Mass Effect Fans

1235789

Comments

  • What does galactic readiness do? I heard you improve it by playing multiplayer.

    I am not much of a multiplayer guy. So, I have never tried ME3 Multiplayer.

  • It makes your chances of defeating the Reapers less "suicidal", if you will, depending on how many allies you've picked up. You can raise it by playing multiplayer. You need a really high amount if you want to survive the Destroy ending.

    Rafoli posted: »

    What does galactic readiness do? I heard you improve it by playing multiplayer.

  • What about the fleet attack? Does it make the casualties less usual or everything is the same?

    Lahkesis posted: »

    It makes your chances of defeating the Reapers less "suicidal", if you will, depending on how many allies you've picked up. You can raise it by playing multiplayer. You need a really high amount if you want to survive the Destroy ending.

  • The fleet is bigger the higher your readiness is. There are much less casualties.

    Rafoli posted: »

    What about the fleet attack? Does it make the casualties less usual or everything is the same?

  • Damn... at least none of my crewmembers died and I made the Synthesis. :D

    Lahkesis posted: »

    The fleet is bigger the higher your readiness is. There are much less casualties.

  • If you have 5000 War Assets and you don't use multiplayer, Your galactic readiness score will remain at 50%. Which will cut off these war assets to 2500. The maximum war assets in which you'll get the master and commander achievement is 4000. Before the extended cut, It was 5000.

    Rafoli posted: »

    Damn... at least none of my crewmembers died and I made the Synthesis.

  • So I guess I had +- 2500 war assets to the final mission :|

    What do you get if you have 4000 war assets and you choose Synthesis?

    If you have 5000 War Assets and you don't use multiplayer, Your galactic readiness score will remain at 50%. Which will cut off these war as

  • What's your galactic readiness status?

    Rafoli posted: »

    So I guess I had +- 2500 war assets to the final mission What do you get if you have 4000 war assets and you choose Synthesis?

  • I remember it was pretty much 3100 if you save Anderson from the Illusive man. 4000 If you don't.

    Rafoli posted: »

    So I guess I had +- 2500 war assets to the final mission What do you get if you have 4000 war assets and you choose Synthesis?

  • Also, If your war assets are below 2800, You can't get Synthesis.

    Rafoli posted: »

    So I guess I had +- 2500 war assets to the final mission What do you get if you have 4000 war assets and you choose Synthesis?

  • I've already finished the game, but I remember I had 50%.

    What's your galactic readiness status?

  • Damn, so glad I explored the planets while I didn't have anything to do.

    Also, If your war assets are below 2800, You can't get Synthesis.

  • Yes, I know. I'm just pointing out some notes about the war assets. Your group will be saved in any Syntehsis ending. I think The war assets will differ how the Normandy Survives. If it's lower than the maximum, You'll have an ending slide in which The Normandy gets repaired. If you have the maximum war assets, It'll take off without repairs.

    Rafoli posted: »

    I've already finished the game, but I remember I had 50%.

  • I just saw some comments of people wondering how the Reaper invasion would happen in the Star Wars universe. Any thoughts?

  • Not much of a Star Wars fan myself, But what do you have in mind?

    Rafoli posted: »

    I just saw some comments of people wondering how the Reaper invasion would happen in the Star Wars universe. Any thoughts?

  • Well, the victory would depend on if the Jedi and the Sith joined forces to destroy the Reapers, and I think that'd be really hard to happen (the actual alliance). It says that the Death Star has the firepower to destroy an entire planet with a single shot, so that proves the technology of the Star Wars universe makes them have a damage against their enemies. The death star is also 140 kilometers of diameter, a Reaper is nothing compared to that. Someone has something to add?

    Not much of a Star Wars fan myself, But what do you have in mind?

  • edited July 2014

    Then Harbinger should be the main villain by being the only weapon that can destroy the Death Star.

