Protoss versus Covenant

[Connor MacLeod]

I'm trying to find the guide booklet for an exact quote, but it was something along the lines of the Protoss reducing Chau Sara to a lifeless ball of rock and ash. One of the novels (Liberty's Crusade) expands on this to describe the planet's surface as molten rock/slaggy, but its canonicity is in question (thanks to Kevin J. Anderson, naturally, and his idiotic use of game mechanics in a series.).

Yes, I'm aware of Liberty's Crusade, and it wasn't written by KJA (It was written by Jef Grubb. KJA wrote "Shadows of the Xel'Naga".) And the effects will only igve you the total energy to achieve the deed (with around 50 or so ships, I might add, including multiple carriers.) It doesn't tell you how long it took to achieve in EITHER case, so the sustained firepower remains effectively unknown (or conjectural.)

[Nephtys]

And since when did real ammunition have ANYTHING to do with Halo? We've got a Cyborg Supersoldier who can wield crew-served machine guns from the hip, yet has issues controlling a 9mm SMG.

I like how this particular rebuttall manages to so thoroughly back itself up with concerete evidence and numbers and whatnot, since this being STardestroyer.net, we follow something called Burdeen of proof, rather than pulling shit out of our asses.

Because citing a real bullet has nothing to do with these magical fictional bullets, which definately have different properties than real life bullets. Such as .45 handgun rounds being immensely superior in all respects to rifle bullets of any caliber, or perhaps fragmentation grenades that don't actually fragment?

Because a real life bullet of those dimensions has a certain performance, doesn't mean a weapon in Haloverse will work similarly. This is a universe where a rifle round does much less against an armored, shielded target than buckshot. Or hell, a one very hard swing of a blunt object is superior in stopping power.

[Connor MacLeod]

Because citing a real bullet has nothing to do with these magical fictional bullets, which definately have different properties than real life bullets.

Ah, so your whole rebuttal is "IT CAN'T BE MEASURED IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE WAHHHH!" bullshit. Again, did you fucking forget which goddamn forum you are posting on, or are you just deciding to whine without providing any meaningful contribution?

Such as .45 handgun rounds being immensely superior in all respects to rifle bullets of any caliber, or perhaps fragmentation grenades that don't actually fragment?

Again, are you going to actually cite a source, or ar eyou just going to whine "it can't be quantified", even though you should know fucking better that that whinign doesn't fly on this forum?

Because a real life bullet of those dimensions has a certain performance, doesn't mean a weapon in Haloverse will work similarly. This is a universe where a rifle round does much less against an armored, shielded target than buckshot. Or hell, a one very hard swing of a blunt object is superior in stopping power.

Given your continual inability to provide any substantial reference, I'm suspecting you're not only bullshitting, you're probalby using game-mechanics based bullshit as well. Or you're just pulling shit out of your ass. Either seems possible at this point, and neither is tolerated here, in case you fucking forgot.

[Covenant]

I'm going to have to disappear after this, so if you post again, don't take offense to the lack of a reply. Got stuff to do tomorrow! I'll just answer to the best of my ability so you know I'm being honest.

Where did you hear this from? I've never heard this before, and since you're the one arguing the range, its rather relevant to your argument and behooves you to actually make sure you can make that justification.

The army: Maximum effective range is the maximum range within which a weapon is effective against its intended target.

Also, if you do a google search for "ak-47 effective range" it just tells you: AK-47 — Effective Range: 300 M (330 Yd). That's the point range, not the area range.

Since most people refer to range as in "From what range can I kill a guy with this gun?" I just assumed they were talking about point targets, since that dude you're talking about is the intended target. If you can't hit him, and instead hit his truck or his dog or the guy next to him, you might still kill something, but that's not an effective range for what you were looking to accomplish.

Now, if we want to just fire shots downrange into an area, then I'd be wrong, but most people I hear talking about the range of a weapon seem to be talking about the distance between them and a hypothetical target, rather than a hypothetical broadside of a barn. These are just assumptions though, to you it might just mean the range at which a bullet still can kill someone... which, mind you, can be an excessively long range if you fire them in a parabolic arc.

Of course, since we're not talking about the Halo side REALLY using M-16s or the equivalent (which was just an off-the-cuff example on my part) but rather something more powerful (see above), the range issue becomes rather different.

Fine, but The Haloverse doesn't seem to use M-16 ammo in their guns as standard, so youre analogy is still off.
...
But as "stateD" they use 7.62x51mm ammo, which is quite a bit better performance-wise than 300 meters. Unless the value can be corroborated in another source I'm calling bullshit.

Right, I never meant to assert they were, but I did want to call into question if they actually were more powerful, so I was comparing them to each other. Even if the ammo is different, the Haloverse ammo exists today, as does m16a2 ammo, so there's no reason we can't compare the ammo and the rifles.

As the article I pointed to shows, the MA5C has a muzzle velocity of 905m/s, which is actually markably lower than the 975m/s muzzle velocity of the M-16.

Obviously, the damage inflicted from a round is extremely complicated to compute, but the bullet not only moves slower but also has a shorter effective range than a common rifle of the day, and in general the 7.62 has a lower foot-pound force than a 5.56 round does. So it seems that it is basically all-around going to carry less impact, less range, and less accuracy than a common weapon of the modern era. That makes it a fair comparison to me.

If there's more to a bullet's damage dynamics than speed, weight, force and muzzle velocity, then correct me. Rate of fire does also come into play, but the MA5C and M16 are identical there (750-900 r/m)

Lethality is also a consideration, since you can have a very high velocity bullet lose energy quickly to the atmosphere if it isn't very heavy (especially with recoil being a huge limiting factor. The higher the velocity, the lwoer the mass. And in this case the 8mm cross section will also work against it.)

As for the low effectrive ranges, it is possible that the design of the rifle, the materials it is made of, or some other design flaws could hamper the ballistics enough to lower it's effective range to 300m. As I said earlier, the AK's effective range is 300m, so maybe the Haloverse marines have shifted to a bizzare sort of synthetic powder that provides poorer ballistics, or that some material their bullets are made of just perform badly. I can't really say, but since that's what the numbers said, I can't really just call it bullshit outright until there's any other source out there that says so. I'm not going to just invent a number for it's range, and if we go for the stated ranges/effectiveness of a 21st century 7.62 then we're still coming up with a weapon that's hardly groundbreakingly powerful, and provides a convenient lower-limit for Covenant technology.

