Talk:M6D magnum

Ammo

 * halo the fall of reach pg. 178, .450 magnum

The M6D is Fully Automatic
It was not much used or well known, but it is. You can easily test it yourself if you own a working copy of Halo, or I believe it says in the manual of the original Halo that you can just hold down the trigger. Please stop editing this important, true fact about the M6D out of the article.


 * You clearly see Master Chief pull the trigger every time it is fired. It does not have a full auto function.  Smoke Sound off! 02:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I stand corrected on the lack of a full auto function, I haven't read the manual in like seven years. However, although you can hold down the right trigger and fire it full auto, you still see Chief pull the trigger every time it's fired. Probably just part of the animation then.  Smoke Sound off! 04:36, 6 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I decided to just call it like I see it in the game - we start putting crap from the manuals, you'll have to call the M6G the M6C (I think that was the mistake in one of the other manuals) as well. After all, the manual said it. You can hold the R trigger down and it will keep firing, but you can clearly see the trigger being pulled continuously - Master Chief does not hold the trigger down.  Smoke Sound off! 05:37, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Nah, there's NO WAY that it could be automatic. I've fired 93Rs, 18Cs, converted MAC10s in .45ACP; I don't know how much experience any of you have with automatic weaponry, but a weapon with such a relatively short action as the big, chunky, .50 would have a ridiculously high rate of fire, and an equally prodigious knock-you-flat-on-your-ass recoil to go along with it. To get around this would require an (incredibly) weighted bolt and rate-of-fire limiters that are not practical to install in weapons of that configuration. Rate of fire in weapons using short-recoil mechanisms is typically much higher than weapons incorporating other styles; examples given are the Steyr TMP and the WWII-era MG42, which has one of the highest rates of fire of any single-barrel automatic weapon to date, and the M6 doesn't exactly demonstrate what I would consider a blistering rate of fire. Besides, you can see him pull the trigger with every shot; he also pauses ever-so-briefly to come back to a null stance before firing the next round. That's not something you can do when cyclically discharging a weapon. Not to mention the fact that the weapon operates using 12 round magazines. There's a scope on the front of the weapon; and gunsights are incredibly impractical on fully automatic pistols. Don't get me wrong here, I DO realize that a great many of people using this site probably have little to no experience with offensive weaponry (like Robert McLees), but no matter how great bad you want it to be true, a weapon that produces one discharge for every pull of the trigger, and that requires a separate trigger pull to continue firing is a semi-automatic weapon. I went over the manual, just to be sure, and unless you're trying to be facetious and pedantic, it is obviously (and correctly) interpreted as a convenient gameplay mechanic, poorly communicated because the designer or either the manual or the weapon did not know the correct terminology; note that even when the Master Chief is firing the weapon "automatically," it still requires an additional trigger pull every time he fires a round. It's also been demonstrated as the series continues that the other weapons in the M6 series are also semi-automatic. The card that "tey wur speshul gunz 4 teh mission" can't realistically be played; historically a feature like that either exists at the project's inception and is done away with in later iterations, or is adopted and kept; major, man-year time-consuming, expensive modifications are not made and implemented, then scrapped and done away with in the course of less than a year. That's not how it works, and that's not how the gun works. So to finish, if the "auto-supporters" are right, we're looking at a shoddily and hastily constructed pile of ass and recoil that no one but a Spartan would be able to fire, and then only for less than a second before his mag went dry. Oh wait, I guess the .50's not automatic then is it? Q.E.D. Griever0311 00:43, 27 July 2009 (UTC)


 * The only reason I let it slide is because the instruction manual said it. There were a lot of inaccuracies in the first Halo, this being one of them.  Smoke Sound off! 04:22, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

How does the scope work
How does the scope work on the pistol? I can see the scope at the front of the gun but how can he see through the scope if it's covered up at the back? user: Joshua 029

The scope is in the front of the pistol, and what is viewed through it link's up to the chief's HUD. 64.136.27.226 16:28, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

that in H:CE I imagine the covered up part can be lifted or removed after all you can't see through a scope through a visor and if you can it would very difficult so probably all scoped weapons have helmet link-ups like ODST helmets probably have the same feature
 * well although the scope of the pistol works like

Pistol Range
The pistol range on the article said it shot around 130 meters, but I have confirmed kills with the M6D for around 250 meters. It's not luck I've done it lots of times -Slowpoke

HUH?
I faught the M6D HE Pistol was in halo:combat evolved. This says it was in halo2 and was also kown as the magnum. yet the other the M6C pistol page says the magnum of halo2 is a stripped down version of the M6D... Which is it!!!
 * The M6D Magnum is in Halo 1. A stripped-down version of it, the M6C Magnum, is in Halo 2. -The Dark Lord Azathoth 20:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * AOK. Its just i've neva heard the pistol in question being called the M6D Magnum  I just call it the Pistol.

