1470 réponses à ce sujet

[David7204]

tevix wrote...

I said "studied" not "mass produced".

Besides, you're head-canoning the living daylights out of this gun. We know very little about it. For all we know the creators had the technology to stabilize it, or make it more efficient than you think.

We just don't know. It was a point of interest dropped into oblivion.

I didn't 'head-canon' a damn thing. I know for a fact that gun caused the canyon on Klendagon. That takes a certain amount of energy, period. You can't 'make it more efficient.'

So what magic technology do you suggest would come out of 'studying' this gun?

Modifié par David7204, 11 mai 2013 - 09:04 .

[IanPolaris]

Morlath wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

If TIM could find it by reverse targeting from Klendagon (sp?), then the Alliance should be able to find it as well.  We know it still exists (or at least did in ME2).  As for the others, maybe it's practical or maybe not.  That could be what much of the plot depends on (i.e. finding ways to improve on the design so it could be produced cheaply enough, fast enough, and in enough quantity so it could at least allow the Alliance to fight the reapers on better terms).

This is just one possible example.

-Polaris

TIM didn't care about the casualties of his reverse-engineering.

That doesn't mean the reverse engineering shouldn't be done.  You'd have to evaluate the risks and rewards.  Sometimes it means that soldiers have to do what soldiers have to do....

A game couldn't depend on the character finding enough resources, people and improvements to one weapon, building large enough mass production factories and then making the things so that they protect the entire galaxy as a war is waging. For starters, that story makes no sense at all.

Why not?  I happen to be a DM in my spare time, and I can easily come up with an entire campaign series that involved nothing but solving the technical problems of such a thing (including scouting new worlds with ancient ruins, fighting rivals that may have key knowledge and/or are looking for the same....such as the Shadow Broker for one, etc).

-Polaris

[tevix]

@David

The protheans had directed-energy weapons. No race in the current cycle did.

Point: You can't decisively say anything about such a weapon without more information. Their technology could have been more advanced.

[IanPolaris]

David7204 wrote...

tevix wrote...

I said "studied" not "mass produced".

Besides, you're head-canoning the living daylights out of this gun. We know very little about it. For all we know the creators had the technology to stabilize it, or make it more efficient than you think.

We just don't know. It was a point of interest dropped into oblivion.

I didn't 'head-canon' a damn thing. I know for a fact that gun caused the canyon on Klendagon. That takes a certain amount of energy, period. You can't 'make it more efficient.'

So what magic technology do you suggest would come out of 'studying' this gun?

But you are.  Youa re making assumptions that aren't supported by the lore.  Maybe the canon is impractical but maybe it isn't.  We know for a fact that it worked at least once.  That makes it worth taking a look-see at the very least.  Also in the Mass Effect universe and especially with anything that uses the "Mass Effect" you need to allow for a fair bit of 'rubber science'.

-Polaris

[Morlath]

Caveat, this is somewhat tongue-in-cheek

Players - The ending sucks and you should have done something about it.
Devs - Like what?
P - The ending takes away our choices.
D - You have both Paragon and Renegade outcomes.
P - No, our CHOICES
D - So you want who you pick as your VS, who you romance and how you talk to characters to influence how this giant, intergalactic war ends?
P - ....we hate the starchild.

D - You don't like the Crucible? Why?
P - It's a DEM! It's a big "you win" button. Give us something else!
D - Like what?
P - A big-ass giant gun!
D - ....
P - A "conventional" way of winning. A big enough fleet!
D - That would go against ME1.

P - Put the Crucible in ME2.
D - So you'd be happier if it was nearer the end of ME2 rather than the beginning of ME3?
P - Yes!
D - The alliance sent people to search through the archives. Even if the plans were found/hinted at in ME2, why would they tell Cerberus?
P - Because we don't want it in ME3!

[drayfish]

David7204 wrote...

Apparently, you think magic is on the table and military leaders should consider that? Because magic is the only way that gun is going to be working on any practical level. Basic physics says it isn't going to work.

IanPolaris wrote...
As for the others, maybe it's practical or maybe not.

It's not practical. That's really the end of it.

...Um, magic is on the table.

The entire plot of ME3 is a galaxy of races deciding to build the universe's biggest magical mystery machine, with no idea what it does.

Almost literally anything makes more sense than that.

And how do you have a problem with the energy requirements for a 'big gun' but the Crucible having the energy to remake all DNA throughout the universe makes more sense?


EDIT:

Also, 'let me make this clear for you':

You might want to calm down.

I'm not sure why you constantly have to resort to shouting at people, calling them stupid, their opinions invalid, and their ideas moronic every single time you get into a discussion, but it's really not helpful.  Aside from making your arguments sound completely asinine, you're probably going to give yourself a heart attack.

