Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: Halo vs Star Wars. Who wins?
  • Subject: Halo vs Star Wars. Who wins?
Subject: Halo vs Star Wars. Who wins?

Posted by: PLUT0NIUM 235
true, lets be honest the doors didn't do much to stop the inept Mark Hammill, Han Solo and a walking carpet for long did they? also in a trooper to trooper fight the humans from Halo would be laughing, since the Imperial Storm Troopers can't hit nothing! even with lasers (which move at the speed of light, except in Star Wars!) so they are blam! either way!


Episode 2 and 3 Portrays the real accuracy of the weapons used in that series as they fight Droids, which are useless Characters to the story. In Episode 6, would you have really liked it if all the main characters died dead in their tracks by standard troops? It's just not story there my friend. If they were fighting maybe the Rebel army, their accuracy would increase ten fold.

Besides, Yavin 4? Base Destroyed. Hoth? Base Destroyed. If you actually witness Battles between the Imperial Army and the rebellion, you would change your idea on their accuracy. Sure they can tend to be clumsy, but in reality, they are portrayed how they should be in Episode 3 with the help of Modern Technology.

  • 05.10.2011 4:00 PM PDT

Welcome to bungie, you have no rights. play nice!
CLICK!


Posted by: mojeda101
Posted by: Spartan 100


I could never see the Covenant having over 1200 ships. Ever.
Before Reach, the Covenant had 300 ships ready to Invade Reach, with 500 orbiting Unyielding Hierophant, and a hundred orbiting High Charity. By the beginning of Earth's invasion, all the 500 ships of the Unyielding Hierophant were lost, along with 100 of the 300 that invaded Reach.

That leaves the Covenant with about maybe 300 ships. 200 from Reach, and the hundred protecting High Charity. With the Great Schism, many were destroyed, With about what? Only 45 left for the Invasion of Earth.

Do you not find that sad? The Empire would be able to mass produce more Imperial ships within Weeks. Add to the fact that they have Millions as it is.

The covenant have more than that...
But that's not what it's about...
Now, however, ten thousand years after their defeat, the system was surrounded by trillions of vigilants that constantly wove in and out of space-time, sometimes so rapidly that they seemed to shape a solid sphere. This sphere extended to a distance of four hundred million kilometers from the star, and thus did not encompass four impressive gas giants whose orbits lay beyond that limit. Sevral of the many moons orbiting those gas giants provided plataforms for semiautomated maintenance stations, some of them population by the builder servant-tools known as huragok.

  • 05.10.2011 4:11 PM PDT

Posted by: Spartan 100

But that's not what it's about...
Now, however, ten thousand years after their defeat, the system was surrounded by trillions of vigilants that constantly wove in and out of space-time, sometimes so rapidly that they seemed to shape a solid sphere. This sphere extended to a distance of four hundred million kilometers from the star, and thus did not encompass four impressive gas giants whose orbits lay beyond that limit. Sevral of the many moons orbiting those gas giants provided plataforms for semiautomated maintenance stations, some of them population by the builder servant-tools known as huragok.


Where is that from? Seems so familiar.

  • 05.10.2011 4:15 PM PDT

Welcome to bungie, you have no rights. play nice!
CLICK!


Posted by: mojeda101
Posted by: Spartan 100

But that's not what it's about...
Now, however, ten thousand years after their defeat, the system was surrounded by trillions of vigilants that constantly wove in and out of space-time, sometimes so rapidly that they seemed to shape a solid sphere. This sphere extended to a distance of four hundred million kilometers from the star, and thus did not encompass four impressive gas giants whose orbits lay beyond that limit. Sevral of the many moons orbiting those gas giants provided plataforms for semiautomated maintenance stations, some of them population by the builder servant-tools known as huragok.


Where is that from? Seems so familiar.

Where do you think?

