FANDOM


This is the talk page for Akuze.
Please limit discussions to topics that go into improving the article.
If you wish to discuss matters not relevant to article upkeep, take it to the blogs, forums,
Discord chat, or discussions module.
Thank you.

Where is Planet Akuze? Does anyone think that it will play a role in Mass Effect 2?

Akuze is located in the star system that contains the planet Akuze. It's location was never given, so that's not really a question the can be answered. As for whether I think it'll play a role in ME2, short answer is: No. SpartHawg948 21:56, December 17, 2009 (UTC)

Glitch? Edit

Does anyone else get, I think it's a glitch, where Tombs and Shepard despite having a ruthless background will speak as though Shepard was still there? I put it in the Akuze topic, but it was removed, and I just thought I should ask about it. NickTyrong 23:10, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind. It's listed on the quest page. Didn't see it.

The reason that it was removed is because it was content inappropriate for an article. It read: "This player has noticed that despite having the Ruthless background, Shepard will, when speaking to Tombs, say that he was on Akuze." Anything that includes phrases such as "This player has noticed" (i.e. anything that reads like a talk page comment) belongs on a talk page, not in an article. SpartHawg948 23:15, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

Shadow Broker DLC Edit

Hi, I added a section about how in the Shadow Broker DLC, if Shephard has the sole survivor background, Tela Vasir confirms that Shephard was behind it. It was removed because it was 'not relevant.' I'm wondering, however, why is it that it is not relevant that Cerberus caused the massacre? (a) Sole Survivor is canon, (b) even if Shephard isn't sole survivor, it points to a horrible thing by them, and (c) confirmation of this would have a large effect on Shepherd's relationship with Cerberus, probably carrying over into ME3.

As far as I can see, half the article talks about in-game revelations about Akuze based on missions. What separates the Shadow Broker revelation?

Thanks!

--Pokeme444 20:39, September 9, 2011 (UTC)

