New Scorpion MBT model for the XB1.

The Scorpion since CE has been nothing more then a joke, a failure. It’s slow, almost twice as big as modern MBT, and has horrible weapons. Not to mentioned lack of defensive capabilities, such as smock screens, flairs, active protection system, reactive armor, and other essentials of what a MBT should have in the 26 century.

Its main gun is a 90mm smooth bore cannon that is just pathetic for even modem tanks that require a 120mm to be effective against other modern MBT and I don’t evrn know how it will surpass even modern 90mm shells when it’s casing is small.

Its Coaxial gun that is just plain terrible and horriblely inaccurate after 20ft (well in game it is). And a maned machinegun tuuret that had a limited field of view. But really, a maned turret, what happened to the unmanned turrets that modern MBT have? What happened to firing the gum from the safety of several inches of armor? The scorpion is just plain bad, worst then even a cold war era tank. Guessing the UNSC used 8 years to engineered their MBT’s and some of their other vehicles as well.

I don’t mined having the tank balance for gameplay purposes, but to make the UNSC and 26century humanity stupid to make it work is plain silly.

A new model something that fits better and is more of a competent designed. Better weapons (canon wise), better armor and better defensive capabilities, aging canon wise.

Something more like this as this is essentially what the scorpion should have been.

A 120mm smooth bore cannon with shells that are fired at twice the speed as that of modern MBT, rockets and guided missile. A Coaxial that fires .50cal rounds an is accurate pass 20feet a unmanned turret and a secondary unmanned turret. Smoke screen, flairs, reactive armor, and a better top speed and acceleration.

This sounds OP when compared to the Scorpion in game, but that’s what a modern MBT is. This could be balance for MP. Such as not been able to use the smoke screen and flairs. One umanned turret and the unmanned turret could be destroyed and would have a lack of ammo requiring the passenger to unmount if he wants to continue to get kills and the driver not being able to use its Coaxial gun. Its 120mm would have a slightly larger radius but still do the same damge that past Scorpion have been doing. It won’t be able to use its rockets or guided missiles. Essentially the Scorpion but with a better designed that makes it look like a decent tank.

The Camping version of the tank could have added features. Such a higher top speed if the camping would be more open. A Smokes screen that would lower the damge you take for a few seconds as some of the hit would miss. Flairs or an active protection system to protect against fuel rods and anti tank weapon, it would have recharge time so it won’t be a god mod feature, but it won’t completely block the damge taken and would only lower it as fuel rods and wraith plasma batteries would still bleed through as the tank would be splashed with plasma. Two unmanned turrets so 3 players could mount on the same tank or 2 additional NPC to help out. The turrets could still be destroyed. It would have 4 guided missles and 12 rockets.

So what do you guys think yes, no, maybe.

Gameplay > Realism, the tank is fine how it is. The only thing they could improve with it is maybe add a machine gun weapon as a secondary for the tank driver.

Change the lore, keep the mechanics

also, give us the grizzly,the cobra and the locust

> Gameplay > Realism, the tank is fine how it is. The only thing they could improve with it is maybe add a machine gun weapon as a secondary for the tank driver.

This, mostly. I always thought what’d improve the teamwork with the scorpion is give the driver the machine gun, and have the co-pilot man the cannon. Besides this, the OP is right about us having to move up from a 90mm tungsten tank cartridge. The Abrams tank uses a 105mm, and is still marginally faster than the scorpion. I’d keep the model, but stats among other things need to be upgraded.

It’s set in the 2500’s (and in the expanded universe, even further-earlier than that), where the military can afford to mass produce tungsten rounds… Too badass to care really hah.

Does anyone with the ability to upload pictures want to circle the smokescreens/grenade launchers on the Scorpion tank’s model? Because, it is totally there, to the left of the main cannon. Don’t pay attention to the Reach/Halo 4 models, they messed that, and a bunch of other artistic details up.

I will give you that the round the Scorpion fires should be larger, or it should be clarified if it has some special property that puts it over standard rounds.

The manned turret in the Halo 3, Reach, and Halo 4 Scorpion tanks are purely for gameplay purpose. Canon wise, they shouldn’t be there. If recent canon says that the Scorpion does have that turret there, then you can chalk that up to the dozens of other artistic flaws in the canon. The coaxial turret to the right of the main cannon is also only inaccurate due to gameplay.