[Covenant]

Can someone fix my quotes? I'm required to head to bed now. Cheers!

[brianeyci]

I'll concede that; I haven't played the games in a while, and I had forgotten that universal shielding was one of the Protoss race benefits.

You're right, but it really is a nitpick on my part: even though the Protoss are shielded, there's really no evidence on the effectiveness of their shields. If we take lower limits then the Protoss shields can take light pistol fire. Grenade launchers, flamethrowers and probably shotguns can stop Protoss. A Ghost's sniper rifle can probably penetrate Zealot shields. Sorry Starcraft fans.

I am at a serious disadvantage though because I haven't read Starcraft novels, but the Starcraft novels are so inconsistent I think I'm safe to ignore them, all due respect to Connor who's using them.

Nevertheless, the shields they bear are still vulnerable to Terran side arms, and would likely be easily overwhelmed by Covenant plasma fire and fuel rod weaponry, especially in the numbers that they are normally employed. Dragoons and Reavers are obviously more of a threat, but the Covenant has its own set of armor to combat them, along with a great deal of close-air support (although I will admit, stationary plasma turrets would seem to be an ideal defense against Banshees).

I'm not even sure I'd call the Dragoons or Reavers armor. They're more like infantry support, and I doubt they're designed along the lines of main battle tanks or they wouldn't be constructed as walkers. A single missile from an inferior race which should have inferior materials science penetrated its hull and there was no hint of point-defense which even modern MBT's have (at least Israeli and Russian tanks.) Not only that, but the Protoss were using that Dragoon as bait, so they should've expected the Terrans to launch a missile and deployed some countermeasure. The safest assumption is they have no countermeasure and the latest generation RPG's and ATGM's would wreak havoc on Dragoons (that's what we see.)

Every time I think of alien races, I try and not assume they've developed the same Western doctrine of warfare we have, with full combined arms. In the cinematic there were no Zealots supporting the Dragoons. The base was not hit in the air by an Arbiter. Force concentration (blitzkreig anybody), massive artillery barrages, tank warfare, trench warfare, it's all a uniquely... human concept, at least when I see alien races at first, especially single-minded religious zealots or monsters. Just because they've got different types of units, doesn't mean they use them effectively at all or have the proper coordination or communication to use them. Or more importantly, the history humans have.

[SylasGaunt]

Okay I'm digging on Bungie.net to try and find all the Halo Universe articles they've put up for use here.

Plasma Rifle:

Official designation: Type-25 DER
Length o/a: 66 cm (26 in.)
Weight: 5.9 kg (13 lbs)
Cartridge: unknown1
Max. effective range: 50 meters (155 ft)
Muzzle velocity: 126 m/s (413 f/s)
Battery capacity: 400 shots
Rate of fire: 360~540 shots/min
Unit Replacement cost: N/A

Description:

The Type-25 DER is a battery-powered directed energy weapon capable of fully automatic fire. The exact mechanism by which it functions is currently under investigation.

Observations:

Up until just recently the Plasma Rifle had been the primary weapon of the Covenant’s officer corps 2. The weapon has a power output of 100~150 Kv@2~3 dA.

It has been widely noted that the disparity in the effective combat range between Covenant short and long arms are much greater than those of the UNSC—this is also reflected in the Covenant’s combat doctrine: destroy enemy morale with harassing fire from distant or hidden snipers and intimate exposure to the alien-ness of their infantry.

Remarks:

“These things are huge—but I guess the Elites are, too—so it sort’a makes sense.”

“[The Type-25 DER] has no recoil to speak of; it tears the ____ out of shields and you can shoot the thing all day long—it is on the heavy side though.”

“I realize that it uses a battery instead of a magazine, but nobody has figured out how to swap it or recharge it yet? Don’t we have scientists working for us or something?”

“It’s got no sightline, it’s awkward to hold, and if it overheats it’ll cook the hair right off of your wrists.”

“You know, it looks delicate and so you feel like you need to hold it kind’a gingerly—but then you see an Elite crack in a Bravo Kilo’s head with one—thing’s are built tough.”

“Yeah, and I’ve seen some [Elites] swinging two of them around like it was nothing—scary ____.”

Plasma Pistol

Official designation: Type-25 DEP

Length o/a: 34.3 cm (13.5 in.)
Weight: 3.5 kg (7.75 lbs)
1Cartridge: unknown[1]
Max. effective range: 50 meters (155 ft)
Muzzle velocity: 108 m/s (354 f/s)
Battery capacity: 200 shots
Rate of fire: semi-automatic only
Unit Replacement cost: N/A

Description:

The Type-25 DEP is a battery-powered directed energy weapon capable of semi- automatic fire. The exact mechanism by which it functions is currently under investigation.

Observations:

The Type-25 DEP is the standard infantry weapon of the Covenant armed forces. This small directed energy weapon has a core power output of 100~150 Kv@2~3 dA in its standard firing mode. Over-charge power output is as high as 1.5 Mv @ 2~3 dA. Over-charging the weapon dramatically reduces the lifespan of the weapon’s battery.

Remarks:

“[The Type-25 DEP] is the bread and butter of Covenant small arms—almost as common as the MA5 is with the UNSC. After the Covenant Carrier jumped there were some areas of Mombasa where plasma pistols covered the ground like leaves—that maneuver killed a bunch of dudes on both sides.”

“The trigger is soft—no feedback—there’s no break that tells you when the overcharge is gonna kick in. First time I did it was on accident and it damn near sprained my wrist.”

“It’s a damned ray gun—how come we don’t have ray guns?”

“It’s great in built-up areas and clearing buildings. Anything over a couple dozen meters though? Not so much.”

“How the foxtrot does it track anything? Whatever—I guess that’s why I carry an em eh five instead of a TACPAD.”

