Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Marine- Bolt gun, Bolt pistol, Power armor, jet-pack, two grenades.
Chief- pistol, battle-rifle, MKVII armor, two grenades.
No plot-armor.
The terrain is an abandoned town.

One bolt takes out his shields and the second bolt blows up his organs.

Chief's BR55 bounces off the Ultramarine's armor. It's a stubber so... S: 2 AP: -?

Can his rifle even pierce power armour?

 welshhoppo wrote:
Can his rifle even pierce power armour?

If he gets a very lucky shot, yes. It's worse than a Lasgun to give you a frame of reference.

Yeah, sorry, this is a roflstomp.

Neither can ever die. Universe ends

May as well divide by zero.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I voted the Ultramarine..

Lol, what I find funny is I posted this exact same thread awhile ago on a Halo forum and it was like 226 votes to Chief and like 94 to the marines. Except in that thread it was Lysander and 3 Veteran Imperial fist marines....

Take into consideration some of thetraining involved as well. While the MC may not have a technological edge with equipment, I'd say they're roughly on the same terms with actual physical capabilities. In terms of training and tactics, the advantage overwhelmingly goes to Master Chief. SM are selected from hopefuls in their early teens in most cases and then augmented from there. The Spartan program started with kids who were already the genetic cream of the crop, kidnapped them at the age of 5-6 and started training them from there. Its not going to be a straight fight where the two stand shooting at each other until their armor fails. Its going to be guerrilla and unorthodox tactics. Also the Mk V armor could canonically withstand a near supersonic impact from a mile high fall. Not saying every one made it out fine, but the armor could largely survive the impact, just not the spartan inside. Pretty sure it might survive more than you expect. Of course he could just put a sniper round through a lens at half a mile away, though that wasn't part of the criteria you set out

 DragonOfAsh wrote:
Take into consideration some of thetraining involved as well. While the MC may not have a technological edge with equipment, I'd say they're roughly on the same terms with actual physical capabilities. In terms of training and tactics, the advantage overwhelmingly goes to Master Chief. SM are selected from hopefuls in their early teens in most cases and then augmented from there. The Spartan program started with kids who were already the genetic cream of the crop, kidnapped them at the age of 5-6 and started training them from there. Its not going to be a straight fight where the two stand shooting at each other until their armor fails. Its going to be guerrilla and unorthodox tactics. Also the Mk V armor could canonically withstand a near supersonic impact from a mile high fall. Not saying every one made it out fine, but the armor could largely survive the impact, just not the spartan inside. Pretty sure it might survive more than you expect. Of course he could just put a sniper round through a lens at half a mile away, though that wasn't part of the criteria you set out

Space Marines are trained from a young age as well. In addition, the implants Space Marines receive make them far more durable than a Spartan even without armor. Their ribcage is bullet proof against the BR55's rounds.

While Spartan armor could withstand such falls it isn't as good as Space Marine power armor at stopping bullets. A stubber could penetrate Spartan armor with not that much effort. A Bolter would easily make short work of the Mk. VI.

While Master Chief would be able to engage a Marine in a guerrila war... nothing he would throw at the marine would hurt him. He would also tire out much sooner than the marine would which would reduce the amount of time Master Chief would have to take town the marine. You also have to account that the marine would probably have a lot of experience even compared to Master Chief so he may or may not anticipate the chief's tactics.

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 DragonOfAsh wrote:
Take into consideration some of thetraining involved as well. While the MC may not have a technological edge with equipment, I'd say they're roughly on the same terms with actual physical capabilities. In terms of training and tactics, the advantage overwhelmingly goes to Master Chief. SM are selected from hopefuls in their early teens in most cases and then augmented from there. The Spartan program started with kids who were already the genetic cream of the crop, kidnapped them at the age of 5-6 and started training them from there. Its not going to be a straight fight where the two stand shooting at each other until their armor fails. Its going to be guerrilla and unorthodox tactics. Also the Mk V armor could canonically withstand a near supersonic impact from a mile high fall. Not saying every one made it out fine, but the armor could largely survive the impact, just not the spartan inside. Pretty sure it might survive more than you expect. Of course he could just put a sniper round through a lens at half a mile away, though that wasn't part of the criteria you set out

Space Marines are trained from a young age as well. In addition, the implants Space Marines receive make them far more durable than a Spartan even without armor. Their ribcage is bullet proof against the BR55's rounds.

