343i, please add SPACE BATTLES and WATER BATTLES!

Campaign:
Bungie was planning on adding space battles and water surface battles. A big part of Halo is vehicle warfare, if Halo 5 wishes to innovated Halo, it should innovate the big vehicle battles as well! 343i, please watch this video (Deleted Content from Halo Games - YouTube) of Bungie’s scrapped elements (due to time constraints). You guys can finish what bungie didn’t have time to start!

The space battles in Halo 4 and Halo Reach were great. Maybe take it to the next level in Halo 5: Guardians by having you fly a Frigate or a Halcyon Class cruiser, maybe the Infinity?

343i, also add water battles in Halo 5:Guardians. The video (Deleted Content from Halo Games - YouTube) shows a Watercraft boat riding the waves, this would be great for vehicle battles at sea against the Neo-Covenant boats, and Promethean boats.

Also once water battles have been established, this opens the door for underwater battles! Why not have Chief travel underwater for a campaign level in a submarine that he can enter and exit as well. This would be a good creepy atmosphere for flood (seeing as the gravemind lived underwater in Halo 2, plus, dead bodies floading in water are scary). The Underwater segments can also feature the use of the legendary spear gun (Pre-Xbox Halo | Halo Alpha | Fandom)

343i, also please consider using other scrapped elements in the video!

Multiplayer:
Space Battles and Water Battles can work in multiplayer like this thread I read a long time ago: (https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/forums/6e35355aecdf4fd0acdaee3cc4156fd4/topics/halo-5-multiplayer-pitch-colossal-slayer/0d38d2c0-0eb0-4fae-a62d-e3880f049fac/posts )

Space battles, sure, but water battles? That makes no sense from a lore standpoint, since the aerial and space technologies of all factions render boats basically outdated and useless, and Spartans can’t swim in gameplay, which would make water-based action difficult.

> 2533275034118914;2:
> Space battles, sure, but water battles? That makes no sense from a lore standpoint, since the aerial and space technologies of all factions render boats basically outdated and useless, and Spartans can’t swim in gameplay, which would make water-based action difficult.

Ghosts, Wraiths and that new vehicle we’re supposed to be getting in Spartan Strike–the Kestrel, are all hovercraft. They should be able to hover on water just as easily. In Halo 2 we got underwater tunnels and that underwater transport lift-thing. In Halo 2 and 3 we fley [or rode in gondolas] over water frequently.

Submarines and mobile aircraft carriers or missile launching facilities are used very frequently today. In-fact, I would bet that most cargo transport–even military cargo is still dependent on water-transport. It’s convenient. Heck, most of the UNSC’s spaceships aren’t even rated for atmosphere–and it takes a gigantic amount of energy to travel into space from a planet, and it’s expensive to transport stuff by air. So, most of the transport for each world like today be transported over water.

There’s plenty of scope for water battles in Halo—ones which you can’t get to by air or space. Here’s a thought: a flooded Forerunner city which is also underground.

More environmental based combat would be so much more fitting for Halo than all the movement based combat in Halo 5.

Dingy vs Sabre. Make it happen 343i

> 2533274883849234;5:
> Dingy vs Sabre. Make it happen 343i

LOL. Does the dinghy have a triple-barreled gauss cannon?

> 2533274880692195;3:
> > 2533275034118914;2:
> > Space battles, sure, but water battles? That makes no sense from a lore standpoint, since the aerial and space technologies of all factions render boats basically outdated and useless, and Spartans can’t swim in gameplay, which would make water-based action difficult.
>
>
> Ghosts, Wraiths and that new vehicle we’re supposed to be getting in Spartan Strike–the Kestrel, are all hovercraft. They should be able to hover on water just as easily. In Halo 2 we got underwater tunnels and that underwater transport lift-thing. In Halo 2 and 3 we fley [or rode in gondolas] over water frequently.
>
> Submarines and mobile aircraft carriers or missile launching facilities are used very frequently today. In-fact, I would bet that most cargo transport–even military cargo is still dependent on water-transport. It’s convenient. Heck, most of the UNSC’s spaceships aren’t even rated for atmosphere–and it takes a gigantic amount of energy to travel into space from a planet, and it’s expensive to transport stuff by air. So, most of the transport for each world like today be transported over water.
>
> There’s plenty of scope for water battles in Halo—ones which you can’t get to by air or space. Here’s a thought: a flooded Forerunner city which is also underground.

