- ROBERTO jh
- |
- Fabled Heroic Member
Posted by: CrazyJediMaster
Posted by: ROBERTO jh
What exactley is unknown about either? In a behavioral and biological sense, we know more about the Flood then we do the Covenant.
We know how they operate, how they think and what factors play into their abilities.
I've noticed Star Wars defenders tend to "forget" or dismiss Halo's greatest weapons because they're either "unfair" (while at the same time pulling a -blam!- storm of numbers out of thin air) or too "mysterious". It gives me the impression they're trying to loophole their way into any easy win, having to fight only two factions.
I'm not saying you're one of them, but it is something I look out for.
I meant the interaction between the two would be hard to quantify. The Vong were biological experimenters, the flood a biological experimentee. If one were to get in the hands of the Vong who knows what could happen or what could change. It becomes a huge moot point if you ask me.
And the problem with any super weapons is the same as a nuclear while the can be used if we go to war we don't just drop a nuke it's overkill, while many of the superweapons from the star wars universe can are often are used on a ship to ship bases not just galaxy cleansing.
Saying you have the best super weapons is equivalent to saying the USA has the most nuclear bombs. It gives you great bargaining position but how often have they actually been used.
Now I get it, I thought you were referring to the Flood overall; didn't realize you were talking about the interaction between those two specifically.
But if you break it down to simplified terms: Flood consume organic material. The Vong's tech is organic material.
Now I don't know a lot about the Vong to assume I'm automatically correct, but no organic substance has ever been resistant to the Flood except for Johnson due to his disrupted neural patterns. The only logical conclusion I see is that their race would be highly susceptible to the Flood.
And by weapon, I meant anything deemed overpowered by the Wars defenders.
For example, before Cryptum, the argument that Forerunners were unquantifiable since little was known was more valid. Indeed, the only thing we knew for sure was that their fleets could force stellar collapse.
So we waited for Cryptum.
As soon as the book came out, Halo defenders looked at the weapons and numbers presented, and calculated their strength based on their abilities. The most famous of which is the complete destruction of a Halo ring by ship weapons.
The pillar of autumn's detonation carved a 5 kilometer crater into the armor, but exploded with a force of several hundred terratons, based on the explosion's size in Halo 2 compared to the width of the Halo.
So, when 4 Forerunner cruisers demolished a Halo using only their ship cannons, carving vast gouges into the armor, the obviousness of the Forerunner's overpowered weaponry was paramount.
But no sooner had this been calculated then the Wars fans cried foul and said the Forerunners could not be considered in a debate due to either being completely unfair (while they at the same time spew nonsensical numbers with next to no supporting evidence and all the evidence against them) or them remaining far to ambiguous to consider.
Same goes for the Precursors. We know a few things about them that makes whatever weaponry they may or may not have had moot.
1) They could travel intergalactically, something the bulk of Wars factions cannot do (on no fault of their own of course, but still).
2) They were beyond normal sentient comprehension, possibly on the level of godhood.
3) Their technology could not be destroyed, this of all the points being the most controversial.
4) They could create life, something very difficult for even Force users to do.
5) Their soldiers would, naturally, be unbelievably powerful, considering their size (15 meters tall with a tail ending on a 2 meter barb)
Now as before, the lack of any information regarding them kept them out of debates, save for point 1 and 4. "Wait for more info on them" Wars defenders would say.
Well, when we got the info, they once again cried foul and said we were either bull -blam!- them, or that, again, they were still too ambiguous.
But the very fact none of their technology can be destroyed by any science Wars has is proof enough that Halo wins by default. They could have no weapons at all, but they'd still in in a war. Just ram everything with ships that cannot be destroyed.
And while they call foul, they spew bs on a level unimaginable. They say a single laser blast from an X-Wing or TIE fighter is as powerful as a Shiva nuke, or that a blast from any Star Destroyer cannon is more powerful then a SMAC.
Well, I've been reading a SW novel called Death Star, released in 2007, chronicling the construction of the massive weapon. One chacracter was considering the immense power of the primary laser, and I found a rather telling paragraph that shuts down all of this fan wank.
"Tenn nodded. He'd asked about power storage first day on the simulator, and the engineers had fallen all over themselves backing away from that one. But once he'd seen the numbers--they had to keep them honest, even in sims--he'd figured it out pretty quick. The capacitors could hold enough juice to light up a planet, true enough, but once they discharged, they weren't going to be filling back up real quick.
"Once you shot the thing, you might as well turn out the lights and go take a nap, because it wasn't going to be back up to full power for the better part of a day." (here's the really good part) "True, you could still pump out some pretty low power beams--and the definition of low here was still bigger then what a Star Destroyer could manage, even letting all the hardware spit at once--but it would be a duster instead of a buster. You could scorch a city or two, boil away a large lake or even a small sea, but that was about it."
(Death Star, page 233)
All of a Destroyers hardware spitting at once, not enough to level a city or vaporize a small sea, yet they have 50 gigatons per shot cannons that rain fire like a Venusian storm?
While Covenant ships can vaporize entire oceans? (reconfirmed by the cover of "Glasslands" and the Condemned multiplayer map, proving the Assembly was wrong about their power)
It looks to me that Star Destroyers, and by extension, Star Wars weapons, aren't really that powerful, doesn't it?