102 réponses à ce sujet

[ddraigcoch123]

Got me started thinking about how Juno made some pretty intricate manouvers to enter orbit around Jupiter with its timed reverse thrusting... big tin foil box for future space travel anyone?

 

Yeah the mako is sooooo not effective... why couldn't the kodiak (or version of) just convert to a land vehicle when needed but yeah honestly is there any need at all for a land vehicle when we have shuttles that can do anything up to and including hover in one place inches off the ground

 

I'm searching for the answer to propulsion that doesn't jar with my need for stuff to be rooted, even theoretically, in science but with an overwhelming need for a sexy cool looking ship... so I'm going to start hunting down a quantum level answer... QUAntum Drive Stealth Cruiser anyone? (brought to you by the QUAD Technology Group a Asari Human joint venture)

[Iakus]

Got me started thinking about how Juno made some pretty intricate manouvers to enter orbit around Jupiter with its timed reverse thrusting... big tin foil box for future space travel anyone?

 

Yeah the mako is sooooo not effective... why couldn't the kodiak (or version of) just convert to a land vehicle when needed but yeah honestly is there any need at all for a land vehicle when we have shuttles that can do anything up to and including hover in one place inches off the ground

 

I'm searching for the answer to propulsion that doesn't jar with my need for stuff to be rooted, even theoretically, in science but with an overwhelming need for a sexy cool looking ship... so I'm going to start hunting down a quantum level answer... QUAntum Drive Stealth Cruiser anyone? (brought to you by the QUAD Technology Group a Asari Human joint venture)

Well, when the probes to Mars landed, they deployed little rover bots.  So wheeled vehicles must be more efficient or something.

 

Besides, we tried the hovering vehicle thing before and got the Hammerhead.  No thanks 

[ddraigcoch123]

Well, when the probes to Mars landed, they deployed little rover bots.  So wheeled vehicles must be more efficient or something.

 

Besides, we tried the hovering vehicle thing before and got the Hammerhead.  No thanks 

Oh hell I'd forgotten the hammerhead... no just no... that thing was terrible... ok mako it is...

And yep the stage of exploration we are at currently means land vehicles and rover bots are obviously superior for now  

[Kabooooom]

Oh hell I'd forgotten the hammerhead... no just no... that thing was terrible... ok mako it is...
And yep the stage of exploration we are at currently means land vehicles and rover bots are obviously superior for now

NASA is testing a drone for remote exploration of Mars. The problem with an aerial robot like that is that it would need to be nearly 100% autonomous, we couldn't control it from Earth fast enough to avoid disaster. Another problem is the energy factor - it typically takes more energy to fly an object than it does to drive it along the ground. The design would have to be incredibly efficient to minimize wasted energy - it would either have to be able to lift its own power source, or efficient enough with solar energy that it doesn't need one. Either are very difficult engineering challenges.

[Gothfather]

Let's remember first how traditional FTL works in the trilogy. Mass Effect technology just lower the mass of the vessel, so it takes conventional means to propel it foward. Because of that, the fastest why to travel is to accelerate half way through the trip, turn the ship around and decelerate the rest of the way. Shepard even makes fun of this in this quote: "You wouldn't believe how often I hear "Why is the ship turning around? We're only halfway there!"

It's true that cutscenes never showed this. But there are two things to consider: cutscenes almost never follow codex entries and the ship leaving FTL pointing "foward" doesn't go against this method of travel. (I also believe we've never seen a full FTL travel that doesn't involve a Mass Relay)

If we look back at the E3'15 trailer however we see that the Tempest doesn't do this at all. It just go foward, much more like Star Wars than Mass Effect. And so I ask, what do you guys make of that? Should we disconsider it because it's a trailer/cutscene (we do know they want no loading screens in the game so that trave screen will be somehow in it). Will Bioware change in the final game? It is indeed a different way of travel, and if so, where did it come from and why wasn't it used before? 

Any ideas out there?

 

 

 

We are in Andromeda GET OVER IT. There will be Tech differences GET OVER IT. There will be a setting change GET OVER IT. There will be new races and old races mixed together GET OVER IT. Shepard isn't in it in any capacity GET OVER IT.

