165 réponses à ce sujet

[ImaginaryMatter]

I always found it a bit confusing because the game never explains the situation tactically how they plan to deal with the Geth fleet. When I first played the game it was a choice between saving the Council and focusing on Sovereign (Choosing "Let the Council die" just seemed too spiteful). The big question I had in my head that the game never addressed was the remaining Geth ships. It sounded like the Citadel Defense Fleet was dying too fast to hold off the Geth which meant they could back up Sovereign and the Alliance would have to deal with them eventually. I opted to choose to save the DA as I figured we had to deal with the Geth fleet first and it was easier to do so with their back turned, so to speak. I don't know if it's just me, but that was my primary concern when dealing with the situation and the game never factored it in; even when you choose to focus on Sovereign the Geth just seems to sort of disappear.

 

Now I just choose it based on which set of councilors I like more and the next two games seems to work better, to me at least, with the new Council in place.

[Livi14]

I always saved the council. I sincerely doubt that the alliance holding back could have had any advantages. Shepard has two options: Launch a surprise attack, save your allies most powerful ship and wipe out the geth fleet or Let the geth see you are there, allow them time to reorganize to meet you, let them destroy your most powerful ally, so they can no longer help you, and hope they just go away. It was also clear that a human letting the council perish won't go over well.

 

- I like the original councilors

 

And this

[capn233]

I always found it a bit confusing because the game never explains the situation tactically. When I first played the game it was a choice between saving the Council and focusing on Sovereign (Choosing "Let the Council die" just seemed too spiteful). The big question I had in my head that the game never addressed was the remaining Geth fleet. It sounded like the Citadel Defense Fleet was dying too fast to hold off the Geth fleet which meant they could back up Sovereign and the Alliance would have to deal with them eventually. I opted to choose to save the DA as I figured we had to deal with the Geth fleet first and it was easier to do so with their back turned, so to speak. I don't know if it's just me, but that was my primary concern when dealing with the situation and the game never factored it in; even when you choose to focus on Sovereign the Geth fleet just seems to sort of disappear.

 

Now I just choose it based on which set of councilors I like more and the next two games seems to work better, to me at least, with the new Council in place.

 

It is probably somewhat purposely vague.  That way the player can imagine that their decision is correct either way.

[FlyingSquirrel]

But if it was between saving the President, and saving the U.S. from destruction, I would save the U.S. There is a line of succession after all. And, as far as we know, if Sovereign succeeds then all organic life will be destroyed. So I think it makes sense to concentrate on Sovereign, not because I want the Council dead, but because it seems like if we don't take him down now, the Councilors (and everyone else) will be dead shortly anyway.

 

I think what would have helped the scene is if we (the player) had a better idea of the quantity of Alliance forces and their capabilities, and whether saving the Council *and* defeating Sovereign looks like a plausible option. Presumably Hackett, Shepard, and Joker have some idea of this, but I myself didn't and I suspect most players didn't either. The very first time I played the game, I thought that giving the "save the Council" order might mean I'd actually lose the game right then and there, and that concentrating on Sovereign might mean that we could still save the Council after defeating Sovereign. In retrospect, I don't think ME ever presents us with a dialogue choice that leads directly to a critical mission failure, but I didn't know that at the time.

 

I like the thematic implications of saving the Council as well as the scene that follows it. My rationale for my canon Shepard is:

• She has a pretty good idea of the strength of the Fifth Fleet and judges that they have enough ships to save the Council and still take down Sovereign.
• There are a lot of civilians on the Destiny Ascension.
• They're going to need the Council after this battle is over if there's ever to be any hope of a united front against the eventual Reaper invasion.
• As a Spectre, her responsibility is to all citizens of the galaxy, including preserving continuity of government wherever possible.

However, not all of my Shepards have saved them. I haven't ever picked "Let the Council die," which just comes out as spiteful and excessively human-centric, but some of them responded with the "Concentrate on Sovereign" line for purely tactical reasons.

