619 réponses à ce sujet

[CmdrFenix83]

Vaenier wrote...

Even more reason to keep it. With Shep dead, there aint much hope for the galaxy. even with cerberus owning the facility, chances of victory are slim.

So you'd trade extinction with slavery.  Why didn't you just help Saren then?

[Vaenier]

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

Vaenier wrote...

Even more reason to keep it. With Shep dead, there aint much hope for the galaxy. even with cerberus owning the facility, chances of victory are slim.

So you'd trade extinction with slavery.  Why didn't you just help Saren then?

It didnt give me the option to.

And Cerberus is less 'evil' than Reapers. Its progress in the right direction atleast.

[DarkNova50]

Because when a souped up fleet of jive ass alien mother ****ers is coming to end existence, you should kill everyone, and blow up everything.

God will recognize His own.

[CmdrFenix83]

Vaenier wrote...

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

Vaenier wrote...

Even more reason to keep it. With Shep dead, there aint much hope for the galaxy. even with cerberus owning the facility, chances of victory are slim.

So you'd trade extinction with slavery.  Why didn't you just help Saren then?

It didnt give me the option to.

And Cerberus is less 'evil' than Reapers. Its progress in the right direction atleast.

You're simply siding with the evil you know over the evil you don't.  Just because Cerberus is less evil doesn't mean the situation will be any better.  In fact, for the survivors, I'll bet they would rather have perished under the Reapers than become TIM's slaves.

[BurstAngel75]

There are some things in life that are inheritly wrong no matter how "justified" it may appear. The base is wrong, all that pain, death, and suffering only to make an abomination. How can we keep it? Just so we can learn to do the same? Humans are such flawed creatures and yet you act as if we can handle that kind of corupted power, but history has shown that when humans have too much power, we destroy everything around us.

Hiroshima.

So tell me, is the world a safer place now that we used a nuke to end a war? Yeah, the war is over, the Allies won, but is it a better world? safer? More Humane? Especially now that any tom, dick and harry can recreate it for the "good of their country"? The sad fact is that the Allies were already winning the war of the Pacific, but the brass wanted it to end it "faster"; we wanted to bring the boys home, so we dropped it on civilians. And the World changed.

We didn't split the atom just for the sake of doing it, we did it with the very purpose of making a weapon of mass destruction. You keeping the collector base for the very same reason, but look at all the good spliting the atom has done for our civilization. We learn how to destroy our world for the sake of winning.

As Shepard, we have to question ourselves, is it worth it?

You are saying that it is, and I respect you thinking, but for my Shepard, I will always destroy the base because even as a renagade, the cost is just too high.

[Dragonharted]

Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutly.

Think about what would happen if TIM got his hands on mega-powerful Reaper tech. YOU wont be the most awesome being in the ME universe anymore. Think about that!

Modifié par Dragonharted, 03 mars 2010 - 01:08 .

[CmdrFenix83]

BurstAngel75 wrote...

There are some things in life that are inheritly wrong no matter how "justified" it may appear. The base is wrong, all that pain, death, and suffering only to make an abomination. How can we keep it? Just so we can learn to do the same? Humans are such flawed creatures and yet you act as if we can handle that kind of corupted power, but history has shown that when humans have too much power, we destroy everything around us.
Hiroshima.
So tell me, is the world a safer place now that we used a nuke to end a war? Yeah, the war is over, the Allies won, but is it a better world? safer? More Humane? Especially now that any tom, dick and harry can recreate it for the "good of their country"? The sad fact is that the Allies were already winning the war of the Pacific, but the brass wanted it to end it "faster"; we wanted to bring the boys home, so we dropped it on civilians. And the World changed.
We didn't split the atom just for the sake of doing it, we did it with the very purpose of making a weapon of mass destruction. You keeping the collector base for the very same reason, but look at all the good spliting the atom has done for our civilization. We learn how to destroy our world for the sake of winning.
As Shepard, we have to question ourselves, is it worth it?
You are saying that it is, and I respect you thinking, but for my Shepard, I will always destroy the base because even as a renagade, the cost is just too high.

