250 réponses à ce sujet

[DuffyMJ]

Aradace wrote...

Ultimately duff, it's not what you think is right...it's what BW thinks is right sooooo you lose, thank you for playing though.

Um, sorry I'm not a typical American lemming that accepts truth and reality as it is spoon-fed me by corporate entities, but I appreciate your unique perspective on things though, even if it is snarky and obnoxious.

[Madecologist]

Still think it is funny that their SWAT Sniper arguement only proves even more that Garrus is the best choice. Their own arguements working against them. Mordin approves.

We get it, you think Garrus is emo and messed up and deserves no second chance. Miranda is a b**** and you won't trust her. Fine. Jacob is this dude, and he is with Cerberus and friends with Miranda so you are not sure of him either fine.

You hate Cerberus, will not trust a single one of them, and not care about Garrus. No second chances. Fine.

None of this suddenly makes Samara better at leading a group. Deconstructing the others do not make the unvalid candidates suddenly valid.

Also, even good commanders have lost battles. You have to understand why they did. That is what Garrus is, if you see why he lost his squad, you know that it won't happen during the suicide mission. His quality of leadership is still there.

Also, not like you (as in Shepard) can hold that against him. Last I check... Shepard died. I guess if I use your logic TIM should have never brought him back. Shepard die, he must suck.

Why do I feel like Leela, and I am arguing with Bender and Fry as to why Zoidberg won't make a good ship captain for the Planet Express.

[Okkomon]

keegdarv1 wrote...

Someone saying they blame them self its differnt then it being his fault, its not a excues but whatever, i know he blames himself wasnt taken that away from anything, but to say he shouldnt lead cause of something that was really out of his hands like getting stabed in the back i find a excues it self

Garrus, has issues unsolved, even afterwards he is still in the process of losing his team, something that would put him under a pressure of this high, possible mental breakdown. Samara does not share the same liability and has worked with teams before (the mercs), even that she is now working on solo i find it hard that asari forget their past and experiences in a jiffy without a concussion or so. (plus plenty of hundred years more combat experience on all regards).

P.S. I'm talking about evaluating the possibilities and choices of whom and why, yes i know, there is a walktrough how to do the perfect run. Some things, to me, are not as logical as they are via gamemechanic and waht one should think due to the events and characters.

Modifié par Okkomon, 18 février 2010 - 08:22 .

[Remaix]

DuffyMJ wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

Okay, people are retarded. Why is Garrus a good group leader? because his fighting experience is, WITH GROUPS. His merc group died WHEN HE WAS NOT THERE. HE WAS BETRAYED.

You go ahead and let me know when you can keep people alive when that happens.

Why is Miranda a good tactician? Because that is how she is TRAINED. She is an OFFICER. Regardless of actual personality. And, by the way, I hate Miranda. But it is what it is.

Jacob? There is some argument there. Not that experience, and the only squad training he'd have, is in the alliance, on eden prime, which, as mentioned, didnt have much going on.

So, Garrus and Miranda are logical choices. Jacob?...Eh, Bioware thinks so.

Samara is very deadly, and has fought a lot. But not in a group setting. Not in a squad. By herself.

You don't take a sniper and put him in charge of combat engineering.

Both jobs have combat experience, BUT DO NOT HAVE THE SAME TRAINING IN COMBAT.

Why is it so hard to understand?

The Garrus issue is as simple as this:  he was betrayed and not present during the ambush, yes.

 But let me point something out to you.  The reason he was vulerable to such betrayal is because hot-headedness and blood lust managed the remarkably incompetent feat of driving THREE RIVAL MERC GROUPS to become ALLIES in their quest to erradicate him, unified their resources, their efforts, and their subterfuge.  Garrus is a great leader in the same way Kim Jong Il is a great leader: he built a following, but managed to ****** off literally everyone to the point where his and his men's lives were under constant siege and attrition.

Garrus has immense hubris issues, it's undeniable.  And I cannot think of a worse person to lead a squad against an unknown enemy in uncharted ground against an unknown target against an enemy of unknown strength than Garrus.

Someone please counterargue these points and stop this whole "yeah but but... he was betrayed!" excuse making B.S.

You're obviously missing the point that Garrus managed to keep his whole squad alive until the betrayal. If he really was such a terrible leader, as you are saying, his squad wouldn't have lasted that long. They'd have died a whole lot sooner.
Now, I'd like to say one thing: I agree with one thing you're saying. Garrus was, indeed, too hot-headed. It was very, very, very stupid of him to ****** off three merc groups. But that's a different situation. The leadership role during the suicide mission is different than that. It tested his ability to keep people alive. It did not test his ability to not ****** off the wrong people.

[DuffyMJ]

Madecologist wrote...

