451 réponses à ce sujet

[dreman9999]

tvman099 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

tvman099 wrote...

If by conventional you mean no space magic or similar contrivance, then yes. Sovereign made it quite clear in ME1 that the galaxy's fleets in their current state were pretty pitiful next to the Reapers. I had originally figured that perhaps the key to defeating them would lie in discovering information about their origins and creation. Even the concept of a crucible-like device as a means to victory isn't a bad idea if integrated into the plot rather than pulled out of nowhere 15 minutes into the final act. Something extra was needed for victory.

THis basicly coming down to "I don't like the catalyst".

Disliking the Catalyst is a side effect of having functioning brain cells and a preference for good writing, yes.

Or just not getting that the ending would be the same with out it.

[Hey]

dreman9999 wrote...

drayfish wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Xerxes52 wrote...

I did OP. The Reaper's MO was divide and conquer. Paralyze all traffic and communication via the Citadel, then harvest the galaxy piecemeal. That was their main advantage, and it was logical to think that the Reaper's did so because they didn't have the capacity to take on a united galaxy.

ME1 and ME2 definitely felt like they were leading to a DA:O in space (which would have been awesome).

Do you know that DA:O was also an unconventional victory?

Probably not the best example to use to for your argument since DA:O did indeed allow the player to have a genuine impact upon the ending, and to express their morality in a dire situation: you could choose whether to die a hero or possibly condemn civilisation; could select whether to screw over your friends or pay the ultimate price yourself; and you get to kill your enemy rather than embrace their beliefs.

Mass Effect, in contrast, lets you agree with the Cataylst's racist premise (which insults the very unified galaxy your gathered together to fight him) and allows you to press one of three arbitrary magic buttons that that grant you a wish with a terrible price...

There was more going on in DA:O than Eugenic Pick-A-Box.

That does not defer the fact that the end of DA:O was not a convention victory. You did not overwhelmed the dark spawn with you forces...You just killed the magic arch demaon with the magic graywarden.

You stating how they dealt with moral does not counter that.....Also, what destroy and control does is not dictated by the catalyst. Only synthesis. Your issue is with what ever race made the crucible with destroy and control.

to b fair there was a lot of choice at the end of DAO.  You could take it for the entire "team" and there is no masive change to Thedas... yo.  

or you can be "sneaky and ****" and go through Morrigans ritual and sill no major change to Thedas - at least not that we know, yo.... Maybe the archdemon = sinthesis in the long run tho - I jus dont know.. 

Personally I love having Logain kill himself for the cause.  LOTS OF CHOICES AND NONE OF THEM INVOLVE CHANGING ALL LIFE BECUSE A LIL BOY DICTATES IT.  

[Baldrick67]

Considering the Take back Earth Trailer had Shepard leading tanks, soldiers and ships into battle against reaper forces then yes it wasn't a stretch of the imagination to believe we would triumph only when united.

[dreman9999]

Festae9 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

drayfish wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Xerxes52 wrote...

I did OP. The Reaper's MO was divide and conquer. Paralyze all traffic and communication via the Citadel, then harvest the galaxy piecemeal. That was their main advantage, and it was logical to think that the Reaper's did so because they didn't have the capacity to take on a united galaxy.

ME1 and ME2 definitely felt like they were leading to a DA:O in space (which would have been awesome).

Do you know that DA:O was also an unconventional victory?

Probably not the best example to use to for your argument since DA:O did indeed allow the player to have a genuine impact upon the ending, and to express their morality in a dire situation: you could choose whether to die a hero or possibly condemn civilisation; could select whether to screw over your friends or pay the ultimate price yourself; and you get to kill your enemy rather than embrace their beliefs.

Mass Effect, in contrast, lets you agree with the Cataylst's racist premise (which insults the very unified galaxy your gathered together to fight him) and allows you to press one of three arbitrary magic buttons that that grant you a wish with a terrible price...

There was more going on in DA:O than Eugenic Pick-A-Box.

That does not defer the fact that the end of DA:O was not a convention victory. You did not overwhelmed the dark spawn with you forces...You just killed the magic arch demaon with the magic graywarden.

