Why Can't We Lie Sometimes?

---

@Kondaru wrote:

---

@PretzleMe wrote:

@EgoMania

"....Well, it was a negotiating tactic and when you agree to have her release the pods the Kett do arrive, so in fact the reality is that you don't have time to set the charges...."

Charges are not how you blow up the base.  As I mentioned in my previous post, SAM was able to blow up the base almost from the beginning.  So again, you're incorrect and not remembering the mission accurately.

Also, this would have no bearing on your ability to return to this base.

---

As far as I understand the situation:

- SAM is ready to set up some EMP-like detonation that kills all Ketts and Angara in the vicinity. But in order to activate the charge (with some very short countdown) SAM needs to be there, so it cannot be done "remotely".

- Cardinal promises to release the captives if Ryder does not activate the charge. It is not about him doing it *now* - it is but a promise. Even so, there is no way for the cages to be opened, and Angara leaving the explosion zone in a matter of seconds or even minutes - I guess it would take them several hours to evacuate. With Kett reinforcments inbound there is *porbably* not enough time to wait that long on the platform.

My personal issues with the scene:

- By accepting Cardinal's suggestion we are forced to trust him. I mean we leave, and we must trust that he will indeed release all those captives *afterwards*. That is a leap of faith to me - while it is possible that Kett are honorable and always keep their word, they do *not* strike me as trustworthy people. So I see no good reason to trust the Cardinal - even though as per game he indeed keeps his word.

- Another thing is that when we accept Cardinal's solution and then shot him, prisoners are still released. It makes little sense to me. *Perhaps* it is so that Cardinal immediately opened those cages, and ordered his man to allow prisoners to leave, and thus shooting him in the face does not stop the process. All the same it will definitely take Angara some time to escape the base, so we cannot just set up the charge - or they will all die inside.

---

it was overloading the facility's power generators iirc, nobody mentioned planting any kind of charge, unless i'm mistaken.

---

@Kondaru wrote:

 *Perhaps* it is so that Cardinal immediately opened those cages, and ordered his man to allow prisoners to leave, and thus shooting him in the face does not stop the process. All the same it will definitely take Angara some time to escape the base, so we cannot just set up the charge - or they will all die inside.

---

Pretty sure that's in the cutscene (Cardinal ordering all cages unlocked over the comms). Though agreed, timeline for everyone to escape before the reinforcements arrive is quite short.

---

@PretzleMe wrote:

snip

---

 @PretzleMe  edited.

Thanks PretzleMe for your private message.

Your comments are very much appreciated.

@Kondaru

Your understanding of the situation is also incorrect.

Remotely means that you do not need to be accessing a physical construct of any kind in order for SAM to detonate the facility.  So yes, SAM does (if you make the choice) detonate the facility almost instantaneously, as you are flying away, when you tell him to do so.

It is about the now.  This is why the conversation that follows involves Jaal saying that we can just come back and the Moshae being concerned that we may not in which case they will just fill that place up again with Angarans.

If you choose to not detonate the facility, they evacuate at roughly the same time you do.  In fact, I'd have to replay it to see, but they may even actually start to leave before you do.  Regardless, if you choose the detonate option, you tell SAM to detonate the place as you're taking off and he does so immediately and none of the Angarans you have with you die so naturally neither would the other Angarans.

Again, the timing aspect didn't have to do with SAM detonating the place as some of you mistakenly try to state.  It had to do with reinforcements showing up and without the Cardinal typing in a code that opened all pods at once, the other team would not have enough time to manually open each one and survive the reinforcements.

Also, you're not forced to trust the Cardinal per se.  They type the code in to release the Angarans right in front of you.  This is why, no matter what you choose, the Cardinal can be killed (or is automatically killed in at least one of those decisions).

The base is also cleared by you and the other team present.  So the Cardinal doesn't need to give any order to anyone to not harm the people released.  However, part of the reason you thought this necessary is because you incorrectly thought it would take hours to evacuate when it didn't/doesn't.  Whatever code the Cardinal puts in, it opens the pods and wakes them all up.  All the other team had to do was lead them to the evacuation point where the Angara (during the course of your assault on the base) had already arranged for other units/ships to be present.

----------

@CasperTheLich

"....i think about some of those renegade interrupts in me2, and a few specific ones i say to myself... how is that renegade? to me that's just being prudent...."

100% agree.  In fact, I kind of feel that way sometimes in this game regarding "impulsive" decisions.  Some of them don't seem impulsive at all to me.  To me, impulsive means to act on impulse which is to act without thinking.  Some of those moments I feel like it is just thinking quickly.  But that is just my opinion.

"...it was overloading the facility's power generators iirc, nobody mentioned planting any kind of charge, unless i'm mistaken...."

You are not mistaken.

-----------

"....I like discussion and opposing views. I like learning things that I didn't see before or forgot. And I can handle being wrong about things. But I what I do not like is this type of condescending remark and your apparent need to take an admission of a mistake as an opportunity to repeatedly beat someone over the head with that. I guess you don't have any brakes on your vindictiveness..."

While I can see why what I said may be interpreted as condescending and or vindictive (it is a logical assumption to make), that was not my intent.  To me, it was just stating a clear fact, that I agree that you should learn about what we're talking about before continuing to speak on it.  That just makes sense to me.

The 3rd option you gave supports this fact as it implied that you didn't know what happened at the base.

I apologize that you feel like I was attacking you in some way, but part of me feels like this is a case of you having a guilty conscious as you have been condescending towards me (which I ignored and simply stated several times that I accept that we don't agree while you kept trying to argue) and to others in other threads and thus you likely expect some kind of "vengeful" intent but that isn't the case... at least not with me.

