65,199
edits
Talk:Glassing: Difference between revisions
m
Text replacement - "([A-Za-z]+) Policy" to "$1 policy"
(Huge post, I'm afraid. Sorry.) |
m (Text replacement - "([A-Za-z]+) Policy" to "$1 policy") |
||
| (16 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== "Unidentified Brute" == | == "Unidentified Brute" == | ||
| Line 20: | Line 18: | ||
Banshees cannot really glass stuff... USE COMMON SENSE. Banshees plasma bolts melt sand glass yes but in large scale that is simply impossible... | Banshees cannot really glass stuff... USE COMMON SENSE. Banshees plasma bolts melt sand glass yes but in large scale that is simply impossible... | ||
:Put an emphasis on the term "Large Scale". Banshee's don't operate in two's or three's, except in the game. In the novels, you can have hundreds flying at you. Imagine the destruction their weapons could wreak on a ground target. -- ''' | :Put an emphasis on the term "Large Scale". Banshee's don't operate in two's or three's, except in the game. In the novels, you can have hundreds flying at you. Imagine the destruction their weapons could wreak on a ground target. -- '''CoH|<font color=purple>Councillor</font>]] [[User:Specops306|<font color=blue>Specops306</font>]]''' - '''''[[User Talk:Specops306|<font color=blue>Kora</font>]] [[Special:Editcount/Specops306|<font color=purple>'Morhek</font>]]''''' 22:30, 3 October 2008 (UTC) | ||
==Halo wars== | ==Halo wars== | ||
| Line 49: | Line 47: | ||
And it is not outdated. You say you have seen videos, have you ever played the games? | And it is not outdated. You say you have seen videos, have you ever played the games? | ||
Glassed is the offical term in the Halo Universe, Bungie uses it the novels use it, it is the accepted canonical term. Just because you feel that it is outdated does not give you the right to change canon, what you are putting up there is fanon, that is not allowed on Halopedia. So stop replacing "glassed" with "razed". Your activity can and will be reported. [http:// | Glassed is the offical term in the Halo Universe, Bungie uses it the novels use it, it is the accepted canonical term. Just because you feel that it is outdated does not give you the right to change canon, what you are putting up there is fanon, that is not allowed on Halopedia. So stop replacing "glassed" with "razed". Your activity can and will be reported. [http://halopedian.com/Halopedia:Covenant_of_Halopedia/Member_List#Honor_Guard_Elites <span style="color: #000080; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt;">'''Honor Guard'''</span>] [[User:Spartansniper450|<font color=#00416A>Spartansniper</font>]]'''[[User talk:Spartansniper450|<font color="#000000">'''4'''</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Spartansniper450|<font color="#000000">'''50'''</font>]] 16:17, Nov 20, 2008 (UTC) | ||
:... I hate reports... [[User Talk:Subtank|<font color="#FF4F00">K</font>]][[User:Subtank|<font color="#EC5800">A</font>]][[ | :... I hate reports... [[User Talk:Subtank|<font color="#FF4F00">K</font>]][[User:Subtank|<font color="#EC5800">A</font>]][[halofanon:Category:Subtank|<font color="#E34234">C</font>]]-File:Knatbus.jpg|24px]] 16:34, 20 November 2008 (UTC) | ||
To HALO Legend, the official term given by Bungie is Glassed. Also, please note that this is a game, thus there are several contradicting facts and reality. Although I agree that Razed would suit with this article, note that the header itself is titled '''"Glassing"'''. So, we would have to use Glassed for consistency. [[User Talk:Subtank|<font color="#FF4F00">K</font>]][[User:Subtank|<font color="#EC5800">A</font>]][[ | To HALO Legend, the official term given by Bungie is Glassed. Also, please note that this is a game, thus there are several contradicting facts and reality. Although I agree that Razed would suit with this article, note that the header itself is titled '''"Glassing"'''. So, we would have to use Glassed for consistency. [[User Talk:Subtank|<font color="#FF4F00">K</font>]][[User:Subtank|<font color="#EC5800">A</font>]][[halofanon:Category:Subtank|<font color="#E34234">C</font>]]-File:Knatbus.jpg|24px]] 16:42, 20 November 2008 (UTC) | ||
== Aftermath? == | == Aftermath? == | ||
| Line 341: | Line 339: | ||