 

If people are so fraking upset with the change in ME:A sight unseen then they should simply stop supporting Bioware by NOT buying a product they don't like. But I don't think this is the purpose of all this QQing. The purpose is to seek support for their subjective opinion like it matters. No one is wrong or right in this area either you like something subjectively or you don't. Someone else sharing your view doesn't reaffirm the correctness of you position because there is no FRAKING correct position on subjective things and all entertainment media is SUBJECTIVE.

 

Going on and on and on about things is just being an annoyance.

 

The relays were designed to LIMIT technological variance in the cycles which is why nearly all intelligent species had their solar systems seeded by a limit quantity of eezo and artefacts related to eezo. The goal is to funnel technology down a 'known' path. Yet this DOESN'T preclude variance, it is 100% perfectly reasonable and fitting in any cycle that some technology isn't derived from eezo tech. Or is a variant of eezo tech that the reapers never encountered. Organics are unpredictable which leads to inefficiencies in collection of the harvest which was mitigated by the relays system but again this only mitigate it does NOT eliminate. The leviathan DLC SPECIFICALLY states that organics are unpredictable in relation to technology so it isn't lore breaking for someone to exhibit a trait attributed to them in the game. SO a new form of FTL to get us to Andromeda and to be used in Andromeda is perfectly fitting within the lore. But again this isn't about being lore faithful this is just another take on the woe is me Mass effect isn't doing what I want them to do. I want them to "fix" the endings. sniff sniff. Get over it.

 

If people spent half the energy they do trying to debunk the whole setting change into climate change we would have a solution to global warming. I swear the amount of man hours spent on this with NOTHING to show for it proves just how unhand wavy this setting change is in principle. Who knows what Bioware has done in practise but we will know WHEN THE GAME IS RELEASED.

 

Not sure if you should buy the game until you know if it is done right? This is a reasonable position, then DON'T buy the fraking game until you have read critic reviews you trust and seen some fan feedback. It isn't rocket science people. If you are wary, WAIT. What is so fraking complicated?

 

I swear people are only here to vent their concerns as some kind of perverse notion of "look how discerning I am. SEE? Look at me? I am a superior gamers because I feel X about ME:A." Get over yourselves people. You are not special. Many of us have no intention of pre-ordering the game until we see reviews from reviewers we trust. This isn't note worthy and it especially isn't a reason to go on and on and on about how ME:A is in trouble when you are voicing these concerns sight unseen.

[Gothfather]

That's true, but the problem with this is that when we talk this kind of space travel, we talk about accelerating all the time, and not just keeping a steady speed (like airplanes). So if you accelerate half the trip, you need to decelerate with the same acceleration for the same amount of time. I'm assuming the reverse thrusters of a jet engine cannot produce the same amount of power as the frontal one.

No you don't that is typical of people not understanding what is actually  happening. You don't need to have the craft to behave that way you can have the craft accelerate faster in one direction and then use slightly less acceleration in the other direction all that is required is that you accelerate forward for less time that you "de-accelerate."  You also don't need constant acceleration there is in fact no REASON to assume that this would be done even with mass effect FTLs in Andromeda. It is one thing to do constant acceleration when you have the INFRASTRUCTURE to create a ready supply of fuel in almost every star system it is entirely different when you have next to ZERO infrastructure. FTL coasting might take you longer to get some place but the fuel savings are immense.

 

The fact that people think the ONLY way things work in the above quote shows that they just don't understand the actual physics involved. Constant acceleration is so inefficient we have NEVER used it for any spacecraft ever. It simply isn't efficient to carry all that fuel when coasting in space once you reach high velocities works wonders.

[Kabooooom]

No you don't that is typical of people not understanding what is actually happening. You don't need to have the craft to behave that way you can have the craft accelerate faster in one direction and then use slightly less acceleration in the other direction all that is required is that you accelerate forward for less time that you "de-accelerate." You also don't need constant acceleration there is in fact no REASON to assume that this would be done even with mass effect FTLs in Andromeda. It is one thing to do constant acceleration when you have the INFRASTRUCTURE to create a ready supply of fuel in almost every star system it is entirely different when you have next to ZERO infrastructure. FTL coasting might take you longer to get some place but the fuel savings are immense.

The fact that people think the ONLY way things work in the above quote shows that they just don't understand the actual physics involved. Constant acceleration is so inefficient we have NEVER used it for any spacecraft ever. It simply isn't efficient to carry all that fuel when coasting in space once you reach high velocities works wonders.