  • 05.10.2011 4:22 PM PDT

Obviously Gordon Freeman wins. HL2 ftw

  • 05.10.2011 5:45 PM PDT


Posted by: PLUT0NIUM 235
not this rubbish about Turbo-lasers and how they are unfathomably powerful! why must it always come down to this, they are not that potent, they just aren't! to gauge the destruction that a single shot from a standard 'light' MAC on a Frigate (light because of short barrel length!) would cause, you have to look at the devastation caused in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, then multiply it by around four or more. also its perfectly feasible due to the fact they are just mass moving at high velocity, similar to an asteroid or comet strike! then on the other side of the spectrum, these lasers that Star Wars-ers are claiming are 'four times as powerful' seem to do NOTHING! to whatever it is they are hitting, a perfect example of how weak Star Wars lasers are, watch Episode III the battle at the beginning the Venator broadsiding the Invisible Hand, all those 'four times as powerful as MAC' weapons do is put a couple of holes in the side of the ship and knock a few clone troopers around! put a MAC round in that same space and you'll loose half the ship, guaranteed! sorry but the Star Wars argument has no substance in that respect at all, neither do these shields that can stop three super MAC rounds yet the presumably very very strong shields of the Executor cannot stop a humble A-wing from colliding with the bridge, totalling it! a MAC round has more mass than an A-wing and since it is just a solid lump of matter it will have the exact same effect on the shield, complete penetration.

to further add to how the argument has no substance, these exact same 'shields' and all there monumental inconsistency earlier stop numerous asteroid strikes, while navigating an asteroid field. how is it that they can stop asteroids (rock and metal) and they can't stop a simple fighter (metal and some other stuff), hence how there is no argument since the shields don't behave in a consistent manner throughout the movies, one second they stop matter, the next (because of plot!) magically don't stop matter.


um, I'm sorry, but those were two WARSHIPS pounding each other. As in, their shields and armor plating was DESIGNED to take the pounding from the turbolasers.

You want proof? Ep1 actually. A hanger bay gun turns, and destroys the diplomatic ship (Which had next to no armor, and no shields up) in a single shot. If it had fired upon a similar sized ship, only with military grade armor? Results would probably be different.

  • 05.10.2011 5:50 PM PDT

Welcome to bungie, you have no rights. play nice!
CLICK!

Quote from halo cryptum commenting on the trillions of vigilants that quarantined the world both in normal and slipstream space over a large area.

  • 05.10.2011 6:04 PM PDT

Posted by: Spartan 100
Quote from halo cryptum commenting on the trillions of vigilants that quarantined the world both in normal and slipstream space over a large area.


Yet they still failed to defeat them, still puzzles me.

  • 05.10.2011 6:17 PM PDT

Welcome to bungie, you have no rights. play nice!
CLICK!

The flood were strong. They might have had a precursor to help them. Plus Mendicant Bias was helping them.

You know, if you were safe, guarding the gravemind, he could possibly convince you to let him out and let yourself be infected.

  • 05.10.2011 6:49 PM PDT

Posted by: PLUT0NIUM 235
not this rubbish about Turbo-lasers and how they are unfathomably powerful! why must it always come down to this, they are not that potent, they just aren't! to gauge the destruction that a single shot from a standard 'light' MAC on a Frigate (light because of short barrel length!) would cause, you have to look at the devastation caused in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, then multiply it by around four or more. also its perfectly feasible due to the fact they are just mass moving at high velocity, similar to an asteroid or comet strike! then on the other side of the spectrum, these lasers that Star Wars-ers are claiming are 'four times as powerful' seem to do NOTHING! to whatever it is they are hitting, a perfect example of how weak Star Wars lasers are, watch Episode III the battle at the beginning the Venator broadsiding the Invisible Hand, all those 'four times as powerful as MAC' weapons do is put a couple of holes in the side of the ship and knock a few clone troopers around! put a MAC round in that same space and you'll loose half the ship, guaranteed! sorry but the Star Wars argument has no substance in that respect at all, neither do these shields that can stop three super MAC rounds yet the presumably very very strong shields of the Executor cannot stop a humble A-wing from colliding with the bridge, totalling it! a MAC round has more mass than an A-wing and since it is just a solid lump of matter it will have the exact same effect on the shield, complete penetration.

to further add to how the argument has no substance, these exact same 'shields' and all there monumental inconsistency earlier stop numerous asteroid strikes, while navigating an asteroid field. how is it that they can stop asteroids (rock and metal) and they can't stop a simple fighter (metal and some other stuff), hence how there is no argument since the shields don't behave in a consistent manner throughout the movies, one second they stop matter, the next (because of plot!) magically don't stop matter.


I seemed to have missed your post.

