172 réponses à ce sujet

[Cainhurst Crow]

Fighters, that makes much more sense. Let me double check with youtube and confirm.

EDIT: 12,000 fighters, hot damn. So if the normandy cost as much as a heavy crusier, than I can assume that a heavy crusier cost 12,000 fighters to make.

Cool.

Modifié par Darth Brotarian, 28 février 2013 - 08:24 .

[Legbiter]

At best only half of Hammer force manages to land in London at the FOB. Also, individually each Reaper ship massively outclasses everything organics have. If a full frontal slugfest is unavoidable (which it is because the Crucible has to dock with the Citadel)then the only chance is to zerg rush the Reapers and hope for the best.

[Maxster_]

simfamSP wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

111987 wrote...
..
-They tried to get there before Harbinger did, they were just late. And once Harbinger was there, a blitz was the only hope of getting through; hopefully there would be too many forces for Harbinger to deal with. After all, nothing was more important than getting onboard the Citadel.
...

Only reason why Harbringer descended from orbit - because of that stupid, unneeded ground assault, which, as expected, ended up with 100% losses.
Instead of that idiocy, Hacket could just ordered several frigate packs to drop forces right before the beam, removing small resistance(like destroyer) with ship-grade weaponry.
There is no need to take ground, mission is to get forces to the Citadel. Not to capture London.
Priority Earth is one big plothole, filled with slightly smaller plotholes; rendering everyone involved, especially commanding officers(as is reapers) - as an utter incompetent morons.

And what of gameplay? Unless ME3 had more time to develop a space-flight system (ala, Battlefront 2) I don't see how this would give room for gameplay.

Fight on the Citadel, instead of Earth.
"Take back Earth" never made any sense in MEU.

Also, apart from the Normandy (it's stated it can by EDI,) can other small frigates enter the atmosphere like that?

Do i need to cite codex?

Starships: Frigates %3D%3DEdit
Mass Effect %3D%3DEdit
Frigates are light escort and scouting vessels. They often have extensive GARDIAN
systems to provide anti-fighter screening for capital ships, and carry a
squad of marines for security and groundside duty. Unlike larger
vessels, frigates are able to land on planets.
Frigate drive systems allow them to achieve high FTL
cruise speeds. They also have proportionally larger thrusters and
lighter design mass, allowing them to maneuver more handily. In combat,
speed and maneuverability make a frigate immune to the long-range fire
of larger vessels; in the time it take projectiles to reach them,
frigates are no longer where they were predicted to be.
In fleet combat, frigates are organized into "wolf pack" flotillas of four to six. Wolf packs speed through enemy formations, hunting enemy vessels whose kinetic barriers have been taken down by fighter-launched disruptor torpedoes. The wolfspack circle-strafes vulnerable targets, using their superior speed and maneuverability to evade return fire.

[Han Shot First]

Hackett's strategy is actually a good one.

He knows the Alliance Navy can't go toe to toe with the Reapers and survive, so after the Reapers invade he opts for a Fabian strategy. Until the final battle the Alliance fleets avoid large pitched battles with the Reapers and instead tries to delay them, buying time for the Crucible to be completed.

As for the final battle, the cutscenes were designed with rule of cool in mind rather than as a display of tactics consistent with the lore. That isn't intended as criticism by the way, since if Bioware to have tried to portray the battles realistically, you'd only see one ship on the screen at a time. I don't think you can draw any conclusions about either the Reapers' or the Alliance's tactics from the battle cutscenes.

[111987]

tevix wrote...

"Drive cores for 9000 fighters" I believe was what the admiral said. And that was referring to how much eezo was in the normandys drive core.

@The Gray Nayr
Let me debunk your theory with one question:
How did the normandy land in front of the beam no problem?
inb4 EDI's cyberwarfare suite BECAUSE...even SHE couldn't land the rockets on the destroyer near the beam. So....

If the normandy can get there, anything else can get there, and at that range you can fire your weapons at the destroyer and/or harbinger that's just...chilling there and score a hit.

"Interferance, lulz".

The Normandy has a uniquely large mass effect core. They could have increased its mass to allow it go get close enough to the beam without suffering form it.

If you send a bunch of cruisers and frigates down to the planet, the Reapers are going to come because that is a claer threat. And if you have even 1 or 2 Capital Ships down on the planet, you're screwed. That's why you have to use shuttles and what not, because that's less of a threat to the Reapers, whom in their arrogance believe their ground forces will be enough to halt any ground attack.

[tevix]

@111987

I admit defeat...

[Maxster_]

111987 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

111987 wrote...
..
-They tried to get there before Harbinger did, they were just late. And once Harbinger was there, a blitz was the only hope of getting through; hopefully there would be too many forces for Harbinger to deal with. After all, nothing was more important than getting onboard the Citadel.
...