I strongly disagree with your image of what the Scorpion should look like. I’d like to remind you as well, that this is over 500 years in the future, it wouldn’t be wise to believe that the optimal Scorpion tank design would be an extra-armored Scorpion chassis with the Abrams turret place on top. Not to mention on that design the treads would not be able to move to match the terrain.

As for the Scorpion’s armor, considering it can take hits from Fuel Rods and still have enough armor to keep fighting, I’d say it’s just fine.

> Does anyone with the ability to upload pictures want to circle the smokescreens/grenade launchers on the Scorpion tank’s model? Because, it is totally there, to the left of the main cannon. Don’t pay attention to the Reach/Halo 4 models, they messed that, and a bunch of other artistic details up.
>
> I will give you that the round the Scorpion fires should be larger, or it should be clarified if it has some special property that puts it over standard rounds.
>
> The manned turret in the Halo 3, Reach, and Halo 4 Scorpion tanks are purely for gameplay purpose. Canon wise, they shouldn’t be there. If recent canon says that the Scorpion does have that turret there, then you can chalk that up to the dozens of other artistic flaws in the canon. The coaxial turret to the right of the main cannon is also only inaccurate due to gameplay.
>
> I strongly disagree with your image of what the Scorpion should look like. I’d like to remind you as well, that this is over 500 years in the future, it wouldn’t be wise to believe that the optimal Scorpion tank design would be an extra-armored Scorpion chassis with the Abrams turret place on top. Not to mention on that design the treads would not be able to move to match the terrain.
>
> As for the Scorpion’s armor, considering it can take hits from Fuel Rods and still have enough armor to keep fighting, I’d say it’s just fine.

Yea I see them now.

I’ll point out a few issues with scorpion.

One, its big, it has a large profile which makes it an easy target. Second, its slow, with its large profile this tank is a death trap when face against something like an Abrams who is smaller, faster and has a larger gun, plus a commander who finds and marks targets for the gunner so not everything is placed on a single person. Third, it’s overly exposed turret. Any lucky shot would disable it or down right destroy it. It discards expended cartages from the back so a weak spot a rock or a fuel rod their might destroy the turret and most likely the tank. Plus it’s narrow and small, doesn’t seam like its heavily armored and most tanks, their most vulnerable spot is the top.

A lower profile with the turret slightly larger, an unnamed turret on top so it can have a large field of view so as to be able to protect the tanks rear. An active protection system, visible on the hull of the tank to know that it has additional defensive capacities, even if it’s just cosmetics ingame. Reactive armor or added armor in crucial areas. Maybe even visible rockets, IIRC the halo wars Scorpion when upgraded had missiles if I am correct. If they added does even if it’s just cosmetic for balancing purpose the Scorpion would be much better off.

The Scorpio doesn’t have to look like the picture that I posted, but something along the lines, with visible counter magers, such as the holes for the smoke grandes, counter ECM, active protection, etc, unmanned turrets, smaller profile, more armor in crucial areas a more defined look.

The single manned turret can stay in MP for balancing purpose, but a different model to he featured in the camping with 2 unmanned turrets and maybe the ability to use the smoke screen, coaxial again but to actually be useful, and maybe some other features. Maybe zoom in option (camping wise).

I don’t practically want to see the scorpion get an all around overhaul were its unrecognizable. More along the lines of being slightly smaller, turret slightly wider and angular with added armor and visible counter magers, unmanned turrets, and a larger gun. And better canon stats, increase speed, main weapon stats that = Scorpion > Abrams by huge margin.

Practical design over huge body, small and overly exposed turret that fires a small 90mm gun. If they were to change what it fires from 90mm to something like a 120 or 140mm then that would make sense why its huge. But 90mm no.

Replace the Scorpion with the Rhino!

I want something new.

The picture given reminds me of a Merkava. The Scorpion could be worse…it could have been based off of a Panzer VIII Maus.

halo 3 version, all the way!
slim line, fast, powerful etc!

Comparing the Scorpion to the awesome link you sent leaves me wanting a real tank. Let me explain.

The scorpion has been moving more toward what military types would typically call “armored artillery” than a traditional tank. Armored artillery is used all over the world as anti-tank vehicles – almost as good, but not quite (usually lacking in armor, electronics, and main armament strength.

The concept art you linked too is more like a tank and an infantry carrier had a baby. So much bigger, with so much more to go into it (if that were real, you’d have a lot more armament on it).

