3 replies to this topic

[spartan-G257]

Well other than models and the different types of ratios between the covenant and UNSC.
And the fact that SotP has the forerunners (eventually)

One I guess is strategy (Sins of the Prophets)

And the other is Tactics (Halo HomeFront)

Am I correct in this.

And we all know that the UNSC was better at the tactical battles than the covenant. While the covenant were better at strategic battles (the covenant barely used any tactics and preferred to just use strength of arms (could very well be wrong right there).

Should this reflect on the mods where it is slightly harder to play the UNSC in SotP but slightly easier in HHF and the opposite for the covenant.

This would also reflect the AI's descisions in the game.

[CanadaMan7]

You can't just forget about the total Covenant superiority in either vision of the universe.

 

And we all know that the UNSC was better at the tactical battles than the covenant.

 

Humans were effective in some celebrated tactical engagements, but definitely not all or the majority of them. The Halo story celebrates great human minds, but it fails to mention the aptitude on the side of Covenant admirals for the most part. They're not an easy opponent.

[Zero]

I think the differences between mods is that one is a 4x and the other is an old school RTS.

[Battle8111]

I also think the difference is that Sins of the Prophets is the more grand strategy, as its more more economy and territory focused. 

 

You could in some ways say the same about Homefront, but Homefront as more dynamic ship combat and tactics. Its more in-depth. 

 

I honestly like Homefront more for that element, but SoTp is not bad, it actually makes regular Sins of a Solar Empire much better, making it less of a slugging match and more of a intense, epic battle, that are short, but decisive.