::Not necessarily. The sarge even states in the end as the Covenant leave "''Damned planet isn't even worth glassing''". Also, it's quite plausible they wouldn't glass Ariel, as it only had an extremely small colony with an archaeological dig. While it's possible they later glassed the planet, it isn't mentioned in any point in the comic. For all we know, Ariel might've been an exception. I'm not saying it was, but we have no proof whatsoever. --[[User:Jugus|<font color="MidnightBlue"><b>Jugus</b></font>]] ([[User talk:Jugus|<font color="Gray">Talk</font>]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jugus|<font color="Gray">Contribs</font>]]) 09:23, March 19, 2010 (UTC) | ::Not necessarily. The sarge even states in the end as the Covenant leave "''Damned planet isn't even worth glassing''". Also, it's quite plausible they wouldn't glass Ariel, as it only had an extremely small colony with an archaeological dig. While it's possible they later glassed the planet, it isn't mentioned in any point in the comic. For all we know, Ariel might've been an exception. I'm not saying it was, but we have no proof whatsoever. --[[User:Jugus|<font color="MidnightBlue"><b>Jugus</b></font>]] ([[User talk:Jugus|<font color="Gray">Talk</font>]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jugus|<font color="Gray">Contribs</font>]]) 09:23, March 19, 2010 (UTC) | ||
== Image | == Image policy == | ||
Durandal earlier told me earlier on this talk page that the Manual of Style says that an article should have just one featured image and the rest go in a gallery unless the article is escessively long. However, I've looked through the MOS, as well as through the image sections, and I don't see this anywhere. Therefore, I would like to ask if I can add a few images within the article, as some of the more detailed sections are a little hard on the eyes, and the gallery is steadily growing larger. Sound okay?[[User:Tuckerscreator|'''Tuckerscreator''']] 04:06, May 2, 2010 (UTC) | Durandal earlier told me earlier on this talk page that the Manual of Style says that an article should have just one featured image and the rest go in a gallery unless the article is escessively long. However, I've looked through the MOS, as well as through the image sections, and I don't see this anywhere. Therefore, I would like to ask if I can add a few images within the article, as some of the more detailed sections are a little hard on the eyes, and the gallery is steadily growing larger. Sound okay?[[User:Tuckerscreator|'''Tuckerscreator''']] 04:06, May 2, 2010 (UTC) | ||
| Line 388: | Line 386: | ||
It appears now to be more a way to simply destroy cities and military installations quickly, to eliminate all large scale resistance. Evolutions even described that as well, and the fact that total planetary destruction was rare. Now we know that even in those occasional circumstances, it is not total. -[[User talk:Anton1792|Anton1792]] 23:15, 24 October 2010 (EDT) | It appears now to be more a way to simply destroy cities and military installations quickly, to eliminate all large scale resistance. Evolutions even described that as well, and the fact that total planetary destruction was rare. Now we know that even in those occasional circumstances, it is not total. -[[User talk:Anton1792|Anton1792]] 23:15, 24 October 2010 (EDT) | ||
:In her journal, Halsey mentions the glassing of Arcadia. There's no quibbling about with "they just hit the cities" - they burned the whole thing. So either the Committee vastly underestimate the Covenant's firepower, or their numbers. Remember, this is an enormous empire that could span thousands of star systems. How many ships could they produce, and how many would they need for internal/external security? -- [[User:Specops306|<b><font color=indigo>Specops306</font></b>]] [[ | :In her journal, Halsey mentions the glassing of Arcadia. There's no quibbling about with "they just hit the cities" - they burned the whole thing. So either the Committee vastly underestimate the Covenant's firepower, or their numbers. Remember, this is an enormous empire that could span thousands of star systems. How many ships could they produce, and how many would they need for internal/external security? -- [[User:Specops306|<b><font color=indigo>Specops306</font></b>]] [[halofanon:user:Specops306|<u><i><font color=blue><sup>Autocrat</sup></font></i></u>]] [[User talk:Specops306|<u><i><font color=purple><sup>Qur'a 'Morhek</sup></font></i></u>]] 01:47, 25 October 2010 (EDT) | ||
''"The careful immolation of every vital part of the planet."'' | ''"The careful immolation of every vital part of the planet."'' | ||
| Line 447: | Line 445: | ||
:::Indeed, the concept of glassing seems to have been getting some retcon treatment recently. However, it is justified; as said above, for the Covenant to glass a planet from pole-to-pole, vaporizing the entire surface area, ''every time'' they take a planet is indeed quite unrealistic, and the amount of energy required would utterly enormous. One thing that has been overlooked in the above discussion however, regarding space combat and glassing being one and the same; they are not. The Covenant glass a planet after a battle, as a merciless religious victory ceremony more than anything else, and as said it happens ''after'' a battle. It has been described that when glassing a planet, the Covenant ships begin to build up and charge enormous amounts of plasma on their underside launchers, and build up the bolt until their shields cannot hold it anymore, then fire it down