I have to be honest, I don't find any of them very appealing.
Sniper Rifle - nothing more than a large bore rifle known today as an anti-material rifle, in use by most major military powers. The most well known is likely the M82.
Battle Rifle - Nothing more than a bullpup rifle. Ammunition and mechanical operation might be a bit better (there isn't a lot to improve on there given that a modern assault rifle can handily achieve sub 1 MOA groupings with good quality ammunition), but that's hardly a reason to want one.
Handgun - There are numerious handguns on the market today that are of exeedingly high quality and lethality. There is no attribute to the halo handgun that makes me think it is superior in any way to any of a number of full sized carry handguns.
SMG - Nothing more than a bullet hose, and we have plenty of those around already. The most notable is the MAC-10 with a rate of fire of nearly 1,100 rounds a minute. Such weapons are not designed for outright combat but rather supression fire. That doesn't make them non lethal, it simply means that reliable high rates of fire, large magazine sizes and the ability to conceal the weapon were more important. Conversely, there are other, larger SMG's that appear to be of better quality in terms of accuracy, such as the fabled MP-5.
Rocket Launcher - The first weapon in the list that has anything notable about it. It essentailly functions in the same fashion as a modern disposable anti-tank weapon but it gets two shots out of the deal. The rockets are unguided and clearly are not terribly effective at piercing armor. Worse still, the rockets travel disconcertingly slow meaning trying to hit a moving target would be fantastically difficult. The fact that you get two shots out of the launcher before needing to reload is perhaps the weapon's only perk, but this is handily counterbalanced by it's tremendous bulk, which would force it to be carried as the primary and perhaps only weapon of a modern non-super soldier.
Covenant Weapons - these all operate on a principle that mankind in the far future has been unable to replicate. A weapon isn't very useful if I have no hope of acquiring more ammunition for it when I exhaust my current supply.
Energy Sword - given that nobody wears armor that is designed to deflect a sword these days (ballistic plates would serve somewhat well), the energy sword is rendered more or less irrelevent because it's key advantage over a normal sword is it's ability to bypass armor.
Were I forced to choose, I would chose the anti-material rifle. I don't have any use for the thing but at least I could find something to do with it (even if that something is take up extreme long distance marksmanship)
Sniper Rifle - nothing more than a large bore rifle known today as an anti-material rifle, in use by most major military powers. The most well known is likely the M82.
Battle Rifle - Nothing more than a bullpup rifle. Ammunition and mechanical operation might be a bit better (there isn't a lot to improve on there given that a modern assault rifle can handily achieve sub 1 MOA groupings with good quality ammunition), but that's hardly a reason to want one.
Handgun - There are numerious handguns on the market today that are of exeedingly high quality and lethality. There is no attribute to the halo handgun that makes me think it is superior in any way to any of a number of full sized carry handguns.
SMG - Nothing more than a bullet hose, and we have plenty of those around already. The most notable is the MAC-10 with a rate of fire of nearly 1,100 rounds a minute. Such weapons are not designed for outright combat but rather supression fire. That doesn't make them non lethal, it simply means that reliable high rates of fire, large magazine sizes and the ability to conceal the weapon were more important. Conversely, there are other, larger SMG's that appear to be of better quality in terms of accuracy, such as the fabled MP-5.
Rocket Launcher - The first weapon in the list that has anything notable about it. It essentailly functions in the same fashion as a modern disposable anti-tank weapon but it gets two shots out of the deal. The rockets are unguided and clearly are not terribly effective at piercing armor. Worse still, the rockets travel disconcertingly slow meaning trying to hit a moving target would be fantastically difficult. The fact that you get two shots out of the launcher before needing to reload is perhaps the weapon's only perk, but this is handily counterbalanced by it's tremendous bulk, which would force it to be carried as the primary and perhaps only weapon of a modern non-super soldier.
Covenant Weapons - these all operate on a principle that mankind in the far future has been unable to replicate. A weapon isn't very useful if I have no hope of acquiring more ammunition for it when I exhaust my current supply.
Energy Sword - given that nobody wears armor that is designed to deflect a sword these days (ballistic plates would serve somewhat well), the energy sword is rendered more or less irrelevent because it's key advantage over a normal sword is it's ability to bypass armor.
Were I forced to choose, I would chose the anti-material rifle. I don't have any use for the thing but at least I could find something to do with it (even if that something is take up extreme long distance marksmanship)