Modifié par drayfish, 11 mai 2013 - 09:14 .

[David7204]

tevix wrote...

@David

The protheans had directed-energy weapons. No race in the current cycle did.

Point: You can't decisively say anything about such a weapon without more information. Their technology could have been more advanced.

Let me make this clear for you.

A process that fundamentalul takes X amount of energy takes X amount of energy. Period. It takes 100 Joules to apply a 10 Newton force over 10 meters. Period. That is the end of it. There is no debate. You say otherwise to any physicist and they'll laugh in your face. Technology makes absolutely no difference.

[David7204]

tevix wrote...

@David

The protheans had directed-energy weapons. No race in the current cycle did.

Point: You can't decisively say anything about such a weapon without more information. Their technology could have been more advanced.

Let me make this clear for you.

A process that fundamentally takes X amount of energy takes X amount of energy. Period. It takes 100 Joules to apply a 10 Newton force over 10 meters. Period. That is the end of it. There is no debate. You say otherwise to any physicist and they'll laugh in your face. Technology makes absolutely no difference.

I can decisely say that a machine that does X amount of work requires X amount of energy.

Modifié par David7204, 11 mai 2013 - 09:17 .

[Morlath]

IanPolaris wrote...

That doesn't mean the reverse engineering shouldn't be done.  You'd have to evaluate the risks and rewards.  Sometimes it means that soldiers have to do what soldiers have to do....

Which means the Alliance (who was funding the search for data on Mars) would have had to do a Cerberus and they were already shown in-game as not willing to do so outside of a few factions.

Why not?  I happen to be a DM in my spare time, and I can easily come up with an entire campaign series that involved nothing but solving the technical problems of such a thing (including scouting new worlds with ancient ruins, fighting rivals that may have key knowledge and/or are looking for the same....such as the Shadow Broker for one, etc).

-Polaris

Why doesn't it make sense? Well out of game because people have complained about the hacking and they've complained about the scanning of planets and your idea would mean more of the same.

In-game, because the time-frame of ME3 doesn't allow for this to happen. Even if ME3 takes place immediately after ME2 you're talking about only a YEAR to get the majority of things in place to understand and produce not just one gun but a vast number of them, put them either into old ships or build new ones and get them galaxy wide.

[tevix]

I don't care if it takes 1,253 super mario flower points.

Technology differs from race to race, cycle to cycle. What one race could accomplish with a nuclear warhead another could accomplish with a small slug that weighs only a few grams.

I'm not arguing the energy required to do X, I'm contending that a weapon could do it with less issues than you may think.

[IanPolaris]

Morlath wrote...

Caveat, this is somewhat tongue-in-cheek

Not to mention incredibly biased.

Players - The ending sucks and you should have done something about it.
Devs - Like what?
P - The ending takes away our choices.
D - You have both Paragon and Renegade outcomes.

No you don't.  You have four choices (and the fourth is essentially a game over screen).  Which of those choices you actually get depends only on a single number (EMS).  The game is blind to how you get this EMS, so at this point your prior choices really don't matter....nor can you say that one choice is really paragon or renegade (other than the control ending epilog scene and that's ex-post-facto).

P - No, our CHOICES
D - So you want who you pick as your VS, who you romance and how you talk to characters to influence how this giant, intergalactic war ends?
P - ....we hate the starchild.

The starchild is the biggest single thing wrong with the ending.  Don't believe me?  Look at MEHEM where the starchild is removed entirely and the story goes much, much better.  The starchild does not fit the overall theme or genre of Mass Effect.  Never did.  It  also is asking us (as Shepard) to accept too much without any reason to trust the source or believe that it actually would work.

D - You don't like the Crucible? Why?
P - It's a DEM! It's a big "you win" button. Give us something else!
D - Like what?
P - A big-ass giant gun!
D - ....
P - A "conventional" way of winning. A big enough fleet!
D - That would go against ME1.

No it would not go against ME1 to allow a non-DEM way to beat the Reapers.  We already know that the Reapers while extremely powerful are not invulnerable.  For that matter the Reapers know it too.  Else why would they try to decapitate the Galactic Govts each time they start to harvest?  In principle, given sufficient technology, ships, clever tactics, etc, there is no reason to think the Reapers shouldn't be beatable without a magic off switch.

P - Put the Crucible in ME2.
D - So you'd be happier if it was nearer the end of ME2 rather than the beginning of ME3?
P - Yes!
D - The alliance sent people to search through the archives. Even if the plans were found/hinted at in ME2, why would they tell Cerberus?
P - Because we don't want it in ME3!