While Spartan armor could withstand such falls it isn't as good as Space Marine power armor at stopping bullets. A stubber could penetrate Spartan armor with not that much effort. A Bolter would easily make short work of the Mk. VI.

While Master Chief would be able to engage a Marine in a guerrila war... nothing he would throw at the marine would hurt him. He would also tire out much sooner than the marine would which would reduce the amount of time Master Chief would have to take town the marine. You also have to account that the marine would probably have a lot of experience even compared to Master Chief so he may or may not anticipate the chief's tactics.

Pretty much this. I mean space marines live for what? Hundreds of years? They also have back up organs. Chief would be hardpressed to win against a space marine. He'd have to use a spartan laser, maybe a scorpion tank, and some luck to maybe kill a space marine. Now how about if he was equipped with some of the covenants plasma weapons?

There are two problems with this thread:
One. People are goimg to argue for whichever character they like the most, regardless of which is actually stronger.
Two. There's no set power level or strength marked down for either soldier.
For example: On the tabletop, an Ork Shoota is an unreliable weapon that fires hot slugs of lead at high speeds. Comparable to a high-caliber anti-armor round. It is A. As powerful as a Boltgun except at armor penetration and B. Takes, on average, 6 hits to kill a Space Marine or 2 hits to kill an Ork.

In the books, though, a Space Marine will have Shoota pellets bouncing off of him without causing any significant damage. Lucky shots will slow him down, but not kill him. Meanwhile, his Boltgun will kill an Ork every time it fires, mowing down enemies like butter.

Want Master Chief to win? Use a tabletop marine. Want a Space Marine to win? Use the book marines.

Need stats!

As much as I love Halo, and as much as Master Chief is a pretty cool guy who kills aliens and doesn't afraid of anything (brownie points to whomever gets the reference), I'm sorry to say that a Space Marine definitely would destroy him without much sweat.

This is what I'd have to rate Master Chief

WS: 4 BS: 4 S: 3 T: 3 W: I I: 3 A: 2 LD: 10 SV: 5+/6++

Wargear:
Shields
BR55HB Battle Rifle
M6G Magnum
Combat Knife
UNSC Grenade

BR55HB Battle Rifle:
S: 2 AP: - 24" Rapid Fire

M6G Magnum:
S: 2 AP- 12" Pistol

UNSC Grenade:
S: 2 AP: -

Above stats...

I think Master Chief is in trouble.

Mjolnir armor is relatively fragile on the sci-fi scale in some areas, and ridiculously strong in others. Unfortunately, resistance to weapons fire isn't one of those. It can survive reentry from orbit while in armor lock, but it can't take a direct hit with a Gravity Hammer.

The shields, which are the only real protection it offers, go down to any major direct hits. They just really provide a little protection while the Spartan relocates between cover.

Lastly, the physical enhancements of the Spartan don't compare to Astartes modification. A Spartan has, compared to a Space Marine, minor bone reinforcement, neural enhancement(which requires the armor to function), and slightly better than human regenerative abilities.

A marine has

1) completely upgraded skeleton, including a ribcage that forms a completely enclosed protective shield for vital organs

2) Nearly instantaneous blood clotting(Biofoam has nothing on this)

3) Enhanced night vision, hearing, and sense of smell

4) Multiple redundant organs, including a 3rd lung and 2nd heart. This is huge, because it means wounds that would otherwise kill a marine may do nothing at all.

5) Improved blood cells that increase the oxygen carrying capacity of the blood.

6) Multiple redundant organs that filter out toxins from various sources.

7) Ability to breath in water, or any other liquid with dissolved oxygen.

8) Natural stasis capabilities without requiring outside equipment.


The only possible advantages a Spartan has would be speed and possibly agility(and only while in his undamaged armor)

The majority of the small arms weapons from Halo are barely approaching Bolter levels, most are on par, or sub-par, with Lasguns and Shurikan weaponry. You need to get into heavy weapons till you get things comparable with 40k Plasma technology, with even pistols being able to damage tanks.

The given scenario would likely result in them expending all their ammo before anyone died, and then Chief has only the butt of his pistol. The Marine has his combat knife that every Astartes always carries.

