Commander Shepard vs Master Chief

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Superboy Prime
The protagonist of Mass Effect takes on Halo's Master Chief for the title of Xbox badass.

Shepard is a Vanguard for this match-up. Vanguards are soldiers with mixed training in biotics and firearms for use in assault. Biotics are genetical implants that grant the wielder super-natural powers such as casting powerful barriers, throw objects meters, warp, hold opponents in stasis for extended periods of time among other powers I currently forget. They prefer to cast their biotics to render their victims defenseless and then finish them off with a shotgun to the face.

Shepard will also have a Sniper Rifle, pistol and Assault rifle. (He can actually carry all of them at the same time in the game so no complaining) He will have cryo grenades. He has shields as well and can replenish them with his biotics.

Shepards background will be earthborn and a War Hero--holding off an entire unit until reinforcements arrived.

Against this Spectre is The Master Chief who is armed with his trusty Assault Rifle and a energy sword. He will also have 2 frags, plasmas and spike grenades. The Chief will have a bubble shield and regenerator.

Lets rock.

Furion
Master Chief. Chief pwns all.

Superboy Prime
Do you know anything about Shepard, or did you just blindly rush in to root for the Chief?

Lady Fox
I want to play Mass Effect, but I havent gotten the chance.

Furion
Originally posted by Superboy Prime
Do you know anything about Shepard, or did you just blindly rush in to root for the Chief?
UMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM...................*runs out of room* Barely Audible "MASTER CHIEF FOREVER!"

Violent2Dope
Thing is...not only is MC stronger, faster, more durable, and at least as skilled as Shepard, but can actually replicate some of the Biotic powers from Shepard. I'm still fairly early in the game, but unless he gets a major powerup, MC takes him with little trouble.

Superboy Prime
Commander Shepard as a Vanguard

slcsaENVy58

ragesRemorse
If shepard were an adept in this matchup, id say chief doesnt have a chance. As a vanguard, i dont see chief having much trouble taking shepard down

Superboy Prime
Originally posted by Violent2Dope
Thing is...not only is MC stronger, faster, more durable, and at least as skilled as Shepard, but can actually replicate some of the Biotic powers from Shepard. I'm still fairly early in the game, but unless he gets a major powerup, MC takes him with little trouble.

You got the game? Sweet. The game's awesome. Your character will be a force to reckon with when you reach the higher levels(45+) Sometimes I've seen some of my Biotic users to freeze, and even battlefield remove opponents in just a matter of seconds. The character will not get an exponential power boost, but a gradual one as you powerup. Needless to say only after having started another playthrough as a level 2 do I realize how powerful I had become. By the way do keep in mind Shepard does have a Sniper Rifle, which is powerful enough to pierce througha Geth Colossus's shield and durable armor with little trouble. Shepard also has the cryogrenades which can freeze the Chief on the spot, and can actually be placed strategically since Shepard can decide whenever he wants them to explode. The Chief is only armed with the Assault Rifle and the energy sword for a reason...I knew this wouldn't fare too well if he was given any power weapon, but IMO Shepard can last for a while since he will definitely use his biotic powers to avoid a head on confrontation with the mighty green giant.

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
If shepard were an adept in this matchup, id say chief doesnt have a chance. As a vanguard, i dont see chief having much trouble taking shepard down

As of now Shepard will be whatever class he needs to be in order to win. I only chose Vanguard because it's the second class I've gotten to play as(And I'm still starting) and my first playthrough was as an Infiltrator, and I realize he won't fare good as an Infiltrator since these guys rely more on Tech traps and Sniper Rifles.

Anyways.

Blax_Hydralisk
The Chief wins due to this video, sorry to spam your thread SBP.

e1vCc1Bt05s

Violent2Dope
I'm a Vanguard right now. I will take back my opinion, I guess I don't know quite enough about Shepard in the later game...tho put MC in my hands with an Energy Sword...Shepard dies...

Blax_Hydralisk
But you suck terrible terrible ass at Halo..

Violent2Dope
Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
But you suck terrible terrible ass at Halo.. And you just suck ass terribly. But don't worry my child...I can train you.

Blax_Hydralisk
I think you're confused, as I was bulldozing your mother. As such, you're actually my child.

Violent2Dope
Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
I think you're confused, as I was bulldozing your mother. As such, you're actually my child. Silly white boy, I fvcked my own mother to give birth to me.

Blax_Hydralisk
Well, I'm done. You win.


SBP could you possibly post some feats of Shepards? I don't have the game yet.

Violent2Dope
Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
Well, I'm done. You win.


SBP could you possibly post some feats of Shepards? I don't have the game yet. http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/9816/seakingqe3.jpg

Blax_Hydralisk
http://www.latinoreview.com/scriptreviews/halo/review.html

Dunno how legit that is, but if its real thats awesome.

chickenlover98
Originally posted by Violent2Dope
http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/9816/seakingqe3.jpg

best pic EVER. and since no one seems to realize this i started this EXACT thread a couple weeks ago. thank you assholes for posting on it.

and now lemme throw in my 2 cents i have to go with chief. give him 2 smgs and the real pwnage begins.

geshien
Just finished Mass Effect, earlier today.

Gotta give this one to Shepherd.

Tech advantage goes to Shepherd. Throws and barriers being the biggest assets.

NemeBro
Fully haxxed Adept equals rape.

SpadeKing
chief has a complete speed advantage, shepard hs some psychic power advantage but if I remember correctly shepard can't attack what he can't keep up with in targetting

and he runs at 1km/hr no expression

geshien
Originally posted by SpadeKing
chief has a complete speed advantage, shepard hs some psychic power advantage but if I remember correctly shepard can't attack what he can't keep up with in targetting

and he runs at 1km/hr no expression

Until Shepherd uses some adrenaline.