Actually, a ground invasion in Japan would have been unbelievably bloody.  The Japanese wouldn't have surrended until the last man was dead.  If Japan wasn't willing to go so far, they would have surrendered after the first nuke.  They had a week.  They didn't, and Truman ordered a second one.  Yeah, civilians were killed, but the point was to save tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of American lives.

I'm just stating reasoning here, please don't turn this into a debate on the ethics of nuclear weapons.  I think everyone on the planet that's sane would agree that they're something wish we could disinvent.

Modifié par CmdrFenix83, 03 mars 2010 - 01:34 .

[Turkeysock]

rab****annel wrote...

You have no idea what exactly the base holds. If you destroy it you throw it and all it's potential away. If you keep it and it turns out there is nothing useful to be gained, then oh well. But do you really think you would be given the option to choose to hold it if it had nothing? Import to ME 3 then, "haha! The base is worthless, chumps!". Then again, if there IS something useful then you have gained an advantage. There are 5 paths I see:

1. Keep the base. Reapers lose. Illusive Man uses base for evil.
2. Keep the base. Reapers lose. Illusive Man keeps it in check and doesn't use base for evil.
3. Keep the base. Reapers win.
4. Destroy the base. Reapers win.
5. Destroy the base. Reapers lose.

If #1 happens, well you've just beaten an entire fleet of Reapers. You really think TIM is going to give you trouble? Again, this goes back to the notion of some people that TIM is the greatest evil in the universe. Not the *sigh* massive fleet of galaxy-raping sentient machines. Assuming you've just massed a huge intergalactic armada, TIM is probably going to stand down under their pressure. Armada + Shepardgod. Plus, you know where the base is. If you want to destroy it after, you can. Though it would be pointless. "The Chevaliers of Orlais are not the threat here". Blindness! You Loghains will be the death of us all! *ahem*

Interesting... Because the way I look at it, TIM is the kind of person who would hold back his Reaper tech fleet and let the other races act as cannon fodder against the Reaper fleet. And than at the last moment come in to "save" the day. And after that, even when his fleet sustained some damage, it wouldn't be bad enough to where he still can take out the rest of the battered fleets from the other races.

rab****annel wrote...
#2 Well then, everything's super, isn't it? This is possibly my desired outcome. Everyone wins. Except you lot who say the base is evil.

Extremely doubtful. How can you keep TIM in check? No one really knows where he's at! Miranda might know, but than again, I don't think she does know, at best, she was probably blindfolded and taken to the location. Also, TIM is not the kind of person to let someone tell him what he can or can't do.

rab****annel wrote...
#3 In this case the Reapers win anyway. It wouldn't have made a difference if you destroyed it. Perhaps you would have died quicker.

#4 Here you'll be thinking, "I wonder what would have happened if I just kept the base?" You would have no guarantee that you would have fared better had you kept it but there is the possibility and that is always worth considering. I'd probably say, "I told you so".

Your right on #3, doesn't matter cause we'd lose anyways. As for #4, I wouldn't be thinking that at all because honestly as it's been said a LOT of times, what we do know about Reaper tech and Cerberus's track record is that blowing up the base would be the right choice. And if you have to ask "what's the right choice", read the previous sentence and THINK about everything we KNOW about Reaper tech and Cerberus.

rab****annel wrote...
#5 Your most desired outcome. Also what I think has the lowest likelihood of happening, logically, but maybe the highest probability for a I'm-a-good-little-Paragon ending.

Logically the least likely to happen? I don't know about you, but this seems to have a higher chance of happening than your reason #2. Honestly, you think anyone can keep TIM in check? He's not afraid of Shepard, he respects him, but he isn't afraid of him.