You stating how they dealt with moral does not counter that.....Also, what destroy and control does is not dictated by the catalyst. Only synthesis. Your issue is with what ever race made the crucible with destroy and control.

to b fair there was a lot of choice at the end of DAO.  You could take it for the entire "team" and there is no masive change to Thedas... yo.  

or you can be "sneaky and ****" and go through Morrigans ritual and sill no major change to Thedas - at least not that we know, yo.... Maybe the archdemon = sinthesis in the long run tho - I jus dont know.. 

Personally I love having Logain kill himself for the cause.  LOTS OF CHOICES AND NONE OF THEM INVOLVE CHANGING ALL LIFE BECUSE A LIL BOY DICTATES IT.  

1.If you don't like synthesis...Don't pick it.

2.Control and destory are still viable options. Destroy still hands the cost winning   the war to someone else, like the god baby choice did.
The difference is that you see the cost now more then later.

Modifié par dreman9999, 04 octobre 2012 - 08:40 .

[dreman9999]

Baldrick67 wrote...

Considering the Take back Earth Trailer had Shepard leading tanks, soldiers and ships into battle against reaper forces then yes it wasn't a stretch of the imagination to believe we would triumph only when united.

That only shows that you fight a war, not win it conventionally. Added, it only shwed you killing of husk , not reapers.

[Hey]

dreman9999 wrote...

Festae9 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

drayfish wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Xerxes52 wrote...

I did OP. The Reaper's MO was divide and conquer. Paralyze all traffic and communication via the Citadel, then harvest the galaxy piecemeal. That was their main advantage, and it was logical to think that the Reaper's did so because they didn't have the capacity to take on a united galaxy.

ME1 and ME2 definitely felt like they were leading to a DA:O in space (which would have been awesome).

Do you know that DA:O was also an unconventional victory?

Probably not the best example to use to for your argument since DA:O did indeed allow the player to have a genuine impact upon the ending, and to express their morality in a dire situation: you could choose whether to die a hero or possibly condemn civilisation; could select whether to screw over your friends or pay the ultimate price yourself; and you get to kill your enemy rather than embrace their beliefs.

Mass Effect, in contrast, lets you agree with the Cataylst's racist premise (which insults the very unified galaxy your gathered together to fight him) and allows you to press one of three arbitrary magic buttons that that grant you a wish with a terrible price...

There was more going on in DA:O than Eugenic Pick-A-Box.

That does not defer the fact that the end of DA:O was not a convention victory. You did not overwhelmed the dark spawn with you forces...You just killed the magic arch demaon with the magic graywarden.

You stating how they dealt with moral does not counter that.....Also, what destroy and control does is not dictated by the catalyst. Only synthesis. Your issue is with what ever race made the crucible with destroy and control.

to b fair there was a lot of choice at the end of DAO.  You could take it for the entire "team" and there is no masive change to Thedas... yo.  

or you can be "sneaky and ****" and go through Morrigans ritual and sill no major change to Thedas - at least not that we know, yo.... Maybe the archdemon = sinthesis in the long run tho - I jus dont know.. 

Personally I love having Logain kill himself for the cause.  LOTS OF CHOICES AND NONE OF THEM INVOLVE CHANGING ALL LIFE BECUSE A LIL BOY DICTATES IT.  

1.If you don't like synthesis...Don't pick it.

2.Control and destory are still viable options. Destroy still hands the cost winning   the war to someone else, like the god baby choice did.
The difference is that you see the cost now more then later.

dreman - i dont mean to be forward or anything... but, do you smoke sherm?

[someguy1231]

United or not, the galaxy doesn't stand a chance against the Reapers in a conventional war. Remember in ME1, the entire Citadel fleet (a fleet consisting of many species) could barely even scratch a single Reaper, and Sovereign was only defeated because it weakened itself by making a mistake. In ME3 we have hundreds, if not thousands, of Reapers invading all over the galaxy.

Besides, consider how many times they've harvested the galaxy before. I'm sure there were many cycles which had exceptionally powerful individual species, and yet they were still defeated by the Reapers all the same. I refuse to believe that "unity" was all that was needed to beat them. The whole "United we can do anything!" aesop utterly fails when you're dealing with the Reapers.

[tvman099]

dreman9999 wrote...

tvman099 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

tvman099 wrote...

If by conventional you mean no space magic or similar contrivance, then yes. Sovereign made it quite clear in ME1 that the galaxy's fleets in their current state were pretty pitiful next to the Reapers. I had originally figured that perhaps the key to defeating them would lie in discovering information about their origins and creation. Even the concept of a crucible-like device as a means to victory isn't a bad idea if integrated into the plot rather than pulled out of nowhere 15 minutes into the final act. Something extra was needed for victory.