First off, The invisible hand is made out of neutronium alloys and other fictional, unfathomably powerful materials with unknown properties. The weapons affects on the armour mean nothing beyond getting an idea of how strong the armour is and it's capability to channel and deflect heat and kinetic force. It is no indication of how strong the weapons are.

Also you are thinking a Nuclear explosion in space looks the same as it does in an atmosphere, it doesn't, you are also assuming that Teratons of energy MUST be released in the same manner of a nuke, again they don't. The use of Teratons is just there to get an idea of how much energy is being thrown around in a small space.

Also the Executor's bridge shields were already DOWN when the A-Wing crashed into it, as a result of the Rebel capital ships bombarding it with their own heavy turbolasers. (consider this series of events, quoted from the film)

Admiral Ackbar:"We've got to give those fighters more time, concentrate all fire on that super star destroyer"

Two A-Wings strafe the port com/scan globe, firing multiple shots before it finally blows as the shields drop from Ackbar's fleet barage.

Bridge Officer:"Sir we've lost our bridge deflector shield!"

Admiral Piett: "Intensify fire on the forward batteries, I don't want anything to get through!"

We see an A-Wing spinning out of control and an X-Wing get vapourized from a side shot

Commander Gherant points at the distant, careening A-Wing

Arvel Crynyd Screams as he struggles to aim the A-Wing at Executor's bridge.

Admiral Piet: "INTENSIFY FORWARD FIREPOWER!!!"

Commander Gherant:"TOO LATE!"

They dive to the crew pit but that clearly isn't enough to save them, Executor's engines misfire into the Death Star 2's Surface before the backup bridge can regain control.

  • 05.10.2011 10:30 PM PDT

Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron

Posted by: mojeda101
SMAC's cutting a Acclamator in half...Haha, your funny.

Considering that the Acclamator shields have enough power to withstand 2 SMAC strikes at the same time. If you are even a second off in the third shot, the shields would be up and be able to hold the third shot, considering it takes 15 seconds to fire one of those stations.

Empire turbolasers are roughly 4 times as strong as a shipboard MAC, and they have 8 of them, with a firing speed of 1 round per second. Any Covenant or UNSC ship would be vaporized in seconds.


Withstand the amount of energy produced by the blast maybe.

It's been theorized that the ship-based shields cannot stop a mass driver weapon's round, or that they are weaker to such impacts. (Aka, the shields are still strong, but the round would pass through it, maybe with difficulty, maybe not, and impact the hull.)

Mojeda, Devils has done his research as well concerning the star wars defenses.


No, ship shields are dual layered, with ray shielding (that stops energy weapons) and particle shielding (that stops mass drivers and the like) the only place where Mass drivers go through Star Wars shields is in Empire at War, and that's a video game mechanic which is non-canon.

  • 05.10.2011 10:31 PM PDT

And my friend here, Devils, has done research into the shields. I trust him when he tells me that the shields were weak to mass driver rounds. I may go have a look myself in a little bit honestly.

  • 05.10.2011 10:38 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Yes I'm fairly young. No, that doesn't mean I'm automatically dumber than you or have less life experience, thats just generally the case. I am not your general case.

Posted by: mojeda101
Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron

Posted by: mojeda101
SMAC's cutting a Acclamator in half...Haha, your funny.

Considering that the Acclamator shields have enough power to withstand 2 SMAC strikes at the same time. If you are even a second off in the third shot, the shields would be up and be able to hold the third shot, considering it takes 15 seconds to fire one of those stations.

Empire turbolasers are roughly 4 times as strong as a shipboard MAC, and they have 8 of them, with a firing speed of 1 round per second. Any Covenant or UNSC ship would be vaporized in seconds.


Withstand the amount of energy produced by the blast maybe.

It's been theorized that the ship-based shields cannot stop a mass driver weapon's round, or that they are weaker to such impacts. (Aka, the shields are still strong, but the round would pass through it, maybe with difficulty, maybe not, and impact the hull.)

Mojeda, Devils has done his research as well concerning the star wars defenses.


No, ship shields are dual layered, with ray shielding (that stops energy weapons) and particle shielding (that stops mass drivers and the like) the only place where Mass drivers go through Star Wars shields is in Empire at War, and that's a video game mechanic which is non-canon.