One would have to question wether or not hovercrafts of those designs are able to hover on a liquid like they hover on a solid.

What’s used today is not a good indicator of what would be used in 540 years. As was already said about spacecrafts being more advanced. Aeiral vehicles provide more manouverability with the same if not more firepower and is not limited to a certain type of medium to travel in/on. Limited space is more of a problem for aerial vehicles.

Of course that woulf make vehicles obsolete as well, apart from the fact that they are able to easily manouver in more limited spaces such as tunnels and dense urban areas.

Another issue with watercrafts is “points of interest”. You’ll rarely see a point of interest where a vehicle for water would be usable. Water cities hace never to my knowledge been a major point of interest.

From a gameplay point of view, I don’t see the point of water vehicles. They’re extremely limited unless you make a map specifically for them, at which point being on foot would most likely be next to useless as spartans can’t move through water.

Water would intersting but it’s very limited and requires a lot for it to be worth it. I’d say it requires a game designed around it.

> 2533274880692195;6:
> > 2533274883849234;5:
> > Dingy vs Sabre. Make it happen 343i
>
>
>
> LOL. Does the dinghy have a triple-barreled gauss cannon?

It has a mac canon.

> One would have to question wether or not hovercrafts of those designs are able to hover on a liquid like they hover on a solid.
>
> What’s used today is not a good indicator of what would be used in 540 years. As was already said about spacecrafts being more advanced. Aeiral vehicles provide more manouverability with the same if not more firepower and is not limited to a certain type of medium to travel in/on. Limited space is more of a problem for aerial vehicles.
>
> Of course that woulf make vehicles obsolete as well, apart from the fact that they are able to easily manouver in more limited spaces such as tunnels and dense urban areas.
>
> Another issue with watercrafts is “points of interest”. You’ll rarely see a point of interest where a vehicle for water would be usable. Water cities hace never to my knowledge been a major point of interest.
>
> From a gameplay point of view, I don’t see the point of water vehicles. They’re extremely limited unless you make a map specifically for them, at which point being on foot would most likely be next to useless as spartans can’t move through water.
>
> Water would intersting but it’s very limited and requires a lot for it to be worth it. I’d say it requires a game designed around it.

Very good points. Let’s start with the “today isn’t indicative of the future” argument. The Halo universe is based around things which sound plausible–or at least, there’s plausible hand-waving to describe why things are possible. Most of what we see in Halo is familiar to us. We have guns which fire bullets. We have plasma weaponry–which is incredibly familar to us, even if we don’t know why–it’s because fire is a form of plasma. MAC Guns–we have trains which operate on this principle–it’s just magnets. You get the idea. I mean, look at the stuff shown in Star Trek–communicators [phones, bluetooth earpieces, etc], datapads [Kindles], etc–a lot of the stuff we have today far outstrips what they imagined in Star Trek–aside from, y’know, aliens and FTL spaceships and such, which we still haven’t gotten around to yet.

Anyway, the style of the Halo series is that it tends to stick with the familiar and/or the “might be possible”–until Halo 4, when they started using Forerunner technology, which is basically magic. We can’t predict the future with any great precision, but we can make guesses.

For example, despite having guns, bows and arrows still exist, and have their purpose. Despite air transport–we still send most of our stuff by ships or by land. Despite video games and movies, people still enjoy stage performances and a good book. New technologies don’t usually replace older ones–the older ones still stick around. Heck, I’ve seen businesses which are still using Windows 2000 computers, because as far as they’re concerned, their computers aren’t broken, and they do the job they need them to do, so they don’t need to “fix” their hardware by upgrading.