Yeah, but I think those stats are bull.

A Spartan is way stronger than a normal human, probably stronger than an Astartes. I don't recall any instances of Space Marines flipping tanks over on their sides or punching through the front of an armoured vehicle without a power fist. In a fist-fight, I think the Chief would win.

Spartans are also really fast, although marines are too. Very difficult to say who is faster.

Marines do seem to be tougher than Spartans though. Spartans have hardened skeletons, but Marines have those plus a whole bunch of special organs to make them harder to kill. The marine is probably psychologically tougher too; more determined, less prone to fear and doubt, more willing to take extreme action.

There's nothing to suggest that Halo rifles are any less powerful than 40k Autoguns except for game mechanics. Probably nowhere near as good as a bolter, but still a respectable weapon.

The MJOLNIR armour is probably better than Imperial carapace, although maybe not quite as good as the Marine's Armour. The shield makes up the difference though.

Skill is difficult to judge too. The Marine probably has more experience, but John-117 might be more 'talented' - he's a truly exceptional individual who would probably have been a great soldier even if he wasn't given the Spartan enhancements.

Overall, I'd say the Marine wins based on overall toughness and having a better gun. Give the Chief access to some decent Covenant gear though and the balance shifts in his favour.

The Master Chief is pretty much my most favorite videogame character of all time, but he would lose. The problem with this, is one character (Master Chief) is written to be believable, a super soldier who is still human. The other (Space Marine) is written to be the most OP super soldier of all time, of which a freakin squad can take a whole planet. Comparing fluff simply doesn't really work. I mean, I write a super soldier that's twice the size of a marine, and has armor that cannot even be scratched by a Bolter... Of course he would win. I guess I just don't understand comparing fiction like this.

 Perfect Organism wrote:
Yeah, but I think those stats are bull.

A Spartan is way stronger than a normal human, probably stronger than an Astartes. I don't recall any instances of Space Marines flipping tanks over on their sides or punching through the front of an armoured vehicle without a power fist. In a fist-fight, I think the Chief would win.

In the Ultramarine Omnibus, Passinus picks up the back end of what was basically an overloaded semi-truck and gets it out of a hole it was stuck in.

Frankly, the flipping of tanks by Spartans is only a game mechanic so that a flipped vehicle isn't unusable. Plus all of the Halo vehicles except the big tanks are very small and light vehicles a couple burly humans wouldn't have much trouble flipping over. They're built for speed, not durability. Even the Scorpion tank is a horribly designed vehicle. You think 40k vehicles are poorly designed, anyone versed in actual tank design would prefer them over Halo vehicles in a heartbeat.

 Perfect Organism wrote:
Yeah, but I think those stats are bull.

A Spartan is way stronger than a normal human, probably stronger than an Astartes. I don't recall any instances of Space Marines flipping tanks over on their sides or punching through the front of an armoured vehicle without a power fist. In a fist-fight, I think the Chief would win.

Spartans are also really fast, although marines are too. Very difficult to say who is faster.

Marines do seem to be tougher than Spartans though. Spartans have hardened skeletons, but Marines have those plus a whole bunch of special organs to make them harder to kill. The marine is probably psychologically tougher too; more determined, less prone to fear and doubt, more willing to take extreme action.

There's nothing to suggest that Halo rifles are any less powerful than 40k Autoguns except for game mechanics. Probably nowhere near as good as a bolter, but still a respectable weapon.

The MJOLNIR armour is probably better than Imperial carapace, although maybe not quite as good as the Marine's Armour. The shield makes up the difference though.

Skill is difficult to judge too. The Marine probably has more experience, but John-117 might be more 'talented' - he's a truly exceptional individual who would probably have been a great soldier even if he wasn't given the Spartan enhancements.

Overall, I'd say the Marine wins based on overall toughness and having a better gun. Give the Chief access to some decent Covenant gear though and the balance shifts in his favour.

The thing is that Scorpions and Warthogs are badly armored even compared to modern day tanks. A .50 Caliber sniper rifle can do serious damage to a Scorpion. Try using a .50 cal on a Abrams, see where that gets you. I think a Space Marine would have no issue punching through that.