on the planet; causing a blast of destruction much larger and more powerful than anything they would use in ship-to-ship combat. Because in ship-to-ship combat, it is a frantic battle, the Covenant don't use nearly as much energy as they do when glassing, and human ships don't need that much plasma to be vaporized anyway. | :::Indeed, the concept of glassing seems to have been getting some retcon treatment recently. However, it is justified; as said above, for the Covenant to glass a planet from pole-to-pole, vaporizing the entire surface area, ''every time'' they take a planet is indeed quite unrealistic, and the amount of energy required would utterly enormous. One thing that has been overlooked in the above discussion however, regarding space combat and glassing being one and the same; they are not. The Covenant glass a planet after a battle, as a merciless religious victory ceremony more than anything else, and as said it happens ''after'' a battle. It has been described that when glassing a planet, the Covenant ships begin to build up and charge enormous amounts of plasma on their underside launchers, and build up the bolt until their shields cannot hold it anymore, then fire it down on the planet; causing a blast of destruction much larger and more powerful than anything they would use in ship-to-ship combat. Because in ship-to-ship combat, it is a frantic battle, the Covenant don't use nearly as much energy as they do when glassing, and human ships don't need that much plasma to be vaporized anyway. | ||
:::This evidence can be collected from ''Halo: Ghosts of Onyx'', during the battle around High Charity. In this scene, the Reverence-class cruiser attempted to destroy a Brute frigate with a single shot from its energy projector, and in order to do so, it had to divert power from every single non-vital component of the ship to discharge enough plasma; and the wait of charging the plasma almost got the ship destroyed. From this, it can be seen that in regular ship-to-ship combat against humans, the Covenant do not use a fraction of the energy their plasma weapons are capable of, for the sole reason that they do not need to. However, when in combat against other Covenant ships, something that was only observed towards the very end of the war, much more energy is required to puncture both shields and their superior hulls. My point is; is that the Assembly did indeed underestimate Covenant glassing capabilities, as they assumed the weaponry used against humans in ship-to-ship combat was the most that they could muster. - | :::This evidence can be collected from ''Halo: Ghosts of Onyx'', during the battle around High Charity. In this scene, the Reverence-class cruiser attempted to destroy a Brute frigate with a single shot from its energy projector, and in order to do so, it had to divert power from every single non-vital component of the ship to discharge enough plasma; and the wait of charging the plasma almost got the ship destroyed. From this, it can be seen that in regular ship-to-ship combat against humans, the Covenant do not use a fraction of the energy their plasma weapons are capable of, for the sole reason that they do not need to. However, when in combat against other Covenant ships, something that was only observed towards the very end of the war, much more energy is required to puncture both shields and their superior hulls. My point is; is that the Assembly did indeed underestimate Covenant glassing capabilities, as they assumed the weaponry used against humans in ship-to-ship combat was the most that they could muster. - [[User:Halo-343|<span style="color: purple; font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: 128%;">'''Halo-343'''</span>]] [[User talk:Halo-343|<font color="green">('''Talk''')</font>]] 06:03, 27 October 2010 (EDT) | ||
::::The only thing I can say, is that it seems bizarre that the Covenant would hold up so high a threat and feat in the destruction of humanity if their methods were something they truly could not follow up on. SOMEBODY in the Covenant fleet has to have noticed, it's right in their face, and yet they always treat it as though the job were a full glassing(such as in ''The Return''). Kinda hard to miss what you were personally involved in, but that's all I have to say. [[User:Tuckerscreator|<span style="color:#6600cc;">'''''Tuckerscreator'''''</span>]]<sup>([[User talk:Tuckerscreator|<font color="#008000">stalk</font>]])</sup> 10:40, 27 October 2010 (EDT) | ::::The only thing I can say, is that it seems bizarre that the Covenant would hold up so high a threat and feat in the destruction of humanity if their methods were something they truly could not follow up on. SOMEBODY in the Covenant fleet has to have noticed, it's right in their face, and yet they always treat it as though the job were a full glassing(such as in ''The Return''). Kinda hard to miss what you were personally involved in, but that's all I have to say. [[User:Tuckerscreator|<span style="color:#6600cc;">'''''Tuckerscreator'''''</span>]]<sup>([[User talk:Tuckerscreator|<font color="#008000">stalk</font>]])</sup> 10:40, 27 October 2010 (EDT) | ||