WO Polaski
adrenaline doesnt mean hes able to mvoe at even a tenth of the chiefs speed (exagertion)...

geshien
Originally posted by WO Polaski
adrenaline doesnt mean hes able to mvoe at even a tenth of the chiefs speed (exagertion)...

Whatever the differential in speed really is, I don't imagine it's enough for MC to get a majority here.

It depends how Shepherd is spec.'d If he's a Nemesis he can use master Lift and Warp and he has a higher offensive in some of his weapons.

If he's a Shock Trooper, he has greater durability/health and can utilize the adrenaline boost more often.

Either way, Shepherd is just too stacked.

MC isn't going to take a guy out who can "force push" (as well has hold someone in stasis), has overshields x3 and can destroy shields and regen with the warp ability.

Plus, the weapons that Shepherd has are more advanced.

WO Polaski
his technology isnt advanced enough to give him any sort of advantage over the chief but youre right in that his psychic abilities or whatever they are is what will give him the win. thats it though he doesnt have the speed or the firepower necessary.

NemeBro
I have actually heard some impressive things about Mass Effect weaponry.

Cannot recall it now though.

WO Polaski
i dont know what type of metal they use but the weaponry doesnt seem able to pierce through what seem to be relatively weak objects as you can use them as cover. they seem to have the same piercing power and speed as bullets.

geshien
Originally posted by WO Polaski
i dont know what type of metal they use but the weaponry doesnt seem able to pierce through what seem to be relatively weak objects as you can use them as cover. they seem to have the same piercing power and speed as bullets.

Game mechanics. Nothing more.

A critical shot can turn a hostile into goo or ash.

WO Polaski
game mechanics. lol.

wheres the cut scenes that show the detestation then?

geshien
In game combat, showing a Vanguard doing work. The first Geth is incinerated.

mbGipe1rRhg

WO Polaski
how are you going to dismiss what I said on the grounds that its game mechanics then state that that is canon? thats hypocritical...

i can state that what you posted is just something flashy that they put in the game for kicks while mine is realistic while you can say the opposite.

geshien
Originally posted by WO Polaski
how are you going to dismiss what I said on the grounds that its game mechanics then state that that is canon? thats hypocritical...

i can state that what you posted is just something flashy that they put in the game for kicks while mine is realistic while you can say the opposite.

I'm just pointing out that in combat the weapons work.

Most games don't have geographical modifications like say, Red Faction. I'm not being a hypocrite, I'm just using common sense.

Do you really think a palm tree that is a part of the map is more durable than a force field that is an in game mechanic?

WO Polaski
i'm not talking about palm trees though if it's a thick enough palm tree yeah. I'm talking about things like overturned tables, pillars in a room, etc. Those are all things that even real bullets can be stopped by, and so do the lasers in the game. besides if they only vaporize with critical hits how does that work? do they have to hit a certain spot? no its just a percentage gimmik. how could that be used in vs. fight if it only happens 1/10 times and the other 9 times it functions in a much weaker way?

geshien
Originally posted by WO Polaski
i'm not talking about palm trees though if it's a thick enough palm tree yeah. I'm talking about things like overturned tables, pillars in a room, etc. Those are all things that even real bullets can be stopped by, and so do the lasers in the game. besides if they only vaporize with critical hits how does that work? do they have to hit a certain spot? no its just a percentage gimmik. how could that be used in vs. fight if it only happens 1/10 times and the other 9 times it functions in a much weaker way?

shrug

I didn't design the game, nor do I think destroying the environment is an integral part of this discussion or in the development of Mass Effect. I would suspect that if the game were more real to life, the guns could just vaporize/melt anything in their path, but they simply didn't implement that into a game. I'm sure the developers had other things in mind. Again, I think it's common sense that it's a game and not everything can be perfect.

If the weapon can penetrate shields and high-tech armor, I doubt the surroundings are going to be any more resistant. I really don't see why we're still discussing this.

Game mechanics aside, a bullet that can disintegrate its target just needs to hit its mark, if you were to ask me.


Each weapon can be modded as well, so it depends. If you have the right equipment you can make a gun uber powerful. A one shot killer.

geshien
And my point was, a flimsy palm tree that is a part of the map is indestructible.

Game mechanics>reality ...or is it the other way around?

WO Polaski
Originally posted by geshien


If the weapon can penetrate shields and high-tech armor, I doubt the surroundings are going to be any more resistant.

why do you think this? a shields strength is shown by the strength of the weapon it protects against not the other way around. and high tech hardly matters like i showed in the swvf stormtrooper armor from starwars can be pierced by wooden arrows wita lot of bullets but a few whacks from a gun will cancel it out. know what i mean?

geshien
Originally posted by WO Polaski
why do you think this? a shields strength is shown by the strength of the weapon it protects against not the other way around. and high tech hardly matters like i showed in the swvf stormtrooper armor from starwars can be pierced by wooden arrows wita lot of bullets but a few whacks from a gun will cancel it out. know what i mean?

I'm sorry, but stormtroopers have no shields and they jobbed to Ewoks.

And I don't think I understand where you're coming from about the shields...

"a shields strength is shown by the strength of the weapon it protects against not the other way around."

Did I say something to suggest otherwise?

The fact that the weapons can be that powerful is a case for the weapons, not the shields. Although, the shielding in Mass Effect can vary.

Now, if you're referring to me stating if a weapon can blast through shields, but somehow not damage the surroundings, it's because, again, the game mechanics. It's pointless. Lets move on from that.


Moreover, the shields in Mass Effect can be stacked. This is not necessarily the case with the Halo series. In Halo, you have the suits standard shielding and then you can obtain a temporary over-shield. In Mass Effect you can level your shielding defense and even create barriers over that. The overall tech in Mass Effect compared to Halo, is superior.


In the end, you know I'm right, even if you deny it, that doesn't change the fact that Shepherd still wins this fight.

