floo9465:

Branko:

I already told you, i could care less about what people on the internet think about me, or anyone for that matter.

such a rebel

Irrelevant

Impasse? How about i kicked your ass? I can see clearly you are just a sore loser, although it does not take me to be in Debate or being in Psychology classes to see that.

Mm-hm. I know you can't be in college so you must mean high school debate and psych... I love people like you who take an elective and then act like an expert on the subject. If you claim to not be doing that, then why is this important?

One, how can you be so sure? Two, I do not act like an expert, i merely stating that i recognize what you LOOK like your doing. Just staing because im bored.

You do not seem to understand anything based on your posts. "Pleasures" Precisely. Pleasures refers to being in a better situation, which would therefore mean that fiction is a better place to put our conciences in. Which means our imaginitive futures will always be better. unless of course the person with the imaginiation is depressed, but that is an entirely different matter.

DO BETTER IN PSYCH!

Irrelevant

We are not talking about whether the RL is needed, but instead which would win, or be better. You stray off-topic too much.

Yeah because this- You do not seem to understand anything based on your posts. "Pleasures" Precisely. Pleasures refers to being in a better situation, which would therefore mean that fiction is a better place to put our conciences in. Which means our imaginitive futures will always be better. unless of course the person with the imaginiation is depressed, but that is an entirely different matter.

-and everything it related to in your other posts is... on.. topic?

As i said, everything of mine has been on-topic, unless it was a response to you, because you are the one who goes off topic.

---

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." -Albert Einstein

floo... you are the thickest most useless person I have ever had the misfortune to see on an internet forum

first of all the things you see are the equipment of the UNSC marines, not the army, the scorpion for instance is a drop tank, not an MBT, even if it was an MBT it would rip modern tanks into little pieces through strength of numbers, the UNSC outnumbers the US like... a billion times over? Hell the only modern power that wouldn't be eradicated in the first hour of fighting is probably china

---

Spess mehrens

If the UNSC and the US army would engage eachother in a fair fight with roughly the same size army, i say US would win.

Think about it, UNSC infantry use oversized rifles that doesnt even have a scope (assault rifle) compared to a Tavor with the land warrior system, the UNSC would not stand a chance.

Who would win, a 1,6 mac F35 or a relativly slow hornet with some miniguns attached to it?

The only thing the UNSC beats the US with is the scorpion, but since US would get air superiority, scorpions would be ripped to shreads with typhical air to ground missiles. 

Truth is the UNSC is a fictional army, with more cool weapons instead of effective ones.

twigggy:

floo... you are the thickest most useless person I have ever had the misfortune to see on an internet forum

first of all the things you see are the equipment of the UNSC marines, not the army, the scorpion for instance is a drop tank, not an MBT, even if it was an MBT it would rip modern tanks into little pieces through strength of numbers, the UNSC outnumbers the US like... a billion times over? Hell the only modern power that wouldn't be eradicated in the first hour of fighting is probably china

I would take quality over quantity any day

---

BC FTW!!!

"Those who sacrifice Liberty for Security deserve neither."

the assault rifles are assault weapons, scopes are a waste of money on something that can't shoot straight anyway, the battle rifle on the other hand...

as for the F35(jet fighter) vs hornet(1 man ground support VTOL), you can't compare them, a better comparison would be F35 vs longsword, where the longsword wins easily, besides you are making these arguments on the assumption that UNSC weapons and armour are as weak as they look, they are not, a pelican could quite easily shrug off RPGs and SAMs with no more than a dent in the side, the UNSC sniper rifles could put a round straight through a humvee and out the other side, gauss hogs could ambush a M1 abrams column and destroy them all with ease.

