211 replies to this topic

[Nebfer]

Mr Psycho, on 19 October 2014 - 08:50 AM, said:

It's kind of funny how it's only the UNSC you talk about. UNSC would just throw in a couple of havok tac nukes.

The UNSC throws out nukes as a first response to any issue? What if they want the facility back intact? How is it in all of the currently released games why are nukes not used at any point? in Reach not one nuke was used, ODST no nukes used, nor where they used in Halo 1-3 IIRC the first time we have one in use, is in Halo 4 (perhaps halo wars...). Do they throw out nukes on hostage situations they are called in on? On facility's they wise to capture (to study)? Do they regularly toss nukes at every little problem? I mean why would they use a nuke on just to them a platoon or two of guys? If they have the nukes to justify their use on a small group of heavily armed guys then their battlefields should be covered in mushroom clouds, which the games and AFAIK the books lack. In short your entire line is BS and you know it, you should be ashamed of your self for even saying it.

Hell they spent a lot of time and money on a group of elite spec forces soldiers for counter insurgency work, something that would be pointless if the first thing that went though the UNSCs collective heads was to nuke it.

In any case using nukes as your counter is an admission that unless that is your doctrine (and it's certainly not the UNSCs doctrine), that you can not handle the forces being presented.

Also B-tech dose have it's 5kg 100 ton fusion warheads... artillery mounted .5kt nuke warheads, bombs, ICBMs, and what nought... going up to 500kt for tactical weapons.

As for the remark on only mentioned the UNSC, well lets see Star wars, well Stormtrooper armor is effectively a fancy full body suit of armor that is space rated, It is not powered armor in the classical sense of the term, sure theirs electricity in it, but thats for the radios and optics, not strength or speed augmentation, and the likes. In this way it's not unlike many B-tech infantry armors, or perhaps a bit closer to the space rated infantry armors in battletech. As such are not going to fair much better than B-tech infantry will when facing a suit of battle armor. Much of what Star wars had that would of counter battle armor was de canonized recently.

Star trek has little in the way of known ground assets, much of what we have seen is not that impressive, but quite capable if used right, but their little more than light infantry.

However B-tech is a bit lower on the totem pole when it comes to space combat, so in a strategic game B-tech loses

Pacific rim, Well i would not know much about this one, but IIRC they where phasing out the mechs...

[Infiltrationist]

Nebfer, on 19 October 2014 - 01:58 PM, said:

The UNSC throws out nukes as a first response to any issue? What if they want the facility back intact? How is it in all of the currently released games why are nukes not used at any point? in Reach not one nuke was used, ODST no nukes used, nor where they used in Halo 1-3 IIRC the first time we have one in use, is in Halo 4 (perhaps halo wars...). Do they throw out nukes on hostage situations they are called in on? On facility's they wise to capture (to study)? Do they regularly toss nukes at every little problem? I mean why would they use a nuke on just to them a platoon or two of guys? If they have the nukes to justify their use on a small group of heavily armed guys then their battlefields should be covered in mushroom clouds, which the games and AFAIK the books lack. In short your entire line is BS and you know it, you should be ashamed of your self for even saying it.

Hell they spent a lot of time and money on a group of elite spec forces soldiers for counter insurgency work, something that would be pointless if the first thing that went though the UNSCs collective heads was to nuke it.

In any case using nukes as your counter is an admission that unless that is your doctrine (and it's certainly not the UNSCs doctrine), that you can not handle the forces being presented.

Also B-tech dose have it's 5kg 100 ton fusion warheads... artillery mounted .5kt nuke warheads, bombs, ICBMs, and what nought... going up to 500kt for tactical weapons.

As for the remark on only mentioned the UNSC, well lets see Star wars, well Stormtrooper armor is effectively a fancy full body suit of armor that is space rated, It is not powered armor in the classical sense of the term, sure theirs electricity in it, but thats for the radios and optics, not strength or speed augmentation, and the likes. In this way it's not unlike many B-tech infantry armors, or perhaps a bit closer to the space rated infantry armors in battletech. As such are not going to fair much better than B-tech infantry will when facing a suit of battle armor. Much of what Star wars had that would of counter battle armor was de canonized recently.