THis basicly coming down to "I don't like the catalyst".

Disliking the Catalyst is a side effect of having functioning brain cells and a preference for good writing, yes.

Or just not getting that the ending would be the same with out it.

That might be the most giant leap of logic I've ever seen. Did you even think before you posted that?

[Calamity]

Baldrick67 wrote...

Considering the Take back Earth Trailer had Shepard leading tanks, soldiers and ships into battle against reaper forces then yes it wasn't a stretch of the imagination to believe we would triumph only when united.

And in one of those they showed a drell that I thought was Thane fighting beside Shep...  Was disappointing that he died without rejoining the crew...

[drayfish]

dreman9999 wrote...

Festae9 wrote...

to b fair there was a lot of choice at the end of DAO.  You could take it for the entire "team" and there is no masive change to Thedas... yo.  

or you can be "sneaky and ****" and go through Morrigans ritual and sill no major change to Thedas - at least not that we know, yo.... Maybe the archdemon = sinthesis in the long run tho - I jus dont know.. 

Personally I love having Logain kill himself for the cause.  LOTS OF CHOICES AND NONE OF THEM INVOLVE CHANGING ALL LIFE BECUSE A LIL BOY DICTATES IT.  

1.If you don't like synthesis...Don't pick it.

2.Control and destory are still viable options. Destroy still hands the cost winning   the war to someone else, like the god baby choice did.
The difference is that you see the cost now more then later.

@ Festae9: Thanks. Indeed, that was precisely the point I was trying (and apparently somehow failing) to make.

@ Dremen9999: The distinct difference between Mass Effect and DA:O is that DA:O actually provides the player with choices that can genuinely reflect their moral outlook. (It remembers that it is meant to be an RGP.) Sacrifice yourself or others; trust Morigan or refuse her request; help set up a style of governance for the kingdom after the battle. Sacrifices must be made, but they reflect your vision for a better world, and do not necessarily require you to sacrifice your ethics - unless you want to.

In contrast, Mass Effect demands that you compromise your morals - unless you already don't care about the horrors that the game forces you to employ.

Choosing Synthesis, Control, or Destroy forces you to side with the enemy you are trying to defeat, agreeing with his premise that the conflict between synthetics and organics can only be ended with one of the Crucible's magic powers (which apparently he can offer, explain, and even petulantly switch off if you insult his widdle feewings).  It's a forced and lazy violation of the whole idea of unifying as a cooperative galactic force - one that (for many players) makes Shepard appear to be a hypocrite or a coward.

None of them reflect genuine moral complexity, just 'which hate crime is more palatable'?

[JBPBRC]

Calamity wrote...

Baldrick67 wrote...

Considering the Take back Earth Trailer had Shepard leading tanks, soldiers and ships into battle against reaper forces then yes it wasn't a stretch of the imagination to believe we would triumph only when united.

And in one of those they showed a drell that I thought was Thane fighting beside Shep...  Was disappointing that he died without rejoining the crew...

His poor room. Alone and isolated without its former owner. Its okay Life Support Room, mourn your fallen owner. Take solace in the fact that he died before the ending, saved by the grace of Marauder Shields.

[dbt-kenny]

To be honest YES

We were told there would be no off switch to the reapers and it was not looking like the catalyst was going to be some supper weapon. I was thinking it would do something like mess up there head and communication. Sort like give them a bad foggy head. So letting us beat them in normal conventional with every one working together. Clear one system then move on to the next and so on.

But we got a BIG OFF SWITCH

[zioninzion]

someguy1231 wrote...

United or not, the galaxy doesn't stand a chance against the Reapers in a conventional war. Remember in ME1, the entire Citadel fleet (a fleet consisting of many species) could barely even scratch a single Reaper, and Sovereign was only defeated because it weakened itself by making a mistake. In ME3 we have hundreds, if not thousands, of Reapers invading all over the galaxy.

Besides, consider how many times they've harvested the galaxy before. I'm sure there were many cycles which had exceptionally powerful individual species, and yet they were still defeated by the Reapers all the same. I refuse to believe that "unity" was all that was needed to beat them. The whole "United we can do anything!" aesop utterly fails when you're dealing with the Reapers.