Why would the crucible have to be found at Mars.  In fact given that the Alliance has known about Mars for more than thirty years, this makes finding the crucible there a huge posterior pull to say the least.  However, if you HAD to have the crucible, finding the remnants of the old Prothean Crucible, or even fragments of it's plans as you fought the collectors, would have been an invaluable first step.

-Polaris

[David7204]

drayfish wrote...

...Um, magic is on the table.

The entire plot of ME3 is a galaxy of races deciding to build the universe's biggest magical mystery machine, with no idea what it does.

Almost literally anything makes more sense than that.

And how do you have a problem with the energy requirements for a 'big gun' but the Crucible having the energy to remake all DNA throughout the universe makes more sense?

I can assure that devoting your resources to the Crucible would be a far, far, far smarter plan than this.

The answer to your question is obvious. The Crucible would require far less energy. It's only used once, if you remember.

[tevix]

Yes building a gigantic mystery device never before completed that consumes immeasurable quantities of resources and that has an incomplete blueprint is totally a sound military strategy...

[IanPolaris]

David7204 wrote...

tevix wrote...

@David

The protheans had directed-energy weapons. No race in the current cycle did.

Point: You can't decisively say anything about such a weapon without more information. Their technology could have been more advanced.

Let me make this clear for you.

A process that fundamentally takes X amount of energy takes X amount of energy. Period. It takes 100 Joules to apply a 10 Newton force over 10 meters. Period. That is the end of it. There is no debate. You say otherwise to any physicist and they'll laugh in your face. Technology makes absolutely no difference.

I can decisely say that a machine that does X amount of work requires X amount of energy.

I happen to be a physicist, and if we were talking about the real world, I might agree.  However, the entire "Mass Effect" postulate inherent in the MEU plays hob with energy conservation.  If the Ancient Alien Railgun used Mass Effect fields to help accelerate the slug, then our conventional energy calcuations which depend on energy invarience are off the table.

-Polaris

[David7204]

tevix wrote...

I don't care if it takes 1,253 super mario flower points.

Technology differs from race to race, cycle to cycle. What one race could accomplish with a nuclear warhead another could accomplish with a small slug that weighs only a few grams.

I'm not arguing the energy required to do X, I'm contending that a weapon could do it with less issues than you may think.

Yes. That's exactly it. You don't care. You're proposing this ridiculous 'solution' because you clearly don't care much at all about such things, do you?

If a projectile is powerful enough to knock a chunk off a planet, it needs energy. It doesn't matter if that projectile is a 20,000 ton slug or a pebble.

[David7204]

IanPolaris wrote...

I happen to be a physicist, and if we were talking about the real world, I might agree.  However, the entire "Mass Effect" postulate inherent in the MEU plays hob with energy conservation.  If the Ancient Alien Railgun used Mass Effect fields to help accelerate the slug, then our conventional energy calcuations which depend on energy invarience are off the table.

-Polaris

You "happen to be a physicist" and if we were "talking about the real world" you might agree? You might with agree with conversation of energy?

You're a physicist. Really.

Modifié par David7204, 11 mai 2013 - 09:24 .

[IanPolaris]

Morlath wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

That doesn't mean the reverse engineering shouldn't be done.  You'd have to evaluate the risks and rewards.  Sometimes it means that soldiers have to do what soldiers have to do....

Which means the Alliance (who was funding the search for data on Mars) would have had to do a Cerberus and they were already shown in-game as not willing to do so outside of a few factions.

From what I can gather, the Alliance station on mars was a low grade, ongoing archaelogical research site that examined the Prothean ruins there.  OTOH, the Klendagon canon was powerful enough to bring down a reaper and crack an earth-sized world.  I know if I was heading the Joint Chiefs for the Alliance, I would most definately want to send at least a scouting expedition to find out more.

Why not?  I happen to be a DM in my spare time, and I can easily come up with an entire campaign series that involved nothing but solving the technical problems of such a thing (including scouting new worlds with ancient ruins, fighting rivals that may have key knowledge and/or are looking for the same....such as the Shadow Broker for one, etc).

-Polaris

Why doesn't it make sense? Well out of game because people have complained about the hacking and they've complained about the scanning of planets and your idea would mean more of the same.

In-game, because the time-frame of ME3 doesn't allow for this to happen. Even if ME3 takes place immediately after ME2 you're talking about only a YEAR to get the majority of things in place to understand and produce not just one gun but a vast number of them, put them either into old ships or build new ones and get them galaxy wide.

People complained because the scanning system in ME2 was a PITA.  That could be improved (like it was in ME3) without loss of generality.  As for the time-frame, ME2 burned two years by having Shepard be "dead".  There was no real reason to do that, so don't tell me that there isn't enough time.  The Reapers travel at the speed of plot.

-Polaris

Modifié par IanPolaris, 11 mai 2013 - 09:27 .

