343 réponses à ce sujet

[Han Shot First]

Maxster_ wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...



Having served in the military, I think I can speak with some degree of authority on what is and isn't practical from a military point of view. And giving the Normandy priority over the ground force wouldn't be practical.

Except explosion of normandy would be more effective than shooting individual soldiers.

The destruction of the Normandy SR1 was not anywhere near as dramatic as the destruction of the dreadnought at the beginning of ME3. As such, there isn't any indication that destroying the Normandy would have caused significant casualties beyond the crew of the ship and the few Marines caught in the immediate vicinity. Also, the Normandy was deployed quite a ways back from the beam, making it much less of a priority than the tanks, gunships, and dismounted infantry that were much nearer to the beam and rapidly closing.

Maxster_ wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...


1. Entire beam rush is retarded: No, it isn't. It was a desperate gamble to be sure, but it isn't like they had other options. Conventional victory simply wasn't possible.

It is retarded, because instead of using stealth frigate to unload squad and support before unprotected beam, to lower the probabilty of reapers shutting down the beam, - command commenced entire ground operation, without air superiority and against overwhelming forces. So, at any moment of that operation, reapers just shut down the beam - and they won.
And don't tell me, that they can't shutdown their own beam.

If the Reapers could simply shut off the beam like fipping a light switch to the off position, whether or not the Alliance deployed frigates wouldn't matter in the slightest. In that case the beam could be shut down whether or not frigates were deployed, and the frigates wouldn't be able to stop it anymore than the ground force could.

As for unloading infantry...

I've already covered that. The frigates would then become priority targets and most would probably not even survive to disembark their troops. The infantry are safer while disbursed on the ground.

Maxster_ wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...


2. Joker ignored chain of command: Where and when did that happen?!

Who is in charge on Normandy when Shepard is ashore? And how and why that unknown person ignored admiral Hackett(or his subordinate in charge of Normandy frigate pack) orders thus endangering the fleet(leaving their position and role)?

Where and when did Admiral Hackett issue orders that the Normandy was not break off from Sword under any circumstances? Joker can't disobey orders that don't exist.

Maxster_ wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

The Normandy and other frigates should have been directly involved in the beam rush: By being directly involved in the push rather than simply conducting medevacs, they would have made themselves priority targets. The Normandy likely would have been destroyed in that scenario. Furthermore deploying troops from the Normandy wouldn't have given the Alliance any advantage, when those troops are actually safer while dispersed on the ground. A single shot from Harbinger could annihilate entire platoon(s) aboard a frigate, where as with dismounted infantry he's only killing or wounding a relative handful at a time.

1. Using stealth warship for medevac is retarded and waste of resources.
2. Risking over a 100 crew and advanced frigate to evacuate a exactly TWO squadmate is retarded and waste of resources. Also, ignoring other wounded is well.. you know, is retarded. Whoever gave Shepard rank higher than lieutenant should hang himself because of shame.
3. Deploying troops from Normandy would give tremendous advantage and element of surpise. You seem to forget, that Harbringer and his support were drawn to the beam because of that retarded ground assault.

1 and 2: A shuttle would have made more sense for the medevac, but just about every other criticism of the evac scene is invalid. It is also a minor issue, as the Normandy is more dramatic (in fiction sometimes drama trumps realism), and Cortez was potentially dead and the shuttle potentially destroyed.

3. Deploying troops from the Normandy just wouldn't have gotten the Normandy destroyed, and those troops along with it. The infantry is safer making the push while disbursed on the ground.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 30 septembre 2012 - 04:26 .

[Sajuro]

Harbinger is a bro, would a bro should down the ship with your bros in it, no.

[Maxster_]

[quote]Han Shot First wrote...

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

[quote]Han Shot First wrote...



