for you, but since we've covered this pages ago, it seems, and it's back, I'm not wasting my time doing the work for you.  Maybe actually having to find the references, and then read them will do more for you than somebody handwalking you through the process.

The reason it seems circular to you is because I'm trying to hold you to a standard, and you keep dodging and weaving to avoid it, going in circles with points, such as Saren "reasoning" with the Reapers.  While you dodge and weave, I'm trying to stay consistent, and this consistency will seem circular, when you keep going in circles trying to prove what can't be proven.  You claim that, standing in SC's chamber, that only exists because we managed to deploy the Crucible, so far as we know, doesn't matter.  This is the whole point to the dialog, you can't make a choice, or choose to not make a choice if you're not standing there.  The Crucible is 1,000s of times more relevent than Saren's indoctrination.  You go on and on about how building it has failed in other cycles, and I guess in a rather direct way, choosing to refuse to use it is a self fulfilling prophecy, since if you don't use it, it would seem like it failed.  Liara will say that it did fail, in fact.  I wonder if she knew it failed because you failed to use it if she'd regret saving your corpse from the Collectors?

So yes, while you run around in circles like a chicken with it's head cut off trying to avoid the crux of the dialog, and the topic of this thread, it will seem like I'm going in circles.  It's that some of your logic is so out there that I have, in order to hold on to some semblence of what the topic is about, stopped chasing you, and now you're coming back around to what the whole point of the discussion actually is about.  How can the Crucible be irrelevent if you can't choose any options, including to refuse to choose any of them, if the Crucible isn't deployed?

"he learned the fate of the many civilizations of eons past. Instead of using Sovereign as a weapon, as he had intended, Saren made it his goal to save the races of the galaxy by aiding the Reapers, proving the worth of organics to the Reapers so that they might be spared"

That's called, reasoning with Reaper ideals.

Here we are, running around in circles again.  Servants do not reason, they serve.  No where in any dialog with Saren does he suggest reasoning with the Reapers.

Reason

appease

The first is what you claim, the second is what Saren is actually doing, and you can call him on it in ME 1, and point out that TIM isn't suggesting it, unlike Saren, when talking to Hackett after the first Citadel run taking VS to the hospital after Mars.  Just because you want to twist the language to assuage your guilt for killing me and all of my relatives due to inaction doesn't mean I'm going to just say, OK, the language doesn't matter, you can twist whatever word you want to mean whatever you want.

Now, since we've come full circle to this, again, and it still has no bearing on the actual topic, do you think we can quit coming back to this?  I am starting to get dizzy from al this circular travel we're doing.

Modifié par robertthebard, 21 août 2012 - 12:41 .

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Goneaviking wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
You're still not getting it, I'm saying building the crucible to Shepard's knowledge was something that always failed, yet he proceeded to do it.

If that's the way you insist on seeing it, then fine.

However creating the Crucible was a reasonably rational decision given the circumstances of the plans discovery, i.e. the rapid overwhelming attack that devastated Earth's defences and then humbled the Turian's military with a much lesser commitment (depicted as the two most powerful military forces in the game.)

Having created the Crucible, and successfully deployed it, it was a rational decision to utilitise it when given the opportunity. Don't trust the Catalyst kid? Fair enough, but you've seen the Reapers smash the ground forces that you helped land on Earth and are currently witnessing the destruction of the fleet you painstakingly assembled ever since fleeing Vancouver.

Thinking that you can somehow defeat the Reapers without using the Crucible in this cycle is irrational. All meaningful evidence is pointing to our inevitable failure.

At least one of the Catalyst's options genuinely makes no sense, and his honesty can legitimately be said to be 'doubtful'. But at least it's a chance, which is something you don't have if you choose to refuse.

Building a super-weapon that is supposedly is suppose to destroy all the Reapers, that countless of previous cycles have tried to build and failed is reasonable?

[Khajiit Jzargo]

robertthebard wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Ah, It's like going to a circle with you...

You keep bringing up the that the Crucible was never used but once more, that is irrelevant. I'm not talking about the Crucible or whether it will work or not even though I believe reasoning with the Reapers is wrong. What I've been trying to explain to you this whole time is that you criticize me for doing something that has failed before, when building the crucible, the essence of your plan, is doing something that has failed before. So you criticizing me is hypocrisy.

Now that you want to bring up using the Crucible we can discuss about it, but don't use to ignore what I keep saying. Building the Crucible is doing something that has failed multiple times, even though it's build now, you still did something that failed before, just like fighting the Reapers, so building the crucible is no more moronic than trying to defeat the Reapers without the use of the Crucible.

