- Astinous
- |
- Noble Legendary Member
- gamertag: [none]
- user homepage:
Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
Posted by: Astinous
Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
Posted by: Astinous
I'd choose an actual warrior over a soldier any day. Study the differences between each one and you'll understand.
Master Chief was a soldier, not a loose cannon idiot who would NEVER be trusted with high value missions.
Your description of a "Best solider/warrior." Would never be chosen for any mission other then the random "We want this base gone, no rules applied."
Taking out bases are, very often, high-priority missions, you moron.
Actually, as far as I know, high priority missions include taking out specific targets (Which such a person wouldn't be chosen for, due to not be trustworthy at all.), guarding bases (Again, not trustworthy, not picked.), VIP style missions (Can't trust them, so isn't picked YET AGAIN.), recovering valueable data, persons, etc. (Not trustworthy, not picked.
Your person would be sent on the MOST basic and low-priority missions, IF ANY AT ALL.
Such a soldier, by default of not following orders and doing his own damn thing, isn't trustworthy. He'd be the bastard who sits in the barracks with no equipment while everybody else goes on missions.
Or he'd be the bastard who spills enough blood to take the world by the balls and impose his own rule. You'd know him as "the dominant bastard".
Oh, and just because he imposes his own rules doesn't mean he's a dictator. He could be a dictator for the people, like... What was that asian dude's name? Kahn something... GENGHIS KAHN.
[Edited on 04.25.2011 10:04 PM PDT]