Having served in the military, I think I can speak with some degree of authority on what is and isn't practical from a military point of view. And giving the Normandy priority over the ground force wouldn't be practical.
[/quote]
Except explosion of normandy would be more effective than shooting individual soldiers.
[/quote]

The destruction of the Normandy SR1 was not anywhere near as dramatic as the destruction of the dreadnought at the beginning of ME3. As such, there isn't any indication that destroying the Normandy would have caused significant casualties beyond the crew of the ship and the few Marines caught in the immediate vicinity. Also, the Normandy was deployed quite a ways back from the beam, making it much less of a priority than the tanks, gunships, and dismounted infantry that were much nearer to the beam and rapidly closing.

[/quote]
So, you have no proof that Normandy explosion would not be effective against infantry. Especially knowing that most explosive thing is eezo core, that on SR-2 have size of cruiser drive core.
Also, dreadnought can't enter the atmosphere, and in intro  was cruiser that was destroyed.
So it is exactly same as intro explosion.

It seems that you never read the codex, and don't know what are you talking about.
And, it is completely retarded, that Harbringer not destroyed Normandy.
[quote]

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

[quote]Han Shot First wrote...


1. Entire beam rush is retarded: No, it isn't. It was a desperate gamble to be sure, but it isn't like they had other options. Conventional victory simply wasn't possible.
[/quote]
It is retarded, because instead of using stealth frigate to unload squad and support before unprotected beam, to lower the probabilty of reapers shutting down the beam, - command commenced entire ground operation, without air superiority and against overwhelming forces. So, at any moment of that operation, reapers just shut down the beam - and they won.
And don't tell me, that they can't shutdown their own beam.
[/quote]

If the Reapers could simply shut off the beam like fipping a light switch to the off position, whether or not the Alliance deployed frigates wouldn't matter in the slightest. In that case the beam could be shut down whether or not frigates were deployed, and the frigates wouldn't be able to stop it anymore than the ground force could.
[/quote]
They actually shutting beam down in cutscenes. And to think, that reapers can't shutdown their own beam - is stupid.
[quote]
As for unloading infantry...

I've already covered that. The frigates would then become priority targets and most would probably not even survive to disembark their troops. The infantry are safer while disbursed on the ground.
[/quote]
You haven't covered nothing. Frigates are faster than reaper dreadnoughts, and with thanix they can fight back. So,  first plan - use stealth frigate normandy to unload troops before the beam, frigate packs act as cover, and entire fleet as a distraction. If that fails, backup plan - using frigate packs to try to unload as many troups as they can. If that is also fails, then full ground invasion.

Also why infantry should be safer, exactly? Their only task to get inside the citadel seize control of it, and open wards.
And in that situation, their losses are completely irrelevant, and actually lesser than what we got.

Instead, that retarded ground invasion, have them first lose 50% on landing, and lose rest while securing completely unneeded ground.

You said you served in military to back up your position in discussion?
[quote]
[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

[quote]Han Shot First wrote...


2. Joker ignored chain of command: Where and when did that happen?!
[/quote]
Who is in charge on Normandy when Shepard is ashore? And how and why that unknown person ignored admiral Hackett(or his subordinate in charge of Normandy frigate pack) orders thus endangering the fleet(leaving their position and role)?
[/quote]

Where and when did Admiral Hackett issue orders that the Normandy was not break off from Sword under any circumstances? Joker can't disobey orders that don't exist.
[/quote]
lolwut? So, any soldier in a battle that hasn't given specifical order to not to leave, have right to run anywhere and do anything he want?

By saying that you lost any credibility. Just admit that you lied about your military service.
[quote]
[quote]Maxster_ wrote...
[quote]Han Shot First wrote...