Yes, I made a post a few days ago about "FTL coasting" and how efficient it would be, but I doubt Bioware will implement an idea like that instead of a handwave.

Constant acceleration would be efficient, provided we find a way to obtain acceleration with fuel of immense energy density or (even better) no fuel at all. If only this really works, it would be incredibly badass: https://en.m.wikiped...cavity_thruster

Otherwise it is incredibly inefficient, and stupid. We can travel across the entire galaxy no problem, even right now - the problem is that none of us will live to see the voyage to its end.

And that's the problem with our species - we are incredibly impatient and shortsighted. We want something like Star Trek. And sure, maybe we can make an FTL drive or at the very least make a vessel reach a relativistic speed. But if we can't, then I say we better get used to the idea of generation or sleeper ships. We better get used to the idea of people being born, living, and dying entirely within the confines of a spacecraft if we ever want to explore the stars.

[Helios969]

I'm not sure that using asteroids as space vehicles is such a great idea.

When you build yourself a watercraft an aircraft or a space craft, you choose the materials the craft is made of, you know approximately the pressures it can withstand, there are few wasted spaces, etc.

An asteroid on the other hand comes "as is", the composition of the materials, the size and shape of the asteroid, and the thickness of the "armor" are
never going to be optimal. All it takes is for you to miss one fault line, and your spacecraft will simply come apart next time you try to jump to FTL.


It is probably much safer for use as a space station.


Personally, I believe that the "optimal" shape for a Mass Effect based space craft is something resembling a submarine.

Wasn't suggesting using it as is. Many engineering aspects to consider and overcome but it's optimal for protecting against both radiation and micro-meteorite impacts. You'd be surprised how much damage a mm piece of quartz traveling at 10m/s will do.

[Wulfram]

Whether FTL coasting is efficient depends on the power consumption of the FTL core. Plus, sometimes you just need to get from A to B as fast as possible, and that does mean constant acceleration.

[Laughing_Man]

Wasn't suggesting using it as is. Many engineering aspects to consider and overcome but it's optimal for protecting against both radiation and micro-meteorite impacts. You'd be surprised how much damage a mm piece of quartz traveling at 10m/s will do.

 

Sure, but you actually need to move this giant chunk of rock in something approaching to an efficient speed. The fuel requirements must be considerable.

 

Not to mention if you get into combat and need to actually maneuver your "ship"...

 

I can see why in a very specific situation with limited technology this might be an option, but to say that this is an ideal design for a spacecraft,

that seems like an exaggeration to me.

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

<<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>

Newtonian physics applies to mass and velocity calculations under the speed of light. However, Newton gets a headache when you do approach the speed of light in the conventional way (ie: rocket acceleration, for example).

FTL speeds is where you throw out Newton and go into another realm of mathematics. If Einstein theory holds true, then you need to cheat Einstein when traveling faster than the speed of light. The tempest engine could translate the ship into sub-space where light speed is not a limiting factor or is less so or it can create its own wormhole as in the Stargate universe.

Getting bogged down by space travel "limitations" is hardly a good game design. Just go from point A to B and be done with it.

Yeah if we wanted to be seriously accurate about it, ships should look like Swiss cheese after flying so far due to all the particles it flew through at the speed of light.

[Laughing_Man]

Yeah if we wanted to be seriously accurate about it, ships should look like Swiss cheese after flying so far due to all the particles it flew through at the speed of light.

 

My personal headcanon is that the ME bubble has something to do with protecting the ship, either by making everything simply flow around it like water around a stone in a stream, by creating some kind of spatial anomaly around the ship while it is in FTL - essentially making it too small relative to anything else to actually hit anything, or by outright deflecting or more likely vaporizing small objects and particles that come into contact with the bubble during FTL.

[Helios969]

Sure, but you actually need to move this giant chunk of rock in something approaching to an efficient speed. The fuel requirements must be considerable.

Not to mention if you get into combat and need to actually maneuver your "ship"...

I can see why in a very specific situation with limited technology this might be an option, but to say that this is an ideal design for a spacecraft,
that seems like an exaggeration to me.

And why would fuel efficiency be appreciably impacted?