“It’s just the right size and it feels good in your hands, but give me an em seven or an em eh five any day of the week.”

1Pending treaty negotiations with the Sangheili.

Carbine

Official designation: Type-51 Carbine

Length o/a: 122.8cm (48.3 in.)
Length (barrel): 58.67 cm (23.1 in.)
Weight (empty): 7 kg (15.5 lbs)
Weight (loaded): 8.8 kg (19.5 lbs)
Cartridge: 8mm x 60 caseless (composition unknown)1
Max. effective range: 600 meters (1968 ft)
Muzzle velocity: 700 m/s (2296 f/s)
Magazine capacity: 18 rounds
Rate of fire: semi-automatic only
Unit Replacement cost: N/A

Description:

This weapon appears to be recoil-operated, semi-automatic, and charger-fed. It fires 8mm caseless projectiles. The projectile is powered along its entire flight path, consuming up to 50% of its total mass by the time it reaches its maximum effective range.

Observations:

To the casual observer the Type-51 Carbine may seem like an oddity within the Covenant arsenal, but its seeming incongruity is superficial. The Covenant has several other solid projectile weapons and many weapons that appear to be direct analogs of UNSC armaments. Whether separated by vast oceans or the enormous gulfs of interstellar space the basic tools required to compete within the ultra-refined arena of armed conflict are invariably going to resemble one another in either form or function—if not both.

Remarks:

“So—it’s just their projectile weapons that we’ve figured out how to reload? I guess I’m cool with that.”

“It’s almost a direct analog of the bee are fifty-five. I just wish it had a more—um—conventional scope.”

“In my youth I used to board Olympus a couple o’ times a year—you see where I’m going with this? Yeah. That foxtrot gun is the size of my old board.”

“Oh man! You really need to learn to recognize the symbols on top of the charger—and count your shots, too. First time I picked one up I just about brained myself when it ejected.”

“Wish it was smaller; wish it had a proper stock—or at least a butt pad.”

"Hey—don’t inhale immediately after the charger ejects. I heard that ____ will give you Boren’s Syndrome.”2
1Pending treaty negotiations with the Sangheili.

2There are no conclusive tests that indicate that the Type-51 Carbine puts a user at risk for contracting Boren’s Syndrome.

Needler

Official designation: Type-33 GML
Length o/a: 57.8 cm (22.75 in.)
Length (barrel): 16.25 cm (6.4 in.)
Weight (empty): 3.74 kg (8.25 lbs)
Weight (loaded): 4.3 kg (9.5 lbs)
Cartridge: unknown1
Max. effective range: 64 meters (210 ft)
Muzzle velocity: 54 m/s (177 f/s)
Magazine capacity: 19 rounds
Rate of fire: 510 rnds/min
Unit Replacement cost: N/A


Description:

The Type-33 GML is an unusual projectile weapon. It fires guided projectiles which are long and very sharp—hence the “needler” moniker—that impale soft targets which detonate several seconds after coming to rest in their target. The exact mechanism by which it functions is currently under investigation.


Observations:

Though not generally considered effective enough to be a combat multiplier, the wounds this weapon inflicts are horrific. In this aspect it is been reasoned by some to be the closest weapon in the Covenant arsenal to the flamethrower of ancient times.2

The standard tactic used by Covenant combatants armed with Type-33 GMLs is to fire several bursts into a confined area before entering; the projectiles ricochet when they hit rigid surfaces at oblique angles and retain sufficient velocity to make dodging them difficult at best.

Linear energy fields3 tend to provide the best protection; as the projectiles are repelled without detonating.


Remarks:

“I don’t know how it works, but it seems [the needles] can only follow you if they can see you.”

“First order of business when dealing with a hostile armed with a needler is finding cover; second order of business is killing the mike foxtrot with the needler.”

“Anything stuck with enough needles will blow sky high—and if a foxtrot is unlucky enough to be carrying grenades, those’re gonna cook off too.”

“I caught three in the leg as I was diving behind a broken wall—they lodged right in there where the greave meets the boot. When they went off it damn near broke my ankle and flung like little splinters of glass or crystal or whatever all up my left side—the corpsman was pulling that ____ out’a me for the better part of two hours.”

“Luckily—listen to me “luckily”—the needles only detonate when they’re imbedded in living tissue. Now that’s lucky because it’s not gonna blow a hole in the wall you’re hiding behind or tear the tires off of the vehicle you’re trying to escape in.”

“It’s about as close to a fire-and-forget small arm that were likely to ever see—and it ain’t ours. This is why we’re losing.”

1Pending treaty negotiations with the Sangheili.

2Or the M7057 DP, although that is not currently listed as a weapon system.

3Such as the Point Defense Gauntlets carried by the Kig-Yar.

Sniper Rifle

Official designation: Type-50 SRS

Length o/a: 160.4 cm (63.2 in.)
Length (barrel): 82.55 cm (32.5 in.)
Weight: 18 kg (39.6 lbs)
Cartridge: unknown1
Max. effective range2: 1500 meters (4900 ft)
Muzzle velocity: 3657 m/s (12,000 f/s)
Battery capacity: 10 shots
Rate of fire: semi-automatic only
Unit Replacement cost: N/A

Description:

The Type-50 SRS is a battery-powered directed-energy weapon. The exact mechanism by which it functions is currently under investigation.

Observations:

This weapon has become much more common in recent months. Whether this is indicative of a widespread change in battlefield doctrine or a local reorganization of unit structure is unknown. The weapon is nearly silent, negligible muzzle signature, weighs considerably less than its UNSC analog and inflicts wounds akin to the 14.5mm SRS 99 AM—by all assessments it is a clear combat multiplier.


Remarks:

“Makes less noise than a bee are; has less felt recoil than an em six; is at least as accurate as ninety-nine eh em—it’s big and heavy and the balance is weird but I can’t wait ‘til I get my hands on another one.”

“It’s deadly accurate. The scope is a little hard to take though—made me nauseous when I first figured out how to engage it—it’s useful enough and easy to understand. Still hurts my eyes though.”

“As soon as the first guy goes down with blood and steam whistling out through the neat new hole in their head you know you’re in for a long miserable game of ‘where the foxtrot did that come from’.”