Only reason why Harbringer descended from orbit - because of that stupid, unneeded ground assault, which, as expected, ended up with 100% losses.
Instead of that idiocy, Hacket could just ordered several frigate packs to drop forces right before the beam, removing small resistance(like destroyer) with ship-grade weaponry.
There is no need to take ground, mission is to get forces to the Citadel. Not to capture London.
Priority Earth is one big plothole, filled with slightly smaller plotholes; rendering everyone involved, especially commanding officers(as is reapers) - as an utter incompetent morons.

The ground invasion was to knock out the anti-air cannons and ground troops with missiles, etc.

Reapers never needed anti-air cannons. It was asspulled for Priority:Earth.
Reapers don't need to land on planets to shoot infantry at close range. They could just shot them all right from orbit.
In that stupid context, which consists of nonexistant magic beam, which only purpose is to bring Shepard to the Citadel - only sane action would be to get to the beam as fast as possible, thus lowering probability of reapers turning beam off. Drop makos with soldiers near the beam, and suppress any resistance with ship-grade weaponry.

As for pathetic "air defence" asspull - said "defence" is easily destroyed by soldier-grade weaponry. Salvo from several frigate packs while descending - is overkill, nothing will remain standing.
That is what any sane officer, who studied at military academy, would do. An experienced admirals like Hackett would made up even more brilliant tactic.
But, somehow, Hackett's place was taken by his retarded twin - and Alliance was doomed.

[111987]

Maxster_ wrote...

111987 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

111987 wrote...
..
-They tried to get there before Harbinger did, they were just late. And once Harbinger was there, a blitz was the only hope of getting through; hopefully there would be too many forces for Harbinger to deal with. After all, nothing was more important than getting onboard the Citadel.
...

Only reason why Harbringer descended from orbit - because of that stupid, unneeded ground assault, which, as expected, ended up with 100% losses.
Instead of that idiocy, Hacket could just ordered several frigate packs to drop forces right before the beam, removing small resistance(like destroyer) with ship-grade weaponry.
There is no need to take ground, mission is to get forces to the Citadel. Not to capture London.
Priority Earth is one big plothole, filled with slightly smaller plotholes; rendering everyone involved, especially commanding officers(as is reapers) - as an utter incompetent morons.

The ground invasion was to knock out the anti-air cannons and ground troops with missiles, etc.

Reapers never needed anti-air cannons. It was asspulled for Priority:Earth.
Reapers don't need to land on planets to shoot infantry at close range. They could just shot them all right from orbit.
In that stupid context, which consists of nonexistant magic beam, which only purpose is to bring Shepard to the Citadel - only sane action would be to get to the beam as fast as possible, thus lowering probability of reapers turning beam off. Drop makos with soldiers near the beam, and suppress any resistance with ship-grade weaponry.

As for pathetic "air defence" asspull - said "defence" is easily destroyed by soldier-grade weaponry. Salvo from several frigate packs while descending - is overkill, nothing will remain standing.
That is what any sane officer, who studied at military academy, would do. An experienced admirals like Hackett would made up even more brilliant tactic.
But, somehow, Hackett's place was taken by his retarded twin - and Alliance was doomed.

The Reapers can't shoot infantry from orbit! Not without leveling huge chunks of the cities, killing their own forces and destroying their camps or humans to be harvested. Even if they could, they can't just ignore the largest fleet in the galaxy blasting them. It makes perfect sense to have anti-air guns on the planet.

If everyone makes a beeline to the Citadel beam, they'll be torn apart by the anti-air guns and the now-pursuing Reapers. If you have too many ships descnending towards the beams, this allows the Reapers to follow.

Your whole argument is based on the incorrect assumption that Reapers wouldn't need anti-air guns, and you explained that lack of need with non-sensical reasoning.

[Maxster_]

111987 wrote...

tevix wrote...

"Drive cores for 9000 fighters" I believe was what the admiral said. And that was referring to how much eezo was in the normandys drive core.

@The Gray Nayr
Let me debunk your theory with one question:
How did the normandy land in front of the beam no problem?
inb4 EDI's cyberwarfare suite BECAUSE...even SHE couldn't land the rockets on the destroyer near the beam. So....

If the normandy can get there, anything else can get there, and at that range you can fire your weapons at the destroyer and/or harbinger that's just...chilling there and score a hit.

"Interferance, lulz".

The Normandy has a uniquely large mass effect core. They could have increased its mass to allow it go get close enough to the beam without suffering form it.

Headcanon. And nonsense.

If you send a bunch of cruisers and frigates down to the planet, the Reapers are going to come because that is a claer threat. And if you have even 1 or 2 Capital Ships down on the planet, you're screwed. That's why you have to use shuttles and what not, because that's less of a threat to the Reapers, whom in their arrogance believe their ground forces will be enough to halt any ground attack.

*facepalm*
Reapers don't need to go down. They can destroy entire offensive right from orbit, with one shot.
Reapers also can turn off the beam any moment.
Sure, a large fleet of shuttles is no threat to reapers. Because they can destroy that with one shot, after landing.
And they can't easily destroy frigates, because, in contrast to planet's surface, above which Citadel in stationary orbit, and thus reapers fleet near the Citadel - frigates are moving, and moving unpredictably.
Anyway, you clearly have no idea what are you talking about.