I’d welcome it as a new vehicle, but I’d rather keep the scorpion relatively untouched as Halo’s “tank” of the future".

Honestly Halo 4 was a new Halo game painted with a shade of ‘Reach.’

We are going next gen, Halo 3 vehicles looked way better than Reach, really going into the future and the Halo 4 tanks were Reach tanks!?

I am expecting a lot of change from 343…

Warthogs were fine they actually CHANGED.
Tanks, well somehow went back in time.
Banshee, don’t get me started.

That tank in the concept art…I want that in Halo 5.

> Honestly Halo 4 was a new Halo game painted with a shade of ‘Reach.’
>
> We are going next gen, Halo 3 vehicles looked way better than Reach, really going into the future and the Halo 4 tanks were Reach tanks!?
>
> I am expecting a lot of change from 343…
>
> Warthogs were fine they actually CHANGED.
> Tanks, well somehow went back in time.
> Banshee, don’t get me started.

I still dont understand this argument. The tank is one of the few vehicles that barely changes with each title. The only difference I see is that Halo Reach’s has higher detail due to better optimization of the system.

Halo isn’t supposed to be 100% real, the tank is designed the way it is for game play purposes, if you want realistic vehicles, I would suggest playing Battlefield 4

actually that concept one is severely cool!! we need that in halo 5!!

> One, its big, it has a large profile which makes it an easy target. Second, its slow, with its large profile this tank is a death trap when face against something like an Abrams who is smaller, faster and has a larger gun, plus a commander who finds and marks targets for the gunner so not everything is placed on a single person. Third, it’s overly exposed turret. Any lucky shot would disable it or down right destroy it. It discards expended cartages from the back so a weak spot a rock or a fuel rod their might destroy the turret and most likely the tank. Plus it’s narrow and small, doesn’t seam like its heavily armored and most tanks, their most vulnerable spot is the top.

I don’t think the canon speed for the Scorpion tank has ever been given, in the games it’s slow for gameplay reasons. Yes, a lucky shot could disable the Scorpion’s main cannon, this can even happen in gameplay, but a lucky shot can also disable the Abrams’ main cannon as well. The larger gun can mean nothing if the Scorpion’s round is special in some way, whether that’s HE or AP or anything else. The Scorpion does place all the work on one person, but the computers inside the tank are heavily advanced and reduce the work by a lot. The only inherent weak spot on the top of the Scorpion I see is the hinge. The changes needed would be to up-armor the area around the hinges, or to ditch the idea of having the whole front-top section on the hinge and place the cannon barrel on its own hinge.

> A lower profile with the turret slightly larger, an unnamed turret on top so it can have a large field of view so as to be able to protect the tanks rear. An active protection system, visible on the hull of the tank to know that it has additional defensive capacities, even if it’s just cosmetics ingame. Reactive armor or added armor in crucial areas. Maybe even visible rockets, IIRC the halo wars Scorpion when upgraded had missiles if I am correct. If they added does even if it’s just cosmetic for balancing purpose the Scorpion would be much better off.

How exactly could making the turret larger ever create a lower profile? You could have more armor around the turret by making the top larger, more muffin-top shaped, but that isn’t the same as a low profile. Besides, based on the size of the Scorpion, I don’t think the design was ever to make it low profile. It seems more like it was designed to be used on the front lines to clear the way through enemy forces, while soldiers and other vehicles followed behind to cover its rear. This also would explain why the Scorpion doesn’t have a turret on top with 360 degrees field of view.

What exactly do you mean by “active protection system” and “reactive armor”?

> The single manned turret can stay in MP for balancing purpose, but a different model to he featured in the camping with 2 unmanned turrets and maybe the ability to use the smoke screen, coaxial again but to actually be useful, and maybe some other features. Maybe zoom in option (camping wise).
>
> I don’t practically want to see the scorpion get an all around overhaul were its unrecognizable. More along the lines of being slightly smaller, turret slightly wider and angular with added armor and visible counter magers, unmanned turrets, and a larger gun. And better canon stats, increase speed, main weapon stats that = Scorpion > Abrams by huge margin.

The Scorpion, and everything else, should be given proper stats and design for canon. Lots of artistic designs have come about, especially in Reach and 4, that contradict practicality and previous canon explanations. Some of those problems were the Banshee redesign, H4 Warthog redesign, SAW’s drum magazine, pretty much all of the Halo 4 visual guide from what I’ve heard about it, and the majority of Halo 4’s armor variants.

