[SPOILERS] Angela is a huge hypocrite

[Ixtab]

It really bothered me that she acts all high and mighty, sacrificing friends and family back home to stop the Patriarch.... But then she turns around and gives you hell if you kill Cordite because she wanted him to take over the clans and go to Kansas to slaughter everyone there because it got them out of Colorado.
Apparently Kansas just doesn't matter.

[SargentKako]

Angela is dumb and irrelevant, you don't have to go along with her stupid plan in order to overthrow the Patriarch(if that's what you want to do). Have her follow your plan instead, and do things in a clean and peaceful way.

[The Konrad]

Angela is AWOL, going against her Generals Orders. She, of all people, should know better. Maybe she is suffering from PSTD considering her witnessing past events but some people aren't solider material after all. I don't understand why anyone following the Ranger/Solider/Military Code might even think for just a second of following her.

[rumpelstiltskin]

well the game gives you a chance to properly fück her over for it, which is even reflected in the pre-credits slides, so i'm fine with how it's handled.

[Zaris]

Originally posted by Saint Konrad:

I don't understand why anyone following the Ranger/Solider/Military Code might even think for just a second of following her.

The rangers at this point are more or less destroyed and are lured in by the Patriarch to do his dirty work so he doesn't need to use his own forces against his problems (kids, tribes). The rangers also don't know at this point that the patriarch is a dictator who gave people away as sacrifces, killed some Dorseys because of their democracy movement, killed his 3 wifes, raised 3 crazy kids and made deals with the tribes to keep them happy.

Angela found the evidence for that and decided it's against the rangers code to help a dictator. Don't forget Angela was one of the founding members if i remember correctly and Woodson (ex-communication guy) is just a replacement for Vargas because most higher ups got killed in the end of W2.

So she decided to get rid of the Patriarch and the tribes herself. The only downside is that she needs Cordite to lure the tribes east to Kansas because she has not enough manpower to fight the Patriarch and all tribes together which sounds correct in-lore. It is stated that the Patriarch hold his position 50 years without getting rid of the tribes. Even if we kill the current tribe leaders in the end we will get a slide where it's mentioned that the tribes are already reinforcing and coming back which means the threat is real without Cordites plan.

For me the ranger / good ending is something like:
- arrest the 3 kids, Patriarch for a fair trial
- kill Cordite / the tribe leaders
- send help back / get the rangers to Colorado
- let Angela stay
- help refugees
- kill the syndicate

[rumpelstiltskin]

Originally posted by Zaris:

The rangers also don't know at this point that the patriarch 1)is a dictator
2) who gave people away as sacrifces,
3) killed some Dorseys because of their democracy movement,
4) killed his 3 wifes,
5) raised 3 crazy kids
6) and made deals with the tribes to keep them happy.

1) and in a struggling postapocalyptic world it's the best form of government by far
2) we don't know what people were given away. maybe it was criminals condemned to death. still not cool by modern standards ofc, but a pretty decent compromise given the circumstances
3) he didn't order to kill the dorseys, and it's obvious they weren't after "democracy" per se, they just thought they'd have more influence and power that way
4) we only know that one of them was killed, and without knowing the exact circumstances i wouldn't pass any blame
5) really, is that something one should be executed for?
6) and i suppose it's a horribly immoral thing to do, as opposed to wiping them out, losing hundreds of soldiers in the process

[The Konrad]

Since when, in history, fictional or otherwise, has a leader (read: dictator) who united his people under one banner NOT had skeletons in his closet.

If you want to dig up dirt on any political figure you can.

Now we have Daddy Buchanon, coming from a rich and privileged stock, with parents who already made their fortune by exploiting those less fortunate and he uses the tools he was handed down to take over and unite an entire state for himself on top of a setting after the bombs fell...

Just let that sink in for a couple of seconds...

And some of the naive folks here just act surprised why he has dirty secrets littered everywhere.
Next time you or your mom gas up the car, asked yourself how much of that gas comes from a dictatorial regime our governments groom as allies just to keep the prices in check and the stock market happy.

[berrako]

I really don't like how the game show the character after two games of being a decent character.

I mean, she is totally right on the patriarch is a dictator and so on. But no other options are better.

What is the sense on support an esclavist leader only because he is going to Kansas and no to Colorado? What gives Angela the moral superiority to think Colorado deserves more protection than kansas, or Arizona by the way. By only this fact their claims are totally empty.

But there's more, she have no real plan for Colorado after taking off the patriarch, her best bet is rangers (she) control the situation until someone decent (apparently rangers, means her, I going to decide who is deserve of the title) appears. So basically change one dictator for other... But sacrificing Kansas and Arizona in the procces.