Star trek has little in the way of known ground assets, much of what we have seen is not that impressive, but quite capable if used right, but their little more than light infantry.

However B-tech is a bit lower on the totem pole when it comes to space combat, so in a strategic game B-tech loses

Pacific rim, Well i would not know much about this one, but IIRC they where phasing out the mechs...

A forerunner structure could survive 1 tac nuke easily so they wouldn't have to worry about it not staying intact. As for study there is a crap load more of forerunner tech so 1 facility being lost is nothing. You know why nukes aren't used all the time in halo? Because why would you nuke a planet you are trying to defend? It's stupid? Same thing about ground troops. And when it comes to the first halo game the halo ring was nuked by the ships core self destructing. And nukes are all the time in space combat. Of course in halo you are on the ground all the time so you don't see ships nuking each other. In the few missions where you are in space there is only about 1 ship and it gets blown up before it can fire nukes. Another reason why you don't use nukes all the time is the fact that nukes emit an emp. Why would you go nuking things if the emp would just shut down all of your own tech. When it comes to the books nukes are used. (just saying) What if the unsc didn't nuke it, they could send in any HRUNTING units they have (mantis, cyclops, epic prototype suit, ect) there are enough, especially enough mantis and cyclops units. I thought we already covered that when it comes to land battles BT would win so enough with the whole "UNSC can't handle BT forces we already covered that. But they could handle BT light forces like you mentioned. And I congratulate you on what I believe was the first insult thrown. Honestly insults adds no affect or emphasis to your posts. It makes you look like you have anger issues. Don't do it.

[Infiltrationist]

I must be the only person who likes the halo and BT universe. Because most halo people seem to overlook anything Battletech and people who like Battletech seem to see halo as an inferior game. But I seem to be the only person who likes both.

I kinda find that disappointing.

[King Arthur IV]

green lantern core!!!

this post keeps getting revived wtf lol.

GLC have a green lantern that is a whole planet and it would make a green lantern magnet thingy and suck all the ships and tech to it then turn into a nut ******* and chomp on all the robots and stuff.

MOGO the living planet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mogo

[990Dreams]

Marack Drock, on 19 October 2014 - 04:09 PM, said:

So superior that a single X-Wing with 2 torpedos can take it out... Because the turrets can't hit a ship going down a trench IN A STRAIGHT LINE! They may be superior but are manned by the Kings of Incompetence. How do you expect these:

to beat these
Doesn't compute. When your soldiers can't duck so as to avoid hitting their heads on half opened doors, or the impenetrable armor of an AT-AT turns out to be not very impenetrable:

Yeah no. Once again here is the Star Wars equations based on all the books and movies.
Jedi<Empire<>Rebel Alliance<Ewoks=Neanderthal

The Empire was winning against the Rebels and won against the Jedi making them superior in the galaxy in every way... except when an Ewok comes into existence. Seriously guys stop overlooking the fact that the Empire was defeated by Tele-Tubbies. Or that fact that the Empire can't hit crap (like a ship... moving straight at you... without varying... at all). Seriously when Ewoks win and are the reason for the downfall of the Empire you pose no threat to Stephen Hawking.

Because the idiots in BT died to a few 111 lb*. or so rockets because they wouldn't get the heck out of the hanger?

*111.111 lbs.=2000 lbs (1 ton)/180 missiles (how many missiles are in a ton of LRM ammo)

Edited by DavidHurricane, 19 October 2014 - 04:44 PM.

[Infiltrationist]

Marack Drock, on 19 October 2014 - 03:56 PM, said:

Halo is overrated. I have literally played all the Halo games back to back and they are inferior. BattleTech is just better done. Halo didn't even feature a reload button. I like both but it is quite clear which is the better game. We have Halo which is just: How many enemies can we throw at you before you die with the story lines in all but 1 game featuring Master Chief John 117, whereas BT is way more complicated and requires you to have skill. I can play Call of Duty and get the exact same experience from playing as I did while playing Halo. Halo does not ever relay to me that any of the enemies you face is a threat and as the Forerunners and NEVER SEEN IN GAME only mentioned and there powers are just shrouded in mystery and skewering from over 100,000 years of lost knowledge and the official stance of Halo is WE DON'T KNOW IF ANY SURVIVED there is nothing to win against BT especially considering that BT has more Nuclear power than the UNSC and Flood do population. WoB rendered some planets uninhabitable from Nucs but.... UNSC has never used nucs in game to my current knowledge but its been a while since I played.