The reason I think a BR55HB is weaker than a Lasgun is mostly because of what the Lasgun can do. A Lasgun can bore holes into people, blow off limbs and punch holes into concrete. A Battle Rifle is pretty much just a modern day gun with a funny looking body and a ammo counter. Modern day and UNSC infantry small arms can't hold a candle to what Lasguns can do. And Lasguns can't even do much to Marines.

And about Covvie plasma tech....

"Against UNSC infantry, the Type-25 Rifle's lethality is considerably greater than its counterpart, the Type-25 Directed Energy Pistol, due to the faster rate of fire, injuries inflicted to the victim are severe third-degree burns, with the wound being cauterized instantly upon impact".

Does this sound familiar to you? Yeah, that's pretty much what the Lasgun does. The Plasma Rifle, a weapon that can chump MJOLINR armor, is about as good as a Lasgun. Think about that for a moment. Note this is from the wiki so it may not be all that reliable but you get the idea. So, we can infer that Spartan armor is vulnerable to even Lasgun fire. That's why I rate it so low.

I voted for marine on this one hand down.

The only way to get better is compete against better opponents and there's no contest in which one fights against tougher, stronger, faster opponents. Covenant just don't stand up to the opponents a marine fights. If Master Chief had to square off against a daemon of any kind he would be sorely out classed, or an Eldar aspect warrior, or even a Tau crisis suit he would be destroyed. Marines frequently encounter and defeat opponents such as these giving them a greatly increased pool of knowledge, experience, and tactics to draw from. Plus it's not just the marines body that's increased but also their mental abilities meaning any trick MC could throw a marine would see coming due to his experience. As for MCs speed he doesn't hold a candle to either Eldar race.

Physically he can't compete on that level either. Between redundant organs, fused and reinforced skeletal structure, and all the other abilities marines have (blood clotting, etc) he would be unable to cause enough damage to do anything before a marine took him apart.

Defence wise a marines armour is made of a material he's never even come across before and is much stronger than anything UNSC can make on that size scale. His bullets would bounce harmlessly off. While a Bolter fires small missiles (ever eaten a grenade on legendary?) In rapid succession, or fires proximity detonated thermite grenades, our any number of other options all of which are designed to take out tougher opponents than MC.

In the topic of training. Let's say MC is 100 years old and still in peak condition (I don't know how old he is so I'm being generous) and he started training at 4 that still only gives him 96 years of experience to draw from and if he spent the first 16 of those training that gives him a laughable 80 years of actual combat experience while a standard tactical marine probably spent more than that just in the scout company earning the right to wear power armour. A marines training would be much more intensive brutal and violent to prepare him for the myriad of opponents and enemies he will see in his lifetime. Plus due to his increased physical stamina and regenerative capabilities he can squeeze in more of this type of training.

Why use brother genericus and not Poppa Smurf if we're going for the most iconic Ultramarine and Spartan?

In any case, the weapons used in Halo would be considered obsolete and ergonomically god awful by today's standards, with the assault rifle firing ridiculously tiny bullets (the difference in weight between a fully loaded assault rifle and an empty one is literally just a few grams) that would need a full clip to kill a normal unarmored human, the Rocket Launcher having much less of a boom than an RPG-7, the energy sword being one of the worst sword designs I have ever seen outside of anime, and Chief is seriously threatened by .303 caliber machine guns, machine guns with a range of less than 30 yards. Which means that they have quite literally next to nothing as far as muzzle velocity goes, ergo meaning Chief's armor could be taken apart with ease by Somali Pirates with Ak-47s.

In addition, as bad as 40k's grasp on tactic's is, Halo's is even worse; with the Covenant having vehicle charges thwarted by literal 18th century style infantry charges, rank systems being determined by kills rather than leadership ability, the covenant employing soldiers who immediately forget everything and charge the guy who downed their shielding, not one example of anyone in the entire setting having any idea of how combined arms warfare works, and employing basic weapons that can be easily dodged even if perfectly aimed by simply running a bit to the side because their projectiles are so damned slow.

The Marine crushes Chief and moves on, complaining about having to be met with an undergunned stormtrooper rather than an actual challenge.

 Kain wrote:
Why use brother genericus and not Poppa Smurf if we're going for the most iconic Ultramarine and Spartan?