Playing the Paragon gets us the Rachni, Krogan, Geth, Qurian, Asari, Turian, Salerian, Humans, the Council races, the Batarians further down the line, and probably some races we don't know about yet to join forces against the Reapers. This would be the best choice, not because it's a "I'm-a-good-little-Paragon" choice, but because this will unite the galaxy together as one, and nothing brings various groups of people truely together than a common enemy that is practically unbeatable without joining forces.

rab****annel wrote...
This is all HIGHLY subjective though. I'd say the I'm-a-good-little-Paragon ending has a pretty high probability of success. Because it's part of the whole game. Keeping the base is still the most sane and sensible thing to do, I still say.

How is giving the base over to TIM sane?  TIM is an egotistical megalomaniac. I don't believe that every project that he's ordered has failed or messed up. But, why do you keep ignoring all of the projects we DO know are extremely unethical. Heck, his massive pouring of funds to bring Shepard back to life just show's how egotistical he is! He's playing god, and I don't know about you, but nothing boosts an ego like bringing someone back from life, who was completely dead.

rab****annel wrote...
Lastly, again against those who say the base is an abomination, it's like saying you won't sleep in a room because someone was murdered there and now you're scared that it's haunted. If you are that type of person, then fine, I won't argue any further. If not, then I hope you see how silly that is.

I think the base is an abomination. Why? Because I think that at least from deducting from the age of the derilict Reaper (The IFF is 37 million years old and still works), either the Collector base or some kind of base was kept there, something that the Reapers didn't want found. Probably the Reaper creation facility, but that is of course speculation. What I do know is that it's a place that the Reapers have obviously been using for a long time. As for your reference, I believe it's completely off the beaten track. Why do I say this? Because one or two people being murdered is one thing, but we're talking about at least ten thousand or more people who were melted down, entire colonies wiped out in the matter of minutes. That sounds a lot like genocide if you ask me. And I don't know about you, but not many people would have the stomach to sleep in the same room as mass genocide took place.

[BurstAngel75]

Yeah I know I'm over simplifying it. Thanks for pointing it out.

But I just don't understand how so many people in today's modern society can be so morally ambiguous all for the sake of progress.

I find it very disturbing.

I was more shocked by how many people could justified the genophage.

[naledgeborn]

"The collector's already killed you once and all it did was ****** you off." "First Saren, now the collectors. I almost feel sorry for the Reapers." Who needs a Collector base when you're Commander Shepard?



Tough choice though, didn't really occur to me that this was the "aww sh!t" decision till I killed T100... it was definetly greyer than the last one.

[CmdrFenix83]

BurstAngel75 wrote...

Yeah I know I'm over simplifying it. Thanks for pointing it out.
But I just don't understand how so many people in today's modern society can be so morally ambiguous all for the sake of progress.
I find it very disturbing.
I was more shocked by how many people could justified the genophage.

Well, it all comes down to perspective.  If you understand what Mordin tells you, your options are A) Let Krogan take over galaxy, inflict genophage to keep numbers to what they were on Tuchanka before first contact sothey never get to the point of starting a war again, or C) Wipe the Krogan out altogether.

Krogan nature is to be violent and bloothirsty.  Krogan history supports this.  (Before Wrex), these were the only three choices out there.  If Wrex isn't in charge of the Krogan, the genophage is what's known as a 'necessary evil'.

[codesmurf]

There are 4 basic arguments in this thread in favor of destroying the base. 

1. The base is evil and must be destroyed
2. The base contains no viable technology
3. Cerberus is evil and will abuse the tech to do evil things
4. Reapers indoctrinate organics which makes studying the base too dangerous

Here are my rebuttals
1. Destroying the base does not magically resurrect the humans who died there. The past is done you have to deal with what's in front of you (and that is a big fleet of reapers).

2.a. If the base contains no viable technology, then destroying it helps Cerberus. Instead of spending billions of credits and countless man hours mining a worthless base for technology they will never find, they will spend it developing their own technology that they can use for whatever nefarious purpose they want to.

2.b. The base almost certainly contains at least some valuable information, a database wipe isn't going to destroy the machinery used to construct the reapers. By studying how the reapers are constructed, it is possible to figure out how to de-construct them.