No, particle shields are comprised of plasma, formed into a shape by an electromagnetic signal and is designed to protect against sub-atomic particles, like radiation, UV rays and particle beams. It can absorb a small amount of kinetic force, yes but as it does so it heats up. Absorbing the impact of a MAC cannon shell would cook the crew and most likly the ship alive.
Ray shielding is simply a fictional device used by nerds everywhere. As far as I am concerned, no such could hypothetically device exists and as such, I do not care for it.

  • 05.10.2011 11:56 PM PDT


Posted by: ROBERTO jh


And before you call foul, saying "prove they're invincible.": "PRECURSORS - A civilization which preceded the Forerunners, leaving behind indestructible and inscrutable remnants of their way of life."

--343i's definition of the Precursors.

It seems to me that you realize the Precursors would curbstomp Star Wars, so tried to get them removed from the fight. Same with the Forerunners. We give you calculations and book proof, you say "nay." And why? Because a friend or brother of yours agreed with you? What does he matter? We're just going by what the book said. My--and everyone's--first thought upon reading the book was "oh, so they're -blam!- ing power houses." I fail to see what you see wrong with the book evidence.

Would you mind telling me what you see wrong with that?

PS: Sorry if I came off a little harsh, had a long, tiring day.


Is that your only citation for you saying that the Precursors are invincible? That quote says they left behind indestructible remnants. Not that their ships, or armor, or anything of military value is invincible. This whole time I thought that you had a concrete example. That quote proves nothing. Remnants could be anything. Which leads us to speculation and thus rendering your "invincible Precursors" argument invalid.

  • 05.11.2011 4:52 PM PDT

Posted by: That Atheist
Posted by: mojeda101
Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron

Posted by: mojeda101
SMAC's cutting a Acclamator in half...Haha, your funny.

Considering that the Acclamator shields have enough power to withstand 2 SMAC strikes at the same time. If you are even a second off in the third shot, the shields would be up and be able to hold the third shot, considering it takes 15 seconds to fire one of those stations.

Empire turbolasers are roughly 4 times as strong as a shipboard MAC, and they have 8 of them, with a firing speed of 1 round per second. Any Covenant or UNSC ship would be vaporized in seconds.


Withstand the amount of energy produced by the blast maybe.

It's been theorized that the ship-based shields cannot stop a mass driver weapon's round, or that they are weaker to such impacts. (Aka, the shields are still strong, but the round would pass through it, maybe with difficulty, maybe not, and impact the hull.)

Mojeda, Devils has done his research as well concerning the star wars defenses.


No, ship shields are dual layered, with ray shielding (that stops energy weapons) and particle shielding (that stops mass drivers and the like) the only place where Mass drivers go through Star Wars shields is in Empire at War, and that's a video game mechanic which is non-canon.

No, particle shields are comprised of plasma, formed into a shape by an electromagnetic signal and is designed to protect against sub-atomic particles, like radiation, UV rays and particle beams. It can absorb a small amount of kinetic force, yes but as it does so it heats up. Absorbing the impact of a MAC cannon shell would cook the crew and most likly the ship alive.
Ray shielding is simply a fictional device used by nerds everywhere. As far as I am concerned, no such could hypothetically device exists and as such, I do not care for it.


No, particle shields are designed to protect against physical impacts, regardless of type, the heat generated by a MAC cannon impact is peanuts for what the shielding is used to dealing with. Ray Shielding is a part of Star Wars canon, so either accept it or leave the debate.

  • 05.11.2011 5:12 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

SC = Supreme Commander/Supreme Canadian.

De Facto leader of the military of the APE (Allied Planets Empire).

Coup = Admiral Asskicker, ZPM hive ship

Posted by: saintssoccer

Posted by: ROBERTO jh


And before you call foul, saying "prove they're invincible.": "PRECURSORS - A civilization which preceded the Forerunners, leaving behind indestructible and inscrutable remnants of their way of life."

--343i's definition of the Precursors.

It seems to me that you realize the Precursors would curbstomp Star Wars, so tried to get them removed from the fight. Same with the Forerunners. We give you calculations and book proof, you say "nay." And why? Because a friend or brother of yours agreed with you? What does he matter? We're just going by what the book said. My--and everyone's--first thought upon reading the book was "oh, so they're -blam!- ing power houses." I fail to see what you see wrong with the book evidence.

Would you mind telling me what you see wrong with that?

PS: Sorry if I came off a little harsh, had a long, tiring day.