What revelation? We know Cerberus was behind the attack and therefore a bit of redundant dialogue from a DLC pack doesn’t need to go into the page. Cerberus was behind the attack, but we don't need one line of dialogue, which is 100% redundant, to say the same thing. In addition, you are speculating that it will have an impact on ME3, and speculation absolutely has no place in articles. Again, this isn't as relevant as you think it is. Lancer1289 20:45, September 9, 2011 (UTC)
Speaking of redundancy... SlayerEGO1342 20:47, September 9, 2011 (UTC)
If you aren't going to contribute positively to a discussion, and just berate people for what they say, then don't participate. Your comment had nothing to do with the topic, therefore your only reason for showing up was to yet again berate me for something. If you want to do that, then go elsewhere as that has no place on a talk page and how many times have you been told that. Lancer1289 20:59, September 9, 2011 (UTC)
Could've just laughed at the irony like I intended, but you wanted to take it as a grave personal insult instead. Not trying to shift the blame over to you or anything, but not responding to what I said would have been the more "contributory" thing to do. SlayerEGO1342 21:03, September 9, 2011 (UTC)
And you had no reason to comment in the first place. So ask yourself why did you? You did nothing to contribute to the discussion? You only did because you felt yet another need to berate me over something. If you aren't going to contribute positively to a discussion, and discuss the topic at hand, then don't say anything. It is possible to do that. Lancer1289 21:08, September 9, 2011 (UTC)
If you think that is berating, then you're either uncommonly sensitive or you don't know what berating is. I was making a passive observation of irony. You're right (see, I CAN admit it) that I didn't need to say anything, but I did anyway. By your own rules, the only logical thing to do at that point would be to wholly ignore my comment and wait until a constructive comment was made at a later time. But you didn't follow the rules you're trying to impose upon me; you "fed the troll", except this was a troll that wasn't trying to be fed. In less internet-y words, since those didn't do so well the last time I used them with you, you "made a mountain out of a mole hill". Don't tell me to follow a rule that you're breaking in the process of telling me not to break it. SlayerEGO1342 21:15, September 9, 2011 (UTC)
SO back on topic. (a) Vasir is revealing that the Council or the Shadow Broker is aware of Cerberus' involvement. (b) If your in-game character isn't imported from ME1 or didn't do the side-quests, Vasir provides the only mention of it in ME2, so it's the only way for in-game Shepard to acquire that knowledge about what *defines him* about The Illusive Jerk (I mean Man). Also, we don't *know* that Cerberus was behind it - we have Toombs' account, and Cerberus did a similar thing to Kohoku. So it is probable. As I noted on the other page I added this information to, the Thresher Maw one that is, the ME1 section could be extended to say:
It is likely Toombs' story is true, as Cerberus used a similar technique six years later, luring Admiral Kahoku's marine team to their deaths in a thresher nest on Edolus. Tela Vasir later confirms Cerberus' involvement in the Lair of the Shadow Broker DLC.
Except, of course, that it wasn't in ME1.
In conclusion, a SPECTRE with access to different information sources than you and close ties to the Shadow Broker, with no reason to lie (and telling the truth about everything else at that point), revealing a hidden truth behind a critical element of Shepard's back-story (which the developers have STATED will play a role in Mass Effect 3), which is the *only time* it (Cerberus' involvement) is mentioned in the game unless you have played ME1 and done the correct side quests properly, and further confirms our SUSPICIONS about the attack...I can't see how you can dismiss that as redundant.
Consider this: when the writers were writing dialog for that sequence, why did THEY feel it necessary to put that in there? Are you a better judge of how redundant it is? Perhaps it's in there for the multiple reasons I listed above, and more?
--Pokeme444 22:17, September 9, 2011 (UTC)
Again we do know that Cerberus was behind it. There's more than enough evidence in Mass Effect to support that statement. Again, if you start new in Mass Effect 2, then it isn't as big of an issue because we'd be redundant to mention it again in a different section. If you start new, then you just have to read what you missed. Mentioning something twice when they say the same thing is the definition of redundancy.
Where to the devs say this incident will play a role in Mass Effect 3? You haven't provided any source for that, and until you do, it is speculation, and that doesn't belong here.
As to your last point, you do realize there is a lot of dialogue from Vasir about Shepard's various actions, background, and phych profiles. You are singling one out for special treatment, and only one. There isn't a mention of other dialogue bits and that is because all are redundant with information that is already present. Maybe there could be some cleanup, but there is no need to mention redundant information. Lancer1289 23:10, September 9, 2011 (UTC)
Please allow me to clarify, I meant that the developers have said that your psych profile and background will play a much bigger role in ME3. Read the ME3 page if you'd like the source. I really don't care to discuss this any more than what I'm about to say; I think that it should be stated that Cerberus is definitely, absolutely, 100% the culprit behind the thresher maw attack on Akuze, because apparently we're so certain that extra reliable in-game canon evidence isn't interesting or helpful. Additionally only people who play that DLC and are a sole survivor ever need to know. So...edit it to say that, or something. Otherwise your argument hardly has any merit. And if you don't, I don't care, it's just a wiki on the web, I will get over it. Just trying to contribute how I can. I know I personally would've liked to have known this before I found it out on my 9th complete play-through (yep, 9th. Doing all classes on Insanity, using Genesis. This is the first time I was a sole survivor, since I was a war hero and ruthless on my two ME original play-throughs for import). --Pokeme444 03:16, September 10, 2011 (UTC)
And your argument for including redundant information won't go very far. We don't need redundant information in articles, and again perhaps some cleanup is in order, but not to include redundant information. One line of dialogue which already states what is in the game isn't more information, it is redundant. So what about the rest of the dialogue Vasir talks about, should we just ignore all of that? You are again just singling out one piece of dialogue for whatever reason and despite the fact it is completely redundant, you think it should have a place. Redundancy is a big factor here. Lancer1289 03:23, September 10, 2011 (UTC)
It's no more redundant than the e-mail you get from Toombs, and that's in the article. Madfoot 16:18, March 21, 2012 (UTC)

Spacer background Edit

I noticed this recently, if your Shepard has a Spacer and Sole Survivor background, it states That "You enlisted at the age of eighteen. One of your first missions was an expedition to investigate Akuze" (See it here [1]) This means that Shepard was 23/24 around the time of Akuze, and yet it states that it was one of his/hers first missions, So in realty he/she would have been around 18/19 at the time. This may be a writing error, but logical it doesn't make any sense, Marines don't take over a year to train or for N7 training. So why was there such a gap between training and the mission? Bluegear93 08:28, September 27, 2011 (UTC)

Hmm curious. Very curious indeed. Lancer1289 13:14, September 27, 2011 (UTC)
I know, thats why I brought it up. Bluegear93 13:18, September 27, 2011 (UTC)