And this is without going into the other branches of the UNSC military ie: the UNSC army

Truth actually is that while the UNSC is a fictional army they still have some incredibly effective gear

---

Spess mehrens

Nyghtwolf22:

twigggy:

floo... you are the thickest most useless person I have ever had the misfortune to see on an internet forum

first of all the things you see are the equipment of the UNSC marines, not the army, the scorpion for instance is a drop tank, not an MBT, even if it was an MBT it would rip modern tanks into little pieces through strength of numbers, the UNSC outnumbers the US like... a billion times over? Hell the only modern power that wouldn't be eradicated in the first hour of fighting is probably china

I would take quality over quantity any day

as would I, which is why I am backing the UNSC

---

Spess mehrens

Whatever Branko. You simply brushed everything that hurt you aside and meagerly attempted in self redemption. Whether you're right in the communities eyes and mine, I think, is a much bigger deal to you than you're letting on.

Being that this thread is only my 2nd or 3rd venture into this section of the forum, I'm proved to once again that it's filled with illogically seated children with no actual view point on anything worth talking about. Most kids in this section of the forum seem to be looking through a paper towel roll.

You speak of intelligence yet cannot spell. I would not normally pick on this, except you have many examples riddled throughout your posts of both your inability to spell and comprehend, yet you badger on about how dumb I am, statments which are normally combatted quite coherently by myself only to disappear in your mind to better suit your failings. You talk about staying on topic and say that you've been on topic whenever you're not responding to me... how many times did you NOT respond to me? None of this is relevant, but none of it is false; you have let me down.

If you truly don't care what anyone thinks and have the ability to restrain yourself (I don't think you do), then I dare you to not respond... at all. After all that is what someone who actually didn't care would do, right? Just not even waste his time? If you chose to respond, I will tell you now, I will not respond. You have let this become too boring for me, and we've both let this drag on for far too long. I love you Branko, and it's been... interesting to say the least.

Floo- like.. what 9, 10?

Branko- 0, maybe 1

Twiggy- who the hell are you?

---

"You've killed John Belushi, Chris Farley, Mitch Hedberg, Richard Pryor, and George Carlin. Congratulations Mr. Cook, you've killed comedy, will you please stop now?"
-R. Gabriel Turner

A long time lurker, btw the score is more like this

UNSC: over 9000!!!!

US: none... at all

---

Spess mehrens

floo9465:

Whatever Branko. You simply brushed everything that hurt you aside and meagerly attempted in self redemption. Whether you're right in the communities eyes and mine, I think, is a much bigger deal to you than you're letting on.

I brushed all the posts that were IRELEVANT to the topic at hand. I could easily argue with you all day and night about anything, (like we kinda are doing right now). Self redeption? Redemtion from what? I have nothing to redeem. Why would I care what the INTERNET thinks of me? It is not like it can hurt me in anyway.

Oh, and this is irrelevant point as well.

Being that this thread is only my 2nd or 3rd venture into this section of the forum, I'm proved to once again that it's filled with illogically seated children with no actual view point on anything worth talking about. Most kids in this section of the forum seem to be looking through a paper towel roll.

Irrelevant. And your wrong in this as well judging by how you keep saying nothing yet claiming everything...

You speak of intelligence yet cannot spell. I would not normally pick on this, except you have many examples riddled throughout your posts of both your inability to spell and comprehend, yet you badger on about how dumb I am, statments which are normally combatted quite coherently by myself only to disappear in your mind to better suit your failings. You talk about staying on topic and say that you've been on topic whenever you're not responding to me... how many times did you NOT respond to me? None of this is relevant, but none of it is false; you have let me down.

Do you wish me to spell correctly? Well i would except i would rather not feel like it. And this is all irrelevant to the damned topic. Why can you not just argue me to the point instead of just speaking badly about me? If you dislike me so much, and think i am so stupid, go start a thread about that, and we can continue that discusion there. I dont badger you, i only say things like that when you say them to me. I comprehend most things unless i have never heard of them (which is rare), or they are badly written, like a few of yours are. Or make no sense, that too. I have effectively responded to all but one or two of yours because they were refuted before I was able to refute them myself, and felt i had nothing more to add on.

I respond to others if you have not noticed, and we argue/debate ON TOPIC, unlike you.

Oh, and this is irrelevant too.

If you truly don't care what anyone thinks and have the ability to restrain yourself (I don't think you do), then I dare you to not respond... at all. After all that is what someone who actually didn't care would do, right? Just not even waste his time? If you chose to respond, I will tell you now, I will not respond. You have let this become too boring for me, and we've both let this drag on for far too long. I love you Branko, and it's been... interesting to say the least.

