To those of you who think they know every little bit about canon, halo, and all it's characters please stop flaunting. You cannot completely know or understand halo canon. Namely in this the orbital MAC. Now scientifically we argue and debate back and forth over it. But think, our only knowledge about it comes from books and games. Now in the books whenever a MAC's power is addressed it is reffered to as, "A normal MAC blast could..." the thing is MAC technology has been already demonstrated in many ways, Ship board MAC's, MAC stations, The guass hog. Who says it cannot be fitted to a bombardment variant? Stating that something unaddressed or unmentioned in halo is non-canon is actually biased information and is actually fanon.

 

     Don't try to argue science here, as it IS after all a fictional universe. On that is not fully detailed or fleshed out. You can't be positive in saying that a bombardment variant of a MAC is impossible, what are your sources? Never addressed in the books. And MC never had air support from a ship as large as the SoF. It's as plausable as anything else like it, combat rifles. And before other members start flooding me with, "Well if they went by that logic they could add werewolves in!" don't say anything as irrelevant as that. It's still a halo game. I'm just saying that the orbital MAC strike could easily (And probably will) become 'Canon'.

---

If all else fails; Duck. As a defensive stratagem it's very unreliable, but incredibly reassuring for a moment or two.

Mr. sprinkles:

To those of you who think they know every little bit about canon, halo, and all it's characters please stop flaunting. You cannot completely know or understand halo canon. Namely in this the orbital MAC. Now scientifically we argue and debate back and forth over it. But think, our only knowledge about it comes from books and games. Now in the books whenever a MAC's power is addressed it is reffered to as, "A normal MAC blast could..." the thing is MAC technology has been already demonstrated in many ways, Ship board MAC's, MAC stations, The guass hog. Who says it cannot be fitted to a bombardment variant? Stating that something unaddressed or unmentioned in halo is non-canon is actually biased information and is actually fanon.

 

     Don't try to argue science here, as it IS after all a fictional universe. On that is not fully detailed or fleshed out. You can't be positive in saying that a bombardment variant of a MAC is impossible, what are your sources? Never addressed in the books. And MC never had air support from a ship as large as the SoF. It's as plausable as anything else like it, combat rifles. And before other members start flooding me with, "Well if they went by that logic they could add werewolves in!" don't say anything as irrelevant as that. It's still a halo game. I'm just saying that the orbital MAC strike could easily (And probably will) become 'Canon'.

I fail, then, to see where your contention leads to discussion or debate. Obviously you won't be persuaded, as you will not listen to anyone else's opinion.

---

This is a new kind of war, I'm not sure I fit in anymore.

<script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.uscg.mil/safetylevels/levels.js"></script>

Mr. sprinkles:

To those of you who think they know every little bit about canon, halo, and all it's characters please stop flaunting. You cannot completely know or understand halo canon. Namely in this the orbital MAC. Now scientifically we argue and debate back and forth over it. But think, our only knowledge about it comes from books and games. Now in the books whenever a MAC's power is addressed it is reffered to as, "A normal MAC blast could..." the thing is MAC technology has been already demonstrated in many ways, Ship board MAC's, MAC stations, The guass hog. Who says it cannot be fitted to a bombardment variant? Stating that something unaddressed or unmentioned in halo is non-canon is actually biased information and is actually fanon.

 

     Don't try to argue science here, as it IS after all a fictional universe. On that is not fully detailed or fleshed out. You can't be positive in saying that a bombardment variant of a MAC is impossible, what are your sources? Never addressed in the books. And MC never had air support from a ship as large as the SoF. It's as plausable as anything else like it, combat rifles. And before other members start flooding me with, "Well if they went by that logic they could add werewolves in!" don't say anything as irrelevant as that. It's still a halo game. I'm just saying that the orbital MAC strike could easily (And probably will) become 'Canon'.

Rotaretilbo:

Mr. sprinkles:

Too bad that's impossible, and actually acting as if you know unspecified canon is pretty much making it up. For all we know there could be a bombardment version of the MAC gun installed in very large ships.

If Wraiths can have shields, why do the Covenant mysteriously stop deploying them in four major conflicts, three of which take place on Forerunner artifacts? And why make a ground bombardment of a ship to ship weapon when you can just use Archer missiles? "We have this coilgun that speeds objects up to nearly half the speed of light, but we want to be able to waste the previous few shots a ship can carry of it on planets without destroying the planets outright, so let's waste the time to develop a second version that fires them incredibly slow, and then, for God knows why, since we can't fit this and a regular MAC on a ship, we'll equip this on some ships instead of a regular MAC, making those ships completely useless in space combat." Yup, that makes perfect sense.

Ŧhunder€hief:

I fail, then, to see where your contention leads to discussion or debate, obviously you won't be persuaded, as you will not listen to anyone else's opinion.

You just made my day.

---

I like pi.