3. There are degrees of evil. Nothing I've seen anything from the illusive man or Cerberus proves that they have ever done anything worse than the U.S. military industrial complex. Sure they may put some puppet batarian in power to get access rich  palladium deposits, or fight a one sided war under the guise of "liberating" a Turian colony to control the price of element zero. The worst behavior we've seen from Cerberus is their experiments on husks, Rachni, and alliance soldiers - and Miranda makes some good points as to why that was done. Sure it's evil, but compared to the reapers destroying all sentient life in the galaxy, it is something my Sheppard can live with.

4. Yes, reaper technology has been known to indoctrinate/huskify organics. Which is why we need to study the base.

The base can be studied under controlled circumstances. Start a penal colony for the Ted Bundys, Jeffry Dahmers, and Jack the Rippers of the galaxy on the base and study from a remote station how indoctrination works. When the reaper fleet arrives with their Super XXX Ninja Indoctrination weapon, they will find it useless against your Aegis Mark IV anti-indoctrination shield.

On the other hand if you blow up the base and you'll have to fight your way to the reapers through a fleet of indoctrinated alliance ships.

[sinisternym]

I think a better comparison exists in the morality question regarding the Japanese Biological warfare unit operating out of manchuria name Unit 731. The question was, if it was worth it letting those that commited that atrocity get off scot-free in exchange for all the viral warfare info.

While the trojan horse comparison is good, the horse is actually the citdel (obviously) but the entire paragon theory involves getting the people that live on the giant 7 million or billion ton trojan to ally themselves with the gypsies and known enemies of the council (rachni, krogan & geth ) with the word of a ex-cerebus operative (you because their intelligence agencies state your traveling in a cerberus flagged ship)

I just think you might need a very big bargaining chip.

As for valuable technology laying around. If you chose not to scuttle the station you have not only the station itself but the area around it. You have the delirict ships scattered everywhere. The Oculus drones that were blown up (probably a means of producing them). The remains of the collector ship. You probably have enough remains to build a gen 2 or gen 3 variation of the Thanix canon since I'm speculating that the collector ship and the Oculus's have a variation of that weapon.  I would also like a few oculus drones of my own in the cargo bay.

The station is still intact so the kinetic barriers that are keeping the station from being ripped apart by the black holes is still intact. Those are the same things that withstood the citadel's fleet as sovreign wiped the out. Along with the shield it requires a power source so you could attempt to replicate that (hopefully doesn't require throwing people into a oven. Any of these would be a very welcome upgrade to the normandy.

Then again I chose the paragon option on my first playthrough. Then I saw the armada and thought I might need bigger guns.

[Habelo]

I only did it to rebell from illusive man. all his lies and bull**** wont get me to join his side.

[CmdrFenix83]

codesmurf wrote...

1. Destroying the base does not magically resurrect the humans who died there. The past is done you have to deal with what's in front of you (and that is a big fleet of reapers).

Irrelevant.  No one's saying that it should be destroyed for what happened there.  It's on the basis that that is what the base is meant to do.  Why would you keep something to liquify people unless you planned on doing the same thing?

2.a. If the base contains no viable technology, then destroying it helps Cerberus. Instead of spending billions of credits and countless man hours mining a worthless base for technology they will never find, they will spend it developing their own technology that they can use for whatever nefarious purpose they want to.

No one said it contains no viable tech.  It's just that you don't *know* it does.  You can't be sure.

2.b. The base almost certainly contains at least some valuable information, a database wipe isn't going to destroy the machinery used to construct the reapers. By studying how the reapers are constructed, it is possible to figure out how to de-construct them.

Again, Reaper tech study has led to disasterous results 100% of the time.  Look at the derelict, look at the device on the planet in the Minos Wasteland, look at the one with the missing survey team in ME1, all of them were turned into husks.  All of them.  What you suggest might work, we don't know if it won't.  However, we don't know if it will.  It's all a matter of "is the possiblity of reward worth the risks".  Big, known risks, without any known reward.