Moving on to “points of interest” underwater–how do I put this? Think of the ocean floor/riverbed/lake bottom as simply land which has been flooded. There’s terrain down there–just as complex as on the surface–it’s just that the medium you have to go through to traverse the terrain is water, not air. On the surface of the water–well, you can do a lot with waterspouts/volcanoes/covenant glassing beams/geysers, mists/fogs, islands, rocky spires, debris, floating mobile platforms [ships, gondolas], etc, etc. In fact, most of this stuff is present in the game to an extent, already.

Spartans have thruster pack/jetpack now to get from A to B. But Spartans not being able to swim has to be one of the biggest jokes in the Halo series. Supply sufficient propulsion and Spartans will be able to stay on top of the water by swimming. Considering that Spartans can run at anything up to 60 km/hr–ish, and can sprint up to 105km/hr, I’d say that they can swim. Or if not, they can sink to the bottom, and walk on the seabed. After all, Mjolnir armour is supposed to be pressurized against vacuum [space] and protect the Spartan against hazardous environments–like bullets in the air. If all it takes is a little water to fry the Spartan’s equipment through shields, then the UNSC’s most effective weapons against Elites, and the Covenant’s most effective weapon against Spartans would be water pistols.

> 2533274880692195;9:
> > .

When the first computers saw light, some predicted that today’s computer would only weigh a ton.

Of course we can make guesses. I’d say it’s quite safe to assume watercrafts for military purposes would be abandoned quite fast after we’d get aerial crafts running with fusion power. Even civilian transportation would most likely be abandoned. For recreational purposes? Maybe not, transport? Most likely. Large cargo transport is another question. Why do you think I assume that? Because of cost effectiveness.

Fuel costs a lot today and is one reason why civilian transport by air is so expensive. Especially over long distances. They’re also limited in how much cargo they can take. Air cargo transport is however still used.

The thing about new technologies not replacing older ones. That’s up to the user. The examples you provided are different experiences, not an “obsolete” version of another. A theatre play is an entirely different experience than a movie. A video game is another experience than a book. Even a recorded theatre play is another experience than a movie.

3D printing is replacing a lot of the conventional product manufacturing techniques in many factories. CRT’s have been replaced by a lot of different display technologies. Regular tv broadcasts are being put on the internet and taken off the air.

The whole thing with a point of interest, is that it’s an important location for a task or mission. The Covenant’s point of interests have usually been large populated areas as their mission was to exterminate mankind.

Yes, the bottom of the sea is normal terrain to an extent. However from my point of view, the only thing worth putting on the bottom of a body of water is something you want to keep a secret, or some sort of mining facility, which either way could be handeled with drones. A large population requires massive amounts of space which is not only expensive, but it requires a lot of maintenance and very little room for failure.

Also, putting things at such a location from a gameplay perapective, it’ll most likely be on the inside which makes the water a scenery thing and not a gameplay mechanic. If we put gameplay on the outside, in the water, we’re going to have to look at the physics and how much they need to change in order for it to not be gameplay with different visuals. In other words, not really making water a gameplay thing. Put gameplay on the water and you’re facing the same things, troops are limited to watercrafts and land areas. Making the water a void where only certain vehicles can be. Making the vehicles limited. From a gameplay perspective I’d say it’d make water a novelity like the half space mission in Reach. Also, in any such scenario, aerial vehicles would be as effective if not more effective.

You do realise how much a Spartan weigh? If you were to put enough propulsion on a spartan to keep it afloat while moving forward, it’s not swimming anymore. They’ll sink if they’re stationary and they can’t possibly produce the neccesary speeds to stay afloat with their hands and feet alone. Water doesn’t have the same friction as ground and it’s a liquid meaning it’ll move around when something in it moves through it. They lack the density to float like a boat or regular person. They’ll sink.