| Line 469: | Line 467: | ||
==Best Ambigious== | ==Best Ambigious== | ||
{{Quote|The term "glassing" was originally coined by the Assembly in 2526, who chose it hoping it would galvanize humanity into action. At the time, the Assembly also estimated that it would take 30.3801 years for a Covenant fleet of comparable size to that of the UNSC's to glass the entirety of Earth. However, the Covenant fleet was later discovered to be many times larger than imagined, with the power of the Covenant's weaponry also underestimated.|this article.}} | {{Quote|The term "glassing" was originally coined by the Assembly in 2526, who chose it hoping it would galvanize humanity into action. At the time, the Assembly also estimated that it would take 30.3801 years for a Covenant fleet of comparable size to that of the UNSC's to glass the entirety of Earth. However, the Covenant fleet was later discovered to be many times larger than imagined, with the power of the Covenant's weaponry also underestimated.|this article.}} | ||
| Line 485: | Line 482: | ||
I would suggest that we edit the article to add a new section called “Feasibility” or “Authenticity” where we place all the relavaen t information on this issue, because I don’t think this is something that can be so easily solved. While the information takes the tone of retcon, other information from that same retcon supports the previous information, and I think that it’s best we rewrite the page to reflect that. [[User:Tuckerscreator|<span style="color:#6600cc;">'''''Tuckerscreator'''''</span>]]<sup>([[User talk:Tuckerscreator|<font color="#008000">stalk</font>]])</sup> 19:18, 7 January 2011 (EST) | I would suggest that we edit the article to add a new section called “Feasibility” or “Authenticity” where we place all the relavaen t information on this issue, because I don’t think this is something that can be so easily solved. While the information takes the tone of retcon, other information from that same retcon supports the previous information, and I think that it’s best we rewrite the page to reflect that. [[User:Tuckerscreator|<span style="color:#6600cc;">'''''Tuckerscreator'''''</span>]]<sup>([[User talk:Tuckerscreator|<font color="#008000">stalk</font>]])</sup> 19:18, 7 January 2011 (EST) | ||
:I agree on the fact that its impossible. However I disagree with the rest. The simple reason is that... what bungie said is canon. [[User talk:Steahl Senka|Steahl Senka]] 20:30, 7 January 2011 (EST) | |||
Then why are we treating it like it's not? We have an explanation on this page that there's no support in canon for, and seems to be more of an attempt to avoid a retcon. At the same time, though, it's difficult to make out what exactly the intent for the canon is too be, as we have some bits of canon information from the same source that go opposite directions. There '''DOESN'T''' seem to be a clear answer, and that's why'd I'd prefer that we change this page to acknowledge this. [[User:Tuckerscreator|<span style="color:#6600cc;">'''''Tuckerscreator'''''</span>]]<sup>([[User talk:Tuckerscreator|<font color="#008000">stalk</font>]])</sup> 21:03, 7 January 2011 (EST) | |||
::The information in the article for the most part is correct, however there are certain things that need to be updated. I've been compiling all the new information and will update the article soon. However there is one big thing a lot of people don't mention or have completely forgotten about is that the Covenant don't just rely on the weapons attached to their ships, they also drop high yield energy bombs as evident by the long night of solace cutscene. Considering that the world has enough nuclear weapons to blanket the entire planet so many times over, its not impossible for the Covenant to do the same with different methods. | |||
::The old canon is still correct and is not so much of a retcon but more of an elaboration that makes sense, you need A LOT of ships in addition to A LOT of firepower to destroy a planet, but they can do it, the canon has already stated that and Reach reaffirms that in the first 5 seconds of the game. I don't believe a new section needs to be added but the information does need to be updated. Ill be getting to it very soon. [[User talk:Durandal-217|Durandal-217]] 22:12, 7 January 2011 (EST) | |||
That nuclear bomb bit is actually just "common knowledge", we actually don't have anywhere near the amount to kill 2% of the current total population(2% is 60 million people, but...). Regardless, it's debatable whether the Covenant really have that strength. It was pointed above in an earlier section that the numbers for the Covenant fleets are too low, you need 2000 ships to glass all of Reach in 30 years, and they brought 314. The orbital bombing is still occurring, but it's debatable how much "glassing" really occurs. Above I speculated perhaps the numbers were gotten from low-range glassing rather than from orbital strike, but there's little real reason to guess. | |||