It has never ever been referred to as a magnum pistol in the original game or manual. Please remove the "magnum" from the name. Only the M6C has been called that, probably to differentiate between the two.Justin Time 07:13, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Power
how is it that the M6D apparently suffers no recoil and yet has a round that is bigger than an AR and a SMG? SpecOps ODST 19:29, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

also, any one know's why the M6D is so powerfull, is it the bullet size or the high explosive compound used?

The M6D suffers no climbing effect because it fires at such a slow rate of fire that its easy for the chief to reposition for each shot before he fires the next one. Its rounds are so powerful because both bullet size and its explosive nature.Justin Time 07:13, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Pistol replacement
In the article it says that people were upset that the halo classic pistol was replaced with the crappier halo 2 pistol. I thought that the Halo classic pistol was replaced with the battle rifle http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/halo-rifle-pistol4.htm

It was. some people were too dumb to realize that the battle rifle had most of the stats of the original pistol and filled the same roll in combat. I think that people were expecting to pick up the pistol in halo 2 and use the weapon from halo 1. They were too suprised by its lack of power to notice that the battle rifle was the more realistic and balanced remake of the halo 1 pistol. MakeItGoSplodey 04:43, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

rate?
there are 2 different fireing rates on this page. one says 3.5 and one says 2.1.

Clarification on some issues.
Again, to point some things out to user 64.131.177.2.

Rtas Vadumee 01:46, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * FACT: The M6D cannot kill 44 fully-shielded Elites with a full 132-round ammo supply. That would entail that it is possible to kill an Elite with three shots, which is impossible, even on Easy difficulty, where it takes no less than four shots to kill even a Minor Elite. On Normal difficulty, which is likely considered the "standard" difficulty, it takes no less than six shots to kill a Minor Elite, and eight shots to kill a Major Elite. This means that, at best, you can kill up to 22 Minor Elites or 16 Major Elites. This number will be even lower on higher difficulties and/or against Elite Zealots.
 * FACT: In terms of damage over time, the M6D is superior to even dual M6Cs. With a rate of fire of 3.5 rounds per second and taking three headshots to kill, the M6D can kill in under a second. However, the Magnum, which takes 13 headshots to kill (yet another fact I'd like to point out; it cannot kill in 12 shots) and has a rate of fire of about 6 rounds per second, requires a bit over a second to kill an enemy when dual wielded. Therefore, dual M6Cs would almost equal the M6D in terms of power, but to to its poor range, the M6D would easily outclass dual M6Ds at any range past point-blank.
 * Comments like "the pistol is the best weapon in the series" should not be stated as a matter of fact, as claims that something or the other is "the best" is a matter of opinion. This or any other article should reflect this, by adding modifiers such as "widely considered to be" to "the best." For example, "Weapon X is considered to be the best weapon by many players."

Bias?
I think the M6D vs M6C Magnum section may seem more like a fan arguement than a profesional encyclopedia. but should it be revised or deleted?68.89.178.209 21:55, 25 July 2007 (UTC)iron maiden

The pistol is not semi-auto
It fires fully automatic, though only at 3.5 rounds/sec as opposed to the Assault Rifle's 15 rounds/sec. Also, the pistol is effective at up to 126 meters, any more and the bullets dissapear. Go test it for yourself. --User:MLG Cheehwawa

Actually, it a select-fire weapon. You can fire in both semi-auto and full-auto modes. Semi-auto is more accurate, though. Rtas Vadumee 01:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Disadvantages of the M6D
This is directed to the "new" user, who, like Shadowslayer117 before him, keeps removing certain parts of the "Disadvantages" section.