Modifié par Maxster_, 28 février 2013 - 09:08 .

[111987]

Maxster_ wrote...

111987 wrote...

tevix wrote...

"Drive cores for 9000 fighters" I believe was what the admiral said. And that was referring to how much eezo was in the normandys drive core.

@The Gray Nayr
Let me debunk your theory with one question:
How did the normandy land in front of the beam no problem?
inb4 EDI's cyberwarfare suite BECAUSE...even SHE couldn't land the rockets on the destroyer near the beam. So....

If the normandy can get there, anything else can get there, and at that range you can fire your weapons at the destroyer and/or harbinger that's just...chilling there and score a hit.

"Interferance, lulz".

The Normandy has a uniquely large mass effect core. They could have increased its mass to allow it go get close enough to the beam without suffering form it.

Headcanon. And nonsense.

If you send a bunch of cruisers and frigates down to the planet, the Reapers are going to come because that is a claer threat. And if you have even 1 or 2 Capital Ships down on the planet, you're screwed. That's why you have to use shuttles and what not, because that's less of a threat to the Reapers, whom in their arrogance believe their ground forces will be enough to halt any ground attack.

*facepalm*
Reapers don't need to go down. They can destroy entire offensive right from orbit, with one shot.
Reapers also can turn off the beam any moment.
Sure, a large fleet of shuttles is no threat to reapers. Because they can destroy that with one shot, after landing.
And they can't easily destroy frigates, because, in contrast to planet's surface, above which Citadel in stationary orbit, and thus reapers fleet near the Citadel - frigates are moving, and moving unpredictably.
Anyway, you clearly have no idea what are you talking about.

It's headcanon and nonsense that the Normandy has a uniquely large Mass Effect core that would allow them to increase their mass? Okay...

The Reapers aren't going to nuke London to deal with ground forces. You cannot discount the arrogance of the Reapers in all of this. They have shown, in every encounter, that they have a major God-complex.

You clearly are too enraged over everything to talk about things reasonably, so whatever. If you want to continue this, please make your points clearer.

[WheatleyHQ]

Hackett out. Hackett out... Hack it out... *cough*

[Maxster_]

111987 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

111987 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

111987 wrote...
..
-They tried to get there before Harbinger did, they were just late. And once Harbinger was there, a blitz was the only hope of getting through; hopefully there would be too many forces for Harbinger to deal with. After all, nothing was more important than getting onboard the Citadel.
...

Only reason why Harbringer descended from orbit - because of that stupid, unneeded ground assault, which, as expected, ended up with 100% losses.
Instead of that idiocy, Hacket could just ordered several frigate packs to drop forces right before the beam, removing small resistance(like destroyer) with ship-grade weaponry.
There is no need to take ground, mission is to get forces to the Citadel. Not to capture London.
Priority Earth is one big plothole, filled with slightly smaller plotholes; rendering everyone involved, especially commanding officers(as is reapers) - as an utter incompetent morons.

The ground invasion was to knock out the anti-air cannons and ground troops with missiles, etc.

Reapers never needed anti-air cannons. It was asspulled for Priority:Earth.
Reapers don't need to land on planets to shoot infantry at close range. They could just shot them all right from orbit.
In that stupid context, which consists of nonexistant magic beam, which only purpose is to bring Shepard to the Citadel - only sane action would be to get to the beam as fast as possible, thus lowering probability of reapers turning beam off. Drop makos with soldiers near the beam, and suppress any resistance with ship-grade weaponry.

As for pathetic "air defence" asspull - said "defence" is easily destroyed by soldier-grade weaponry. Salvo from several frigate packs while descending - is overkill, nothing will remain standing.
That is what any sane officer, who studied at military academy, would do. An experienced admirals like Hackett would made up even more brilliant tactic.
But, somehow, Hackett's place was taken by his retarded twin - and Alliance was doomed.

The Reapers can't shoot infantry from orbit! Not without leveling huge chunks of the cities, killing their own forces and destroying their camps or humans to be harvested. Even if they could, they can't just ignore the largest fleet in the galaxy blasting them. It makes perfect sense to have anti-air guns on the planet.

*facepalm*
They can use their spinal mounted guns, or secondary guns, or destroyers.
Space combat in MEU conducts in a ranges of tens of thousands kilometers, which is much farther than low Earth orbit, and against moving targets.
And of course, they could easily hit even individual soldiers right from orbit, if that makes any sense for them.
And why exactly reapers need their ground forces in London?  They don't.
And since when reapers actually cared about husks? Never.
And of course, reapers never needed "air-defence" simply because they always had space superiority.
And of course, they had said superiority in ME3, and nothing allied fleets could do, would even stop that bombardment. Because all you need, to annihilate that entire retarded offensive- is a single reaper. And that's all.

If everyone makes a beeline to the Citadel beam, they'll be torn apart by the anti-air guns and the now-pursuing Reapers. If you have too many ships descnending towards the beams, this allows the Reapers to follow.

