Halo Humans vs Mass Effect Small Arms Weaponry: Whose is better?

I'm saying pushing the slug forwards causes recoil.

Dammit, how did I miss this conversation?!

Oh well, to add in my two cents on whose small-arms are better? Let's see...

Yes, Halo does have some weapons which pack some serious punch, such as the gravity hammer, SPARTAN Laser, and the gauss cannons, but a lot of those weapons are either in limited supply, require special training, or really don't give that great of an advantage compared to other conventional infantry weapons. The rest of the stuff that is mass-produced and often used seem to be pretty much on par with what we have to today, or are expies of modern weapon systems. Take for example the sniper rifle, which was likely inspired by the Barret .50 cal and even has the same functionality and purpose. The rest, such as the rifles, SM Gs, and handguns, don't have any qualities that make them superior from the firearms of today, and also will likely suffer the same issues.

Mass Effect's universe is in a similar situation, for the most part. Most of the weapons shown serve a similar function to what has been developed in real life, and don't seem to have a major advantage in terms of damage or penetration. Again, the more exotic weapon systems are either scarce or designed for certain targets. Only the Cain "nuke launcher" and the rifle that shoots superheated-liquid-metal have an advantage over Halo's stuff. The ammo advantage really doesn't count for much either, since specialized ammo exists even today, and only a few of the ammo types are exceptionally dangerous (the high explosive, sledgehammer, and warp rounds come to mind). Instead, their advantage would be accuracy: since you're shooting at relativistic speeds with a targeting computer built into each gun, you'll be able to hit targets over huge distances almost instantly and not have to worry too much about wind trajectory, gravitational pull, bullet drop, etc. They can also be used in any environment, be it space, underwater, heavy-gravity worlds, you name it, and would not suffer in terms of accuracy or effectiveness. Mass Effect also has unlimted ammo for their weapons, which would be a MAJOR plus over Halo or a lot of other Sci-Fi settings but... well, they took that advantage away from themselves.

Rather than sheer firepower or technical complexity, it seems to me that the biggest advantage of Halo's guns is their simplicity. Many of the human weapons do not require complex systems or powerful energy sources to operate, and if EMP'ed they would still be 100% effective (the one exception being the sniper rifle, since that sucker relies a lot it's targeting computer and has an electric motor in it's firing mechanism). Therefore, it would be easy to maintain and repair them on the battlefield, even with limited supplies.

Unfortunately for Mass Effect, almost everything they have requires sophisticated parts and resources that might be hard to acquire, such as cooling systems, Element Zero, electrical components, targeting trajectory software and the mechanism that cuts the "bullet" from the metal block inside the gun. That, and the ME 'verse's decision to switch to thermal clips compared to their original system was friggin idiotic, since it took away their gun's single biggest combat advantage...

So, who wins? I'd say they're even. Mass Effect technology-based weapons have a bit more versatility in terms of ammo, accuracy and modifications, which would give them an edge in a firefight, but Halo's weapons seem to be better built for more long-term theater operations, are easier to maintain, and in some cases pack more punch... as long as they're on an earth-like environment.

I'm not even gonna get into the space combat though. Even the Reapers would be hard pressed to win against some of the stuff from either the UNSC or Covenant!

edited 3rd Sep '12 3:37:28 AM by SgtRicko

I think the original ME gun also wins out on combat endurance (not ME 2 or 3 guns, stupid thermal clips)...

edited 3rd Sep '12 3:04:54 AM by onyhow

Give me cute or give me...something?

From that totally reliable source Wikipedia:

Recoil (often called knockback, kickback or simply kick) is the backward momentum of a gun when it is discharged. In technical terms, the recoil caused by the gun exactly balances the forward momentum of the projectile and exhaust gasses (ejecta), according to Newton's third law. In most small arms, the momentum is transferred to the ground through the body of the shooter; while in heavier guns such as mounted machine guns or cannons, the momentum is transferred to the ground through its mount. In order to bring the gun to a halt, a forward counter-recoil force must be applied to the gun over a period of time. Generally, the counter-recoil force is smaller than the recoil force, and is applied over a time period that is longer than the time that the recoil force is being applied (i.e. the time during which the ejecta are still in the barrel of the gun). This imbalance of forces causes the gun to move backward until it is motionless.

In short, ME guns should have as much recoil. Recoil is caused by the equal and opposite reaction to the internal ignition in the gun that pushes the bullet forward. An ME gun is a railgun, from what T've read. From Wikipedia:

The rails and projectiles must be built from strong conductive materials; the rails need to survive the violence of an accelerating projectile, and heating due to the large currents and friction involved. The recoil force exerted on the rails is equal and opposite to the force propelling the projectile. The seat of the recoil force is still debated. The traditional equations predict that the recoil force acts on the breech of the railgun. Another school of thought invokes Ampère's force law and asserts that it acts along the length of the rails (which is their strongest axis).[12] The rails also repel themselves via a sideways force caused by the rails being pushed by the magnetic field, just as the projectile is. The rails need to survive this without bending and must be very securely mounted.

