FANDOM


This is the talk page for Grissom Academy: Emergency Evacuation.
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.

Mission naming?Edit

When you pick up this mission, it starts as Grissom Academy: Investigation. Shouldn't the missions reflect that?

Removing Items Edit

Lancer1289, an admin wanted the items list removed from the Priority: Mars walkthrough; should it also be removed here? I don't understand the conventions so am reluctant to remove it, and I wanted the list. Ea-41905502 06:55, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

Except we don't do something like this here. No walkthrough should have that. Everything should be written like the vast majority of ME and ME2 walkthroughs. Lancer1289 12:04, March 15, 2012 (UTC)
So do you want to remove it, or should I, it's still there (first section of walkthrough, titled items). Ea-41905502 03:14, March 16, 2012 (UTC)
Couldn't we move the items section to the end of the article as a "Rewards" section? It would be a good summary of all the things you should have collected in the mission. Like this: http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Priority:_Palaven#Rewards
I'd be happy to do it, I would have done it already, but someone, somewhere, will probably complain and remove the edit... --Balty 02:04, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
I forgot about this. Those sections are not how walkthroughs are done on this site. Therefore both sections will be removed. None of the current walkthroughs in ME3 are up to site standards and it will probably be that way for some time. Lancer1289 02:12, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
I'm just curious as to why there shouldn't be a "rewards" section? Those sections are not how walkthroughs are done on this site isn't a justification.
Items are listed in the walkthrough, and you read them as you go. It may seem redundant, but it is nice to have a concise summary of all the weapons, armour, credits and follow up missions. Similar to the Mass Effect 2 mission summary screen, you can read the summary after finishing the mission, or even before the mission so you will know what to expect. --Balty 02:22, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
It is not a justification to you because you do not like it. The bottom line is that it isn't called for in the MoS, it is not done on any other walkthrough on the site, and well, this is not Mass Effect 2. This is Mass Effect 3, therefore a different standard, one closer to the standards for Mass Effect apply. Lancer1289 02:26, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
It is not a justification because it was not explained properly. My question is not about about what the rules say; it is about why the rules say what they do. From a purely academic point of view, in your opinion, what is wrong with having a mission summary/de-brief?
By the way, I found quite a few walkthroughs on this site with a mission summary section (especially the ME2 missions). Regardless of the reason why they have a mission summary, all those walkthroughs benefit from the mission de-brief.
Also, a few other walkthrough sites have post-mission summaries. And a few do not (most likely due to lack of user input). It is certainly beneficial to look around and take note of what other sites are doing, and one should then make his decisions using common sense and critical thinking.
Take for example:
"Rewards" section
http://au.ign.com/wikis/mass-effect-3/Grissom_Academy:_Emergency_Evacuation
"Post-Mission Wrap Up"
http://au.ign.com/wikis/mass-effect-3/Priority%3A_The_Citadel_2
"Post-mission Rundown
"http://mycheats.1up.com/view/section/3175099/32250/mass_effect_3/xbox_360
They list the rewards at the very top
http://mycheats.1up.com/view/section/3144257/20152/mass_effect/xbox_360
"Prizes for completing this mission"
http://guides.gamepressure.com/masseffect3/guide.asp?ID=14210
--Balty 03:06, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
And none of that is relevant here as each site does what it wants. What other sites do is ultimately irrelevant here as we set our own rules, our own standards, and do things our way. We do our walkthroughs one way, they do it their way. And you clearly missed parts of my comments because there are different standards for different games. ME2 is different from ME and ME3. Lancer1289 03:09, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
Exactly my point, those sites can do what they want, it is completely irrelevant in that sense. However, it is important to take note of "good examples" and "things that work" so we can incorporate them here. We should use common sense and critical thinking to evaluate our own policies, and when the need arises, to revise and improve them.
Please read my response carefully, I did not miss your comment about Mass Effect 2 supposedly having different standards. Regardless of the reason why they have a mission summary, all those walkthroughs benefit from the mission de-brief.
In the end it is up to you, the "higher ranking officer", as to what you want to do. You can consider my constructive criticism, or ignore it as you please. --Balty 03:22, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
Except in the MoS it specifically states omit the Mission Summary section for ME and ME3. Lancer1289 03:26, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
The MoS which you have adjusted recently, by the way. Anyhow, Balty, I suggest you take up a proposal to the forums here to amend the Manual of Style for Missions to discuss formatting change to the mission pages. From there, at least we can get community feedback and open up voting for the proposal. — Teugene (Talk) 03:38, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
It was adjusted when it was realized that ME3 does not have the same screen that ME2 did. If it did, then it would be a different story. ME doesn't have something like this, nor does any other walkthrough on the site. 03:46, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
Thank you Teugene; someone willing to discuss change rather than to simply say "NO" outright and remain stubborn. I will take up a proposal if and when I have the time.
I wonder why Bioware removed the mission summary screen, it was quite nice. Why did they add it to ME2 in the first place, they must have had a reason? Anyway, with the previous experience of playing ME2 and ME1, I extended my experience and came here with a simple and trivial thought: "Wouldn't it be cool to see all the weapons, armour, experience and credits you earn after doing a mission, and the follow-up missions I have to do next". I actually played through the Grissom Academy mission using this walkthrough, and the first thing I noticed was how cluttered this relatively new article was. Looking at the talk page there was a complaint about this, so I made a reasonable suggestion to move the "Rewards list" out of the way and to the bottom, so that it still remains accessible to those who want it.
What happened was a complete objection and rejection of a simple, innocent and productive change. The list (made by someone else in their valuable spare time) was deleted and the entire basis of my arguments ignored. I did not come here to cause trouble, I simply thought I could make an improvement of a trivial issue. What has happened to me, and I suspect many other new contributors to this wiki, is that we have been alienated and our desire to help has been completely shattered.
In the end, the "law" is a guideline, not an absolute. It is subject to change if deemed necessary, and should be changed and reformed if it is to remain effective and healthy.
Also, Lancer, you never answered my original question. "From a purely academic point of view, in your opinion, what do you [Lancer] think is wrong with having a mission summary/de-brief?" --Balty 04:12, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
If you need any help in setting up a proposal, I could get the ball rolling. I personally feel a summarised rewards section would be very useful for a walkthrough guide, though I have no ideas in mind now. Not everyone will share the same sentiment or may have a different ideas altogether. Furthermore, as this involves changing the formatting for all ME3 mission walkthroughs, a change of this scale will require the community feedback.
In the same time, do consider setting up sandbox samples for the proposal. it will greatly help with visualizing the idea(s).
Teugene (Talk) 04:40, April 19, 2012 (UTC)