“Maybe with the Elites on our side we’ll finally find out how to reload or recharge these weapons or whatever… I have a feeling we shouldn’t start holding our breath any time soon though.”

“Not as much recoil as the ninety-nine but then again the mechanism is entirely different—don’t worry about the machine; a steady hand, breath control, and patience are the key to success with either one.”

“[the Type-50 SRS is] not completely silent nor is it invisible. Jackals may be superb marksmen and they’re very sneaky, but that doesn’t make them excellent snipers—they’re a little too bloodthirsty for that.”

1Pending treaty negotiations with the Sangheili.

2These numbers are estimates pending the procurement of a working example for investigative purposes.

The Fuel Rod Gun (note apparently the one the hunters carry is a different kind)

Official designation: Type-33 LAAW

Length o/a: 130.2 cm (51.26 in.)
Length (barrel): 73.66 cm (29 in.)
Weight (empty): 20.8 kg (46 lbs)
Weight (loaded): 23.1 kg (51 lbs)
Cartridge: unknown1
Max. effective range: 165 meters (541 ft)
Muzzle velocity: 72 m/s (236 f/s)
Magazine capacity: 5 rounds
Rate of fire: semi-automatic only
Unit Replacement cost: N/A


Description:

This weapon is a man-portable support weapon. It appears to be recoil-operated. It fires 3.8cm explosive ballistic projectiles. It is commonly employed in both anti-personnel and anti-vehicle roles.

Observations:

This weapon has changed very little since it was first encountered in 2531. The most obvious change has been the elimination of the “dead man’s switch” 2 which occurred late in 2552. Because of the weapon’s visibility it is just as effective as a psychological weapon. It is often the case that soldiers will ignore closer, more obvious targets in order to eliminate a Type-33 and its operator.

Remarks:

“Those things are scary as hell. Ya hear that weird “whump” sound and even if ya see it comin’ yer transfixed—these big green blobs flying at you throwin’ off sparks!”

“It’s so weird. I don’t know who first called it a fuel rod gun, but it’s kind’a funny. I suppose the projectile is reminiscent of how you might expect to see a nuclear fuel rod depicted in a gee eh cartoon—all glowing green and throwing off sparks.”

“They’re pretty tricky to handle—first off you gotta get over the fact that there is this glowing, green explosive whatever right next to your head; and it’s not like you can req any more ammo for the damn thing—but you can lay down a whole lot’a hurt in a very short amount of time I’ll tell you what.”

“[The Type-33s] have more in common with the ballistic weapon on the Banshee than it does with the weapon that the Hunters carry around—well, not carry around, but you know what I mean.”

“I catch a glimpse of green out of the corner of my eye and then there’s this huge “whoomf” and the ‘hog goes end over end burning with Gaz still at the wheel. I was riding shotty with the em forty-one so I just unlatched and pushed off when we started going up into the air—and there went the ‘hog and Gaz and all our gear cart-wheeling into the ravine.”

“No sooner had I put the Grunt down than Fisk has got a hold of that bad boy and dumps the whole clip into the column—stickies and everything just cooking off—secondaries like mad! Fisk was a crazy bastard he was—wish he was still with us.”


1 Pending treaty negotiations with the Sangheili.


2 Although the existence of the “dead man’s switch”—a mechanism that sabotages the weapon if it is dropped without first engaging a safety—has only been theorized, it would be difficult to believe that every single Unggoy and Sangheili that was killed while using one fired the weapon right at their feet the moment they died.

That's from the latest batch, I'll see if I can find the other relavent articles and past them up.

[Covenant]

Brian, I think you're way off with the dismissial of everything besides the Starcraft CGI-cinematics as canonical evidence for their tactics. Those were made on the most strained pieces of equipment that it would have been seriously difficult to do more than they did, and I believe the in-game cinematics and the actions the Protoss take with the built-in inter-unit dependencies demonstrate that they're intended to be used in coordination. They certainly comprise the vast majority of the scripted sequences, and don't rely on ingame mechanics to get the idea across.

Remember, the little flying guys who make the wad of energy that shuts down ground guns? Those were the Corsairs, the hyper-specialized supportcraft stated to be used as antiair and ground suppression, to allow ground forces to be teleported in by an Arbiter, which itself is a support unit that cloaks units in a radius as well. These are not accidental uses, they are one of the few intelligent things the Protoss do, and the in-game cutscenes demonstrate a great emphasis in the Protoss force on using close air support in the place of ground armor.

I would also further call the original Starcraft's CGI cutscenes rather inconsistant and difficult to base things upon. We see a few combat situations done in CGI format, but they don't make all that much sense, such as the 'bullets richocheting off the zergling' scene that ended up with someone shooting the two bugs with a pair of missiles that was seemingly so underpowered that it barely disturbed the air. I'd say they were amateurish to a degree that makes them almost pointlessly bad for the purpose of quantification. The inconsistancies are what has made it so hard to do any of this debating with them in the past.

The Ghost cinematic trailer did a much better job, and it did NOT represent zerg as hopping at a drunkenass lazy pace, shrugging off bullets like mini Wolverines. While the novels are inconsistant (I've never read 'em either), they are at least not wildly incorrect about their own source material.

This is why I wanted to work towards quantifying some of the terran marine equipment, and then see if we could relate that to the Protoss in some fashion to get some lower limits that make sense.

[TithonusSyndrome]

I can't find any similar reference for Protoss weapons, but here are some of the new units in the ranks from Starcraft II. Calculating yields might be out of the question, but units like the Colossus definitely provide an adequate response to the absence of heavy armor.

[Nephtys]

Game Mechanics.

Right. Game mechanics. I know what those are, but a previous thread did mention that they are approximately accurate in firepower levels based on what would kill /you/ in 'Legendary' difficulty of the first game according to Bungie. It's mentioned and not particularly contested in several threads, such as Here, midway down. Given that there's a crapload of Master Chief threads in OSF, I'll keep searching to fish it out. I've seen the mention in at least two threads though.