[themikefest]

I always let the council die.

 

Hackett should've/could've over ruled Shepard as to whether or not it's worth saving the council at all since he can see the battle better than Shepard can. I don't like that the council in ME3 blames Shepard for letting the council die when I would blame Hackett.

[geth47]

One of th things that make me, in new plays, save the council is that no matter how you behave during the whole trilogy, not saving the council makes you forever marked as egoistical. Who cares that I helped every alien that requested my aid in order to do something good (well, not things like cheating at quasar, planting a spy on a rival industry or scanning the keepers). it seemed that everyone was resentful with me, as if I was to blame. Even that freak pro-human reported (begging for a punch) turned her back on my shep. 

 

other things that make me consider saving them the ideal solution (according to the game) is that the new council is ever more loathsome and hard to deal with. And also because with the new council it´s harder to be a spectre (only if anderson is in charge). Also, since people who play me2 without me1 (or the comic book dlc) can not have the council saved, so it seems, more than ever, a bonus ending with optimized results. Possibly in order to avoid explaining in details what spectres are all about in me2, and because saren was out of the picture, they just built up a situation in which you can not be reinstated.  

 

And since I miss quark from the ds9, and I love dr´. michel´s voice actress, having the original council in 3 sounds better (and looks better too, judging by the asari).

 

But I still believe that for a blind, non-spoiled play, prioritizing the council is a very risky measure, and much likely will reveal itself as a big mistake. Politicians can be replaced. The fact that they died (I hope) would only help convince their home-worlds that the reapers are a major threat requiring extreme measures for their upcoming invasion. If the damned politicians did not cover it all up, it would also convince the public opinion to support a combined military built-up. And yet again, even with all the warnings, the big time losers, the politicians, managed to screw all up. I was kinda hoping there would be a reveal that the council was indoctrinated, working so close to the citadel tower, which is reaper tech. The reapers themselves said that they control events, by allowing people to use the relays and take residence on the citadel, always used as a centralized government. It would make perfect sense to me that an indoctrinated council was protecting their agent saren (with them having full knowledge of his actions, since he was under their orders) and trying their best to delay and sabotage me. That would be the most coherent and realistic justification for their patent and utter incompetence. 

[geth47]

"I think what would have helped the scene is if we (the player) had a better idea of the quantity of Alliance forces and their capabilities, and whether saving the Council *and* defeating Sovereign looks like a plausible option."

 

As another person already pointed out, the game intended for both solutions to be valid so in order to implement it they were intentionally vague. So no matter what you did, it was the right thing to do. When Miranda relates shepard´s action during the me2 intro, the developers used the same philosophy. 

 

If you have an entire family of 4 individuals very injured after a serious car collision, with all 4 of them in severe need of blood, and you only have blood for one person, dividing the blood available to four will only ensure that all 4 perish. A competent doctor would need to triage and choose the one most likely to survive to receive the transfusion. it is wise to understand that there are situations beyond out control, and that we can not change them, no matter how much we may wish that things could be different. 

 

" Presumably Hackett, Shepard, and Joker have some idea of this, but I myself didn't and I suspect most players didn't either."

 

Talking about awareness, the DA is sending a general distress call so any nearby ship can receive. Shepard´s communicator omni-tool also received it. They are not asking for alliance aid, since they´re not even informed yet that the alliance has just arrived at a mass relay that will allow them to arrive in just a second as soon as the relay network is re-established by shepard. 

 

The aliens have a lot of nerve if they dare to say that shepard killed the old council. Saren and Sovereign had turned the mass relay network off. FTL speeds are still possible, but it will take A LOT of time so that one can say that each system is now closed to the others. If anderson and shepard had not rebelled, without the data obtained on illos from the vigil AI there would be no way to take control of the citadel once again and re-initiate the mass relays.  If now for shepard, the person they grounded, the alliance would not even be able to arrive at the battle. 

