I don’t remember seeing this around here and I thought it was a fun read.
[
](http://www.toplessrobot.com/2011/02/7_things_about_the_halo_universe_that_make_no_sens.php?utm_source=scribol&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=scribol)Every scifi story has it’s problems, look Star Wars and Trek. Millions of people love both of them just as much as we love Halo.
It was pretty fun read, but some of those like why the Flood is left on Halo rings is just lack of knowledge. I wonder why the size of the Pillar of Autumn wasn’t mentioned? It should have been in the top three. But good read anyway.
It hit a gravlift so it didnt even touch it, also that is multiplayer 
Spartans are strong and can move fine in MJOLNIR.
Gameplay mechanics
They didnt just built the halos then activate them right away. they wanted to see if they could find a cure and keeping them on halo away from life seems smart, no?
Guns were invented around the 1600’s right? you can say the same about us. Why the hell do WE still use guns? Because they are the best things to use. Why do we still use the wheel? Because it is useful. plus they have lasers space ships and mac cannons…
Why during ww2 and other wars are there civilians? Well for one you need people building new stuff for the war, having kids and raising them, ect ect. War isnt just “give me a gun and ill run in there and die.” It needs a lot of other people to do stuff.
This one i dont even feel like explaining. The covie ship was glassing the human one so duh it wouldnt hit chief. The long swords made the holes for him. And it is space, one kick and you will go flying, did i mention he is how much more times stronger than a normal human?
Nearly all of those are just gameplay elements; in actual canon warthogs are rfine supporting spartans if not they are refit, the rings are research centers and were also wildlife preserves which is why the flood are on them,weapons aren’t advanced becuase they were focused on moving outward not fighting,and nothing is wrong with the last one. The PoA size was given.
> Also, if you manage to jump on a grunt’s head, you don’t crush it like a tomato – which would be terribly fun to do.
lol, thought of that too. I figured it be too much like Mario or something.
> I would think that humanity in the 26th century would have a tiny pistol that, with one shot, cover the Elite’s homeworld in angry bees
This one is from those that lack the understanding that a pistol that fires a mini-nuke will blow you up too. At some point, you really do have to consider power vs intent. It’s the reason SMGs, ARs, BRs and LMGs exist. The mobility vs firepower consideration limits the capabilities of each weapon. If a person were to make an SMG that fired the 7.62 NATO round, it would be an extremely useless weapon. The size of the barrel would not allow the bullet to gain its capable killing punch and the recoil would make it very inaccurate with high rates of fire. Now where Halo does “fix” things is with the AR. It has the control of a 5.56mm assault-rifle while using the powerful battle-rifle round. The Halo AR IS a battle-rifle that functions like an SMG.
The Halo SMG, it uses rounds with more power potential than today’s 5.56mm rounds and with nearly the exact caliber. The Halo SMGs not only have the ammo capacities greater than that of a P90, they fire more powerful bullets as quickly, with as much precision.
The Halo SMG is to modern assault rifles as the AK-74u is to SMGs. The Halo MA5-series is to modern battle rifles as the AK-47 (both are BRs btw) is to modern assault rifles. Weapons that borderline their respective achieved boundaries.
Hell, the Halo sniper is 7 times more powerful than today’s .50 rifles. Both are anti-material weapons first, long-range anti-personal second. And the DMr/BRs, they have very little recoil, if any, compared to modern BRs that have much more kick than Halo’s gameplay gives. A DMR, size and weight wise, using the 7.62 NATO round will puncture a 2’ diametre tree and the soldier on the other side at 500m. It’s weight should cause it to recoil by about 20 degrees or more (standing… which no modern marksman would do, unless in CQB). The DMR IS advanced to control the recoil and maintain power.
This is a part of the universe that does make sense. It’s the lack of understanding of the players that give it a lack of sense (too much CoD me thinks lol). The scale of size and power in Halo is truly an awe-thing.
As for the Cairo… I would have loved the trailer version better. Cause it would have been all that but instead without the aid of the Longswords… it would have been all Chief… But ya, fortune doesn’t favour the bold, the bold make their own fortune. And Chief sleeps on top of a pile of money with lots of naked women.
Plasma nades are advanced, sophisticated, and obviously kinda smart, so they stick only to stuff worth blowing up. If you want “dumb” grenades that stick to anything, use the Brutes’ spike grenades.