Pure nonsense.
"Anti-air" guns is easily destroyed by infantry, thus even one frigate is enough to destroy them, and they will never even hit it.
And having several frigate pack - just one salvo from their guns - and entire area is clear. Dreadnoughts will not have time to react.

Your whole argument is based on the incorrect assumption that Reapers wouldn't need anti-air guns, and you explained that lack of need with non-sensical reasoning.

They never needed them - so that is asspull for specific mission.
They are easily destroyed even by infantry - therefore they are no threat to frigates at all.
As i said, Priority:Earth is one big plothole, filled with slightly smaller plotholes.

[Maxster_]

111987 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

111987 wrote...

tevix wrote...

"Drive cores for 9000 fighters" I believe was what the admiral said. And that was referring to how much eezo was in the normandys drive core.

@The Gray Nayr
Let me debunk your theory with one question:
How did the normandy land in front of the beam no problem?
inb4 EDI's cyberwarfare suite BECAUSE...even SHE couldn't land the rockets on the destroyer near the beam. So....

If the normandy can get there, anything else can get there, and at that range you can fire your weapons at the destroyer and/or harbinger that's just...chilling there and score a hit.

"Interferance, lulz".

The Normandy has a uniquely large mass effect core. They could have increased its mass to allow it go get close enough to the beam without suffering form it.

Headcanon. And nonsense.

If you send a bunch of cruisers and frigates down to the planet, the Reapers are going to come because that is a claer threat. And if you have even 1 or 2 Capital Ships down on the planet, you're screwed. That's why you have to use shuttles and what not, because that's less of a threat to the Reapers, whom in their arrogance believe their ground forces will be enough to halt any ground attack.

*facepalm*
Reapers don't need to go down. They can destroy entire offensive right from orbit, with one shot.
Reapers also can turn off the beam any moment.
Sure, a large fleet of shuttles is no threat to reapers. Because they can destroy that with one shot, after landing.
And they can't easily destroy frigates, because, in contrast to planet's surface, above which Citadel in stationary orbit, and thus reapers fleet near the Citadel - frigates are moving, and moving unpredictably.
Anyway, you clearly have no idea what are you talking about.

It's headcanon and nonsense that the Normandy has a uniquely large Mass Effect core that would allow them to increase their mass? Okay...

Strawman.
Nonsensical headcanon is this line "They could have increased its mass to allow it go get close enough to the beam without suffering form it. "

And you know it.

The Reapers aren't going to nuke London to deal with ground forces. You cannot discount the arrogance of the Reapers in all of this. They have shown, in every encounter, that they have a major God-complex.

They don't need to nuke london, they can one-shot entire offensive after landing. Or they can bombard with secondary weapons, or use destroyers.
Or they could just turn off the beam. And then just wait while husks destroy everyone, and obliterate allied fleets.

You clearly are too enraged over everything to talk about things reasonably, so whatever. If you want to continue this, please make your points clearer.

You obviously never read ME codex about space combat and planetary assault. Or you just pretending you never read it, to defend ME3's garbage writing.

[tevix]

To be honest you guys both make good points. The anti air cannons are kind of silly, since the "cannon" is basically a destroyer with a gun (which is weaker than a destroyer, since it only crippled the shuttle with a direct hit). Reapers are their own anti-air cannons. They didn't use them on any other mission, so they can be tossed out for earth as just made up for no reason.

A dedicated group of frigates could slip through the sword battle to the beam and drop makos/shuttles near the beam then take out the destroyer in the same pass. Something done this quickly would get forces to the beam before harbinger even has a chance to react.

[111987]

Maxster_ wrote...

111987 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

111987 wrote...

tevix wrote...

"Drive cores for 9000 fighters" I believe was what the admiral said. And that was referring to how much eezo was in the normandys drive core.

@The Gray Nayr
Let me debunk your theory with one question:
How did the normandy land in front of the beam no problem?
inb4 EDI's cyberwarfare suite BECAUSE...even SHE couldn't land the rockets on the destroyer near the beam. So....

If the normandy can get there, anything else can get there, and at that range you can fire your weapons at the destroyer and/or harbinger that's just...chilling there and score a hit.

"Interferance, lulz".

The Normandy has a uniquely large mass effect core. They could have increased its mass to allow it go get close enough to the beam without suffering form it.

Headcanon. And nonsense.

If you send a bunch of cruisers and frigates down to the planet, the Reapers are going to come because that is a claer threat. And if you have even 1 or 2 Capital Ships down on the planet, you're screwed. That's why you have to use shuttles and what not, because that's less of a threat to the Reapers, whom in their arrogance believe their ground forces will be enough to halt any ground attack.

*facepalm*
Reapers don't need to go down. They can destroy entire offensive right from orbit, with one shot.
Reapers also can turn off the beam any moment.
Sure, a large fleet of shuttles is no threat to reapers. Because they can destroy that with one shot, after landing.
And they can't easily destroy frigates, because, in contrast to planet's surface, above which Citadel in stationary orbit, and thus reapers fleet near the Citadel - frigates are moving, and moving unpredictably.
Anyway, you clearly have no idea what are you talking about.

