748 réponses à ce sujet

[Erez Kristal]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

You can imagine whatever delusions you want, it doesn't make any of them likely. Shepard is barely alive in Refuse and the Catalyst could easily send additional husks or soldiers after him as it sees fit. Not to mention, the sheer difficulty of getting anyone onto the station period. Shepard has no reason to believe he's getting out of this in one piece.

Hey, if Shepard believed victory was a possibility even on a long scale, that should have come up in discussion. I'd take that as a strategy over throwing all our resources at a non-working device. But as that never is brought up, by anybody, it's reasonable to believe it's not going to happen.


What trouble? They use our dead to generate additional forces. They have Indoctrination. With the Citadel, they can cut off support across every system and they have no need for supply lines. And we've already spent most of our resources simply mobilizing the Crucible.

Again, where are you ass-pulling these forces from that we're going to use for victory? What do we have that no other cycle has, on top of having thrown all our forces at a suicide struggle? Whatever long term victory you're imagining in your head is not happening.

 You call it dellusions, the probability of surviving is higher than getting hold of some rods or shooting a tube from close distance. at least you have a chance of survival, an evac isnt far fetched since the citadel arms are open and shepard is standing in an easy place to track,...(with working radio. also he lost connectiona a few mintues ago. if hacket knows his business he a would have sent a shuttle by now. you dont leave these things for chance)

Its an rp. shepard believes what you believe. my shepard hoped for a decent victory that will save as many as possibile. but bioware hjacked him after me2. he had to do what what he had. and with the krogans and geth by his side he still believe in a long term victory (10,000) years.
Another option was never brought up, because people would like to believe in an easy way out 

Yes trouble-  the reapers had easy acess at the begining for shocktroopers but as the war progress people will use more desperate measures such as cerberus indoctirnation tools and nukes on husks facilities.
they require people in order to create new reapers while the geth can produce new ships from much less complicated materials.
You have reaper tech, you have krogans, you have geth, you have vorcha and you have shepard and the sr2.
you also have knowledge a lot of knowledge on the enemy. 
Intel can win a war.

[dorktainian]

erezike wrote...


Intel can win a war.

i knew reapers were AMD tech.  

[Erez Kristal]

dorktainian wrote...

erezike wrote...

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...


Full stop. Reapers are already victorious. Every character has indicated that conventional victory is impossible. Once you accept that conclusion, you turn to whichever probability has the next highest success rate, even if only by a slight margin. The Catalyst could be lying but it's also possible he's telling the truth. We're already dead in refuse scenarios, leaving activation of the Crucible as the only possibility.

As for the Crucible being a red herring, well that seems like a massive waste of time given the effort put forth by both the Reapers and Cerberus in stopping it.

lets start naming them... We should start with Back Stabbing Hacket.

at last.  someone questioning hackett.

Hacket was doing what he thought was best, but he was sitting behind the desk for too long he forgot the importance of morale. and he was also not thinking as far ahead as needed.

The shepard being locked up is a lot more ridiculous then people would care to admit for even another reason,.
The alliance could have told everyone they had shepard locked up make a big media event of it. and still have shepard roaming around the galaxy kicking ass in secret... Just another example of a galaxy going dumb.

[.50CalBrainSurgeon]

I despise the endings in general, but for discussion sake, I will throw my hat into the ring.
Let us assume that we know nothing of the endings and put ourselves into Shepard's boots for a the last dismal 20 minutes of dialogue with Reaperchild/starbrat. Everything that bastardly little AI says to Shepard would be taken by Shepard at face value because he/she has no way to truly decipher if the AI is lying for all 3 endings. It is a guarantee that the Reapers will win if Shepard refuses, but there is the possibility of victory if Shepard makes a decision. Shepard does not really know, but under logical circumstances he/she would make a decision with a possibility of victory.
Perhaps consider it like the Schrodinger Cat paradox. Shepard in his present state does not know what the Catalyst will do. It could be deception by Reaper kid. It could be one of the three endings. But the galaxy will not know unless Shepard makes a decision. For all he/she knows the choices could all be deceptions, but Shepard has to at least act on a possibility that his chosen decision will bring about victory.

In all honesty, every outcome of the catalyst that the AI says has to be taken at equal face value because of the serious lack of information regarding the nature of the catalyst. And given Shepard's original goal of destroying the Reapers, the destroy choice at face value (equal to the face value of the other choices) proves to be the better of three very uncertain and shallow decisions.