Well, since science is against the rules of this thread, I'll use the religion of Mythbusters to support my argument. When they fired guns and rifles into a swimming pool, they found that the high-powered, high-velocity rounds shattered upon impact with the water, which is only slightly more dense than air. Air is infinitely more dense than a vacuum, so a high-velocity shell accelerated from orbit might shatter on impact with the atmosphere, and burn up before it hits the ground. Thus necessitating a low-velocity variant for surface attacks. Also, if made of the correct material, an orbit to surface shell wouldn't need to be very large, probably only 40 kilos or so. It would be cheaper than a missile, which needs fuel, oxygen, guidance, and precision-manufactured components. The orbit to surface shell could be simply a core of iron wrapped in carbon fiber. (Please don't think that any of the figures given are based on any sound science, this is only random speculation for the purpose of entertaining a debate.)

---

Quite frankly, I'm surprised I haven't been banned yet. These mods are slipping.

science does apply here.

1. and the only way the bombarding would work is if the MAC was made for speed (3 shots on 5 secounds) instead of power (planet buster)

---

@Sprinkles: not a bad argument, but Rot's counter basically just illustrated everything that's wrong with halowars. If fans can think of better stuff (read "more suitable" things with the same effect) than the developers, then something's wrong.

---

L0d3x:

@Sprinkles: not a bad argument, but Rot's counter basically just illustrated everything that's wrong with halowars. If fans can think of better stuff (read "more suitable" things with the same effect) than the developers, then something's wrong.

hopefully the new company listens alot more

---

hey, Ive been wondering if the MAC gun worked anything like a particle accelerator?

Im not exactly sure how it work.

---

Ukurse.
Well, Hello people, I'm Ukurse and I was banned.
My new Account is IamUkurse. I practically never post on the forum.

ukurse:

hey, Ive been wondering if the MAC gun worked anything like a particle accelerator.

Im not exactly sure how it work

It accelerates huge metal slugs using magnetic coils.

---

L0d3x:

ukurse:

hey, Ive been wondering if the MAC gun worked anything like a particle accelerator.

Im not exactly sure how it work

It accelerates huge metal slugs using magnetic coils.

So, what its just like a giant spring shotting huge slugs of metal?

---

Ukurse.
Well, Hello people, I'm Ukurse and I was banned.
My new Account is IamUkurse. I practically never post on the forum.

ukurse:

L0d3x:

It accelerates huge metal slugs using magnetic coils.

So, what its just like a giant spring shotting huge slugs of metal?

No

the coil goes around the barrel.

when electricity flows through it... it becomes magnetic and the MAC round it fired.

 

 

(all of that could be wrong but that's my understanding of it) 

ukurse:

L0d3x:

ukurse:

hey, Ive been wondering if the MAC gun worked anything like a particle accelerator.

Im not exactly sure how it work

It accelerates huge metal slugs using magnetic coils.

So, what its just like a giant spring shotting huge slugs of metal?

No it's like a bullet that is fired without the use of gas or "powder", but rather a magnet polarized to the same as the slug being forced out of the "barrel". Alot more potential for destruction, go "google" gauss, or coil gun.

Grey101:

science does apply here.

1. and the only way the bombarding would work is if the MAC was made for speed (3 shots on 5 secounds) instead of power (planet buster)

Yea, but to my knowledge only the "Pillar of Autumn" was ever outfitted with that version. So once again you run into a canon error.

 

Omega Lambda:

Well, since science is against the rules of this thread, I'll use the religion of Mythbusters to support my argument. When they fired guns and rifles into a swimming pool, they found that the high-powered, high-velocity rounds shattered upon impact with the water, which is only slightly more dense than air. Air is infinitely more dense than a vacuum, so a high-velocity shell accelerated from orbit might shatter on impact with the atmosphere, and burn up before it hits the ground. Thus necessitating a low-velocity variant for surface attacks. Also, if made of the correct material, an orbit to surface shell wouldn't need to be very large, probably only 40 kilos or so. It would be cheaper than a missile, which needs fuel, oxygen, guidance, and precision-manufactured components. The orbit to surface shell could be simply a core of iron wrapped in carbon fiber. (Please don't think that any of the figures given are based on any sound science, this is only random speculation for the purpose of entertaining a debate.)

first, air is hundreds of times less dense than water.  but second, and more importantly, you can, exactally crash into the atmosphere, as it starts out at a few molecules per liter and gradually increases to 600000000000000000000000 molecules per liter. 

---

If you are interested in joining us, go here: http://www.bungie.net/fanclub/240092/Group/GroupHome.aspx

NHW:

ukurse:

L0d3x:

It accelerates huge metal slugs using magnetic coils.

So, what its just like a giant spring shotting huge slugs of metal?

No

the coil goes around the barrel.

when electricity flows through it... it becomes magnetic and the MAC round it fired.

 

 

(all of that could be wrong but that's my understanding of it) 

Close enough. A coil gun is a barrel with a series of magnetic coils around it. When fired, the coils turn on and then off in a sequenced action resulting into what is referred to by some coil gun enthusiasts as "the pulse." This pulse occurs at phenomenal speeds. As each coil turns on they pull the round forward until it exits the barrel.

Now don't get this confused with the railgun which utilizes two magneticized rails instead of coils, but on the same principal. 

---

Ride the Rocket

Double post. Dangit

---

Ride the Rocket