WO Polaski
Originally posted by geshien
I'm sorry, but stormtroopers have no shields and they jobbed to Ewoks.

to the former you missed my point. to the latter youre incorrect. while the stormtroopers themselves may have jobbed their technology didnt. prior to the battle a trooper was knocked out by a judo throw so their armor isnt all that grand.





how are they that powerful? since you want to rule out gameplay can you provide a canon showing of the power of one of their conventional weapons(conventional meaning a weapon not designed to take out tanks or attached to a vehicle)?




i never said it wasnt superior.






with all due respect to you what the heck are you talking about? i never said the chief would win i already stated hed lose. my point was that he doesnt lose because sherpard has better technology. shepards technology isnt so advanced and powerful that the chief would succumb to it. THAT was my primary point. my other point is that there is no reason to think that the blaster bolts are much more deadly then a bullet and youve yet to provide canon proof to the contrary.

SpadeKing
are we talking canon chief or game mechanics?

geshien
Originally posted by WO Polaski
while the stormtroopers themselves may have jobbed their technology didnt. prior to the battle a trooper was knocked out by a judo throw so their armor isnt all that grand.

First of all, we aren't talking about stormtroopers. Secondly, stormtrooper armor has no shielding. It doesn't compare.


Originally posted by WO Polaski
how are they that powerful? since you want to rule out gameplay can you provide a canon showing of the power of one of their conventional weapons(conventional meaning a weapon not designed to take out tanks or attached to a vehicle)?

I rule out gameplay that is irrelevant, like bringing up the environment, because it's a flaw.

And if I had some video to show you other than gameplay, which I don't see why the one I provided doesn't clearly show what M.E. weapons are capable of, I would certainly bring it up. I simply don't have any on hand.

Geths have shields as well. Depending on how powerful the shields or weapons are, naturally, determines the effectiveness of both. Providing a consistent basis to showcase the power of the weapons and/or shields are difficult, but the video I provided is a good norm for game (difficulty settings play their part as well).

The fact that you can upgrade your weapons in M.E. makes them better than standard. You can spec. your weapons to have a higher capacity to resist overheating for example, which allows the user to have basically, unlimited ammo. Versatility, if nothing else, gives M.E. armaments the edge.

Originally posted by WO Polaski
i never said it wasnt superior.

Good.


Originally posted by WO Polaski
with all due respect to you what the heck are you talking about? i never said the chief would win i already stated hed lose. my point was that he doesnt lose because sherpard has better technology. shepards technology isnt so advanced and powerful that the chief would succumb to it. THAT was my primary point. my other point is that there is no reason to think that the blaster bolts are much more deadly then a bullet and youve yet to provide canon proof to the contrary.

I know you know Shepherd wins. Though, it's not only because of the abilities that Shepherd has at his/her disposal.

MC can be taken down by a few well placed head shots. A sticky and/or a rocket can take him out. In Mass Effect, you can get nailed by a missile and remain standing, albeit, in poor shape, alive, none the less.

You've already admitted that Shepherd has the better gear and you should understand that MC's armor and shielding can only hold up to so much of an assault. Even if I cannot convince you that the weapons in M.E. are no greater than the ones in Halo, the defensive aspect is more apparent.

WO Polaski
Originally posted by geshien
First of all, we aren't talking about stormtroopers. Secondly, stormtrooper armor has no shielding. It doesn't compare.

yes it does. im gonna give you another shot to try to understand my initial point. read the post that i had responded to, then read mine. you should understand.






you mean you rule out gameplay that contradicts your point but you keep what is sound to you. thats a double standard.



well then what are you doing? if you cant provide any canon proof and all you have is a double standard drop the point. you dont really have an argument right now because you have conflicting points,



but its a double standard AND its utiziling a "critical hit" which is a complete game mechanic and is only viable with "luck" and happens rarely, all of which means that it isnt what USUALLY happens with the weapons. so thats not something that you want to base the strength of the guns upon because it almost never happens that way.



only if shepard has prep before hand or can go back and mod them as he pleases. otherwise this is an irrelevant fact.




tell me again how shepard is going to headshot a.k.a shoot the smallest part of a persosn body, considering said person had fast enough reflexes to punch a rocket fired from a jet fighter, sees bullets in slow motion, and can run half a kilometer in 19 seconds with a busted ankle?

and youve yet to show how powerful mass effect guns really are. care to explain why you think "a few well placed head shots" is going to tear through the chiefs shields and armor?



game mechanics. the force of a rocket exploding would launch a 200 pound man flying at least twenty feet if it was a direct hit. but regardless rockets are dangerous because of the heat and the kinetic damage. if you wanna talk kinetic damage the chief fell out of a spaceship from the ATMOSPHERE, hit the ground, and his armor was abrely scratched and he was compeltely unharmed. there is not a single feat within all of mass effect that can compare to that.



and i never contended any of that.

geshien
Originally posted by WO Polaski
yes it does. im gonna give you another shot to try to understand my initial point. read the post that i had responded to, then read mine. you should understand.

Do the stormtroopers have shields? Honest question.


Originally posted by WO Polaski
you mean you rule out gameplay that contradicts your point but you keep what is sound to you. thats a double standard.

facepalm

Again, that particular nuance is pointless to bring up because it's flawed. It doesn't support nor discredit anybody's argument. So, no, for it to be a double standard it would have to damage my defense.
It simply doesn't contribute.

Oh, and how can a rocket destroy air crafts and tanks, but fail to make holes in the ground in Halo? See what I did there?


And seriously, last time I go over this.


Originally posted by WO Polaski
well then what are you doing? if you cant provide any canon proof and all you have is a double standard drop the point. you dont really have an argument right now because you have conflicting points,

Except there isn't a double standard.

That and the weapons do in fact have upgrades that can be applied to them, thus making them more efficient and lethal.