In said section, it is stated that pistol is widely believed to be overpowered. In the interest of balance, I believe it is imperative to point out objections to said claim, i.e. that there weapons that are more powerful. Therefore, it must be stated that the sniper rifle, rocket launcher, and shotgun are all one-shot-kill weapons, making them all stronger than the pistol, which takes no less than three shots to kill a fully-shielded opponent. In particular, the shotgun and especially rocket launcher take far less skill than the pistol, which requires precision aiming to get the best results. Furthermore, the sniper rifle has an effectively infinite range in addition to its greater power, while the pistol has a maximum range of 123 meters. Therefore, the pistol is at a disadvantage to these weapons.

If you can provide good reason to not include this content in the article, then feel free to post said reason here. Otherwise, don't remove it.

End of line.

Rtas Vadumee 01:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

The strength of other weapons is not relevant if it can't do the ranges in general that the pistol does. 50 foot distance TSK anyone? So shut the frick up you moron. So I suppose having to dodge pistol idiots like yourself and getting within the 15 to even 5 foot diameter distance to instakill you with an RL or Shotgun isn't skill? Right. Thank GOD Halo 3 will fix these idiotic people who STILL think the pistol is balanced.

... Methinks someone has anger issues. Honestly, anyone who doesn't have the intellectual capacity to process a differing point of view, and not react with violent anger, doesn't deserve to exist. (some other guy said it better... but that's the gist). while this is clearly written months ago, I'll still comment. First, I'll look at the arguements. You speak of range, the first guy says, Rocket Launcher has infinite range, and much higher power. The Sniper Rifle definately has longer range, and great power. The shotgun is a close range weapon, so anyone trying to take on a person with a mid-range weapon using the shotgun is just not thinking. Second, the Battle Rifle and Carbine effectively fill the same exact role in Halo 2 and Halo 3. The only difference is they take a few more shots (BR is a little slower and takes 4 headshots, Carbine is faster and takes 7) so, at best the M6D is only slightly overpower. Third, what on earth does Halo 3 have to do with anything?

Ok, tell you what, the disadvantage section has it uses, every weapon has its disadvantage, I say, even a shotgun has it's weakness, everything has a weakness, nobody's perfect, and I think that personal attack on this page is violating Halopedia's rule seriously. Master Chief Petty Officer Spartan Contribution 07:32, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

cocking Trivia
Every time you bring out the pistol you pull back the action. this should not be necessary if it has been done once. Spartan 107 20:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Same as racking the shotguns pump and the clacking noises involved in readying the assault rifle. maybe hes switching off the safty? which admittedly he wouldent have on in hot combat.Maiar 09:03, 22 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Oversight by Bungie. In real life, continuously racking the slide will causes rounds to fly out of the ejection port. The safety is usually a button or switch. Smoke 16:02, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Technical Specs
Ummm, I just read through the technical specs of the gun and noticed that there is a pretty detailed description on how to reload the M6D, and a description describing it as similar to modern day handguns. This by extension, effectively describes how to reload and operate most modern day handguns. And while it isn't extremely difficult to figure out, hard to find knowledge, or anything of the sort. I feel that knowledge and information like that shouldn't be so detailed, especially on a Halo wiki. I propose complete removal of the paragraph, or at least editing to cut down the detail overall. I would like to point out this is not paranoia that we may inadvertently cause a shooting. Indeed, I feel that this is hardly enough information to cause any sort of serious damage in the world. I just feel that such information isn't truly necessary or relevant. Like I said, this is a proposal, if you disagree, feel free to say so. XRoadToDawnX 19:41, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Liberator design?
"A possible influence on the design of this weapon is the FP-45 Liberator, a weapon designed in the United States during World War II. The long handle, but short barrel as well as the covered hand-grip are obvious features."

Yeah... I don't think this pistol bears any resemblance whatsoever to the Liberator http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/15/M1942_liberator.jpg

other than the fact that it has a short barrel. The liberator does not have a "whole hand" trigger guard, and a short barrel is a feature of all pistols. I'm removing these statements, because they are pure speculation, and poor speculation at that. 144.132.128.19 07:06, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Main Image
What's with the disgusting pic? I thought the other one, from the Bungie renders section, was much better. Why was it changed? Diaboy 10:51, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm wondering if anybody else has gotten a one hit kill on a fully shielded elite in Halo CE? --facelessPysch0 14:26, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Corrections
The M6D IS NOT mechanically fully automatic. The game allows the trigger to be held down so the gun will continue firing without the need to constantly pull the trigger just like the M90 Mk. I. The character(Chief)is still physially pulling the trigger after every shot. As for the scope dispute, the "scope" on the top of the pistol is either a red-dot or a flashlight. The scope itself is built into the weapon and links directly to the HUD of the user. B2 23:08, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Refining language question
Am I correct that language on this wiki should be as exact as possible ("2" instead of "a couple") as well avoid subjective measurements ("polymer handle, making it comfortable in the user's hands", in this case comfortability).