Also from your last statement Psycho, you clearly indicated that you only support your stance on Halo winning because you like it, but have no evidence to support your argument. Also assuming that these people here don't like the game just because they say it will lose is so very inaccurate it staggers my mind. I like Halo, I like BT but it is clear who wins this match.

Again with the Forerunners. Here is the final statement on the Forerunners.... THEY ARE LOST! UNKOWN! COULD BE EXTINCT! Until they come into the Canonical Games and not just as a reference (because after 100,000 years no one knows the truth) they are irrelevant to this discussion. Also considering they have NO allegiance would mean they would just kill everyone they came across.

As for Nukes. WoB alone has more nucs at their disposal to use than the UNSC has man power. WoB was able to hide a planet. Not to mention WoB's tech was never effected by EMP and such (or at least not that much) giving them an advantage of Insta Win because of it.


Never comes into a game and only mentioned. Forerunners are irrelevant until put as NPC beings in Canon and seen not just as a passing Story Arc and must be there in the present day of Halo.

Face it man Halo loses. Just because you love the series doesn't mean it will win. Just because people say it will lose doesn't mean they hate/dislike the series. The series is fine, but there is no way they can win against the sheer might of the Clans, Inner Sphere, and Word of Blake combined or apart. There is just to much technology to BT's advantage.

Geez read it properly. I said halo could take out all the grey death mechs in the facility I didn't say they could beat Battletech. And I didn't say halo would win because I like it I meant it in the way that I'm the only one here who knows enough about it to actually argue about it. And the forerunners not being shown in game thing? Didact... Yeah they shown in game. And they still exist. I already stated that the remaining ones are sleeping in a crypt or left the galaxy. The only reason master chief could beat him is
because insane cortana distracted the didact by using his own tech against him. And the didact is still alive. And no you don't like halo you already said that. Halo actually does require skill but just not nearly as much as any BT game. Which is why if you don't have skill you suck at it. And I don't understand the no reload button thing. Does that mean no reloading your gun because that's a lie. Is there another term for reload I don't know about? I'm seriously confused by that one thing

[Infiltrationist]

We should really talk about who would ally with who in this fight. Would BT even be fighting anyone else with all the fighting with themselves? Would the empire bother to fight anyone else with their fighting with the rebels? Would pacific rim even get the tech to go into space? Would the unsc bother to fight with anyone else while busy fighting what is left of the original prophets covenant?

[mad kat]

Star wars would loose as the storm troopers couldn't hit a shut down Awesome within 20ft. Halo, what is that game all about Yeah i'll say that comes next. Star trek nah far too cheesy and Cliche to win plus they never seem to want to actualy use their weapons (obvious). MW wouldn't win either with current game balance and freindly fire team killing currently. So i think pacific rim purely as they were actually capable of actually fighting and hitting the enemy despite the huge mechs being carried by a couple of chinooks!

Just gonna add these guys in here too i think :

Edited by mad kat, 20 October 2014 - 06:31 AM.

[Strum Wealh]

Mr Psycho, on 19 October 2014 - 03:18 PM, said:

I must be the only person who likes the halo and BT universe. Because most halo people seem to overlook anything Battletech and people who like Battletech seem to see halo as an inferior game. But I seem to be the only person who likes both.

I kinda find that disappointing.

Personally, I enjoy the Halo series more for the universe itself than for the games' gameplay.
That is, I like the novels (which are, for the most part, excellently-written... even though Greg Bear's Forerunner Saga can be a bit hard to parse at times, mainly due to how scale & time are presented) and the cinematic work (that is, the live-action Forward Unto Dawn and the animated Halo: Legends) and the story told by the games, especially when they flesh-out the world & actually focus on characters other than the Master Chief.

