Talk:MJOLNIR Powered Assault Armor/Mark VI

Could someone post a picture of the Mark VI with better resolution? --RadicalEdward2 21:22, December 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * There, fixed. For me at least. Some glitch or something, makes it all blurry when the size is set to 200px. --Jugus 21:27, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

Biofoam injectors only in MJOLNIR Mark VI?
On page 244 of Halo: First Strike, it says, "It irritated her, yet without that armor with its constant hydrostatic pressure and automated biofoam injectors, ''John would have literally fallen apart by now." ''

Doesn't the MJOLNIR Mark V have biofoam injectors too?Rollersox 02:06, July 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * Presumably not, hence their inability to recharge health like the Mark VI can. To be fair, I don't think any official source has ever said the Mark VI had the injectors as well, but it's the conclusion the fandom came up with to explain a gameplay mechanic. --  Specops306   Autocrat     Qur'a 'Morhek   02:16, July 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think the "automated" part is a simple mistake. The Mark V does have ports through which to inject biofoam, but does not carry its own supply of the stuff. That's why medkits can be used so easily and efficiently. Just grab a biofoam canister, insert it in the slot, activiate it, and, voila, your wound's patched up. As I recall, John does just that near the end of The Flood when he's taking out the Autumn's engines. --&quot;Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have.&quot; -Thomas Jefferson 03:06, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

MJLOLNIR Mark VI in Halo: Reach?
Does anyone think either of these images should be posted in the article image gallery? I think it should, partly because it differs from the image file of the custom Vanity Mk. V posted in the article MJOLNIR Powered Assault Armor/Mark V, and if one is looking closely, this image, unlike the Mark V image, is lacking the shoulder pauldrons, and of course having the characteristic Mark VI helmet. I'm aware of the fact that the MJOLNIR Armor is consistent from the Mark IV to Mark V, and that none of us see a Mark V in Halo 3 at all, and I certainly agree, but should we not include this and not just the Mark VI helmet in Halo Reach as well? Aside from the Manual of Style, I can find no rules prohibiting this. Does anyone else agree with this, or no? Last Updated by --Xamikaze330 23:52, 11 November 2011 (EST)Xamikaze330


 * All the pictures' sets have from the Mark VI is the helmet. On the Mark V page, all we include from Halo 3 is the helmet. Canon is the priority, and canonically only that the helmet and any other components labeled as MArk VI can be Mark VI. So no. Tuckerscreator (stalk ) 00:47, 12 November 2011 (EST)

Transformers 3
The Autobot with a Scottish accent, Roadbuster, looks a lot like MJOLNIR armour, just sayin... Alex T Snow 04:57, 7 July 2011 (EDT)

FH on helm in halo reach
I posted that there is an FH on the chin area of the mark VI helm in Reach and it got undone. I'm going to add a screenshot to prove it because that's the only reason I can imagine someone undoing it.

update: readded it. the FH can be seen here

Upgraded/Altered Mark VI Suit
Looking at the article and relating it to what is known to the present about Halo 4, might it be valuable, at least to some degree, to note that John-117's armor has been physically reworked?

And not just in the audio-visual department, which is a favorite subject of 343 when discussing this subject. While I don't have the sources at this precise moment, it has been repeatedly stated that John's armor has had an in-universe change, and it is not mere impulsive artistic license. This means that the armor's outer physical shell looked the way it did in-universe because that is how it was constructed. The Mark VI as it was portrayed in Halo 3 is the original, unaltered version of the Mark VI, period.

Now that the context has changed, and Cortana did whatever she did, she reworked the suit's firmware while he was in cryo, but when the other information that I speak of is taken into account, it is clear that she did more than just firmware upgrading; she employed the resources at her disposal to alter the armor's physical shell.

And speaking of firmware, it is probably helpful to provide at least a partial description of the term. Firmware is basically software that is located in a physical structure, such as the circuitry in a TV remote, or in the devices such as network routers, video cards for computers, CD and DVD drives, hard drives, etc.

