475 réponses à ce sujet

[Oni Changas]

Nevermind smudboy or ign. How about we keep focus on the video?

[Seival]

o Ventus wrote...

Seival wrote...

Easily - the shots were random. Why? because Reaper warships warm-up their lasers for powerful precision shots. We see that in almost each cut-scene with Reapers shooting. Looks like their lasers require a lot of seconds to be aimed perfectly.

Aside from "nowhere", where in the unholy hell are you taking your information from? 

They need to warm up their shots? Is that why the Destroyer on Earth doesn't do that? Is that why Harbinger doesn't do that?

About Destoryers. Warm-up and aim a gun to shoot a target which is 100 meters infront of you? This makes no sense. Several random shots at least have a chance to hit someone. And what if perfectly aimed shot will miss, because target evaded it? Each second of warming-up and aiming was just wasted for nothing in that case.

EDIT: And Harbinger was in hurry in "final run" scene. It had no time for precision shots.

Modifié par Seival, 14 octobre 2012 - 04:11 .

[o Ventus]

[quote]Seival wrote...

Warm-up and aim a gun to shoot a target which is 100 meters infront of you? This makes no sense.[/quote]

Of course it doesn't, you made it up.

[quote]Several random shots at least have a chance to hit someone.[/quote]

*gasp* So do aimed shots!

[quote]And what if perfectly aimed shot will miss, because target evaded it?[/quote]

If it was "perfectly aimed", then it isn't going to miss.

[quote]Each second of warming-up and aiming was just wasted for nothing in that case.[/quote][/quote]

Are you even trying to act stupid, or is it legit?

[Maxster_]

OniTYME wrote...

Nevermind smudboy or ign. How about we keep focus on the video?

Well, most obvious things was EDI evacuation double(or triple?) stupidity. In june, when i installed EC, she was on my team.
Also, teleporting Normandy - because of that i laughed so hard, so i barely noticed idiocy of EDI's evacuation.
"It is an order. A moral one"
*facepalm*

flying big mako was less obvious. Well, to be precise, strangeness of flying mako was obvious, but it's size was not.

[o Ventus]

Maxster_ wrote...

OniTYME wrote...

Nevermind smudboy or ign. How about we keep focus on the video?

Well, most obvious things was EDI evacuation double(or triple?) stupidity. In june, when i installed EC, she was on my team.
Also, teleporting Normandy - because of that i laughed so hard, so i barely noticed idiocy of EDI's evacuation.
"It is an order. A moral one"
*facepalm*

flying big mako was less obvious. Well, to be precise, strangeness of flying mako was obvious, but it's size was not.

Flying Makos are anything but strange. Have you played ME1?

[Maxster_]

A Bethesda Fan wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

A Bethesda Fan wrote...

Seival is not a troll.
He use to be a reasonable and logical person but the horrors of Mass effect 3 sent him into state of denial and naive views.

Naive? He just keeps inventing things up, to a point of an utter stupidity and contradiction with a game. That's not what naive means, i'm afraid.

Depends on the context.
He did have some points solid throughout but with a false conclusion to them.
You could say he was naive of the bigger picture.

He is plainly inventing things which contradicts lore, and events shown in game. So no, it is obvious troll behavior.

[Seival]

@ o Ventus

You should observe Reaper warships in action more carefully.

And perfectly aimed shots also have large chance to miss, if target moves unpredictably.

Modifié par Seival, 14 octobre 2012 - 04:17 .

[o Ventus]

Seival wrote...

@ o Ventus

You should observe Reaper warships in action more careful.

And perfectly aimed shots also have large chance to miss, if target moves unpredictably.

1. In cutscenes, they charge up. In gameplay, they don't.

2. Seeing how the Reapers gun is just a bigger Thanix Cannon, that would mean the beam travels at relativistic speeds. It would reach the target before the target can process that it's being attacked.

3. Reapers also have suped-up versions of GARDIAN lasers. Aiming one of them is irrelevant.

Modifié par o Ventus, 14 octobre 2012 - 04:18 .

[Maxster_]

o Ventus wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

OniTYME wrote...

Nevermind smudboy or ign. How about we keep focus on the video?