I can restrain myself. I do not care what people think of me. But i feel obligated to help people, and discuss things and be social in this community. Why, because i greatly enjoy this game and love to talk about it.

Dare me? lol, more like you do not want me to make your entire poist seem pointless, like it really is.

I have alot of free time now that i am grounded, so i really do need to waste it.

"I will not respond." AKA "I admit defeat, but still continue to be a sore loser."

Drag on too long is a big understatement.

"I love you Branko" Ugh... Irrelevant.

Interesting? More like traumatizing to people who think that everyone was created equal...

Floo- like.. what 9, 10?

Floo- Like 0, -1?

Branko- 0, maybe 1

Branko- Like 0? No achievement in defeating someone who has a mental problem.

Twiggy- who the hell are you?

Twiggy- An actually competant person who understands words, and the meaning of those words. Understands when someone has lost a fight, and when someone seems thick-headed.

---

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." -Albert Einstein

Felix:

Fyrhawk:

Compared to everything that's been seen for the UNSC in each game(not HW), the U.S. alone would win, as long as everything equals out(from men and armor on the field).

Abrams(smaller target, heavier armor and main gun, can have two top turrets(50 cal. to a smaller version of a M-134)> Scorpion(smaller gun, larger target, one crew, 4 jump seats)

F-22>longsword(too large) and shortsword(too large), pelican, hornet...

Spartan's would easily die from an Abrams "pellet" shot.

AH-64D would own all ground vehicles. Same for the MLRS system. Pelican's would be swatted out of the sky by SAM's...

Now, the UNSC would win if we knew of every single vehicle and weapon in their arsenal.(EVERYTHING, we only know of about seven vehicles.), unless those too are like the current.

Against the whole world...the UNSC would be doomed...With combined assaults from Abrams, T-72s/80s, Leopard 2s, Merkavas, and every other modern tank out there...The only place that I know the UNSC could successfully land would be in France...(:P)....

Why do people always asked this? From our current knowledge, modern technology is hard enough for the current weapons of the UNSC...and there's never going to be a conclusion...unless it really happens....

AIs, Archer strikes, numbers.  the list goes on and on.  UNSC will win.

you are completly right, the unsc would decimate

edit: and twiggy is even more right

---

i have an extra flaming warthog code
anyone want it?

xAndy51x:

Felix:

Fyrhawk:

Compared to everything that's been seen for the UNSC in each game(not HW), the U.S. alone would win, as long as everything equals out(from men and armor on the field).

Abrams(smaller target, heavier armor and main gun, can have two top turrets(50 cal. to a smaller version of a M-134)> Scorpion(smaller gun, larger target, one crew, 4 jump seats)

F-22>longsword(too large) and shortsword(too large), pelican, hornet...

Spartan's would easily die from an Abrams "pellet" shot.

AH-64D would own all ground vehicles. Same for the MLRS system. Pelican's would be swatted out of the sky by SAM's...

Now, the UNSC would win if we knew of every single vehicle and weapon in their arsenal.(EVERYTHING, we only know of about seven vehicles.), unless those too are like the current.

Against the whole world...the UNSC would be doomed...With combined assaults from Abrams, T-72s/80s, Leopard 2s, Merkavas, and every other modern tank out there...The only place that I know the UNSC could successfully land would be in France...(:P)....

Why do people always asked this? From our current knowledge, modern technology is hard enough for the current weapons of the UNSC...and there's never going to be a conclusion...unless it really happens....

AIs, Archer strikes, numbers.  the list goes on and on.  UNSC will win.

you are completly right, the unsc would decimate

edit: and twiggy is even more right

my question is...how can AI's even do something, when they must be taken to a hard-drive(any place that they can enter) to do anything? A marine can't just walk up to an Abram and place the AI inside, it would be too difficult.

And, I said that with even numbers, the U.S. alone would win(against what we've seen in the games, not HW). Men on the field must equal, vehicles and armor on the field must equal, aircraft amounts must equal. With that, orbital ships would have to be removed, the closest thing to them is a NASA shuttle which isn't a wartime vessel. So it's all surface warfare...