I’m fine with upgrading the Scorpion’s abilities in Campaign, and also in Customs games by making it an additional variant, to allow a deeper tank experience. Maybe this would mean that Halo game could finally have a tank section that’s not a fraction of one of the main missions?

However, let’s try and avoid turning it into the beast of nature the Heavy Scorpion was.

> I don’t think the canon speed for the Scorpion tank has ever been given, in the games it’s slow for gameplay reasons. Yes, a lucky shot could disable the Scorpion’s main cannon, this can even happen in gameplay, but a lucky shot can also disable the Abrams’ main cannon as well. The larger gun can mean nothing if the Scorpion’s round is special in some way, whether that’s HE or AP or anything else. The Scorpion does place all the work on one person, but the computers inside the tank are heavily advanced and reduce the work by a lot. The only inherent weak spot on the top of the Scorpion I see is the hinge. The changes needed would be to up-armor the area around the hinges, or to ditch the idea of having the whole front-top section on the hinge and place the cannon barrel on its own hinge.

Its more along the lines of the Abrams needing a rocket to be shot strait down on top of it to penetrate the thin armor on top or a lucky shot to the barrel, rendering its main gun useless. But the Scorpion, a shot to the back or the size sides could compromised gun. Its a small turret that it’s heavily exposed. It needs room inside for its auto loader, the gun, computers, cooling, artillery if it’s even stored their (don’t think it is), etc. Don’t see how it could have allot of armor, so it’s vulnerable their and its heavily exposed added it with its slow acceleration and speed, a death trap for the one person crew.

I think the old halo encyclopedia gave it the terrible acceleration and its top speed. Which also hasn’t been changed by any new source regarding the Scorpion. As mentioned a more realistic model with better canon stats is needed, even if it heavily resembles the original scorpion.

> How exactly could making the turret larger ever create a lower profile? You could have more armor around the turret by making the top larger, more muffin-top shaped, but that isn’t the same as a low profile. Besides, based on the size of the Scorpion, I don’t think the design was ever to make it low profile. It seems more like it was designed to be used on the front lines to clear the way through enemy forces, while soldiers and other vehicles followed behind to cover its rear. This also would explain why the Scorpion doesn’t have a turret on top with 360 degrees field of view.
>
> What exactly do you mean by “active protection system” and “reactive armor”?

What I ment lower profile, is lower to the ground. The being bigger is not increasing it hight and how exposed it is, but fixing the weak areas with added armor an weaponry. Its small size turret would make more sense if it didn’t have an overly large and slow armored vehicle under it to move it around. Its seams to be more appropriate to have mount that turret or an APC or LAV. Fast, mobile an packing allot heat for an LAV, instead off, slow, big, and not allot of firepower for what is expected of a 26 century tank.

Halo wars trailer has them leaving the tanks behind as they speed towards what ever they are going.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t29P-DVQB1E

Active protection is ECM, Smoke screen, flairs etc. But one particular one that I mean when I say active protection, its like a shield but not exactly. What it does is it actively scans the area around the tank for threats such as RPG’s, missiles or tank rounds when it detects an incoming threat it fires something to intercept it.

If the wiki address is not working, searching trophy countermeasure would show you what mean.

Reactive armor as in explosive armor, but that is only effective on human weapon, don’t think it will protect against plasma. What reactive armor does is when something such as an RPG hit the reactive armor, it explodes creating more armor around that area minimizing the initial damge. But because it explodes it would need replacements. Reactive armor are the boxes you see around tanks.

So maybe just hardpoints around the tank to allow for armor upgrades, increased armor. The leopard II did this perfectly with out compromising speed and mobility, well when compared to the first leopard.

> The Scorpion, and everything else, should be given proper stats and design for canon. Lots of artistic designs have come about, especially in Reach and 4, that contradict practicality and previous canon explanations. Some of those problems were the Banshee redesign, H4 Warthog redesign, SAW’s drum magazine, pretty much all of the Halo 4 visual guide from what I’ve heard about it, and the majority of Halo 4’s armor variants.
>
> I’m fine with upgrading the Scorpion’s abilities in Campaign, and also in Customs games by making it an additional variant, to allow a deeper tank experience. Maybe this would mean that Halo game could finally have a tank section that’s not a fraction of one of the main missions?
>
> However, let’s try and avoid turning it into the beast of nature the Heavy Scorpion was.

