298 réponses à ce sujet

[Someguy101]

i aint givin anything back to him.



he funds a project to bring back to life, he gives me a crew, shows me where the best of the best can be found, and gives me a new and improved ship.



i repay him by stealing his ship, his people including miranda and jacob, giving the sensitive cerberus data to the alliance and blowing up the collector base.





felt good trolling TIM.

[KarmaTheAlligator]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

What you people are doing here is jumping from condemning TIM's motivation (which is a matter of opinion) to denying him an ability to take right decisions and issue efficient orders in the war against the Reapers, that, to your knowledge, he is the only one to be waging. The mission's success, however, suggests that the plan (TIM's part) was good, if not perfect. At least as good as the execution (Shepard's part).

But his plan wasn't for Shepard to survive the Omega 4 relay mission (it's slated as a suicide mission, remember?). It happened thanks to Shepard's skills and leadership.

[Goodwood]

Given all the evidence gathered from talking to EDI, Miranda, Jacob, and even Joker and Kelly, Cerberus is most definitely not a military -- or even paramilitary -- organization. It's a cell-based "resistance movement" (to put it charitably -- which they don't deserve) that has declared itself in opposition to non-humans and in support of human advancement at any cost. Shepard herself says it when querying EDI: "Aside from the Illusive Man, I don't see much chain of command..."

Simply put, Cerberus wouldn't work as a paramilitary organization anyway. Its goals are too diffuse to support such an operational style; while the organization may have a paramilitary division, from what we see it is relegated to providing security for Cerberus facilities and experimenting on those "disposable shock troops" that Miranda mentions.

Anyone who tries to equate Cerberus with the Rebel Alliance will be slapped.

Modifié par Goodwood, 18 mars 2010 - 07:46 .

[Sialater]

KarmaTheAlligator wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

What you people are doing here is jumping from condemning TIM's motivation (which is a matter of opinion) to denying him an ability to take right decisions and issue efficient orders in the war against the Reapers, that, to your knowledge, he is the only one to be waging. The mission's success, however, suggests that the plan (TIM's part) was good, if not perfect. At least as good as the execution (Shepard's part).

But his plan wasn't for Shepard to survive the Omega 4 relay mission (it's slated as a suicide mission, remember?). It happened thanks to Shepard's skills and leadership.

That's right... stikes me is that TIM wanted you to get offed while fighting the Collectors thereby leaving him with the base and no boundaries on it. 

[Zulu_DFA]

Lalandrathon wrote...

TIM had an admiral murdered.

Ah, yes, an admiral...

Kahoku, an Alliance officer went after Cerberus without any instruction from his superiors, acted on his own discretion and upon discovery that it had been an Alliance secret division at least at some point in the past passed the information to a Council Spectre, who was outside of Alliance command structure. And he struck a deal that involved a transfer of informarion on said (apparently former) Alliance secret division to the Shadow Broker, whose allegiance is not friendly to the Alliance at the very beast.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 18 mars 2010 - 07:48 .

[Zulu_DFA]

KarmaTheAlligator wrote...
it's slated as a suicide mission, remember?

By TIM? When?

[Lalandrathon]

He's an admiral. He doesn't have a whole lot of superiors.

[Terraneaux]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Lalandrathon wrote...

TIM had an admiral murdered.

Ah, yes, and admiral...

Kahoku, an Alliance officer went after Cerberus without any instruction from his superiors, acted on his own discretion and upon discovery that it had been an Alliance secret division at least at some point in the past passed the information to a Council Spectre, who was outside of Alliance command structure. And he struck a deal that involved a transfer of informarion on said (apparently former) Alliance secret division to the Shadow Broker, whose allegiance is not friendly to the Alliance at the very beast.

