The Ground Shaking Scarab, with Armor like the Dangerous Hunters, or the Mighty Kraken?
Tell me what you think!
Why?
Just curious!
I like the scarab better because it was more dynamic.
Both were very satisfying to fight against, but my favourite has to be the Scarab, just because it was more dynamic than the Kraken. You were pretty much on the ground with a tank or on foot, you had to shoot the legs, hop on board, shoot the core and bolt away from the explosion. The Kraken was very similar but you had a Phaeton instead. I’d Also like to see a BTB or WZ gamemode where either team has a vehicle of mass destruction, it would be more difficult than the ones in the campaign, but it would be cool.
Are you asking which one I prefer or who would win in a 1v1?
The Scarab was much better than the Kraken, IMO.
One key difference is that Scarabs had their own AI’s so they were dynamic, moved, and could make decisions. They walked and turned where and when they wanted, and had a main laser and secondary plasma launcher that could shoot two different targets at once. Scarabs were very dangerous and were constantly moving around to kill UNSC forces before they could destroy them. They were fun to take down because you had to be strategic about it, either rushing in with an aircraft and landing on it or damaging the legs or back to incapacitate them; either way you’d have to fight through several enemies and destroy the core to destroy the massive vehicle and jump off before it exploded.
The Kraken, on the other hand, was completely static. It was an unmoving object that had enemies fire for it, instead of being able to choose its target and attack like Scarabs could. For this enemy, you simply had to kill the few enemies on the top and destroy the core. Yes, you’d have to be smart about it but it was not as dangerous nor as fun as fighting a Scarab, in my experience.
> 2535429585915411;5:
> The Scarab was much better than the Kraken, IMO.
>
> One key difference is that Scarabs had their own AI’s so they were dynamic, moved, and could make decisions. They walked and turned where and when they wanted, and had a main laser and secondary plasma launcher that could shoot two different targets at once. Scarabs were very dangerous and were constantly moving around to kill UNSC forces before they could destroy them. They were fun to take down because you had to be strategic about it, either rushing in with an aircraft and landing on it or damaging the legs or back to incapacitate them; either way you’d have to fight through several enemies and destroy the core to destroy the massive vehicle and jump off before it exploded.
>
> The Kraken, on the other hand, was completely static. It was an unmoving object that had enemies fire for it, instead of being able to choose its target and attack like Scarabs could. For this enemy, you simply had to kill the few enemies on the top and destroy the core. Yes, you’d have to be smart about it but it was not as dangerous nor as fun as fighting a Scarab, in my experience.
This guy pretty much explains everything why the scarab was just so much more fun to fight.
To me the scarab felt like an actual enemy trying to kill you in every way possible, but the kraken felt like it was just an objective to be done rather than an enemy to fight.
> 2535447480293666;4:
> Are you asking which one I prefer or who would win in a 1v1?
either!
I like the scarab, it was fun to fight and a good change of pace in Halo 3. But the kraken just felt dull IMO, it just felt like another platform to fight on, there wasn’t even a cool explosion at the end. The scarab in Halo 3 exploding is something that I’ll never forget, the kraken just didn’t quite hit it off for me.
I prefer the Scarab as they had many many variants and dynamic details.
As for the 1v1, I still think the Scarab would have a better change, it may have less troop management and only 3 small turrets for some variants. It still have that massive laser cannon as well as the anti-air cannon. The Kraken isn’t safe ground or skies! lol
> 2535437010131483;7:
> > 2535447480293666;4:
> > Are you asking which one I prefer or who would win in a 1v1?
>
> either!
Scarab and Scarab. It’s just so good. You can also drop a scarab so if you drop it on a kraken, it doesn’t stand a chance.
Standby for ScarabFall!
my favorite has to be the Scarab…
> 2535437010131483;7:
> > 2535447480293666;4:
> > Are you asking which one I prefer or who would win in a 1v1?
>
> either!
Scarab in terms of fighting against it. The Kraken boss battle was too hyped up for what it ended up being.
Kraken steps on the Scarab in a 1v1. ~~WE DO NOT SOW~~Even if it’s a T29, even if the focus cannon is powerful enough to melt off a leg, it can still fly independently… and it still has two others with which it can flatten the excavation platform.
The Lich… could be a great deal better, but it has potential. And it makes a bit more sense from a lore perspective.
Scarab was definitely more fun to play against, because it was more an actual enemy, and less just a part of the map.
In terms of combat, the Kraken would probably come out on top in most situations, since it’s pretty much just a roided up, flying Scarab.
Scarab. Although much smaller than the Kraken, it has greater mobility and nimbleness, and it’s no slouch in terms of firepower.
It’s greatest strength would be quantity. An entire battalion of Scarabs would overwhelm the Kraken from multiple directions.
I honestly like everyone’s opinions here, but I have to say: the battle against the kraken in halo 5 was horrible. Mostly because it was stationary and wasn’t trying to kill you, the manned turrets were. I liked the scarab because it actively tried to kill you.