Halo: Combat Evolved Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: "Ineffective weapons to combat the Flood"
  • Subject: "Ineffective weapons to combat the Flood"
Subject: "Ineffective weapons to combat the Flood"
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

"Puzzling. You brought such ineffective weapons to combat the Flood, despite the containment protocols."

A lot of people were confused when 343 Guilty Spark said this. If the shotgun is so much better than the Sentinel Beam, then how can it be ineffective? That doesn't make sense... does it? Let's anylize.
Look at the name of the machines. Sentinels. What does that mean? The dictionary says:

**Sentinel: n : a person employed to watch for something to happen [syn: lookout, lookout man, sentry, watch, spotter, scout, picket]**

So that means that Sentinels are supposed to watch for things. They're armed, but it's mostly a defensive weapon, because their intended function is reconnaissance and repair. Often times they can be seen using a tiny bluish laser when they aren't in combat. It's a sort of welding tool. It's the same thing that the miniature plasma-pistol-sized robots use at the beginning of "Sacred Icon". The sentinels are used on Halo as the main weapon against Flood because they're all that's available.

Here's what Guilty Spark was talking about: He expected an actual person to have better flood-killing weapons in his arsenal. Remember the line "But, I suggest you upgrade to at least a Class Twelve combat skin. Your current model only scans as a Class Two, which is ill suited for this kind of work."? He assumes that an average "forerunner" would have better armor.

If you drove your armored Humvee towards a line of enemy tanks, someone might suggest upgrading to an M1 Abrams, regardless of the footsoldiers around you for support armed with M-4's. Your mounted .50 caliber machine gun is still more powerful than thier weapons, but one would think that's not quite enough to destroy the enemy tanks.

  • 12.24.2005 2:14 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I think it means it does not completely destroy the parasite. As long as any part of the combat form is there, it can still be used. It is ineffective because it takes 3 + shots to completely destroy it.

  • 12.24.2005 3:43 PM PDT

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Erepublik: Save the world from oppression!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ineffective. The most effective way of defeating flood is to totally destroy any trace, meaning you burn it. Then again, effective for all we know is a mini halo thats compressed into a device of some sort.

  • 12.24.2005 6:08 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Yeah, in The Library part of the Flood novel, where the Sentinels are helping, it says "Lasers hissed and sizzled as the robots struck their opponents down, and having done so, moved in to sterilize what remained." The lasers were designed to completely burn away the Flood junk, which Human guns could not do.

[Edited on 12/26/2005]

  • 12.26.2005 9:02 PM PDT

It is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who has given us the freedom to demonstrate. It is the soldier, not the lawyer, who has given us the right to a fair trial. And it is the soldier who salutes the flag, who serves the flag, whose coffin is draped in the flag that allows the protester to burn the flag.Father Dennis Edward O'Brien, USMC

As said above


Beam=fire=burn
shooty=ballistics=just holes

  • 12.26.2005 10:13 PM PDT