Aha! The perfect compromise: http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Equipment_Guide_(Mass_Effect_3).

The fact that we have an "Equipment Guide" is not advertised anywhere near enough - I found it by accident while snooping around. Anyway, this whole mess could have been avoided if the existence of this page had been pointed out at the beginning. :)

An academic question: Should there be interaction between a specific walkthrough page and its respective section on the Equipment Guide? I ask this because The Equipment Guide links to the walkthrough but the walkthrough does not link to the Equipment Guide. --Balty 02:32, April 23, 2012 (UTC)

It probably should. If there's one thing the walkthroughs are lacking, this would be one of it. — Teugene (Talk) 03:53, April 23, 2012 (UTC)

Completion Notes Edit

Made a pass through, found several new items. Ea-41905502 03:29, March 16, 2012 (UTC)

Cinematic Images Edit

Could someone clarify for me what the difference is between the "poor quality" pre-rendered image that User:Aryn2382 removed from this page earlier and the pre-rendered images currently on the Normandy SR-2 page -- some of which I contributed? PhoenixBlue 20:15, March 23, 2012 (UTC)

I can offer some clarification. An example of one of the pre-rendered image would be from the Mass Effect 2 trailer that plays when you load the game up and leave it on for a bit. Images from something like that weren't appropriate. The main issue with your image is the sheer number of pixellations and other low quality aspects to it. If that's all we can get,t hen that's all we can get. Would like to see a better stab at it, particularly in png format. — Aryn Comms 21:40, March 23, 2012 (UTC)
In fact, here's a great example of format, size and more. Re: Normandy SR-2, would like to see us go back and replace those with higher quality PNGs sometime -- http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/File:ME3_Kalros_Destroyer_Fight.png
It'll take some tweaks to my FRAPS software, but I'll give it a shot when I get home. It'll have to be on my next playthrough, though, obviously. :) PhoenixBlue 21:49, March 23, 2012 (UTC)
  • salute* It's something I wish I could seriously help on. I have no reliable capture software or hardware and my copy's on the 360. That's where I started, back in 2k7.. man it's been some time. :x — Aryn Comms 22:50, March 23, 2012 (UTC)

Mission failure Edit

Can anyone confirm failure scenarios? Right after doing Palaven and then Cerberus Lab, I choosed to go to Sur'Kesh without talking to Traynor, therefore I didn't picked this mission. After rescuing the female Krogan and talking to her she passed me the mission, so far everything normal here.