Numbers mean nothing when it's set like that. Because they equal out.

Without ships, but with the entire population of the US against the UNSC, it would be close. The UNSC would be out teched, only winning with AI's and spartans. Warthog's would be no use to Strykers(sp), the armor of tanks for the US can stop AT rockets. Pelican's can't stand airstrikes. Air suppirority wins, the F-22 and F-35 are too small to be effectively fought in the sky, they are too manouverable. Only numbers can save the UNSC...

 And like I said before: This is pointless! There will never be a victor in this, we are comparing something from a fictional world to today. 

***EDIT***

And from what I've seen above:

How in the world would a warthog assault on an Abram's armored collumn get that close? There would be gunners on top of the tank, each watching the flanks. The warthog's would have to be in a city...and that armored collumn wouldn't just be moving down a single street...there's the Stryker and other Abram's in adjacent streets, not to mention the aircraft over head(if there's any that is)

The weapons, particularly the M4, can shoot just as straight as a battlerifle. Poision rounds of an AK-47/74 can easily immobolize a UNSC marines. ODST would have to be dropped a distance away, otherwise, when they climb out they would be killed, they don't just jump out the instant the hit. They would have to grabbed their weapon and open the hatch, which woud give enough time for anything on the otherside to get ready.

Spartan lasers...they're proto-types... I'm sure that we wouldn't see every UNSC marine carrying one, and if one even did...and airstrike/artillery strike would quickly decimate the area.

And like I said before: This is pointless! There will never be a victor in this, we are comparing something from a fictional world to today.

---

Aloysius:

3. Mandatory search bar usage.

__________________________________________
http://s3.invisionfree.com/WWII_Domination/ (WWII forum game, still being worked on. Halo game, will soon follow)

Fyrhawk:

xAndy51x:

Felix:

Fyrhawk:

Compared to everything that's been seen for the UNSC in each game(not HW), the U.S. alone would win, as long as everything equals out(from men and armor on the field).

Abrams(smaller target, heavier armor and main gun, can have two top turrets(50 cal. to a smaller version of a M-134)> Scorpion(smaller gun, larger target, one crew, 4 jump seats)

F-22>longsword(too large) and shortsword(too large), pelican, hornet...

Spartan's would easily die from an Abrams "pellet" shot.

AH-64D would own all ground vehicles. Same for the MLRS system. Pelican's would be swatted out of the sky by SAM's...

Now, the UNSC would win if we knew of every single vehicle and weapon in their arsenal.(EVERYTHING, we only know of about seven vehicles.), unless those too are like the current.

Against the whole world...the UNSC would be doomed...With combined assaults from Abrams, T-72s/80s, Leopard 2s, Merkavas, and every other modern tank out there...The only place that I know the UNSC could successfully land would be in France...(:P)....

Why do people always asked this? From our current knowledge, modern technology is hard enough for the current weapons of the UNSC...and there's never going to be a conclusion...unless it really happens....

AIs, Archer strikes, numbers.  the list goes on and on.  UNSC will win.

you are completly right, the unsc would decimate

edit: and twiggy is even more right

my question is...how can AI's even do something, when they must be taken to a hard-drive(any place that they can enter) to do anything? A marine can't just walk up to an Abram and place the AI inside, it would be too difficult.

And, I said that with even numbers, the U.S. alone would win(against what we've seen in the games, not HW). Men on the field must equal, vehicles and armor on the field must equal, aircraft amounts must equal. With that, orbital ships would have to be removed, the closest thing to them is a NASA shuttle which isn't a wartime vessel. So it's all surface warfare...

Numbers mean nothing when it's set like that. Because they equal out.

Without ships, but with the entire population of the US against the UNSC, it would be close. The UNSC would be out teched, only winning with AI's and spartans. Warthog's would be no use to Strykers(sp), the armor of tanks for the US can stop AT rockets. Pelican's can't stand airstrikes. Air suppirority wins, the F-22 and F-35 are too small to be effectively fought in the sky, they are too manouverable. Only numbers can save the UNSC...