Armor piercing rounds, cryo rounds, explosive rounds, yadda, yadda, yadda. You get the idea.

You can make any weapon you have, become a very versitile piece of equipment with a few modifications. This is where common sense should come in and make you think, "Hmm, my battle rifle only does short burst of concentrated fire, but his assault rifle has just as much range along with a longer rate of fire and shoots toxic rounds."

I don't need cannon material to have a point. I'm just that good.


Originally posted by WO Polaski
but its a double standard AND its utiziling a "critical hit" which is a complete game mechanic and is only viable with "luck" and happens rarely, all of which means that it isnt what USUALLY happens with the weapons. so thats not something that you want to base the strength of the guns upon because it almost never happens that way.

Critical simply means serious.

If the two were to face one another, outside the realm of vg mechanics, luck has nothing to do with it (doesn't even exist). Percentages do though.

If I aim at you with a shot gun and/or assault rifle, I'm merely going to aim in your general direction. The a.o.e. will make its mark and any effect added will provide the efficiency to immobilize.

And what? You think a Specter can't hit MC?


Originally posted by WO Polaski
only if shepard has prep before hand or can go back and mod them as he pleases. otherwise this is an irrelevant fact.

How is that?

It was never stated what kind of modifications are or are not allowed. You can call it prep if you'd like. Talking about the best armaments that either character can bring to the table isn't foul play.

Kay, no mods for Shepherd. Taking away the very thing that makes the weapons more advanced, btw.

If Shepherd had vanilla weapons, the sniper, pistol and assault rifle vs Chiefs assault rifle and energy sword (as stated by the thread starter), the advantage still goes to Shepherd. Chiefs rifle has limited range, Shepherd's has greater range and he has two more ranged weapons.

Close combat, no Vangaurd abilities, Chief makes short work of Shepherd thanks to the sword.

And that's if I throw you a bone. Mods on, Shepherd has distinct advantages. Close combat would still go in Chiefs favor, but for a majority, he's not going to be able to close the gap for that to be a factor.


Originally posted by WO Polaski
tell me again how shepard is going to headshot a.k.a shoot the smallest part of a persosn body, considering said person had fast enough reflexes to punch a rocket fired from a jet fighter, sees bullets in slow motion, and can run half a kilometer in 19 seconds with a busted ankle?

I didn't suggest that Shepherd would attempt any "headshots". A shotgun or assault rifle has a wide a.o.e. and solid range. Point and click hardware. A moderate aim would be all that is necessary, which isn't the case for a skilled elite soldier like Shepherd.

Bringing up headshots and ballistics was to explain the durability of Chief's tech vs the durability of Shepherd's tech, nothing more.

And I thought we were just discussing the tech, since we both know Shepherd wins this when you consider skills and abilities.


Originally posted by WO Polaski
and youve yet to show how powerful mass effect guns really are. care to explain why you think "a few well placed head shots" is going to tear through the chiefs shields and armor?

Been over this. I provided what was available.


And Chief can be killed in that fashion. Trust me. I've played Halo.


Originally posted by WO Polaski
game mechanics. the force of a rocket exploding would launch a 200 pound man flying at least twenty feet if it was a direct hit. but regardless rockets are dangerous because of the heat and the kinetic damage. if you wanna talk kinetic damage the chief fell out of a spaceship from the ATMOSPHERE, hit the ground, and his armor was abrely scratched and he was compeltely unharmed. there is not a single feat within all of mass effect that can compare to that.

I can agree with that. I brought that up because we were discussing comparisons. That being, MC dies when hit with a ballistic and/or grenade and Shepherd does not (though the concussive force probably should). Then again, the shields/barriers may be the explanation for that. Dunno.

MC was in a pod in that fall. We don't know exactly how far he fell outside of it.

But, if you want to talk double standards. Okay, MC can die from said ballistics, but survive a fall several thousand feet up. Medical science would disagree.


Anyways, I've made my point. Don't see it? Oh well. I'll live.

Too tired to debate anymore. G-nite.

SpadeKing
if this is canon chief shepard gets a head shot before he can do anything

if it is just gameplay chief is probably gonna get thrown around by psychic powers

WO Polaski
Originally posted by geshien
Do the stormtroopers have shields? Honest question.




facepalm

Again, that particular nuance is pointless to bring up because it's flawed. It doesn't support nor discredit anybody's argument. So, no, for it to be a double standard it would have to damage my defense.
It simply doesn't contribute.

Oh, and how can a rocket destroy air crafts and tanks, but fail to make holes in the ground in Halo? See what I did there?


And seriously, last time I go over this.




Except there isn't a double standard.

That and the weapons do in fact have upgrades that can be applied to them, thus making them more efficient and lethal.

Armor piercing rounds, cryo rounds, explosive rounds, yadda, yadda, yadda. You get the idea.

You can make any weapon you have, become a very versitile piece of equipment with a few modifications. This is where common sense should come in and make you think, "Hmm, my battle rifle only does short burst of concentrated fire, but his assault rifle has just as much range along with a longer rate of fire and shoots toxic rounds."

I don't need cannon material to have a point. I'm just that good.




Critical simply means serious.

If the two were to face one another, outside the realm of vg mechanics, luck has nothing to do with it (doesn't even exist). Percentages do though.

If I aim at you with a shot gun and/or assault rifle, I'm merely going to aim in your general direction. The a.o.e. will make its mark and any effect added will provide the efficiency to immobilize.

And what? You think a Specter can't hit MC?




How is that?

It was never stated what kind of modifications are or are not allowed. You can call it prep if you'd like. Talking about the best armaments that either character can bring to the table isn't foul play.

Kay, no mods for Shepherd. Taking away the very thing that makes the weapons more advanced, btw.