Is that your only citation for you saying that the Precursors are invincible? That quote says they left behind indestructible remnants. Not that their ships, or armor, or anything of military value is invincible. This whole time I thought that you had a concrete example. That quote proves nothing. Remnants could be anything. Which leads us to speculation and thus rendering your "invincible Precursors" argument invalid.

So when a race whose infantry crack continents for fun and whose smallest warship is called a Planet Breaker says that something is indestructible, that automatically means that their weapon tech sucks and that they are just as advanced as Neanderthals? (Compared to the Precursors, yes) That a single Venator class Star Destroyer would run roughshod over their entire fleet?

That is extreme troll logic, buddy.

  • 05.11.2011 5:47 PM PDT

-blam!- Was that actually blammed out? Or did I just type it? You'll never know.


Posted by: SC Matt Klassen
So when a race whose infantry are said to have cracked continents for fun and whose smallest warship is called a Planet Breaker says that something is indestructible, that automatically means that their weapon tech sucks and that they are just as advanced as Neanderthals? (Compared to the Precursors, yes) That a single Venator class Star Destroyer would run roughshod over their entire fleet?

That is extreme troll logic, buddy.


Added in some key info there.

  • 05.11.2011 5:49 PM PDT

Welcome to bungie, you have no rights. play nice!
CLICK!


Posted by: dahuterschuter

Posted by: SC Matt Klassen
So when a race whose infantry are said to have cracked continents for fun and whose smallest warship is called a Planet Breaker says that something is indestructible, that automatically means that their weapon tech sucks and that they are just as advanced as Neanderthals? (Compared to the Precursors, yes) That a single Venator class Star Destroyer would run roughshod over their entire fleet?

That is extreme troll logic, buddy.


Added in some key info there.

Are said as in, it's written.

  • 05.11.2011 5:54 PM PDT


Posted by: SC Matt Klassen
Posted by: saintssoccer

Posted by: ROBERTO jh


And before you call foul, saying "prove they're invincible.": "PRECURSORS - A civilization which preceded the Forerunners, leaving behind indestructible and inscrutable remnants of their way of life."

--343i's definition of the Precursors.

It seems to me that you realize the Precursors would curbstomp Star Wars, so tried to get them removed from the fight. Same with the Forerunners. We give you calculations and book proof, you say "nay." And why? Because a friend or brother of yours agreed with you? What does he matter? We're just going by what the book said. My--and everyone's--first thought upon reading the book was "oh, so they're -blam!- ing power houses." I fail to see what you see wrong with the book evidence.

Would you mind telling me what you see wrong with that?

PS: Sorry if I came off a little harsh, had a long, tiring day.


Is that your only citation for you saying that the Precursors are invincible? That quote says they left behind indestructible remnants. Not that their ships, or armor, or anything of military value is invincible. This whole time I thought that you had a concrete example. That quote proves nothing. Remnants could be anything. Which leads us to speculation and thus rendering your "invincible Precursors" argument invalid.

So when a race whose infantry crack continents for fun and whose smallest warship is called a Planet Breaker says that something is indestructible, that automatically means that their weapon tech sucks and that they are just as advanced as Neanderthals? (Compared to the Precursors, yes) That a single Venator class Star Destroyer would run roughshod over their entire fleet?

That is extreme troll logic, buddy.


What you just said means you have to take it on faith that the Precursors are invincible. Just because a certain species that was powerful, left behind certain indestructible objects doesn't prove anything. I'm not saying they weren't powerful, but their is no clear definition on what exactly is indestructible and whether or not that has any military significance. Show me where it says their fleets were invincible and then I'll believe you. Until then, all the invincible stuff is speculation and irrelevant.

  • 05.12.2011 3:41 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Intrepid Heroic Member

If you use a halo you would prevent any future star wars.

  • 05.12.2011 3:43 AM PDT

Warhammer 40,000 wins.

/thread

  • 05.12.2011 4:27 AM PDT

Remember Elk

What factions are fighting for halo? Like a scarab would stomp an AT-AT and then melt any remaining one.