TL;DR: Yeah there's recoil, but we don't know from what.

edited 3rd Sep '12 7:45:49 AM by MetaSkipper

Artificial Intelligence is no match for Natural Stupidity.

Halo guns probably use a stronger metal alloy for bullets and maybe a stronger propellant than what we use today.

Not likely. The "machinegun" uses 5.56mm rounds, and the DMR uses 7.62mm. Both of those bullet types exist today. I think the pistol is the only gun with a unique bullet type.

I love these sorts of conversations just for the stuff people make up in support of their position.

Really, shields make all the difference. Shields in the Halo 'verse are rare and expensive, used exclusively by Mjolnir armor (at least on the human side, which is what we're considering). In Mass Effect, everything has shields, from individual soldiers all the way on up to warships. Even if everything else is equal, Mass Effect still has a huge advantage because of that.

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.

Not all shields and armor are created equal.

Artificial Intelligence is no match for Natural Stupidity.

True, but I don't see how that helps the Halo 'verse at all. Even if Mass Effect shields are weaker than Covenant shields, the fact remains that ME has them and Halo humans don't. And that's without even taking into account Mass Effect's better weaponry, availability of combat mechs, biotics...

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.

I'm gonna contest the idea that ME has better weapons. There's a post above that I'm gonna use in my defense. Also, Halo weapons are shown to be effective enough against Covanent shields. Why not ME shields.

Combat mechs? They're not terribly intimidating. For an anti-infantry unit, it sounds really inefficient against infantry.

Biotics? What's the ratio of biotics to non-biotics?

edited 3rd Sep '12 1:11:01 PM by MetaSkipper

Artificial Intelligence is no match for Natural Stupidity.

Mass Effect weapons are indisputably more powerful than Halo weapons. If nothing else, Halo weaponry is limited by recoil — you can only shoot so much before the kickback knocks you on your ass. With mass effect fields, though, you can lower the amount of recoil without lessening the power of the weapon.

As far as shields go, they're undoubtedly a huge advantage. Even if Halo weaponry can penetrate Mass Effect shields, all other things being equal, the guy with shields will beat the guy without shields. Ditto with mechs — even if the mechs aren't particularly effective, Halo has no response to them. All other things being equal, the army that can deploy combat mechs will beat the one that can't.

I can't recall what the percentage of biotics is in the human population, but it's much higher in the military — they're aggressively recruited for obvious reasons. They're not rare enough that running into a biotic soldier is unusual, but they're not common enough that biotics are everywhere, either.

In any case, even if none of those are overwhelming advantages that would decisively overwhelm Halo marines by itself, you're gonna have to come up with some advantages on Halo's side if you want me to believe that they'd be able to put up a good fight. ME's got better weapons, more widespread shields, combat mechs, and biotics. What's Halo got?

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.

Shields are moot as far as Mass Effect goes. They can't stop energy weapons, so they might as well not exist.

Biotics are way too rare to make that much of a difference, unless we're talking about the Asari. Halo troops are far better trained for all out war than Mass Effect soldiers are. Mass Effect troops are primarily designed to stop pirate attacks.

Also, while Spartans may be few, they can easily turn the tide of a battle. See the Battle of Earth. And Halo has an excellent response to mechs: EM Ps. They're everywhere in the Haloverse.

A good tactic for the Halo verse would simply be to EMP a planet, which would disable a huge amount of Mass Effect equipment, and take them on without their technological advantage.

edited 3rd Sep '12 1:48:22 PM by TheProffesor

ODS Ts and Spartans. On a more macro scale, space dominance.

Artificial Intelligence is no match for Natural Stupidity.

@post106: The bullets may be the same size, but I remember there being some sort of difference in the technology compared to what was available 10 year ago (when the first Halo came out). Caseless ammo or gas propelled or something like that, or more effective variations of that than modern weapons.

It's all gas propelled /nitpick

Also, only the SMG uses caseless ammo. The Assault Rifle uses 7.62mm NATO and the BR/DMR uses something heavier than that. I think the Sniper Rifle uses some APDSFS 14.5mm or something.

^ According to the fluff, the DMR uses the same ammo as the AR series weapons. Or rather the same caliber. The BR on the other hand uses an entirely fictional round the 9.5x40 Kurz. (Nearest real world counterpart is the subsonic 9x39mm round used by Russian Spetsnaz marksmen.)

The question is whether Mass Accelerator weaponry's main advantage, speed of projectile, is actually worth anything.

Huh, I thought (or rather just kinda figured) that the DMR and BR used the same round.