Then I completed the missions to rescue the turian squad, Cerberus bomb and the Cerberus presence gurading the cannon, all in Tuchanka. Only then I headed to Grissom Academy and the mission is still available. There's a difference between how some missions are counted, like some are more important and don't compute in the math, or this was a bug? Brfritos 03:50, April 1, 2012 (UTC)

I am also sceptical about the time limit. On my first two playthroughs I know I first did Priority: Sur'kesh, Tuchanka: Turian Platoon, Tuchanka: Bomb and N7: Cerberus Attack at the very least, and quite possibly several others. Also, in the XBOX version the Grissom mission is on disk 2, which seems kind of stupid if it is time sensitive since trying to do it quickly would result in two extra disk swaps.
Can anyone else confirm that they have somehow failed the Grissom Academy mission, other than by completing Priority: Tuchanka (which fails a load of other missions as well)? Bilge Rat 16:57, April 23, 2012 (UTC)
OK, the note about needing to complete this within three missions is definitely wrong. I just completed every other possible mission, planet scan and side quest other than Priority:Tuchanka, and the Grissom Academy mission remained available and gave the full amount of war assets when completed. No one else has replied to my above note to contradict my findings so I am removing the incorrect fail conditions. Bilge Rat 17:09, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
Did you ever consider that something like this got overlooked? From your blatent response, I'm guessing not. We do know that it is a timed mission but the actual amount of time is apparently up for debate. I will readd the note and adjust it but we do know that it is a timed mission. Lancer1289 17:16, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
To reiterate, I completed every other possible mission. EVERY possible mission. Unless the fail condition is based on the passage of real time or some obscure factor like flying to the Citadel and back a ridiculous number of times then I don't see how this could possibly be considered to be a timed mission. Either that or the XBOX 360 version is bugged so that the failure doesn't trigger. Again, I assume that completing Priority: Tuchanka will fail it, but since it still worked for me after completing the maximum number of alternate missions (all of them) it can't otherwise be timed.Bilge Rat 06:50, May 27, 2012 (UTC)

In my current playthrough, I acquired the mission after Priority: Palaven and the Hanar Diplomat; I've done Priority: Sur'Kesh, Mising Scouts, Cerberus presence on Tuchanka, Turian Platoon, Cerberus abductions on Benning and Disarm the Bomb, in this particular order, I've explored all I could, but the mission is still available - it's among active missions in the journal, it's on the galaxy map, when I travel to the system, I can still normally dock and the mission starts. So, a bug, after all, or do particular missions and their order matter? --Ygrain (talk) 17:25, August 14, 2012 (UTC)

in one of my speedruns i never did any sidequest, just jumped straight into sabotaging the cure. i can't remember exactly when the mission expired, but it's either after saving the citadel from cerberus or after sabotaging the cure. i distinctly remember traynor making a note about everyone in grissom probably being dead. the "timed mission" factor is probably just a reminder to do everything before priority: tuchanka because after that you'll be dealing with a very changed citadel and therefore forced plot progression. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 17:39, August 14, 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, but the article specifically claims that the time limit is three missions, and I'm a third person already in whose playthrough this isn't true. Either a further specification is needed, or this is a bug, or the information is incorrect. I'll keep playing and keep an eye on this. --Ygrain (talk) 17:51, August 14, 2012 (UTC)
the failure part was originally written by some random anon just a few days after ME3's release : http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Grissom_Academy:_Emergency_Evacuation?oldid=258964 . obviously people were just starting to play the game then so info are bound to be incomplete or incorrect. but nobody bothered to change this in the ensuing months when evidence was presented to the contrary. now is probably the time to do so. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 18:10, August 14, 2012 (UTC)
Since we've had three users who have confirmed that it isn't 3 missions, it will no longer be present in the article and attempts to readd it will be reverted siting this talk pages. What we need now is a confirmation on how long it will stay available. Lancer1289 (talk) 18:14, August 14, 2012 (UTC)
I'd bet on the Cerberus attack, since this is the termination point for other missions, as well, but I'll take care to check after curing the genophage. --Ygrain (talk) 18:20, August 14, 2012 (UTC)
After Tuchanka and after the Cerberus base on Noveria, the quest is still available. --Ygrain (talk) 21:43, August 14, 2012 (UTC)
Confirmed: before going to the Citadel, the quest is still there and active. After dealing with Cerberus, it's not among the active quests in the journal any longer. --Ygrain (talk) 20:47, August 15, 2012 (UTC)
It is definitely Priority: The Citadel II that is the cut-off. After it, when Traynor asks you for an aside, Shepard will ask if it's about Grissom Academy. Traynor says no, since Cerberus has overrun the station, then informs you about Arrae: Ex-Cerberus Scientists. Trandra (talk) 00:23, August 16, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the discussion necromancy but I was cut off from the mission before doing Priority: Tuchanka and thus (obviously) before doing Priority: The Citadel II. I didn’t notice when exactly it happened, but it was before even doing Attican Traverse: Krogan Team and N7: Cerberus Abductions; so the information in the article is incorrect. There is no reliable way to know, but I assume that it had to do with visiting the Citadel too often, because I did fly back and forth a number of times (three or four, plus the various times for the Leviathan DLC). Yuaen (talk) 14:35, January 21, 2018 (UTC)