If Shepherd had vanilla weapons, the sniper, pistol and assault rifle vs Chiefs assault rifle and energy sword (as stated by the thread starter), the advantage still goes to Shepherd. Chiefs rifle has limited range, Shepherd's has greater range and he has two more ranged weapons.

Close combat, no Vangaurd abilities, Chief makes short work of Shepherd thanks to the sword.

And that's if I throw you a bone. Mods on, Shepherd has distinct advantages. Close combat would still go in Chiefs favor, but for a majority, he's not going to be able to close the gap for that to be a factor.




I didn't suggest that Shepherd would attempt any "headshots". A shotgun or assault rifle has a wide a.o.e. and solid range. Point and click hardware. A moderate aim would be all that is necessary, which isn't the case for a skilled elite soldier like Shepherd.

Bringing up headshots and ballistics was to explain the durability of Chief's tech vs the durability of Shepherd's tech, nothing more.

And I thought we were just discussing the tech, since we both know Shepherd wins this when you consider skills and abilities.




Been over this. I provided what was available.


And Chief can be killed in that fashion. Trust me. I've played Halo.




I can agree with that. I brought that up because we were discussing comparisons. That being, MC dies when hit with a ballistic and/or grenade and Shepherd does not (though the concussive force probably should). Then again, the shields/barriers may be the explanation for that. Dunno.

MC was in a pod in that fall. We don't know exactly how far he fell outside of it.

But, if you want to talk double standards. Okay, MC can die from said ballistics, but survive a fall several thousand feet up. Medical science would disagree.


Anyways, I've made my point. Don't see it? Oh well. I'll live.

Too tired to debate anymore. G-nite.

alright. it seems that we're running in place here. for the sake of both of our time do you want to just agree to disagree?

geshien
Originally posted by WO Polaski
alright. it seems that we're running in place here. for the sake of both of our time do you want to just agree to disagree?

thumb up

Uriel005
I don't know about this one it would depend on Shepard's TK level. But even then it's hard to stop a man who weighs over half a ton charging at 35 mph by the way that number is from the fall of reach book. Physically the chief could completely crush Shepard no matter what skills shepard gets. It would come down to whether or not the Chief could close the distance and even at a range the Chief is raised on war. His basic training as a small child involved killing people to ensure there would be no problems in the field. He is a trained killing machine through and through. Shepard is probably about as good as a person is able to be without enhancements.

Overall I have to give this one to the chief. The Mjolnir armor and his skills and strength just give him too much of an advantage. Also his shields regenerate much faster than Shepards and can withstand plasma bolts. Any telekinesis damage he takes would be minimal at best.

The only real way I see Shepard winning is a Tk followed by a Sniper Round to the face while the chief is still disoriented from meeting a telekinetic human.

KingD19
Well, Shepard could just use the explosive round you get near the end of the game. It overheats your gun if you don't have the right mods, but the damage potential is at least equal to or greater than the Rocket Launcher, which kills instantly with a direct hit, or a close splash hit. And since it has higher speeds than a regular bullet, MC would have a hard time dodging it.

Shepard wins at the end of the day. And somebody said something about Shepard's tech not being higher, it obviously is, since they use Mass Accelerator tech, and it was stated in game that one of the rounds used for the pistol could be shot with force equal to a nuke.

And Shepard's TK is pretty cool, and considering how it works, Chief's weight really doesn't factor in. His TK push is just a huge blast of kinetic force, and the lift doesn't account for weight, it negates gravity around the target, so it doesn't matter if Chief is 3.5 tons or 400, he'll still float around helpless while Shepard is tagging him from the ground.

geshien
Originally posted by KingD19
Well, Shepard could just use the explosive round you get near the end of the game. It overheats your gun if you don't have the right mods, but the damage potential is at least equal to or greater than the Rocket Launcher, which kills instantly with a direct hit, or a close splash hit. And since it has higher speeds than a regular bullet, MC would have a hard time dodging it.

Shepard wins at the end of the day. And somebody said something about Shepard's tech not being higher, it obviously is, since they use Mass Accelerator tech, and it was stated in game that one of the rounds used for the pistol could be shot with force equal to a nuke.

And Shepard's TK is pretty cool, and considering how it works, Chief's weight really doesn't factor in. His TK push is just a huge blast of kinetic force, and the lift doesn't account for weight, it negates gravity around the target, so it doesn't matter if Chief is 3.5 tons or 400, he'll still float around helpless while Shepard is tagging him from the ground.


thumb up

SpadeKing
Originally posted by geshien
thumb up

I wouldn't even put Shepard on level with canon Chief, he would get shots off at his head before shepard can even think.

if its just out of pure gameplay, chief is more than likely gonna get tossed by shepard's powers plain & simple

NemeBro
Originally posted by SpadeKing
I wouldn't even put Shepard on level with canon Chief, he would get shots off at his head before shepard can even think. Lol.

Nephthys
Shepard has force fields. no expression

WO Polaski
Originally posted by NemeBro
Lol.
well he has the speed to do it. just not the guns.

WO Polaski
after reading contact: harvest its come to my attention that there is a sniper rifle 10+ years older than the one in halo 1 that fires its inch long bullet at a speed of 15 thousand meters per second which is 43 times the speed of sound. that is certainly superior technology to any weaponry shown in mass effect no? i dont think their ships even move that fast outside of their version of light speed.

that doesnt have any actual bearing on this fight as the chief doesnt have access to that weapon but i feel its an important thing to mention when comparing their technolgoy. theres no reason to assume that mass effect technology is superior. they use magnetic fields to increase their speeds which means that theyre just using rail guns. the unsc uses the same technology on their ships. MAC (magnetic accelerator cannon) guns are nothing more then giant rail-guns that take a giant chunk of tungsten steel and accelerate it to a massive speed using electromagnetic energy.

WO Polaski
holy shit. the super MAC gun fires a 6000 (thousand) pound chunk of tungsten steel at 120 MILLION meters per second, which is almost half the speed of light. @.@

geshien
ME weapons use mass acceleration tech. This allows rounds to have the potential to be shot at near light speeds.

