343 réponses à ce sujet

[plfranke]

I'm a big fan of your daily hate threads but this one just doesn't make any sense at all. Take for instance, the Reaper on Rannoch who could not kill a lone human in tight quarters, how is that at all more powerful than Sovereign whose powers have already been listed here or Harbinger who could control the collectors from dark space?

[Mahrac]

Eterna5 wrote...

LucasShark wrote...

huge snip

They attempt to wipe out all traces of past civillizations, you can't do that without a lot of destruction. And no, this "Contrived" power has always been their. We've just used contrived reasons to stop them. 

Except that in the past it was always 

1: capture the Citadel and get knowledge of where the population is
2: lock the relays
3: keep all systems except for ones that have been compleatly conquored isolated
4: open a new relay and use indoctrinated agents to weaken strongpoints
5: repeat 3 and 4, until all life is gone

In ME3 it's

1: steamroll the galaxy

Modifié par Mahrac, 03 octobre 2012 - 03:02 .

[Siran]

You're forgetting, that Sovereign could only be destroyed because his shields failed after Shepard kills Saren. So yeah, even in ME1 they were that powerful. Didn't even doubt for a second these ships were monstrous. If anything ME3 made them weaker, since you see them get damaged and destroyed in several scenes. But this is explained with Thanix cannon-technology being more readily available. So I don't see OP's point.

Modifié par Siran, 03 octobre 2012 - 03:06 .

[cyrexwingblade]

I would actually argue the opposite, OP. Reapers got nerfed into oblivion in ME3 by comparison.

Before ME3, we're dealing one Reaper per game. Sovereign, after his escort is wiped out, held off an entire alliance fleet and the entire Citadel defense fleet until Shepard fried its defense systems because it made the mistake of linking Saren's body to its core systems.

Harbinger slave-controlled an entire population of Prothean Husks as a preliminary and preparation phase to the full invasion. The Reapers are always experimenting in effeciency. Terror tactics, bio-weapons, etc. are just as popular with them as blunt 'thanix nuke your face'.

In ME3, we watch Reapers (Sovereign class, no less) get blown right the F up by 2-5 battlecruisers in direct combat.

The space-battle in Priority Earth should be a slaughter, not a fight, but the united fleet is in fact holding ground.

That was one of the big problems. ME3 actually presented conventional victory as possible *visually*, while constantly telling us it was impossible via plot/dialogue. It was disjointed and annoying, and made the Crucible harder to accept. I don't mind mcguffins, so I just ran with it.

[SNascimento]

cyrexwingblade wrote...

I would actually argue the opposite, OP. Reapers got nerfed into oblivion in ME3 by comparison.

Before ME3, we're dealing one Reaper per game. Sovereign, after his escort is wiped out, held off an entire alliance fleet and the entire Citadel defense fleet until Shepard fried its defense systems because it made the mistake of linking Saren's body to its core systems.

Harbinger slave-controlled an entire population of Prothean Husks as a preliminary and preparation phase to the full invasion. The Reapers are always experimenting in effeciency. Terror tactics, bio-weapons, etc. are just as popular with them as blunt 'thanix nuke your face'.

In ME3, we watch Reapers (Sovereign class, no less) get blown right the F up by 2-5 battlecruisers in direct combat.

The space-battle in Priority Earth should be a slaughter, not a fight, but the united fleet is in fact holding ground.

That was one of the big problems. ME3 actually presented conventional victory as possible *visually*, while constantly telling us it was impossible via plot/dialogue. It was disjointed and annoying, and made the Crucible harder to accept. I don't mind mcguffins, so I just ran with it.

.
Pretty much this.
.
About making victory seems "visually" possible, there are buts. People look to much is small victories and forget the bigger picture. 

[xxskyshadowxx]

Gruntburner wrote...

grey_wind wrote...

Gruntburner wrote...

Darn, I could have sworn I saw hundreds of reaper ships that looked like Sovereign appear in dark space at the end of ME2. But that can't be true, because if it were that would mean that there would be an entire fleet of ships that could essentially tear through most fleets single handed.

I know, right?
I mean, you see SO many Reapers in that final cutscene in ME2, that if you counted them their numbers would show how numerous they are, how the Reapers alone outnumber every ship in the galaxy put together, how there are a grand total of....


295 Reapers.

At that point in time, only one Reaper had been seen in combat with another fleet... and it absolutely decimated everything in its path.  Not to mention that Sovereign was only destroyed after Shepard killed the Saren avatar, causing its shields to fall.

And Shepard learned all of nothing from that tactic.  In ME3 Shepard is dumb as heck...I blame lack of sleep from dreaming of some kid he/she didn't know over and over again. But the same tactic could have worked in ME3 as well...considering he/she was up in a room alone with the brain controlling the Reapers.