Still think it is funny that their SWAT Sniper arguement only proves even more that Garrus is the best choice. Their own arguements working against them. Mordin approves.
We get it, you think Garrus is emo and messed up and deserves no second chance. Miranda is a b**** and you won't trust her. Fine. Jacob is this dude, and he is with Cerberus and friends with Miranda so you are not sure of him either fine.
You hate Cerberus, will not trust a single one of them, and not care about Garrus. No second chances. Fine.
None of this suddenly makes Samara better at leading a group. Deconstructing the others do not make the unvalid candidates suddenly valid.
Also, even good commanders have lost battles. You have to understand why they did. That is what Garrus is, if you see why he lost his squad, you know that it won't happen during the suicide mission. His quality of leadership is still there.
Also, not like you (as in Shepard) can hold that against him. Last I check... Shepard died. I guess if I use your logic TIM should have never brought him back. Shepard die, he must suck.
Why do I feel like Leela, and I am arguing with Bender and Fry as to why Zoidberg won't make a good ship captain for the Planet Express.

Second chance?  Really?   i guess you have a short term memory and don't remember Garrus turning into a baby wanting to execute someone you were in the process of detaining in Mass Effect 1 "because he deserves to die" without any due process whatsoever.  Garrus then says "thank you" and promises to return to csec and that hes learned the importance of doing things the right way, blah blah blah.  And he completely renegs on that.

He's unpredictable, irrational, hotheaded, and inconsistent. Not a good leader do those things make.

I can't believe how so many of you reject this... I'm glad you guys weren't in charge during the Civil War, you would have all told U.S. Grant he didn't have enough experience and we'd still have slavery around!

[jklinders]

Madecologist wrote...

snip
We get it, you think Garrus is emo and messed up and deserves no second chance. Miranda is a b**** and you won't trust her. Fine. Jacob is this dude, and he is with Cerberus and friends with Miranda so you are not sure of him either fine.
You hate Cerberus, will not trust a single one of them, and not care about Garrus. No second chances. Fine.
None of this suddenly makes Samara better at leading a group. Deconstructing the others do not make the unvalid candidates suddenly valid.
snip.

Good luck getting them to actually acknowledge that point, I am still waiting fo rone of them to address from about 20 posts back. Agree with you on all points of course.

[Cutlass Jack]

I sense Godwin's Law appearing soon...

[Madecologist]

Sorry guys, I have to do this...





...at the logic of Samara being a good squad leader.

Modifié par Madecologist, 18 février 2010 - 08:23 .

[Llandaryn]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

I sense Godwin's Law appearing soon...

Nah, the forum censors out the word specifically so that Godwin's law can never happen on this forum.

[keegdarv1]

The unsolved issues is why and what his mission is about i feel if you do it you for lack of a better word "fix" Garrus,



on the Samara thing I get the she should be a leader thing i think i tried her out once in my second of thrid playthrough before i knew the "best" ones to use but i also get the no shes not the best one to lead being alone for so long, her pass shows that she been apart of groups<but come to think of it didnt she kill her last group of being slavers or something> and she been alone

[Blind Lark]

DuffyMJ wrote...

Garrus himself says he got his team killed.  It weighs on his conscious no matter what, your interpretation of events doesn't change that reality.

Yes, but it wasn't.  I thought you were based off of "reality".  Garrus didn't do anything to kill his squad.  He got lured away and they died because they didn't have their leader.  It wasn't a mistake of tactics, he simply was betrayed.  And that would be the difference on the last mission, there wouldn't be anybody to send him off on a wild goose chase in the middle of the collecter base that he would attempt by himself.

And it's been fairly well established that solo figthing is much different than fighting in groups.  There's a difference in killing and leading.  For example, Cathka is the tactician and maps out the plan of attack during the Archangel recruitment mission, but he doesn't fight.  Samara is the opposite, she can just use biotic power to tear through enemies like a knife through butter, but it doesn't affect her skill to coordinate attacks.  When you do something solo, you focus on elements like stealth.  When you do something with a group, it's more about positioning and teamwork. 

[KainrycKarr]

DuffyMJ wrote...

Madecologist wrote...

Still think it is funny that their SWAT Sniper arguement only proves even more that Garrus is the best choice. Their own arguements working against them. Mordin approves.
We get it, you think Garrus is emo and messed up and deserves no second chance. Miranda is a b**** and you won't trust her. Fine. Jacob is this dude, and he is with Cerberus and friends with Miranda so you are not sure of him either fine.
You hate Cerberus, will not trust a single one of them, and not care about Garrus. No second chances. Fine.
None of this suddenly makes Samara better at leading a group. Deconstructing the others do not make the unvalid candidates suddenly valid.
Also, even good commanders have lost battles. You have to understand why they did. That is what Garrus is, if you see why he lost his squad, you know that it won't happen during the suicide mission. His quality of leadership is still there.
Also, not like you (as in Shepard) can hold that against him. Last I check... Shepard died. I guess if I use your logic TIM should have never brought him back. Shepard die, he must suck.
Why do I feel like Leela, and I am arguing with Bender and Fry as to why Zoidberg won't make a good ship captain for the Planet Express.