 

"The very first time I played the game, I thought that giving the "save the Council" order might mean I'd actually lose the game right then and there,"

 

It is a logical, responsible and mature assumption. or maybe it could cause fears that sovereign shall be able to invite or wake up a bigger number of reapers for the invasion that he would should the alliance be more expedient. 

 

 "and that concentrating on Sovereign might mean that we could still save the Council after defeating Sovereign."

 

Indeed. Maybe the DA will hold on. Maybe they will use escape pods or shuttles.  I mean, they don´t have a mobile bunker, a resistant capsule like a black box from a plane for top-ranking people? Anybody remember the president at "escape from new york"?

 

"I don't think ME ever presents us with a dialogue choice that leads directly to a critical mission failure, but I didn't know that at the time."
 

The only way to die verbally is by letting morinth seduce you, but this can only happen after you beat me2.

 

But in blind plays, if we are playing seriously, we try to make the safer assumptions.  

"enough ships to save the Council and still take down Sovereign."

 

All they know it that the reaper is measured by kilometers. But no one has seen one in action. it´s still a big gamble. On everyone´s lives.

"There are a lot of civilians on the Destiny Ascension."

 

Are there? 

 

Somehow I don´t think such a sensitive military vehicle would allow civilians without a very good reason. I know that the volus on the wards spoke to the woman about being aboard once, but I presumed that the tour was a exceptional event. I imagine that most of the people, if not all, are officials as well as enlisted personal, or whatever system the asari use. I don´t even know if there are exchanging programs accepting turians and salarians serving inside the ship. It is fun to wonder if an asari facility has 2 types of restrooms, in case of poli-gender aliens decide to visit the place.  

"They're going to need the Council after this battle is over"

 

They may need A council, but I don´t see as a necessity that they have THE exact same previous council. In fact, even if they survived (out of pure luck or because the alliance saved their necks) I think the most decent thing they could do is to resign, and take responsibility for the attack. They were careless and less than competent, to say the least. 

 

I think the aliens themselves could ask for martial law. The military should take control. Building plans for the war is a top-priority now, as long as there´s time. 

 

 "if there's ever to be any hope of a united front against the eventual Reaper invasion."

 

So they can display the same wisdom and competence as before? I think I´ll pass, thank you. 

 

If you saved them for me2, you should know that they were the most unreliable people for this job. 'oh, yes, "reapers"...  we dismissed all this nonsensical crap long ago'. Tim was right. 

 

"As a Spectre, her responsibility is to all citizens of the galaxy, including preserving continuity of government wherever possible."

 

They can be replaced. Easily, I suppose. In the case of the asari this may be a shock, given how much they can endure prior to a natural death. As for the salarian it would not take much, since it´s rare to find a salarian who lived more than the 40s. 

"However, not all of my Shepards have saved them."

 

Same as I, who had multiple builds. Byt for my blind play, the one that I did with pure instinct, I refrained from saving them. But nothing personal. 

 

 "I haven't ever picked "Let the Council die," which just comes out as spiteful and excessively human-centric, but some of them responded with the "Concentrate on Sovereign" line for purely tactical reasons."

 

When I did a trilogy play trying to cause as much loss, death and tragedy as possible, i picked the renegade option. Same thing when I used a pro-human shepard. 

 

One good thing about me3 is that paragon does not always mean saving lives, nor paragon means killing them. In order to ensure that javik and kelly will survive one must use the renegade option. If kelly and shepard are naive when it comes to cerberus, she ends up paying in blood. 

[WraithTDK]

 

Your decision is based on meta-gaming. Your Shepard can see the future. Mine can't. My Shepard cannot know that we will be able to save the DA AND stop Sovereign. That is only revealed after the decision is made. As far as my non-meta-gamed Shepard knows, we will need all those Alliance ships to take down Sovereign.

 

My Shephard can't see the future, but what he can do is do a damn good job at tactical analysis. My Shephard qualified N7. My shepherd is a military lifer. My Shephard is the first human being that the council chose to be a Spectre. And regardless of what choices you made in the game, all of these things apply to your Shephard as well. It is entirely reasonable to assume that Shephard was smart enough to recognize that enough ships could be dedicated to rescuing the council. 