3. There are degrees of evil. Nothing I've seen anything from the illusive man or Cerberus proves that they have ever done anything worse than the U.S. military industrial complex. Sure they may put some puppet batarian in power to get access rich  palladium deposits, or fight a one sided war under the guise of "liberating" a Turian colony to control the price of element zero. The worst behavior we've seen from Cerberus is their experiments on husks, Rachni, and alliance soldiers - and Miranda makes some good points as to why that was done. Sure it's evil, but compared to the reapers destroying all sentient life in the galaxy, it is something my Sheppard can live with.

Again, this is just the Paragon/Renegade debate.  Sacrificing lives for the mission is against what a Paragon stands for.  "We don't sacrifice lives for the sake of the mission.  There's always a better way." - Shepard said that himself during Zaeed's loyalty mission.

4. Yes, reaper technology has been known to indoctrinate/huskify organics. Which is why we need to study the base.

The base can be studied under controlled circumstances. Start a penal colony for the Ted Bundys, Jeffry Dahmers, and Jack the Rippers of the galaxy on the base and study from a remote station how indoctrination works. When the reaper fleet arrives with their Super XXX Ninja Indoctrination weapon, they will find it useless against your Aegis Mark IV anti-indoctrination shield.

On the other hand if you blow up the base and you'll have to fight your way to the reapers through a fleet of indoctrinated alliance ships.

Why would these Alliance ships become indoctrinated?  They didn't board any Reaper vessels, or play with Reaper tech.  You don't need to protect against something that you can simply avoid coming into direct contact with.  The only one that might need to resist it is Shepard and his crew, and that's only if we have to board a living Reaper in ME3 to win.  That's a silly way for this all to end, but I suppose it is a possibility.

[Theoristitis]

I destroyed the base with my Paragon Shep for two main reasons:



A. My Paragon Shep has a set of morals that, as he says in-game, he won't compromise just to potentially gain an advantage. He saw what happened to the team on the Derelict Reaper, he knows what TIM is like, and he believes strongly that using a station that turned a hundred thousand humans into a smoothie to feed an embryonic Reaper would be a betrayal of his humanity.



B. Sovereign stated on Virmire that in using Reaper tech, we develop along paths they desire. My Shep will admit that yes, Normandy Jr. and its upgrades involve experimenting with Reaper tech, as do EDI and most likely Shepard himself. He would then say that such developments are hardly along paths the Reapers desired, since they had to kill Sovereign to get them (unless he was very much expendable for this purpose).



EDI (or someone else?) also mentioned something about unpredictability being the organic advantage over synthetic logic. Keeping the base would be the logical decision for a machine (assumption here). From this it is safe to assume that Harbinger, despite the seemingly-innate Reaper arrogance, would check back in with the base at some point to see if it still existed. If it did...well, he was able to not only indoctrinate but even possess pretty much everything on the station.

[CmdrFenix83]

Theoristitis wrote...

EDI (or someone else?) also mentioned something about unpredictability being the organic advantage over synthetic logic. Keeping the base would be the logical decision for a machine (assumption here). From this it is safe to assume that Harbinger, despite the seemingly-innate Reaper arrogance, would check back in with the base at some point to see if it still existed. If it did...well, he was able to not only indoctrinate but even possess pretty much everything on the station.

Not an assupmtion at all.  Legion advocates keeping it if he's with you when you make the choice.  Later, Legion is suprised that you gave up such easy power.  Overall, your post was well said.  You get 1 happy wizard.

[rasblak]

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

You're not listening at all.  The base liquifies people.  That is its' purpose.  That's what it does.  That's why it exists.  For all you know, the only tech you could get from this, is a faster way to dissolve organics than using acid.  We don't know, and guessing anything beyond what you know is speculation.  You're *assuming* and *speculating* that it might be useful beyond this.  That's hypothesis and conjecture.  You have no proof, nor do you have time to research it.

