320 réponses à ce sujet

[BleedingUranium]

The whole point of the Citadel is so they can attack it before anyone knows they exist. That's not going to help them now.

[Smeffects]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Smeffects wrote...

The continuation of the ending will still paint Reapers as moron if we win even under IT, they literally LET US WIN. Unlike every other cycles we heard of.

Oh? They let us win in IT? I thought we were utterly hopeless and doomed. Last I checked that was one of the main reasons people don't want to accept IT.

Yes if there is a shot at victory under IT, it means they let us win, just like they do in literal. They let us win by doing increadibly stupid mistakes they never did before. The premise was that we rely on their technology and fail, yet they do not use that advantage once they have control of the citadel. They were at an Odd and our cycle was a disater, until they have the citadel control again. Once the relay are under reaper control, there is nothing the cycle could do, we use the relay technology, we are bound by it.

Modifié par Smeffects, 21 janvier 2013 - 11:40 .

[Smeffects]

BleedingUranium wrote...

The whole point of the Citadel is so they can attack it before anyone knows they exist. That's not going to help them now.

No the point was also that they cut off every system from one another. Its actually explained in me1 and me3. The prothean still had a fleet, but it was stuck and not able to coortinate without the relay, they ended up fighting one system at a time, that war took century, they knew reaper existed this whole time.

We would be forced to do the same if reaper control the relay, only shepard even bothered doing anything about the reapers until the very end, for all intend and purpose reapers took the rest of the galaxy by surprise, because they didnt believe him, but this time they did not have the citadel and relay control. Which is the point of controlling the relay in the first place. There is no logic to let your enemy use your travel paths to mass bigger fleets and organise if you have the option to prevent it completly. Reapers would get 0/10 in the Art of War.

You want to applie logic to this game in this thread. Logic would have to applie everywhere, included in what the reaper does to win the cycle. They clearly do not understand simple combat tactics.

Modifié par Smeffects, 21 janvier 2013 - 11:44 .

[Eryri]

BleedingUranium wrote...

And a large number more were lost as mentioned in the codex and planet descriptions.

This cycle is the Reaper equivalent of doing the worst possible playthrough of Mass Effect.

 Well put.

Viewed as an amada of Ships the Reapers are massively powerful. But if you view them as a species, then they are actually very small in number. There are only a few tens of thousands of individuals. If they were human they would fit in one medium sized town. The loss of a single Reaper is a huge setback from that perspective.

[Smeffects]

Eryri wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

And a large number more were lost as mentioned in the codex and planet descriptions.

This cycle is the Reaper equivalent of doing the worst possible playthrough of Mass Effect.

 Well put.

Viewed as an amada of Ships the Reapers are massively powerful. But if you view them as a species, then they are actually very small in number. There are only a few tens of thousands of individuals. If they were human they would fit in one medium sized town. The loss of a single Reaper is a huge setback from that perspective.

Thats an even bigger reason not to confront a full fleet once they gained control of the relay. The more they outnumber enemy ships the better chance they have. By letting a fleet mass and coordinate all they do is risk more deaths under substained fire. Sorry but there is no logical reason to keep the relay open, its a conflict any tactician would laugh at. Infrastructure like bridges and air fields are the first to be destroyed in a war and for good reasons. You always want to restrict your enemy movements.

Modifié par Smeffects, 21 janvier 2013 - 11:48 .

[Eryri]

Smeffects wrote...


Except that is not true. They were in an odd position until they captured the citadel again. Once they have the citadel, the normal cycle can begin. They dont care about ferrting out pocket of resistance, they did that before. 

But badly and incompletely - hence their current problems. 

What if the pockets of resistance decide not to attack them head on? What if they pull a Javik, and hide in stasis pods deep inside some planet where the Reapers would never find them. The Galaxy is a big place after all, even for Reapers. Then when the Reapers are gone, they could re-emerge, build up a huge fleet in the Reaper's absence, that has up to 50,000 more years of technological advancement, mentor a new crop of races to build them up for the fight, and completely annihiliate the Reapers when they eventually return.

[Little Princess Peach]

Instead of making you're slves misrable why not just take it as it is, you wont get an explanation from anyone not even Bioware so just enjoy the darn game you pay'd for or more on. it's a no win situation.

[Smeffects]

Eryri wrote...

Smeffects wrote...


Except that is not true. They were in an odd position until they captured the citadel again. Once they have the citadel, the normal cycle can begin. They dont care about ferrting out pocket of resistance, they did that before. 

But badly and incompletely - hence their current problems. 

What if the pockets of resistance decide not to attack them head on? What if they pull a Javik, and hide in stasis pods deep inside some planet where the Reapers would never find them. The Galaxy is a big place after all, even for Reapers. Then when the Reapers are gone, they could re-emerge, build up a huge fleet in the Reaper's absence, that has up to 50,000 more years of technological advancement, mentor a new crop of races to build them up for the fight, and completely annihiliate the Reapers when they eventually return.