 

Allowing the council to die because you don't like them, or you don't agree with what they've done or because they're not human is politics. It's like being a soldier and refusing to save the POTUS because you don't like his foreign policy. Shephard is a military lifer. He's got a job to do, and I don't think he's going to ignore his duty because he felt like he had to say "thank Obama" one too many times. And even if we were going to play the politics game, it's more important to show that humanity is sincere about being a member of the galactic community, as opposed to simply being an isolated empire unto themselves that trades with others as need be. Saving the alliance send the message loud and clear that we will act for the good of the galaxy, even at the cost of human lives.

 

One of th things that make me, in new plays, save the council is that no matter how you behave during the whole trilogy, not saving the council makes you forever marked as egoistical. Who cares that I helped every alien that requested my aid in order to do something good ... 

 

Except, of course, for the three most visible aliens in the entire Galaxy, whose fate affects everyone. Those aliens you let die. All those other things you did? They're remembered by the surviving aliens you helped. That accounts for what? A few dozen? Meanwhile billions, probably trillions across all the worlds inhabited by known sentient species, know that the council chose a human to be a Specter, and then humans, on the order of that very Specter, sacrificed the council for I'm sure they all saw as political motivations.

 

And you can say "well, it wasn't political, because my Shephard really believed..." but who cares? The rest of the Galaxy wasn't controlling your Shephard like you were. All they know is what the media tells them - you were chosen as a Specter, then they grounded you, you broke the law by and fled, and then, when the council called for help, and the human fleet specifically told you "we can save the council," you waved them off and let the council die. That's what was doubtlessly reported to the galaxy.

 

So yea, there's no way you (or humanity) comes off looking good after that.

[DeathScepter]

the character, Shepard can't predict the future regardless of the player's metagaming knowledge.

[sophisticated shepard]

I saved the council because I like playing good/paragon and the decision feels right. 

 

funnily enough I did a renegade play through to get the 80% renegade achievement and it popped when i sacrificed the council. 

[cap and gown]

My Shephard can't see the future, but what he can do is do a damn good job at tactical analysis. My Shephard qualified N7. My shepherd is a military lifer. My Shephard is the first human being that the council chose to be a Spectre. And regardless of what choices you made in the game, all of these things apply to your Shephard as well. It is entirely reasonable to assume that Shephard was smart enough to recognize that enough ships could be dedicated to rescuing the council.

Based on what information are you making this "tactical analysis?" Your pulling this info out of your meta-gaming behind. The only information the game provides us is that the DA is under attack and that Sovereign is trying to activate the Citadel. It does not tell us where the DA is. How many ships are attacking it. How many ships the Alliance has. It gives us NO TACTICAL INFORMATION AT ALL. Don't pretend that the game gives you enough information to make the meta-gaming decision you want to make.

Personally, I prefer to save the Council because of how things play out in the later games. But when faced with the choice (and this is the choice we are given) of saving the DA or concentrating on Sovereign, I can easily see a non-meta-gamed Shepard saying "concentrate on Sovereign."

Allowing the council to die because you don't like them, or you don't agree with what they've done or because they're not human is politics.

I have never said they should die because of their policies or personal traits. I think it would be evil to kill someone just because you disagree with them on religion, politics, taste in music, or whatever.

[geth47]

"So yea, there's no way you (or humanity) comes off looking good after that."

 

Not acording to Udina in me1´s paragon ending with the council dead. The other species wanted humans to have a bigger role, and they started to believe in humanity because of shepard´s noble actions. ME2 however, retconned this somehow, or there was a massive propaganda campaign of jealous aliens, since humanity got it right when they failed. 

 

The citadel´s council is so incredibly stupid that even humanity´s scum like cerberus is better than them in me2. 

