It just doesn't matter if it survived the glassing beam. It was mission-killed by a standard piece of Covenant tech, and that's all that really matters. The Infinity is not ubiquitous, but the means to kill it are ubiquitous throughout Covenant space. The Infinity was turned into a salvage operation and given its size and the extent of the damage done to it, would have spent months in drydock undergoing repairs and the repair cost would have been extortionate due to all that experimental tech. Meanwhile the losses on the Covenant side was a single defense platform likely to be only a fraction of the cost for them to replace. This goes back to an old debate about the cost-effectiveness of battleships in the modern era; it costs a lot to build and maintain one, but it doesn't cost much to destroy or mission-kill one. Just one torpedo can do the job.Lambsenglish wrote:You think I’m overrating the significance of Infinity because you say it relies on the same support mechanisms as any other ship, is expensive, and is still susceptible to Sangheili weaponry. I disagree. I’m saying the Infinity is sufficiently advanced (tech, navigation, weaponry, manufacturing) that the advanced costs are delivered with a non-linear relationship to impact, making it more efficient at the price - not a drain, but a bonus, money better spent.
e.g. I’m telling you it’s significant that Infinity was damaged by but survived multiple hits from a glassing beam, because no other human PLANET has survived this, let alone any other ship. To ignore the significance of this advance in tech, and the difference it would have made to Human-Sangheili conflict, seems odd.
If it were present during the Human-Covenant war, Infinity wouldn't survive the first fleet engagement that involved hundreds of Covenant vessels. It would not be able to lead a successful attack against a Covenant world that had orbital defenses using those platforms above. It's not even outstanding either that it survived being hit by one of those platforms; the Pillar of Autumn piloted by a Smart-AI was able to go toe-to-toe with a Covenant ship carrying one of these weapons. Unlike the PoA however the Infinity is 3km longer and significantly more massive, and wouldn't be capable of pulling off the same kinds of maneuvers the PoA pulled off.
In the post-Halo 3 era it's not likely to face such numbers of Covenant ships or that level of preparedness, but it certainly can't do much in the way of offensive operations against Covenant strongholds. The UNSC is still just as toothless as it's always been in that regard. So we see Infinity running defensive operations in UNSC space, which any other battle-group could do given the rag-tag nature of most of these remnant factions, or hitting targets like the Kig-Yar pirate base seen in Escalation which isn't exactly a hard target. The only time I can remember the Infinity doing something that I don't think any other UNSC ship could do, other than merely being mission-killed by a glassing beam was when it went to Sanghelios to help the Arbiter. It wasn't blown out of the sky by Sanghelios' defenses, I can only guess that's due to the lack of central control of said defenses following the collapse of the Covenant on a world that is very tribal and hence for which control of these stations would be a very problematic issue.
I just haven't seen Infinity do anything that a more conventional UNSC battle-group couldn't do, which given the Infinity's price tag is a real problem. I also see it as being very vulnerable to being mission-killed by a Covenant force that takes itself seriously and isn't just a bunch of pirates or Covenant leftovers trying to fight two wars at once (And Covenant space is huge; ONI has no idea what polities are potentially lurking out there after the fall of High Charity). Given that the Infinity is an exceptional ship tech wise and logistics wise, it will require exceptional logistical support. So if a Covenant faction more prepared than Jul's faction became a problem, a faction more like the 2558 Swords of Sanghelios, the Infinity woudl be hit hardest by the loss of colonies and sources of components required to keep it sailing (I'm guessing that following the near loss of Earth and Mars that quite a lot of this logistical support comes from outside the Sol system, and is therefore quite vulnerable).
It's just not a suitable fallback for if ONI's mucking about in Sanghelios' political affairs backfires.
They can obviously afford it, but again I question the effectiveness of spending so much on too many of these soldiers when these wars get decided by naval engagements and not how many super-soldiers one has.Quote:Also yes Mjolnir was super expensive, but now that there’s an army of Spartan-IVs running amok in the stuff surely you can see that that obviously shows the UNSC can afford it, because, simply, it exists. So again it would seem that efficiency gains mean the tech must be cheaper to produce and maintain - basic manufacturing economies of scale.
This doesn't apply to the Spartan-IIs, which were made to assassinate human insurgents - and with whom it is impossible to draw a straight line between them and humanity surviving the Covenant with all the other assisting factors that helped to unravel the Covenant.
Russia, Ukraine and the states of the former Yugoslavia are not part of the EU nor have ever been a pat of it's predecessor organizations. As for Germany, the Treaty of Versailles also placed restrictions on the German military which in the end turned out to be ineffective. That alone isn't enough to account for the peace. The economies of the European countries are so heavily integrated now that they cannot fight a war. Most of them don't even have their own currency anymore, don't have a central bank to control inflation and the value of their own currency, and have huge amounts of debt that is held by the banks of other euro-zone countries. If all that collapsed due to someone wanting a war, a war would suddenly become the least of everyone's problems.Quote:You say I’m viewing species relations as zero sum, I’m telling you I’m not. I’m pretty clear on this, so why you’re not, I’m not sure. I’m perfectly aware the history of Europe, but you seem to missing out the details inconvenient to your argument:
This peaceful trade-driven bliss you’re taking about doesn’t exist mate. Trade keeps things smooth but people are people. It’s not an oversimplification to point out that thousands of years of human history outweighs the last 50 - it’s naive to think otherwise.
- Germany STILL has self-imposed military restrictions due to its history
- Russia just annexed Crimea and has lit up both Ukraine and Georgia in the last decade
- The Yugoslav wars went on for 10 years starting in the 90s
I'm questioning if human-Sangheili conflict is a meaningful term that should be used post-Halo 3. The Human-Covenant war was a religiously motivated war, not a statement about race relations or the feasibility of viewing species as contiguous political units.Quote:And this whole thread is about Human-Sangheili conflict, so apologies but saying that nothing you’ve said has anything to do with the Human-Covenant war just makes no sense.
The War has no bearing on what the Carver Finding's have to say about how humanity is not politically contiguous, and has nothing to say about how ex-Covenant space is not politically contiguous either.
In short, the human-Covenant war is simply not relevant.