And that's kinda my whole point, that we don't know what the actual cause is, that it half seems the Assembly's purpose to do so, and that the article should be re-done to reflect that. We have one source from the data pads that tells us glassing is an impossiblity, and another data pad that says terraforming efforts will take centuries. Definately let us take a look at the parts you plan to update, I'll be sure to want to see them, but I really don't think that we can come up with a fully conclusive answer. [[User:Tuckerscreator|<span style="color:#6600cc;">'''''Tuckerscreator'''''</span>]]<sup>([[User talk:Tuckerscreator|<font color="#008000">stalk</font>]])</sup> 00:52, 8 January 2011 (EST) | |||
::May I remind you and fellow fans of an old interview by Jason Jones (the last one in fact since he hasn't done one in 10 year) of which he states: | |||
''"Believing they were being led to an undiscovered human world, yes, the vast majority of the Covenant fleet which destroyed Reach followed the Pillar of Autumn to Halo (a minority of the navy's AIs actually disagree with this, believing instead that the Covenant followed the Pillar of Autumn because they had already found the Alpha Halo and wanted to prevent the humans from finding it as well). '''The Covenant is so much larger than the Earth Empire, however, that the divergence of a fleet of this size has no impact whatever on their search for Earth.'''"'' | |||
::[http://www.bungie.net/news/content.aspx?cid=6 here is the link.] This I think is still as valid as ever, also take into consideration that Ghosts of Onyx also relates to this as well, when Kurt-051 questions how large the Covenant fleet really was during the review of PROMETHEUS. | |||
::I feel like all and all the intent is to discredit the old material, that even up to this very point (and I mean the re-release of Halo: First Strike) has never been touched and is for a fact still viewed as valid. If that is I don't agree with it, if its the other way around, well, its just me. I full well understand the rules of Halo canon, but many of us as fans too quickly want to discard the old because of the new, Halo canon doesn't work that way. We are in a state of, they say one thing, then say another, but as it has been stated long ago they won't flat out discard the old material or render it non-canon because if that was the case Fall of Reach, The Flood and First Strike would be completely different books right now. They had the power to rewrite the entire mythology but kept it the same with minor tweaks. | |||
::All in all I do think there is a valid explanation, and a good way to integrate all of this into the article, of which I will work on, but if the intent is or was to discard and discredit the old canon because the science or a pad say's otherwise is premature. We, as fans, Bungie and 343I as creators, are not scientists and no matter what, they're going to get it wrong and they're going to have to find some convoluted, scientifically stupid way of explaining it for entertainment purposes. Bungie meant well, trying to rationalize something they didn't know a lot about, at the time; but the execution of it though is flawed. They either didn't explain it well or didn't take the older pieces of work into consideration. | |||
::That, or it comes down to we don't understand what they were saying. In any case I will pass along my updates here before I make them public (by public I mean article wise). [[User talk:Durandal-217|Durandal-217]] 02:40, 8 January 2011 (EST) | |||
That sounds reasonable. I was just afraid that we might end up trying to ignore newer information in favor of old. [[User:Tuckerscreator|<span style="color:#6600cc;">'''''Tuckerscreator'''''</span>]]<sup>([[User talk:Tuckerscreator|<font color="#008000">stalk</font>]])</sup> 21:28, 8 January 2011 (EST) | |||
::No never, that's the way I work. I always try to integrate everything and try to make it as consistent as possible, without straying too far into speculation. [[User talk:Durandal-217|Durandal-217]] 21:45, 8 January 2011 (EST) | |||
== Some calculations == | |||
While I'm aware that this is likely to open up a gigantic can of worms, Stardestroyer.net has [http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/Beam/BaseDeltaZero.html some fascinating calculations] on how much energy would be required to perform something similar to the boil-the-atmosphere, vaporise-the-oceans, slag-the-continents-style glassing we all love.--[[User talk:The All-knowing Sith'ari|The All-knowing Sith'ari]] 10:42, 22 October 2011 (EDT) | |||