Talk:Covenant portable shield

Halo PC
In Halo PC, the shields never deactivate, though they may flicker and make a recharging noise after being shot. Juranas 01:43, May 5, 2010 (UTC)

Images from Halo: Reach's Nightfall
I think there should be at least a few images or so of all the stages (if any) of the Stationary Shield Generator, as well as maybe a new main image from Halo: Reach. I can do it myself, but I will need some help obtaining some screenshots to work on in Photoshop, probably one without very little background to be noted, if that's remotely possible. I do recall seeing something that looked like this, the stationary shield generator, probably on the level Nightfall, just before crossing a bridge, and attacking a Covenant Stealth Pylon, and then being attacked by Hunters. I strongly believe those are stationary shield generators, and if they aren't, then what are they? --Xamikaze330 20:13, 27 December 2011 (EST)Xamikaze330
 * Yeah, some images on this page would be nice. I would gladly offer help to upload images, but I can't right now due to technical difficulties.-- Commander Spartacus  ~  ŤДŁĶ  ~  ĈʘŃŤṜǏΒŨŤǏʘŃŞ  ~  ĚṂДǏŁ  20:16, 27 December 2011 (EST)

I'll ask around, see if anyone else is willing to help that doesn't have any technical difficulties. And since the stationary shield generators are also in Halo: Reach, shouldn't they be noted in the article, as well as added to the Appearances section? --Xamikaze330 20:25, 27 December 2011 (EST)Xamikaze330

This image of the SSG not from Halo Anniversary?


How is this image not from Halo Anniversary? It genuinely looks like it definitely is! And what did this mean, "not from HCEA: this is from CMT spv3"? I did just go and look it up, but aside from it being a screenshot from a Custom Mapping Team video, it still looks like it is from Halo Anniversary, and one can hardly even tell it has been modded! So, I'm really confused and maybe a little ticked that this got removed from the article's Gallery section. I think this little hassle is gonna need more on the WHY part than just saying "not from HCEA: this is from CMT spv3". --Xamikaze330 23:43, 30 March 2012 (EDT)Xamikaze330
 * Sounds like a bullshit reason to remove something, so you could probably put it back. This user removed it, so ask him.--  Col. Spartacus   Talk Page Contributions Contact  00:30, 31 March 2012 (EDT)
 * I'm aware of who exactly removed it, as it was Hacame. But yes, I think I will revert. --Xamikaze330 01:32, 31 March 2012 (EDT)Xamikaze330
 * Confirmed from CMT's SpV3 mod for the Halo Custom Edition. It should be noted that the Shade in the screenshot is different from the Shade from HCE (and in HCEA since it's avisual upgrade) as it sports two separate shield covers protecting the gunner whereas the official one does not have any.— subtank  08:26, 31 March 2012 (EDT)
 * Oh, will then that makes better sense as to the why. I hadn't looked closely enough, but then again, it is rather dark and difficult to pick out details, which would explain why I missed those critical details in the supposed screenshot. --Xamikaze330 13:48, 31 March 2012 (EDT)Xamikaze330

Add a Changes section?
Hey, maybe we should consider adding a Changes section to the article. I believe it would help to see how the SSG changes from game to game. Like for example, the SSG has most definitely changed from Halo: Combat Evolved to Halo 2, and from Halo: Reach to Halo 4. Furthermore, in Halo: Reach, the SSG shield cover is more rounded and has a different base than the one in Halo 4, and the shield cover is more pointed than circular than it was in the inital game. This should be added. What say all of you? -- Xamikaze330  [Transmission |Commencing ] 21:45, 3 August 2013 (EDT)Xamikaze330
 * Go for it. Sith-venator Wavingstrider  ( Commlink ) 03:24, 4 August 2013 (EDT)
 * I'm going to need a little help too. Expansion-like stuff. I'll do what I can, but it might not be very elegant. -- Xamikaze330  [Transmission |Commencing ] 10:33, 4 August 2013 (EDT)Xamikaze330
 * Okay, I just added it, with whatever I could put together. Presently, it doesn't look very pretty. Could use some cleaning up, and a little bit more expansion. -- Xamikaze330  [Transmission |Commencing ] 17:42, 4 August 2013 (EDT)Xamikaze330

Necessary?
Why aren't the shields in Halo 4 an Halo 5 also just included on the other page? What makes these so different from the Pavise of the worthy/stationary shield generator? Japeth555 (talk) 00:09, 23 October 2016 (EDT)Japeth555
 * Their function is very similar but their appearance is different, indicating a different model. According to Halo 5's Forge, this one is called a Covenant portable shield. We don't have a source for them being the same, and there's no source saying Pavise of the Worthy/stationary shield generator/Covenant emplaced shield is a blanket term for the shields either, so it should be assumed they're different models. -- Topal the Pilot ( Talk | Contribs ) 00:17, 23 October 2016 (EDT)


 * I disagree. "Stationary shield generator" or "Covenant portable shield" are not model names. They are merely descriptions of what the object is and what function it performs, and as such either is applicable to the other. Meanwhile, it makes sense that we only use "Pavise of the Worthy" for the war-era model since it is rather specific as a title (thought it's just as possible all portable shields are called that). However, both types are, without question, "stationary shield generators" or "portable shields", and despite minor aesthetic differences they are still functionally the same thing. Giving them their own pages is needlessly complicated and potentially confusing, IMO. --Jugus (talk) 07:53, 23 October 2016 (EDT)


 * "Stationary" and "Portable" would seem to me to be fundamentally different functions as the words are more or less antonyms; I don't think you really could apply either word to the other. Obviously they are very similar, however, and indeed similar in function and appearance to the deployable barrier, so I think it would be best to have a general article about covenant shields with subsections about the three different types (with Pavise of the Worthy referring only to the specific model to which we know it applies). The article for deployable barrier ought to be kept, of course, due to its gameplay role as an equipment. I think this would be the least confusing way of addressing the matter, especially as it would make it easiest to compare each to the other. DefeatingLine (talk) 15:55, 23 October 2016 (EDT)


 * I think I may have adopted a more inclusionistic perspective from my time on Wookieepedia. But if everyone wants it as one page, so be it. -- Topal the Pilot ( Talk | Contribs ) 18:20, 23 October 2016 (EDT)


 * @DefeatingLine: Well, both types are "stationary" when deployed, in comparison to things like vehicle or armor shields, but they've also always been portable (since Halo CE's first mission, in fact). So other than that slight quirk of terminology, there really is really no discernible difference in function between the two. As for the Halo 3 deployable cover, it can stay as its own page due to its gameplay significance, but we could have a link and subsection about it on this page.


 * @Topal the Pilot: Our "policy" on these things is quite contextual, but in general we tend to group things that meet the same definition under the same umbrella page. Take Covenant drop pod for example. If it's Covenant and a drop pod, it goes on the page because the title is a descriptor, not a name. If it were established that the war-era portable shield is called the, say, "Type-29 Deployable Infantry Energy Shield Generator/Portable" while the post-war one was the "Type-49 Portable Energy Barrier", there might be grounds to split them, but we could still have them on the same umbrella page since they are both the same type of object that performs the same function.


 * That said, I actually prefer "Covenant portable shield" for the main title. It's more specific and descriptive than "stationary shield generator", which could be anything and is, AFAIK, only mentioned once in Ghosts of Onyx. --Jugus (talk) 03:28, 24 October 2016 (EDT)


 * I guess that's fair enough. -- Topal the Pilot ( Talk | Contribs ) 05:12, 24 October 2016 (EDT)