Well, most obvious things was EDI evacuation double(or triple?) stupidity. In june, when i installed EC, she was on my team.
Also, teleporting Normandy - because of that i laughed so hard, so i barely noticed idiocy of EDI's evacuation.
"It is an order. A moral one"
*facepalm*

flying big mako was less obvious. Well, to be precise, strangeness of flying mako was obvious, but it's size was not.

Flying Makos are anything but strange. Have you played ME1?

Not from a shot. To mako to fly like that, pushing force vector must be from under vehicle.
Also, for some strange reasons, makos used in assault were not so mobile and fast.
Well, it's minor anyway. Everything else is so retarded, that small thing is nothing.

[The Night Mammoth]

Seival wrote...

Dark_Caduceus wrote...

Seival wrote...

Dark_Caduceus wrote...

Look at this: http://www.youtube.c...CMVQP0I4#t=4m02

Harbinger performed a precision shot on a Mako, then a soldier in quick succession.

Please explain.

Those are not precision shots. Many lucky random shots may look as "precision shots", but they are not actually "precision shots". I think it's clear that Harbinger in rushing forward and has no time to make precision shots.

He initiated the beam twice, within 2 seconds, and struck down two small, fast moving targets. How is that not a precision shot?

Easily - the shots were random. Why? because Reaper warships warm-up their lasers for powerful precision shots. We see that in almost each cut-scene with Reapers shooting. Looks like their lasers require a lot of seconds to be aimed perfectly.

Reapers also have a system similar to the GARDIAN point defenses on other warships, which is what Harbinger was using. Pretty sure it's in the codex. So no, it wasn't shooting randomly because it had no time to charge its main gun. 

Nice to see you using your chewbaca defense 'haters' strawman again. Some things never change. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 14 octobre 2012 - 04:29 .

[o Ventus]

Maxster_ wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

OniTYME wrote...

Nevermind smudboy or ign. How about we keep focus on the video?

Well, most obvious things was EDI evacuation double(or triple?) stupidity. In june, when i installed EC, she was on my team.
Also, teleporting Normandy - because of that i laughed so hard, so i barely noticed idiocy of EDI's evacuation.
"It is an order. A moral one"
*facepalm*

flying big mako was less obvious. Well, to be precise, strangeness of flying mako was obvious, but it's size was not.

Flying Makos are anything but strange. Have you played ME1?

Not from a shot. To mako to fly like that, pushing force vector must be from under vehicle.
Also, for some strange reasons, makos used in assault were not so mobile and fast.
Well, it's minor anyway. Everything else is so retarded, that small thing is nothing.

I know. It was a joke.

[Maxster_]

o Ventus wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

OniTYME wrote...

Nevermind smudboy or ign. How about we keep focus on the video?

Well, most obvious things was EDI evacuation double(or triple?) stupidity. In june, when i installed EC, she was on my team.
Also, teleporting Normandy - because of that i laughed so hard, so i barely noticed idiocy of EDI's evacuation.
"It is an order. A moral one"
*facepalm*

flying big mako was less obvious. Well, to be precise, strangeness of flying mako was obvious, but it's size was not.

Flying Makos are anything but strange. Have you played ME1?

Not from a shot. To mako to fly like that, pushing force vector must be from under vehicle.
Also, for some strange reasons, makos used in assault were not so mobile and fast.
Well, it's minor anyway. Everything else is so retarded, that small thing is nothing.

I know. It was a joke.

[Seival]

o Ventus wrote...

Seival wrote...

@ o Ventus

You should observe Reaper warships in action more careful.

And perfectly aimed shots also have large chance to miss, if target moves unpredictably.

1. In cutscenes, they charge up. In gameplay, they don't.

2. Seeing how the Reapers gun is just a bigger Thanix Cannon, that would mean the beam travels at relativistic speeds. It would reach the target before the target can process that it's being attacked.

What matters is that they actually warm-up, and aiming takes considerable amount of time. That's why Shepard was able to dodge destroyer's laser on Rannoch misson.

Did you ever heared of evasive maneuver? When you presume being attacked even before actual attack, to increase your chances to avoid the attack.

