Not likely.. and technology slows the closer you get to a peak of perfection. For the purpose it served, the nade launcher obviously came very close to perfection, and any minor modifications didn't call for a complete model remake..
I've skimmed the thread, and what popped into my mind was this: wouldnt a high speed arrow or crossbow bolt through the skull kill an elite just as good as a bullet? just because its old, doesnt mean its no good anymore. anyway, just a random thought
Well we have these already, in 500 odd years the best they can do is get rid of the sights, make the grenade bigger and add an EMP burst? I'm pretty sure that in 500 years we will not be using any gun that even resembles any gun being used today
It's not quite the same situation as us fighting in Iraq with what you mentioned. Military technology has limits, so I imagine that for 300 years, there just weren't any efficient improvements that could be made, or needed to be made on it. Not everything becomes outdated. How long have we been using gun powder, or gas engine? Though incurring minor changes, they've remained relatively the same, in concept at the very least.
I want you to make a diagram for me of how to efficiently and cheaply produce small irretrieveable canisters capable of not only exploding but containing an EMP burst. Actually, first show me a diagram of an EMP capable weapon that is not a fusion or fission bomb.
well the ak-47 has been used since nam and people still use it today. so yeah if its a good gun already why make a new one and use up money. thats how i see it like what pino said
launching explosives is old sure, but being able to hold a charged EMP blast that measures and lets you know how far away you are from it and exactly how many people are around it definitely is not. i recently discovered how epic and effective this thing was, i love the grenade launcher in this game.
Doubt it because shields (takes 5 high powered futuristic bullets to the face to destroy) then there actual armor looks pretty strong enough to withstand a arrow. But its pretty lame every one comparing arrows/rocks/first guns ever made , Comparing when civilization just started forming to when it has been formed then upgraded isn't the same. How Arrows is to guns is not How Guns is to Better Guns If you get what I'm saying. Only real way we can have a real comparison is Bows and arrows been over 500 years old and how much have they improved? from just D shaped piece of wood to the fancy expensive ones of today like in Black ops(even though its a crossbow)(and its still used today :O!!!) But it practically does same thing shoot a arrow at a target just more accurate faster etc, The Grenade Launcher is around today shoots a grenade not very accurate but is alright, then you have Grenade launcher of halo which has remote detonation and EMP and Distance and angle upgrades etc. But basicly does same thing shoots a grenade. How else can you improve a gun that shoots a grenade? Kinda off topic BUT where?? is the part that tells you how many people are in explosive range I've tried shooting it past people looking on HUD for any visual cues for when it passes people but nothing seems to change ?
If you don't believe that, look at Kat. Also for those of you who have fired a serious bow, (30+ inch pull, not the dinky boyscout stuff) those are powerful. IMO they feel more powerful than a gun.
firing a compound bow is intense. i agree the arrow argument is somewhat pointless and subjective, but i thought it was reasonable comparison to make at the time. i mean, i wasnt assuming it was a native american riding a horse firing it, my point was more that a powerful, penetrating physical force will always be that
Lmao AK47 fails. It just uses 7.62mm rounds as far as I'm aware which makes it incredibly powerful. But because it's an old russian model weapon, it's terribly innacurate, very cheap, prone to jamming and can be found in all corners of the globe. I'm pretty sure the AK is famous for being cheap crap.
With a great enough speed, anything can pierce anything... So theoretically if there was a railgun modified for arrows, then an arrow could easily pierce high tech armor... So the arrow analogy is perfectly reasonable.
That may be true. But if you're talking traditional wooden arrows or something (or even modern arrows) your arrow is probably not going to penetrate a tank anytime soon. More likely it'll shatter on impact with anything siginificantly tougher than itself.
They're actually fairly reliable as opposed to the US backed M16. You can drag the AK through the nastiest of terrain and still fire it... Only issue is that is sucks as far as accuracy. Also, something about the nature of the rounds causes them to tumble through the air... Makes for a nasty entry/exit wound too. The M16 on the otherhand, great accuracy. It takes some work, but its possible to score body shots from 500 yards away with an IRON SIGHT. That there is baller. Unfortunately, its a very fickle weapon as is needs to be kept immaculately clean to function to its full potential. It also has a tendency to jam depending on how much carbon has built up... A day of firing on the range is enough carbon residue sometimes. But the US uses the M16 for a reason... Not so much because it's "good", but because it's the cheapest available gun at a certain level of standard. We buy from the lowest bidder.
weapons develop. The UNSC use guns, by your logic they would be running running around with old chinese pistols from like th1 17th century
Hey guess what, "small irretrievable canisters capable of not only exploding but containing an EMP burst" have actually been around since 1952. Maybe you should do some research before making posts that make you look like a pretentious asshole. If given 500 years, I'm relatively sure that engineers could manage to make that into a grenade, I mean it already has the same basic shape. All you need are small enough parts. And as for the efficiently and cheaply part, nobody would have a problem with exploiting foreign planets for resources and enslaving alien races to work in our factories. Or they could simply produce robots to build them.
oh snap. he got you so someone was actually arguing the grenades couldn't be produced? what about all the other impossible things in the game? invisibility cloaks? energy weapons?