Now the Crucible, even though it's true it has never been used and has never failed, reasoning with the Reapers has, the same thing you do when using the Crucible.  
Saren wants to reason with the Reapers, he becomes indoctrinated. The splinter groups who wanted Control who later became indoctrinated did reason with the Reapers, by seeing a future with them and wanting to co-existing with them. Reasoning has always failed, yet your doing it. 

It is, and here's why:  again, Saren didn't want to reason with Reapers, he wanted to serve them.  He didn't arrive at this conclusion on his own, he was allowed have the delusion of reaching it on his own by Sovereign.  Read up on it, read up on indoctrination.  I would do the research for you, but since we've covered this pages ago, it seems, and it's back, I'm not wasting my time doing the work for you.  Maybe actually having to find the references, and then read them will do more for you than somebody handwalking you through the process.

The reason it seems circular to you is because I'm trying to hold you to a standard, and you keep dodging and weaving to avoid it, going in circles with points, such as Saren "reasoning" with the Reapers.  While you dodge and weave, I'm trying to stay consistent, and this consistency will seem circular, when you keep going in circles trying to prove what can't be proven.  You claim that, standing in SC's chamber, that only exists because we managed to deploy the Crucible, so far as we know, doesn't matter.  This is the whole point to the dialog, you can't make a choice, or choose to not make a choice if you're not standing there.  The Crucible is 1,000s of times more relevent than Saren's indoctrination.  You go on and on about how building it has failed in other cycles, and I guess in a rather direct way, choosing to refuse to use it is a self fulfilling prophecy, since if you don't use it, it would seem like it failed.  Liara will say that it did fail, in fact.  I wonder if she knew it failed because you failed to use it if she'd regret saving your corpse from the Collectors?

So yes, while you run around in circles like a chicken with it's head cut off trying to avoid the crux of the dialog, and the topic of this thread, it will seem like I'm going in circles.  It's that some of your logic is so out there that I have, in order to hold on to some semblence of what the topic is about, stopped chasing you, and now you're coming back around to what the whole point of the discussion actually is about.  How can the Crucible be irrelevent if you can't choose any options, including to refuse to choose any of them, if the Crucible isn't deployed?

"he learned the fate of the many civilizations of eons past. Instead of using Sovereign as a weapon, as he had intended, Saren made it his goal to save the races of the galaxy by aiding the Reapers, proving the worth of organics to the Reapers so that they might be spared"

That's called, reasoning with Reaper ideals.

Here we are, running around in circles again.  Servants do not reason, they serve.  No where in any dialog with Saren does he suggest reasoning with the Reapers.

Reason

appease

The first is what you claim, the second is what Saren is actually doing, and you can call him on it in ME 1, and point out that TIM isn't suggesting it, unlike Saren, when talking to Hackett after the first Citadel run taking VS to the hospital after Mars.  Just because you want to twist the language to assuage your guilt for killing me and all of my relatives due to inaction doesn't mean I'm going to just say, OK, the language doesn't matter, you can twist whatever word you want to mean whatever you want.

Now, since we've come full circle to this, again, and it still has no bearing on the actual topic, do you think we can quit coming back to this?  I am starting to get dizzy from al this circular travel we're doing.

They became Indoctrinated servants by trying to reason with Reapers, that's what you fail to understand.

[robertthebard]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
"he learned the fate of the many civilizations of eons past. Instead of using Sovereign as a weapon, as he had intended, Saren made it his goal to save the races of the galaxy by aiding the Reapers, proving the worth of organics to the Reapers so that they might be spared"

That's called, reasoning with Reaper ideals.

Here we are, running around in circles again.  Servants do not reason, they serve.  No where in any dialog with Saren does he suggest reasoning with the Reapers.

Reason

appease

The first is what you claim, the second is what Saren is actually doing, and you can call him on it in ME 1, and point out that TIM isn't suggesting it, unlike Saren, when talking to Hackett after the first Citadel run taking VS to the hospital after Mars.  Just because you want to twist the language to assuage your guilt for killing me and all of my relatives due to inaction doesn't mean I'm going to just say, OK, the language doesn't matter, you can twist whatever word you want to mean whatever you want.

Now, since we've come full circle to this, again, and it still has no bearing on the actual topic, do you think we can quit coming back to this?  I am starting to get dizzy from al this circular travel we're doing.

They became Indoctrinated servants by trying to reason with Reapers, that's what you fail to understand.

