Talk:Halo: The Fall of Reach

Untitled
Please stop linking to my server. The ebooks no longer exist. Thank you. -Nick Presta

Does anyone know where I can get chapter summaries of this book? It's quite important. Thanks. --68.192.145.192 00:39, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Trivia Section Inconsistencies
In the Trivia section, it stated that the Pelican that evac's the SPARTANS, marines and civilians from Cote D'Azur contains "14 marines, 4 Spartans, 18 total". This is despite the fact that 12 SPARTANS were deployed from it, and Green Team discovered '20' civilian survivors. Since there was only one dropship, all 12 SPARTANS and the 20 civilians must have been in the same transport. I have rectified this. A trivia note about a banshee on the original cover of the book did not specify it was the original cover - I also rectified that. Thebigyeash 08:37, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

Shredder Rounds???
Does anybody know what Shredder rounds are? It's in the book page 3 fourth to last paragraph first sentence.

The book says, "The three spartans exhausted their AP clips and then,in unision, Switched to shredder rounds.--Spartan 1 1 7 01:58, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * We have an article about them: Shredder Rounds. -- ED ( talk )(shockfront) 21:36, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

You'd think it's kind of self-explanatory. Think about it, then keep it to yourself that you're not smart enough to figure it out by yourself.

Reference to Contact Harvest
I thought that in the book, it said that Johnson and the others encounter the Covenant a few years before On February 3, 2525, or have I read it wrongly?Master Chief Petty Officer Spartan Contribution 12:02, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I had also noticed that in the Halo book " The Fall of Reach" it mentioned Harvest, if this is correct maybe it is in some way linked to the latest Halo novel "contact Harvest"? or is it just a coinsidence? --H92 19:27, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Due to the tiny amount of thrust applicable to the freight containers that Johnson and the other survivors evacuate Harvest in, it would be sensible to claim that they would not return from Harvest until after the Battlegroup arrived - in which the Vostok and Arabia were destroyed and the Heracles damaged by a single Covenant vessel. Whilst the survivors did flee Harvest in very early 2525, the military responses to investigate lack of contact were not sent until around September and November.Thebigyeash 08:40, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

Banshee having green sheen?
I have the book, and I don't see any green sheen, it's all purple. I'm taking off that Trivial comment. --Force Colonel ' Valhala ' 112  22:13, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

synopsis error
The second paragragh lists mendez's name as Petty Chief. This should be definetly be changed to either Chief or Chief Petty Officer because from experience calling a Chief a petty Chief would get a scalding and this is obviously not correct.--Johnknee 21:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I changed the title but as a side note his full name should probably be listed in the context of the article it's confusing. A link to his page would probably be useful also.Johnknee 21:15, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

REACH
To anyone who reads this it says that Reach was turned into a glass like state with only John-117 making it out ............................... is it possible for them to slipspace back to Reach and Recover the Spartans or was Reach destroyed? Please answer peace

SPARTAN 117 did leave but in the book Halo: First Strike it says that a small section was left untouched by the Covenant. I hope this helps you

WARS
Does anyone think fall of reach will be a part in halo wars ?


 * No. The Fall of Reach takes place in 2552. Halo Wars is set in 2531, twenty-one years before Reach falls. -- CoH| Councillor ]] Specops306  -  Kora   'Morhek  03:41, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Halo Film to be based on Halo: the fall of reach book
I have found Evidence that the Halo film will be based on this book, here is what I found http://www.latinoreview.com/news/exclusive-halo-movie-has-reach-4305


 * I wish...there's currently nobody picking up the script, or financing it. A pity, since it sounds like it would be great. -- CoH| Councillor ]] Specops306  -  Kora   'Morhek  00:07, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Halo film artical
Would someone be kind enough to write an artical on this page about the film script based on the Halo: the fall of reach book please? My writing skills are bad...

25 or 35
Twice in the book it mentions that John was recruited by Halsey 'Twenty-Five' years ago, but if you take 2552 minus 2517 it makes 35....am I the only one that has gone crazy about this?

No, it drives me crazy when writers skip math too.- Fluffball Gato


 * If you actually look at the date in the book it says 2542 which im gussing is another inconsistency Liamhead 21:59, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * In the book it also gives the date of John's recruitment as 2517. We know he was six at the time, so that puts his year of birth at 2511, making him 41 by the year 2552, when Reach falls, and when the events of Halo: Combat Evolved take place. I don't know what the root of these inconsistencies are...possibly just oversight on the part of the author.
 * In the book it also gives the date of John's recruitment as 2517. We know he was six at the time, so that puts his year of birth at 2511, making him 41 by the year 2552, when Reach falls, and when the events of Halo: Combat Evolved take place. I don't know what the root of these inconsistencies are...possibly just oversight on the part of the author.