So you're saying that all it takes to build / breed a Reaper is to liquify people and keep the juice is some metal container? That's all a Reaper is?
You saw with your own eyes that they were *building* a Reaper there and you are saying that "You have no proof"??
What has your Shepard been smoking dude? Who's really "not listening at all"?

There are valid reasons for keeping the base, and there are valid ones for destroying it. The decision is up to each player.

The point about reliving the past is very relevant.  You do know what they call someone that .....

.... sees with his own eyes that they were building a Reaper there and yet claims "You have no proof" that what's there can be useful; "That's hypothesis and conjecture", right?

In my version of Mass Effect, they're called The Council.

[Turkeysock]

codesmurf wrote...

There are 4 basic arguments in this thread in favor of destroying the base. 

1. The base is evil and must be destroyed
2. The base contains no viable technology
3. Cerberus is evil and will abuse the tech to do evil things
4. Reapers indoctrinate organics which makes studying the base too dangerous

Here are my rebuttals
1. Destroying the base does not magically resurrect the humans who died there. The past is done you have to deal with what's in front of you (and that is a big fleet of reapers).

Now... I don't ever recall anyone saying that destorying the base will resurrect those who have died. How is that even a rebuttal?

codesmurf wrote...
2.a. If the base contains no viable technology, then destroying it helps Cerberus. Instead of spending billions of credits and countless man hours mining a worthless base for technology they will never find, they will spend it developing their own technology that they can use for whatever nefarious purpose they want to.

2.b. The base almost certainly contains at least some valuable information, a database wipe isn't going to destroy the machinery used to construct the reapers. By studying how the reapers are constructed, it is possible to figure out how to de-construct them.

If we have the schematics on how to make a Reaper, that's even better than the machinery. The Machinery just show's us how to MAKE one, it does not necessarily tell us it's weaknesses. Reapers may very well have no physical weakness, at least for the current level of tech that the galaxy contains. Look at the Panzer tanks of the Germans in WWII, those tanks practically had no physical weakness to the weapons of the day. The only weakness in the tanks was the fact that the Germans had a tedency to have them operate by themselves, or in pairs, and attack columns of American, British and Russian tank columns.

There is another thing we have to remember, the Human Reaper is incomplete. With that being said, any testing done on it wouldn't yield the kind of information aside from what would punch through it's armor. And the armor isn't what we need testing on to figure out how to bypass, it's their shield (Soveriegn's shield was able to withstand a bombardment from over a dozen Alliance cruisers until Shep defeated his "conciousness" that had taken over Saren's body).

But I think you need to work on your argument, because seriously... Learning how to construct them helps us know how to deconstruct them? That doesn't really make sense...

codesmurf wrote...
3. There are degrees of evil. Nothing I've seen anything from the illusive man or Cerberus proves that they have ever done anything worse than the U.S. military industrial complex. Sure they may put some puppet batarian in power to get access rich  palladium deposits, or fight a one sided war under the guise of "liberating" a Turian colony to control the price of element zero. The worst behavior we've seen from Cerberus is their experiments on husks, Rachni, and alliance soldiers - and Miranda makes some good points as to why that was done. Sure it's evil, but compared to the reapers destroying all sentient life in the galaxy, it is something my Sheppard can live with.

Yes, you are right that there are degrees of evil. But... really? TIM hasn't done anything worse than the U.S. government? Does buying children (or at least endorsing it) to run extremely unethical experiments on them not surpass anything the U.S. hasn't done? You heard the reports at Jack's old facilities, they went through those kids really fast. Now, we do know that TIM did not know the whole story going on there, but he started the project and he would've known they were buying kids to experiment on. He was fine with for who knows how long too. But there's a lot we don't know about Cerberus operations. Yeah, for the most part anything we really say is speculation. But we do know this, TIM wants to use it to advance Human dominance of not just the galaxy, but the universe! He clearly states this at the end, and he's a person who's said he is willing to do ANYTHING to ensure this. That is proof enough on why you shouldn't give him the Collector Base.

codesmurf wrote...
4. Yes, reaper technology has been known to indoctrinate/huskify organics. Which is why we need to study the base.