That’s one I kinda agree with. Spartan IIs definitely are strong and have no problems moving around in their armor whatsoever. But the rest of the environment ought to suffer a bit under a Spartan’s mass. “Sit down, Master Chief.” - “Yessir!” - crunch - “Sorry about the chair, sir.” - “Yeah. Nevermind. I should’ve known.”
Warthogs are primarily designed to be fast and maneuverable - they aren’t tanks. Hence, hardly any armor to protect the crew. And the part about constantly flipping Warthogs? All depends on the driver’s skill.
That’s always been something I wondered as well. I mean, sure - keep a few Flood specimens to do research on and maybe find a way to save the galaxy without having to wipe out all sentient life. But the moment you come to the conclusion that there’s no alternative anymore to firing the Halo array, you should have disposed of them immediately. There’s no point in keeping them any longer.
As stupid as it sounds, it’s all a question of cost vs. efficiency. Can I kill you by bumping you full of cheap lead with an assault rifle? Yes? Good, then there’s no need for super expensive directed-energy weapons. And up to the point where humanity encountered the Flood, they were just kicking each other’s tushies, so there was no need for anything more sophisticated. However, one would think that despite there being no actual need to use more advanced weaponry, research and development was still ongoing and that there were at least concepts if not even prototypes of more advanced weapons already. And that during the 30-year war against the Covenant none of these prototypes were put into production is also a bit strange. I mean, if mankind as a whole is about to get wiped out, money shouldn’t be a problem anymore.
You still need civilians for “mundane” tasks, like growing/producing food, taking care of those unfit for combat (children, elderly, sick), and so on. Besides, there are quite many who don’t WANT to fight. And as far as I know, the UNSC doesn’t have the right to conscript individuals against their will.
Let’s just say that we all ought to be extremely happy that Master Chief never got into gambling. With his incredible luck, he’d own the universe by now.
> 2) You still need civilians for “mundane” tasks, like growing/producing food, taking care of those unfit for combat (children, elderly, sick), and so on. Besides, there are quite many who don’t WANT to fight. And as far as I know, the UNSC doesn’t have the right to conscript individuals against their will
Dude… the Spartan II project… 
At what point did you ever consider ONI or the UNSC concerned with rights? Especially with the reasons behind the civil war 
> This one is from those that lack the understanding that a pistol that fires a mini-nuke will blow you up too. At some point, you really do have to consider power vs intent. It’s the reason SMGs, ARs, BRs and LMGs exist. The mobility vs firepower consideration limits the capabilities of each weapon. If a person were to make an SMG that fired the 7.62 NATO round, it would be an extremely useless weapon. The size of the barrel would not allow the bullet to gain its capable killing punch and the recoil would make it very inaccurate with high rates of fire. Now where Halo does “fix” things is with the AR. It has the control of a 5.56mm assault-rifle while using the powerful battle-rifle round. The Halo AR IS a battle-rifle that functions like an SMG.
> The Halo SMG, it uses rounds with more power potential than today’s 5.56mm rounds and with nearly the exact caliber. The Halo SMGs not only have the ammo capacities greater than that of a P90, they fire more powerful bullets as quickly, with as much precision.
>
> The Halo SMG is to modern assault rifles as the AK-74u is to SMGs. The Halo MA5-series is to modern battle rifles as the AK-47 (both are BRs btw) is to modern assault rifles. Weapons that borderline their respective achieved boundaries.
>
> Hell, the Halo sniper is 7 times more powerful than today’s .50 rifles. Both are anti-material weapons first, long-range anti-personal second. And the DMr/BRs, they have very little recoil, if any, compared to modern BRs that have much more kick than Halo’s gameplay gives. A DMR, size and weight wise, using the 7.62 NATO round will puncture a 2’ diametre tree and the soldier on the other side at 500m. It’s weight should cause it to recoil by about 20 degrees or more (standing… which no modern marksman would do, unless in CQB). The DMR IS advanced to control the recoil and maintain power.
>
> This is a part of the universe that does make sense. It’s the lack of understanding of the players that give it a lack of sense (too much CoD me thinks lol).
I understand what your trying to say but Halo has some really big technology holes, weapons being one of them. Weaponry of the future wouldn’t be so cut and clean as just having a better rifle, warfare would go so beyond just your basic chemical reaction based slug thrower gun. Almost all of the UNSC weaponry in halo is achievable in today’s technology, in 500 years the landscape of warfare would be vastly different.