It's headcanon and nonsense that the Normandy has a uniquely large Mass Effect core that would allow them to increase their mass? Okay...

Strawman.
Nonsensical headcanon is this line "They could have increased its mass to allow it go get close enough to the beam without suffering form it. "

And you know it.

The Reapers aren't going to nuke London to deal with ground forces. You cannot discount the arrogance of the Reapers in all of this. They have shown, in every encounter, that they have a major God-complex.

They don't need to nuke london, they can one-shot entire offensive after landing. Or they can bombard with secondary weapons, or use destroyers.
Or they could just turn off the beam. And then just wait while husks destroy everyone, and obliterate allied fleets.

You clearly are too enraged over everything to talk about things reasonably, so whatever. If you want to continue this, please make your points clearer.

You obviously never read ME codex about space combat and planetary assault. Or you just pretending you never read it, to defend ME3's garbage writing.

I never claimed that was the explanation, but that it could be an explanation for it. They aren't going to add a random technical explanation into that scene because it would be at odds with the tone of that scene (emotion, danger, etc.).

The Reapers are occupied in the space battle. If they turn away to orbitally bombard the ground offensive, they could lose a lot of ships. Not to mention the Reapers have focused the bulk of their harvest around London. If they bombard it, they're contradicting their entire purpose, which is harvesting. As arrogant as the Reapers are, they would be confident enough to leave their ground forces responsible for dealing with the ground forces. They would only break off from the fleet battle, the immediate danger, if the ground offensive got too close (which is what happened).

As for turning off the beam, you are right that no explanation was given for that. Thus any explanation I came up with would just be head canon, no matter how plausible it is.

I've read the Codex many times and remember it well.

[Ridwan]

Here's another thing. Remember when Hackett said we can't defeat the Reapers conventionally? Well that was at the start of the game, you know.. when we didn't unite the entire freaking galaxy.

[Maxster_]

[quote]simfamSP wrote...

[quote]Fight on the Citadel, instead of Earth.
"Take back Earth" never made any sense in MEU.[/quote]

Fight what? Angry Keepers?
[/quote]
C-Sec. For lulz.

[quote]
[quote]
They never needed them - so that is asspull for specific mission.
They are easily destroyed even by infantry - therefore they are no threat to frigates at all.
As i said, Priority:Earth is one big plothole, filled with slightly smaller plotholes.[/quote]

They did. Perhaps 'air-defence' is the wrong term, more like 'shooting as many shuttles as possible.' In fact, the very reason *why* they need it is there in your argument. If a Cain gun can destroy one, then they they'd rather *not* have a bunch of shuttles with weapons that can kick a Reaper ships' ass.
[/quote]
Oh, i'm sure, space ships with ship-grade weapons, ship-grade shields and ship-grade armor, is obviously less a threat, than [comparatively] unarmored, unarmed, unshielded and much slower transports.
[quote]
[quote]Nonsensical headcanon is this line "They could have increased its mass to allow it go get close enough to the beam without suffering form it. "[/quote]

It's headcanon, that's for sure. But it's plausible. Unless there's something in the ME lore you want to bring up... you're the expert here.
[/quote]
Beam have no place in the lore at all.
It is just an asspull, with one single purpose.
Therefore, it is not "plausible|unplausible", it simply does not exists.

[quote]
[quote]They don't need to nuke London, they can one-shot entire offensive after landing. Or they can bombard with secondary weapons, or use destroyers.
Or they could just turn off the beam. And then just wait while husks destroy everyone, and obliterate allied fleets.[/quote]

Wasn't that the whole point of the entire fleet? To distract those from orbit? Sure, ONE Reaper could've made the shot, but if we're going to go down that line then there are other video-game examples that could have ended the story with just one logical course of action.
[/quote]
By this example, i meant only that writing of ME3 and Priority:Earth specificaly - is very bad. It requires everyone to be dumbed down to negative iq, just for that excuse of a plot to "work".
[quote]
As for turning of the Beam, well, that's another "why didn't they shut down the Mass Relays?" Or "why didn't Geralt cast an igni sign at Letho?" It's all for the narrative, I suppose. There *could* have been an explanation.
[/quote]
There is no explanation. And also, Letho is a trained witcher.
[quote]
In fact, Chris Avellone talked about one of the key factors of writing is trying to echo the audience's thoughts on the situation. He used Aliens as an example. The most logical course of action there would have been to get out and nuke the damn planet; but the film covered that with reasoning.[/quote]
Quality of such reasoning and explanation for such thin points - is the quality of writing.
"It happens just because it happens", for example, is not an explanation. And horrible writing.
[quote]
All the team had to do was make up some techno-babble and say the Beam couldn't be shut off that easily, it needed time and whatnot. [/quote]
1. That explanation never existed.
2. Beam is never existed in MEU.
3. And even if first 2 point were covered(and they are not) - there is still no need for ground assault.

Modifié par Maxster_, 28 février 2013 - 11:20 .