or you have some unofficial story mods installed and therefore not a valid claim. citadel 2 is the -absolute- cutoff for the mission, the info is still legit across all normal avenues of gameplay. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 14:34, January 21, 2018 (UTC)
Yes, you’re right, I have the EGM installed and play it for the first time. I didn’t realise it would tamper with the mission progression in this way. I dug around in the discussion forum on the mod and found confirmation that Grissom Academy is being destroyed at some point pretty early. Sorry for the confusion. Yuaen (talk) 14:54, January 21, 2018 (UTC)

Second Eviscerator instead of second Mattock? Edit

Was just playing through Grissom as a Vanguard. After I met David and he unlocked the room, I went inside to find the sniper rifle piercing mod as usual, but instead of a Mattock I found an Eviscerator instead of a Mattock. Compare with my Infiltrator playthrough where I got a Mattock. Is the choice of weapon class dependent or something? Question0

I also had this happen. In my first play-through as an engineer I got a second mattock rifle, but in this play-through as an adept, I got a second eviscerator.--N7Legion 07:24, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
Same here. I'm on an imported ME3 play through as an infiltrator and I picked up the 1st Eviscerator and 1st Mattock during the first of the mission but in the "Guns, lots of guns." weapons room it had the Eviscerator instead of the Mattock. Given that when I picked the Eviscerator and the Mattock in the 1st part of the mission that it upgraded the Mattock to level 10(max weapon level) while the Eviscerator went to level 8. In the 1st play through the Mattock was in the weapons room. I'm thinking that it might default to Mattock if both weapons are on the same weapons level but if not then it picks the weapon with the lowest weapon level.Djdelirius 10:07, April 23, 2012 (UTC)
screencapped one as per my usual habit. also playing vanguard, ME2-import shep. so it appears the rumors are true. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 17:17, November 27, 2012 (UTC)
I thought this had already been settled. There was also discussion of it on the Equipment Guide Talk page. Trandra (talk) 17:19, November 27, 2012 (UTC)
it was. i just remembered about the section on this page while i was slugging through the mission again before even reading the walkthrough proper. kneejerk reaction slip-up. :p T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 17:27, November 27, 2012 (UTC)

Disloyal? Edit

Has anyone done this mission with a disloyal Jack? In a number of these character-centric side missions, it's posssible for the character to die if they were not loyal, and Jack has the obvious option of going down the way Prangley does. Does anyone have information? ~SlvstrChung 19:48, April 16, 2012 (UTC)

I just tried it with a disloyal Jack (see my profile for details) and she lived regardless. Awaiting confirmation from others before I add anything specific to the walkthrough. ~SlvstrChung 09:42, April 20, 2012 (UTC)
Only Grunt, Miranda, Kasumi and Zaeed can die if they are disloyal. 31.63.219.248 15:29, July 16, 2012 (UTC)

Exiting the Atlas Bug? Edit

I replayed this last night and came across what appears to be a bug. In the final battle, you can kill a Combat Engineer and take over the empty Atlas beside him. After the battle, I couldn't exit the Atlas. I walked around everwhere, trying to get it to work. There weren't any more enemies, and Jack and the other biotics had stopped firing. The panel on the door you use to get to the shuttles had even turned green. But I still couldn't get out. Anyone else have this happen? TheUnknown285 22:27, May 3, 2012 (UTC)

You sure you had a key bound to "Exit Atlas"? If so... I've had several times when something has caused a key to fail (in my case, especially the mouse button I.e. the fire key), requiring a reload to fix. Perhaps something like that happened to you. ---- AnotherRho (talk) 07:00, June 9, 2012 (UTC)
I was playing on the Xbox 360 version, if that helps any. TheUnknown285 23:10, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

Spelling of Rodriguez' name Edit

Why Rodriguez name is spelled with q when game spells it with g? I'm not familiar with the name itself, but is there a reason why it does not stick with what's presented in game?