Might have found the answer to the question. According to a Codex entry in Mass Effect 3 (See here [2]) It states that to enter N7 training, you must complete N1 training and progress up the training ranks. This could explain why in a Spacer/Sole Survivor background it states Akuze as one of Shepard's first missions. Bluegear93 10:07, April 20, 2012 (UTC)

Reference in Shadow Broker DLC - vote include/remove Edit

In the LotSB mission, Tela Vasir makes a special reference to Shepard's mission on Akuze. So far, at least three wiki contributors believe this is relevant info for the article, and Lancer is alone in removing it. I personally maintain that it's relevant as an in-game reference to something that's important to the player, and in-game references to Shepard's background history are rare in ME2 and ME3. Lancer defends his removal by calling it redundant info, but like I said further down the talk page, so is Toombs' e-mail. You don't learn anything new about Akuze from that or from any of the ME3 references. I know that it would have been helpful for me personally when I was playing the series if the wiki was clear about how often background references show up in the later games, so I don't think Lancer is justified in removing useful info based on his own whim unless he can cite formal editing policy that supports him.

I vote include. --Madfoot 07:29, July 12, 2012 (UTC)

And it isn't relevant nor it is anything else. It isn't notable, and is therefore irrelevant and will not go into the aticle. Lancer1289 (talk) 16:21, July 12, 2012 (UTC)
I support Lancer in this. It's a throw away mention. The Toombs email is a result of what you did. Tela just gives you a blurb. She isn't a character (like Toombs) who was affected by it. She just says it to get Shepard's goat.--Xaero Dumort (talk) 18:29, July 12, 2012 (UTC)
It's still a specific reference to Akuze and doesn't happen if you choose any of the other backgrounds. I don't really understand your objection to this. Madfoot (talk) 07:19, August 14, 2012 (UTC)

I vote to remove, this shouldn't even be an issue.--Legionwrex (talk) 18:34, July 12, 2012 (UTC)

It has already been removed for complete failure to follow proper procedure, and because it wasn't notable to include anyway. Lancer1289 (talk) 19:16, July 12, 2012 (UTC)
What is proper procedure? You're making up procedure from absolutely nowhere. I am going to put it back in the article until you can cite the Wiki's official policy instead of just your personal opinions. Madfoot (talk) 07:19, August 14, 2012 (UTC)
vasir makes the throwaway comment based on your background: war hero, torfan butcher or sole survivor. does elysium and torfan have these kinds of info? no. should you add it? no. why? it's not unique information in the sense that you get something out of vasir no matter your background. also, look at it this way: so vasir mentions akuze. big deal. what did we learn about akuze from what vasir said? absolutely nothing.
just drop it and play the games. i for one don't care for an extended edit war over puerile issues like this. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 08:02, August 14, 2012 (UTC)
It matters a lot to me, since I played a Sole Survivor, and it's one of four unique references to that service record in all of ME2 and ME3. Before playing ME2 DLC or ME3, I wanted to know if your service record ever pays off in any way besides ME2's e-mails, and it would have been useful if this was mentioned on Akuze's wiki page. Looking above, I'm not the only one who thinks this is a useful thing to add. Why do you care? If you don't want an edit war, then stop removing it.
and some of my playthroughs are sole survivors as well. do i care? i don't. by your logic we should start mentioning vasir's throwaway mentions for the war hero and the butcher as well. shall we take a number and start counting the references to War Hero and Ruthless? 1) talking to hackett on a moment of self-doubt, 2) talking to joker after thessia, 3) talking to vasir when she dies. do you see any of them mentioned anywhere? of course not. don't be obstinate in adding one TINY piece of information to the exclusion of others.
TIM's recordings and toombs. 1) toombs is a crucial part of your backstory, 2) TIM's recording outright confirms cerberus involvement in akuze. so we DID learn something of importance. vasir's throwaway mention is nowhere near any of those.
last two things: 1) it's clear i'm not the only one who thinks this ISN'T a useful thing to add. 4 vs 2. give up. 2) when a discussion on contested information is happening it's common courtesy NOT to commit any changes to mainspace until some sort of accord is achieved.
next time you try to use arguments please make sure it can't be turned against you. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 10:30, September 5, 2012 (UTC)


vasir doesn't mention the other backgrounds. only SS. --Madfoot (talk) 08:18, September 28, 2012 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.