    Rafoli posted: »

    Well, the victory would depend on if the Jedi and the Sith joined forces to destroy the Reapers, and I think that'd be really hard to happen

  • Well, the Death Star still has the firepower to destroy an entire planet. I don't think Harbinger could have done that all by itself, it'd be encessary to use much more than a Reaper.

    Then Harbinger should be the main villain by being the only weapon that can destroy the Death Star.

  • Maybe, The Citadel?

    Rafoli posted: »

    Well, the Death Star still has the firepower to destroy an entire planet. I don't think Harbinger could have done that all by itself, it'd be encessary to use much more than a Reaper.

  • The Citadel + The Crucible vs The Deathstar.

    Rafoli posted: »

    Well, the Death Star still has the firepower to destroy an entire planet. I don't think Harbinger could have done that all by itself, it'd be encessary to use much more than a Reaper.

  • GG Crucible + Catalyst, but only if there were Mass Relays in this universe. If so, RIP Death Star.

    The Citadel + The Crucible vs The Deathstar.

  • It'd be an interesting fight though.

    Rafoli posted: »

    GG Crucible + Catalyst, but only if there were Mass Relays in this universe. If so, RIP Death Star.

  • Definitely, I think both universes are really complete and interesting, even though I do prefer Mass Effect's better. The races are more interesting in honest opinion.

    It'd be an interesting fight though.

  • I personally think that Mass Effect universe is a true Sci-Fi. I see Star Wars as some kind of space magic, No offense to the fans.

    Rafoli posted: »

    Definitely, I think both universes are really complete and interesting, even though I do prefer Mass Effect's better. The races are more interesting in honest opinion.

  • I reallllly hope they don't screw dragon age up. Right now it looks so good, and it's pretty much the only game I'm interested in this year (other than telltale's games of course). 2014 for a year in gaming seems kinda boring lol. Im so excited for 2015 though. BATMAN ARKHAM KNIGHT ANYONE?! :P

  • I'm in for Arkham Knight. Though, Arkham City got me bored. However, I haven't played Dragon Age and I'm not interested to be honest. 2014 is a total loss to me in gaming. Even Watch_Dogs had the same storyline of Assassin's Creed II. Ubisoft just LOVES to recreate the same thing over and over and over again. I don't really think they're gonna screw up Dragon Age, For multiple reasons. However, Mass Effect 4 is most likely screwed. Mac Walters taking over the series didn't end up well in ME3, And It won't ever end up well. Don't want to get into too much talks about Mass Effect's fallen original team.

    Healoz posted: »

    I reallllly hope they don't screw dragon age up. Right now it looks so good, and it's pretty much the only game I'm interested in this year

  • Science fantasy, I think is the term. Or "soft" sci-fi?

    I personally think that Mass Effect universe is a true Sci-Fi. I see Star Wars as some kind of space magic, No offense to the fans.

  • Yeah, That'd fit it well. Mass Effect rules the hardcore Sci-Fi world.

    Science fantasy, I think is the term. Or "soft" sci-fi?

  • edited July 2014

    The Eclipse could handle a Reaper.

    Alt text

    Its superlaser is comparable to the Reaper Cannon or a bunch of Thanix Cannons, possesses much more mobility than the enormity of the Death Star (although it is still quite large and not as "agile" as a Reaper) and - unless we're talking Death Star II here - can actually target a Reaper. Death Star One's laser was way inaccurate, and could only fire on enormous targets (like planets/moons) but not a ship.

    Then Harbinger should be the main villain by being the only weapon that can destroy the Death Star.

  • Codex Secondary Entries >The Reapers > Reaper Vulnerabilities

    Although clearly technologically superior to the Citadel forces, the Reapers have experienced casualties in the battles across the galaxy. This indicates that, theoretically, with the right intelligence, weapons, and strategy, the Reapers could be defeated.

    Unlike the mass effect relays that they created, Reapers do not have quantum shields. Locking itself down at a quantum level would leave a Reaper unaware of its surroundings until the shielding deactivated. Instead, Reapers rely on kinetic barriers.