You know, it's pretty sad when you can quote, and emphasize a passage, and still try to twist it to mean what you want it to mean.  At any rate, I'm going to have to get off this merry go round you have going on.

Modifié par robertthebard, 22 août 2012 - 02:11 .

[Goneaviking]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Goneaviking wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
You're still not getting it, I'm saying building the crucible to Shepard's knowledge was something that always failed, yet he proceeded to do it.

If that's the way you insist on seeing it, then fine.

However creating the Crucible was a reasonably rational decision given the circumstances of the plans discovery, i.e. the rapid overwhelming attack that devastated Earth's defences and then humbled the Turian's military with a much lesser commitment (depicted as the two most powerful military forces in the game.)

Having created the Crucible, and successfully deployed it, it was a rational decision to utilitise it when given the opportunity. Don't trust the Catalyst kid? Fair enough, but you've seen the Reapers smash the ground forces that you helped land on Earth and are currently witnessing the destruction of the fleet you painstakingly assembled ever since fleeing Vancouver.

Thinking that you can somehow defeat the Reapers without using the Crucible in this cycle is irrational. All meaningful evidence is pointing to our inevitable failure.

At least one of the Catalyst's options genuinely makes no sense, and his honesty can legitimately be said to be 'doubtful'. But at least it's a chance, which is something you don't have if you choose to refuse.

Building a super-weapon that is supposedly is suppose to destroy all the Reapers, that countless of previous cycles have tried to build and failed is reasonable?

At the time the decision to create the Crucible was taken there was no talk about 'countless previous cycles', it was just a schematic they had retrieved very recently. It was taken with the knowledge that the Reapers had pulled of a surprise strike which decapitated the Prothean Empire and closed down the relay network effectively stranding every individual system and blocking any kind of collaboration.

The device is massive and requires diverse and excessive supplies of materials which would have rendered it effectively impossible to even attempt to make it credibly. Which is not to mention the amount to time it would have required to simply design such a weapon, particuliarly in an apparently isolated backwater system like Sol (where the schematices were hidden.)

By the time all of this malarkey about 'countless previous cycles' comes into play Shepard and co. are already committed to the plan and the device is well on its way to completion. Beyond that, the Crucible project is the entire focus of the multi-species alliance, if at this point they shelve the only plan anyone has put forward for mutual defence then it starts to look remarkably stupid sending your fleets away from your own homeworld to safeguard other species instead of looking out for their own survival.

So yes, it is a reasonably rational decision.

Certainly more so than throwing your forces away in pointless skirmishes while the reapers just steamroll over your major worlds and strip you of supplies and recruits.

[Goneaviking]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
They became Indoctrinated servants by trying to reason with Reapers, that's what you fail to understand.

Out of curiousity, where is your source for this position? Presumably it's in one or more of the novels, which I haven't read.

[The Twilight God]

Goneaviking wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Goneaviking wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
You're still not getting it, I'm saying building the crucible to Shepard's knowledge was something that always failed, yet he proceeded to do it.

If that's the way you insist on seeing it, then fine.

However creating the Crucible was a reasonably rational decision given the circumstances of the plans discovery, i.e. the rapid overwhelming attack that devastated Earth's defences and then humbled the Turian's military with a much lesser commitment (depicted as the two most powerful military forces in the game.)

Having created the Crucible, and successfully deployed it, it was a rational decision to utilitise it when given the opportunity. Don't trust the Catalyst kid? Fair enough, but you've seen the Reapers smash the ground forces that you helped land on Earth and are currently witnessing the destruction of the fleet you painstakingly assembled ever since fleeing Vancouver.

Thinking that you can somehow defeat the Reapers without using the Crucible in this cycle is irrational. All meaningful evidence is pointing to our inevitable failure.

At least one of the Catalyst's options genuinely makes no sense, and his honesty can legitimately be said to be 'doubtful'. But at least it's a chance, which is something you don't have if you choose to refuse.

Building a super-weapon that is supposedly is suppose to destroy all the Reapers, that countless of previous cycles have tried to build and failed is reasonable?

At the time the decision to create the Crucible was taken there was no talk about 'countless previous cycles', it was just a schematic they had retrieved very recently. It was taken with the knowledge that the Reapers had pulled of a surprise strike which decapitated the Prothean Empire and closed down the relay network effectively stranding every individual system and blocking any kind of collaboration.

The device is massive and requires diverse and excessive supplies of materials which would have rendered it effectively impossible to even attempt to make it credibly. Which is not to mention the amount to time it would have required to simply design such a weapon, particuliarly in an apparently isolated backwater system like Sol (where the schematices were hidden.)