I disagree with this premise. I can't remember where if it was in a Codex or a speech but somewhere they detail how many fleets it takes to take down a Reaper and if you add up the fleets the good guys had against the Reapers then it turns out it is entirely feasible. Sorry for lack of footnoting or sourcing

The Protheons lost because they had no one else and they were indoctrinated to believe they could control the reapers (another proof of IT ). This time round there are tons of species all united in the fight against the Reapers. Its a very different scenario in my opinion.

[GimmeDaGun]

MyChemicalBromance wrote...

To clarify: although all the races do come together to build the Crucible, and the Crucible is ultimately the collective work of many dead civilizations, it would have been really narrative-breaking for me if the Reapers could be defeated conventionally by "Teamwork."

This. 

The unity the OP is talking about is still a very significant theme in the trilogy (ending included). The Crucible is called the way it is because it is lterally a crucible of the talent and knowledge of many and the result and product of the effort of the whole galaxy and of many previous civilizations. I think it's a much stronger symbol then Shepard simply rallying "his army" against the reapers and winning in a huge bim-boom-battle. That would have been very cheap and we've seen such conclusions many times in Hollywood stories. 

Answering your question: Yes, I was expecting the "conventional victory through cooperation", but thank God it was handled with a lot more thought put into it. I still hated the original ending which was very lacking and seemed rushed, but with the EC it's almost perfect for me. 

[Seival]

I didn't expect conventional victory even before I managed to understand and love the endings' concept. And I definitely don't expect it now.

Conventional victory is not possible. Game itself states that clearly.

[GimmeDaGun]

zioninzion wrote...

someguy1231 wrote...

United or not, the galaxy doesn't stand a chance against the Reapers in a conventional war. Remember in ME1, the entire Citadel fleet (a fleet consisting of many species) could barely even scratch a single Reaper, and Sovereign was only defeated because it weakened itself by making a mistake. In ME3 we have hundreds, if not thousands, of Reapers invading all over the galaxy.

Besides, consider how many times they've harvested the galaxy before. I'm sure there were many cycles which had exceptionally powerful individual species, and yet they were still defeated by the Reapers all the same. I refuse to believe that "unity" was all that was needed to beat them. The whole "United we can do anything!" aesop utterly fails when you're dealing with the Reapers.

I disagree with this premise. I can't remember where if it was in a Codex or a speech but somewhere they detail how many fleets it takes to take down a Reaper and if you add up the fleets the good guys had against the Reapers then it turns out it is entirely feasible. Sorry for lack of footnoting or sourcing

The Protheons lost because they had no one else and they were indoctrinated to believe they could control the reapers (another proof of IT ). This time round there are tons of species all united in the fight against the Reapers. Its a very different scenario in my opinion.

The codex says that it takes an approximated number of 4 dreadnoughts simultaniously (the most powerful ships the galaxy has) to take down 1 reaper. According to the codex in the year 2186 (the year of the reaper invasion) there were  39 turian, 20 asari, 16 salarian, 9 human and 1 volus dreadnoughts. That's 85 dreadnoughts. One reaper can take out one dreadnought without any real effort. There are thousands of reapers (destroyers and supply-processing ships included). Do the math. 


IT is only wishful thinking for those who still can't deal with the way the story ended, just ast this new puzzle theory and the whole conventional victory debate. 

Modifié par GimmeDaGun, 04 octobre 2012 - 11:37 .

[freekkiller9]

The one thing I see people keep forgetting is the fact that this is the only cycle (that uses the relays) thus far that has been able to use the relays even after the Reapers invaded. It's what Vigil told you in ME1. With every other cycle, the reapers used the Citadel's Relay to enter the galaxy, blew everything on it to pieces, signaled the Keepers to shut down the Relay network, and eradicated all spacefaring races, system by system. However, because our Prothean friends brainwashed the Keepers for us, they couldn't. That's what makes our cycle different.

Modifié par freekkiller9, 04 octobre 2012 - 11:38 .

[GimmeDaGun]

freekkiller9 wrote...

The one thing I see people keep forgetting is the fact that this is the only cycle (that uses the relays) thus far that has been able to use the relays even after the Reapers invaded. It's what Vigil told you in ME1. With every other cycle, the reapers used the Citadel's Relay to enter the galaxy, blew everything on it to pieces, shut down the Relay network, and eradicated all spacefaring races, system by system. However, because our Prothean friends brainwashed the Keepers for us, they couldn't. That's what makes our cycle different.

