Are you blind man?
Who's talking about the Juggs? How many times must I repeat that I'm refering to OTHER shivan ships!!!!
I mentioned them in my rebuttal, so I hadn't forgotten about them. The fact that they're still there actually adds to the impact of that cutscene. Even in the face of an imminent supernova that only they could have predicted, and I would contend they were well aware of it, the Shivans preferred to keep engaging our forces with the other elements of their fleet rather then let our forces retreat unscathed.
Think about it: If there were no Shivans attacking our convoys or the other operations in system at that point, what are the odds that any of the escaping craft would have been caught in the supernova? Their destruction was hardly inevitable, and retreats tend to go a lot smoother when you're not being shot. No, the presence of the other Shivan vessels ensured that we didn't get away without a scratch, but took significant losses. So the destruction of numerous smaller Shivan vessels wasn't entirely pointless, even from a human perspective.
Which I'll remind you is exactly what you're using when you bust out the metrics and tell us what a waste of resources it was. I already know you don't know how to properly apply Occam's Razor, so please don't delve into arguments about logic. Really, for your own good (you'll of course ignore this, but at least I can say I typed it). Here's something to think about: To understand a logical course of action, you must first know the intended result the actions will produce.
Asking "But why would they do that if they could have done [such and such] because they have [so and so]" is automatically
faulty, because that's just what YOU would have done, or how you think they should have done something, based on the astounding assumption that you understand what the Shivans meant to do
Except you don't, because nobody does, so how do you know they didn't achieve it precisely as intended? How do you know they weren't logic incarnate without knowing what they were aiming for
? And even assuming you were gifted with knowledge from on high about the Shivans plans, you're most emphatically not a Shivan and thus aren't qualified to think like one, and so the way you employ logic is entirely motivated by your human values.
Heck, I'll even use a real life example of the differences mere cultural perspectives
can have on the thought process and warfare. WW2 saw the use of Kamikazes, pilots who would fill their planes with explosives and intentionally crash into aircraft carriers, something we (I'm American) never expected to defend against because that's not a tactic we would have thought of or actually considered implementing. It's an entirely logical approach to warfare however, you just need to have little to no regard for your own life over that of the empire.
Or take the battle for Iwo Jima and the other small islands where we'd bombard them for weeks and then STILL lose a ton of men because they just kept fighting
, down to the last man, to the point where it was obvious that victory wasn't even a remote possibility. Logic from our perspective
would have had them surrendering long before that point. If the Japanese had acted logically
, as we
understood it, there wouldn't have been cause to use the A-Bomb.
The problem is of course that in our culture "Death before dishonor!" and the "divinity of the emperor and his will" weren't a factor. The metrics we used to calculate the value of human life and the metrics they were using were entirely different. We saw them as fanatical maniacs throwing their lives away for nothing and taking far too many of ours with them. I'd imagine they saw if differently.
Now consider this: Both our cultures are Human
. If that didn't just make my point, nothing will.