[Kabooooom]

My personal headcanon is that the ME bubble has something to do with protecting the ship, either by making everything simply flow around it like water around a stone in a stream, by creating some kind of spatial anomaly around the ship while it is in FTL - essentially making it too small relative to anything else to actually hit anything, or by outright deflecting or more likely vaporizing small objects and particles that come into contact with the bubble during FTL.

This would have been a good idea. And yet, the codex shows this isn't the case. When traveling at FTL, microwave radiation gets blue shifted into the visible light range, and visible light gets blue shifted into x-Ray and gamma ranges. This is somewhat clever, and I'm glad they addressed this in the codex, but they neglect that if the crew can look out a window and see things that were previously in microwave range, then they are literally being hardcore irradiated by everything that they CAN'T see, lol.

[Laughing_Man]

And why would fuel efficiency be appreciably impacted?

 

I dunno, bigger mass and size usually means bigger engines and bigger Eezo core, and if you assume thick "armor" to protect from small impacts,

this monster is going to need even bigger engines.

 

So again, I guess the real question is, what do you plan on doing with this "ship"?

[Laughing_Man]

This would have been a good idea. And yet, the codex shows this isn't the case. When traveling at FTL, microwave radiation gets blue shifted into the visible light range, and visible light gets blue shifted into x-Ray and gamma ranges. This is somewhat clever, and I'm glad they addressed this in the codex, but they neglect that if the crew can look out a window and see things that were previously in microwave range, then they are literally being hardcore irradiated by everything that they CAN'T see, lol.

 

Yeah, some of the science is... not very well thought out, but I don't remember the codex talking specifically about my hypothesis.

[Sartoz]

Well, when the probes to Mars landed, they deployed little rover bots.  So wheeled vehicles must be more efficient or something.

 

Besides, we tried the hovering vehicle thing before and got the Hammerhead.  No thanks 

                                                                                    <<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>

 

The Hammerhead was a superior pizz poor design, if I ever saw / used one.

 

My take is simple. If we can go to Andromeda we can design an anti-grav combat shuttle for ground operations or for air exploration. You can stuff the thing with a complete sensor suite. If EA DICE can make Battlefield 1 with WW1 airplanes that fly as they should, Bio can do the same (with DICE code). There is no more excuse from Bio, with regards to flying vehicles.

[Gothfather]

Yes, I made a post a few days ago about "FTL coasting" and how efficient it would be, but I doubt Bioware will implement an idea like that instead of a handwave.

Constant acceleration would be efficient, provided we find a way to obtain acceleration with fuel of immense energy density or (even better) no fuel at all. If only this really works, it would be incredibly badass: https://en.m.wikiped...cavity_thruster

Otherwise it is incredibly inefficient, and stupid. We can travel across the entire galaxy no problem, even right now - the problem is that none of us will live to see the voyage to its end.

And that's the problem with our species - we are incredibly impatient and shortsighted. We want something like Star Trek. And sure, maybe we can make an FTL drive or at the very least make a vessel reach a relativistic speed. But if we can't, then I say we better get used to the idea of generation or sleeper ships. We better get used to the idea of people being born, living, and dying entirely within the confines of a spacecraft if we ever want to explore the stars.

it appears from the recent E3 trailer we got a sleeper ship. I mean to me the evidence is pretty clear that Ryder woke up on a sleeper ship. So this explains the how they crossed the intergalactic distances. ANd the Tempest simply looks like a ship designed to solve FTL flight issues when there are no mass relays. AKA it uses a different form of FTL systems. Yet somehow people seem to think it is handwaving. I don't understand this when the catalysis clearly explains that the relays were a mitigation to the unpredictable technologies that arise in a cycle. Is it really hand waving to use an attribute attributed to you in the game lore? It seems to me that this isn't about lore issues or hand waving but more people wanting an excuse to b!tch about ME3 again because ME4 isn't "fixing" it.

 

Seriously why would you bring a ship designed to use mass relays to travel large distances when you are going to a location you have zero rational reason to think it will have mass relays there? It would seem more hand wavy to me for them to use the same FTL systems in Andromeda. For example assuming mars had an oxygen-nitrogen atmosphere at the same pressure we wouldn't send a fraking rover there that ran on petrol because we have no rational reason to believe there are petrol stations on mars. And if someone wrote a story about exploring mars and there just happen to be petrol stations everywhere you'd think hand waving. But Bioware behaving in a way that assumes there are no relays thus they don't use standard FTL drives in Andromeda is hand waving? WTF?