In any case, the weapons used in Halo would be considered obsolete and ergonomically god awful by today's standards, with the assault rifle firing ridiculously tiny bullets (the difference in weight between a fully loaded assault rifle and an empty one is literally just a few grams) that would need a full clip to kill a normal unarmored human, the Rocket Launcher having much less of a boom than an RPG-7, the energy sword being one of the worst sword designs I have ever seen outside of anime, and Chief is seriously threatened by .303 caliber machine guns, machine guns with a range of less than 30 yards. Which means that they have quite literally next to nothing as far as muzzle velocity goes, ergo meaning Chief's armor could be taken apart with ease by Somali Pirates with Ak-47s.

In addition, as bad as 40k's grasp on tactic's is, Halo's is even worse; with the Covenant having vehicle charges thwarted by literal 18th century style infantry charges, rank systems being determined by kills rather than leadership ability, the covenant employing soldiers who immediately forget everything and charge the guy who downed their shielding, not one example of anyone in the entire setting having any idea of how combined arms warfare works, and employing basic weapons that can be easily dodged even if perfectly aimed by simply running a bit to the side because their projectiles are so damned slow.

The Marine crushes Chief and moves on, complaining about having to be met with an undergunned stormtrooper rather than an actual challenge.

+1

It's been a while since I saw the Halo setting eviscerated this thoroughly.
What even funnier is that it expects one to take the setting seriously.

I would put the MC's stats as considerably above human, more along the lines of

Ws 4 Bs 5 S 4 T 3 W 1 I 5 A 2 Ld 10 Sv 4+/5++

It's those weapons that let the Chief down, if he had better options he would be much more of a threat. For example if he had an Energy Sword (Let's just assume this counts as a power sword, for arguments sake) and a plasma rifle (not as strong as 40k plasma, about S 4 Ap 4 Assault 2 i'd wager) then it would be a closer fight. Especially in an abandoned city, Ultramarines aren't exactly known to blend in or be stealthy while the master chief is considerably more agile.

Ahh Screw it, someone has already done this work for me. Watch the first 4 minutes of this and it will tell you all you need to know about him, then you can decide who you think wins.

That video was idiotic.

Also, for a soldier who can kill demons and dodge missiles, he seems to have forgotten that he can, you know, dodge grenades.

I know who he is and what he can do.

A spetsnaz squad would kill him with ease with zero casualties and teabag his corpse for good measure.

To be fair, few "supersoldiers" would be able to defeat a prepared Spetsnaz squad.

Marine vs Spartan? Marine, hands down. Faster, stronger, tougher. More experience. Better weapons, better armour.

Marine Vs Chief, though? Sierra-117. He's one of those guys, like Han Solo or James Bond, who just wins. No matter how impossible, how outclassed, he's always got the tool, trick or just sheer luck to get out alive and win the fight.

Assuming the context of a wider battle, with casualties on both sides, it's also reasonable to expect Chief to find a better weapon from a dead guy, and while 40k tech is a little wacky, a plasma or meltagun is still a 'point and click' weapon. Once he's found a weapon, it's a heck of a lot more even.

 Paradigm wrote:
Marine vs Spartan? Marine, hands down. Faster, stronger, tougher. More experience. Better weapons, better armour.

Marine Vs Chief, though? Sierra-117. He's one of those guys, like Han Solo or James Bond, who just wins. No matter how impossible, how outclassed, he's always got the tool, trick or just sheer luck to get out alive and win the fight.

Assuming the context of a wider battle, with casualties on both sides, it's also reasonable to expect Chief to find a better weapon from a dead guy, and while 40k tech is a little wacky, a plasma or meltagun is still a 'point and click' weapon. Once he's found a weapon, it's a heck of a lot more even.

Ah, but then the question is, who has the thickest plot armor?

And this is the problem with 40K vs anything.

Star Wars, Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, etc. Are fairly consistent in what the technology is able to do. Especially since (for the most part) there is a set hierarchy on what trumps what. For example, in the Star Wars movie, Ob-Wan Kenobi says "These are not the Droids you are looking for." If someone wrote a novelization, where Obi-Wan says "These Droids ain't the ones you're looking for" then when we go to analyze, the movie quote is correct.

With 40K, you have lasguns burning holes through human flesh and at the same time bouncing off of paper (exaggeration, I know, but just an example).

Since 40K tech bounces all over and there is no set hierarchy, it is impossible to determine the strengths and weaknesses of 40K tech.