The Title
I know this is really dumb- but I have to say it: The title of the book, according to the article is "Halo: The Fall of Reach". The cover, however, displays it differently. It looks like either "HALO: THE Fall OF Reach" or "halo: the Fall of Reach" as the letters do not differ, in the words "Halo" "the" and "of", from one another in size. Are we just assuming the title is what we call it? It is possible the cover wanted mistakes in it. --Fluffball Gato 20:04, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

Accually Its: HALO

THE FALL OF  REACHJimMy pAz Br07 04:06, May 5, 2010 (UTC)

I'm just presuming that the article has it right, I guess. According the Nylund, though, the name of the series is HALO... In all capitals.--Fluffball Gato 04:21, May 5, 2010 (UTC)

Artificial Gravity on Human Ships
After re-reading the book recently, I noticed that Nylund refers several times to spinning sections on human ships, including the Pillar of Autumn. However, no such sections are apparent in any of the games. The book does makes one mention of appropriating Covenant gravity technology, but then doesn't follow up on this, and all human ships are assumed to still be utilizing spinning center sections to induce gravity.

In addition, the bridge is described as being circular, which makes sense in the context of the book, but once again, the game depicts things differently. Not only is the bridge rectangular, and positioned at the extreme fore of the ship, Captain Keyes, the Chief, and everyone else on the bridge is seen to be walking under normal gravity, despite the absence of centrifugally-induced artificial gravity.

Is there an explanation for this, or should it just be chalked up to the novel/game disconnect? I like operating under the assumption that all the Halo source materials are reconcilable with each other, but maybe this is not the case.


 * Artificial gravity was being developed by humanity even before they met the Covenant. It just took a long time to refit all ships for it.-- Forerunner 20:02, July 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * In the novel(pg 274), Keyes is described as feeling the effects of passing through spinning and non-spinning sections of the Pillar of Autumn. This took place on the shakedown cruise, immediately before the ship participated in the battle of reach and then departed for Instalation-04. Did they stop to refit before leaving? I was under the impression that the timeframe was much shorter.


 * That doesn't say that he was only on the bridge. The Autumn uses artificial gravity, at least on the "non-spinning" sections. I'm not sure about the sections that still use rotating corridors, though. If there are still parts of the ship without artificial gravity (and thus have rotating corridors), we don't see them in-game.-- Forerunner 20:17, July 30, 2010 (UTC)

reissued version
Is there new content in the reissued version of the book? Im not sure wheter I should buy it or not... 

Though I am genuinely concerned with your decision AgentSmith I'm more interested in knowing that if there is new content is it worth updating the article with? Perhaps a section that reads "Revised Version Edits" or something along those lines? Colonel Calamity 11:32, August 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, reception by Halo fans have been negative mostly.-  5 əb'7 aŋk (7alk ) 11:55, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

I just got it, here is the extra content:
 * Really, the only major difference is the cover. The story is the same with some minor alterations to fit in with the updated canon - one possible example being Harvest's population.-- Forerunner 15:07, August 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * - section devoted to intergoetion of an elite by Cole, same as in halo wars: genisis
 * - Message from supreme commander Luro 'Taralumee, disscusing the events of the legends short "the package". it is reveled that the major was not Thel Vadumee, but thel Lodamee, who apparntly was able to kill an adintional spartan.
 * - an ONI letter dissusing how Dr. halesly was captured
 * - a letter from ssomone named mike to somone named agnes, disscusing how Ralph 303 was removed from the spartan program, led a normal life, and re-joined the marines, (explaing his apperance in homecoming) it also suggestets that Humanity knew about, of all things, the Flood.
 * - a letter from keyes to vice adimiral kopano n'singile
 * -ONI invesgetion of a conversion that led to the discovery of reach
 * - something aboiut winter conginticy. Jabberwock xeno 16:02, August 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * - something aboiut winter conginticy. Jabberwock xeno 16:02, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

I have the revised edition of the book, and while I don't feel the same way about the book as those on the Bungie forum do, they do have valid points. For reasons that are not clear, there was some kind of editing and printing problem which made the 2552 dates at the top of the later chapters 2542. Also, many of the early numbers and inconsistencies from the first edition exist in this edition.

While on the one hand this is irritating and disappointing, on the other hand I understand that these are mistakes and not actual story retcon facts. As for the part where Halsey briefs John and company on the ultimately-scrapped mission to capture a Prophet etc. does include a minor change.

On page 275 it says "We also know that there is a 'race' of field commanders we have historically called 'Elites.'" Though I do not have the original version anymore, I remember it talking about Elites as if they were brand new, when it has since been established that they were not. Also, toward the end of the book, where John, Linda, and James deal with that navigation data, there is a new sentence in place of the old one.

Page 347: "These were Elites-the iron heart of the Covenant. Would they best the Spartans this time? They were all about to find out."

This is clearly very different from the original, which again treated the Elites as if they were new. These two new sentences clearly establish that the UNSC is very familiar with the Elites, but talks about them in the context of their knowledge and hypotheses about Covenant society and its caste system.

While its true that they changed the number of ships attacking Reach to 700 from the original 300, they didn't really change much of anything else beyond the unneeded editing mistakes.