Yea that picture of that scorpion is kind of silly. 2 guns 1 on top of the other 2 additional ones in the sides, don’t know how that will work for a tank, for an AA maybe.

But yea, MP wise it could have the same game mechanics that governs the Scorpion but with a more practical designed that also resembles the scorpions. Camping wise, yea it would be nice to have added features. Zoom in option, missiles, coaxial, 2 unmanned turrets for co-op, smoke screen, fliers, drones to mark enemies. But if they add stuff like that onto the Camping variant they should add proper enemies and terrain for it. Large tank battles with the enemy having air sport ground troops moving in with fuel rod cannons. The unmanned turrets can be destroyed and the tank can be immobilize before it’s destroyed, so coordination between the players if playing in co-op would make it easier and allot more fun.

But most of all better canon stats. For 343i to change most off everything that was in the old encyclopedia as it makes everything in the halo universe (excluding the forerunners) look stupid. AR with max effective range of 300 meters, battle rifle with a max effective range of 200 meters. Most covenant weapons have an effective range of 50 meters and the ones that uses ballistics have such a terrible muzzle velocity that even modern armor would laugh at. I feel like the encyclopedia is one big error that should have never seen the light of day and 343i needs to publish a definitive edition that gives everything better canon stats that puat it halo > modern society.

That’s a cool design, but the original Scorpion is just too iconic to replace.

> Its more along the lines of the Abrams needing a rocket to be shot strait down on top of it to penetrate the thin armor on top or a lucky shot to the barrel, rendering its main gun useless. But the Scorpion, a shot to the back or the size sides could compromised gun. Its a small turret that it’s heavily exposed. It needs room inside for its auto loader, the gun, computers, cooling, artillery if it’s even stored their (don’t think it is), etc. Don’t see how it could have allot of armor, so it’s vulnerable their and its heavily exposed added it with its slow acceleration and speed, a death trap for the one person crew.

I’ve got to admit, the more you look at it, the more the Scorpion’s top with the turret looks thin. I think I’m starting to see the concerns you have, there really isn’t a whole lot standing between the vitals of the turret and the outside. Looking at the sides to the mechanism that ejects the spent shell, there’s a large gap and very thin armor, a couple inches at most. The back top, front sides, and the areas around the hinge also need to be thickened considerably.

Keep in mind the Scorpion DOES need to keep its current overall shape, with the turret coming over the tank like the tail of a scorpion. With your suggested image, this isn’t apparent.

> What I ment lower profile, is lower to the ground. The being bigger is not increasing it hight and how exposed it is, but fixing the weak areas with added armor an weaponry. Its small size turret would make more sense if it didn’t have an overly large and slow armored vehicle under it to move it around. Its seams to be more appropriate to have mount that turret or an APC or LAV. Fast, mobile an packing allot heat for an LAV, instead off, slow, big, and not allot of firepower for what is expected of a 26 century tank.
>
> Halo wars trailer has them leaving the tanks behind as they speed towards what ever they are going.

More firepower should be expected, I remember that I used to think it had a 120 mm cannon for some reason, now it makes more sense. This would probably mean the Grizzly would need to have it’s cannons sizes increase as well.

The Halo wars trailer has a lot of problems going on with it already, and I’m not sure it’s that reliable in context. Still, the Scorpion’s speed should be reassured. However, I do remember it going pretty fast in the ToTS cutscene.

> Active protection is ECM, Smoke screen, flairs etc. But one particular one that I mean when I say active protection, its like a shield but not exactly. What it does is it actively scans the area around the tank for threats such as RPG’s, missiles or tank rounds when it detects an incoming threat it fires something to intercept it.

Okay, I looked it up the countermeasure. I’m not sure how much use the UNSC would have for that on the Scorpion though. For 30 years they weren’t fighting enemies that such a device would be really effective against.

> Reactive armor as in explosive armor, but that is only effective on human weapon, don’t think it will protect against plasma. What reactive armor does is when something such as an RPG hit the reactive armor, it explodes creating more armor around that area minimizing the initial damge. But because it explodes it would need replacements. Reactive armor are the boxes you see around tanks.

I don’t see why the Scorpion would need this. This is the year 2552, assuming that the material the tank is made out of isn’t capable of well defending against explosives is a bit ridiculous. From what I can tell the Scorpion has thick Titanium-ceramic armor, which should be near in quality to the Titanium that UNSC ships are made out of, and the ceramic is the part that resists the heat from plasma.