[Maxster_]

[quote]111987 wrote...

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

[quote]111987 wrote...

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...

[quote]111987 wrote...

The Normandy has a uniquely large mass effect core. They could have increased its mass to allow it go get close enough to the beam without suffering form it.
[/quote]
Headcanon. And nonsense.
[quote]
If you send a bunch of cruisers and frigates down to the planet, the Reapers are going to come because that is a claer threat. And if you have even 1 or 2 Capital Ships down on the planet, you're screwed. That's why you have to use shuttles and what not, because that's less of a threat to the Reapers, whom in their arrogance believe their ground forces will be enough to halt any ground attack.
[/quote]
*facepalm*
Reapers don't need to go down. They can destroy entire offensive right from orbit, with one shot.
Reapers also can turn off the beam any moment.
Sure, a large fleet of shuttles is no threat to reapers. Because they can destroy that with one shot, after landing.
And they can't easily destroy frigates, because, in contrast to planet's surface, above which Citadel in stationary orbit, and thus reapers fleet near the Citadel - frigates are moving, and moving unpredictably.
Anyway, you clearly have no idea what are you talking about.

[/quote]

It's headcanon and nonsense that the Normandy has a uniquely large Mass Effect core that would allow them to increase their mass? Okay...
[/quote]
Strawman.
Nonsensical headcanon is this line "They could have increased its mass to allow it go get close enough to the beam without suffering form it. "

And you know it.
[quote]
The Reapers aren't going to nuke London to deal with ground forces. You cannot discount the arrogance of the Reapers in all of this. They have shown, in every encounter, that they have a major God-complex.
[/quote]
They don't need to nuke london, they can one-shot entire offensive after landing. Or they can bombard with secondary weapons, or use destroyers.
Or they could just turn off the beam. And then just wait while husks destroy everyone, and obliterate allied fleets.
[quote]
You clearly are too enraged over everything to talk about things reasonably, so whatever. If you want to continue this, please make your points clearer.
[/quote]
You obviously never read ME codex about space combat and planetary assault. Or you just pretending you never read it, to defend ME3's garbage writing.


[/quote]

I never claimed that was the explanation, but that it could be an explanation for it. They aren't going to add a random technical explanation into that scene because it would be at odds with the tone of that scene (emotion, danger, etc.).
[/quote]
What a pathetic excuse for a bad writing.
[quote]
The Reapers are occupied in the space battle.
[/quote]
They are not. They are far superior in numbers and overall strength. Several thousands of dreadnoughts against 86, and every reaper dreadnought is 2-4 times stronger(more powerful guns, more powerful shields) than single allied one.
Great odds, reapers are terrified, and losing.
[quote]
If they turn away to orbitally bombard the ground offensive, they could lose a lot of ships.[/quote]
No, they are not.
1 dreadnought is enough to destroy entire offensive, and fast. And there are thousands of them.
And they can just turn off the beam at any moment.
[quote]
Not to mention the Reapers have focused the bulk of their harvest around London.If they bombard it, they're contradicting their entire purpose, which is harvesting.
[/quote]
No, they are not. Earth is far larger than london, and they don't need to destroy entire city. And they can destroy entire city, if they'd ever wanted, without contradicting anything.
And of course, they don't care for their zombies, nor they ever needed to concentrate them at London.
[quote]
As arrogant as the Reapers are, they would be confident enough to leave their ground forces responsible for dealing with the ground forces. [/quote]
Lol.
[quote]
They would only break off from the fleet battle, the immediate danger, if the ground offensive got too close (which is what happened).
[/quote]
There is no danger in fleet assault, because reapers outguns and vastly outnumbers allied fleets.
And they surely can spare a 1 reaper out of several thousands, to obliterate ground offensive.

[quote]
I've read the Codex many times and remember it well.

[/quote]
Then you do understand, that there is no ground solution to a space problem in MEU?

[111987]

Maxster_ wrote...
What a pathetic excuse for a bad writing.

You clearly know little about tone and emotion in a scene. Some random explanation about something most people don't care about at a tense moment like that would have been completely out of place.

They are not. They are far superior in numbers and overall strength. Several thousands of dreadnoughts against 86, and every reaper dreadnought is 2-4 times stronger(more powerful guns, more powerful shields) than single allied one.
Great odds, reapers are terrified, and losing.

There are not thousands of Reapers at Earth. In the space battle we see, there are absolutely no more than 100 or so. While other Reapers could come to reinforce from other systems, they are presently irrelevant to the discussion.

Also, the Geth have a ton of dreadnoughts that you have discounted. Almost as much as the Turians. And Capital ships can be taken out via sustained cruiser and frigate fire, especially thanks to the advent of Thanix Cannons. And there are hundreds of cruisers and frigates.

No, they are not.
1 dreadnought is enough to destroy entire offensive, and fast. And there are thousands of them.
And they can just turn off the beam at any moment.

1 dreadnought is enough to take out the offensive, but as I've repeatedly said, there is no good reason to do that. The Reapers are arrogant, and they have a significant numbers advantage and a Destroyer on the ground.