This is why I give you XP when I agree or reply in agreement and in detail if we happen to agree.  I do not know you personally and even when you try to talk down, I just ignore that and move on.

Now my preference in this situation is that you will respond in this thread once you have acquired the necessary facts to make your posts more productive... but if you have no desire to interact with me, while that saddens me to some extent, I'll understand.

Regardless, good luck to you and I sincerely thank you for the conversations we did have.

Oh, and despite desire to be able to engage one another in discussion whether in agreement or in spirited debate and open door policy so to speak, I will tell you that you should be able to ignore me by clicking on my name I believe and seeing the options that way.

Again, you have both my gratitude and my apologies.  Take care.

as to my earlier suggestion with the diplomatic mission... here's a little hypothetical (and it's a tad over simplified, i know)

lets say this later mission has 3 potential outcomes. the first layout depends on you being honest, either you destroyed the facility, or you made the deal. but you never reneged.

so lets say you're in a room full of kett, there's a kett officer who survived the exaltation base, and he's in command of the opposing force. you have work to do, they have their jobs as well, time is an issue for both. you both back down and avoid a fight. or you can duke it out... and they withdraw after a short fight. and you don't waste too much time, and you arrive in a timely manner and save the day. (that's the first 2)

with the last, the kett officer remembers you opens fire without the option for dialogue, and instead of withdrawing he digs in his heals, and you're forced to fight an enraged enemy force to the death, as a result you took to long and there's heavy friendly casualties, and hostiles are more numerous, and with more foes of higher caliber.  

---

@CasperTheLich wrote:

as to my earlier suggestion with the diplomatic mission... here's a little hypothetical (and it's a tad over simplified, i know)

lets say this later mission has 3 potential outcomes. the first layout depends on you being honest, either you destroyed the facility, or you made the deal. but you never reneged.

so lets say you're in a room full of kett, there's a kett officer who survived the exaltation base, and he's in command of the opposing force. you have work to do, they have their jobs as well, time is an issue for both. you both back down and avoid a fight. or you can duke it out... and they withdraw after a short fight. and you don't waste too much time, and you arrive in a timely manner and save the day. (that's the first 2)

with the last, the kett officer remembers you opens fire without the option for dialogue, and instead of withdrawing he digs in his heals, and you're forced to fight an enraged enemy force to the death, as a result you took to long and there's heavy friendly casualties, and hostiles are more numerous, and with more foes of higher caliber.  

---

Your way could definitely work and I actually didn't think your hypothetical was oversimplified.

Now my idea, is much oversimplified, but:

---

@PretzleMe wrote:

There are times where I'd like the option to be "dishonorable" and you know something?  I'd be okay if it had an adverse affect on my relationships with certain people (or improved it in some cases).

For instance, when you rescue the Moshae and you need the Cardinal to open the pods in order to save as many people as possible.  The Cardinal won't do this unless you agree to spare the base.  My Ryder definitely would have agreed to those terms, allowing the Cardinal to open up all those pods, and then blew the base up anyway.

Dishonorable?  Maybe.  Don't care.  And if you do, fine and I understand, but I'd like the option.

So there are times where I'd like the option to go back on my word.

What are your thoughts on this?

---

As to your original question on lying, I think it would be great if there were more conversation options to be able to do this at times, the ability to be a bit deceptive or coerce your way, through conversation to achieve a certain goal.  But as with all choices, there should be consequences, either immediate or long range.  It brings to mind some of the quests from Witcher 3, especially the Bloody Baron quest, where you make choices, that even though you feel it is the right or humanitarian choice, people end up dying.  I would like to see more of these situations develop as the MEA universe continues.  While playing last night, doing Liam's loyalty quest, I had the option to lie (it was in parenthesis in one of the conversation options), which I took, but I don't know that the out come of the quest was  altered in anyway by taking that choice.

As far as the Moshae quest goes, I saved the captives because my friend Jaal wanted me to save them, and that the Angara place a great value on family.  I also shot the Cardinal in the head when the opportunity arose (which was very satisfying), so I feel that I lied or deceived him to get what I wanted.  This is a choice, a quest, that should have long range implications.  Did I save a few hundred Angara, only to see more loose their lives later because I failed to destroy the facility?  Did someone from that group that I saved go on to become a great leader or scientist that eventually helped the war effort?  I don't know what the consequences of my choice will be, but there should be something.

in my opinion, i never said i'd spare the cardinal, so it wasn't deceptive at all.

---edit

as to my thought being oversimplified... if i was going into detail, i'd have additional alternate situations based on possible reactions for: destroying the facility, vs. freeing the angara, or shooting the cardinal, vs. not doing so. etc.

---

@CasperTheLich wrote:

in my opinion, i never said i'd spare the cardinal, so it wasn't deceptive at all.

---

I suppose we could call it an assumption on the side of the Cardinal. In my first playthrough I was actually surprised I got the option at all and well, who am I to refuse such a gift? 😉

---

@PretzleMe wrote:

There are times where I'd like the option to be "dishonorable" and you know something?  I'd be okay if it had an adverse affect on my relationships with certain people (or improved it in some cases).

For instance, when you rescue the Moshae and you need the Cardinal to open the pods in order to save as many people as possible.  The Cardinal won't do this unless you agree to spare the base.  My Ryder definitely would have agreed to those terms, allowing the Cardinal to open up all those pods, and then blew the base up anyway.

Dishonorable?  Maybe.  Don't care.  And if you do, fine and I understand, but I'd like the option.

So there are times where I'd like the option to go back on my word.

What are your thoughts on this?

---

I like the idea, but think that particular choice would of gotten you the worst outcome. Just letting Angara out of pods to blow them up would look bad on your resume. They were never going to give you the option to do both. 😞