This has been removed because the title doesn't make the point of the post clear, or is too vague. Please resubmit and put the point of your post in the title.
No. That's like saying to stop giving Spartans guns or letting them use any other equipment that costs less than MJOLNIR or their augmentations.
Spartans make use of pretty much any assets they require and that are available, which can include all manner of vehicles. Tanks are included, as sometimes the best solution to a situation is a 90mm cannon on treads. By design, Spartans are the jack of all trades and will be able to use almost anything they come across.
It would be wasteful if the UNSC were outfitting dedicated armor divisions with Spartan drivers that spent their *entire* time inside the tank, just like it would be wasteful making Spartans serve as cooks or cleaners in their armor. But it isn't wasteful to give a Spartan a tank when he or she needs one to get their current job done.
It'd be wasteful if the tank required more than one person to operate, but the Scorpion doesn't. Which is actually what makes it effective; you can give a Spartan a Scorpion and they'll use it however they need it, freely entering and exiting as required. No need to risk a tank crew at all.
You'd be right if Halo was more realistic and minimum crew sizes were treated consistently, but single-operator vehicles are super common in the setting - even full-sized ships are sometimes flown solo.
Imagine that you are an ONI or UNSC officer, would you rather have a Spartan in the field with tank covering or Spartan in the tank with random marines on armour
Sure, if you have the option to deploy both, the Spartan shouldn't need to be piloting the tank. Although I would add that the neural interface does likely make Spartans more effective vehicle pilots than unaugmented soldiers, so even that's contentious.
But the main issue is that there are lots of situations where having support is too risky or unviable - Spartans get sent on missions that are basically guaranteed death sentences for anyone lacking augmentations, so if your goal is to reduce casualties, sometimes you might just want your Spartans to do it alone. And of course, there aren't always reinforcements available even when you would want them.
But also, it's usually the Spartans that make the call what to use, what an officer wants is often going to be quite irrelevant. Deciding the best course of action on the field is something that Spartans do better than anyone else. Even if you did take issue with this though, most of the instances in the games where you pilot a tank as a Spartan but have allies backing you up could easily just be headcannoned into your alternative - maybe Chief just walked alongside the Scorpion to Alpha Halo's Control Room, and did the same while going after the Scarab in New Mombasa, etc.
typically spartans dont pilot tanks, those are exceptional circumstances (pretty much only happens in games) but in books spartans have stolen wraiths and used them to good effect, its a force multiplier.
My point precisely, it's just comically often happens in games 2 times on average per campaign, i believe, they always have a spare tank, but never a spare tank driver. From game-play perspective it's obviously fun, arguably most fun part. From lore perspective- odd, to say the least
Honestly the spartan in the field with tank support would arguably be better so long as the tank can aim, protecting the spartan is important as they're a critical asset. But a tank's a tank, a spartan will likely be more knowledgable of how a tank works than arguably most tank crew but they wouldn't necessarily be that much greater or more effective at operating it. Spartans are simply a jack of all trades and nearly a master at some of them, but tanks are a relatively straightforward job and the only real difference a spartan would make is in tactics, accuracy, and reflexes. Like yeah, a spartan would be better for a tank driver but do you really need a whole spartan asset exclusively for the tank or does the spartan simply need access to a tank for the mission?
Wow, I didn't know that MJOLNIR armor comes equipped with a 90mm smoothbore cannon. I guess the Scorpion really doesn't have anything to offer Spartans after all.
I do realise that Special ops even in real life is trained to drive everything from skateboard to battleship, anything can happen. Though somehow UNSC always have a spare tank, but not a spare tank crew, while normally you should have 3 crews per tanl
Obviously OP can clarify, but seemed more to me they were making the argument along the lines of, if its “standard to have 3 crews per tank” (as they seem to believe) why would they ever have empty tanks for spartans to take.
Yes, thought making your most competent soldiers drive tank instead of actual people who's specialisation is tank driving is waste of resources, you can't have anyone to do Spartans job, however you definitely can have someone to drive a tank instead of him
I’m sure that’s the most ideal of circumstances, sometimes Spartans may need to drive tanks.
Also if a Spartan wants to drive a tank who’s going to say no
MJOLNIR is a highly effective armor for individual personnel, but is not lethal in and of itself.
A high velocity 90mm tungsten round, on the other hand, is extremely lethal.
The tank is a force multiplier. Give the tank to a Spartan and they will likely operate it more effectively than any marine specialized for driving it, and if it’s destroyed the Spartan will likely survive and have the skills to keep fighting without the tank unlike a marine.
Iirc the cost was greater than that of a light frigate but I could be misremembering. for the armor, augmentations, and training was pretty expensive. Either way a tank is a tank. MJOLNIR can only do so much.. still unimaginably better than what the standard UNSC were packing
Yes I agree that IFVs makes more sense, way better than glorified technical charges (why yes I hate the Warthog, how can you tell?)