As for the vulnerability of elites to Buckshot, well. I don't have a comprehensive source given yet again, lack of access to novels, but it seems damn likely that they'd work that into the fiction somewhere, given how much shotgun loving there is.

Bungie Site
Though it is mentioned that the 'SMG' is 'tricky to control'. Which seems a mite silly for a weapon with a stock and such puny bullets, that doesn't fire that much faster than the far larger MA5B. It's looking like another inconsistancy with 'modern' weapons comparisons.

This mentions that 20 AR rounds in a short span will down the shield of an 'better' elite and kill it. Okay. Seems like a good limit to base judging this stuff on. The MA5B has effectively the same numbers as an M14 per-round it'd seem, with the same muzzle velocity and round dimensions.

In this thread, Noble Ire makes a mention of the 9.5x40mm ammo going clear through an Elite to the other side. I don't know how that hypothetical round would compare to a 7.62x51mm, but it doesn't really speak particularly highly of their unshielded body armor, despite it looking metal. This site has some speculation on this round and other weapons.

But as "stateD" they use 7.62x51mm ammo, which is quite a bit better performance-wise than 300 meters. Unless the value can be corroborated in another source I'm calling bullshit.

The Halo Wiki states their effective range is 300 meters. Not sure where they got that from, but a lot of the official Bungie material has pretty terrible range compared to comparable RL stuff, like the SMG(official release stats) having a 50 meter effective range instead of 150 of a somewhat comparable RL one. The M-14 according to google's first hit (FAS.org) is 460 meters. So it's not /that/ different. Perhaps the numbers are for closer range fighting required against Covenant targets, as opposed to human ones?

[SylasGaunt]

This is the Halo Universe article on the MA5C:

MA5C Individual Combat Weapon System
Official designation: MA5C
Length (o/a): 88 cm (34.6 in.)
Length (barrel): 60.7 cm (24 in.)
Weight (empty): 3.8 kg (8.378 lbs)
Weight (loaded): 4.1 kg (9.05 lbs)
Cartridge: 7.62mm x 51 FMJ
Max. effective range: 300 meters (984 ft)
Muzzle velocity: 905 m/s (2970 f/s)
Magazine capacity: 32 rounds
Rate of fire: 750 – 900 rnds/min
Unit Replacement cost: 1686.00
________________________________________Description:
The MA5C 7.62mm rifle is an air-cooled, gas-operated, magazine fed weapon designed for automatic fire. The weapon has an attached electronics suite that provides information on rounds remaining in magazine, compass heading, as well as several other "housekeeping" functions.
Improvements over the MA5B include:
- a heavier barrel with a 1 in 7 twist;
- a redesigned cowling to house the electronics suite that reduces weight and increases pointability of weapon;
- a redesigned handguard which is sturdier and provides a more positive grip.
________________________________________
Observations:
Soldiers are very satisfied with this weapon. It performed well in a variety of environments especially given the perceived delicacy of the attached electronics suite. The general consensus is that every infantryman wants a MA5C.

The most significant negative comment was reference to the MA5C’s lack of a secondary weapon system.
Remarks:
“The (MA5C) is the workhorse for us ground-pounders. Just holding it makes you feel like God’s own anti-son-of-a-blam!-machine.”

“I have slogged through snow and mud and sand with my (MA5C); even got dumped into an open sewer with it and it has never given me a bit of complaint. I trust it like I trust my own arms.”

“The MA5C is built like a brick outhouse with Venetian blinds. You can pound on a mike foxtrot with it like it was a sledgehammer.”

“For every time I’ve felt outgunned by those alien bastards shooting blobs of energy at me I have felt like death himself watching their bodies come apart under a hail of lead from my (MA5C).”

“The romeo echo mike foxtrot’s decision to mechanically reduce the (MA5C)’s magazine capacity by nearly half is pretty frustrating; even if their data was showing that jamming because of loss of spring strength was becoming an issue.”

“The only thing I can think of that would make the (MA5C) any sweeter would be an under-slung shotty or a forty mike mike.”

“Next time I’m dirtside I’ve gotta try and find a red filter for the flashlight; slipspace travel screws with mail-order something fierce.

[Covenant]

Thanks Sylas!

So, I think that's enough information on the MA5C, which was the weapon I was talking about, to confirm that it has a 300 meter range and that it's other ballistic characteristics are extremely lackluster. For all we know this thing is somehow built funky to be able to be fired in strange atmospheres and that's done something to the kind of propellant they use or the materials that go into the barrel construction and so on, but it does seem remarkably underpowered.

Now, is there any way to use this data to get an idea of how potent the Covenant forces are, and then compare that degree of competancy against what we can figure out about Protoss forces (if anything)?

Protoss are seen surviving against comparatively heavier hardware, but even if a Zealot turns out to be a tougher nut to crack, it would still be relevent to figure out how many infantry of various types they can be expected to deploy. Even if I'm right, and a Zealot is massively more potent in combat than an Elite, sheer numbers can bring down the 'Toss just fine.

[Ghost Rider]

So much like the Zerg mess.

If I ask "What's an outlier lower limit on the Zealot's shields?", I'll get a few rough low end numbers, with examples, right?

Okay, I'll ask. If nothing, I am locking because this and the Zerg one are messes of nothing but maybes. At least with Covenant, you can establish something. So far nada on the Protoss.

[Covenant]

Sadly, the only literary, non-game reference I can get to Protoss Zealots taking damage is in an exchange from Hydralisk strains of Zerg. Those things are ten kinds of wierd, so I'm not sure what if anything can be gleaned from that besides more confusion. The Zealot shields took punishment that marine armor could not, but the fact that they were killed by some sort of biologically propelled exploding acid spine weapon really leaves too many variables in the mix to make it quantifable.

Their canon might state differently, but it's too spotty to be useful. At least the Terrans have a little bit of useful quantification--if only we could get a novel segment where a marine shoots a Zealot, for fuck's sake. I still favor the Protoss from how weak the Covenant have been demonstrated to be, but Starcraft has refused to give us any kind of quantifiable examples.

