- Erebus1317
- |
- Noble Member
It's a dangerous business, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no telling where you might be swept off to.
Posted by: Adragalus
Posted by: Uncarinelf
Posted by: grey101
Posted by: Uncarinelf
2's anyone arguing different is brain dead. The 3's in Reach are far more bad ass then the ones in the books and Reach is a game that broke several other canon points...[/quote]
You clearly don't know what you are talking about[/quote]
show me im wrong[/quote]
Or how about you understand what each class was made for and their differences before coming up with an illogical conclusion.[/quote]
read my edit
Doesn't matter, if you make a claim, you have to back it up.
I am.
Also where did you guys hear they got the same augmentation? My understanding was they got a different one that, while weaker, made it so it could be given to a wider ranger of people.Wrong, sorry mate. The S-III augmentations, given during Project CRYSANTHEMUM and as described by Kurt in GoO, are identical to the S-II surgical process.
The only changes are that they widened the genetic selection, allowing for subjects not quite as exceptional as the S-IIs, and that it was done in about half the time as the II program. They lacked the growth augmentation that caused increased stature in S-IIs.
Aside from that, the augmentations are identical. Advances in tech allowed for it to be done entirely through chemicals, no surgery involved, with a 100% success rate, no washouts. The result wasn't any weaker, only the subjects selected weren't entirely the genetic paragons that S-IIs are.
Give a S-III Mjolnir armor and some additional training or experience, and they perform just as well. The biggest different is that IIIs were trained for squad-based combat or en masse assault, while IIs are one-man or small-squad juggernauts.
End of argument. Summed up perfectly. Refer to this whenever someone asks this question again to save time.