Using Element Zero (technology obtained by the Protheans) allowed engineers to manipulate the mass effect field, by using the discharge (dark energy) from exposing Element Zero to an electrical current, thus either lowering or raising the mass of any object passed through it. This process enabled them to use FTL speeds.

For their hand held weapons, the gear has a recoil equal to their impact energy. This is mitigated somewhat by the mass effect fields that rounds are suspended within, but weapon recoil is still the prime limiting factor on slug velocity. Not FTL, but near light speeds are obtainable.

Like KingD19 stated earlier, a mere paint chip can be accelerated to produce the force of a nuclear weapon.

The tech that ME has is still more advanced. Though, they only need to do their job. If a sniper rifle in Halo can propel a round at that kind of velocity, then the difference won't be noticeable.

NemeBro
Originally posted by WO Polaski
well he has the speed to do it. just not the guns. No he doesn't.

He said he is fast enough to do this before Shepard can THINK.

The MAC guns are the ones from Mass Effect right?

Yeah, that is pretty fvcking insane. no expression

geshien
Originally posted by NemeBro
The MAC guns are the ones from Mass Effect right?

Yeah, that is pretty fvcking insane. no expression

No, they're from Halo.

They're cannons on warships.

NemeBro
Ohz.

The average cannon on a Dreadnaught in ME is capable of accelerating one 20 kg. slug to a velocity of 4025 km/s (1.3% of light speed) every two seconds. Each slug has the kinetic energy of 38 kilotons of TNT, three times the energy released by the fission weapon that destroyed Hiroshima.

That's not bad.

WO Polaski
Originally posted by geshien
ME weapons use mass acceleration tech. This allows rounds to have the potential to be shot at near light speeds.

Using Element Zero (technology obtained by the Protheans) allowed engineers to manipulate the mass effect field, by using the discharge (dark energy) from exposing Element Zero to an electrical current, thus either lowering or raising the mass of any object passed through it. This process enabled them to use FTL speeds.

For their hand held weapons, the gear has a recoil equal to their impact energy. This is mitigated somewhat by the mass effect fields that rounds are suspended within, but weapon recoil is still the prime limiting factor on slug velocity. Not FTL, but near light speeds are obtainable.

I've already read this article; in fact I went to Mass Effect's wikia before I re-read Contact Harvest. That's where I basically got the info for this:



they'res a keyword in that paragraph that you have to keep in consideration when discussing mass effect's weapons: potential. Notice it in the second sentence.



This is the exact quote from Wiki:



do you know what that means? it means it has the potential to move at that speed and be that powerful. but thats nothing special. we as in earth in real life already have weapons that have the potential to move at lightspeed and cause that much damage at such a small size. having the potential to do something and actually doing it are two different things, and that is the difference between more advanced and less advanced. lets compare what mass effect has actually done and what they can actually already do with their tech at their current level with halo's. this is what dark-jaxx has posted:



okay, nice. this is the specs for a MAC round:



one shot has that effect.

so lets forget about "potential" and "what they could possibly do with enough speed and time" and lets focus on what the two forces would be bringing into a fight if it was tomorrow. what weaponry does anything in mass effect have that can compare to that?

NemeBro
Originally posted by WO Polaski
do you know what that means? it means it has the potential to move at that speed and be that powerful. but thats nothing special. we as in earth in real life already have weapons that have the potential to move at lightspeed and cause that much damage at such a small size. having the potential to do something and actually doing it are two different things, and that is the difference between more advanced and less advanced. lets compare what mass effect has actually done and what they can actually already do with their tech at their current level with halo's. this is what dark-jaxx has posted: Indeed, I would like to point out it is the weapon recoil that is the limiting factor in slug velocity.

But I am still inclined to say Mass Effect tech wins because Mass Effect is a much better game.

geshien
Originally posted by WO Polaski
so lets forget about "potential" and "what they could possibly do with enough speed and time" and lets focus on what the two forces would be bringing into a fight if it was tomorrow. what weaponry does anything in mass effect have that can compare to that?

You're talking about a weapon on the ODP. So you're talking about one station on the field.

Also the rate of fire that the MAC's on the average warship takes a toll on the ship it's fired from and a considerable amount of time to reload.

It takes 2 seconds between shots on a standard ME ship.

Plus, there's the GUARDIAN weapons system that can counter incoming ballistics.

WO Polaski
id disagree about it being better but mass effect is an awesome game nonetheless. its the only rpg i can really stand.

NemeBro
Originally posted by WO Polaski
id disagree about it being better but mass effect is an awesome game nonetheless. its the only rpg i can really stand. If you think Halo is better than Mass Effect, you're wrong. estahuh

WO Polaski
Originally posted by geshien
You're talking about a weapon on the ODP. So you're talking about one station on the field.

its a weapon nonetheless that they possess. erm

and they oeprate in clusters of 2-5, so at minmum there'd be 2-5 of them.



5 seconds? thats not considerable.



it takes three seconds less time. one shot from a super mac gun is over five-thousand times stronger then that of a standard ME ship's cannon.




and you think it can even react fast enough to hit an object moving at 40% the speed of light based on... what?

geshien
Originally posted by WO Polaski
id disagree about it being better but mass effect is an awesome game nonetheless. its the only rpg i can really stand.

Really?

The only one?

I can tell you're a sci-fi geek. You don't like the Fallout series?

NemeBro
Originally posted by WO Polaski
it takes three seconds less time. one shot from a super mac gun is over a five-thousand times stronger then that of a standard ME ship's cannon. Dreadnoughts are not standard ME ships.

There are only 80 of them controlled by the Council.

There are only 81 in all of the ME verse if you include Sovereign(although he is far above any other Dreadnought).