[tevix]

And how do you know how that energy is produced?

You don't. You have no idea what power-production technology they might have had. You have no idea how advanced their understand of the mass effect might have been.

How they produce the energy, how the discharge is handled, WHAT exactly is discharged...all variables.

All variables you can't account for, so you can't put it or studying it off the table.

[IanPolaris]

David7204 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

I happen to be a physicist, and if we were talking about the real world, I might agree.  However, the entire "Mass Effect" postulate inherent in the MEU plays hob with energy conservation.  If the Ancient Alien Railgun used Mass Effect fields to help accelerate the slug, then our conventional energy calcuations which depend on energy invarience are off the table.

-Polaris

You "happen to be a physicist" and if we were "talking about the real world" you might agree? You might with agree with conversation of energy?

You're a physicist. Really.

Do you know the difference between fantasy and reality?  Do you understand why the "Mass Effect" means that you can not use energy calculations to reject the Klendengon gun?  Do you understand why the Mass Effect breaks Energy Invarience?

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

David7204 wrote...

tevix wrote...

I don't care if it takes 1,253 super mario flower points.

Technology differs from race to race, cycle to cycle. What one race could accomplish with a nuclear warhead another could accomplish with a small slug that weighs only a few grams.

I'm not arguing the energy required to do X, I'm contending that a weapon could do it with less issues than you may think.

Yes. That's exactly it. You don't care. You're proposing this ridiculous 'solution' because you clearly don't care much at all about such things, do you?

If a projectile is powerful enough to knock a chunk off a planet, it needs energy. It doesn't matter if that projectile is a 20,000 ton slug or a pebble.

And in the Mass Effect Universe, if you apply the Mass Effect correctly, you can generate aribrary amounts of energy from nothing.  That's why you can't use conventional physics as part of your argument.

-Polaris

[David7204]

You know, funny thing Mr. Physicist. I just googled "Energy Invariance," and not a whole lot comes up. Mostly research papers. No Wikipedia entry or anything like that. It's clearly not a widely used term. That's awfully unusual for a professional physicist, wouldn't you say?

[IanPolaris]

David7204 wrote...

drayfish wrote...

...Um, magic is on the table.

The entire plot of ME3 is a galaxy of races deciding to build the universe's biggest magical mystery machine, with no idea what it does.

Almost literally anything makes more sense than that.

And how do you have a problem with the energy requirements for a 'big gun' but the Crucible having the energy to remake all DNA throughout the universe makes more sense?

I can assure that devoting your resources to the Crucible would be a far, far, far smarter plan than this.

The answer to your question is obvious. The Crucible would require far less energy. It's only used once, if you remember.

Actually I would contend this issue.  If you look at the galactic map, and note that each relay is blowing up with the apparent luminosity of at least a 100 solar mass supernova, you can make a pretty good estimate from the lumunisity alone as to what the minimum energy would have to be.

The cannon is a pop-gun in comparison.

-Polaris

[drayfish]

David7204 wrote...

drayfish wrote...

...Um, magic is on the table.

The entire plot of ME3 is a galaxy of races deciding to build the universe's biggest magical mystery machine, with no idea what it does.

Almost literally anything makes more sense than that.

And how do you have a problem with the energy requirements for a 'big gun' but the Crucible having the energy to remake all DNA throughout the universe makes more sense?

I can assure that devoting your resources to the Crucible would be a far, far, far smarter plan than this.

The answer to your question is obvious. The Crucible would require far less energy. It's only used once, if you remember.

Used once... thoughout every cell in the entire universe, fundamentally reshaping the very fabric of reality.

Are you seriously comparing that with a 'big gun', and calling the gun unrealistic magic?

[IanPolaris]

David7204 wrote...

You know, funny thing Mr. Physicist. I just googled "Energy Invariance," and not a whole lot comes up. Mostly research papers. No Wikipedia entry or anything like that. It's clearly not a widely used term. That's awfully unusual for a professional physicist, wouldn't you say?

Try conservation of energy then.  When a physicist says 'invarience' they are refering to the various conservation laws since they are invarient under various transformations.

The Mass Effect breaks momentum (and therefore energy) invarience (and thus also violates Newton's third law) for the same reason that classic anti-gravity does.

The point is that the Mass Effect Universe has some dodgy physics and thus you can't use conventional energy calculations with any sort of reliability once you allow for a Mass Effect techonology to enter the picture (as it surely wold for a giant rail gun).

-Polaris

[David7204]

First of all, the energy from the Mass Relays exploding would be from the Mass Relays, not from the Crucible.

Secondly, that's just the Rule of Perception. The explosions have to bright, otherwise the player wouldn't even see them. So that shouldn't be considered evidence.