Talk:Pez'tk-pattern fuel rod gun

Difference between Fuel Rod Gun and Cannon? I DOUBT IT!--User:JohnSpartan117 05:15, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

There is a difference, the Fuel Rod Gun is similar to a Plasma Pistol, it charges up and has a semi-homing effect, and also has 100% ammo when full. It also has an energy core, so, when the Fuel Rod Gun reaches 0% ammo, it cannot be replaced unless a new one is picked up. It is not reloadable, however, the Fuel Rod Cannon is reloadable and does not home. It does not have an energy core and does not charge up. Oh, and the Fuel Rod Gun can only be seen on Halo Pc.

wait the FRG has the five or so projectiles coming out of the top of the gun and the FRC has the battery like clip so does anyone else think like this or is it just me

Emos 09:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC) 

---

there is no real difference save that Bungie named the PC one gun apparently. They are exactly the same, save one uses an energy core. However, the gun system itself is the same. --User:Zyrin05:44, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

The one in the PC version was thrown in by gearbox, they just assumed it would be battery powered, like all other covi weapons at the time, besides, if its lableed 'Fuel Rod GUN' in the halo 3 game, manual, and plaers guid, then I'm pretty sure its called a Fuel Rod Gun

I'll second that. Everyone that's plowed through the material, the game, and every other bit of bungie canon in calling this a fuel rod cannon should be shot.

New image

Swapped the main image with a more accurate one. The previous image was the version in halo 2 when the game was still in testing...I guess. -Spartan781 ^{Talk | CSV} 16 June 2007

About the new name...

quite the mouthful, isn't it?

What, Fuel Rod Cannons in 24 years!?

In this article lukems says "This weapon has changed very little since it was first encountered in 2031". It is most likely a typo i think he meant 2531. --File:Halo3.comchief.PNGEliteSpartan ^{My Talk} _{My Contribs}File:Private first class.jpgFile:GDI.jpg

Probably. But that means there were FRCs at Harvest! -76.235.215.125 21:31, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, and also it does tell us that both the Fuel Rod Gun and Cannon are from the same design but has been updated with new models just like how we do here on Earth. So it's correct that there are different types of FRGs and Cs.-- Joshua 029 14:06, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Update: yea its a typo the article now correctly says "first encountered in 2531". --File:Halo3.comchief.PNGEliteSpartan ^{My Talk} _{My Contribs}File:Private first class.jpgFile:GDI.jpg 8 September 2007

Merge with fuel rod gun

its been confirmed that they are the same weapon. get over it Ralok 21:57, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Slow-motion realization

If you watch a FRG during saved films, slow it down and take a closer look: You can actually see the rod being surrounded by the radiation, no longer just a green blob of death. Ahh, the wonders of saved films! Kap2310 22:02, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Merger with Fuel Rod Gun

I suggest that this be merged with Fuel Rod Gun. It is actually the same weapon, and contrary to popular belief, the Fuel Rod Cannon's name is interchangeable with the Fuel Rod Gun, and those "mistakes" are not mistakes at all. Even the Plasma Sword was merged with the Energy Sword somewhere in the start of last year. There's no need for 2 separate articles.

Votes for merger

For

As per above.--Spartan-781 ^Comm_CSV 09:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

The PC version Fuel Rod weapon is a bit of a red herring. It is completely different in terms of appearance from the armament the grunts have during the missions in Halo: Combat Evolved. The weapon they are armed with is the same as the T33 AAW, so the differences make very little sense. However I feel that as they are effectively the same weapon, so even if the tactics for use have changed, they should be merged. The fact that it is noteably different can be mentioned ina subsection of the article. As far as I am aware, I thought that it was Gearbox's 'artistic license'that brought about the Fuel Rod weapon in Halo PC? Diaboy 11:33, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

The merger is definitely a good idea, but the line must be very clearly drawn between the two. Statistics and perhaps a comparison section could be added. Ghost elite 18:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Against

1. I don't think thats enough proof.--The Demonic Idiot 10:39, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

1. No, there really is a difference!((unsigned|Master chief Petty Officer}}

There too different in function.--The Demonic Idiot 07:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it's just that the "Gun" is battery operated, firing sound is different, damage is different, and bolts have a more arc-like trajectory. They are, in fact, the same weapon. Many weapons, such as the Plasma Rifle or Plasma Sword have different sounds, damage and stuff from the Halo 2 and 3 counterparts. Trust me, they are as different in function as this Fuel Rod Gun/Cannon thingy.--Spartan-781 ^Comm_CSV 04:22, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

1. They are two completely different weapons. Some differences are: the "Gun" is an indirect-fire energy MORTAR but the "Cannon" is a direct-fire energy weapon, the "Gun" is battery powered and the "Cannon" is ammo powered, the "Gun" has 13 rounds and the "Cannon" has 30, the "Gun" has a "dead-man switch" but the "Cannon" doesn't . The only similarity's are that the ammo and battery's are green and that they are shoulder-mounted weapons. Delta-269 22:17, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

1. I agree with Delta-269. This gun has had so many several changes that it has resurged as a "new" weapon. Just take a look to the "new" Halo 3's Rocket Laucher. It's the same thing, but no one says that it must merge. This isn't the same thing...and they want merge it! No way. Daniel 019 File:Before.JPG ^{My Talk}_{My Work}

1. As per above. Spartan 112 21:42, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

1. they are diferant wepons and therefor should not be put in the same area