This to me illustrates the biggest weakness about 343 Industries and its publishing and reissuing of books; improper quality control on editing and fact checking. Other than that, 343 Industries hasn't really made that many mistakes or dramatic changes to the story, other than some of the more controversial additions from Halo Legends.

One other mistake that they left intact were the statistics of there being 25 Spartans at Reach out 28. Again, improper editing, but perhaps more than that? Maybe they are too afraid to make too many changes to the book, especially on topics such as that, maybe that given the amount of work that they have on their plate at the present time, they are unable or unwilling to do?

While definitely worrying and disappointing, I do not see this in the same light as the posters on Bungie forum did. I do not see it as indicative of the Halo canon being completely destroyed. It is a case of editing mistakes in what is really only two specific cases, being the original version of the Encyclopedia and this book's current reissue.

While they have explained what happened and promised to make sure it doesn't happen with the two other books, the fact of the matter is that only time will tell.

Even with these glaring mistakes, they can still take responsibility for their actions and make some amends. It seems a little extreme to generalize from just these two cases and declare that Halo is dead and that it will completely fall apart. Such knee-jerk reactions seem a little excessive even though they are rooted in concerns that are completely legitimate and cannot be ignored.

For me, I am definitely skeptical of 343 Industries and their future actions, but I am most definitely not condemning them in highly polarized and skewed ways.

They only have to address and correct this kind of problem and be appropriately careful and vigilant when doing these sorts of things. Other than that, i am still intrigued about their future developments, albeit cautiously and skeptically so.

That is a far cry from saying that they have completely destroyed Halo. --Exalted Obliteration 01:53, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

Bahahaha I love their stupid whining and overreaction..."OMG! Typos and 700 ships at Reach!!!!! 343 Industries has ruined Halo! This book is literally a piece of shit! Halo was the greatest piece of art and literature in history and they ruined everything! The canon is destroyed!" .... they don't know how to express the concept of "minor disappointment..." Flayer92 21:26, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

Confused

 * I have not read thiss book in quite some time and I have 2 questions that really stump me.


 * 1) After John destroys the ships nav data (the Circumfrence?) so the Covenant cant get it, he goes back to the PoA. I thought then the PoA goes to the first Halo Construct, but if that is possible, how can John rescue Dr. Halsey down in the mineshafts under the CASTLE base?


 * 2) What happens after they are rescued, and evacuated off of Reach?

Sorry if you these are really dumb questions. You do not need to write a long answer. Thanks Darb 013 02:33, August 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * 1) He comes back after the events of the original Halo game and rescues her and the other spartans. This is in Halo: The First Strike.

2)They eventually make their way back to Earth. This is the storyline of Halo: The First Strike. VadersFist666 02:58, August 7, 2010 (UTC)

Ahh thats right! Thanks a ton. Darb 013 03:04, August 7, 2010 (UTC)

New cover art?
I was at the store and decided to pick up the new book, when something crossed my eye. It shows John-117 and 2 unnamed Spartans and the glassing of a planet. and that what caught my eye. I later searched John 117 and found a picture in which the headline underneath stats "John wearing his MJOLNIR Mark IV armour." which I thought was weird cause John had mark 5 armour during the fall of reach. so it cant be a cover art for that. then I read about john's battles over the years Other then the glassing of reach, we only know 2 other two other battles in which the planet fell to the covenant that John was in. The Harvest Campaign and the Battle of Jericho VII. But I highly doubt that it was the harvest campaign cause it is never mentioned to the point that participated in it and two he was shown wearing I believe the MJOLNIR Powered Assault Armor/C variant. I then was a little disappointed cause if in fact the cover art is based of the Battle of Jericho VII in which the planet was glassed and John had still had mark 4 then it would be kinda stupid don't u think cause the actual battle of Jericho VII took place in one chapter. and if that is the case then i would if i were them i would have at least updated the original cover art or actually show John fighting for reach on the cover.
 * It's symbolic. It need not represent any particular engagement or time, it just represents the general badassery of the SPARTAN-IIs.--The All-knowing Sith&#39;ari 21:49, August 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * What im trying to say is what does the front cover represent? Jericho VII in my opinion.--Bronze98 22:04, August 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * Read that again; it's symbolic, it doesn't represent any particular event.--The All-knowing Sith&#39;ari 19:22, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

On the new cover art it appears that the spartan to Johns left has the tag 134 which is not a spartan II tag to the best of my knowledge. Also is it just me or does the spartan to his right have a bunny on his/her armor?Weeping Angel 23:15, 14 March 2012 (EDT)
 * It's 034, not 134.— subtank  06:55, 15 March 2012 (EDT)

That explains a lot. ThanksWeeping Angel 17:52, 15 March 2012 (EDT)

Re-Issue Pages
How many pages are in the re-issue? My original book has 340 pages, including prologue. If the reissue has more or less pages, that may screw up our sourcing system. Que  Sera,  Sera  13:26, August 25, 2010 (UTC)