Second chance?  Really?   i guess you have a short term memory and don't remember Garrus turning into a baby wanting to execute someone you were in the process of detaining in Mass Effect 1 "because he deserves to die" without any due process whatsoever.  Garrus then says "thank you" and promises to return to csec and that hes learned the importance of doing things the right way, blah blah blah.  And he completely renegs on that.

He's unpredictable, irrational, hotheaded, and inconsistent. Not a good leader do those things make.

I can't believe how so many of you reject this... I'm glad you guys weren't in charge during the Civil War, you would have all told U.S. Grant he didn't have enough experience and we'd still have slavery around!

Even assuming you are correct in all this stuff, what in the hell does it do to make Samara any better of a leader?

She knows how to kill people, and how to keep herself alive. This does not translate into leading a squad. Period.

[Remaix]

Madecologist wrote...


Sorry guys, I have to do this...





...at the logic of Samara being a good squad leader.

I think I love you.

[Wiggletphyre]

Garrus would make a great leader, because leading is something you learn by example. Because a good leader helpes you get experienced with dealing unexpected situations, unexpected situations that would probably kill you if not for the person showing you how its done so you can show other ppl how its done.

Hmmm who was one of those guys following Commander Shepard around in ME1 kicking synthetic ass all over the galaxy?

So garrus would be the perfect leader for the team, since he has a lot more experience dealing with extreme situations.

[quote]DuffyMJ wrote...

[quote]Madecologist wrote...

He's
unpredictable, irrational, hotheaded, and inconsistent. Not a good
leader do those things make.

I can't believe how so many of you
reject this... I'm glad you guys weren't in charge during the Civil War,
you would have all told U.S. Grant he didn't have enough experience and
we'd still have slavery around!
[/quote]

Uhm... that would kinda make a great leader, since you would not want to be predictable, and sometimes you just have to yell at ppl to get stuff done or better yet direct that anger towards the enemy and kick some ass

Modifié par Wiggletphyre, 18 février 2010 - 08:31 .

[DuffyMJ]

Remaix wrote...

DuffyMJ wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

Okay, people are retarded. Why is Garrus a good group leader? because his fighting experience is, WITH GROUPS. His merc group died WHEN HE WAS NOT THERE. HE WAS BETRAYED.

You go ahead and let me know when you can keep people alive when that happens.

Why is Miranda a good tactician? Because that is how she is TRAINED. She is an OFFICER. Regardless of actual personality. And, by the way, I hate Miranda. But it is what it is.

Jacob? There is some argument there. Not that experience, and the only squad training he'd have, is in the alliance, on eden prime, which, as mentioned, didnt have much going on.

So, Garrus and Miranda are logical choices. Jacob?...Eh, Bioware thinks so.

Samara is very deadly, and has fought a lot. But not in a group setting. Not in a squad. By herself.

You don't take a sniper and put him in charge of combat engineering.

Both jobs have combat experience, BUT DO NOT HAVE THE SAME TRAINING IN COMBAT.

Why is it so hard to understand?

The Garrus issue is as simple as this:  he was betrayed and not present during the ambush, yes.

 But let me point something out to you.  The reason he was vulerable to such betrayal is because hot-headedness and blood lust managed the remarkably incompetent feat of driving THREE RIVAL MERC GROUPS to become ALLIES in their quest to erradicate him, unified their resources, their efforts, and their subterfuge.  Garrus is a great leader in the same way Kim Jong Il is a great leader: he built a following, but managed to ****** off literally everyone to the point where his and his men's lives were under constant siege and attrition.

Garrus has immense hubris issues, it's undeniable.  And I cannot think of a worse person to lead a squad against an unknown enemy in uncharted ground against an unknown target against an enemy of unknown strength than Garrus.

Someone please counterargue these points and stop this whole "yeah but but... he was betrayed!" excuse making B.S.

You're obviously missing the point that Garrus managed to keep his whole squad alive until the betrayal. If he really was such a terrible leader, as you are saying, his squad wouldn't have lasted that long. They'd have died a whole lot sooner.
Now, I'd like to say one thing: I agree with one thing you're saying. Garrus was, indeed, too hot-headed. It was very, very, very stupid of him to ****** off three merc groups. But that's a different situation. The leadership role during the suicide mission is different than that. It tested his ability to keep people alive. It did not test his ability to not ****** off the wrong people.

That's ridiculous, though, you can only say that in hindsight.

