Edited By
Leo Zhang

In a recent discussion, gamers questioned why many original Covenant weapons, despite being labeled as rifles, don't have stocks. This design choice has sparked debate among fans about its implications both in-game and within the lore.
Some argue that developers intended to set Covenant weapons apart from humanity's arsenal. However, this raises critical questions about the practicality of these designs. Are Covenant species too strong to need the stability that stocks provide?
Comments reveal three major themes regarding weapon design:
Recoil Management: Plasma weapons generally possess lighter recoil. Hence, this design could be suitable for Grunts and Jackals who favor agility over stability.
Mobility Over Precision: Covenant tactics often emphasize an abundance of firepower rather than pinpoint accuracy. This suggests that design choices prioritize accessibility and quick action over marksmanship. One fan noted, "Covenant troops engage in high-volume suppressive fire."
Species Adaptability: Smaller Covenant species, like Grunts and Jackals, may struggle with stocks due to their combat roles, which favor speed. As another comment stated, "Elite minors typically avoid stocks due to their sword-heavy culture."
"Designing alien weapons to look alien was key" - Insightful comment.
Fans have shared mixed sentiments about the aesthetics of Covenant weapons. Some appreciate how these weapons embody an alien nature, while others grow bored of rifles that simply mimic human designs. Users noted, "Because Covenant weapons were designed to look alien, they are obviously out of place in human hands."
Interestingly, the physical capacities of Covenant speciesโespecially Grunts and Jackalsโplayed a crucial role in understanding their weapon design. One user pointed out that while Grunts are described as physically weak, they effectively wield heavy guns like Fuel Rod Guns. This indicates that Covenant species are tailored to handle their respective firearms, even in unconventional forms.
โก Plasma weapons are designed for close combat, aiding mobility.
๐ฆด Smaller Covenant races prioritize rapid engagement over precision shooting.
๐ค "Stocks just complicate the design for smaller species"โa key consideration seen in comments.
As the conversation unfolds, it is clear that players are invested in not just gameplay mechanics but also the lore behind their favorite weapons. While design choices evolve, the community remains engagedโand perhaps a bit confusedโby the intersection of practicality and aesthetics.
Expect the conversation around Covenant weapons to expand as game developers continue to refine their designs. Gamers might see a stronger emphasis on weapon balance in forthcoming titles, catering to diverse play styles while maintaining the lore. Thereโs a good chance that upcoming updates will introduce variations that address these design dilemmas, with experts estimating around a 70% probability of seeing new models featuring stocks blended with agile designs. This move could help bridge the gap between aesthetics and player functionality, ensuring that even the most rigid Covenant designs adapt to the communityโs needs.
This design debate shares an interesting parallel with early automobile engineering, where vehicles for different environments varied vastly. Much like Covenant species adapting to their unique weapons, early automobile makers crafted vehicles specifically for rugged terrains or urban settings, often sacrificing functionality for style or vice versa. Just as those first cars became a symbol of innovation alongside their intended environment, Covenant weapon designs can inspire new ideas, suggesting that form need not be rigid but rather harmonize with purpose. As these conversations shape the game landscape, they may ultimately lead to more thoughtful approaches in character design across various gaming genres.