I propose the removal of much of the Technical Specifications section, as it deals with modern and trivial details of pistol usage rather than actual technical specifications. I also propose the deletion of the Influences section because it's data seems to be speculation and thus banned form this wiki.

''[I was reminded by the admins to make a comment to elicit discussion on the talk page of articles before large modifications. Thus, could someone respond in a timely manner to this?]''

-- Nutarama 01:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree about the Influences section, as well as avoiding subjective measurements. Remove those as you see fit (if someone can produce sources about the Influences section, they can feel free to bring it back). Keep in mind that some of the Technical Specifications section is used to better explain some of the terminology used, or to explain how something works. Remove what you feel fit to remove in that section, but try to keep that in mind.  Smoke Sound off! 02:03, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you. The editing guidelines seem vague, especially on what constitutes cleanup per the Cleanup tag. On a related note, a stub is an article that does not contain all the information that could be there, correct? So if an article is short only due to a lack of information (the subject is only mentioned on one page of a novel, for example), does it merit a stub tag? Also, thinking of the articles M70 and A2, how unimportant/short do articles need to be to be nominated for deletion? -- Nutarama 17:24, 3 June 2009 (UTC)


 * What I use is the M.O.S., proposed in a blog by Subtank a while ago. If I'm cleaning an article, I try to bring it in line with what is outlined there. From that point on, you may use your own judgment. I read your talk page - what she meant was just going in and removing things at random without any explanation. If you leave a note in the edit summary saying that you are cleaning up the article, you won't be bothered. Now, if it's something that may be contested, you can remove it and then bring it up on the talk page (I've done this a few times).


 * As for the nomination for those unimportant articles to be deleted... I've seen articles here on things like toilets. Apparently the explanation is that anything that is mentioned in the Halo universe rates an article. I personally don't care, I find the reaction to it kind of funny actually. That's beside the point, though. It probably will not be deleted unless you can prove without a doubt that it either does not exist in the Halo universe or is simply not mentioned.  Smoke Sound off! 22:44, 3 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok, thanks. I did that in my first 6 hours here, and I had no idea what the edit summary box was for or how to use it. -- Nutarama 15:12, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The M6D is NOT fully automatic.
While the game manual states that it is fully automatic, that is from the standpoint of the game controls - you can hold the trigger on the controller down and it will fire. However, one can observe Master Chief pulling the trigger in succession, NOT holding down the trigger. That he doesn't cock it and he doesn't hold down the trigger means it is ONLY semi-automatic!

Whoever thinks otherwise should use their head - a machine pistol would have a much higher rate of fire, or else it would simply be a glorified semi-auto. -- Nutarama 23:32, 14 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I took note of that. Are there any instances in Halo canon of the M6D being fired in full-auto?  Smoke Sound off! 04:34, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * There are several things you need to take into consideration, Halo: Combat Evolved's animations are not accurate at all. For example, every time Master Chief takes out the pistol, he pulls the slider back, in reality if he did that a round would eject from the gun, when he reloads he never pulls the slider back to chamber a round into the gun. The animation of him firing the gun could be the same thing, the manual states that the gun can be fired full auto. Until we see it again and its labeled as a semi, then we must go by what is in Halo: CE. Durandal-217 01:30, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Or you could just get on board and realize that the people that wrote the manual and designed the weapons didn't know 2 sh*ts about firearms, military protocol, customs and courtesies, or the terminology to describe most of it.


 * Please sign the remarks you make on talk pages, Griever0311. You can do this by typing four tildes, which will automatically be converted into a link to your userpage and a timestamp. [[Image:DavidJCobb_Emblem.svg|16px]] DavidJCobb  02:32, 27 July 2009 (UTC)