The Normandy and other frigates should have been directly involved in the beam rush: By being directly involved in the push rather than simply conducting medevacs, they would have made themselves priority targets. The Normandy likely would have been destroyed in that scenario. Furthermore deploying troops from the Normandy wouldn't have given the Alliance any advantage, when those troops are actually safer while dispersed on the ground. A single shot from Harbinger could annihilate entire platoon(s) aboard a frigate, where as with dismounted infantry he's only killing or wounding a relative handful at a time.
[/quote]
1. Using stealth warship for medevac is retarded and waste of resources.
2. Risking over a 100 crew and advanced frigate to evacuate a exactly TWO squadmate is retarded and waste of resources. Also, ignoring other wounded is well.. you know, is retarded. Whoever gave Shepard rank higher than lieutenant should hang himself because of shame.
3. Deploying troops from Normandy would give tremendous advantage and element of surpise. You seem to forget, that Harbringer and his support were drawn to the beam because of that retarded ground assault.

[/quote]

1 and 2: A shuttle would have made more sense for the medevac, but just about every other criticism of the evac scene is invalid. It is also a minor issue, as the Normandy is more dramatic (in fiction sometimes drama trumps realism), and Cortez was potentially dead and the shuttle potentially destroyed.

3. Deploying troops from the Normandy just wouldn't have gotten the Normandy destroyed, and those troops along with it. The infantry is safer making the push while disbursed on the ground.



[/quote]
1, 2 - is not a minor issue, it is completely retarded and ooc for Shepard and crew. It also not dramatic, just so retarded that it is laughable, because completely unrealistic, stupid, and ooc.
Also saying that only Cortez can pilot the shuttle in entire allied fleets - retarded just the same.

3. You again evading point, that Harbringer was drawn to a beam because of that retarded ground invasion. If Normandy was used first to deploy the troops reapers wouldn't have time to react, leaving beam undefended.

Well, you lost any credibility anyway.

[N7 Shadow 90]

It really isn't hard to figure out. It annoys me when people say this is a plot hole. It could of been the IFF, or Harby could simply be stopping people getting to the beam. This is a brilliant scene that hardly anyone seems to appreciate!

[Maxster_]

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

It really isn't hard to figure out. It annoys me when people say this is a plot hole. It could of been the IFF, or Harby could simply be stopping people getting to the beam. This is a brilliant scene that hardly anyone seems to appreciate!

It is a most stupid and ooc scene in entire ME3. There is no brilliance in that retarded mess.

[N7 Shadow 90]

Maxster_ wrote...

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

It really isn't hard to figure out. It annoys me when people say this is a plot hole. It could of been the IFF, or Harby could simply be stopping people getting to the beam. This is a brilliant scene that hardly anyone seems to appreciate!

It is a most stupid and ooc scene in entire ME3. There is no brilliance in that retarded mess.

Believe what you want. I think it's awesome.

[Maxster_]

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

It really isn't hard to figure out. It annoys me when people say this is a plot hole. It could of been the IFF, or Harby could simply be stopping people getting to the beam. This is a brilliant scene that hardly anyone seems to appreciate!

It is a most stupid and ooc scene in entire ME3. There is no brilliance in that retarded mess.

Believe what you want. I think it's awesome.

Before that you said that people who says that this scene is a plot hole annoying you. And now you run away?
Begone then.

[N7 Shadow 90]

Maxster_ wrote...

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

It really isn't hard to figure out. It annoys me when people say this is a plot hole. It could of been the IFF, or Harby could simply be stopping people getting to the beam. This is a brilliant scene that hardly anyone seems to appreciate!

It is a most stupid and ooc scene in entire ME3. There is no brilliance in that retarded mess.

Believe what you want. I think it's awesome.

Before that you said that people who says that this scene is a plot hole annoying you. And now you run away?
Begone then.

I'm supporting what I said. This is running away how? And what is the point of getting in an argument? I'm clearly not going to be able to change your opinion.

[Isichar]

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

It really isn't hard to figure out. It annoys me when people say this is a plot hole. It could of been the IFF, or Harby could simply be stopping people getting to the beam. This is a brilliant scene that hardly anyone seems to appreciate!

To me its the single largest and most blatant plot hole in the game. It is literally the closest I have ever come to falling out of my chair laughing.

I am not saying theres anything wrong with liking the scene, or feeling that it made sense since people who know much more on the subject then me (Hans for example) seem to think its plausible, but for me it will always stick out like a sore thumb.

