There's a lot of choices in the trilogy that Shepard gets to make, that he really shouldn't be the one making. There are so many decisions I would gladly have passed on to people more higher up if the game had allowed me to.
The rachni queen comes to mind. It's not like she was going anywhere.
OTOH, it's hard to believe that the Council would have ever let her go or breed, so turning her over isn't much different from killing her outright.
They could have given the queen some uninhabited planet and maintain a quarantine around it. I think that would have been better than unleashing the rachni on the galaxy (there's a slide with the rachni taking over Tuchanka...) or commiting genocide.
The Council would probably kill her. Discreetly, of course. They actually approve of you wiping out Feros.
We know Sovereign's power is in its front. It was able to destroy those ships since it had all its power directed to its front shields. How tough would Sovereign of been if Hackett had all ships fire on Sovereign from behind? Bioware only did that to show how powerful a reaper is, but at the same time showed it had a weakness, its backside. Had Hackett fired on Sovereign's backside, the loss of ships would've been less and possibly of destroyed Sovereign without having Shepard fighting robosaren.
Throughout the whole trilogy we never see anyone firing at the back of a reaper only the front. In the Battle of Palaven, the turains were able to destroy several Capital reaper ships by firing on their backside.
As far as the Destiny Asenscion goes, why didn't it fire its weapons even if it was been overwelmed? Also why couldn't Hackett look over the battle and determine if the Ascension could be saved. He knew how big a force he had not Shepard.
I don't think BioWare had that intention back in ME1. The Reaper inability to only fire backward was introduced in ME3 which was a pretty sill...(damn it, David, ruined that word) subpar decision, until then I thought the assumption was that they could fire backwards as their weapons were mounted on relatively flexible tentacle things and weren't limited to the technological limitations the Organics had. Ya, it's a big assumption on my part but the cutscenes (especially the space battles) aren't known for their adherence to the lore, so I think all the implications from them have to be taken with a large grain of salt.
As for the Destiny Ascension, I think one of the crew members states that the main weapon went offline. As for why Shepard made the decision I chalk that one up to a combination of player agency and the notion that the Alliance fifth fleet had minimal information about what was happening and were leaving it to Shepard to give a more educated decision (although I do hope Shepard knows the size and rough composition of the fifth fleet).
Yeah never understood that choice. Why would shepard know what to do and not the commander of the fleet? Especially as it turns out you can save the Ascension and the council and still defeat sovereign without too much fuss.
Combination of player agency and the notion that the fifth fleet didn't know much about the situation apart from the fact that the Geth were attacking.
If Hackett had any common sense(which he doesn't) he would've had the fleet fire on Sovereign from behind limiting the losses to a minimum
Again, the space battle cutscenes aren't exactly in sync with the lore. Everything that a space battle scene implies should be taken with a grain of salt.
As for the Destiny Ascension, I think one of the crew members states that the main weapon went offline. As for why Shepard made the decision I chalk that one up to a combination of player agency and the notion that the Alliance fifth fleet had minimal information about what was happening and were leaving it to Shepard to give a more educated decision (although I do hope Shepard knows the size and rough composition of the fifth fleet).
Why didn't the Destiny Asension fire as soon as it was been fired upon? The Commander had a panic attack and didn't know what to do or they didn't have a main gun and wanted everyone believe they did.
A crew member says main drives offline and kinitec barriers are down to 40 %. There weapons should still be functioning
The Thanix system gave the Normandy's main gun the firepower of a cruiser. Which is a 500% increase. A cruiser should then be able to have the firepower of a dreadnought. A dreadnought should have the firepower of a Reaper. The Ascension should be able to shoot through multiple Reapers with ease.
But no, that whole thing is forgotten. Space magic time.
The Thanix system gave the Normandy's main gun the firepower of a cruiser. Which is a 500% increase. A cruiser should then be able to have the firepower of a dreadnought. A dreadnought should have the firepower of a Reaper. The Ascension should be able to shoot through multiple Reapers with ease.
But no, that whole thing is forgotten. Space magic time.
There was mention in the codex that the Thanix cannons' power draw increased exponentially the bigger the ship it was installed on; dreadnaughts were in danger of catastrophic power loss if they even attempted to fire one time.
Why didn't the Destiny Asension fire as soon as it was been fired upon? The Commander had a panic attack and didn't know what to do or they didn't have a main gun and wanted everyone believe they did.