Going into the mission, you have no idea what you're facing.  For all you know, half the colonists could be indoctrinated and thrown against you in waves.   You really think Garrus has the mental state to deal with that kind of scenerio, or any kind of highly emotional scenerio?

I sure as **** don't...  You know who would be  able to deal with that, though?  A stoic, disciplined, highly experienced Justicar. 

When you're going into the unknown you want someone COOL HEADED.  in that regard, i actually think miranda is decent, but she is handicapped by the lack of trust of squadmates. 

The fact is, the mechanic should have been more complicated.  Miranda should have been a good leader EXCEPT if she was placed in charge of a team with jack or tali or other anti-cerebus types in it.  Jacob shou-ld have been a good one EXCEPT if thane was in his group... is that SO ungodly unreasonable for me to suggest? Am I really such a horrible, blatantly wrong person for seeing Samara's exceptionally valuable skillset and competence and the defects of precious garrus?

[Okkomon]

Remaix wrote...

Madecologist wrote...


Sorry guys, I have to do this...





...at the logic of Samara being a good squad leader.

I think I love you.

Get a room and do it. Elsewhere. Thanks.

Modifié par Okkomon, 18 février 2010 - 08:28 .

[Legbiter]

By their logic resurrecting Shepard was 4 billion credits down the drain....

[Sledgehammer44mm]

Okkomon wrote...

Yeah, we may argue. Hundreds of years of combat experience including understanding tactiques to overcome her enemies over all those years, not to mention uber biotic skills, plus all that samurai stuff, if she is so aware of human history and all i might of guessed she has also heard of Sun Zhu and some tactis overall? This all means she is a failure as a firesquad lead as in juxtapositioned to forexample Jacob? Sure, Samara is a loner by choice of 'career' but not recless like the download guy (can't even remember his name).  Jacob, is basically just a merc himself and former alliance pawn, annd he even suggests to put himself on a mission (the ducts) that he doesn't even has the skills to carry out.

...Oh well, legion took the hit on my maiden playtrough, and i suppose he has 'more lives than nine' being a 'legion'.

I think your a poor leader dude not Samara.
No offence.......

[keegdarv1]

<sighs> back to the Grrus thing of his past



Shepard makes Garrus what he is Garrus is the character i think Sheaprd has the most over, make him a half way good guy a a kiler in the first game, if he goes back to csec im sure he tried hard but like most of the ME! character they got "lost" without Shepard which probally is more true without Shepard how lost he was

[izmirtheastarach]

Why would a solitary warrior monk be a good leader?

[DuffyMJ]

Remaix wrote...

Madecologist wrote...


Sorry guys, I have to do this...





...at the logic of Samara being a good squad leader.

I think I love you.

Yup, typical gang mentality to make a mockery out of those who disagree.  Real nice and civil, guys.

[Okkomon]

Sledgehammer44mm wrote...

Okkomon wrote...

Yeah, we may argue. Hundreds of years of combat experience including understanding tactiques to overcome her enemies over all those years, not to mention uber biotic skills, plus all that samurai stuff, if she is so aware of human history and all i might of guessed she has also heard of Sun Zhu and some tactis overall? This all means she is a failure as a firesquad lead as in juxtapositioned to forexample Jacob? Sure, Samara is a loner by choice of 'career' but not recless like the download guy (can't even remember his name).  Jacob, is basically just a merc himself and former alliance pawn, annd he even suggests to put himself on a mission (the ducts) that he doesn't even has the skills to carry out.

...Oh well, legion took the hit on my maiden playtrough, and i suppose he has 'more lives than nine' being a 'legion'.

I think your a poor leader dude not Samara.
No offence.......

Awww...Never blamed Samara though.

[Madecologist]

Legbiter wrote...

By their logic resurrecting Shepard was 4 billion credits down the drain....

Aye, I think I mentioned that earlier. Really, he dies to save a crippled pilot. What a dumb move. Clearly he is a bad leader. Clearly he couldn't survive something that like everyone almost did. Someone should have hired these two as advisor's for TIM. Save this whole Shepard business.

I am half tempted to argue why Tali is a good squad leader. Using their "logic" model, I think I can....

[InvaderErl]

I always choose Garrus.



He has had Turian military training and we know that above all else the importance of the TEAM is burned into their minds and that is on top of the actual experience he gained while a member of said military.



His work on Omega, working with Shepard TWICE, all of it points to Garrus as an excellent choice for fire team leader.



As for his team's death, yes that was a failure on Garrus' part to look at the big picture. Their many successes likely spurned him to become more and more ambitious until he was fighting the entirety of Omega's criminal element itself. But that while leading just 11 men he managed to do so much damage is a testament to his abilities as team leader.

[Legbiter]

izmirtheastarach wrote...

Why would a solitary warrior monk be a good leader?

Well, she has at least 2 great assets...
..Her inspiring personality and her biotics.