There is nothing stopping someone from doing it even if the fleet is attacking full front or not. It does not change the parameter of the combat. But even that will be harder without the mass relay, its harder to find a hiden location to hide yourself if you cant really leave star systems. Its hard to coordinate to hide your army if you cant travel much. At best there will be pockets like illos or javik, but thats always a risk, its even a bigger risk with the relay active. Illos was only a few people because the relay were closed and they were stuck there, if they were open there could have been 10 illos. As you said, the galaxy is a big place, lets not make it bigger by leaving the relay open to your enemies so they can squatter even more.

Ok lets just say somehow reapers idea to bait the fleet was good. Why arent the relay closed behind them once the fleet engage? They can have the crucible show up minutes later? They even get to flea, doesent sound smart either?

Modifié par Smeffects, 21 janvier 2013 - 11:57 .

[Eryri]

Smeffects wrote...


There is nothing stopping someone from doing it even if the fleet is attacking full front or not. It does not change the parameter of the combat. But even that will be harder without the mass relay, its harder to find a hiden location to hide yourself if you cant really leave star systems. Its hard to coordinate to hide your army if you cant travel much. At best there will be pockets like illos or javik, but thats always a risk, its even a bigger risk with the relay active. Illos was only a few people because the relay were closed and they were stuck there, if they were open there could have been 10 illos. As you said, the galaxy is a big place, lets not make it bigger by leaving the relay open to your enemies so they can squatter even more.

True, but if I were the Reapers, I would leave the Relays open just long enough to lure the Alliance to Earth, and then shut down the Relays behind them.

Best of both worlds then. You smash the majority of the enemy in one fell swoop, and leave so few stragglers behind that they wouldn't have the resources to find and build a place to hide and wait out the cycle.

Also it is possible to travel around the galaxy from system to system even without relays, using Ship FTL drives. It's just comparatively slow. You wouldn't want to hide in a system too near a relay anyway. In fact you wouldn't need to hide in a system at all. Just load up a big ship with fuel, put everyone in stasis, pick any old direction and head off into interstellar space. Even the Reapers could never find you, it would be like looking for a needle in a haystack.

Modifié par Eryri, 21 janvier 2013 - 12:12 .

[Eryri]

Smeffects wrote...

Ok lets just say somehow reapers idea to bait the fleet was good. Why arent the relay closed behind them once the fleet engage? They can have the crucible show up minutes later? They even get to flea, doesent sound smart either?

They may well have been. Or the Reapers were planning to. We don't know. The fleet jumped away using their own drives at the end of the battle. (Assuming that was the end of course.)

[Smeffects]

Eryri wrote...

Smeffects wrote...

Ok lets just say somehow reapers idea to bait the fleet was good. Why arent the relay closed behind them once the fleet engage? They can have the crucible show up minutes later? They even get to flea, doesent sound smart either?

They may well have been. Or the Reapers were planning to. We don't know. The fleet jumped away using their own drives at the end of the battle. (Assuming that was the end of course.)

Its still overall a terrible idea over what they always did. The difference without relay is that travel takes months or years. A ship statis wouldnt survive the century of war that would ensus anyway. Illos barelly did it and it was on a planet, more reliable source of energy. In a war of attrition where they control the relay, they wont be defeated.

Prothean still had a fleet and still pushed for combat, but without the relay they couldnt do anything significant. The relay were closed and they scattered, reapers still found most of them.  Shepard would have been long gone in a war of attrition.

[DirtyPhoenix]

Project Lazarus is impossible at face value. Must be indoctrination..

[Eryri]

Smeffects wrote...

Its still overall a terrible idea over what they always did. The difference without relay is that travel takes months or years. A ship statis wouldnt survive the century of war that would ensus anyway. Illos barelly did it and it was on a planet, more reliable source of energy. In a war of attrition where they control the relay, they wont be defeated.

Prothean still had a fleet and still pushed for combat, but without the relay they couldnt do anything significant. The relay were closed and they scattered, reapers still found most of them.  Shepard would have been long gone in a war of attrition.

Maybe. But the Protheans were partly defeated because their tactics were too rigid and their empire too homogeneous. Most of them fought to the death, which was noble, but perhaps not the best course of action. If instead they had sent out thousands of hibernation ships in all directions to wait the cycle out, perhaps more of them would have survived. Javik's pod survived for 50,000 years, so we know it's possible. If this cycle wanted to wait out the war they wouldn't need to last nearly so long, say 500 years to be sure the Reapers had gone back to dark space. It's just a matter of engineering a more reliable stasis system.

Regarding energy for an "ark" ship - that could be a problem in interstellar space, granted. Perhaps they could program a course to take them close to some, out of the way, red dwarf star every 50 years or so, to charge up the ship with solar energy?

Modifié par Eryri, 21 janvier 2013 - 03:00 .

[Dropkicks4ever2]

Clearly you all missed the obvious, the doctor saved Shepard... duh. Besides.. wibbly wobbbly timey whimey. I rest my case.

[Peranor]

Dropkicks4ever2 wrote...

Clearly you all missed the obvious, the doctor saved Shepard... duh. Besides.. wibbly wobbbly timey whimey. I rest my case.