Modifié par Seival, 14 octobre 2012 - 04:27 .

[Village_Idiot]

Seival wrote...

What matters is that they actually warm-up, and aiming takes considerable amount of time. That's why Shepard was able to dodge destroyer's laser on Rannoch misson.

Did you ever heared of evasive maneuver? When you presume being attacked even before actual attack, to increase your chances to avoid the attack.

Considering the Rannoch Reaper is using a weapon that fires molten metal at near-relativistic speeds, it is just a case of point and shoot. No need to lead shots since the time-lag between shot and impact is negligible.

The limiting factor is accuracy, and apparently that Reaper attended the Imperial Stormtrooper Marksmanship Academy™. Considering in space combat it would be firing over infintitely longer distances with some semblance of accuracy, not being able to track a target several hundred meters away is bonkers.

It's a fun sequence, if somewhat implausible.

[Seival]

Shadrach 88 wrote...

Seival wrote...

What matters is that they actually warm-up, and aiming takes considerable amount of time. That's why Shepard was able to dodge destroyer's laser on Rannoch misson.

Did you ever heared of evasive maneuver? When you presume being attacked even before actual attack, to increase your chances to avoid the attack.

Considering the Rannoch Reaper is using a weapon that fires molten metal at near-relativistic speeds, it is just a case of point and shoot. No need to lead shots since the time-lag between shot and impact is negligible.

The limiting factor is accuracy, and apparently that Reaper attended the Imperial Stormtrooper Marksmanship Academy™. Considering in space combat it would be firing over infintitely longer distances with some semblance of accuracy, not being able to track a target several hundred meters away is bonkers.

It's a fun sequence, if somewhat implausible.

Reaper shot is about a lag between "pulling a trigger" and actual shot, which is as bad as lag produced by flying projectile.

Rannoch Reaper used random shots, and guided beam towards Shepard, while beam was sustained. And this is one more proof that Reaper ships are really bad against small targets in terms of accuracy.

It's clear that Reaper warships have only close-range weapons designed to destroy large targets. Against other targets Reapers use hasks, harvesters and fighters, i.e. small units which can be destroyed without any problems. And this is what gives Galactic Civilization chance to survive for a long time before harvested.

[Dark_Caduceus]

Seival wrote...

Shadrach 88 wrote...

Seival wrote...

What matters is that they actually warm-up, and aiming takes considerable amount of time. That's why Shepard was able to dodge destroyer's laser on Rannoch misson.

Did you ever heared of evasive maneuver? When you presume being attacked even before actual attack, to increase your chances to avoid the attack.

Considering the Rannoch Reaper is using a weapon that fires molten metal at near-relativistic speeds, it is just a case of point and shoot. No need to lead shots since the time-lag between shot and impact is negligible.

The limiting factor is accuracy, and apparently that Reaper attended the Imperial Stormtrooper Marksmanship Academy™. Considering in space combat it would be firing over infintitely longer distances with some semblance of accuracy, not being able to track a target several hundred meters away is bonkers.

It's a fun sequence, if somewhat implausible.

Reaper shot is about a lag between "pulling a trigger" and actual shot, which is as bad as lag produced by flying projectile.

Rannoch Reaper used random shots, and guided beam towards Shepard, while beam was sustained. And this is one more proof that Reaper ships are really bad against small targets in terms of accuracy.

It's clear that Reaper warships have only close-range weapons designed to destroy large targets. Against other targets Reapers use hasks, harvesters and fighters, i.e. small units which can be destroyed without any problems. And this is what gives Galactic Civilization chance to survive for a long time before harvested.

No one respond, it will keep going if you do!

[Village_Idiot]

Dark_Caduceus wrote...

No one respond, it will keep going if you do!

But I wanted to discuss Indoctrination theory!

[The Night Mammoth]

Seival wrote...

It's clear that Reaper warships have only close-range weapons designed to destroy large targets. Against other targets Reapers use hasks, harvesters and fighters, i.e. small units which can be destroyed without any problems. And this is what gives Galactic Civilization chance to survive for a long time before harvested.