 

I mean, we just saved millions of civilians on the citadel (most of them non-humans). If not for some serious social engineering tatics by the council, shepard and humanity should still be hailed as heroes in me2. 

 

And yes, there´s no doubt that the human fleet can defeat the geth. But this isn´the issue. The main point is: Can they beat the geth and still have power to take down the reaper? Since everybody has ZERO intelligence regarding the reapers level of power, one can´t be too careful about it, nor allow the luxury of wasting resources. Shepard and the Alliance weren´t even supposed to be there in the first place. The council believed that they were secured should saren attempted to attack. Their deaths and the destruction of the DA is proof of their incompetence. 

 

And trust me, to defeat sovereign could require that every single alliance ship had to ram it. If this can prevent a full-scale reaper invasion, it is worth the sacrifice. 

 

2 phrases from Santayana come to mind: 1-"Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it" Like the council, always placing politics ahead of the real threat. You´re basically suggesting that people act just like they did. Just look at the fruits of their actions. 2-""A fanatic is someone who redoubles his efforts while losing sight of his goal." The goal is to stop Saren and the reaper. Plain and simple. The geth are a less urgent matter. 

 

It was Udina and the 3 stooges who always placed politics ahead of everyting in their clouded judgment. My Shepard did the exact opposite, and what happened in me2 was nothing but an evil misrepresentation of the facts. 

[Jukaga]

Apparently they failed to fire back as shown in the cutscenes. And if it did rip a hole in any ship why didn't it show it? Why didn't it fire at Sovereign? If its as powerful as you say it could've damaged Soveriegn. The cutscenes show it doing nothing and the next cutscene has it flying away from the Citadel and the last cutscene shows it not moving or firing back while the Geth fire at it. The Commander of the ship failed because she had a panic attack and didn't know  how to respond.

 

. Apparently if its in ME3 it never fires at all during the battle over Earth. Again its useless. Its nothing but a hunk of metal that flies around.

To me it looks like the council is using it not to command the battle but as a very roomy escape pod.

[geth47]

Saving the council is only better for those who know how the events play out both in me1 as well as the rest of the trilogy. No one would question that it is indeed, but in terms of story as war assets, the best ending. 

 

However, this is merely because the writing staff arbitrarily decide to take things in this direction. I just wanted to see the player´s face if thanks to thew delay or the smaller number of surviving alliance/citadel ships the reaper managed to bring just half a dozen of his friends into our galaxy. Or, if in frustration, the reaper decided to mess around with the citadel´s gravity of life supported, and killed just about everyone with the possible exception of a few people (thousands at most) that were evacuated in the nick of time. 

 

By the way, I get the impression that it´s shields only went down because of a power surge when it´s consciousness was still inside saren´s when it was vaporized. If not for this fortuitous situation, the battle could take much longer, and cost many more ships. I honestly can´t even say if the alliance would have been victorious at that moment. 

 

So yes, there´s a way to let them perish without being wicked or vile. And considering what the citadel council once did with the rachni and the krogan, and recently wanted me to do with the rachni and the human colonists on feros, they´re the last people to complain about lack of mercy. 

 

I used to have a theory, that to this day I don´t think it´s wild. It´s wrong, of course, but prior to me3 I did consider it at least valid and waited to see if it would be confirmed. There was even a hint of sort from garrus in me1, about the council protecting saren.

 

ME3 actually made the theory closer to reality, when people speculated that udina could be indoctrinated, considering how foolish his move was, and how the reapers wanted to divide and conquer. Same thing goes for cerberus.

 

My theory was that the council was indoctrinated, and they were indeed protecting him. Maybe the end could feature shepard against the universe in a way, since the heads of the alliance diplomatic corp (udina), the hanar diplomat as well, the council and cerberus. Since the alliance allowed shepard, their biggest hero and a symbol of the alliance, to remain arrested for six months it is possible that someone big was indoctrinated. This would mean that the council, cerberus and the alliance were nothing but a controlled and ineffective opposition. 