Being on the bottom then. Logically it’d mean sluggish movement and limited vision. How well that works for gameplay then is another question. As I mentioned, how much do the physics have to change in order for it to be different than combat in the air. If it doesn’t change, water is nothing more than a visual aspect.

I’d say space battles are in the same category, some differences but still in the same category. My opinion is that it’d be better for the gameplay to make games around those aspects than split up one game into several versions, water, ground and space combat.

> 2533275034118914;2:
> Space battles, sure, but water battles? That makes no sense from a lore standpoint, since the aerial and space technologies of all factions render boats basically outdated and useless, and Spartans can’t swim in gameplay, which would make water-based action difficult.

Well… There’s a mod on Reach that lets you go underwater so your wrong!!

jk jk

I like space batles tho, still playin battlefront II!

Space battles, Awesome! :smiley:

Naval battles, seems a bit outdated. :confused:

They already have space battles, but if they made them bigger and made it so you can fly frigates and stuff it would be 10x more awesome.

Yes, that would be sweet

Yes, why not. I would be entertained.

> 2533274795123910;10:
> > 2533274880692195;9:
> > > .
>
>
> When the first computers saw light, some predicted that today’s computer would only weigh a ton.
> Of course we can make guesses. I’d say it’s quite safe to assume watercrafts for military purposes would be abandoned quite fast after we’d get aerial crafts running with fusion power. Even civilian transportation would most likely be abandoned. For recreational purposes? Maybe not, transport? Most likely. Large cargo transport is another question. Why do you think I assume that? Because of cost effectiveness.
> Fuel costs a lot today and is one reason why civilian transport by air is so expensive. Especially over long distances. They’re also limited in how much cargo they can take. Air cargo transport is however still used.
> The thing about new technologies not replacing older ones. That’s up to the user. The examples you provided are different experiences, not an “obsolete” version of another. A theatre play is an entirely different experience than a movie. A video game is another experience than a book. Even a recorded theatre play is another experience than a movie.
> 3D printing is replacing a lot of the conventional product manufacturing techniques in many factories. CRT’s have been replaced by a lot of different display technologies. Regular tv broadcasts are being put on the internet and taken off the air.
> The whole thing with a point of interest, is that it’s an important location for a task or mission. The Covenant’s point of interests have usually been large populated areas as their mission was to exterminate mankind.
> Yes, the bottom of the sea is normal terrain to an extent. However from my point of view, the only thing worth putting on the bottom of a body of water is something you want to keep a secret, or some sort of mining facility, which either way could be handeled with drones. A large population requires massive amounts of space which is not only expensive, but it requires a lot of maintenance and very little room for failure.
> Also, putting things at such a location from a gameplay perapective, it’ll most likely be on the inside which makes the water a scenery thing and not a gameplay mechanic. If we put gameplay on the outside, in the water, we’re going to have to look at the physics and how much they need to change in order for it to not be gameplay with different visuals. In other words, not really making water a gameplay thing. Put gameplay on the water and you’re facing the same things, troops are limited to watercrafts and land areas. Making the water a void where only certain vehicles can be. Making the vehicles limited. From a gameplay perspective I’d say it’d make water a novelity like the half space mission in Reach. Also, in any such scenario, aerial vehicles would be as effective if not more effective.
> You do realise how much a Spartan weigh? If you were to put enough propulsion on a spartan to keep it afloat while moving forward, it’s not swimming anymore. They’ll sink if they’re stationary and they can’t possibly produce the neccesary speeds to stay afloat with their hands and feet alone. Water doesn’t have the same friction as ground and it’s a liquid meaning it’ll move around when something in it moves through it. They lack the density to float like a boat or regular person. They’ll sink.
> Being on the bottom then. Logically it’d mean sluggish movement and limited vision. How well that works for gameplay then is another question. As I mentioned, how much do the physics have to change in order for it to be different than combat in the air. If it doesn’t change, water is nothing more than a visual aspect.
> I’d say space battles are in the same category, some differences but still in the same category. My opinion is that it’d be better for the gameplay to make games around those aspects than split up one game into several versions, water, ground and space combat.