[AlanC9]

erezike wrote...

Im i have portrayed my opinion strongly in this thread. at this point you can take it or leave it.
There a three main factors in accepting my opinion.
1) do you trust the catalyst.
2) can you imagine no alternatives.
3) Do you believe complete sumbmission is preferable to extinction.

If you answered yes to all 3 questions above you will never see logic in refuse. as for synthesis i will leave that one for sevial.

Those questions are in the wrong order.#1 depends on the answer to #2; if the answer to # 2 is "no" then the expected payout from not trusting the Catalyst is zero.

#3 doesn't have enough evidence to evaluate. Submission to.... what, exactly?

[AlanC9]

erezike wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

There are worse possibilities than that. The Reapers might realize that the cycles don't serve any valid Reaper interests and abolish them in favor of something like the Goa'uld system. Say, reduce all intelligent life to 19th century technology and keep it there. Harvest as needed.

Or they could just decide to wipe up all organics life oh wait 

That would be workable too, if the Reapers decide to go fully mechanical rather than remain partly organic

[Erez Kristal]

if you can see no alternatives, and still dont trust the catalyst then synthesis will be a more viable solution because it will leave the catalyst most pleased, if you dont trust him you are putting yourself at his mercy.

Choosing any of the three choices in case you dont trust him, also means submission you agree to accept one of his offers you agree to submit.

Most players will say yes to 2. even though they would probaly like to say no to 1 and 3.
thats a dangerous game to play. to the players defence i will say that bioware games to encourage thinking out of the box.

Also, independent shepard of mass effect 3 really annoyed a lot of players on BSN and they took the opportunity to kill gladly when it presented itself.

Modifié par erezike, 15 juillet 2013 - 05:46 .

[Display Name Owner]

Is Destroy really one of the Catalyst's options though? All it does is acknowledge that it's possible and that it couldn't stop you from doing it if you so choose. Control and Synthesis are options it actually presents. It offers you the chance to seize control of the Reapers and see if you do any better since the variables it was given are supposedly obsolete. The other one is Synthesis, which it clearly favours. I don't really see how Destroy is any less a rejection of the Catalyst's terms than Refuse.

[Erez Kristal]

If you believe the catalyst then destroy will work.
If you dont believe the catalyst then anything can happen.

If the catalyst was truly wanted to stop the fighting it could.
Unless it doesnt control the reapers and then its lying for sure... galactic wide choices are never easy. good thing none came back to bite us in the ass in me3...

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

There is another possibility. The reapers picked up a mysterious virus while in the Batarian systems and turned into a harmless dust while you were playing the Citadel DLC. When you get back on your ship, Traynor will probably tell you that Admiral Hackett is available on vidcom. Don't worry. He's just going to tell you that the reapers have all vanished. You can take the disk out of the tray and put the game away knowing that the galaxy is safe once again.

[Display Name Owner]

Then it's between 'anything can happen' and the certain extinction of this cycle and potentially every single one in the following billions of years.

And this is where we just disagree I suppose, I say "certain extinction" and you say there's a probability of survival. In my mind there is no hope whatsoever for survival besides the successful use of the Crucible. The fleets being torn up above you as you talk to the Catalyst are all the galaxy has. Turian fleets, Alliance fleets, Asari fleets,Citadel fleets, Geth/Quarian fleets (if they survived), Salarian fleets (if they joined in), mercenaries, Batarians, Rachni, Volus ships... Every one is already losing right above you when you choose Refuse. If there were any chance of those fleets winning a protracted war, which military leaders tell you more than once there isn't - and these are people who have the information Shep doesn't - it's already gone. Whatever you choose, this is the final battle, and I don't see how that's even disputable. If your choices are between taking an untrustworthy option or consigning the galaxy to it's doom, you can only take the one with the higher probability (that is - any probability at all) of working.

[Guy On The Moon]

Idk why this keeps going on. I even gave up the Indoctrination Theory...

Bioware has stated that literally everything that happened in the ending...HAPPENED. It's all taken at face-value. There is no deeper meaning. When you see the Reapers fall...they have done just that, fall. When you see Shepard breathe, he/she is still alive. Which makes destroy the most logical choice (if you want to live and destroy the Reapers...which was the purpose of Mass Effect in the 1st place)

There is no "metagaming." Just stop your wishful thinking and accept reality...EMBRACE ETERNITY

[AlanC9]

erezike wrote...
if you can see no alternatives, and still dont trust the catalyst then synthesis will be a more viable solution because it will leave the catalyst most pleased, if you dont trust him you are putting yourself at his mercy.