> Almost all of the UNSC weaponry in halo is achievable in today’s technology, in 500 years the landscape of warfare would be vastly different.
Here’s the way I see this. Humanity reached a peak of technology on Earth when they developed space travel. Not just flying to the moon, but the Shaw-Fujikawa slipspace engines. So they travel to other worlds, and because of this “thinning out,” technology slowed considerably. We have rapidly evolving technology now because - I believe - we’re a close-knit global community.
I imagine that when humanity focuses on using their advanced technology (far beyond what we have,) to terraform planets and colonize them, their focus wouldn’t be so much on warfare. When war did come with intercolonial factions, they most likely simply used what they had on hand because the opposition wasn’t all that advanced. Then, enter the Covenant, we see a more concentrated and driven engineering of higher technology to combat that of a more advanced enemy. Spartan lasers, reverse-engineering Covenant tech, the SPARTAN program.
It’s all a matter of their current need and available research. It’s not all that easy to have an early colony phone Earth and say “Hey, can you send us some scientists to figure out how to make laser guns?”
> > Weaponry of the future wouldn’t be so cut and clean as just having a better rifle, warfare would go so beyond just your basic chemical reaction based slug thrower gun. Almost all of the UNSC weaponry in halo is achievable in today’s technology, in 500 years the landscape of warfare would be vastly different.
>
> Humans were focusing on colonizing and expanding thus weapons are pointless seeing how there weren’t tahe many wars in that timespan. We created guns atleast 500 years ago and still use them so who is to say that UNSC (who focused on colonizing) should have crazy laser guns? so if we were to follow the same path we wouldn’t have advanced much farther not to mention guns kill people regardless so no need to greatly change somethings that works.
Technology advancement doesn’t work like that through a society guys, what is developed in one field carries over to the others. The ability to exert our will over someone/something else will always be a leading force even in times of peace. Weaponry is a form of power and we are always looking to achieve more.
Here’s a question for you, where’s the mundane robots in halo? In our warfare today we use tons of robots, where’s the robots in halo?
So the MACs(including the M99-AMSR) and Spartan Lasers aren’t freaky powerful or futuristic enough?
May I ask how using those weapons in urban combat or on a ship will result in anything but the destruction of said urban area or ship? You can’t use a broad sword to preform an open-bypass. You sure as hell can open the cavity up though. If your intent is to destroy a ship from the inside out, then hell ya Splasers for all. I suggest MACing or nuking from space if your intent is to simply obliterate an area.
We can destroy entire stars… how much more powerful do we need to be?
Contrary to MW2’s inference that nuking the battlefield wins the battle, knowing how much damage you want to deal determines the awesomeness of the available armament.
> Here’s a question for you, where’s the mundane robots in halo? In our warfare today we use tons of robots, where’s the robots in halo?
ODSTs get the gadgets, Spartans are the gadgets.
> So the MACs(including the M99-AMSR) and Spartan Lasers aren’t freaky powerful or futuristic enough?
>
> May I ask how using those weapons in urban combat or on a ship will result in anything but the destruction of said urban area or ship? You can’t use a broad sword to preform an open-bypass. You sure as hell can open the cavity up though. If your intent is to destroy a ship from the inside out, then hell ya Splasers for all. I suggest MACing or nuking from space if your intent is to simply obliterate an area.
>
> We can destroy entire stars… how much more powerful do we need to be?
I agree it’s not just about raw power but to answer you neither the mac guns or the spartan laser are powerful enough. A mac gun does not take out large covenant cruiser in one shot nor does a spartan laser take out a scarab. It’s more than that though, it’s about how we approach warfare with technological advancements. Every bullet in Halo would never miss a target, every grenade would never frag a friendly and so on.
Why do warthogs have human manned turrets? Why wouldn’t the turret be an equivalent to a modern day phallanx system but with a targeter ridding in a better protected area?
> Here’s a question for you, where’s the mundane robots in halo? In our warfare today we use tons of robots, where’s the robots in halo?
Smart and Dumb AI, plus the Drones seen in Halo 3: ODST. It’s likely that they exist, but that we had very little use for them in the games, and therefore they didn’t appear as much. It’s like the lack of a Spartan Laser in Combat Evolved; the Autumn just didn’t have them in it’s armory. Doesn’t mean they weren’t there.
> Every bullet in Halo would never miss a target, every grenade would never frag a friendly and so on.