[geth47]

"To me it looks like the council is using it not to command the battle but as a very roomy escape pod."

 

if they have such big dinataries onboard, should they not flee from the battle? 

 

And should they remain, why aren´t the other ships protecting the flagship at all costs? Talk about bad tactical coordination. Who´s in charge? Beetle Bailey?

[Jukaga]

"To me it looks like the council is using it not to command the battle but as a very roomy escape pod."

 

if they have such big dinataries onboard, should they not flee from the battle? 

 

And should they remain, why aren´t the other ships protecting the flagship at all costs? Talk about bad tactical coordination. Who´s in charge? Beetle Bailey?

Well no, they shouldn't be running. If we lose the Citadel at that point, it's over, we're done the Reapers are here.

 

It seems to me that the Asari and Turians are terrible war fighters. Asari are infiltration specialists and the Turians for all their martial chestpounding are just a little higher on the tactical and strategic scale as a mob of pitchfork wielding peasants going against a Greek Phalanx. How else could the extremely overmatched (in numbers and tech) humans possible hold their own in the FCW?

[ImaginaryMatter]

Saving the council is only better for those who know how the events play out both in me1 as well as the rest of the trilogy. No one would question that it is indeed, but in terms of story as war assets, the best ending.

 

I think choosing to save the council is valid as it gets rid of the Geth fleet. It sounds like the Citadel Defense fleet is in no position to beat them or even hold them off, and if the Geth fleet is still active by the time the Alliance starts bombarding Sovereign it seems reasonable that the Geth would break away and begin defending their boss. Which means the Alliance is going to have to deal with them, taking losses, and drawing fire away from Sovereign. In ME1 it seems as if the Geth fleet just sort of vanishes if the DA is destroyed.

[WraithTDK]

the character, Shepard can't predict the future regardless of the player's metagaming knowledge.

 

I literally JUST addressed this. One post above you. It's got nothing to do with "metagaming."

 

Based on what information are you making this "tactical analysis?" Your pulling this info out of your meta-gaming behind. The only information the game provides us is that the DA is under attack and that Sovereign is trying to activate the Citadel. It does not tell us where the DA is. How many ships are attacking it. How many ships the Alliance has. It gives us NO TACTICAL INFORMATION AT ALL. Don't pretend that the game gives you enough information to make the meta-gaming decision you want to make.

 

See, here's where your "you're meta-gaming and I play based on what Shephard would know" attitude breaks apart. The game doesn't give us enough info to make a tactical analysis. But you just got through talking about the difference between what you know and what Shep knows. Well, guess what? 

 

That works both ways. Just like Shep doesn't know what YOU know about how things will turn out and what ME2 and ME3 have in store for him/her, you don't know everything Shephard knows, either. You don't know the strength of the 5th fleet. Shephard does. You didn't see the status of the battle during arrival. Shephard most likely did. And you don't have the tactical skill of a seasoned N7 veteran. Shephard does.

 

There's a difference between metagaming and recognizing that you're controlling a character who has lived a different live, sees different things, and has a different mind than you do.

 

 

"So yea, there's no way you (or humanity) comes off looking good after that."

 

Not acording to Udina in me1´s paragon ending with the council dead. The other species wanted humans to have a bigger role, and they started to believe in humanity because of shepard´s noble actions. ME2 however, retconned this somehow, or there was a massive propaganda campaign of jealous aliens, since humanity got it right when they failed. 

 

Have you ever studied history? Because that's generally how it works. The things that people praise you for doing in battle shortly after their lives are on the line are the same things they condemn you for years later when time has lessened the impact. Happens with humanity all the time. Why expect better from aliens?

 

 

 

The citadel´s council is so incredibly stupid that even humanity´s scum like cerberus is better than them in me2. 

 

I mean, we just saved millions of civilians on the citadel (most of them non-humans). If not for some serious social engineering tatics by the council, shepard and humanity should still be hailed as heroes in me2. 