Yes, it is up to the user. That’s my point–the old technologies still stick around. It’s just that once they were widespread, and now they are not so common. Actually, take a look at the pen/paper, and the digital pen. Scribbling a note on paper is still far simpler and cheaper to accomplish.

That’s why civilian, military and cargo transportation still use waterways and the oceans–because it’s far cheaper and easier to do so than by air. It doesn’t matter if you have fusion generators in the future or not–going by sea is still going to be cheaper and easier to do than over land or by air or space–except when the sea doesn’t take you to where you want to go. By the way, most of humanity still lives near a source of water–and that’s another reason why sea/river transport is still so effective.

The Covenant just glasses things from orbit if it doesn’t find them interesting. It’s when there’s Forerunner artifacts that they tend to actually come down to the surface and poke around before glassing.

You have many similar problems to putting things underwater as you do when creating facilities in space. You have to protect the interior from a hostile environment. Houses follow the same principle–they protect us from the weather. A large population requires massive amounts of space–and underwater you have that space. See Bioshock. Of course it would be hugely expensive, but then again, most of the Netherlands is vulnerable to flooding, and it is one of the most densely populated countries in the world.

Yep. 450kg. A boat weighs more. Heck, even some cars can float in water, if they’re airtight. You’ll actually find that if you hold your breath underwater, you will slowly rise, and if you let it out, you will sink. Spartans are in airtight armour, so even if they sink to a certain depth, they won’t sink like a stone all the way to the bottom.

> 2535460490287918;1:
> Campaign:
> Bungie was planning on adding space battles and water surface battles. A big part of Halo is vehicle warfare, if Halo 5 wishes to innovated Halo, it should innovate the big vehicle battles as well! 343i, please watch this video (Deleted Content from Halo Games - YouTube) of Bungie’s scrapped elements (due to time constraints). You guys can finish what bungie didn’t have time to start!
>
> The space battles in Halo 4 and Halo Reach were great. Maybe take it to the next level in Halo 5: Guardians by having you fly a Frigate or a Halcyon Class cruiser, maybe the Infinity?
>
> 343i, also add water battles in Halo 5:Guardians. The video (Deleted Content from Halo Games - YouTube) shows a Watercraft boat riding the waves, this would be great for vehicle battles at sea against the Neo-Covenant boats, and Promethean boats.
>
> Also once water battles have been established, this opens the door for underwater battles! Why not have Chief travel underwater for a campaign level in a submarine that he can enter and exit as well. This would be a good creepy atmosphere for flood (seeing as the gravemind lived underwater in Halo 2, plus, dead bodies floading in water are scary). The Underwater segments can also feature the use of the legendary spear gun (Pre-Xbox Halo | Halo Alpha | Fandom)
>
> 343i, also please consider using other scrapped elements in the video!
>
> **Multiplayer:**Space Battles and Water Battles can work in multiplayer like this thread I read a long time ago: (https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/forums/6e35355aecdf4fd0acdaee3cc4156fd4/topics/halo-5-multiplayer-pitch-colossal-slayer/0d38d2c0-0eb0-4fae-a62d-e3880f049fac/posts )

Yeah, space battles are something I’ve been longing to have in multiplayer.

I agree it would be awesome! Air, land, sea, and space.

> 2533274898131165;8:
> > 2533274880692195;6:
> > > 2533274883849234;5:
> > > Dingy vs Sabre. Make it happen 343i
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > LOL. Does the dinghy have a triple-barreled gauss cannon?
>
>
> It has a mac canon.

It also comes with machine turrets with two spartan lasers attached to them on the sides.