[Kabooooom]

it appears from the recent E3 trailer we got a sleeper ship. I mean to me the evidence is pretty clear that Ryder woke up on a sleeper ship. So this explains the how they crossed the intergalactic distances. ANd the Tempest simply looks like a ship designed to solve FTL flight issues when there are no mass relays. AKA it uses a different form of FTL systems. Yet somehow people seem to think it is handwaving. I don't understand this when the catalysis clearly explains that the relays were a mitigation to the unpredictable technologies that arise in a cycle. Is it really hand waving to use an attribute attributed to you in the game lore? It seems to me that this isn't about lore issues or hand waving but more people wanting an excuse to b!tch about ME3 again because ME4 isn't "fixing" it.

Seriously why would you bring a ship designed to use mass relays to travel large distances when you are going to a location you have zero rational reason to think it will have mass relays there? It would seem more hand wavy to me for them to use the same FTL systems in Andromeda. For example assuming mars had an oxygen-nitrogen atmosphere at the same pressure we wouldn't send a fraking rover there that ran on petrol because we have no rational reason to believe there are petrol stations on mars. And if someone wrote a story about exploring mars and there just happen to be petrol stations everywhere you'd think hand waving. But Bioware behaving in a way that assumes there are no relays thus they don't use standard FTL drives in Andromeda is hand waving? WTF?

Not sure why you are aggressively rambling here. First of all, FTL in Mass Effect doesn't require relays at all, so the Tempest could simply use traditional FTL at the canon speed of 12 light years per day to explore Andromeda. No adjustment to lore is necessary.

Secondly, people are upset (and I'm not one of them) because the trailer shows an apparently different kind of FTL. The reason, I think, people are upset by this is that it is pretty much confirmed at this point that the Arks leave before the ending of ME3 and the game starts when they arrive in Andromeda. So where is the time to develop new advanced tech that is completely unfamiliar to them? I'll answer it for you: there is no time to do it. So, I bet they are using Remnant FTL tech to explore Andromeda, and I have no problem with that.

Finally, yes it is confirmed that the Ark is a sleeper ship AND that the journey takes approximately 600 years to reach Andromeda, which is almost exactly the canon FTL speed of 12 light years per day. All indications are that they most certainly did NOT use newfangled technology to reach Andromeda. Now, whether they discover new tech once there and use it to their advantage - that's another story. And given that the leak is obviously true, the Remnant tech is a good bet on that.

[Arcian]

There was a recent paper that said that any ship travelling ftl in a warp bubble when said bubble is dropped it would sterilise every system visited due to all the particles caught up on the front of the bubble suddenly flying outwards at Near C

That's really an exaggeration. After all, a warp bubble the size of a star ship logically can't scoop up enough mass to wipe out an entire star system.

Also, they wouldn't be flying outwards at near c if the warp drive slows down to sublight speeds before "popping" the bubble. They'll have to slow down anyway, if they're dropping out of the bubble at near c they're going to overshoot their targets and require ludicrous amounts of fuel to slow down with the chemical rocket engines.

[capn233]

That's really an exaggeration. After all, a warp bubble the size of a star ship logically can't scoop up enough mass to wipe out an entire star system.

Also, they wouldn't be flying outwards at near c if the warp drive slows down to sublight speeds before "popping" the bubble. They'll have to slow down anyway, if they're dropping out of the bubble at near c they're going to overshoot their targets and require ludicrous amounts of fuel to slow down with the chemical rocket engines.

 

I remember them talking about this on some show (specific, I know... maybe it was The Universe).

 

Supposedly you would indeed accumulate particles, but as you deactivate the bubble, these extremely blue shifted particles propagate as gamma rays, and even short trips would result in extremely high intensity.

 

They had a proposed solution though, which was to basically oscillate the bubble so that you would only collect a very small amount before they are released.

 

Of course since nobody knows how you would create the bubble, or manipulate it from inside once you do, it is a bit moot.

[Kantr]

That's really an exaggeration. After all, a warp bubble the size of a star ship logically can't scoop up enough mass to wipe out an entire star system.