 And like I said before: This is pointless! There will never be a victor in this, we are comparing something from a fictional world to today. 

I don't know how many times I can say this.  UNSC weapons, vehicles, and troops are made for quicker deployment and the use of numbers.  US and UNSC don't even out, as the UNSC use the quickness and numbers of weapons to win battles.  If two scorpions comfront a modern tank, they will take it out.  And, seeing as they they outnumber the US 800:1, the UNSC wins.

Plus, taking out archer strikes is BS.  That is like saying the US can't use missles.  And for the love of God, they can deploy troops anywhere on the surface.  Sending ODSTs behind enemy lines, killing entire battilions.  Spartans would just reack havic.  AIs, with the acompany of either spartans or marines, would take over an enemy fortress, hack the mainframe, and wipe out all data for the US, and make all weapons un-useable.

---

MY POST COUNT IS OVER 9,000!!!
Bow before me mortals!
banned, for no good reason. I will be back though, and I intend to kick some serious ass...

Felix:

Fyrhawk:

xAndy51x:

Felix:

Fyrhawk:

Compared to everything that's been seen for the UNSC in each game(not HW), the U.S. alone would win, as long as everything equals out(from men and armor on the field).

Abrams(smaller target, heavier armor and main gun, can have two top turrets(50 cal. to a smaller version of a M-134)> Scorpion(smaller gun, larger target, one crew, 4 jump seats)

F-22>longsword(too large) and shortsword(too large), pelican, hornet...

Spartan's would easily die from an Abrams "pellet" shot.

AH-64D would own all ground vehicles. Same for the MLRS system. Pelican's would be swatted out of the sky by SAM's...

Now, the UNSC would win if we knew of every single vehicle and weapon in their arsenal.(EVERYTHING, we only know of about seven vehicles.), unless those too are like the current.

Against the whole world...the UNSC would be doomed...With combined assaults from Abrams, T-72s/80s, Leopard 2s, Merkavas, and every other modern tank out there...The only place that I know the UNSC could successfully land would be in France...(:P)....

Why do people always asked this? From our current knowledge, modern technology is hard enough for the current weapons of the UNSC...and there's never going to be a conclusion...unless it really happens....

AIs, Archer strikes, numbers.  the list goes on and on.  UNSC will win.

you are completly right, the unsc would decimate

edit: and twiggy is even more right

my question is...how can AI's even do something, when they must be taken to a hard-drive(any place that they can enter) to do anything? A marine can't just walk up to an Abram and place the AI inside, it would be too difficult.

And, I said that with even numbers, the U.S. alone would win(against what we've seen in the games, not HW). Men on the field must equal, vehicles and armor on the field must equal, aircraft amounts must equal. With that, orbital ships would have to be removed, the closest thing to them is a NASA shuttle which isn't a wartime vessel. So it's all surface warfare...

Numbers mean nothing when it's set like that. Because they equal out.

Without ships, but with the entire population of the US against the UNSC, it would be close. The UNSC would be out teched, only winning with AI's and spartans. Warthog's would be no use to Strykers(sp), the armor of tanks for the US can stop AT rockets. Pelican's can't stand airstrikes. Air suppirority wins, the F-22 and F-35 are too small to be effectively fought in the sky, they are too manouverable. Only numbers can save the UNSC...

 And like I said before: This is pointless! There will never be a victor in this, we are comparing something from a fictional world to today. 

I don't know how many times I can say this.  UNSC weapons, vehicles, and troops are made for quicker deployment and the use of numbers.  US and UNSC don't even out, as the UNSC use the quickness and numbers of weapons to win battles.  If two scorpions comfront a modern tank, they will take it out.  And, seeing as they they outnumber the US 800:1, the UNSC wins.

Plus, taking out archer strikes is BS.  That is like saying the US can't use missles.  And for the love of God, they can deploy troops anywhere on the surface.  Sending ODSTs behind enemy lines, killing entire battilions.  Spartans would just reack havic.  AIs, with the acompany of either spartans or marines, would take over an enemy fortress, hack the mainframe, and wipe out all data for the US, and make all weapons un-useable.

did I not say with the numbers equaling out?