The one cinematic we see a Protoss zealot in, we're actually treated to a shot of his psi-blades sputter and fail, something that is physically impossible to happen, which takes the usefulness of that scene from none to negative. I don't think there's anything we can do with them, really, as I've asked for someone to offer me some info several times in this thread and it just seems the well is dry.

[hongi]

Not only that, but the Protoss were using that Dragoon as bait, so they should've expected the Terrans to launch a missile and deployed some countermeasure. The safest assumption is they have no countermeasure and the latest generation RPG's and ATGM's would wreak havoc on Dragoons (that's what we see.)

It could have been a suicide mission, considering how damaged the dragoon was (it was limping) maybe the Protoss hoped to keep up the pretense of a lone straggler for as long as possible. It did take a few moments in between the killing of the dragoon and the arbiter teleporting everyone else in. I'd think a countermeasure missile flying in from the dark and intercepting the Terran AGM would alert the Terrans that something wasn't quite right.

[pieman3141]

Regarding the range of an SC gauss gun to an M16A2/4: I'd chalk the surprising lack of range of the gauss rifle up to poor writing and research. In theory, a gauss rifle would have to be faster than a chemically-propelled bullet, yes? And the density of DU rounds are higher than lead. This could mean a decrease in velocity and acceleration due to increased mass, but why would they switch, then, if there's the same amount of K.E.? "It's cooler" doesn't cut it. These people have stupid amounts of resources and production capacity.

Every other universe writes gauss and other electromagnetic-ally propelled round as a really really powerful projectile. Not as good as energy, but good enough to use (see Wing Commander - mass drivers - and whatever Stargate fanfic is out there).

I'd also scale game mechanics up a bit. Just as Space Marines in 40K are supermen in fiction, compared to the game, so would Protoss (assuming Protoss as real). My vote goes to the Protoss. Constant fighting makes for good warriors. Plus, it's stupid how a carrier can only produce a small number of drones.

[Connor MacLeod]

I'm going to have to disappear after this, so if you post again, don't take offense to the lack of a reply. Got stuff to do tomorrow! I'll just answer to the best of my ability so you know I'm being honest.

Frankly I don't care how long you take, because I'm not going to rush back to this debate (evidently.)

The army: Maximum effective range is the maximum range within which a weapon is effective against its intended target.

The M-16 lists "point" and "area" targets as both being "max effective ranges", you know.

In any case, look here for further complication with your assumptions. I will also note that depending on other circumstances see here the "effective range" can be far less (200 meters in the link I noted above.)

Also, if you do a google search for "ak-47 effective range" it just tells you: AK-47 — Effective Range: 300 M (330 Yd). That's the point range, not the area range.

I found this indicating the "killing range" is over 1500 meters.

Modern firearms give a max effective range of 400 meters. It also notes that the sights vary from 100 to 1000 meters. 300 meters seems to be a "battle" setting, though I've seen it in the past of having an effective range around 250 meters (see previous link on M-16) The Operator's manual gives an MER of 400 meters.

From what I can gather it depends highly on the ammo and configuration of the weapon being used - some weapons have lower effective ranges due to ballistics or letahlity/penetration limitations at longer ranges (such as loss of KE at longer ranges.)

Since most people refer to range as in "From what range can I kill a guy with this gun?" I just assumed they were talking about point targets, since that dude you're talking about is the intended target. If you can't hit him, and instead hit his truck or his dog or the guy next to him, you might still kill something, but that's not an effective range for what you were looking to accomplish.

I've NEVER heard anyone say that, at least noone I know who has some real knoweldge about such weapons. Weapon's ranges are based on a good many factors (bullet mass, muzzle velocity, the type of sighting, etc. ) You can get "effective ranges" based on lethality/penetration of a target as much as by whether oyu use iron sights or a high-powered scope. The very differencee between "point" and "area" target (which highlights differencees in accuracy over ranges) should have told you this.

I am going to point out that even assuming we ARE talking an area target, its not very likely that a Guass weapon is going to get 700-1000 meter ranges without a fairly sophisticated scope (and probably a fixed position.) RAte of fire may even affect this as well (recoil after so many shots starrts moving the barrel..).

Now, if we want to just fire shots downrange into an area, then I'd be wrong, but most people I hear talking about the range of a weapon seem to be talking about the distance between them and a hypothetical target, rather than a hypothetical broadside of a barn. These are just assumptions though, to you it might just mean the range at which a bullet still can kill someone... which, mind you, can be an excessively long range if you fire them in a parabolic arc.

Why is it 'either/or?" Range should account for both penetrration and lethality as well as sighting method and ballistics (IE accuracy.) I don't see how you could possibly treat it as an either/or proposition.

Right, I never meant to assert they were, but I did want to call into question if they actually were more powerful, so I was comparing them to each other. Even if the ammo is different, the Haloverse ammo exists today, as does m16a2 ammo, so there's no reason we can't compare the ammo and the rifles.

Which is what I'm doing. If we were going to be pedantic about it, the "in universe" range of 300 meters probably refers to Covenant targets. If this means anything, this probably tells us the riflemen need to get closer to ensure relaible kills against covvie opponents than against human ones, hence the closer ranges.

This would also explain why they seem to make heavy use of sugh high-caliber ammo in pistols (every pistol I've seen in Halo seems to be a .50 cal HE round.) -other than NEEDING that kind of power there's no plausible reason why one should bother with .50 cals (because they have a whole bunch of drawbacks - recoil/muzzle climb being one, low ammo capacity another.)

As the article I pointed to shows, the MA5C has a muzzle velocity of 905m/s, which is actually markably lower than the 975m/s muzzle velocity of the M-16.

But the 7.62mm bullet is going to be CONSIDERABLY heavier, which compensates for that. A .50 BMG rifle has a much lower muzzle velocity than an M-16, but you can hit targets out to a mile or more (A Canadian Sniper named Rob Furlong made a 2.4 km kill with a .50 BMG rifle.)

Obviously, the damage inflicted from a round is extremely complicated to compute, but the bullet not only moves slower but also has a shorter effective range than a common rifle of the day, and in general the 7.62 has a lower foot-pound force than a 5.56 round does.

I don't see how on one hand you can claim its "complicated to compute" yet throw in a completely "off the cuff" claim at the same time.