And the worst part is that you can't give her a decent moral speech. I kill cordite in the bunker as soon as he tell me his plans, but when Angela calls you after that, you only can tell her that cordite died in the battle instead of yelling her that side with a dictator to save your country can be one thing, but siding with an sclavist warlord is what is going to far away

[SargentKako]

Originally posted by Saint Konrad:

Next time you or your mom gas up the car, asked yourself how much of that gas comes from a dictatorial regime our governments groom as allies just to keep the prices in check and the stock market happy.

People primarily from modern western countries have such a naive and self-righteous view of the world, it's shocking. And it's even funnier when they try to apply that same morality to a post-apocaliptic setting.

[Pnume]

She just wants power. She sounded phony to me from the start.

[Wakawaka]

I feel like they really bungled her character. I would have preferred they left her out of the game. I feel like siding with Liberty makes 1000x more sense than siding with Angela.

[Grantig]

Yeah, unfortunately the Patriarch ending is the only "good" one.
Thinking in the future, after his death, there may still be elections and stuff. That possible future is left out in the credits.
I think, none of the endings is thought really through by the game creators. Also the Denver solutions aren't.
If you have a game which is much about choices, the choices shouldn't be badly thought through or just bad because of lazy story writing.

[[JdG] Pejman]

no there are 2 "good" endings :
Peaceful transition and November reigns
I went with november reigns because I wasn't feeling like letting vic or liberty live anyway (and already deleted valor so ...)

[Twice]

Angela has gone off the deep-end. She's unstable and irrational in this game, which could've been awesome storytelling if it was due to her past experiences haunting her, but the game doesn't really convey that.

[Brooks]

I think that everything we learn about the Patriarch (Saul Buchanan) during our trips around Colorado clearly indicates that he is a trustworthy man for the Desert Rangers.
What's our task?
Provide "long-term" aid and an alliance with Colorado
Buchanan is a man who bases his power on alliances, if he was able to get along with the gangs to protect your people. He sees now that he has the ability to form an alliance with "decent" and "honest" people (of course for the conditions of the post-apocalyptic world), I mean Rangers, so in alliance with the Rangers he can finally destroy the bandits.
He has a few things on his conscience, but he is not like Pol Pot from Cambodia, nor Bokassa or Idi Amin from Africa
He is making, as the Germans say, "realpolitik", so politics that start from the possible and dispense with abstract programs and ideal postulates. It is often the case that there are no good solutions, so then efficient ruler should choose in such a way as to maximize your own benefits or minimize your own losses.
I can't agree that he uses us Rangers, finally gives us a base, people (Kwon and the radio man), spies and intel, advisers (Graetski or that man from the Hundred Families) and of course,chances of saving our people in Arizona
After all, he puts himself at great risk by inviting us to his home as well. One of his enemies might bid us a better offer.
Besides, we can always help the poor and the oppressed on our own, he doesn't forbid us, doesn't interfere with our way of dealing with people.

EDIT. If Buchanan is such a monster, why does his beloved daughter Liberty say he is too weak, willing to make concessions and compromises when he should rule like a true dictator and drown Colorado in the blood?
I think a lot of the views here on the forum are the result of a rather superficial analysis of the situation.
People seem to take their word for everyone who says bad things about the Patriarch and don't bother to check it out, but all these rumors can be checked while playing.

[SargentKako]

Originally posted by Grantig:

Yeah, unfortunately the Patriarch ending is the only "good" one.
Thinking in the future, after his death, there may still be elections and stuff. That possible future is left out in the credits.
I think, none of the endings is thought really through by the game creators. Also the Denver solutions aren't.
If you have a game which is much about choices, the choices shouldn't be badly thought through or just bad because of lazy story writing.

November Reigns is also a good ending, perhaps even better since it expands the Rangers' realm of influence and everything is done in a peaceful and orderly way.

As for Denver, the Gippers end up forming their own society and becoming rich because of their monopoly on the oil, which attracts a lot of people to live there. If you get a "loved" relationship with them, the game will say that even if they become a power to rival Colorado Springs they'll still remain friendly.

Turning Denver into a functioning and prosperous society doesn't seem like a bad ending in a post apocalyptic setting. It'll also aliviate the refugee pressure into Colorado Springs by giving them a new place to settle instead.

As for the Gippers themselves being cultists, again, it's not that big of an issue if you consider every other faction in Colorado. You have cannibals, slavers, a gang that makes kites out of people, so an anti-communist religious cult is the least of one's worries.

But, you can also take the Reagan A.I hostage and force the Gippers to deliver Valor and their Oil, therefore keeping them on a leash.