By the time all of this malarkey about 'countless previous cycles' comes into play Shepard and co. are already committed to the plan and the device is well on its way to completion. Beyond that, the Crucible project is the entire focus of the multi-species alliance, if at this point they shelve the only plan anyone has put forward for mutual defence then it starts to look remarkably stupid sending your fleets away from your own homeworld to safeguard other species instead of looking out for their own survival.

So yes, it is a reasonably rational decision.

Certainly more so than throwing your forces away in pointless skirmishes while the reapers just steamroll over your major worlds and strip you of supplies and recruits.

Yes, it was initially thought to be a prothean design that was never completed. Even after the past cycles info was revealed  it changes nothing as it is never stated that it was deployed in combination with the Citadel. In all the other cycles the Citadel was already taken. It was used earlier, but without the Citadel (i.e relay network) which means it just affected a relatively small area of the galaxy like the initial blast that hit the local cluster before the Citadel then sent the enrgy through the relays.

And it was intended to be built and hooked to the Citadel before the invasion even started. This is presumably what the next cycle does if Shep ios indoctrinated and chooses Refuse. Which is why Vendetta was so quick to dismiss Shepard seeing the the Reapers were already here and in the middle of their harvest. He assumed the Citadel was lost until he was told otherwise.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 22 août 2012 - 05:18 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Because refuse is full of win because the Quarians had people on pilgrimage on the Citadel during Saren's attack. They got parts of Sovereign off the Citadel, developed a superweapon of their own and blew up the reapers. Shepard and Anderson survived the whole thing, and no one knows exactly what happened on the Citadel during the time Shepard was talking to the Catalyst. All that Hackett saw was "holy ****! what the hell was that!" coming from the Quarian ships.

Modifié par sH0tgUn jUliA, 22 août 2012 - 05:15 .

[Conniving_Eagle]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Because refuse is full of win because the Quarians had people on pilgrimage on the Citadel during Saren's attack. They got parts of Sovereign off the Citadel, developed a superweapon of their own and blew up the reapers. Shepard and Anderson survived the whole thing, and no one knows exactly what happened on the Citadel during the time Shepard was talking to the Catalyst. All that Hackett saw was "holy ****! what the hell was that!" coming from the Quarian ships.

Thanks to you I don't have to resort to shameless self promotion

[Zaidra]

It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees. That is all that must be said.

This is coming from someone who chose destroy. I don't freaking care about the reapers, I want them gone. I didn't choose to live on my knees. I chose to live to take my feet back, to stand back up and show the reapers that they can't control me. Don't take their attack straight on, parry their attack and repost! Hit them back, harder than they hit you!

Because I wasn't fighting for my pride... I was fighting for survival... and for the survival of everyone who I ever met in that game, and all of the protheans, and all of the ones who fell before. And Tali and Garrus. Can't forget Tali and Garrus

Modifié par Zaidra, 22 août 2012 - 05:22 .

[Conniving_Eagle]

/Che Guevara

[Solaxe]

Zaidra wrote...

It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees. That is all that must be said.

This is coming from someone who chose destroy. I don't freaking care about the reapers, I want them gone. I didn't choose to live on my knees. I chose to live to take my feet back, to stand back up and show the reapers that they can't control me. Don't take their attack straight on, parry their attack and repost! Hit them back, harder than they hit you!

Because I wasn't fighting for my pride... I was fighting for survival... and for the survival of everyone who I ever met in that game, and all of the protheans, and all of the ones who fell before. And Tali and Garrus. Can't forget Tali and Garrus

And how is "destroy all Reapers with one button" living on your knees?

[Father_Jerusalem]

Zaidra wrote...

It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees. That is all that must be said.

This is coming from someone who chose destroy. I don't freaking care about the reapers, I want them gone. I didn't choose to live on my knees. I chose to live to take my feet back, to stand back up and show the reapers that they can't control me. Don't take their attack straight on, parry their attack and repost! Hit them back, harder than they hit you!

Because I wasn't fighting for my pride... I was fighting for survival... and for the survival of everyone who I ever met in that game, and all of the protheans, and all of the ones who fell before. And Tali and Garrus. Can't forget Tali and Garrus

For you, maybe.

Did you ask all the other people in the galaxy if they wanted you to throw away their one and only chance of victory to sacrifice them all to a horrible, horrible death?

Because I'm pretty sure most of them would yell "shoot the ****ing pipe you son of a ****!" rather than "No! I refuse! *poutface*"

[Porenferser]

Because then you won't have to abandon your ideals.