Archer strikes, the US has nothing similar to them, it's simple as that. The UNSC is bound to have something similar to real life. Both sides have missiles don't they? don't they? With the things from HW's, the US would just have a tougher time. The US has vehicles too, that are for rapid deployment...did you know?

Most of the spartan's have died, and none are ready for active duty...hmm...well, they can't just come back to life now can they? So spartan's are out of the picture.

Two scorpions against a single Abrams...Well, considering the turning speed of a scorpions turret, I don't think they can even target an Abram's at full speed. After the first few hours of fighting, the US would either have the Abrams defend key locations from hard to hit places or would have the Abrams go on a full out counter attack. I say they would choose number 1. Numbers mean nothing when it comes to narrow positions like a city street. Scorpion collumns would be holed up in the streets and not even be able to turn around, and easy place for an airstrike.

Scorched Earth would enter effect if the US would be losing. Causing the UNSC to go on without much to gain, just destroyed land.

And like I said before: This is pointless! There will never be a victor in this, we are comparing something from a fictional world to today. All we can do in this is argue.

---

Aloysius:

3. Mandatory search bar usage.

__________________________________________
http://s3.invisionfree.com/WWII_Domination/ (WWII forum game, still being worked on. Halo game, will soon follow)

Fyrhawk:

Felix:

Fyrhawk:

xAndy51x:

Felix:

Fyrhawk:

Compared to everything that's been seen for the UNSC in each game(not HW), the U.S. alone would win, as long as everything equals out(from men and armor on the field).

Abrams(smaller target, heavier armor and main gun, can have two top turrets(50 cal. to a smaller version of a M-134)> Scorpion(smaller gun, larger target, one crew, 4 jump seats)

F-22>longsword(too large) and shortsword(too large), pelican, hornet...

Spartan's would easily die from an Abrams "pellet" shot.

AH-64D would own all ground vehicles. Same for the MLRS system. Pelican's would be swatted out of the sky by SAM's...

Now, the UNSC would win if we knew of every single vehicle and weapon in their arsenal.(EVERYTHING, we only know of about seven vehicles.), unless those too are like the current.

Against the whole world...the UNSC would be doomed...With combined assaults from Abrams, T-72s/80s, Leopard 2s, Merkavas, and every other modern tank out there...The only place that I know the UNSC could successfully land would be in France...(:P)....

Why do people always asked this? From our current knowledge, modern technology is hard enough for the current weapons of the UNSC...and there's never going to be a conclusion...unless it really happens....

AIs, Archer strikes, numbers.  the list goes on and on.  UNSC will win.

you are completly right, the unsc would decimate

edit: and twiggy is even more right

my question is...how can AI's even do something, when they must be taken to a hard-drive(any place that they can enter) to do anything? A marine can't just walk up to an Abram and place the AI inside, it would be too difficult.

And, I said that with even numbers, the U.S. alone would win(against what we've seen in the games, not HW). Men on the field must equal, vehicles and armor on the field must equal, aircraft amounts must equal. With that, orbital ships would have to be removed, the closest thing to them is a NASA shuttle which isn't a wartime vessel. So it's all surface warfare...

Numbers mean nothing when it's set like that. Because they equal out.

Without ships, but with the entire population of the US against the UNSC, it would be close. The UNSC would be out teched, only winning with AI's and spartans. Warthog's would be no use to Strykers(sp), the armor of tanks for the US can stop AT rockets. Pelican's can't stand airstrikes. Air suppirority wins, the F-22 and F-35 are too small to be effectively fought in the sky, they are too manouverable. Only numbers can save the UNSC...

 And like I said before: This is pointless! There will never be a victor in this, we are comparing something from a fictional world to today. 

I don't know how many times I can say this.  UNSC weapons, vehicles, and troops are made for quicker deployment and the use of numbers.  US and UNSC don't even out, as the UNSC use the quickness and numbers of weapons to win battles.  If two scorpions comfront a modern tank, they will take it out.  And, seeing as they they outnumber the US 800:1, the UNSC wins.