The business with the Shadow Broker might have been out of line, though for all we know he wasn't actually going to give them any information about Cerberus but had just agreed to (it's what I would have done), but first of all Hackett had been passing information to Shepard in the hopes that Shep would be able to do something about it, so it was understood among the Alliance brass that Shepard could be trusted with matters of military importance still (which makes sense, considering that Shep still referred to him/herself as 'commander' - reinforcing the idea that Shepard is still very attached to the Alliance military).  Kahoku going to Shep was perfectly reasonable.  Remember, Kahoku didn't actually order any action against Cerberus itself - he had his soldiers checking up an intelligence lead, they got killed, he sends Shep out to find what's up, he finds out it's Cerberus AND THAT THEY'VE GONE ROGUE (which makes them fair game), and then he gets killed.  

[Zulu_DFA]

Terraneaux wrote...
finds out it's Cerberus AND THAT THEY'VE GONE ROGUE (which makes them fair game), and then he gets killed.  

That  was just his opinion, and an ill-informed one. No wonder he got himself killed, when he pried his nose where he shouldn't.

[Chuck_Vu]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Goodwood wrote...

One of the worst things you can do in real-world operations is to go in blind, and to assume that your operator(s) can handle the situation without knowing all the facts. Every good operation starts with Intelligence; anyone in the military knows this, and knows too that the chances of success have a direct correlation to how good the intel is going in. If you want maximal results, you give your forces maximal intelligence, and the resources to be able to deal with any foul-ups or unexpected complications therein. You don't throw your command into a fight without telling them what to expect; officers have been subject to court-martial, and thrown in jail, for less.

If they lose.

In fact the first and foremost rule in the military and intelligence services sd that you never second-guess you superiors. You receive an order and carry it out without knowing it's true purpose.

For example, you serve with special forces. Command sends you behind enemy lines to blow up some bridge at the grid reference such&such. You go in. Then they just give you out through their agents to the enemy. The enemy send their best troops to hunt you down. They search you day and night trying to confirm your location, but you are good, and not easy to spot, so the enemy randomly send in the bombers and fire missions, your squad is down to 50%, but you are tough mother, and push on to your objective, approach the bridge, and there is an ambush to finish you off. Your squad is dead, you are wounded and taken prisoner to live the next couple of years in your own crap and have torture sessions twice a day. But in the meantime time another bridge goes up at another grid reference, and a major offensive commences in that area and the enemy is unable to reinforce their lines and your side wins. Surprise, you were a decoy! That's how the military works, when the enemy has airforce of their own.

Two things:

If command did that, it's called TREASON.  Simply put.  Giving away intel to the enemy is treason.  There's no getting around this.  NO ONE is above this.  Even the President of the United States is subject to laws regarding treason.  And I suspect most, if not all, heads of state.

Second, if they did pull this stunt.  You lose the faith (and quite possibly the loyalty) of the soldiers/agents/operators.  This is one of the major factors of insubordination, mutiny, "going rogue", or even joining the enemy.  Anyone who's a been in a leadership position knows this.  Some leaders have suffered incidents of "training accidents" or "friendly fire" from this.  If command want's to keep the faith and loyalty of those on a Decoy mission, they tell them that they are on a decoy mission, and that it's dangerous.  Then you can argue the "They knew what they were getting into."

If I had the option.  After the Collector mission, I would have parked the Normandy 2 at the Citadel, told the entire crew what TIM did, and given each of them the option to join me as I go make my case with the Council or they (those who decided to stay with TIM) can take the Normandy 2 back to TIM.  But EVERYONE who served on the Normandy 2 would know about TIMs betrayal/treason.

[Terraneaux]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Terraneaux wrote...
finds out it's Cerberus AND THAT THEY'VE GONE ROGUE (which makes them fair game), and then he gets killed.  

That  was just his opinion, and an ill-informed one. No wonder he got himself killed, when he pried his nose where he shouldn't.

No, Cerberus has gone rogue.  There's no evidence to suggest they haven't.  All of the background material says they have.  They have supporters and spies in place among the alliance, of course, but it was very clear in ME1 that they went rogue.  Any other belief is wishful thinking on your part, I think.  

[KarmaTheAlligator]

Terraneaux wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Terraneaux wrote...
finds out it's Cerberus AND THAT THEY'VE GONE ROGUE (which makes them fair game), and then he gets killed.  

That  was just his opinion, and an ill-informed one. No wonder he got himself killed, when he pried his nose where he shouldn't.