[Maxster_]

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

It really isn't hard to figure out. It annoys me when people say this is a plot hole. It could of been the IFF, or Harby could simply be stopping people getting to the beam. This is a brilliant scene that hardly anyone seems to appreciate!

It is a most stupid and ooc scene in entire ME3. There is no brilliance in that retarded mess.

Believe what you want. I think it's awesome.

Before that you said that people who says that this scene is a plot hole annoying you. And now you run away?
Begone then.

I'm supporting what I said. This is running away how? And what is the point of getting in an argument? I'm clearly not going to be able to change your opinion.

You said that you like that scene, and people who saying that this scene is a plothole annoys you. There is no argument in that.
Also, it is clearly you don't want to give any arguments, because you do not have a valid ones. Also read thread name - you really believe, that the reason for Harbringer not to shoot down the Normandy, is that you like that scene?

Modifié par Maxster_, 30 septembre 2012 - 05:17 .

[N7 Shadow 90]

Isichar wrote...

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

It really isn't hard to figure out. It annoys me when people say this is a plot hole. It could of been the IFF, or Harby could simply be stopping people getting to the beam. This is a brilliant scene that hardly anyone seems to appreciate!

To me its the single largest and most blatant plot hole in the game. It is literally the closest I have ever come to falling out of my chair laughing.

I am not saying theres anything wrong with liking the scene, or feeling that it made sense since people who know much more on the subject then me (Hans for example) seem to think its plausible, but for me it will always stick out like a sore thumb.

I don't agree with you, but thanks for being civil.

[N7 Shadow 90]

[/quote]
You said that you like that scene, and people who saying that this scene is a plothole annoys you. There is no argument in that.
Also, it is clearly you don't want to give any arguments, because you do not have a valid ones. Also read thread name - you really believe, that the reason for Harbringer not to shoot down the Normandy, is that you like that scene?
[/quote]


I gave two reasons.

Modifié par N7 Shadow 90, 30 septembre 2012 - 05:20 .

[Maxster_]

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

You said that you like that scene, and people who saying that this scene is a plothole annoys you. There is no argument in that.
Also, it is clearly you don't want to give any arguments, because you do not have a valid ones. Also read thread name - you really believe, that the reason for Harbringer not to shoot down the Normandy, is that you like that scene?

I gave two reasons.

Nah, you didn't. You just stated that those reasons are irrelevant to you. Also, you didn't read the thread.
So tell me, why exactly you came to this thread?

Modifié par Maxster_, 30 septembre 2012 - 05:27 .

[Maxster_]

Isichar wrote...

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

It really isn't hard to figure out. It annoys me when people say this is a plot hole. It could of been the IFF, or Harby could simply be stopping people getting to the beam. This is a brilliant scene that hardly anyone seems to appreciate!

To me its the single largest and most blatant plot hole in the game. It is literally the closest I have ever come to falling out of my chair laughing.

I am not saying theres anything wrong with liking the scene, or feeling that it made sense since people who know much more on the subject then me (Hans for example) seem to think its plausible, but for me it will always stick out like a sore thumb.

I think Earth intro takes second place.

[N7 Shadow 90]

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

[quote]N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

[/quote]
You said that you like that scene, and people who saying that this scene is a plothole annoys you. There is no argument in that.
Also, it is clearly you don't want to give any arguments, because you do not have a valid ones. Also read thread name - you really believe, that the reason for Harbringer not to shoot down the Normandy, is that you like that scene?
[/quote]


I gave two reasons.[/quote]
Nah, you didn't. You just stated that those reasons are irrelevant to you. Also, you didn't read the thread.
So tell me, why exactly you came to this thread?

1. I never said that those resons were irrelevent.
2. I did read the thread.
3.  I came here to express my feelings. Just like you. (And in a more civil way.)

Also, tell me why you are on the ME3 forums. Aren't forums supposed to be for fans? Everything you have said has been negative.