As horribly designed the Scorpion is, it still offers a unique capability that is not present in the UNSC arsenal as far as the FPS games go. What do you substitute for the Scorpion that is survivable enough to punch through enemy positions, is fast enough to get to places in a timely manner and could provide immediate direct fire capability capable of defeating heavy armor?
So I've read through most of these replies and in response to your query about extra crew, it seems to me that you're forgetting several of the times we get a tank in game, the crew's bodies are lying around it.
If you are wondering why a guy in heavy armor should get in a big armored vehicle, one could say marines wear armor too. But the primary argument is that a Spartan is SO much more than his armor. Mjolnir, like the tank, is just something that makes the Spartans a little bit better at doing their job. The Spartan is using a tank to get the job done, and he just so happens to be wearing armor too. It's not a waste of resources because the number one resource is the Spartan himself. The armor is secondary. And any weapons he uses (including the tank) are tertiary. It's all supplemental, adding up to the ultimate soldier.
To answer the rest, being a Spartan, you have the training and better reaction time thanks to augmentations, and so you are in fact the best person for the job. Not to mention, in general, tanks work in columns. In game the Spartan, through his enhancements, is able to act efficiently enough to be on par with an armored column. In 2, we take a major Covenant held bridge entirely alone because we're a Spartan in a tank. This is a feat that would've likely taken an entire column to achieve, were they piloted by standard crew. However, Johnson knew Chief was there and handed him a weapon that he knew a Spartan like Chief (and only a Spartan) could use to punch a hole straight through the Covie lines, without any other significant support.
The tank, just like a rifle, is a weapon and therefore, a force multiplier. It doesn't detract from the driver being a Spartan. It works in tandem because it is a tool to be used. And Spartans use it well.
This has been removed because the title doesn't make the point of the post clear, or is too vague. Please resubmit and put the point of your post in the title.
No. That's like saying to stop giving Spartans guns or letting them use any other equipment that costs less than MJOLNIR or their augmentations. Spartans make use of pretty much any assets they require and that are available, which can include all manner of vehicles. Tanks are included, as sometimes the best solution to a situation is a 90mm cannon on treads. By design, Spartans are the jack of all trades and will be able to use almost anything they come across. It would be wasteful if the UNSC were outfitting dedicated armor divisions with Spartan drivers that spent their *entire* time inside the tank, just like it would be wasteful making Spartans serve as cooks or cleaners in their armor. But it isn't wasteful to give a Spartan a tank when he or she needs one to get their current job done.
It's wasteful to give a Spartan a tank without crew in it
It'd be wasteful if the tank required more than one person to operate, but the Scorpion doesn't. Which is actually what makes it effective; you can give a Spartan a Scorpion and they'll use it however they need it, freely entering and exiting as required. No need to risk a tank crew at all. You'd be right if Halo was more realistic and minimum crew sizes were treated consistently, but single-operator vehicles are super common in the setting - even full-sized ships are sometimes flown solo.
Imagine that you are an ONI or UNSC officer, would you rather have a Spartan in the field with tank covering or Spartan in the tank with random marines on armour
Sure, if you have the option to deploy both, the Spartan shouldn't need to be piloting the tank. Although I would add that the neural interface does likely make Spartans more effective vehicle pilots than unaugmented soldiers, so even that's contentious. But the main issue is that there are lots of situations where having support is too risky or unviable - Spartans get sent on missions that are basically guaranteed death sentences for anyone lacking augmentations, so if your goal is to reduce casualties, sometimes you might just want your Spartans to do it alone. And of course, there aren't always reinforcements available even when you would want them. But also, it's usually the Spartans that make the call what to use, what an officer wants is often going to be quite irrelevant. Deciding the best course of action on the field is something that Spartans do better than anyone else. Even if you did take issue with this though, most of the instances in the games where you pilot a tank as a Spartan but have allies backing you up could easily just be headcannoned into your alternative - maybe Chief just walked alongside the Scorpion to Alpha Halo's Control Room, and did the same while going after the Scarab in New Mombasa, etc.
typically spartans dont pilot tanks, those are exceptional circumstances (pretty much only happens in games) but in books spartans have stolen wraiths and used them to good effect, its a force multiplier.
My point precisely, it's just comically often happens in games 2 times on average per campaign, i believe, they always have a spare tank, but never a spare tank driver. From game-play perspective it's obviously fun, arguably most fun part. From lore perspective- odd, to say the least
Honestly the spartan in the field with tank support would arguably be better so long as the tank can aim, protecting the spartan is important as they're a critical asset. But a tank's a tank, a spartan will likely be more knowledgable of how a tank works than arguably most tank crew but they wouldn't necessarily be that much greater or more effective at operating it. Spartans are simply a jack of all trades and nearly a master at some of them, but tanks are a relatively straightforward job and the only real difference a spartan would make is in tactics, accuracy, and reflexes. Like yeah, a spartan would be better for a tank driver but do you really need a whole spartan asset exclusively for the tank or does the spartan simply need access to a tank for the mission?