No, Cerberus has gone rogue.  There's no evidence to suggest they haven't.  All of the background material says they have.  They have supporters and spies in place among the alliance, of course, but it was very clear in ME1 that they went rogue.  Any other belief is wishful thinking on your part, I think.  

Well the Alliance says they have, Cerberus says they haven't... You cant' trust either since it's their biased opinions. You'd need to ask a third party.

[Terraneaux]

KarmaTheAlligator wrote...

Well the Alliance says they have, Cerberus says they haven't... You cant' trust either since it's their biased opinions. You'd need to ask a third party.

When does Cerberus say they haven't gone rogue?

[Halo Quea]

You people are crazy.

Look at the bill Shepard has racked up with Cerberus and TIM-

Costs to the Shadow Broker for Shepard's body (unknown, but Liara is still paying Cerberus for it)
Lazarus Project- $4 Billion Credits
Normandy SR2- $240 Billion Credits (assuming the SR2 is twice the cost of the original Normandy)


I don't think TIM is just going say goodbye to the Normandy and let Shepard just walk away with his property without some serious consequences. Those of us who played as Paragons better start dealing with that right now.

No one, (especially Cerberus) gives money and property like that away for nothing. Trust me, the TIM will make a call concerning his investments. I fear for Miranda as well, both she and her sister were under the protection of TIM and Cerberus.

Modifié par Halo Quea, 18 mars 2010 - 08:13 .

[KarmaTheAlligator]

Terraneaux wrote...

KarmaTheAlligator wrote...

Well the Alliance says they have, Cerberus says they haven't... You cant' trust either since it's their biased opinions. You'd need to ask a third party.

When does Cerberus say they haven't gone rogue?

Jacob says something like that at the beginning, when he mentions they work for Cerberus (something to the effect of Cerberus going rogue is just Alliance propaganda).

[Zulu_DFA]

Chuck_Vu wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Goodwood wrote...

One of the worst things you can do in real-world operations is to go in blind, and to assume that your operator(s) can handle the situation without knowing all the facts. Every good operation starts with Intelligence; anyone in the military knows this, and knows too that the chances of success have a direct correlation to how good the intel is going in. If you want maximal results, you give your forces maximal intelligence, and the resources to be able to deal with any foul-ups or unexpected complications therein. You don't throw your command into a fight without telling them what to expect; officers have been subject to court-martial, and thrown in jail, for less.

If they lose.

In fact the first and foremost rule in the military and intelligence services sd that you never second-guess you superiors. You receive an order and carry it out without knowing it's true purpose.

For example, you serve with special forces. Command sends you behind enemy lines to blow up some bridge at the grid reference such&such. You go in. Then they just give you out through their agents to the enemy. The enemy send their best troops to hunt you down. They search you day and night trying to confirm your location, but you are good, and not easy to spot, so the enemy randomly send in the bombers and fire missions, your squad is down to 50%, but you are tough mother, and push on to your objective, approach the bridge, and there is an ambush to finish you off. Your squad is dead, you are wounded and taken prisoner to live the next couple of years in your own crap and have torture sessions twice a day. But in the meantime time another bridge goes up at another grid reference, and a major offensive commences in that area and the enemy is unable to reinforce their lines and your side wins. Surprise, you were a decoy! That's how the military works, when the enemy has airforce of their own.

Two things:

If command did that, it's called TREASON.  Simply put.  Giving away intel to the enemy is treason.  There's no getting around this.  NO ONE is above this.  Even the President of the United States is subject to laws regarding treason.  And I suspect most, if not all, heads of state.

It's not called treason. It's called plan of offensive. Win the war and go home by Xmas.

Second, if they did pull this stunt.  You lose the faith (and quite possibly the loyalty) of the soldiers/agents/operators.  This is one of the major factors of insubordination, mutiny, "going rogue", or even joining the enemy.  Anyone who's a been in a leadership position knows this.  Some leaders have suffered incidents of "training accidents" or "friendly fire" from this.  If command want's to keep the faith and loyalty of those on a Decoy mission, they tell them that they are on a decoy mission, and that it's dangerous.  Then you can argue the "They knew what they were getting into."