No, they are not. Earth is far larger than london, and they don't need to destroy entire city. And they can destroy entire city, if they'd ever wanted, without contradicting anything.
And of course, they don't care for their zombies, nor they ever needed to concentrate them at London.

Earth is far larger than London, but they've focused everything on London. The bulk of their slaves are there because that's where they are being processed. Destroying them wipes out potentially millions of captured humans that they've worked long to gather up. No point in risking that when in their minds, their is no point in doing so. It would be massive overkill on their part.

There is no danger in fleet assault, because reapers outguns and vastly outnumbers allied fleets.
And they surely can spare a 1 reaper out of several thousands, to obliterate ground offensive.

Not thousands. And that's exactly what they do, with Harbinger. Come on now, surely you can remember even basic details like this?

[Maxster_]

[quote]111987 wrote...

[quote]Maxster_ wrote...
What a pathetic excuse for a bad writing.
[/quote]
You clearly know little about tone and emotion in a scene. Some random explanation about something most people don't care about at a tense moment like that would have been completely out of place.
[/quote]
You clearly have no idea about exposition, details and context.
Somehow, ME1 managed to have explanations for things like Conduit(you know, a mass relay built by the protheans). Maybe because it wasn't asspulled for a single reason because EAWare run out of ideas, and let marketing team decide the course of the story("Take Earth Back" slogan); which is a clear sign of EAWare inability to write coherent and consistent story, and that they are don't care for such things at all.
[quote]
[quote]
They are not. They are far superior in numbers and overall strength. Several thousands of dreadnoughts against 86, and every reaper dreadnought is 2-4 times stronger(more powerful guns, more powerful shields) than single allied one.
Great odds, reapers are terrified, and losing.
[/quote]

There are not thousands of Reapers at Earth. In the space battle we see, there are absolutely no more than 100 or so. While other Reapers could come to reinforce from other systems, they are presently irrelevant to the discussion.
[/quote]
Lol.
And in ME2 cutscene, there is only near 270 of the reapers shown. Therefore, final count of the reapers fleet is 270 dreadnoughts, and no destroyers.
Thus, reapers can be beaten conventionally, and there is no need for a crap like Crucible.
Also, if we're talking about cutscenes - Earth was bombed to a nuclear winter by allied fleet.

[quote]Also, the Geth have a ton of dreadnoughts that you have discounted. Almost as much as the Turians. And Capital ships can be taken out via sustained cruiser and frigate fire, especially thanks to the advent of Thanix Cannons. And there are hundreds of cruisers and frigates. [/quote]
86 - it is all. With Geth included.
And i like how you trying to prove, that conventional is possible, to defend garbage excuse of a plot of ME3. That's just hilarious.
[quote]
[quote]
No, they are not.
1 dreadnought is enough to destroy entire offensive, and fast. And there are thousands of them.
And they can just turn off the beam at any moment.
[/quote]

1 dreadnought is enough to take out the offensive, but as I've repeatedly said, there is no good reason to do that. The Reapers are arrogant, and they have a significant numbers advantage and a Destroyer on the ground.
[/quote]
So, they are arrogant, and because of that, they carefully prepared anti-shuttle defense and concentrated ground forces.
Sounds legit
[quote]
[quote]
No, they are not. Earth is far larger than london, and they don't need to destroy entire city. And they can destroy entire city, if they'd ever wanted, without contradicting anything.
And of course, they don't care for their zombies, nor they ever needed to concentrate them at London.
[/quote]

Earth is far larger than London, but they've focused everything on London.
[/quote]
They have processor ships for harvesting. Shows how you read the codex, yeah.
And of course, for them to focus everything at london - makes absolutely no sense.
[quote]The bulk of their slaves are there because that's where they are being processed.
[/quote]
Nonsense. There is no need to transfer dead bodies to London, when you can just transfer them to Citadel. It would be faster and more efficient.
And of course, they can not be alive at London, because there is no infrastructure and food there.
[quote]
Destroying them wipes out potentially millions of captured humans that they've worked long to gather up.[/quote]
That's your nonsensical headcanon, again.
[quote]
No point in risking that when in their minds, their is no point in doing so. It would be massive overkill on their part.
[/quote]
Earth population is 11 billions. Several millions are irrelevant.
And as i said, there is no need for them to destroy entire london. And of course they can afford that, because they are harvesting from many points, not just London. And they can use secondary guns, or destroyers.
And of course, they could turn the beam off at any moment.

[quote][quote]
There is no danger in fleet assault, because reapers outguns and vastly outnumbers allied fleets.
And they surely can spare a 1 reaper out of several thousands, to obliterate ground offensive.

[/quote]

Not thousands. And that's exactly what they do, with Harbinger. Come on now, surely you can remember even basic details like this?