"The main gun on a Reaper capital ship dwarfs that of the Alliance's Everest-class dreadnoughts. No dreadnought has yet survived a direct hit from the weapon. Estimates put its destructive power anywhere from 132 to 454 kilotons of TNT. Even if the target is hardened, as in the case of a surface-based missile silo, the gun can instead bury the target beneath molten metal. Precise targeting computers and correctors also give the Reaper weapons a longer effective range than organics' dreadnoughts or cruisers.The kinetic barriers on a Reaper capital ship can shrug off the firepower of a small fleet. Weapons specifically designed to overcome shields, such as the Javelin, GARDIAN lasers, or the Thanix series, can bypass the barriers to some degree. The difficulty is getting close enough to use them -- the surface-mounted weaponry on Reaper ships, similar in principle to GARDIAN, presents an effective defense against organic species' fighters."

Straight from the codex.

So... you probably couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Shadrach 88 wrote...

Dark_Caduceus wrote...

No one respond, it will keep going if you do!

But I wanted to discuss Indoctrination theory!

This proves IT

[Seival]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Seival wrote...

It's clear that Reaper warships have only close-range weapons designed to destroy large targets. Against other targets Reapers use hasks, harvesters and fighters, i.e. small units which can be destroyed without any problems. And this is what gives Galactic Civilization chance to survive for a long time before harvested.

"The main gun on a Reaper capital ship dwarfs that of the Alliance's Everest-class dreadnoughts. No dreadnought has yet survived a direct hit from the weapon. Estimates put its destructive power anywhere from 132 to 454 kilotons of TNT. Even if the target is hardened, as in the case of a surface-based missile silo, the gun can instead bury the target beneath molten metal. Precise targeting computers and correctors also give the Reaper weapons a longer effective range than organics' dreadnoughts or cruisers.The kinetic barriers on a Reaper capital ship can shrug off the firepower of a small fleet. Weapons specifically designed to overcome shields, such as the Javelin, GARDIAN lasers, or the Thanix series, can bypass the barriers to some degree. The difficulty is getting close enough to use them -- the surface-mounted weaponry on Reaper ships, similar in principle to GARDIAN, presents an effective defense against organic species' fighters."

Straight from the codex.

So... you probably couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

Each ship should have some kind of "air defence". And the Reaper warships are not an exception. But this doesn't make warship an interseptor. As in modern army, noone will use a cruiser to deal with enemy fighters and bombers, because it's uncapable to perform such tasks. Interceptors and fighters are used for that. And using a cruiser against infantry makes no sense at all. If someone uses cruiser for that, this only means there are no other options left, and order was clear - "shoot the infantry, we have no other options, that was an order!". Of course the cruiser will not be effective for this task, but there is still a chance it will kill some enemies.

The game itself proves many times that Reaper warships are designed for close combat against large targets. That's why they need many types of additional units on their side.

Modifié par Seival, 14 octobre 2012 - 05:58 .

[MegaSovereign]

Smudboy...I am...your father.

[Maxster_]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Shadrach 88 wrote...

Dark_Caduceus wrote...

No one respond, it will keep going if you do!

But I wanted to discuss Indoctrination theory!

This proves IT

IT proves IT.

[The Night Mammoth]

Seival wrote...
The game itself proves many times that Reaper warships are designed for close combat against large targets. That's why they need many types of additional units on their side.

Apart from the fact that the codex directly contradicts that assertion, being designed for one role does not make then ineffective or unusuble in another.

Whether Harbinger is designed for taking on other warships in close combat or not (it's the latter, sorry) is irrelevant. It has a point defense system for taking out smaller targets. Thi system is very accurate. It uses this system to shoot at the Hammer forces running at the Conduit. There's no reason it can't shoot at the Normandy. 

[GimmeDaGun]

I find this guy way too nitpicky... I mean, is he so damn "anal" about everything in his life? Maybe for this reason and for his pretty arrogant style (I mean who is he to suggest that everybody who likes something he clearly hates is wrong or sutpid?) why I can't take him seriously.
...and he is way too obsessed with this game and this whole issue, maybe he should do something constructive and useful for a change: there's a life waiting for him out there.