That means that in a real-world context, the physical structure containing the programs is fixed, but the programming itself can be upgraded, such as a person wanting to burn a set of DVDs or CDs in their DVD/CD drive, but being unable to do it because the software in their device is not able to perform the task, despite physically being able to do so. In that case, a person can contact the manufacturer of the device, who will in turn direct them to a source where they can get upgraded software, i.e. a firmware update for their DVD/CD drive, which will then enable them to perform their desired tasks.

Another aspect of firmware is that it is ROM, or "Read Only Memory." As far as I understand it, ROM is the hardwired programming for how a computer starts up before the software is enabled. Unlike alterable memory, like flash memory, these instructions are fixed and cannot be changed.

In the context of Halo 4's refitted Mark VI, Cortana accessed the suit and reworked the programs in its physical structure without necessarily changing the internal components. As for the physical change, it still isn't clear, though I do distinctly remember that at some point in late 2011, Frank O'Connor did state that prior to the start of the game, John had been physically removed from the cryotube and then later returned. Given the facts that I have described, this could mean that Cortana used the surviving machinery on the FoD to fashion new physical armor pieces, and then removed the original physical shell and replaced it with the new one. She could very well have done this she after she took him out of the tube, but that still leaves many questions.

Just speculation, of course, and unfortunately I don't have time at this precise moment to provide the necessary sources of my statements. I will, however, find them when I have the chance.--Exalted Obliteration 00:24, 9 May 2012 (EDT)

Should the new Mark VI have it's own section or article?
We can see that the new modded Mark VI is far different than the standard Mark VI visually and it's capabilities. Shouldn't there be a section on this article about it or maybe a new article on it? --ADinoSupremacist 00:06, 26 September 2012 (EDT)


 * There is already a section covering the aesthetics: Nanobots, instructed by Cortana, changed the entire armour but apparently they can't fix that gash on the chestpiece for some unknown reason. To say that nanobots is capable of doing wondrous to the armour (including the firmware, hardware, whatever-ware) as to giving new abilities/capabilities is ludicrous; you can't make a Windows95 to perform and function like a WindowsXP. So, as for capabilities, it is presumed that the MJOLNIR always had the ability to run/sprint as well as the ability to use loadouts, and that there was an onboard storage of hardware upgrades (e.g. VISR) as well as weapons (e.g. MA5D, BR85). — subtank   01:06, 26 September 2012 (EDT)

Magically upgraded hardware? A Precursor did it. Tuckerscreator (stalk ) 01:21, 26 September 2012 (EDT)

Page image?
So what should we do about the page image? Should we keep the Halo 3 one, or use the GEN2 variant available in Halo 4 multiplayer? I was thinking maybe we could just make an image that has them side by side.ArchedThunder 00:07, 30 October 2012 (EDT)


 * Keep the Halo 3 since that is the default MJOLNIR Mk VI. The Mk VI in Halo 4 is simply an older system made compatible with the GEN2 system. That should go in the gallery. — subtank   00:14, 30 October 2012 (EDT)
 * GEN2 Mark VI (old styling) is actually a full, complete suit. But I would still keep the older Halo 3 model, if not use a side-by-side with the Halo 3, Halo 4 (GEN1), and Halo 4 (GEN2) variants.
 * Yeah, since it is a fully upgraded Gen2 Mark VI suit I think we should do a side by side image.ArchedThunder 00:18, 30 October 2012 (EDT)
 *  * fixing comment before Grizzlei changed it to the older revision* Anyway, the Mark VI is a GEN1 and not a GEN2. The one we see in Halo 4 is a GEN1 made compatible with the GEN2. This is similar to how we (should) never used Halo 3's Mark V for the Mark V article as the introductory image. — subtank   00:22, 30 October 2012 (EDT)
 * Except this isn't just the helmet, it is the entire suit upgraded from the GEN1 set to the GEN2 set, I think it should at least have its render in the article and not just the gallery.ArchedThunder 00:25, 30 October 2012 (EDT)
 * Check again. I amended my comment to include the entire system rather than just the helmet before Grizzlei reverted it to the older revision. And yes, there should be a section about its compatibility with the GEN2. What I am opposing is replacing the introductory image.— subtank   00:27, 30 October 2012 (EDT)
 * Like I said in the beginning I don't think we should replace it either, but I think changing it to a side by side image of the Halo 3 and Halo 4 versions would be a good idea.ArchedThunder 00:31, 30 October 2012 (EDT)
 * In the "Overview" section, we could detail the various incarnations with a single image per variation: Mark V Prototype, Standard, Upgraded, and GEN2-compatible.