Those would be a vast impossibility. All the technology in the world can’t alleviate human error.
Oh you mean “Eraser”-aim. A targeting system locks onto the target and somehow manages to hit the target with nearly 100% accuracy. The user merely points in the general area and as long as the target is within an area, the gun somehow adjusts the barrel properly and the user then simply pulls the trigger and the bullets hit where they’re intended rather than aimed.
That’s how the precision weapons, heck all of the weapons to a degree (maybe sans AR) work. The DMR and NR are like that when their reticle is at rest, the trilogy precision weapons are all heavily assisted when with red-reticle. So though the Haloverse doesn’t work like that, the games do
> > Here’s a question for you, where’s the mundane robots in halo? In our warfare today we use tons of robots, where’s the robots in halo?
>
> Smart and Dumb AI, plus the Drones seen in Halo 3: ODST. It’s likely that they exist, but that we had very little use for them in the games, and therefore they didn’t appear as much. It’s like the lack of a Spartan Laser in Combat Evolved; the Autumn just didn’t have them in it’s armory. Doesn’t mean they weren’t there.
>
>
> > Every bullet in Halo would never miss a target, every grenade would never frag a friendly and so on.
>
> Those would be a vast impossibility. All the technology in the world can’t alleviate human error.
Robots would be so intergrated into warfare the most mundane armorments would have them.
Not a vast impossibility with things like smart bullets and such, ever seen the movie “Runaway” with Tom Seleck, or The 5th Element with Bruce Willis? Both have smart bullets that are being worked on by scientist today. In fact our tanks and artillery already use smart bullets and munitions.
Even the basics like camo aren’t properly covered in halo. The regular gijoe would have an active camo system running, I’m not say the active camo field the elites run but some type of hard active camo on the armor like the spartan 3s were running inthe ghosts of enix book. We today have wearable lcd ponchos that are being developed for active camo, in 500 yrs I’m guessing the system would be fairly good.
Yes they do use smart munitions now. We’ve had the technology for a while to “bend” our munitions towards their targets. It’s a long-range thing, not a short-range thing. And yes we do have turrets that to aim more precisely for us while the operator simply moves the targeting camera (while the weapon does all the work.)
To apply the same technology on the small scale/short range… it’s been solved by having either the monocle helmet attachment or by having a neural link that automatically paints a reticle for you to see no matter the angle of the weapon. You always have a true-aim, no matter the angle, you know where gun is “looking.” That has much more advantage in close-quarters than assisted bullets or aim.
Long-range however, yes that is different. And I must admit, the M99 has eraser-aim, perhaps even the SRS-99s do too. The shorter range weapons, it’s almost useless.
And as for Ripley, Ripley shoots mini-rockets/missiles or somehow tethers the target with some sort of magnetic link that is somehow capable of bending a projectiles vector in any direction whilst accelerating it…That’s acceleration-squared. I so want to see the science behind that one, it being similar to the Needler or Plasma Torpedoes and all. Of course, the energy-charged needles or plasma traveling along a magnetic line seems is more likely than a metallic object of significant mass doing the same.
Something I was aware off long before RvsB, yes it is an mini-EMP and there’d be too much torque
> Robots would be so intergrated into warfare the most mundane armorments would have them.
Unless Smart and Dumb AI completely eradicated the need for robots. So far the F-99 is the only unmanned craft, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t more.
> smart bullets
As Reaper said, it’s very possible that the Sniper Rifles use this. But let’s look at this from a gameplay perspective, as that’s what is governing most of this. Imagine if every gun never missed. Have you ever run into a headshot-mod? It’s not fun, at all. Even in campaign, imagine if you never missed. It would get very boring. Sure, you would have a possibly amazing K/D, but it wouldn’t be a challenge. It would become a mundane task, and then it wouldn’t be a game any more.
As for the universe, it’s likely that it was seen as something that would just be cliche, or it wasn’t thought of. but look at it this way; there’s nothing saying that UNSC arms can’t work like that.
Gameplay and universe are different and I realize that there’s a balance that needs to happen for play.
Halo is futuristic in ways but at it’s core it’s just not logically sound for 500yrs in the future. I’m fine with it though, Star wars and Trek have their tech holes too and I love them just as much.
First time I noticed a tech hole in Halo was the flashlight in Halo CE, I cracked up that it wouldn’t stay on.
Oh, Gods… I forgot about the flashlight. I would not miss it’s removal, haha.