Although if all the the Reapers are like Sovereign, there will be many more.

geshien
Originally posted by NemeBro
Dreadnoughts are not standard ME ships.

There are only 80 of them controlled by the Council.

There are only 81 in all of the ME verse if you include Sovereign(although he is far above any other Dreadnought).

Although if all the the Reapers are like Sovereign, there will be many more.

Reapers are a different matter.

Sovereign's lasers sheered right through ships. Hell, he bored right through them.

Their tech is suppose to be Godly.

WO Polaski
Originally posted by geshien
Really?

The only one?

I can tell you're a sci-fi geek. You don't like the Fallout series?

i like sci-fi but im real into the military; my favorite games are realistic shooters like call of duty, halo being the only real exception.

ive yet to play fallout 3 but ive heard good things.



u wanna fight about it. mad

NemeBro
Yeah if I remember right one blast from Sovereign destroyed Ascension, the most powerful ship in Citadel airspace.

Not sure what that means firepower-wise, but meh.

NemeBro
Originally posted by WO Polaski
i like sci-fi but im real into the military; my favorite games are realistic shooters like call of duty, halo being the only real exception.

ive yet to play fallout 3 but ive heard good things.



u wanna fight about it. mad You will hate Fallout 3 since as a shooter fan you will despise not being able to kill something in a couple shots with the minigun.



Yes. estahuh

geshien
Originally posted by NemeBro
You will hate Fallout 3 since as a shooter fan you will despise not being able to kill something in a couple shots with the minigun.

I dunno. I liked the VATS system and I enjoyed the gore that the game provided.

Besides, a sniper rifle still works just the same, in or out of the system.


Oh, and there is a story.

NemeBro
Not to mention Liam Neeson kills 25 foot tall Super Mutant Behemoths with a lead pipe.

WO Polaski
he wouldnt be liam neeson if he didnt do stuff like that. hes liam ****ing neeson.

NemeBro
Originally posted by WO Polaski
he wouldnt be liam neeson if he didnt do stuff like that. hes liam ****ing neeson. That's true.

If I have learned one thing in this mortal life, it is not to **** with Qui-Gon Jinn.

WO Polaski
unless you have horns.

NemeBro
Or a tattooed penis.

WO Polaski
wut. @.@

geshien
Only Ewan McGregor can counter tattooed penis.

NemeBro
Originally posted by WO Polaski
wut. @.@ Look at Maul.

You cannot tell me he did not tattoo everything but his penis, and as per t3h Rulez, tattooed penis grants you incredible amounts of manly powa.

Or is that just Maul's skin color? no expression I don't know lol.

geshien
Originally posted by NemeBro
Look at Maul.

You cannot tell me he did not tattoo everything but his penis, and as per t3h Rulez, tattooed penis grants you incredible amounts of manly powa.

Or is that just Maul's skin color? no expression I don't know lol.

It's his skin.

WO Polaski
his skin is red the black is all tatoos.

geshien
Originally posted by WO Polaski
his skin is red the black is all tatoos.

...So his penis is...

NemeBro
Originally posted by WO Polaski
his skin is red the black is all tatoos. Ah, I see.

So red and black penis ey?

WO Polaski
Originally posted by geshien
...So his penis is...


... dont look at me i dunno. confused

NemeBro
Originally posted by WO Polaski
... dont look at me i dunno. confused All this talk of tattooed penis reminds me.

Tell Isaiah I love and miss him. sad

geshien
Just found this...

http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/7/76/DarthMaulGettingHisTatoos.jpg

The cloth keeps it a mystery. Mysterious alien penis, it is.

KingD19
Those tats kept going under the cloth, it's tatted up, believe it. And Shepard takes this, his weaponry, his suit's shields, and his own Biotic shields plus his other biotic abilities wins this for him. Plus he had sex with two blue alien chicks and maybe ashley, I hated Ashley.

WO Polaski
i liked ashley. sad

and yeah actually uh... with their current equipment the chief gets raped utterly. one assault rifle and sword vs. a sniper rifle assault rifle pistol grenades biotics AND full shielding... thats like... really unbalanced because despite the chiefs speed i dont know if he even has enough ammo required to put down shepard's shields. the assault rifle is pretty weak. his only real chance would be to hit shepard with a physical attack like a punch which could concievably kill him in one shot but his biotics will deal with that.

NemeBro
I liked Ashley too. sad

KingD19
It's not that I hated Ashley, she was a babe, and a great teammate, but her attitude until like the final mission got me. And I usually ended up letting Kaiden survive instead of her.

NemeBro
Originally posted by KingD19
It's not that I hated Ashley, she was a babe, and a great teammate, but her attitude until like the final mission got me. And I usually ended up letting Kaiden survive instead of her. ...Why Kaiden? The squad-mate with probably the least personality?

The only thing more blasphemous than that is letting Ashley kill Wrex.

geshien
Ashley was headstrong, but to the point where she a *****.

She's alright. I save her more times than Kaiden, only because I usually play a male. Not much dialog with Kaiden when you're a male either, or pie.

Though, personally, I like my blueberry pie. awepedo

KingD19
I don't let Kaiden survive because he's Kaiden, I let him survive because if I let Ashley survive, I'm sure the tension between her and Liara will be intense in 2, and I don't want no late night arguments on my ship. Liara was hawt though, gotta love that blueberry.

And once Ashley killed Wrex without my okay, she just tagged him. However, after I found out how to max my paragon and renagade points so I could use just about any answer, I had no problems.

WO Polaski
am i the only one who let ashley live for non sex related reasons?

i never learned how to use the biotics effectively i used my gun every play through and played as a soldier so letting ashley live was just more logical.

geshien
Originally posted by WO Polaski
am i the only one who let ashley live for non sex related reasons?


Yes.