As far as I can tell, an M-16 might throw a 3.5-4 gram bullet at around 850-975 m/s depending on source (853 m/s and 975 m/s)

The difference in velocity probably depends on things like barrel configuration and ammunition, but its roughly consistent. I'll be generous and go with a 4 gram bullet at 975 m/s.

An AK-47 as given here has a muzzle velocity of 700 m/s and a bullet mass of ~8 grams.

The KE of the M16A2 is roughly 1900 joules. It's momentum is 3.9 kg*m/s.

The AK-47 has a KE of around 1960 joules, and a momentum of 5.6 kg*m/s.

For shits and giggles, an M-14 seems to have a MV of around 840 m/s and a bullet mass around 9-10 grams. That pumps out an KE of around 3000-3500 joules roughly, and between 7.5-8.4 kg*m/s worth of momentum. The Halo 7.62x51mm seems to have a higher velocity, so I'm guessing the round is slightly less massive to compensate. But it would still carry comparable KE.

That is, however, at the muzzle. Beyond that it gets more complicated, and in general the M16A2 seems to have a somewhat superior range because it retains its lethality much further than the AK-47 (The bullet is designed to tumble in the wound and/or fragment, which can create a large wound channel despite the small bullet diameter. The small diameter coupled with its high velocity help offset the lower mass in terms of ballistics, and improve penetration.) But again it also depends highly on the ammo and rifle configurations.

I should note that in terms of the Gauss rifle, that despite it having a high muzzle velocity, it has a very large cross section (about that of the AK-47.). And recoil limits will dictate that the higher velocity means LOWER bullet mass, which carries alot of drawbacks when it comes to ballistics. Another reason, IMHO, that the "maximum range of the Gauss rifle as max effective point target range" is a debatable assumption.

So it seems that it is basically all-around going to carry less impact, less range, and less accuracy than a common weapon of the modern era. That makes it a fair comparison to me.

For the 7.62x51mm? What do you base this on? I just got done pointing out some of the flaws in your unsubstantiated conclusion. Do you have ab etter analysis available?

If there's more to a bullet's damage dynamics than speed, weight, force and muzzle velocity, then correct me. Rate of fire does also come into play, but the MA5C and M16 are identical there (750-900 r/m)

The shape/configuration of the ammo and its composition play HUGE roles in damage. Some bullets tumble, some will fragment inside the targets, some are simply expanding rounds like hollowpoints. Softer materials expand quicker and are more effective at transferring damage to the target, while others are designed for armor piercing. I shouldn't have to even mention hollowpoints. Bullet diameters can (in certain bullets) also play a role, but this is mainly lower velocity ones (pistol SMG rounds.)

I would note that its not very likely gauss rounds "tumble" or "fragment" - the novel "speed of darkness" notes that the spikes are designed for maiming and armor penetration, they need special expanding/exploding rounds to achieve grreater lethality.

The configuration/shape of the ammo, its composition, and the diameters also play a factor in range (as does a myriad other factors), including retaining enough energy to be lethal at long ranges.

As for the low effectrive ranges, it is possible that the design of the rifle, the materials it is made of, or some other design flaws could hamper the ballistics enough to lower it's effective range to 300m.

Or, the targets they're designed to fire on are much tougher than a conventional human target. Or, its a sights-based limitation (since as I noted, M-16s can have "effective ranges" of 200 meters or less.)

As I said earlier, the AK's effective range is 300m, so maybe the Haloverse marines have shifted to a bizzare sort of synthetic powder that provides poorer ballistics, or that some material their bullets are made of just perform badly.

First off, the AK-47 ain't a 7.62x51mm bullet, so let's get that clear. (The M-14 performance-wise is capable of at LEAST matching M-16 ranges, and in truth the sniper variants can reach MUCH farther. Have you ever seen what 7.62x51mm marksman rifles can do?)

As for the "powder", its not bloody likely, since IIRC their casings are considerably more compact than what RL 7.62mm bullets do (Alyeska has noted this on SB at least, and possibly over here.) which is why they can pack lots of bullets into a small area. That tends to argue against "poor powder." Nevermind that you'd have to come up with pretty dramatic reasons why the "powder" would be dramatically worse than what we've got now (and have had for many decades - you're baiscally proposing they must have something equivalent to a black powder muzzleloading rifle.)

As for "poor bullet material", What the hell sort of material could you devise that necessitates a dramatically "short" range? I find it pretty hard to believe they'd run out of steel, copper, lead, or anythign else you could make a bullet out of, and even then I doubt the performance would be THAT dramatically different (unless you can propose something that suggests otherwise.) This argument seems to be grasping at straws.

And, as I said, if you're going to try to come up with "reasons", I've already presented at least two other alternate ones that are far less convoluted and have at least some circumstantial backing.

I can't really say, but since that's what the numbers said, I can't really just call it bullshit outright until there's any other source out there that says so. I'm not going to just invent a number for it's range, and if we go for the stated ranges/effectiveness of a 21st century 7.62 then we're still coming up with a weapon that's hardly groundbreakingly powerful, and provides a convenient lower-limit for Covenant technology.

To be perfectly blunt, you seem to have been doing nothing BUT inventing numbers (and conclusions) from flawed, limited and/or nonexistent data.

[Connor MacLeod]

Right. Game mechanics. I know what those are, but a previous thread did mention that they are approximately accurate in firepower levels based on what would kill /you/ in 'Legendary' difficulty of the first game according to Bungie. It's mentioned and not particularly contested in several threads, such as Here, midway down. Given that there's a crapload of Master Chief threads in OSF, I'll keep searching to fish it out. I've seen the mention in at least two threads though.

I've heard it claimed, but never particularily seen evidencec for it. I've also seen people claim multi-teraton covenant torpedoes without citing specific proof of it (I had to do my own calcs for this, and it depends on the assumptions in herent in the calc.) I've also heard the novels are highly canonical as well (again without authority.) so forgive me if I don't take hearsay as a definite.

Besides which, there are OTHER reasons why we dismiss gameplay (which has been done under SoD style analysis way back in the ASVS days.) doubtful consistency with physics being one of them.