A crew member says main drives offline and kinitec barriers are down to 40 %. There weapons should still be functioning
You needed humans to save the day, that's why. If (and what should have really happened) the Citadel fleet deals with the Geth and the Ascension blows a hole in Sovereign, the Alliance coming in like the cavalry isn't needed and humanity is still kicking its heels outisde the door of the Council Club.
Yep. Fleet strengths are determined by the plot, not the other way around.
There was mention in the codex that the Thanix cannons' power draw increased exponentially the bigger the ship it was installed on; dreadnaughts were in danger of catastrophic power loss if they even attempted to fire one time.
Probably the most powerful ship in the Galaxy, the Kwunu, has everything Thanix.
So what I'm seeing here is:
1)ME1's ending is every bit as badly written and full of holes as ME3's ending yet it gets a pass because the player felt "heroic" and got to crawl out of the rubble at the end. Hence it is a great ending.
2)ME2's ending was badly written because it had the terminator and allowed critical characters to die setting up numerous problems for writing a better ME3 plot, but it gets a pass even though something magical appeared in the floor of a floating platform that caused the entire station to either detonate or have a timed radiation pulse. You survived. You felt heroic. Hence it is a great ending.
3)ME3's ending sucked because nothing masked the crappy choices and plot holes. You died, the relays exploded, and the Normandy crashed. The only real difference was the color of the explosions on your screen. It was art. Dragon Age Spoiler -
There was mention in the codex that the Thanix cannons' power draw increased exponentially the bigger the ship it was installed on; dreadnaughts were in danger of catastrophic power loss if they even attempted to fire one time.
Seriously? Quality Bioware writing. No wonder I only write AU FF where people have brains. When they installed them, one would think the engineers would have installed larger drive cores? Or are we doing another galaxy-wide derp.
The Thanix system gave the Normandy's main gun the firepower of a cruiser. Which is a 500% increase. A cruiser should then be able to have the firepower of a dreadnought. A dreadnought should have the firepower of a Reaper. The Ascension should be able to shoot through multiple Reapers with ease.
But no, that whole thing is forgotten. Space magic time.
I don't even know where to start with this.
No.
As mentioned above, I wouldn't take the cutscenes too seriously. Chris L'Etoile for example said that they used the wrong ship models in the battle of the Citadel because the cinematics department didn't read the Codex.
I don't even know where to start with this.
No.
Well, that's sure a great way to make an argument.
Guest_Jesus Christ_*
Well, that's sure a great way to make an argument.
I was convinced!
Let's begin with the fact that you're making up numbers out of thin air and calling them facts?
The fact that you're assuming weapons can be scaled with no basis?
The fact that you're completely pulling the strength of the Reaper's armor out of nowhere?
Ridiculous.
Seriously? Quality Bioware writing. No wonder I only write AU FF where people have brains. When they installed them, one would think the engineers would have installed larger drive cores? Or are we doing another galaxy-wide derp.
You know, I really get annoyed at the 'Facepalm' .gifs people like to post in lieu of an argument, but the temptation is pretty strong at the moment upon reading this overwhelming amount of ignorance.
I know not everyone has a technical mind such as myself, but surely these concepts are not that difficult.
I know not everyone has a technical mind such as myself, .
You're a legend in your own mind Bob from Accounting.
Let's begin with the fact that you're making up numbers out of thin air and calling them facts?
The fact that you're assuming weapons can be scaled with no basis?
The fact that you're completely pulling the strength of the Reaper's armor out of nowhere?
Ridiculous.
I got the number scaling from here: http://social.biowar...ndex/12076415/1
They can be scaled. The Kwunu, for example. And the Codex says the thanix has been scaled up on Alliance dreadnoughts and beyond.
Their armor can't withstand a shot fired from the Normandy in ME.
You know, I really get annoyed at the 'Facepalm' .gifs people like to post in lieu of an argument, but the temptation is pretty strong at the moment upon reading this overwhelming amount of ignorance.
I know not everyone has a technical mind such as myself, but surely these concepts are not that difficult.
Maybe I should rephrase that to a more exacting standard for your technical mind: upgrade to a more powerful drive core. Power might have nothing to do with size. After all we're talking about space magic here.
Did I just see an argument hat a Reaper tech weapon would make a single warship able to punch through multiple Reapers. It's hard to take the argument seriously. A reverse-engineered Reaper weapon makes our ships more powerful than Reapers?
Do you know what hyperbole is?
Retour en haut