- z0rgy
- |
- Senior Mythic Member
Proud frenchie, elite fan, anthro artist not hellbent on yiff convention/pics/whatever, mature and intelligent forum guy, 4chaner, halo 2 lover and halo 3 hater.
Posted by: EldritchWarlord
Posted by: z0rgy
in a practical way, air vehicle > water vehicles.
in a realistic point of view, air > water.
since reach is totally under UNSC control, they don't need submarines to ambush enemy water vehicles.
and when invading a planet, why bother using water based vehicles when you can just drop from orbit or use dropships?
no matter what angle you look at this problem from, it's just not realistic or even a good idea...
You see, the thing about "why bother?" is that you often are unable or find it inadvisable to do the "clearly superior" alternative.
Example: Why bother with infantry when you can just blast things from orbit?
Or for a more relevant example: Why do Navy Seals use assault boats when they could get there quicker by helicopter?
why bother with infantry : to capture key locations, keep intel intact, etc. also, not everybody can man a space cannon, and they would cost too much to be mass produced.
and the seals use boats to infiltrate. it makes less sound and is less visible than a helicopter.