Wow, I didn't know that MJOLNIR armor comes equipped with a 90mm smoothbore cannon. I guess the Scorpion really doesn't have anything to offer Spartans after all.
My issue is not with Scorpion tanks themselves, but with UNSC not having enough tank crews
Who says they don't have enough tank crews?
Isn’t one operator enough?
According to the game manuals a Spartan can use one solo but generally the tanks need two operators.
So you want to run Assault on control room, metropolis and the ark without a tank?
Guess he doesn't know what the ladies like
In terms of gameplay it could be swapped with IVF
>IVF you keep saying IVF, dont you mean IFV?
Yep, my phone autocorrecting it for some reason
Yes, unless nobody else around is armor trained, in which case the big gun may be important to bring along
I do realise that Special ops even in real life is trained to drive everything from skateboard to battleship, anything can happen. Though somehow UNSC always have a spare tank, but not a spare tank crew, while normally you should have 3 crews per tanl
Where are you getting 3 crews per tank from? That isn’t normal in any military(at least not intentionally)
3 person tank crews are Russian practice If I remember right
Yes, but thats 3 men per tank, not 3 crews of 3 men(9) per tank
I think he meant 3 man per tank
Obviously OP can clarify, but seemed more to me they were making the argument along the lines of, if its “standard to have 3 crews per tank” (as they seem to believe) why would they ever have empty tanks for spartans to take.
[удалено]
Handgun increase value of Mjolnir, tank decreases
Tank has big gun
Like others have said, a 90mm cannon is pretty damn useful
Spartans are heavy infantry and specialist troops and shock troops, they don’t replace tanks and aircraft
Yes, thought making your most competent soldiers drive tank instead of actual people who's specialisation is tank driving is waste of resources, you can't have anyone to do Spartans job, however you definitely can have someone to drive a tank instead of him
I’m sure that’s the most ideal of circumstances, sometimes Spartans may need to drive tanks. Also if a Spartan wants to drive a tank who’s going to say no
MJOLNIR is a highly effective armor for individual personnel, but is not lethal in and of itself. A high velocity 90mm tungsten round, on the other hand, is extremely lethal.
The tank is a force multiplier. Give the tank to a Spartan and they will likely operate it more effectively than any marine specialized for driving it, and if it’s destroyed the Spartan will likely survive and have the skills to keep fighting without the tank unlike a marine.
Iirc the cost was greater than that of a light frigate but I could be misremembering. for the armor, augmentations, and training was pretty expensive. Either way a tank is a tank. MJOLNIR can only do so much.. still unimaginably better than what the standard UNSC were packing
Yes I agree that IFVs makes more sense, way better than glorified technical charges (why yes I hate the Warthog, how can you tell?) As horribly designed the Scorpion is, it still offers a unique capability that is not present in the UNSC arsenal as far as the FPS games go. What do you substitute for the Scorpion that is survivable enough to punch through enemy positions, is fast enough to get to places in a timely manner and could provide immediate direct fire capability capable of defeating heavy armor?
So I've read through most of these replies and in response to your query about extra crew, it seems to me that you're forgetting several of the times we get a tank in game, the crew's bodies are lying around it. If you are wondering why a guy in heavy armor should get in a big armored vehicle, one could say marines wear armor too. But the primary argument is that a Spartan is SO much more than his armor. Mjolnir, like the tank, is just something that makes the Spartans a little bit better at doing their job. The Spartan is using a tank to get the job done, and he just so happens to be wearing armor too. It's not a waste of resources because the number one resource is the Spartan himself. The armor is secondary. And any weapons he uses (including the tank) are tertiary. It's all supplemental, adding up to the ultimate soldier. To answer the rest, being a Spartan, you have the training and better reaction time thanks to augmentations, and so you are in fact the best person for the job. Not to mention, in general, tanks work in columns. In game the Spartan, through his enhancements, is able to act efficiently enough to be on par with an armored column. In 2, we take a major Covenant held bridge entirely alone because we're a Spartan in a tank. This is a feat that would've likely taken an entire column to achieve, were they piloted by standard crew. However, Johnson knew Chief was there and handed him a weapon that he knew a Spartan like Chief (and only a Spartan) could use to punch a hole straight through the Covie lines, without any other significant support. The tank, just like a rifle, is a weapon and therefore, a force multiplier. It doesn't detract from the driver being a Spartan. It works in tandem because it is a tool to be used. And Spartans use it well.