Modifié par N7 Shadow 90, 30 septembre 2012 - 05:28 .

[AlexMBrennan]

As far as I'm aware Reapers don't have eyes, it is logical they use scanners to see.

No, it's not. Having only high-tech sensors is stupid. Not questioning another Reaper dreadnought suddenly popping up, not sticking to the plan, and not responding to communication attempts is bound to make anyone suspicious.

More importantly, Harby knows that Shepard has the IFF. Once again, you're assuming that the Reapers will blindly stick to a fixed plan and not react to our moves in any way. When you lose your credit card, you phone your credit card company and they'll cancel your cards and send you new ones - do you seriously expect me to believe that the Reapers haven't come up with something similar? Yes, it's not inconceivable, but I'd rather prefer a plan that doesn't require the enemy to be terminally stupid.

[babachewie]

This argument is retarded

[Maxster_]

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

You said that you like that scene, and people who saying that this scene is a plothole annoys you. There is no argument in that.
Also, it is clearly you don't want to give any arguments, because you do not have a valid ones. Also read thread name - you really believe, that the reason for Harbringer not to shoot down the Normandy, is that you like that scene?

I gave two reasons.

Nah, you didn't. You just stated that those reasons are irrelevant to you. Also, you didn't read the thread.
So tell me, why exactly you came to this thread?

1. I never said that those resons were irrelevent.
2. I did read the thread.
3.  I came here to express my feelings. Just like you. (And in a more civil way.)

Also, tell me why you are on the ME3 forums. Aren't forums supposed to be for fans? Everything you have said has been negative.

1. You did, when you offered 2 diametral opposite reasons, and stated that it is a brilliant scene, and everyone should appreciate that.
That clearly shows, that reason is irrelevant to you.

2. So why exactly you are repeating those retarded "reasons"?
If reaper iff is working that way, that reapers can't see Normandy at point blank range - 1) reapers are completely retarted, having no sensors, and easily fooled. 2) Entire priority:earth is completely unneeded, because you just need to go right to the beam on Normandy, and unload entire squad, and support troops there 3) Whoever came up with that mission(I presume that was Hackett), is completely retarded, and couldn't even promoted to a rank higher than lieutenant.

If Harbringer is just not destroyed the Normandy, it makes him completely retarded, because exploded normandy would be much more effective, than shooting individual soldiers. Also, priority:earth is still completely unneeded.

3. Yeah, that why you said that people that thinks not like you, annoys you. And offered nothing related to the topic.

4. Of course, i'm here just to annoy you. And also, the existance of people that eat everything they served, without questions or doubts, annoys me. Especially when sci-fi is on the menu.
Being serious, i like ME universe, and ME1 especially. And i despise that standalone pseudo-rpg shooter with auto-dialogue that called "ME3".
As for you assumption, that forums should be only for yes-man - that was actually funny, thanks
Also, look that those yes-man helped SWTOR, that should give you some clues

Modifié par Maxster_, 30 septembre 2012 - 05:45 .

[DarthSliver]

its a plothole covering another plothole, there is no easy way to go about this. Simply put ME3 needed more time because I mostly feel its the ending that got botched up when it comes to ME3. If there was one thing to pick that was botched up with ME3 it would be the ending. If could choose two things it would be the beginning and the ending of ME3 that was botched up for the simple fact that the beginning there shouldve been a trial to get us familiar and some dumb side missions that got us familiar with Earth allowing our character to actually see the families getting destroyed on Earth.
But Bioware i feel held back on ME3 with ME1's part which in turn hurt ME3's ending and ME3 overall. Simply put with that EA shouldve held ME3 back for ME1 release to the PS3.

[N7 Shadow 90]

Maxster_ wrote...

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

You said that you like that scene, and people who saying that this scene is a plothole annoys you. There is no argument in that.
Also, it is clearly you don't want to give any arguments, because you do not have a valid ones. Also read thread name - you really believe, that the reason for Harbringer not to shoot down the Normandy, is that you like that scene?