  • 05.12.2011 5:09 AM PDT


Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron

Posted by: PLUT0NIUM 235
not this rubbish about Turbo-lasers and how they are unfathomably powerful! why must it always come down to this, they are not that potent, they just aren't! to gauge the destruction that a single shot from a standard 'light' MAC on a Frigate (light because of short barrel length!) would cause, you have to look at the devastation caused in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, then multiply it by around four or more. also its perfectly feasible due to the fact they are just mass moving at high velocity, similar to an asteroid or comet strike! then on the other side of the spectrum, these lasers that Star Wars-ers are claiming are 'four times as powerful' seem to do NOTHING! to whatever it is they are hitting, a perfect example of how weak Star Wars lasers are, watch Episode III the battle at the beginning the Venator broadsiding the Invisible Hand, all those 'four times as powerful as MAC' weapons do is put a couple of holes in the side of the ship and knock a few clone troopers around! put a MAC round in that same space and you'll loose half the ship, guaranteed! sorry but the Star Wars argument has no substance in that respect at all, neither do these shields that can stop three super MAC rounds yet the presumably very very strong shields of the Executor cannot stop a humble A-wing from colliding with the bridge, totalling it! a MAC round has more mass than an A-wing and since it is just a solid lump of matter it will have the exact same effect on the shield, complete penetration.

to further add to how the argument has no substance, these exact same 'shields' and all there monumental inconsistency earlier stop numerous asteroid strikes, while navigating an asteroid field. how is it that they can stop asteroids (rock and metal) and they can't stop a simple fighter (metal and some other stuff), hence how there is no argument since the shields don't behave in a consistent manner throughout the movies, one second they stop matter, the next (because of plot!) magically don't stop matter.


um, I'm sorry, but those were two WARSHIPS pounding each other. As in, their shields and armor plating was DESIGNED to take the pounding from the turbolasers.

You want proof? Ep1 actually. A hanger bay gun turns, and destroys the diplomatic ship (Which had next to no armor, and no shields up) in a single shot. If it had fired upon a similar sized ship, only with military grade armor? Results would probably be different.


Yes, the armor plating is ddesigned to tank warship shells.

Here's the problem: In Ep. III we see a few of the Hand's rounds strike a direct hit on a Venator gun battery. A few of the clones get caught in the explosion. I can garuntee you that shell did not hit with the force of a nuke. Those clones were not vaporized by flames that consumed them. They WERE killed, but not vaporized like they should have been.

Or howabout when the Venator detonates the Hand's loading magazine for one of its guns? No collosal super explosion occured when the energy cells in the magazine exploded. It looked more like a modern day explosion with modern explosives.

Or when a turbolaser landed a direct hit on a droid in Ep I, the droid got obliterated, but not vaporized. If those guns were nuke cannons, the droid shouldn't even had time to scream.

Or when an Executor SSD turbolaser destroyed an X-Wing in Ep VI, the X-Wing (a titanium-built fighter) was not vaporized. It did fly apart (it WAS a warship weapon) but there were still sizable pieces left.

Or when the first X-Wing pilot was killed on the Death Star raid in Ep. IV by a turbolaser. Should have been vaporized, but he wasn't.

I can keep going, if I had the time, but I need to leave for now. Case in point, the movies contradict the EU so many times in terms of the power of these guns its laughable.

Face it, they're not that strong. They are numerous however, so they're still dangerous, but not in strength.

[Edited on 05.12.2011 5:42 AM PDT]

  • 05.12.2011 5:39 AM PDT


Posted by: SH4D0W0733
What factions are fighting for halo? Like a scarab would stomp an AT-AT and then melt any remaining one.


We are trying to keep it Covenant and/or UNSC vs Empire, maybe another faction.

And yeah, that's cause AT-AT's sucked, way to easy to disable and take down lol...


Posted by: ROBERTO jh
I can keep going, if I had the time, but I need to leave for now. Case in point, the movies contradict the EU so many times in terms of the power of these guns its laughable.

Face it, they're not that strong. They are numerous however, so they're still dangerous, but not in strength.


Was waiting for you to pull this bull-blam!- line.

Well, let's face it then, the fuel rod cannon isn't as powerful as the books say. I mean, we haven't seen any marines in the games get vaporized by it. Or massive chunks of their body blown apart. Exact same concept, so don't deny it.

  • 05.12.2011 8:59 AM PDT

Welcome to bungie, you have no rights. play nice!
CLICK!

No the same. A fuel rod impact creates a 4 meter crater. Total annahilation on that spot.
The game has limits so it's not the same thing.

  • 05.12.2011 11:18 AM PDT