Talk:Operation: UPPER CUT: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
(Added section about caps.) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
== Operation capitalisation? == | == Operation capitalisation? == | ||
What is the need to capitalise the names of Operations? It's not capitalised in game as Operation UPPERCUT, it's simply Uppercut. Why the need to capitalise directives like Winter Contingency and operations when it isn't the case?--[[User talk:TrevelyanL85A2|TrevelyanL85A2]] 01:20, 26 February 2011 (EST) | What is the need to capitalise the names of Operations? It's not capitalised in game as Operation UPPERCUT, it's simply Uppercut. Why the need to capitalise directives like Winter Contingency and operations when it isn't the case?--[[User talk:TrevelyanL85A2|TrevelyanL85A2]] 01:20, 26 February 2011 (EST) | ||
== Taking note of major, direct canon contradictions == | |||
All of the relevant Halo novels (and Halo 2) feature the orbital MAC platforms above Reach as major plot points and assets in the battle. This all becomes particularly bizarre when there isn't even a mention in Halo: Reach about the orbital MAC platforms being used to destroy the Covenant supercarrier, especially when both the novels and the games confirm that even one such orbital platform can make quick work of any Covenant capital ship, including a supercarrier. | |||