Yes, a significant tactical advantage, but it won't make you win a war. The operational relay system makes it possible to finisht the Crucible so fast and to gather such a huge force to deliver it to the Citadell. Otherwise the civilizations of the current cycle would be toasted just like any previous ones. It wins some time and resources and gives a few more strategic opportunities, but the reapers aren't dependent of the relays themselves: it's just a tool for them to speed up the cycle and to make the harvest more effortless, but it won't stop or defeat them. 

[Nicodemus]

GimmeDaGun wrote...

zioninzion wrote...

someguy1231 wrote...

United or not, the galaxy doesn't stand a chance against the Reapers in a conventional war. Remember in ME1, the entire Citadel fleet (a fleet consisting of many species) could barely even scratch a single Reaper, and Sovereign was only defeated because it weakened itself by making a mistake. In ME3 we have hundreds, if not thousands, of Reapers invading all over the galaxy.

Besides, consider how many times they've harvested the galaxy before. I'm sure there were many cycles which had exceptionally powerful individual species, and yet they were still defeated by the Reapers all the same. I refuse to believe that "unity" was all that was needed to beat them. The whole "United we can do anything!" aesop utterly fails when you're dealing with the Reapers.

I disagree with this premise. I can't remember where if it was in a Codex or a speech but somewhere they detail how many fleets it takes to take down a Reaper and if you add up the fleets the good guys had against the Reapers then it turns out it is entirely feasible. Sorry for lack of footnoting or sourcing

The Protheons lost because they had no one else and they were indoctrinated to believe they could control the reapers (another proof of IT ). This time round there are tons of species all united in the fight against the Reapers. Its a very different scenario in my opinion.

The codex says that it takes an approximated number of 4 dreadnoughts simultaniously (the most powerful ships the galaxy has) to take down 1 reaper. According to the codex in the year 2186 (the year of the reaper invasion) there were  39 turian, 20 asari, 16 salarian, 9 human and 1 volus dreadnoughts. That's 85 dreadnoughts. One reaper can take out one dreadnought without any real effort. There are thousands of reapers (destroyers and supply-processing ships included). Do the math. 


IT is only wishful thinking for those who still can't deal with the way the story ended, just ast this new puzzle theory and the whole conventional victory debate. 

Hmmm didn't it say in the game that with all the weapons the Quarians had put onto their liveships they were effectively Dreadnoughts too?

I agree that there was a limited number of Dreadnoughts available for use, but I don't think the entire Reaper Armada was at Earth only a portion of it, as they were still off reaping the rest of the Galaxy. A conventional victory could have been possible IF the crucible had been a local area weapon that had weakened the Reapers in it's vicinity. None of this spread through out the galaxy via relay magic rubbish that we got.

It would have made the game make more sense if that had been the case, Crucible + Combined fleets = Earth conventional victory, but the rest of the Galaxy is still under attack.

Modifié par Nicodemus, 04 octobre 2012 - 11:57 .

[drayfish]

Seival wrote...

I didn't expect conventional victory even before I managed to understand and love the endings' concept. And I definitely don't expect it now.

Conventional victory is not possible. Game itself states that clearly.

Yep.

Just like the Suicide Mission in ME2 was impossible because the game said it was.  And we never understood what motivated the Reapers, because both ME1 and ME2 said we wouldn't.  And we never gathered the galactic armada together because everyone in ME3 said we couldn't.

[zioninzion]

GimmeDaGun wrote...

zioninzion wrote...

someguy1231 wrote...

United or not, the galaxy doesn't stand a chance against the Reapers in a conventional war. Remember in ME1, the entire Citadel fleet (a fleet consisting of many species) could barely even scratch a single Reaper, and Sovereign was only defeated because it weakened itself by making a mistake. In ME3 we have hundreds, if not thousands, of Reapers invading all over the galaxy.

Besides, consider how many times they've harvested the galaxy before. I'm sure there were many cycles which had exceptionally powerful individual species, and yet they were still defeated by the Reapers all the same. I refuse to believe that "unity" was all that was needed to beat them. The whole "United we can do anything!" aesop utterly fails when you're dealing with the Reapers.