So far this is probably the most plausible explanation as to how Shepard could survive 

[GreyLycanTrope]

I still say Shep's inches from death.

[dorktainian]

spot on Eryri

[Codename_Code]

Is confusing, weird, dream like and the enemy main offense is to own your mind. yep.

[dorktainian]

Eryri wrote...

Smeffects wrote...


There is nothing stopping someone from doing it even if the fleet is attacking full front or not. It does not change the parameter of the combat. But even that will be harder without the mass relay, its harder to find a hiden location to hide yourself if you cant really leave star systems. Its hard to coordinate to hide your army if you cant travel much. At best there will be pockets like illos or javik, but thats always a risk, its even a bigger risk with the relay active. Illos was only a few people because the relay were closed and they were stuck there, if they were open there could have been 10 illos. As you said, the galaxy is a big place, lets not make it bigger by leaving the relay open to your enemies so they can squatter even more.

True, but if I were the Reapers, I would leave the Relays open just long enough to lure the Alliance to Earth, and then shut down the Relays behind them.

Best of both worlds then. You smash the majority of the enemy in one fell swoop, and leave so few stragglers behind that they wouldn't have the resources to find and build a place to hide and wait out the cycle.

and what happens (if you take em literally) in all three endings?  Watch the endings again.  in all 3 endings the relays are closed down.

[WhiteKnyght]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Some very ill-informed people have tried to claim that Shepard could survive any of the following:

-Destroy tube explosion
-Destroy wave
-20km wide explosion originating from where he is

And if they claim he is on Earth (still literal):

-Being in space without a sealed suit
-Reentering Earth's atmosphere
-Hitting the ground


Shepard could maybe have survived one of these things, and only one: the Destroy tube explosion.

Let's have a look, shall we?

Oh look, Shepard is completely incinerated. And no, you can't claim that it's just the character model disappearing, because there are very obvious scorch marks on the ground. And yes, this is visible without flycam, so you can't claim that either.

Shepard is completely vaporized. Explain the breath scene without using "bad riting" or handwaving.

1. Shepard never re-entered orbit.

2. The scene distinctly showed Shepard being blown back by the pipe explosion. He wasn't vaporized. The camera panned upward to show the crucible activating before he hit ground.

3. That explosion wasn't powerful enough to vaporize anything. Otherwise it would have been a lot larger than what is roughtly 20 square feet.

4.  The Citadel is surrounded by powerful mass effect fields, which is what allows people to live on the wards without wearing spacesuits everywhere. It's also what is keeping the Citadel fragments from falling into Earth. Meaning Shepard still has air to breathe.


Also if you cant even spell *writing,* or make sure your facts are straight then you're not qualified to criticize it.

Modifié par The Grey Nayr, 21 janvier 2013 - 04:38 .

[Eryri]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

3. That explosion wasn't powerful enough to vaporize anything. Otherwise it would have been a lot larger than what is roughtly 20 square feet.

Perhaps not, but the later explosion when the crucible fired was enough to fill the 15 km diameter of the Presidium Ring.

4.  The Citadel is surrounded by powerful mass effect fields, which is what allows people to live on the wards without wearing spacesuits everywhere. It's also what is keeping the Citadel fragments from falling into Earth. Meaning Shepard still has air to breathe.

But the epicenter of that explosion would be within those fields, so they would do nothing to protect Shepard. On the contrary they would seal him in with it. Also those fields were insufficient to stop holes being blown in the quantum shielded superstructure of the ward arms.

Also if you cant even spell *writing,* or make sure your facts are straight then you're not qualified to criticize it.

The OP was being sarcastic. His point is that it is not "bAd riting, lulz" as many anti-enders would vehemently describe it, but is in fact a deliberate decision by Bioware to make us question the reality of what we are seeing.

[JesseLee202]

Don't you guys have an IT grew to discuss this stuff?

[WhiteKnyght]

Well for one thing, Bioware doesn't intend for players to use things like flycam and look under the game's hood at all the inner mechanisms and workings.

Most likely scenario, they didn't feel it was worth the extra budget money to make a "Shepard doesn't get incinerated" version of the cutscene that you could only see the difference of by hacking the game.

[WhiteKnyght]

JesseLee202 wrote...

Don't you guys have an IT grew to discuss this stuff?

I'm not an Indoctrination Theory follower. It's a bunch of malarky.

[Ageless Face]

 Was it ever confirmed the Breath-scene happened at Earth? I don't remember, though I might have passed it. Anyway, if it was then I compeltley agree that the breath scene is impossible logically. However, if it wasn't, and the Breath scene could have happened on the Citadel (which makes much more sense, imo), then the Breath scene is possible to happen.


Also, Flycam was created for us to see things BioWare didn't mean for us to see. Which means, it can't really be used as proof. More on that, the first camera angle of the explosion scene clearly shows Shepard's body. Which means her/his body wasn't completly vaporised (though s/he'll might have pretty bad burns...). As for the second one, well we can't really tell, as the smoke interrupts right before the camera goes up. 

Modifié par HagarIshay, 21 janvier 2013 - 04:44 .