642 réponses à ce sujet

[nukembaby]

Darth Brotarian wrote...
Last time I check, north korea does not possess the ability to control everyone they come in contact with simply by standing near them or leaving one of their devices near them for a few days, or even a few hours. Nor can north korea stay dormant for thousands of years without anyone noticing any activity from them and than come back as strong as they were the day they decided to wait.

And when was the last you checked in person? Thought so

[Cainhurst Crow]

nukembaby wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

So unless you hit all the reapers with a single nuclear bomb with pinpoint accuracy, you aren't going to do much damage to them, even with the background radiation such a bomb will release.  If fact, you'll probably kill off more of your own men from this tactic than you would reapers, unless you were using only krogan and vorcha soliders, they'd probably be fine against the leathal radiation levels.

Again, nuke detonation directly on Reaper hull is what I was assuming. Why would I be detonating anywhere else? Like halfway between my ship and the Reaper? I mean c'mon. Common sense here please. 

You assume much, and most of it unrealistic for what would actually happen in a battle.

nukembaby wrote...

And when was the last you checked in person? Thought so

Charming.

I'm done with this. You are either a troll, or too immature to have an actual discussion on the matter.

Sayonara and Avidazen

Modifié par Darth Brotarian, 17 avril 2013 - 05:52 .

[AlexMBrennan]

Pure naivete. You don't have to destroy your enemy to win a war

In traditional wars where the enemy has territory, requires resources and has to maintain a supply chain, sure but this is not such war - you have an enemy who can turn invisible, teleport and outrun bullets. Again, giving the reapers all these capabilities in Arrival made the war unwinnable.

When you're not able to repudiate an argument

Citing wikipedia is not an argument.

Of course I'm assuming detonation on the Reaper hull. Why would I detonate anywhere else?

Because nuclear missiles are slow, and waiting to detonate them only after impact maximises the chances of the missile getting shot down or dodged. Again, if the reapers can see the nuke they can jump to FTL and escape unharmed.

In fact 50% might as well be 100%;

I have no idea what you could possibly have meant by that.

most other weapons have vastly lower efficiencies including railguns on a dreadnought.

I think you are talking about a different sort of efficiently because when you hit someone with a kinetic projectile which does not penetrate then all the kinetic energy is transferred.

What you may be thinking of is probably the power required to fire kinetic weapons vs power required to use produce/nukes, but since there so many unknown variables I don't see how you could possibly think that you can conclude anything with any kind of certainty.
If anything, the wide-spread adoption of mass effect based rail guns (using mass effect magic to get around conservation of momentum and energy) suggests that these kind of weapons are more effective than conventional ones.

[nukembaby]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

You assume much, and most of it unrealistic for what would actually happen in a battle.

Well I think we all have to make assumptions here since there has never been a real case of nuclear war in space....last time I checked.

And calm down bro, you're getting overly excited.

[nukembaby]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

In traditional wars where the enemy has territory, requires resources and has to maintain a supply chain, sure but this is not such war - you have an enemy who can turn invisible, teleport and outrun bullets. Again, giving the reapers all these capabilities in Arrival made the war unwinnable.

There have been so many times in history in which armies with vastly better technology have been defeated by relatively barbaric forces that I can't really agree with that.

AlexMBrennan wrote...
Citing wikipedia is not an argument.

My argument was that nukes would destroy Reapers handily even in space, and I backed it up with a widely accepted source of accurate information. If you are questioning Wikipedia, then I'd have to ask if you have a better source?

AlexMBrennan wrote...
Because nuclear missiles are slow, and waiting to detonate them only after impact maximises the chances of the missile getting shot down or dodged. Again, if the reapers can see the nuke they can jump to FTL and escape unharmed.

These are relatively trivial problems. I can think of many solutions--use a railgun to deliver the warhead, decoys, etc. It can be done.

AlexMBrennan wrote...
I have no idea what you could possibly have meant by that.

Perhaps I was being too oblique with that reference. I am referring to the fact that a nuclear detonation transforms mass to energy, essentially creating energy--and not just converting it from one form to another. Typical efficiency calculations do not apply.

[Reorte]

nukembaby wrote...

AlexMBrennan wrote...

In traditional wars where the enemy has territory, requires resources and has to maintain a supply chain, sure but this is not such war - you have an enemy who can turn invisible, teleport and outrun bullets. Again, giving the reapers all these capabilities in Arrival made the war unwinnable.

There have been so many times in history in which armies with vastly better technology have been defeated by relatively barbaric forces that I can't really agree with that.