Also, they wouldn't be flying outwards at near c if the warp drive slows down to sublight speeds before "popping" the bubble. They'll have to slow down anyway, if they're dropping out of the bubble at near c they're going to overshoot their targets and require ludicrous amounts of fuel to slow down with the chemical rocket engines.

You use the bubble to travel at speeds faster than light. The ship itself isn;t moving.

 

Anyway here's the link. http://www.universet...iller-downside/

[Helios969]

I dunno, bigger mass and size usually means bigger engines and bigger Eezo core, and if you assume thick "armor" to protect from small impacts,

this monster is going to need even bigger engines.

 

So again, I guess the real question is, what do you plan on doing with this "ship"?

That ultimately depends on how rapidly you need to accelerate, but fair enough.  The other side of the equation are construction costs.  If many of the materials used in construction are mined and forged onsite that would represent a significant reduction in manufacturing costs.  It wouldn't be practical for smaller ships like the Normandy/Tempest, but large structures like the Destiny Ascension and certainly the Arks, it would be ideal.

[Laughing_Man]

That ultimately depends on how rapidly you need to accelerate, but fair enough.  The other side of the equation are construction costs.  If many of the materials used in construction are mined and forged onsite that would represent a significant reduction in manufacturing costs.  It wouldn't be practical for smaller ships like the Normandy/Tempest, but large structures like the Destiny Ascension and certainly the Arks, it would be ideal.

 

Well, you will need to find an steroid of ideal size shape and composition somewhere, and then drag this huge asteroid out of its possibly extremely dangerous original location - like say an asteroid field - back to your staging area / shipyard.

 

Over all, I think that if you have the technology to do all that, you might as well just mine the required materials and build your own spacecraft according to the optimal design, rather than something random like natural shape and composition.

 

Naturally occurring asteroids are not designed to survive jumps to FTL, withstand pressures of re-entry, or even resist a high powered mass accelerator round.

 

Ideally, most of the heavy lifting like mining and building the skeleton and the hull of the ship would be automated via construction robots, you will only need to keep an eye on them.

[fdrty]

Not sure why you are aggressively rambling here. First of all, FTL in Mass Effect doesn't require relays at all, so the Tempest could simply use traditional FTL at the canon speed of 12 light years per day to explore Andromeda. No adjustment to lore is necessary.

Secondly, people are upset (and I'm not one of them) because the trailer shows an apparently different kind of FTL. The reason, I think, people are upset by this is that it is pretty much confirmed at this point that the Arks leave before the ending of ME3 and the game starts when they arrive in Andromeda. So where is the time to develop new advanced tech that is completely unfamiliar to them? I'll answer it for you: there is no time to do it. So, I bet they are using Remnant FTL tech to explore Andromeda, and I have no problem with that.

Finally, yes it is confirmed that the Ark is a sleeper ship AND that the journey takes approximately 600 years to reach Andromeda, which is almost exactly the canon FTL speed of 12 light years per day. All indications are that they most certainly did NOT use newfangled technology to reach Andromeda. Now, whether they discover new tech once there and use it to their advantage - that's another story. And given that the leak is obviously true, the Remnant tech is a good bet on that.

 

 

Ok so my theory was that maybe they used wormholes, or, failing that, just use a huge amount of eezo to get there. Looks like it'll be the latter, not the former.

 

The galaxy is a huge place. It is not impossible for someone out there to have the smarts and the funds to stockpile eezo.

 

Given that Mass relays are milky way tech, and we don't even know if there is eezo in the andromeda galaxy, in MEA we will either discover new FTL tech (by that I mean utilise whatever folks use in Andromeda) or spend the game in a small cluster of systems, and not the galaxy as a whole. Either is fine.

 

Now, why wouldn't they tell Shepard about this brilliant plan to save our species by going to the andromeda galaxy?

 

Well, first of all, he doesn't need to know. So why tell him? Best case scenario is it makes no difference and Shep kills the reapers. Worst case, it creates a sense of jealousy or complacency which actively harms efforts to stop the reapers - I mean, everyone's gonna want a spot on the lifeboat. Given that Shep's mental state is fragile, it's best not to do anything which could add stress to him/her.

 

Also, it's not like the reapers have mind control abilities oh wait they do better keep the whole save the species stuff on the down low then. Indoctrination amongst the ARK workers is absolutely the worst case scenario as it's a guarantee that it'll be sabotaged.