This requires a certain level of trust in the Catalyst's statements too; you have to trust that synthesis is real though the other options are not, and that it isn't a fate worse than death

Choosing any of the three choices in case you dont trust him, also means submission you agree to accept one of his offers you agree to submit.

This is not a very sensible way to use "submission." Rolling the dice isn't submission, except in the sense that you're submitting to the probabilities of the situation.

Most players will say yes to 2. even though they would probaly like to say no to 1 and 3.
thats a dangerous game to play. to the players defence i will say that bioware games to encourage thinking out of the box.

There are no ways to play the endgame that are not dangerous, whatever strategy you adopt.

Modifié par AlanC9, 15 juillet 2013 - 06:48 .

[BaladasDemnevanni]

dorktainian wrote...

at last.  someone questioning hackett.

Hey, if we want to start questioningHackett, that's fine.

But it also makes all those Shepards who do complete and utter morons. You had a multitude of opportunities to question Hackett and every other leader who believes conventional victory had no hope of working throughout ME3, but Bioware never let's us seriously push the issue. Instead, Shepard goes through with the Crucible plan without a peep, similar to Argo's "This is the best bad idea we have".

But now, after we've lost most of said resources which we would have put towards conventional victory, we still have people thinking it's a possibility? If conventional victory was ever on the table, Shepard managed to shoot it in the face with his approach to the Crucible problem.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 15 juillet 2013 - 07:03 .

[AlanC9]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

There is another possibility. The reapers picked up a mysterious virus while in the Batarian systems and turned into a harmless dust while you were playing the Citadel DLC. When you get back on your ship, Traynor will probably tell you that Admiral Hackett is available on vidcom. Don't worry. He's just going to tell you that the reapers have all vanished. You can take the disk out of the tray and put the game away knowing that the galaxy is safe once again.

Are you agreeing with erezike, or making fun of him? It's kind of hard to tell.

Anyway, I'll see that and raise. It doesn't matter what Shepard does, since none of it's real. Everything past the ME2 prologue is just a hallucination in Shepard's dying brain as his air runs out over Alchera. (Concept originating with  DukeOfNukes, IIRC.)

[Erez Kristal]

isnudo wrote...

Then it's between 'anything can happen' and the certain extinction of this cycle and potentially every single one in the following billions of years.

And this is where we just disagree I suppose, I say "certain extinction" and you say there's a probability of survival. In my mind there is no hope whatsoever for survival besides the successful use of the Crucible. The fleets being torn up above you as you talk to the Catalyst are all the galaxy has. Turian fleets, Alliance fleets, Asari fleets,Citadel fleets, Geth/Quarian fleets (if they survived), Salarian fleets (if they joined in), mercenaries, Batarians, Rachni, Volus ships... Every one is already losing right above you when you choose Refuse. If there were any chance of those fleets winning a protracted war, which military leaders tell you more than once there isn't - and these are people who have the information Shep doesn't - it's already gone. Whatever you choose, this is the final battle, and I don't see how that's even disputable. If your choices are between taking an untrustworthy option or consigning the galaxy to it's doom, you can only take the one with the higher probability (that is - any probability at all) of working.

I was raised on stories of fighting against the odds, of avoiding submission. of few beating many.
As you count the alliance ships destroyed. i count the reapers ships destroyed.
I know its about numbers in the end, can i destroyed more reaper ships than they can build them.
It may take me 5000 years. hell it may take me 20,000.

Despite what the reapers would like you to believe they have weaknesses a lot of weaknesses.
The galaxy leaders proved to be largely incompetent throughout the war. but the strong survived and will keep the fighting on.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

erezike wrote...

You call it dellusions, the probability of surviving is higher than getting hold of some rods or shooting a tube from close distance. at least you have a chance of survival, an evac isnt far fetched since the citadel arms are open and shepard is standing in an easy place to track,...(with working radio. also he lost connectiona a few mintues ago. if hacket knows his business he a would have sent a shuttle by now. you dont leave these things for chance)

I call it like it is. Sending a shuttle? Well, if you want to shoot against the odds, go for it. How many people did we lose just getting Shepard onto the Citadel? And the only other person who made it on board was Anderson? How many people did we lose just getting the Crucible attached? If the Catalyst has half a brain, Shepard is dead before anyone gets within arm's reach of him.