 

 

Politics. You're a soldier using a personal value judgment as a reason to let the leaders of the intergalactic government die. That is not going to reflect well on you or us as a species.

 

 

 

And yes, there´s no doubt that the human fleet can defeat the geth. But this isn´the issue. The main point is: Can they beat the geth and still have power to take down the reaper? Since everybody has ZERO intelligence regarding the reapers level of power, one can´t be too careful about it, nor allow the luxury of wasting resources. Shepard and the Alliance weren´t even supposed to be there in the first place. The council believed that they were secured should saren attempted to attack. Their deaths and the destruction of the DA is proof of their incompetence. 

 

And trust me, to defeat sovereign could require that every single alliance ship had to ram it. If this can prevent a full-scale reaper invasion, it is worth the sacrifice. 

 

So again your decision was based on the premise that your Shephard could not make an accurate tactical analysis of the situation.

[cap and gown]

How in the world do you know how many ships it would take to bring down Sovereign? How do you know how many ships the Alliance would lose saving the DA? How do you know anything about a battle taking place outside the Citadel when the arms are closed? You have no idea what Shepard knows and you have no idea what the tactical situation is BECAUSE THE WRITERS DON"T TELL US!

[WraithTDK]

How in the world do you know how many ships it would take to bring down Sovereign? How do you know how many ships the Alliance would lose saving the DA? How do you know anything about a battle taking place outside the Citadel when the arms are closed? You have no idea what Shepard knows and you have no idea what the tactical situation is BECAUSE THE WRITERS DON"T TELL US!

 

I don't know any of this. I never had N7 training. I have not had a career in an interplanetary military force. I have never commanded starships before.

 

If we're going to play the "no fair metagaming, we have to play based on what Shephard knows" game, then we have to remember that Shephard knows a whole hell of a lot more than we do about this stuff.

 

And yes, I do have some idea what Shephard knows. I know that he has the most advanced military training that humanity has to offer. I know that he has qualified at a level that very, very few people are capable of, which he could not have done if the extent of his knowledge and tactical know-how was limited to what any of us know.

 

And no, the writers didn't tell us every detail of the tactical situation. They also didn't tell us where people pooped while on extended trips aboard the Normandy. Just because the writers didn't show us everything doesn't mean it didn't happen, and doesn't mean that Shephard doesn't know about it.

 

You seem unwilling to factor in what you know that Shep doesn't, but you're refusing to factor in what he knows that you don't.

[cap and gown]

You haven't answered my questions. How does Shepard know how many ships it would take to bring down Sovereign? Was that part of her N7 training to figure out how to fight Reapers? How does Shepard know about what kind of opposition the DA is facing and what it would take to save it? Where is there any hint that someone told Shepard "the DA is facing 12 dreadnaught class ships, and 23 cruisers?" You are imputing omniscience to Shepard.

[WraithTDK]

You haven't answered my questions. How does Shepard know how many ships it would take to bring down Sovereign? Was that part of her N7 training to figure out how to fight Reapers? How does Shepard know about what kind of opposition the DA is facing and what it would take to save it? Where is there any hint that someone told Shepard "the DA is facing 12 dreadnaught class ships, and 23 cruisers?" You are imputing omniscience to Shepard.

 

I'm imputing tactical understanding and a greater knowledge of the situation. No one ever knows exactly what it will take to win a battle. The best any general can do is analyze the situation and react accordingly. Just because you can't do that with the information the writers showed you doesn't mean Shep couldn't do it with the information provided to him/her. Besides, I get the distinct impression that if the rest of the main characters were aboard the DA, you would have made the decision to save it.

[themikefest]

When Shepard says to save/not save the council, he/she has no idea how big a force Sovereign has that is  attacking the Citadel. Hackett is the only one who would be able to know if the deastiny ascenscion is worth saving or not. He knows how many ships he has. He can see the battle a lot better than Shepard can and he should over rule what Shepard says if he feels that its necessary. But he doesn't. He just goes with what Shepard says.