As for the vulnerability of elites to Buckshot, well. I don't have a comprehensive source given yet again, lack of access to novels, but it seems damn likely that they'd work that into the fiction somewhere, given how much shotgun loving there is.

Shotguns can fire more than pellets you know. And given the generally high-momentum output of a shotgun, it wouldn't surprise me in the least. (small scale KE shielding in general is going to be a limited technology simply due to conservation of momentum.)

Bungie Site
Though it is mentioned that the 'SMG' is 'tricky to control'. Which seems a mite silly for a weapon with a stock and such puny bullets, that doesn't fire that much faster than the far larger MA5B. It's looking like another inconsistancy with 'modern' weapons comparisons.

It looks like you failed to notice certain details:

]Recoil from all but sustained fire is very controllable.

...

Sustained automatic fire tends to cause the muzzle to “walk” upwards as recoil compounds.

...

“[The] recoil isn’t bad but the [M7] itself is relatively light. Not unpleasant to shoot, but a little tricky to control—it’s all about controlling the impulse.”

a 5x23mm mm bullet will mass around 5-6 grams. At 427 m/s the recoil wil be between 2.1 and 2.6 kg*m/s approximately. (By comparison, the recoil of the MP-5 is between 2.8 and 3.2 kg*m/s.. its not THAT much higher unless you delibeartely compare the low end MP7 with the high end MP5. Not that this matters, since controllability is only an issue on sustained fire.)

At 900 RPM the combined recoil will be significant.. close to or equal to a single shot from a .50 BMG rifle I'd say. Controllability would be a HUGE problem with that much momentum (or even a fraction of it, in fact.)

This could also be compouned by the not-so-minor fact that this gun also has a very short barrel relative to an MP5 (2-3 inches shorter in fact.) - you'd need a more powerfufl gun charge for the muzzle velocity (where force and pressure come into play, really.)

From what I've looked at I have no doubt that Bungie has fucked up the gunnery stats somewhere (Covenant weapons are even more laughably inconsistent.) but this isn't an example that will help your argument in the least.

IF anything bothers me about the SMG, it's the range. 50 meters is FAR too short for the vast majority of submachine guns for its characteristics. (Most SMGs would make 100-200 meters easily. The MP-5 and the P-90 being prime examples.)

Of course a good in universe explanation might be that USNC forces need to be closer to reliably ensure a kill: Weapons ranges for modern weapons depend as much on penetration and lethality (such as retaining sufficient KE at long ranges) in a target as much as accuracy and sighting mechanisms do. Out of universe, however, ,the gun is just given dumb-ass stats.

This mentions that 20 AR rounds in a short span will down the shield of an 'better' elite and kill it. Okay. Seems like a good limit to base judging this stuff on. The MA5B has effectively the same numbers as an M14 per-round it'd seem, with the same muzzle velocity and round dimensions.

Which is perfectly fine, , but that fails to account for the variables involved (What kind of rounds, the range between the target and the weapon, does shield performance differ from front to back, etc.) More to the point, projectile weapons are rather more complex than a beam weapon. Force/pressure/momentum plays as much a role as energy does.

Which brings the point of the comparison. This might work well against projectile weapons in Starcraft (and possibly melee weapons, if the calcs exist) but it won't work well against energy weapons.

In this thread, Noble Ire makes a mention of the 9.5x40mm ammo going clear through an Elite to the other side. I don't know how that hypothetical round would compare to a 7.62x51mm, but it doesn't really speak particularly highly of their unshielded body armor, despite it looking metal. This site has some speculation on this round and other weapons.

I see no such mention from Noble Ire in that thread. Doing a search on the site I can't find anything from him dealing with 9.5x40mm either. As for the other side, it looks more or less conjectural based on what the guy thinks it OUGHT to be. AND, it looks heavily gameplay-oriented to boot.

Briefly rummaging through the halopedia entry on the 9.5x40mm round, the implication seems to be that it would be at least equal to a 7.62x39mm, but given its a wiki and its unsupported I'd take it with a grain of salt. The dimensions given would seem to suggest the comparison might be reasonable, although the round would probably be heavier. It's no worse than what your site presents, anyhow.

In any case, without stats on the round's performance (among the other "aforementioned parameters") I fail to see how you derive your conclusion aside from pure conjecture.

The Halo Wiki states their effective range is 300 meters. Not sure where they got that from, but a lot of the official Bungie material has pretty terrible range compared to comparable RL stuff, like the SMG(official release stats) having a 50 meter effective range instead of 150 of a somewhat comparable RL one. The M-14 according to google's first hit (FAS.org) is 460 meters. So it's not /that/ different. Perhaps the numbers are for closer range fighting required against Covenant targets, as opposed to human ones?

And once again, rifle ranges are not some hard line absolute. Alot of factors affect what one can consider a weapon's "effective range".

You will note, for example, that it depends highly on configuration. The sniper variants of the M-14 (with the same round) can reach out to over twice that (the Wiki on the M-14 says it can reach out to 800 meters with optics.) so clearly the round is capable of longer ranges, it just depends on how its used. As another example is the AR-10 which reputedly can have effective ranges in excess of 600 or more meters. Other 7.62x51mm assault/battle rifles seem to have similar performance. We should note that the Halo 7.62x51mm rounds have significantly higher muzzle velocity than other "real life" comparisons (between 60-100 meters difference, roughly.)

As I already said, scopes are only one part of it. Lethality and penetration are others. If the "Effective range" is given as 300 meters even though we know the range is ballistically capable of more (as I noted), then there's other reasons dictating the range. (the type ot sight/scope used, the kind of target commonly employed against, etc.)

In any case, I am going to note that there is no fucking way the gauss rifle is going to be getting 700-1000 meter ranges against a point target (as Covenant interprets it) without some sort of scope or optics (and probably a fixed position) no matter if its a slug thrower or a gauss weapon, so even assuming the 300 meter range HAS some validity, its still a bloody invalid comparison (unless someone has proof that Terran marines have the eyesight to allow them to hit a target unassisted out to 700-1000 meters, assuming that isn't an "area" target (which isn't a given.)