(reset indent) Or we could just rename "Armor variant" section to "Variants and compatibility" as to allow GEN2 to have its own subsection. — subtank   00:34, 30 October 2012 (EDT)
 * In addition to this, we could go with a stylised table instead of subsections. This would allow us to put in the images alongside their descriptions. :) — subtank   00:36, 30 October 2012 (EDT)
 * That actually sounds better, I'm all for it.ArchedThunder 00:38, 30 October 2012 (EDT)
 * So when will this be done? I can't do it because I don't know exactly what you mean.ArchedThunder 04:02, 2 November 2012 (EDT)
 * There. :) — subtank   11:25, 2 November 2012 (EDT)

Halo 4 section changes
I believe the statement about the new suit: "neither character addresses any differences in the hardware", is inaccurate. MC clearly looks down at his new armored forearms when he says "you've been busy". This isn't a question, it's a statement, he sees what's been changed and the player is meant to understand he's acknowledging it. Cortana's next line "I've updated your suit's firmware" is not a response to that statement, it is a separate thought adressing other changes. I believe that an acknowledgement mainly done through gestures and context is sufficient, as you wouldn't say "[x] character didn't notice as [y] character walked into the room, because he nodded at him and said "hey" instead of addressing him by his full name". Similarly, MC didn't need to say "you changed my suit", as the direction of his gaze tells you what he's talking about.

secondly, the damage to his suit was most probably caused by the damage sustained in the final section of the level, when he's flying through debris and crashed on Requiem. This is supported by the fact that all cutscenes in the third person on Dawn make sure to not show his chest in-frame, instead showing him from the back or only his helmet. You can see the damage when playing co-op or when he dies, but given that both of those are non-canon scenarios, the second of which could have plausibly been an alternate cause of the damage, it's clear where the intention was as far as showing damage on his chest. its placement was a callback to the old suit, and a fresh model was not created because it would only be used for one mission and would likely take up extra space on a disk already containing a whole lot of armor types.

I'd like for the Halo 4 section to be changed to reflect the above. the first observation is kinda unquestionable, the second one relies on informed speculation, but it's not out of line with the type of speculation that often fills in the gaps for things like this. Should I put in the changes?--Calvarok (talk) 23:09, 16 July 2014 (EDT)


 * About your first point, I think you got the sequence of lines in reverse. Also, a source on that final sentence in your second paragraph would be helpful. Otherwise, that's just unfound speculation on your part. I would like to also point out that the gash was also featured on Awakening trailer, the promotional images and official screenshots. If anything, this meant that the developer wanted to visually change his armor from the very start (i.e. retcon).— subtank   04:52, 17 July 2014 (EDT)


 * I almost feel like Cortana being rampant is the new "a wizard did it" where the Chief's armour is concerned. Attributing irrational actions to an irrational entity is a bit silly. My own theory is that she just liked the way it looked, and didn't care enough to remove the gash, but that's just me. And as for portrayals of him pre-Requiem, I doubt 343i would have created an entirely different model to depict a gash-less Chief simply to save space, especially without campaign saved films for us to actually check. And, of course, we've tried not to take promotional material or pre-release trailers as hard canon. --  Qura 'Morhek   The Autocrat     of Morheka   06:15, 17 July 2014 (EDT)


 * Indeed. They are not to be taken as hard canon. However, they are still relevant as evidence of intention (i.e. "what they intend to achieve").
 * Going back on "cutscene" explanation provided by Calvarok, the alternative could also be argued: if they want to show the gash on the armor as a result of post-Dawn level, the cutscene would've give special attention to the armor taking damage. — subtank   07:20, 17 July 2014 (EDT)