Its an rp. shepard believes what you believe. my shepard hoped for a decent victory that will save as many as possibile. but bioware hjacked him after me2. he had to do what what he had. and with the krogans and geth by his side he still believe in a long term victory (10,000) years.
Another option was never brought up, because people would like to believe in an easy way out 

I never said he doesn't. There's nothing to stop people from playing very stupid Shepards, hence why refuse is on the table. But it's a far cry from that to say either refuse or synthesis were logical. Fact of the matter is: unless your Shepard was a moron, if he actually believed conventional victory was possible, he would have brought it up.

And it's hard to have either the Krogan or Geth by your side when they're stranded in completely different systems, if not isolated with the Reapers on Earth.

Yes trouble-  the reapers had easy acess at the begining for shocktroopers but as the war progress people will use more desperate measures such as cerberus indoctirnation tools and nukes on husks facilities.
they require people in order to create new reapers while the geth can produce new ships from much less complicated materials.
You have reaper tech, you have krogans, you have geth, you have vorcha and you have shepard and the sr2.
you also have knowledge a lot of knowledge on the enemy. 
Intel can win a war.

You mean like Javik? And the Protheans? Their tactics were about as brutal and desperate as it got and they still failed, without wasting all their resources on a suicide run. The Reapers are still considered technologically above the Geth, hence why the latter look to the former as Gods. There's nothing they can do it which the Reapers have not been able to do better. We know enough about them to recognize that it takes at least four dreadnoughts to take down a single capital ship. How many dreadnoughts do we have left following this fight?

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 15 juillet 2013 - 07:02 .

[Erez Kristal]

Guy On The Moon wrote...

Idk why this keeps going on. I even gave up the Indoctrination Theory...

Bioware has stated that literally everything that happened in the ending...HAPPENED. It's all taken at face-value. There is no deeper meaning. When you see the Reapers fall...they have done just that, fall. When you see Shepard breathe, he/she is still alive. Which makes destroy the most logical choice (if you want to live and destroy the Reapers...which was the purpose of Mass Effect in the 1st place)

There is no "metagaming." Just stop your wishful thinking and accept reality...EMBRACE ETERNITY

Dear guy on the moon. you can take bioware game as it is. or you can appriceate the artisitc peace they have created and analyse it to death. by taking things as is you will miss alot.

Bottom line. this thread isnt about what bioware said happened. its about what is logical and what isnt. its about decision making. claiming your choice is logical because the consquences bioware showed afterwards shows no thinking process and is meta gaming. knowing things will turn out better because this is a game, is meta gaming. you have to look at it from shep prespective in ordet to avoid meta gaming.

Modifié par erezike, 15 juillet 2013 - 07:03 .

[Erez Kristal]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

dorktainian wrote...

at last.  someone questioning hackett.

Hey, if we want to start questioningHackett, that's fine.

But it also makes all those Shepards who do complete and utter morons. You had a multitude of opportunities to question Hackett and every other leader who believes conventional victory had no hope of working throughout ME3, but Bioware never let's us seriously push the issue. Instead, Shepard goes through with the Crucible plan without a peep, similar to Argo's "This is the best bad idea we have".

But now, after we've lost most of said resources which we would have put towards conventional victory, we still have people thinking it's a possibility? If conventional victory was ever on the table, Shepard managed to shoot it in the face with his approach to the Crucible problem.

thats right, bioware made a lot of decisions for us. and took large amount of roleplaying away in mass effect 3. but we have to do the best with what little we are given,. and even though this crappy siuation wasnt of our doing. we have to make the best decision based on what we know.(which isnt meta-gaming. this is a game so it has to turn for the best)

[AlanC9]

erezike wrote...
I was raised on stories of fighting against the odds, of avoiding submission. of few beating many.
As you count the alliance ships destroyed. i count the reapers ships destroyed.
I know its about numbers in the end, can i destroyed more reaper ships than they can build them.
It may take me 5000 years. hell it may take me 20,000.

Raised on stories? Are you just going all-out irrational on us?

As for reducing Reaper numbers, are you talking about a CV in this cycle, or helping out the next cycle? The latter can't work. The timing of the cycles is wholly at the Reapers' discretion. If they have too few Reapers left to win a war with organics, they don't have to let organics develop enough technology to fight such a war. They probably shouldn't let that happen anyway.