NemeBro
Originally posted by WO Polaski
am i the only one who let ashley live for non sex related reasons?

i never learned how to use the biotics effectively i used my gun every play through and played as a soldier so letting ashley live was just more logical. I did. no expression

Because Ashley>>>Kaiden. Although I do like Ashley.

I played as a Vanguard first playthrough to get a feel for Biotics, and then as an Adept(who could use t4h shotgun baby!) second, and am pretty good at it I think.

SpadeKing
Originally posted by Nephthys
Shepard has force fields. no expression

those force fields didn't do me much justice when I accidently hopped out of the car in front of a turret no expression

KingD19
Correct me if I'm wrong, but last time I checked, Chief's armor and shields give out a lot faster than Shepards. Since you know I accidentally hopped out of a warthog in front of a turret. I believe the level was Sandtrap, or maybe Valhalla.

SpadeKing
Chief's suit can easily bounce of bullets anyway & gameplay mechanics any shots at the head can drop his shields in seconds.

I really haven't seen shepard do any amazing feats but then again I only rented the game never finished it cause i was too busy and he basically took 20 min jogging to the next part of the mission.

KingD19
Considering this is the game forum, we go by what was done in the game. In the game, Chief isn't a god, his shields go down faster then Shepard's, Shepard has better weaponry, barring the Spartan Laser, Energy Sword, and Gravity Hammer of course. He has better shields, and his biotic powers are a stomp for him.

Now if you want to argue book feats, we can go there, I haven't read the 2nd and 3rd Mass Effect books, but if Shepard's in them, we can use him.

WO Polaski
master chief is superior in every way to Shepard with the book and the book is as canon as the games are unless theres a contradiction between the two so lets drop the "game chief" and "book chief" concept theyre the same person por favor.

shepard because he has biotics and because the weapons that are given to the chief in this match, an assault rifle and a sword, arent designed to destroy shields... the assault rifle is the weakest anti-shield weapon in its OWN universe.

if you were to give the chief better equipment int his thread because as i stated its imbalanced, he could win even against shepards biotics. he has the tech to do it but its not given to him in this fight.

KingD19
Actually, they're not the same, his in game likeness isn't shown to be anywhere as fast as the book, etc... And the only weapon he has that can take out Shepards shield is the Spartan Laser. And what does he have to protect him against biotics.

SpadeKing
Originally posted by KingD19
Considering this is the game forum, we go by what was done in the game. In the game, Chief isn't a god, his shields go down faster then Shepard's, Shepard has better weaponry, barring the Spartan Laser, Energy Sword, and Gravity Hammer of course. He has better shields, and his biotic powers are a stomp for him.

Now if you want to argue book feats, we can go there, I haven't read the 2nd and 3rd Mass Effect books, but if Shepard's in them, we can use him.

also considering this forum goes on whats canon to the game series & the books were labelled as canon to the series. so unless stated otherwise by the guy who made this, I'm sticking to chief.

Also unless shepard has some feats that surpass the spartans in his books & is considered canon to the series I could probably change my mind.

Hewhoknowsall
Commander Shepard is strong, but is he the "super soldier" that MC is?

It all depends however on what class Shepard is and what weapons he has...and does he get the mako?

KingD19
Considering he's a Vanguard, he can wear pretty decent armor, use high grade weapons, and use powerful Biotics. He's not genetically and cybernetically enhanced, but he is still a super soldier, after all, he is a Spectre.

geshien
Originally posted by SpadeKing
also considering this forum goes on whats canon to the game series & the books were labelled as canon to the series. so unless stated otherwise by the guy who made this, I'm sticking to chief.

Also unless shepard has some feats that surpass the spartans in his books & is considered canon to the series I could probably change my mind.

Given the stipulations of this fight, you're still going with Chief?

Shepherd, as a Vanguard, is able to use biotics. Chief is screwed.

SpadeKing
Originally posted by geshien
Given the stipulations of this fight, you're still going with Chief?

Shepherd, as a Vanguard, is able to use biotics. Chief is screwed.

after seeing your profile pic and sig I'm not even gonna bother an arguement with you ermm

NemeBro
Originally posted by SpadeKing
after seeing your profile pic and sig I'm not even gonna bother an arguement with you ermm Now THAT would be an ad hominem fallacy.

SpadeKing
Originally posted by NemeBro
Now THAT would be an ad hominem fallacy.

its like arguing kain against BT or link against cyner & superluigi (he would put his money on link against anyone)

NemeBro
Geshien has brought up many valid points.

From what your post conveyed, it is like you are basing your decision only because he is a fan of Shepard.

SpadeKing
he just said he was a vanguard thats not many no expression

king brought up more points than that but, I can't exactly remember vanguard class other than apparently he had biotics, & I just haven't seen or heard anything that personally shepard has shown impressive to me other than being a human spectre which sounds more like star wars except you use high tech guns instead of lightsabers.

NemeBro
Did you miss Geshien's many other posts?

SpadeKing
uuummmm.... more than likely yes? big grin

NemeBro
Then begone commoner.

Incendax
After extensive investigation of video and literary media, I would say victory depends on what class Shepard was.

Adept, Vanguard, and Sentinel would beat Chief. He really has poor defenses against psychic powers.

Chief would beat Soldier, Infiltrator, and Engineer. He is physically and technologically more dangerous.

So that pretty much brings it down to an even 50/50 chance.

FinalAnswer
Shepard took a blast from Harbinger and survived. Nothing Chief has can bring Shepard down.

XanatosForever
Was that Harbinger? I thought it was just some random Reaper.

FinalAnswer
Originally posted by XanatosForever
Was that Harbinger? I thought it was just some random Reaper.

At the end, yeah. You can tell because only Harbinger has those glowing yellow eyes

XanatosForever
Oh snap, you're right! That didn't hit me until just now...laughing

I am Vegeta
Chief falls out of space and lands on Shepard for the win.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.