[ioannisdenton]

Battle of the citadel somehow in my pmemory proves that it took fleest to take down sovereign. Plus
The reapers have beem reaping thousands of cycles, each cycle makes them stronger, gain more experience. What is so special about the conventional means of this cycle?
NOTHING

[shepskisaac]

LucasShark wrote...

Plain and simple: up until Bioware had to force the crucible into existance or relevance, the Reapers were never as strong as they claimed.  Period.

Not at all. You're just saying it because they didn't give you happy conventional victory ending

[Ithurael]

This post may go unnoticed

OP One reaper cannot defeat a galactic armada. Hundreds and Thousands of them can.

Also, I don't know if you have discussed or thought about this. But the reapers in ME3 were - essentially - nerfed.

In ME1 Sovy had lasers on each tentacle. In ME3 (most likely to allow them to fight on planets) they only fired out of a laser at the "mouth". Imagine how devastating the reapers in ME3 would have been if they had the mouth laser for planet warfare and the tentacle lasers for space warfare?

[Humakt83]

IsaacShep wrote...

LucasShark wrote...

Plain and simple: up until Bioware had to force the crucible into existance or relevance, the Reapers were never as strong as they claimed.  Period.

Not at all. You're just saying it because they didn't give you happy conventional victory ending

Maybe he just has an obsessive need to rant on daily basis.

[MegaSovereign]

grey_wind wrote...

Gruntburner wrote...

Darn, I could have sworn I saw hundreds of reaper ships that looked like Sovereign appear in dark space at the end of ME2. But that can't be true, because if it were that would mean that there would be an entire fleet of ships that could essentially tear through most fleets single handed.

I know, right?
I mean, you see SO many Reapers in that final cutscene in ME2, that if you counted them their numbers would show how numerous they are, how the Reapers alone outnumber every ship in the galaxy put together, how there are a grand total of....


295 Reapers.

The cycle is at least 1 billion years old.

There are tens of thousands of capital Reaper ships. Even more Destroyers.

[Seboist]

plfranke wrote...

I'm a big fan of your daily hate threads but this one just doesn't make any sense at all. Take for instance, the Reaper on Rannoch who could not kill a lone human in tight quarters, how is that at all more powerful than Sovereign whose powers have already been listed here or Harbinger who could control the collectors from dark space?

Don't forget the idiot Reaper who was taken out by a worm because it didn't have the sense to fly up. That's as pathethic as aquaman drowning in a tub.

[dreman9999]

Maxster_ wrote...

If they are so strong they don't need entire citadel trap and shutting down relay network.
And that was hilariously illustrated in ME3, when they didn't even bother to come to a Citadel, and when they got it, they don't even bother to shut down relay network.

Most people who ask this don't realize that the trap is there so the reaper don't kill us. Normal reaper forces kill more organics then the trap. They are atacking directly because theyare forced to.

[LilLino]

Seboist wrote...

plfranke wrote...

I'm a big fan of your daily hate threads but this one just doesn't make any sense at all. Take for instance, the Reaper on Rannoch who could not kill a lone human in tight quarters, how is that at all more powerful than Sovereign whose powers have already been listed here or Harbinger who could control the collectors from dark space?

Don't forget the idiot Reaper who was taken out by a worm because it didn't have the sense to fly up. That's as pathethic as aquaman drowning in a tub.

OH MY GOD! Player Character does highly unrealistic things in a game where he's the only one who can save THE WORLD and WINS. Who the hell would have thought.

And yes they were potrayed. Sovereign only died because his shields were down. He kicked ass of entire human fleet and kicked some Turian ass on the way.

[dreman9999]

Mahrac wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

LucasShark wrote...

huge snip

They attempt to wipe out all traces of past civillizations, you can't do that without a lot of destruction. And no, this "Contrived" power has always been their. We've just used contrived reasons to stop them. 

Except that in the past it was always 

1: capture the Citadel and get knowledge of where the population is
2: lock the relays
3: keep all systems except for ones that have been compleatly conquored isolated
4: open a new relay and use indoctrinated agents to weaken strongpoints
5: repeat 3 and 4, until all life is gone

In ME3 it's

1: steamroll the galaxy

The trap is meant to catch organics, not have them be take down easier.

[CINCTuchanka]

Quite the contrary, BioWare basically wrote themselves into a corner by making Sovereign so powerful.

The Crucible ending, for all its flaws, is still much better than a xconventional victory ending. And think about it, in what way wpuld Shepard be important in a conventional victory? He is just one dude. The point of the ending, as contrived as it had to be is that Shepard's choice matters.

[jkflipflopDAO]

LucasShark wrote...

Plain and simple: up until Bioware had to force the crucible into existance or relevance, the Reapers were never as strong as they claimed.  Period.