No there haven't. The times that have had examples the technological gap hasn't been as great as you'd imagine, and then it's often been down to sheer weight of numbers and / or complete stupidity on the part of the higher-tech side. Even then the low-tech people have often been curbstomped in return later. What low-tech fighting can do is keep hassling the higher-tech side if they're in the same place until they've had enough of it and go home, which isn't really applicable to the Reapers. Even then they tend to lose a hell of a lot more people, they're just more prepared to accept it.

[nukembaby]

Cobretti ftw wrote...

Its not possible just because the writters decided to make almost every1 on the galaxy semi retard.


ITs almost ridiculous. ANd its even worse to see people defending the idea of not being able to defeat them conventionaly.. Well, of course we cant.. with the ssemi retard galaxy it is indeed impossible.

Finally the first response that makes some sense. Everyone's arguing nukes wouldn't work, but of course they would. It's the ****** people in the ME universe who wouldn't be able to make them work.

Modifié par nukembaby, 17 avril 2013 - 07:46 .

[nukembaby]

Reorte wrote...
No there haven't. The times that have had examples the technological gap hasn't been as great as you'd imagine, and then it's often been down to sheer weight of numbers and / or complete stupidity on the part of the higher-tech side. Even then the low-tech people have often been curbstomped in return later. What low-tech fighting can do is keep hassling the higher-tech side if they're in the same place until they've had enough of it and go home, which isn't really applicable to the Reapers. Even then they tend to lose a hell of a lot more people, they're just more prepared to accept it.

Assuming you are right, I would then counter by proposing that the technological gap in this case is also not as great as we think. It's been calculated that we would need a ratio of 4 to 1 in ships to have a chance in pitched battle--I say that's not a huge gap at all.

And that's not even using nukes.

Also Reapers are not immune to acts of "complete stupidity" as witnessed by that awfully dumb attempt to take over the Citadel by Sovereign and how easy it was to defeat him.

Modifié par nukembaby, 17 avril 2013 - 07:56 .

[David7204]

Crap arguments like this are the reason people dismiss conventional victory.

[nukembaby]

David7204 wrote...

Crap arguments like this are the reason people dismiss conventional victory.

Can't quite tell who you're trying to insult, so I'll have to assume it's yourself for making such a useless post.

[Reorte]

nukembaby wrote...

Assuming you are right, I would then counter by proposing that the technological gap in this case is also not as great as we think. It's been calculated that we would need a ratio of 4 to 1 in ships to have a chance in pitched battle--I say that's not a huge gap at all.

And that's not even using nukes.

Also Reapers are not immune to acts of "complete stupidity" as witnessed by that awfully dumb attempt to take over the CItadel by Sovereign and how easily it was to defeat him.

Although as people keep pointing out to you nukes aren't particularly great when you've got railguns that can deliver the same amount of energy in a harder to intercept form. 4 to 1 ships is rather a lot when they massively outnumber us.

Yes, the complete stupidity on all sides is one of the more annoying things about the game.

The simple fact is that it's crazy to think that our cycle is that much more powerful than previous ones, and that anything we try wouldn't have been tried before. The differences that we do have are largely ignored. Bits of Sovereign and the contents of the Collector base should've been a huge part of the victory, giving us knowledge of the Reapers that no previous cycle had.

[nukembaby]

Reorte wrote...
Although as people keep pointing out to you nukes aren't particularly great when you've got railguns that can deliver the same amount of energy in a harder to intercept form. 4 to 1 ships is rather a lot when they massively outnumber us.

I have to remind you again that mass effect barriers are supposed to do a very good job at mitigating the damage from kinetic weapons. Nukes operate on an entirely different principle; hence why I argue they would be much more effective. And anyway if railguns were so effective, why spend all the resources building the Crucible when you could instead build thousands of railguns? 

[XqctaX]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Why would the majority of the Reapers travel to one main system?

They have indoctrinated agents, they would know of a plan that big in scope.

they were headed somewere in arrival right. if shep would of hold of on the explosion untill the exact same time
they came out of the "jump" his/her sacrifice or who ever he left behind to do it would acually be worth something.

*edit. stupid spelling *

Modifié par XqctaX, 17 avril 2013 - 08:25 .

[XqctaX]

Argolas wrote...

DinoSteve wrote...

Argolas wrote...

Wouldn't it take way too long for the asteroid to reach the relay so the reapers would have plenty of time to just jump through it, like the Normandy that picked Shepard up in the last moment?

Like every plan it would require timing.

Even in the moment right before the impact, a jump is possible. The whole reaper fleet would have to enter the systems literally seconds before the impact. There is no way the reapers would miss the hours the asteroid needs from a belt to the relay, and I can't imagine that there is any place that close to the relay where that thing could be hidden long enough to be prepared.

in arrival we had an exact countdown the the reapers ARRIVAL. EHUM*

[Linkenski]

nukembaby wrote...