Hijacking the Atli(Atlases) Edit

I've been trying to Hijack each of the 3 Atlas mechs and can break the glass, but when I try to take out the driver/pilot, it gets destroyed. Any tips? Edit: Probably doesn't belong here but it's the first place I could think of.Master Decoder (talk) 22:27, August 3, 2012 (UTC) Nevermind, managed to hijack the one at the end. Master Decoder (talk) 22:52, August 3, 2012 (UTC)

Citadel: Biotic Amp Interfaces Edit

It should be mentioned somewhere that even though the mission itself is still available after Priority: Tuchanka, it has to be completed prior in order to be able to complete Citadel: Biotic Amp Interfaces, but where does this information belong? --Ygrain (talk) 10:55, August 16, 2012 (UTC)

The addendum on Priority: Tuchanka seems to be enough. There's precedent for this--Citadel: Alien Medi-Gel Formula has a note about a time limit, while the associated mission for getting it, N7: Cerberus Lab does not. Trandra (talk) 11:30, August 16, 2012 (UTC)
A conscious precedent, or an omission which should be rectified? IMHO, this kind of information which leads to failing/expiring missions, should be available on each related page. --Ygrain (talk) 11:44, August 16, 2012 (UTC)

Question regarding EC Epilogue Edit

On the save where i chose to make the students Biotic Company, Jack was alone in the Synthesis and Destroy slides but the students were alive in the Control ending. Not sure if this is significant but i thought i'd mention it. Is it possibly for Biotic Company to survive in all endings with high EMS? Jedted (talk) 22:15, September 8, 2012 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the outcome of the students is only tied to your decision in this mission. We'd need confirmation from other users. --Mr. Mittens (talk) 22:23, September 8, 2012 (UTC)

Upgrade bug Edit

I think there is a bug with the SMG magazine upgrade here. I pick it up, but there's no message in the lower right corner, and it's not in my inventory when I check at the weapon bench. Can anyone confirm or solve this? Thanks. --Midnightq2 (talk) 10:25, December 26, 2012 (UTC)


Intercom Edit

Didn't see this anywhere else but in the area just before Orion Hall, right around where Kahlee tells you the students are under attack there is a generator next to a non-interactable computer. Destroying the generator allows Kahlee Sanders to broadcast over the intercom to tell all the students you are there to save them. However this doesn't seem to make Jack any less surprised to see you or change any dialogue with the Octavia encounter. I had completed overlord however so David Archer was there to bail me out. Does anyone know if this changes that encounter if he isn't there? If not is this still worth adding?--65.100.32.215 04:04, January 4, 2013 (UTC)