The base can be studied under controlled circumstances. Start a penal colony for the Ted Bundys, Jeffry Dahmers, and Jack the Rippers of the galaxy on the base and study from a remote station how indoctrination works. When the reaper fleet arrives with their Super XXX Ninja Indoctrination weapon, they will find it useless against your Aegis Mark IV anti-indoctrination shield.

If the base has the tech or ability to indoctrinate living beings, than we aren't going to learn anything. To be honest, Saren was studying indoctrination, and he learned next to nothing except that indoctrination is subtle and unnoticeable until it is too late. Not only this, but basically sacrificing those people, no matter how evil or bad they are, to be test subjects is no better than TIM, or the Collectors melting humans down. It's unethical, and this is how things start. You start with criminals, and than you run out of them, you move onto those who committed less crimes, and eventually you start sacrificing innocents in order to keep studying. Now, it's possible that you can figure out a way to defend against the indoctrination, but at what cost? It's simply too unethical to do this! Plus it could very well be a giant waste of time as it's possible there is just no defense against indoctrination.

codesmurf wrote...
On the other hand if you blow up the base and you'll have to fight your way to the reapers through a fleet of indoctrinated alliance ships.

It takes at least a week or two before indoctrination takes effect. Plus, the more indoctrinated the people are, the less capable they are. If they are indoctrinated to the point of siding with the Reapers, it may very well be impossible for them to operate ships.

And as an FYI, only Dragons Teeth can huskify living beings.

[Kekse2k]

While I agree with destroying the base to avoid fear compromising who Shepard is, I also must point out that there's a very strong possibility that keeping the base would have eventually started a process of indoctrination to anyone who worked with it. Their technology has proven that organic life can be easily indoctrinated by a derelict vessel. The reaper was dead, but it's mind wasn't, or something...whatever those indoctrinated fools said in their video logs. It makes sense that a race so advanced could retain software meant for indoctrination, even if their hardware is busted.

Even if machines were sent to study the collector base, I don't doubt that machines could be manipulated as well. Better safe than sorry, I suppose. This situation is just not similar to studying a disease, or something to that effect. In those cases, we have a better understanding of the limits of a disease, with safeguards such as breathing masks and contamination suits.

[Turkeysock]

rasblak wrote...
So you're saying that all it takes to build / breed a Reaper is to liquify people and keep the juice is some metal container? That's all a Reaper is?
You saw with your own eyes that they were *building* a Reaper there and you are saying that "You have no proof"??
What has your Shepard been smoking dude? Who's really "not listening at all"?

There are valid reasons for keeping the base, and there are valid ones for destroying it. The decision is up to each player.

Reapers are a combination of organic and inorganic material. Much like building a ship, except you need to liquify organic materials.

You should also really READ what he said. He said the Collector's Base appears to be made really to "build" a Reaper. That's pretty much all we know about the base, and anything beyond being used to create a Reaper is pure speculation, and can't be used to argue. Your earlier posts were talking about how the base COULD hold other useful information to help beat the Reapers. But I believe that what we got on the datapad from Joker, was Reaper schematics for Harbinger. And seeing as how the majority of Reapers appear similar, they all might have similar weakness.

rasblak wrote...
.... sees with his own eyes that they were building a Reaper there and yet claims "You have no proof" that what's there can be useful; "That's hypothesis and conjecture", right?

In my version of Mass Effect, they're called The Council.

Again, you aren't reading what he's saying. He never said there's no proof the base is being used to make Reapers, he said that there's no proof the base can be useful beyond anything other than MAKING a Reaper.

In my version of Mass Effect, this would be Conrad Verner talk:whistle:

[Theoristitis]

rasblak wrote...

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

We don't know, and guessing anything beyond what you know is speculation.  You're *assuming* and *speculating* that it might be useful beyond this.  That's hypothesis and conjecture.  You have no proof, nor do you have time to research it.

There are valid reasons for keeping the base, and there are valid ones for destroying it. The decision is up to each player.