I gave two reasons.

Nah, you didn't. You just stated that those reasons are irrelevant to you. Also, you didn't read the thread.
So tell me, why exactly you came to this thread?

1. I never said that those resons were irrelevent.
2. I did read the thread.
3.  I came here to express my feelings. Just like you. (And in a more civil way.)

Also, tell me why you are on the ME3 forums. Aren't forums supposed to be for fans? Everything you have said has been negative.

1. You did, when you offered 2 diametral opposite reasons, and stated that it is a brilliant scene, and everyone should appreciate that.
That clearly shows, that reason is irrelevant to you.

2. So why exactly you are repeating those retarded "reasons"?
If reaper iff is working that way, that reapers can't see Normandy at point blank range - 1) reapers are completely retarted, having no sensors, and easily fooled. 2) Entire priority:earth is completely unneeded, because you just need to go right to the beam on Normandy, and unload entire squad, and support troops there 3) Whoever came up with that mission(I presume that was Hackett), is completely retarded, and couldn't even promoted to a rank higher than lieutenant.

If Harbringer is just not destroyed the Normandy, it makes him completely retarded, because exploded normandy would be much more effective, than shooting individual soldiers. Also, priority:earth is still completely unneeded.

3. Yeah, that why you said that people that thinks not like you, annoys you. And offered nothing related to the topic.

4. Of course, i'm here just to annoy you. And also, the existance of people that eat everything they served, without questions or doubts, annoys me. Especially when sci-fi is on the menu.
Being serious, i like ME universe, and ME1 especially. And i despise that standalone pseudo-rpg shooter with auto-dialogue that called "ME3".
As for you assumption, that forums should be only for yes-man - that was actually funny, thanks
Also, look that those yes-man helped SWTOR, that should give you some clues

1. If I thought this was an actual plot hole then i would not like the scene as much, and I never said that 'everyone' should appreciate it. I simply said that it's a shame that hardly anybody appreciates it, because, in my opinion it is an awesome scene.
2. What's to say the Normandy wouldn't of got shot down by Reaper troops? And you really think they are going to fit enough support troops in the Normandy?
3. I said that it annoys me when people say this is a plot hole, because it is not one. I am talking about Harby not shooting down the Normandy specificly. I think that it's clear that Harby was trying to stop people getting to the beam. Why would he bother to shoot the Normandy and let people get to the beam?
4. As I have said I would not like the scene as much if I genuinely considered it a plot hole. And the fact that you like ME1 doesn't tell me why you are on the ME3 forums. If you don't like ME3 then fair enough, but is there honestly not anything better for you to do than spending your time on the forums of game you don't like complaining?

[N7 Shadow 90]

Sorry for derailing your thread Eterna5. It was unintentional.

[FOX216BC]

Well the collectors shot down the first Normandy and look what happend to them.
Harby just didn't like the idea of a Normandy SR-3 kicking his ass.

Actually, i don't know and it doesn't bother me anyway

[Maxster_]

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

N7 Shadow 90 wrote...

You said that you like that scene, and people who saying that this scene is a plothole annoys you. There is no argument in that.
Also, it is clearly you don't want to give any arguments, because you do not have a valid ones. Also read thread name - you really believe, that the reason for Harbringer not to shoot down the Normandy, is that you like that scene?

I gave two reasons.

Nah, you didn't. You just stated that those reasons are irrelevant to you. Also, you didn't read the thread.
So tell me, why exactly you came to this thread?

1. I never said that those resons were irrelevent.
2. I did read the thread.
3.  I came here to express my feelings. Just like you. (And in a more civil way.)

Also, tell me why you are on the ME3 forums. Aren't forums supposed to be for fans? Everything you have said has been negative.

1. You did, when you offered 2 diametral opposite reasons, and stated that it is a brilliant scene, and everyone should appreciate that.
That clearly shows, that reason is irrelevant to you.