It's mostly the same way with BattleTech, actually (even in spite of the difference in the caliber of writing & BT's general lack of screentime) - most of my favorite BT novels are the ones that don't focus on the "biggest-name" characters (sure, the Jade Phoenix trilogy focuses on Aidan Pryde... but, he's nowhere on the same level as the likes of VSD, Natty-K, Phelan, Kai, and so on).

[Lily from animove]

Strum Wealh, on 07 October 2014 - 03:55 PM, said:

Still, I maintain Star Trek doesn't really belong in this discussion because most of Trek factions lack any significant ground forces beyond infantry.

because all they need are some simple one and two handed phasers infantry melting anything. Why using bigger military stuff when they can literally pinpoint shoot them with their phasers from orbit? Thats a waste of military material bound to a useless location (planet). Better make some spaceships out of them.

[Infiltrationist]

But you can't really go around melting things when you get sniped and blown up by a full military ground force.

Star Trek wouldn't win on ground.


BT would

[Lily from animove]

Mr Psycho, on 20 October 2014 - 04:54 AM, said:

But you can't really go around melting things when you get sniped and blown up by a full military ground force.

Star Trek wouldn't win on ground.


BT would

what ground force? anything cna already be melted with phasers from the space (and the scanners can detect below surface).
So all Star Trek can not, is destroy the deep ground hidden forces, which are either infrantry themselves, or pointless when heavy machinery is hidden in the ground. And as soon it would come to the surface. Fire all the phasors. Star trek could even fire the phasors to kill infrantry if they want. You don't military rule a planet when you hide everything below ground.

@mad kat


lol, they can't even keep their sh*t together and get betrayed by their own corrupted kind. How would they ever rule over anything else? Star Trek would beam the Space mariens out of their armor and little tin cans.

Warp to earth, beam the emporer form the golden throne into the nexxt pile of poop. proit, all Empire warptravel and whole infrastucture dead with a single beaming action.

Edited by Lily from animove, 20 October 2014 - 05:11 AM.

[Infiltrationist]

You need to lock on to beam someone and know that they're there first. And the Star Trek ground forces could still be sniped before they know what hit them. BT has light infantry that can snipe it's not only mechs. So yes Star Trek loses if it is infantry vs infantry. But besides that point yes it is true that any ground forces could be blown up from space. That's true with any of these universes though not just Star Trek . So then this would just be a space fight which Star Trek would win.

Well actually it depends on which time in the Star Trek universe you are talking about

[Infiltrationist]

If it is when the prequel Star Trek series when the federation was new and all the technology they had was new they would lose definitely but if it is next generation or any time after they would win.

[Infiltrationist]

Cuz when federation was new phasers were only stun/kill

[Lily from animove]

Mr Psycho, on 20 October 2014 - 05:25 AM, said:

You need to lock on to beam someone and know that they're there first. And the Star Trek ground forces could still be sniped before they know what hit them. BT has light infantry that can snipe it's not only mechs. So yes Star Trek loses if it is infantry vs infantry. But besides that point yes it is true that any ground forces could be blown up from space. That's true with any of these universes though not just Star Trek . So then this would just be a space fight which Star Trek would win.

Well actually it depends on which time in the Star Trek universe you are talking about

you don't lock on, you just beam. The lock on is necessary to make a safe beaming to not make the beaming subject end as a pile of cooking meat, which in the case of beaming to get rid of opponents is nothing you would care about.

And we speak of at least classik Star Trek with kirk and spock

[Infiltrationist]

Ok what setting do they have in that timeline.

Like the phaser mode settings.

[Infiltrationist]

Sooo about alliances. What about that.

[Lily from animove]

Mr Psycho, on 20 October 2014 - 06:07 AM, said:

Ok what setting do they have in that timeline.

Like the phaser mode settings.

they can kill, thats all I know and enough to know xD.

[Infiltrationist]

If a phaser had a knife and a flashlight it would be the ultimate survival gun. Cook and kill your food with one of the fry, boil, or cook settings and cut off the parts you don't want with the knife. And you could light fires with it too. And with a flashlight you could see at night. Ok now I want one.

BUT SERIOUSLY who would ally with who?!?!