[AlanC9]

erezike wrote...
(which isnt meta-gaming. this is a game so it has to turn for the best)

"This is a game so it has to turn out for the best" is the epitome of metagaming.

Modifié par AlanC9, 15 juillet 2013 - 07:12 .

[BaladasDemnevanni]

erezike wrote...

thats right, bioware made a lot of decisions for us. and took large amount of roleplaying away in mass effect 3. but we have to do the best with what little we are given,. and even though this crappy siuation wasnt of our doing. we have to make the best decision based on what we know.(which isnt meta-gaming. this is a game so it has to turn for the best)

The bolded is exactly what metagaming is...

But like I said, if you want to shoot for refuse, no one can stop you. It just makes those respective Shepards idiots, based on what actions Bioware does and doesn't let the player take throughout the story.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 15 juillet 2013 - 07:13 .

[Erez Kristal]

AlanC9 wrote...

erezike wrote...
I was raised on stories of fighting against the odds, of avoiding submission. of few beating many.
As you count the alliance ships destroyed. i count the reapers ships destroyed.
I know its about numbers in the end, can i destroyed more reaper ships than they can build them.
It may take me 5000 years. hell it may take me 20,000.

Raised on stories? Are you just going all-out irrational on us?

As for reducing Reaper numbers, are you talking about a CV in this cycle, or helping out the next cycle? The latter can't work. The timing of the cycles is wholly at the Reapers' discretion. If they have too few Reapers left to win a war with organics, they don't have to let organics develop enough technology to fight such a war. They probably shouldn't let that happen anyway.

Now you are talking about the chances of the next cycle.
But this cycle is still in and is still fighting.
now we are talking about chances of success.
While i think there a very little and tiny chance of success for refuse. you think its doesnt exist.

Just like I dont believe it exist for destroy and control. while synthesis is agreeing to surrender

[Erez Kristal]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

erezike wrote...

thats right, bioware made a lot of decisions for us. and took large amount of roleplaying away in mass effect 3. but we have to do the best with what little we are given,. and even though this crappy siuation wasnt of our doing. we have to make the best decision based on what we know.(which isnt meta-gaming. this is a game so it has to turn for the best)

The bolded is exactly what metagaming is...

But like I said, if you want to shoot for refuse, no one can stop you. It just makes those respective Shepards idiots, based on what actions Bioware does and doesn't let the player take throughout the story.

Exactly! People choose one of the three options regardless of what they know of the catalyst because they know its a game (edit) - I mean because they know its a Bioware game.
. while you think shepards who refuse are idiots, I think shepards who believe the catalyst will turn them over the keys for destroy and control are naives.

Modifié par erezike, 15 juillet 2013 - 07:18 .

[Guy On The Moon]

erezike wrote...

Guy On The Moon wrote...

Idk why this keeps going on. I even gave up the Indoctrination Theory...

Bioware has stated that literally everything that happened in the ending...HAPPENED. It's all taken at face-value. There is no deeper meaning. When you see the Reapers fall...they have done just that, fall. When you see Shepard breathe, he/she is still alive. Which makes destroy the most logical choice (if you want to live and destroy the Reapers...which was the purpose of Mass Effect in the 1st place)

There is no "metagaming." Just stop your wishful thinking and accept reality...EMBRACE ETERNITY

Dear guy on the moon. you can take bioware game as it is. or you can appriceate the artisitc peace they have created and analyse it to death. by taking things as is you will miss alot.

Bottom line. this thread isnt about what bioware said happened. its about what is logical and what isnt. its about decision making. claiming your choice is logical because the consquences bioware showed afterwards shows no thinking process and is meta gaming. knowing things will turn out better because this is a game, is meta gaming. you have to look at it from shep prespective in ordet to avoid meta gaming.

Dude you literally missed the entire point of what I said.  I love what Bioware created and I analyzed it to death.  My conclusion was to agree with the Indoctrination theory (which is basically what you're copying off of).  But if reality says the sky is blue even though I "believe" it's green...it's still gonna be blue no matter what you think

Bioware itself has stated that everything in the ending happend.  There is no interpretation.  You're simply deciding to no accept reality...and if you want to do that fine, but reality doesn't change.  If they hadn't of said anything I would consider your theory but it is invalid