Quoting these bits 'cause I like 'em a lot.

All that your Shepard can do is guess. The base may contain nothing more than the gigantic smoothie-machine that we players know is in it. It may also hold full technical readouts to the Death St...Harbinger.

Since we don't know, our Shepards (and I can't stress this term enough, because the path we choose for Shepard may not be the exact one we would take or believe in, or even close to it) have to use logic based on loose facts and broad assumptions. Both options have fairly valid reasons for pursuing them. Since logic can only take Shepard so far without a whole set of irrefutable truths laid out in front of them, he has to (as he's always done, in both games) follow his gut, his emotions, his set of beliefs.

Paragon is one set of morals. Renegade is another set of morals. Whether one decision leads to a better outcome is a matter of opinion based on those sets of morals (this is kinda more geared to the little decisions in side-quests and such). Of course a Paragon will generally think a Paragon response leads to a better outcome, and vice versa.
If that makes sense. Looks confusing to me.

At the risk of going off on more of a tangent than some of this post probably is, I want to add my views of the Paragon and Renegade choices...

Paragon: The "honorable" one. The one you'd hold up to the galaxy as an idealist, a moral soldier, the one whom civilians would praise for how he saved them and does his job. The decisions tend to be doing "good" in the moment, being righteous in one's choices without compromise, perhaps at the cost of an advantage down the line.

Renegade: The "get-it-done" one. The one you'd hold up the galaxy as an example of a being who will make tough choices even though many might consider them repugnant. The one whom civilians will celebrate for being able to get any mission done with ease and probably brush off how exactly he accomplished that. The decisions are doing what must be done in the moment, perhaps compromising oneself in the moment, to gain an advantage down the line, to do the "greater good".

Obviously they can be mixed and matched, and these are but broad definitions that are in some cases in both games downright incorrect, but these are the definitions I'd give for the "pure" Paragons and Renegades.

And thanks very much, Fenix 

[Sky Shadowing]

The mere fact that the Illusive Man plans on keeping the base to secure Cerberus domination of Humanity and Human domination of the Galaxy is enough of a reason to get rid of it.



If the Illusive Man takes the base, he will need to see how it works. He kills somebody to see it. He commits murder. That alone is enough of a reason to see to it that the base is destroyed. You can argue that the ends meet the means, but it's a short step towards saying that you need a Reaper to fight Reapers, and planets are depopulated to get a Cerberus reaper. You can argue that genoicide by Reapers is enough of a reason to say no, but there is no way to rationalize the prevention of Genocide BY Genocide.



Everybody says that Shepard will be able to destroy the base later. What if he can't? What does The Illusive Man start doing once he holds the ultimate power to achieve his goals? He gets paranoid. He says that he will stop at nothing to ensure human dominance. After Shepard destroys the Reaper fleet, there's only one of two things the calculating Illusive Man can see him as- an asset or a threat. If he's an asset, it means he's been completely turned to Cerberus and it's goals. If he's anything else, he's a threat. If he's a threat, he needs to be eliminated. So he gets a pat on the back with a knife, his death a "tragic accident" and leaving the only person who could stop the Illusive Man dead.



That said, the Collectors- how exactly did the Reapers maintain control of them? How did the Reapers control newborns? Indoctrination. Cerberus has no experience with active Reaper tech. The people they sent to the inactive Reaper are all dead. They wouldn't realize what was happening until it was too late. The reason the base was so undefended was because the Omega 4 relay itself was it's best defense.



So in the end, you have two outcomes- a xenophobe with ridiculously advanced tech and possibly the galaxy's greatest bad ass at his side (or dead at his feet). Or the entirety of Cerberus, with all it's network of informants and obviously considerable assets, at the control of the Reapers.



There is no way keeping the base can end well. The Illusive Man is ruthless. Nothing in Cerberus can happen without him- if a sector "goes rouge", how can they afford to maintain supplies? Probably because they're still receiving supplies- going rogue is just an excuse the Illusive Man uses to keep his hands nice and sparkly.