During the game I saw several Reapers being destroyed conventionally--and without nukes (Cain at the end doesn't really count since it's so small). Throw a couple megaton bombs in there and they should be toast in no time. Even without nukes, the Reaper ships are kind of a joke. Sure, their main gun is destructive but so slow to fire and so easy to predict, a NASA space shuttle could run circles around one.

I don't buy it.

Bioware would surely excuse this with "umm, gameplay and story segregation" but i agree with you. One thing is Hackett and others saying it's impossible but in many cases it doesn't seem that hard. I think the problem is, that while defeating reaper Destroyers required several armed ships or cains, whatever, the sovereign class reapers are much taller and more fortified, plus there are much more Reapers in total than what we are shown.
I think the game should have given you more levels where you actually see the Reapers invading, more than just on Earth, Mars, Palaven etc. I would have loved to have a moment where the Reapers actually took the Citadel earlier in the game too, and i would have loved if you could have convinced Cerberus to work alongside you instead.

[XqctaX]

Nightdragon8 wrote...

yea but who wants to sacrifice there homeworld first...

earth. its the obvious choise like a bigger version of me1 ending

[Ticonderoga117]

Seival wrote...

nukembaby wrote...

Can't destroy the Reapers conventionally. Really?

Really.

Grow up, kid.

AHAHAHAHAHAHA. Saying we can't beat something because Admiral "I lost an entire fleet for no good reason and now I'm in charge of everything" Hackett says so is bunk. If maybe he wasn't using Napolean era tactics in space we would, you know, do something more than suck and die?

Oh right, doing that would make the bull**** endings irrelevant and we can't have that!

[robertthebard]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Seival wrote...

nukembaby wrote...

Can't destroy the Reapers conventionally. Really?

Really.

Grow up, kid.

AHAHAHAHAHAHA. Saying we can't beat something because Admiral "I lost an entire fleet for no good reason and now I'm in charge of everything" Hackett says so is bunk. If maybe he wasn't using Napolean era tactics in space we would, you know, do something more than suck and die?

Oh right, doing that would make the bull**** endings irrelevant and we can't have that!

So just what tactic is it that you would employ?  Seriously, do enlighten us as to what you would do to beat them.  I'd like to know.

[Funkdrspot]

Lol this thread is comedy. At least its only one person in denial. Back when the game first came out there were DOZENS of people just like OP, using massive amounts of logical fallacies and just a few talking sense.

Glad to see the tables turned.

[grey_wind]

robertthebard wrote...

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Seival wrote...

nukembaby wrote...

Can't destroy the Reapers conventionally. Really?

Really.

Grow up, kid.

AHAHAHAHAHAHA. Saying we can't beat something because Admiral "I lost an entire fleet for no good reason and now I'm in charge of everything" Hackett says so is bunk. If maybe he wasn't using Napolean era tactics in space we would, you know, do something more than suck and die?

Oh right, doing that would make the bull**** endings irrelevant and we can't have that!

So just what tactic is it that you would employ?  Seriously, do enlighten us as to what you would do to beat them.  I'd like to know.

Not flying at them in a straight line would be a start.

[nukembaby]

grey_wind wrote...


Not flying at them in a straight line would be a start.

Or standing completely still waiting for the main eye-canon to tear you apart. I mean how much more would it have cost to animate those ships for a proper cinematic?

[nukembaby]

Funkdrspot wrote...

Lol this thread is comedy. At least its only one person in denial. Back when the game first came out there were DOZENS of people just like OP, using massive amounts of logical fallacies and just a few talking sense.

Glad to see the tables turned.

I guess it's because I'm the only left who still CARES. Maybe too much

And I don't think my logic is flawed. The ME game universe is the one that's flawed.

Modifié par nukembaby, 17 avril 2013 - 11:31 .

[Ticonderoga117]

grey_wind wrote...

robertthebard wrote...
So just what tactic is it that you would employ?  Seriously, do enlighten us as to what you would do to beat them.  I'd like to know.

Not flying at them in a straight line would be a start.

Pretty much. There's also using short FTL jumps to come in and get a shot behind the Reapers.

Using the information gained from Horizon to completely jam husk communication and controls would also be cool. Cause then, you know, you don't need to worry about ground troops.

Anything other than "Fly right at them" would be better.

Modifié par Ticonderoga117, 18 avril 2013 - 12:16 .

[AlanC9]

AlexMBrennan wrote...
If anything, the wide-spread adoption of mass effect based rail guns (using mass effect magic to get around conservation of momentum and energy) suggests that these kind of weapons are more effective than conventional ones.

We have to give Bio a pass on this one. If mass effect drives weren't free energy they wouldn't work at all.

I imagine the ultimate power source would be making water weigh nothing with mass effect fields, pumping it to the top of a skyscraper, and then restoring its mass and use it to drive turbines.