Where can I support this?  Right back in ME1 where all this started.

YES: Sovreign was the most powerful ship in the known galaxy at the time.  Yet: Vigil makes particular note about how even it could not storm the citadel on its own.  The battle of the citadel consists primarily of a battle against a massive Geth armada Sovreign brings along.  Yes Sovreign has a big gun, but that's about it.

The weakness of the reapers is also demonstrated in their grand plan and tactics: it is based on suprise and isolation, not outright warfare (which apparently got retconed somewhere).  The whole `we will darken the skies`quote was a BLUFF!  Yes they could do it litterally: but by attacking system by system, one or two at a time.  How do we know thisÉ  The Prothean campaign took centuries, CENTURIES!  Not the weeks or months that the currrent one does.  They are also implied on being dependant on their `farmed`civilizations not getting too far along, or taking their own technological path, as that would make them a threat.

Cut to ME2, and we find still more evidence to them being far weaker then they claim.  We both reverse engineer a weapon from Sovreign, and then use it to KO a reaper-built ship (the collector cruiser) in 2 shots.  And that`s a frigate versus a super-cruiser.  We see the Leviathan of Dis, which was killed in 1 shot from a planet-based weapon, a conventional planet-based weapon.

The Reapers got a massive shot of power-roids sometime at the start of ME3, and apparently some stupidity pills right along with it.  Their new tactics make no sense: why are they stomping about on planets godzilla styleÉ  All they are doing is making their own job harder.

Even within ME3, Reaper invulnerability faulters whenever it is required for dramatic effect, most notably use of a single shot from a Cain to destroy the `Hades canon`, which IS a reaper destroyer.

Sovereign destroyed an entire fleet of warships, by himself, while sitting still and taking fire, while hacking the station, while also remote controlling Saren.

He sounds pretty damned powerful to me.

[dreman9999]

jkflipflopDAO wrote...



Sovereign destroyed an entire fleet of warships, by himself, while sitting still and taking fire, while hacking the station, while also remote controlling Saren.

He sounds pretty damned powerful to me.

And people say we can conventionally defeat a fleet of that.<_<

[What a Succulent Ass]

dreman9999 wrote...

The trap is meant to catch organics, not have them be take down easier.

?????

What even does this mean?

[grey_wind]

IsaacShep wrote...

LucasShark wrote...

Plain and simple: up until Bioware had to force the crucible into existance or relevance, the Reapers were never as strong as they claimed.  Period.

Not at all. You're just saying it because they didn't give you happy conventional victory ending

You do realize that a conventional victory would have cost more than any of the other three endings?
In fact, a conventional victory would make the casualties in Destroy look positively peachy......

Modifié par grey_wind, 03 octobre 2012 - 05:15 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 lol yeah they were.

Sovereign took on multiple fleets at a time and took out many, MANY ships before finally going down.

ME3 Reapers are really no stronger than they have always been.

[dreman9999]

Random Jerkface wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

The trap is meant to catch organics, not have them be take down easier.

?????

What even does this mean?

The directive of the reaper/catalyst is to perserve life no matter the cost. A full assult my get the job done but it puts a danger to the exsistance of the race they are trying to perserve. To take a race and perserve them with the least ammount of death to that race trap is made.
Think sticky tape traps use to catch flys alive in stead of using a fly swater. In short , the reaper are holding back.

Modifié par dreman9999, 03 octobre 2012 - 05:25 .

[dreman9999]

grey_wind wrote...

IsaacShep wrote...

LucasShark wrote...

Plain and simple: up until Bioware had to force the crucible into existance or relevance, the Reapers were never as strong as they claimed.  Period.

Not at all. You're just saying it because they didn't give you happy conventional victory ending

You do realize that a conventional victory would have cost more than any of the other three endings?
In fact, a conventional victory would make the casualties in Destroy look positively peachy......

Your Shepard would not lose anything directly in an ending like that. Everyone else would have loss.

[plfranke]

LilLino wrote...

Seboist wrote...

plfranke wrote...

I'm a big fan of your daily hate threads but this one just doesn't make any sense at all. Take for instance, the Reaper on Rannoch who could not kill a lone human in tight quarters, how is that at all more powerful than Sovereign whose powers have already been listed here or Harbinger who could control the collectors from dark space?

Don't forget the idiot Reaper who was taken out by a worm because it didn't have the sense to fly up. That's as pathethic as aquaman drowning in a tub.

OH MY GOD! Player Character does highly unrealistic things in a game where he's the only one who can save THE WORLD and WINS. Who the hell would have thought.

And yes they were potrayed. Sovereign only died because his shields were down. He kicked ass of entire human fleet and kicked some Turian ass on the way.

There's a difference between the player doing something unrealistic suicide mission style, and doing something unrealistic like combat rolling away from the laser of a Reaper.