Talk:OPERATOR-class Mjolnir

Picture
Hey could someone get a picture of the Operator Shoulders? i read the Armor Permutations article that mentions them. --Failamanjaro 16:57, 3 November 2010 (EDT)

CNM or CNM-I
For the side attachment used in the CNM,it is not the typical CNM module, and looks more like the External Hardened Uplink, could this be a small mistake? --Kota328 01:03, 7 December 2010 (EST)

Ill study that right now. Didnt notice that. --68.200.147.211 10:35, 18 December 2010 (EST)

There are a LOT of small mistakes like this in the armory, the one on the last upgrade is actually a CNM-I.

Alex T Snow 06:36, 21 December 2010 (EST)
 * CNM = PEQ-2
 * CNM-I = Webcam
 * HUL = SAM Launcher

Updated MJOLNIR
It says in the Trivia section that this helmet looks similar to an updated MJOLNIR design from the Art of Halo. Could somebody please provide said picture? --Delta1138 SnooPING AS usual I see 12:54, 8 April 2011 (EDT)


 * Here. The first in the gallery was drawn by Shiek while the other two by Eddie Smith.— subtank  15:13, 8 April 2011 (EDT)

Article Naming Convention
This article has "Mark V" in it's naming convention, and has information in the first paragraph that was established from Halo: Reach that doesn't pertain to Halo 4 (at least not yet). However the Operator armor is now available for the "GEN2" armor in Halo 4 thanks to newly established canon. I have a question: Should we create a whole new article for the new Operator armor that represents the GEN2 variant (i.e. MJOLNIR Powered Assault Armor/GEN2/Operator variant or MJOLNIR Powered Assault Armor/Operator variant (GEN2)) or rename this article to reflect the change in canon (as well as the information presented in the first paragragh)? -- Killamint  [Comm |Files ] 13:15, 22 August 2012 (EDT)
 * We could follow a style like in this article, where we have sections dedicated to GEN1 and GEN2 characteristics. As for the article name, I'm not sure about that.-- Spartacus  ('''Talk 14:55, 22 August 2012 (EDT)
 * Sounds like a plan. I'll work something up later. But the article name is still in question. We may have to move it so we can get rid of the "Mark V" in the title so that it covers both armor variants. -- Killamint  [Comm |Files ] 16:55, 22 August 2012 (EDT)
 * ✅. However, like I said above, I think we should still move the article to be less "armor" specific.-- Killamint  [Comm |Files ] 09:34, 25 August 2012 (EDT)