David does not appear there. Where he does appear is listed later in the article. Lancer1289 (talk) 04:06, January 4, 2013 (UTC)
I am aware of that, my question was whether or not activating that event earlier on in the level caused the later encounter to have altered dialogue. The intercom announcement basically tells everyone in the school that Commander Shepard of the Alliance is here to save them, yet when you encounter Octavia later on and introduce yourself as COMMANDER SHEPARD OF THE ALLIANCE she still tells you that she doesn't buy it, and you have to have to have David vouch for you that you are who you say you are. If overlord wasn't completed then that encounter NORMALLY results in you either destroying the barrier (never tried that) or calling Kahlee on your omni-tool to tell Octavia that she is being an idiot. After finding that generator I immediately thought that the developers must have put it there with the intent of giving you an "out" for that conversation, but the dialogue is the same either way. My question, therefore, is whether there is any change in the non-overlord dialogue, or do you still have to call Kahlee or blow up the barrier or whatever. If the latter, does this option have any effect whatsoever on the mission or is it simply a developer fumble, and is it still worth including in the article if it is.--CoughingFrog (talk) 04:58, January 4, 2013 (UTC)
And my answer doesn't change. Everything is listed in the article with all dialogue choices. Lancer1289 (talk) 05:13, January 4, 2013 (UTC)
it's just a bit of lines to make the situation less static. as to the main question, no change. just checked it on a non-overlord save. it's not a dev fumble as it is, clearly octa(h)via is paranoid about everything (including suspecting the sanders transmission as fake) so she needed some telling off/coercion irrespective of whether shep destroys the generator or not. as to jack not acting less surprised - would you, if you were fending off lots of goons at the time? there's also such a thing as greeting people like they just arrived out of nowhere even when you knew they were coming. you know, IRL situations. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 06:01, January 4, 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for checking. I would still argue that it must have been placed there with the intent of altering the later dialogue, though I apologize if my use of the word "fumble" offended you, it was a poor choice of words. As to my second question, is this worth including in the article? Even if it has no known effect on the mission it is still an interesting little footnote.--CoughingFrog (talk) 21:00, January 4, 2013 (UTC)
eh, it was already there. right beside the first picture of the atlas. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 03:48, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
Dang, didn't catch that (why is it listed after the Orion Hall header?) so do I just delete this topic or what? Not sure how wikis work.--CoughingFrog (talk) 05:46, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
well, orion hall is basically a few steps away so i guess it counts. as to removing this, under wiki rules, we're not permitted to delete/modify comments other than our own and we have to ask permission from other users first before you delete/modify theirs. you'll have to ask lancer for permission on removing his comments, and i'm only permitting mine to be removed if everything goes. wouldn't look too good replying to empty spaces don't it. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 05:59, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
What exactly does "asking for permission" consist of? Does what you just posted count? And how would I go about getting a response from lancer? I'm not tremendously concerned about having this stay here but it seems kind of pointless now and I might as well learn how the community works at the same time.--CoughingFrog (talk) 22:12, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
for starters, if you want to ask lancer's permission on deleting his comments here, click the "talk" link beside his name, click "leave message" in his talkpage (do NOT edit the entire page, just click "leave message"), say what you want there. if he replies whichever way, then he's seen your message. best you point him to this page as there's a lot of things going on the wiki recently and this is easily overlooked. if you have any other questions you can also reach me on the talk link beside my sig (we're detracting from the purpose of talkpages). T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 11:46, January 7, 2013 (UTC)
Topics are generally not deleted from talk pages. They are archived when the page gets too long. Lancer1289 (talk) 19:16, January 7, 2013 (UTC)


Jack presence Edit

Jack will be present if either alive from ME2 import or by creating new personage via Genesis2 dlc. On genesis2 all core (non-dlc) squadmates will be present if not killed during last mission. --89.222.140.87 22:44, May 20, 2013 (UTC)

Kahlee Sanders War Asset Edit

Kahlee Sanders is the primary war asset obtained from this mission (regardless of choices) but is not listed under that section. Also, on the War Assets page it says she has a value of 15 or 20... presumably 20 if Jason Prangley survives, though this isn't very clear (it just says "depends if" which could be read either way). I think this needs to be more clear on one (or both) pages. As I understand it, the war asset is treated as such: if Jack survived ME2, then Jason Prangley will survive and Kahlee Sanders war asset will get a value of 20. If Jack did not survive, Jason will die and Sanders' asset will have a base value of 15. This asset is further update (by 5-10) depending on whether the students survive and whether David Archer was saved in Project: Overlord -- DeJuanNOnley (talk) 09:55, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

Partially agree, but
  1. You wouldn't presume that the survival of an ally (Prangley) weaken Military Strength, would you?
  2. In terms of MS, max(Kahlee) = 30 < 50 = min(students), so she's not 'the primary' asset.
Nonetheless, I don't see why Kahlee and Jack shouldn't be included in this page's War Assets section. — Elseweyr (talk) 10:39, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

Matrix Reference? Edit

When David Archer tells you about "Guns, lots of guns" could it be a reference to Neo's "Guns, lots of 'em" in The Matrix? Also consider Archer was plugged in a virtual world last time you saw him. Might be just casual, but the way he frased it is interesting. 2.224.116.57 10:37, December 15, 2013 (UTC)

Good and interesting catch! Sadly it's too speculative to be considered as trivia. --DeldiRe (talk) 10:47, December 15, 2013 (UTC)
see David Archer#Trivia before claiming anything else. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 10:50, December 15, 2013 (UTC)
Indeed ;) But my remark stays, is this not too speculative for a trivia even if I'm really not against such trivia.--DeldiRe (talk) 11:16, December 15, 2013 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.