    In the case of a Reaper capital ship, these kinetic barriers can hold off the firepower of two dreadnoughts simultaneously, but three clearly causes strain, and four typically results in destruction. Weapons designed to maximize heat damage, such as the Thanix series, show better results against the Reapers than pure kinetic impacts.

    The barriers of a Reaper destroyer are less formidable than those of a capital ship. It is possible for a single cruiser or many fighters to disable or demolish a destroyer if they can get within range before they are themselves destroyed.

    The Reapers' energy sources are not infinite. For example, to land on a planet, a Reaper must substantially reduce its mass. This transfer of power to its mass effect generators leaves the Reaper's kinetic barriers at only partial strength.

    Sovereign was destroyed while assuming direct control over Saren. The feedback from Saren's death seemed to entirely overload Sovereign's shields. Current Reapers do not seem to suffer from this design flaw.

    Reaper capital ships can turn faster than Citadel dreadnoughts, but to do so, they must lower their mass to a level unacceptable in combat situations. Consequently, it is possible for a dreadnought to emerge from FTL travel behind a capital ship, then bring its guns to bear faster than the Reaper can return fire. This is a poor tactic, however, against Reapers flying in proper formation.

    The Eclipse could handle a Reaper. Its superlaser is comparable to the Reaper Cannon or a bunch of Thanix Cannons, possesses much mor

  • So, You're gonna need four of those quipped with Thanix to destroy one reaper. Pity. Also, According to the codex, Harbinger is stronger than a normal Reaper. But it's not known by how much.

    The Eclipse could handle a Reaper. Its superlaser is comparable to the Reaper Cannon or a bunch of Thanix Cannons, possesses much mor

  • The way I see it, one on one, Eclipse wins unless the Reaper gets too close. This is allegedly 19 km long, and a Reaper is 2 km long, right? Once close, that behemoth has little time to maneuver and cannot target it with the laser at such a short distance. Then the Reaper could easily tear through whatever the SW universe uses for shielding and bye. From afar, though, it would be like a sniper taking a shot.

    If there are two or more Reapers, the Eclipse would get f****. Even if only against two destroyers. It is too big of a target.

    Codex Secondary Entries >The Reapers > Reaper Vulnerabilities Although clearly technologically superior to the Citadel forces, the

  • OR, We could use space-flighting Thresher Maws. :P

    Jokes aside, I think you may be right. I don't remember the exact length of a reaper, But it's something between 1-3 Kilometers. 19 KMs are too much for a reaper to handle. It'd be one hell of a fight.

    The way I see it, one on one, Eclipse wins unless the Reaper gets too close. This is allegedly 19 km long, and a Reaper is 2 km long, right?

  • Well, I am assuming only one would be enough. It still has the equivalent firepower of two dreadnoughts because of its size, but I think that it still would lose because of speed. If a normal capital ship/dreadnought in ME is considered slow, this is mighty slow.

    So, You're gonna need four of those quipped with Thanix to destroy one reaper. Pity. Also, According to the codex, Harbinger is stronger than a normal Reaper. But it's not known by how much.

  • You saw how slow the Destiny Ascension is. Imagine something, let's say, x10 bigger than the Destiny ascension. It'd be barely moving.

    Well, I am assuming only one would be enough. It still has the equivalent firepower of two dreadnoughts because of its size, but I think tha

  • Yeah, Inquisition is about the only thing I'm looking forward to this year as well. So far, it's hitting all the right notes with me.

    Healoz posted: »

    I reallllly hope they don't screw dragon age up. Right now it looks so good, and it's pretty much the only game I'm interested in this year

  • What about Assassins Creed Unity. It's looking boss so far.

    Yeah, Inquisition is about the only thing I'm looking forward to this year as well. So far, it's hitting all the right notes with me.

  • Ubisoft games have a tendency of remaking the same characters development. Which is kinda of a turn-off. Watch_Dogs' gameplay is brilliant, Though many players criticize the gameplay for some reasons. That's why I'm not that excited for AC: Unity.

    What about Assassins Creed Unity. It's looking boss so far.

Sign in to comment in this discussion.