And, if the enemy takes them prisoner, they spill that they are just a decoy and the enemy understands that something big is going to happen some place else, and that other Commado team gets ambushed and the whole operation goes to hell. Great. Be an honest man - lose the war!

If I had the option.  After the Collector mission, I would have parked the Normandy 2 at the Citadel, told the entire crew what TIM did, and given each of them the option to join me as I go make my case with the Council or they (those who decided to stay with TIM) can take the Normandy 2 back to TIM.  But EVERYONE who served on the Normandy 2 would know about TIMs betrayal/treason.

Obviously, in real life you will never take a position similar to Shepard's in-game.

[Terraneaux]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Obviously, in real life you will never take a position similar to Shepard's in-game.

Actually it'd be pretty reasonable to try to turn the crew away from Cerberus following the Collector Ship mission.  After all, better that the crew be loyal to Shepard than loyal to TIM.  The lack of ability to say 'yeah, TIM didn't tell us the mission was a trap, this was a terrible idea and almost lost us the conflict against the reapers' should have been there.  

[Terraneaux]

KarmaTheAlligator wrote...

Terraneaux wrote...

KarmaTheAlligator wrote...

Well the Alliance says they have, Cerberus says they haven't... You cant' trust either since it's their biased opinions. You'd need to ask a third party.

When does Cerberus say they haven't gone rogue?

Jacob says something like that at the beginning, when he mentions they work for Cerberus (something to the effect of Cerberus going rogue is just Alliance propaganda).

No, I'm pretty sure that he's talking about all of the 'bad things' that Cerberus has been doing, like murdering alliance soldiers and abducting civilians and such.  

[KarmaTheAlligator]

Terraneaux wrote...

No, I'm pretty sure that he's talking about all of the 'bad things' that Cerberus has been doing, like murdering alliance soldiers and abducting civilians and such.  

Wouldn't that count as going rogue?

[Xpheyel]

jgordon11 wrote...

B/c resurecting you from the dead at the cost of billions of dollars (or whatever currency), giving you a crew of some of its best men, and one of the most advanced ships in the galaxy isn't enough to enlist your help to defeat a threat to humanity and the rest of the galaxy.  Yeah those selfish cheap bastards could at least give you their super advanced ship.

That's what makes it so funny. That and doing it with the help of TIM's well-endowed secretary. Ha.

Paragon Shepard is truly a pirate-king in space. 

[Halo Quea]

Terraneaux wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Obviously, in real life you will never take a position similar to Shepard's in-game.

Actually it'd be pretty reasonable to try to turn the crew away from Cerberus following the Collector Ship mission.  After all, better that the crew be loyal to Shepard than loyal to TIM.  The lack of ability to say 'yeah, TIM didn't tell us the mission was a trap, this was a terrible idea and almost lost us the conflict against the reapers' should have been there.  

Agreed.  

[ObserverStatus]

I'd be mad if it turned out that if you dump TIM the alliance gives you a dreadnought.

[Thrakkesh]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but TIM pretty much said 'We're not going to tell you what to do, just give you what you need to get the job done as you see fit.'



So they really can't complain if 'what you see fit' is to tell TIM to stick it in his Dark Matter Collector.

[Terraneaux]

KarmaTheAlligator wrote...

Terraneaux wrote...

No, I'm pretty sure that he's talking about all of the 'bad things' that Cerberus has been doing, like murdering alliance soldiers and abducting civilians and such.  

Wouldn't that count as going rogue?

'Going rogue' means leaving the chain of command, betraying the Alliance.  

[KarmaTheAlligator]

Terraneaux wrote...

KarmaTheAlligator wrote...

Terraneaux wrote...

No, I'm pretty sure that he's talking about all of the 'bad things' that Cerberus has been doing, like murdering alliance soldiers and abducting civilians and such.  

Wouldn't that count as going rogue?

'Going rogue' means leaving the chain of command, betraying the Alliance.  

Or doing stuff they're not supposed to do. Like murdering Alliance soldiers. Doesn't that count as a betrayal?