I disagree with this premise. I can't remember where if it was in a Codex or a speech but somewhere they detail how many fleets it takes to take down a Reaper and if you add up the fleets the good guys had against the Reapers then it turns out it is entirely feasible. Sorry for lack of footnoting or sourcing

The Protheons lost because they had no one else and they were indoctrinated to believe they could control the reapers (another proof of IT ). This time round there are tons of species all united in the fight against the Reapers. Its a very different scenario in my opinion.

The codex says that it takes an approximated number of 4 dreadnoughts simultaniously (the most powerful ships the galaxy has) to take down 1 reaper. According to the codex in the year 2186 (the year of the reaper invasion) there were  39 turian, 20 asari, 16 salarian, 9 human and 1 volus dreadnoughts. That's 85 dreadnoughts. One reaper can take out one dreadnought without any real effort. There are thousands of reapers (destroyers and supply-processing ships included). Do the math. 


IT is only wishful thinking for those who still can't deal with the way the story ended, just ast this new puzzle theory and the whole conventional victory debate. 

First of all I think IT is absolutely true and is not based on wishful thinking. It is an extremely well put together theory (empathis on theory) to explain the events and possible twists the story took and may took.

Wishful thinking is wishing for something that has no real basis in reality. We didnt make the rules or the subplots we are using what we have. So unless your going to invalidate the Codex when it says.....:

"Although clearly technologically superior to the Citadel forces, the
Reapers have experienced casualties in the battles across the galaxy.
This indicates that, theoretically, with the right intelligence,
weapons, and strategy, the Reapers could be defeated."

....We think conventional victory. Not space magic. The whole conventional debate is completely legitimate. Everything else up to this point has been won conventionally. So now were wishful thinking for having expected conventional victory.

As for doing the math, your numbers refer to capital ships and not destroyers. We don't know the exact numbers on earth as far as I know. Here are some facts that greatly prove conventional victory is possible (via the Codex):

1) "The barriers of a Reaper destroyer are less formidable than those of a
capital ship. It is possible for a single cruiser or many fighters to
disable or demolish a destroyer if they can get within range before they
are themselves destroyed.
"

2) "The Reapers' energy sources are not infinite. For example, to land on a
planet, a Reaper must substantially reduce its mass. This transfer of
power to its mass effect generators leaves the Reaper's kinetic barriers
at only partial strength.
"

So we have destroyers capable of being destroyed by a single cruiser and we have landed Reapers at depleted strength going up against a united galaxy.

You dont have to agree but you dont have to cast it as wishful thinking. A worm took down the Reaper on Tuchanka.

[d1ta]

Yes OP, you're not alone in this one.

I agree that there was a limited number of Dreadnoughts available for use, but I don't think the entire Reaper Armada was at Earth only a portion of it, as they were still off reaping the rest of the Galaxy. A conventional victory could have been possible IF the crucible had been a local area weapon that had weakened the Reapers in it's vicinity. None of this spread through out the galaxy via relay magic rubbish that we got.

It would have made the game make more sense if that had been the case, Crucible + Combined fleets = Earth conventional victory, but the rest of the Galaxy is still under attack.

Nicodemus, you can read my mind? Coz that is exactly what I had thought would happen in ME3.

[zioninzion]

d1ta wrote...

Yes OP, you're not alone in this one.

I agree that there was a limited number of Dreadnoughts available for use, but I don't think the entire Reaper Armada was at Earth only a portion of it, as they were still off reaping the rest of the Galaxy. A conventional victory could have been possible IF the crucible had been a local area weapon that had weakened the Reapers in it's vicinity. None of this spread through out the galaxy via relay magic rubbish that we got.

It would have made the game make more sense if that had been the case, Crucible + Combined fleets = Earth conventional victory, but the rest of the Galaxy is still under attack.

Nicodemus, you can read my mind? Coz that is exactly what I had thought would happen in ME3.

Then we could have had the cut scene where inspired by the almost impossible unified victory on Earth, the unified Alien fleets go from planet to planet finishing off the job. Nahh lets just have wierd space magic

[Podge 90]

I expected uniting the galaxy would play a part yes. I was also expecting a surprise weapon/character/development that would play a part too.

I wasn't expecting it to be forgotten about and come down to essentially flicking a switch on the Citadel to determine the conclusion of the series.

Modifié par Podge 90, 04 octobre 2012 - 01:18 .