Like I said earlier, it would help a lot in long range engagements as well as with general accuracy since you wouldn't have to worry about bullet drop, windspeed, or the slight delay in time it takes for a bullet to reach it's target.

I'd say Mass Effect kicks Halo's ass in the small arms department because of biotics, no recoil, and infinite ammo.

edited 3rd Sep '12 7:51:11 PM by Scardoll

Fight. Struggle. Endure. Suffer. LIVE.

ME weapons have recoil, they decided infinite ammo was a bad thing (don't ask me), and I'm not sure biotics are as game changing as one might think. Maybe they are. I dunno.

Artificial Intelligence is no match for Natural Stupidity.

^ It's just Bioware cannot do any sane justification for it (other than cooldown time being longer than reload time?)

Give me cute or give me...something?

Nah, they still have nigh-infinite ammo for a regular engagement. They switched to thermal clips because waiting to cool down took too long.

Of course, the gun can't be fired without thermal clips so it's basically the same thing why can't it do both then it would make perfect sense :-|

edited 3rd Sep '12 8:35:05 PM by VutherA

I'm just going to judge on Mass Effect 1 levels here. In that case, the only possibility on the ground is a complete curbstomp in Mass Effect's favor.

Vehicles: The standard IFV, the Grizzly, is equipped with a cannon and coaxial machine gun and medium armor similar to the Halo Scorpion Tank. However, unlike the Scorpion, the Grizzly is much faster, more rugged, and has stronger weapons overall. Both of the guns have longer ranges, their main gun has a larger splash radius*

, and its machine gun is so powerful that it literally throws back people several meters with the pure force. It also packs powerful shields that rapidly regenerate and can soak up dozens of rockets *

we're not going to get anywhere if you disregard gameplay and just say, with no proof, that the relatively primitive Halo rockets are magically stronger than futuristic and, gameplay-wise, more powerful Mass Effect rockets

and can climb over mountains and just about any other terrain. The Scorpion's weapons are weaker, it only takes two rockets to down, it lacks shields, it is slower, and it is much less mobile (i.e. it can't climb mountains). Given how widespread these vehicles are, they could easily go around one or two shotting every vehicle in the Halo verse (Scorpions, Warthogs, Banshees, Wraiths, Ghosts, etc.) while barley being scratched by the enemy attacks. Note: this is based off the descriptions of the Mako, both in-universe and in gameplay, which is described as being more or less the exact same as the Grizzly except smaller, a bit more mobile, more easily deployable, and with moderately stronger shields. Also, like all other Mass Effect weapons, the vehicles have infinite ammo.

Small Arms: I've said this before; Mass Effect weapons are more compact, more diverse, have very powerful ammo types, have infinite ammo, have very long ranges, are cheaper *

and are strong. Some versions also light people on fire right through their heavy armor, almost completely bypass shields, shoot exploding rounds, give anyone who gets hit chemical poisoning, and throw people back with pure force. I shouldn't even need to explain why they blow Halo small arms out of the water.

Super Soldiers: Biotics > Spartans for the following reasons: one, shields do absolutely nothing to protect you from them. Two, biotics are way more widespread than Spartans, being very common in the human military and the standard grunt of the asari military. Three, biotic abilities are ludicrously overpowered and can be literally activated with a thought; what does super strength and speed matter when your enemy can simply throw you off a cliff without touching you, or surround their squad with a bubble shield, or completely freeze you mid-charge and let all their buddies shoot you? This only gets worse if there are several biotics working together and chaining those attacks, or if they have particularly powerful biotics who can crush light tanks like tin cans. The only counters against biotics are Mass Effect-verse exclusive technology and/or really good dodging, and even the latter won't help you against attacks that hit instantly like Stasis. Every other type of Super Soldier in the Mass Effect verse exceeds Spartans for different reasons.

Armor: Average Halo armor does not stack up well against average Mass Effect armor, even if the average Spartan armor does. The average combatant in the Halo universe completely lacks shields and the other high tech modifications that every soldier in Mass Effect has. This puts them at a huge disadvantage.

I can't comment on space battles, since the only thing I know about Halo ships vs. Mass Effect ships is that Halo ships don't need Mass Relays to make system to system jumps. Not that a military in the Mass Effect universe even needs a stronger fleet to win a war, as the krogan rebellions show.

edited 3rd Sep '12 9:04:05 PM by CPFMfan

...

^ ME spaceships are faster than Halo in terms of distance traveled per day (UNSC ships only travel at 4ly/day from what I can remember)...weapon wise I don't know about UNSC ship weapons, but I don't think that even Reapers can stand against Super MAC shot (thankfully those only are in Earth's orbit)

edited 3rd Sep '12 10:54:13 PM by onyhow

Give me cute or give me...something?