2. So why exactly you are repeating those retarded "reasons"?
If reaper iff is working that way, that reapers can't see Normandy at point blank range - 1) reapers are completely retarted, having no sensors, and easily fooled. 2) Entire priority:earth is completely unneeded, because you just need to go right to the beam on Normandy, and unload entire squad, and support troops there 3) Whoever came up with that mission(I presume that was Hackett), is completely retarded, and couldn't even promoted to a rank higher than lieutenant.

If Harbringer is just not destroyed the Normandy, it makes him completely retarded, because exploded normandy would be much more effective, than shooting individual soldiers. Also, priority:earth is still completely unneeded.

3. Yeah, that why you said that people that thinks not like you, annoys you. And offered nothing related to the topic.

4. Of course, i'm here just to annoy you. And also, the existance of people that eat everything they served, without questions or doubts, annoys me. Especially when sci-fi is on the menu.
Being serious, i like ME universe, and ME1 especially. And i despise that standalone pseudo-rpg shooter with auto-dialogue that called "ME3".
As for you assumption, that forums should be only for yes-man - that was actually funny, thanks
Also, look that those yes-man helped SWTOR, that should give you some clues

1. If I thought this was an actual plot hole then i would not like the scene as much, and I never said that 'everyone' should appreciate it. I simply said that it's a shame that hardly anybody appreciates it, because, in my opinion it is an awesome scene.
2. What's to say the Normandy wouldn't of got shot down by Reaper troops? And you really think they are going to fit enough support troops in the Normandy?
3. I said that it annoys me when people say this is a plot hole, because it is not one. I am talking about Harby not shooting down the Normandy specificly. I think that it's clear that Harby was trying to stop people getting to the beam. Why would he bother to shoot the Normandy and let people get to the beam?
4. As I have said I would not like the scene as much if I genuinely considered it a plot hole. And the fact that you like ME1 doesn't tell me why you are on the ME3 forums. If you don't like ME3 then fair enough, but is there honestly not anything better for you to do than spending your time on the forums of game you don't like complaining?

1. Plot holes are plot holes, they are objective. Your opinion are not. If you like to cover your eyes, or just don't know anything about ME lore - that is your decision, that have nothing to do with objectiveness.
I'm saying that this entire scene, is completely retarded, as entire priority:earth is completely unneeded, thus making commanding officers of the allied fleets complete idiots. If you did read the thread, why you didn't objecting real points, and just repeating same points, that already proved as false.

2. Yeah, military frigate grade shields penetrated by hand weapons, sure thing. That is why airplanes easily shut down by AK from 5 km, and tanks stopped by 9mm pistols.
As for enough support troops - sure, it would be like 50 more than in existing ending, encluding extraordinary specialists like Shepard(unwounded), Garrus, Vega, and Tali.

3. I like how you completely ignored explosion of Normandy, that would simultaneously destroy a lot more than single soldier by shot, also completely stopping entire retarded advance.
It is a plothole, and a glaring one. You just choose to ignore it.

4. Don't tell me what i should do with my time. If you are so annoyed - just deal with it.
I'm getting fun from my purchase, just the other way.

[tvman099]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

As for the stealth, it's only the prevention of blackbody emissions. Normandy can't stay stealthy indefinitely, since the heat generated must be discharged eventually. Also, consider the extraction of Primarch Victus from Menae. The engines are clearly running, so the stealth argument goes out the window.

The Normandy's stealth won't work in the atmosphere due to heat generated from friction. Take, for example, Mars. Despite Reaper signatures all around, none attacked the Normandy.

The Normandy's stealth system doesn't work against Reapers anyway. At the beginning of ME2 the Normandy was detected and destroyed by the Collectors while in stealth mode.

[babachewie]

FOX216BC wrote...

Well the collectors shot down the first Normandy and look what happend to them.
Harby just didn't like the idea of a Normandy SR-3 kicking his ass.

Actually, i don't know and it doesn't bother me anyway

i dont know why it should bother anybody to be honest