[/quote]

That's just pathetic.
You just repeating your nonsensical headcanon over and over, and you think that makes it plausible?
It does not, no matter how many times you repeat that.
1. There is no need for Harbringer to descend.
2. Any reaper could obliterate that entire retarded offensive at any moment.
3. Reapers could turn off the beam any moment, thus entire allied fleet is dead for nothing.
4. Reapers could turn off the relay network at any moment, thus entire operation would never happen.
5. There is no need for "air defence". That's just an asspull, for the sake of idiotic drama.
6. There is no need to concentrate ground forces at London.
7. Magic beam does not exist.

[111987]

Maxster_ wrote...

111987 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...
What a pathetic excuse for a bad writing.

You clearly know little about tone and emotion in a scene. Some random explanation about something most people don't care about at a tense moment like that would have been completely out of place.

You clearly have no idea about exposition, details and context.
Somehow, ME1 managed to have explanations for things like Conduit(you know, a mass relay built by the protheans). Maybe because it wasn't asspulled for a single reason because EAWare run out of ideas, and let marketing team decide the course of the story("Take Earth Back" slogan); which is a clear sign of EAWare inability to write coherent and consistent story, and that they are don't care for such things at all.

Have to agree to disagree then.

Lol.
And in ME2 cutscene, there is only near 270 of the reapers shown. Therefore, final count of the reapers fleet is 270 dreadnoughts, and no destroyers.
Thus, reapers can be beaten conventionally, and there is no need for a crap like Crucible.
Also, if we're talking about cutscenes - Earth was bombed to a nuclear winter by allied fleet.

Also, the Geth have a ton of dreadnoughts that you have discounted. Almost as much as the Turians. And Capital ships can be taken out via sustained cruiser and frigate fire, especially thanks to the advent of Thanix Cannons. And there are hundreds of cruisers and frigates.

86 - it is all. With Geth included.
And i like how you trying to prove, that conventional is possible, to defend garbage excuse of a plot of ME3. That's just hilarious.

The shot at the end of ME2 was inconclusive because we couldn't see how far back the fleet went, and since the Reapers filled up the screen, there easily could have been more off screen. So yes, there are thousands of Capital ships, but not all on Earth. There are a few hundred at most.

Conventional victory is impossible, but that fleet still could have done significant damage to the Reaper forces on Earth. Which is unacceptable for the Reapers, given their mission.

The Geth have almost as many dreadnaoughts as the Turians do, according to their War Asset page. So either you forgot about them or your math is horrendous. 39+20+16+8+1=84. Then add say, 35 for the Geth, plus however many the Quarians have (via retrofits). Plus hundreds of cruisers and frigates...

So, they are arrogant, and because of that, they carefully prepared anti-shuttle defense and concentrated ground forces.
Sounds legit

They're arrogant, not stupid. They aren't going to leave it undefended, but they aren't going to level the entire city...

They have processor ships for harvesting. Shows how you read the codex, yeah.
And of course, for them to focus everything at london - makes absolutely no sense.

They don't just use processor ships...wow.

Oh yeah, makes no sense to gather up your harvest in one spot to make one convenient transfer. Try again.

Nonsense. There is no need to transfer dead bodies to London, when you can just transfer them to Citadel. It would be faster and more efficient.
And of course, they can not be alive at London, because there is no infrastructure and food there.

They transfer them to London to move them to the Citadel. They had only just moved the Citadel there. They prepared london in advance, and then when the Citadel was moved there, they can easily transfer it. Makes perfect sense.

That's your nonsensical headcanon, again.

Your lack of understanding of basic elements of ME3 seems to be your real problem here.

EIT: At this point there's no point in continuing this since we are not going to agree, so, good day.

Modifié par 111987, 01 mars 2013 - 12:30 .

[ahnariprellik]

Goneaviking wrote...

ahnariprellik wrote...

Indy_S wrote...

You forgot his part in Arrival. He says it's incredibly important that Shepard saves Kenson alone rather than bring his team. If Shepard doesn't do it, however, he sends a platoon.

This is why I think he may be a Reaper plant...why did Shepard have to go alone? Object Rho would have been beatable had my squadmates been there. Although see, they never would have been able to capture Shepard and do whatever they did to him for those two days had your squad been with you.So again, why did Hackett order Shepard to go alone instead of with his team, hmmmm?

Hackett may be willing to extend the benefit of doubt the until recently presumed dead Shepard, whom he helped select as a prospective Spectre... but why on Earth would he extend that level of faith in any of the people in his team? We're talking terrorists, murderers, mad scientists and loose cannon vigilantes.

He hasn't been shot in the head anywhere enough to make trusting a Cerberus funded team to enter Batarian space and rescue the deep cover science agent without:

a) bollocking the whole operation
attempting to exploit the opportunity in some way that wasn't to the Alliance's benefit
c) blackmailing him with the knowledge that he'd employed a human supremacist terror group to violate a cold war rival's borders and do violence on the behalf of a captured spy, or most likely
d) all of the above

Garrus used to work for C-Sec. Tali was a quarian trying to prove her father's innocence and her own. Neither of them were hardened criminals. Neither liked working with Cerberus but did for Shepard.They could have gone with Shepard.