Plus, taking out archer strikes is BS.  That is like saying the US can't use missles.  And for the love of God, they can deploy troops anywhere on the surface.  Sending ODSTs behind enemy lines, killing entire battilions.  Spartans would just reack havic.  AIs, with the acompany of either spartans or marines, would take over an enemy fortress, hack the mainframe, and wipe out all data for the US, and make all weapons un-useable.

did I not say with the numbers equaling out?

Archer strikes, the US has nothing similar to them, it's simple as that. The UNSC is bound to have something similar to real life. Both sides have missiles don't they? don't they? With the things from HW's, the US would just have a tougher time. The US has vehicles too, that are for rapid deployment...did you know?

Most of the spartan's have died, and none are ready for active duty...hmm...well, they can't just come back to life now can they? So spartan's are out of the picture.

Two scorpions against a single Abrams...Well, considering the turning speed of a scorpions turret, I don't think they can even target an Abram's at full speed. After the first few hours of fighting, the US would either have the Abrams defend key locations from hard to hit places or would have the Abrams go on a full out counter attack. I say they would choose number 1. Numbers mean nothing when it comes to narrow positions like a city street. Scorpion collumns would be holed up in the streets and not even be able to turn around, and easy place for an airstrike.

Scorched Earth would enter effect if the US would be losing. Causing the UNSC to go on without much to gain, just destroyed land.

And like I said before: This is pointless! There will never be a victor in this, we are comparing something from a fictional world to today. All we can do in this is argue.

It's not about similiarity, it's about who would win.

Yes, I know they have rapid deployment vehicles.  What I don't know is if a pelican sized transport can carry a tank.  As, the only way I see tanks being delivered is in huge cargo planes(which, if shot down, looses a lot of tanks) or boats(which are pretty easy to hit with an archer missle).

Died?  What the crap?  This is talking about Halo military vehicles and personal in general.  Plus, having a spartan on the field doesn't gaurantee victory.  It just increases the chances. 

here's what a smart general would do.  Send in Skyhawks with scorpions and wolverines to attack tank positions.  Flank with Anti-vehicle units, and send in a spartan and/or marine squad, take bunker, hack computer, learn codes, tactics, battle plans, etc.  UNSC wins war.

---

MY POST COUNT IS OVER 9,000!!!
Bow before me mortals!
banned, for no good reason. I will be back though, and I intend to kick some serious ass...

Felix:

Yes, I know they have rapid deployment vehicles.  What I don't know is if a pelican sized transport can carry a tank.  As, the only way I see tanks being delivered is in huge cargo planes(which, if shot down, looses a lot of tanks) or boats(which are pretty easy to hit with an archer missle).

Yeah, they some do come in large cargo planes, but those planes wouldn't just land near the battle, it's suicide. The tanks would have to drive the distance to the battle, the distance depends on the battlefield and airfield location. The CH-47 could possible carry a Stryker and other FAV's and LAV's.

Died?  What the crap?  This is talking about Halo military vehicles and personal in general.  Plus, having a spartan on the field doesn't gaurantee victory.  It just increases the chances. 

well, we should've come to that conclusion sooner. After H3 there wouldn't be any spartan's, in general there would be 33 or so...(And I never said it would garrauntee a victory.)

here's what a smart general would do.  Send in Skyhawks with scorpions and wolverines to attack tank positions.  Flank with Anti-vehicle units, and send in a spartan and/or marine squad, take bunker, hack computer, learn codes, tactics, battle plans, etc.  UNSC wins war.

Not all plans are in a single bunker. The plans in a bunker would be the current operation's details, so then the US would have to adapt again, but once they learn of the AI's, then they'll just use CV radio's and/or keep all data at the most secure locations.

And like I've been saying, and will keep saying: This is pointless! There will never be a victor in this, we are comparing something from a fictional world to today. All we can do in this is argue.

---

Aloysius:

3. Mandatory search bar usage.

__________________________________________
http://s3.invisionfree.com/WWII_Domination/ (WWII forum game, still being worked on. Halo game, will soon follow)