maybe they were designed only for the MW cuz that's where the citadel was. idk.
Yeah I have no idea. It is also plausible that the codex on Reaper limitations is not quite accurate and some of the intelligence we had on them is faulty. Like "only need to discharge every 10,000 hours" instead of never. Or something like that. Significantly better than Council drives obviously.
I only stopped by to say driving the mako straight up a wall in ME1 was fantastic! 
Also...pls do not make the mistake made in ME3. Make sure MP and SP are completely separate. Thank you! 
- 'There is more than one Ryder. There is a Ryder family, we're going to tie that in to the story.' (This wil start in character customization, which will be quite different.)
I bet the N7 is our brother or something.
I wonder if we'll get the same family dynamic mechanic as we did in DA2?
My inner eight year old giggles at the title.
Totally unrelated but somewhat funny:
I just found a copy of Sunset Riders for SNES today.
Just a thought, but I wonder if male/female Ryder are siblings...play one and the other is incorporated into the story. Hmmm, maybe not.
OP you can add that is comfrim that the Andromeda expedition star before the Ending on ME 3
So they have at least some idea of what they're doing. It's good to know 
I bet the N7 is our brother or something.
I wonder if we'll get the same family dynamic mechanic as we did in DA2?
You are reading my mind!
OP you can add that is comfrim that the Andromeda expedition star before the Ending on ME 3
So the only hope of the Ark project making sense in the lore now is the Black Ark Theory.
A ship that can move twice as fast without the need to discharge allows for a lot of possibilities.
The advantage of a nuclear submarine is that they can stay submerged nearly indefinitely. That was the major advantage over diesel-electrics.
Staying submerged for longer periods just means they're harder to detect. That doesn't make them more powerful. The Normandy was very hard to detect, but it couldn't bring down a Reaper.
So the only hope of the Ark project making sense in the lore now is the Black Ark Theory.
I doubt the Ark is going to make less sense than the resurrection of Lazarus Shepard, the Deus Ex Crucible or the Imperium of Cerberus.
Because we've played BioWare's games? The lore of Mass Effect and Dragon Age changes from game to game.
The fact Bioware casually changes its lore from game to game is a sign of bad writing. Lore should never be changed for the sake of making the plot work and even the smallest retcon's begin to add up.
What in the actual **** are you talking about? Nuclear-powered subs aren't dangerous because they run on nuclear power. They're dangerous because they have nuclear warheads on board. Just having a Reaper FTL drive would do nothing to even the odds against the Reapers. Even if we had faster FTL drives than the Reapers the only advantage it would yield is being able to escape the Reapers in space more easily.
Apart from yours being a categorically hilarious claim that ignores the advantage that nuclear powered subs have in never needing to surface and expose themselves to charge diesel-electric batteries (and therefore even making SLBM's an effective part of the Nuclear Triad), who mentioned subs? Many classes of modern vessels run on nuclear power due to its advantages. Only a retarded person could ignore obvious advantages in power, speed, available displacement, reliability and range (with the primary disadvantage being high costs).
Having faster, more manuverable and larger vessels with heavier payload and larger combat radius is a tactical boon. You clearly have no idea what I nor you are talking about, as usual. Educate yourself at least a little, please.
https://en.m.wikiped...ki/Nuclear_navy
and then retry to counter the analogy, keeping in mind the advantage with Reaper drives is even larger. Hypothetically, giving first dibs on the latest, greatest naval proplulsion advantage to goddamn Jeac Cousteau instead of putting it on your military aircraft carriers or subs is dumb, dumb, dumb.
Like"ah, yes Reapers" dumb, which probably explains it.
The fact Bioware casually changes its lore from game to game is a sign of bad writing. Lore should never be changed for the sake of making the plot work and even the smallest retcon's begin to add up.
That would only be a problem if Bioware took themselves too seriously (COUGH COUGH Obsidian! COUGH COUGH though maybe they've earned it). They make escapist popcorn and are proud of it. Ask Weekes.
I doubt the Ark is going to make less sense than the resurrection of
LazarusShepard, the Deus Ex Crucible or the Imperium of Cerberus.
Do you mean you doubt it will make more sense than those?
Just a thought, but I wonder if male/female Ryder are siblings...play one and the other is incorporated into the story. Hmmm, maybe not.
I had the same thought. Had a flashback of Age of Pirates: Caribbean Tales.
That would only be a problem if Bioware took themselves too seriously (COUGH COUGH Obsidian! COUGH COUGH though maybe they've earned it). They make escapist popcorn and are proud of it. Ask Weekes.
That's no excuse for sloppy, writing they were called out for it with the original ME3 endings and there is no reason to stop now.
Right, Reapers supposedly go twice as fast as council ships, don't need to discharge, and apparently have unlimited energy. Strange they wouldn't have just magically taken over Andromeda if they didn't have any range limitations.
Okay, so they officially can't ignore the laws of relativity now going faster than the speed of light. They don't have the 'special corridor of space-time' between mass relays to help them out.
In order to make the trip in only "a few hundred years" they have to go AT LEAST 5,000-10,000 times the speed of light
I have heard that as any object approaches the speed of light, its mass grows to infinity. And since e=mc^2, the amount of energy required becomes infinite.
I'm not sure how they will space-magic themselves out of this. Damnit.
The reapers have a base speed of 10950x lightspeed, or 30 ly/day.
Lets say the Arks had about half of that, they would reach Andromeda in about 500-600 years time. And as i recall the basic Me ships had 12ly/day speed. So its about right. The problem is the fuel.
Do you mean you doubt it will make more sense than those?
No, I meant what I said Like Tommy was saying:
Reaper tech works. All it requires is an expansion of the lore - no retcons, no breaks. The collectors manage to build a damn reaper easily enough, and Cerberus (yeah yeah, I know) manages to co-opt the tech as well. It's not a stretch for the council and humanity's greatest minds to take a reaper drive apart and put it back together again.
Of course, in saying this, I know I'm summoning a few posters who say that's impossible because they don't like the idea of it for whatever reason.
Sovereign was just laying around the Citadel for years. We know there are other pieces of Reaper technology scattered throughout the galaxy, including the carcasses of dead Reapers. We know there have been people who know about the Cycle of Destruction for ages, and many of them even knew the Reapers were responsible. Really, the Ark makes much, much more sense than any of those things I mentioned.
Moreover, things need to have narrative purpose. You keep trying to make the Ark fit the lore. That's not the point. They've come out and said it: they made the decision to go to Andromeda so they wouldn't have to carry over the choices from the trilogy and ME3 in particular. It's completely pointless and just a poor decision all around to go to Andromeda after ME3. Even if the Ark would have been as forced a plot device as you paint it, it would still have been preferable.
The fact Bioware casually changes its lore from game to game is a sign of bad writing. Lore should never be changed for the sake of making the plot work and even the smallest retcon's begin to add up.
I think a problem is BioWare wrote the lore too straight forward and didn't leave enough vagueness/hints so that they can have wiggle room to alter it without it coming off as an awkward retcon.
We're not actually, they need to drop the accumulated charge all the time, remember? That, or the PC becomes Fryeder.
I think they dumped that accumulated discharge or waste into the atmospheres of gas planets to reduce the 'space debris' that would gt in the way of interplanetary travel.
If they're traversing dark space for the majority of the journey between galaxies, perhaps they felt at liberty to discharge out in dark space.
A ship that can move twice as fast without the need to discharge allows for a lot of possibilities.
The advantage of a nuclear submarine is that they can stay submerged nearly indefinitely. That was the major advantage over diesel-electrics.
Retour en haut
