Editing Talk:M6D magnum

<div style="float:right; padding-left:5px;">

Nah, there's NO WAY that it could be automatic. I've fired 93Rs, 18Cs, converted MAC10s in .45ACP; I don't know how much experience any of you have with automatic weaponry, but a weapon with such a relatively short action as the big, chunky, .50 would have a ridiculously high rate of fire, and an equally prodigious knock-you-flat-on-your-ass recoil to go along with it. To get around this would require an (incredibly) weighted bolt and rate-of-fire limiters that are not practical to install in weapons of that configuration. Rate of fire in weapons using short-recoil mechanisms is typically much higher than weapons incorporating other styles; examples given are the Steyr TMP and the WWII-era MG42, which has one of the highest rates of fire of any single-barrel automatic weapon to date, and the M6 doesn't exactly demonstrate what I would consider a blistering rate of fire. Besides, you can see him pull the trigger with every shot; he also pauses ever-so-briefly to come back to a null stance before firing the next round. That's not something you can do when cyclically discharging a weapon. Not to mention the fact that the weapon operates using 12 round magazines. There's a scope on the front of the weapon; and gunsights are incredibly impractical on fully automatic pistols. Don't get me wrong here, I DO realize that a great many of people using this site probably have little to no experience with offensive weaponry (like Robert McLees), but no matter how great bad you want it to be true, a weapon that produces one discharge for every pull of the trigger, and that requires a separate trigger pull to continue firing is a semi-automatic weapon. I went over the manual, just to be sure, and unless you're trying to be facetious and pedantic, it is obviously (and correctly) interpreted as a convenient gameplay mechanic, porrly communicated because the designer or either the manual or the weapon did not know the correct terminology; note that even when the Master Chief is firing the weapon "automatically," it still requires an additional trigger pull every time he fires a round. It's also been demonstrated as the series continues that the other weapons in the M6 series are also semi-automatic. The card that "tey wur speshul gunz 4 teh mission" can't realistically be played; historically a feature like that either exists at the project's inception and is done away with in later iterations, or is adopted and kept; major, man-year time-consuming, expensive modifications are not made and implemented, then scrapped and done away with in the course of less than a year. That's not how it works, and that's not how the gun works. So to finish, if the "auto-supporters" are right, we're looking at a shoddily and hastily constructed pile of ass and recoil that no one but a Spartan would be able to fire, and then only for less than a second before his mag went dry. Oh wait, I guess the .50's not automatic then is it? Q.E.D. [[Special:Contributions/173.80.120.183|173.80.120.183]] 00:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

. Q.E.D. [[Special:Contributions/173.80.120.183|173.80.120.183]] 00:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I faught the M6D HE Pistol was in halo:combat evolved. This says it was in halo2 and was also kown as the magnum. yet the other the M6C pistol page says the magnum of halo2 is a stripped down version of the M6D... Which is it!!! {{UserForerunner}}

It was. some people were too dumb to realize that the battle rifle had most of the stats of the original pistol and filled the same roll in combat. I think that people were expecting to pick up the pistol in halo 2 and use the weapon from halo 1. They were too suprised by its lack of power to notice that the battle rifle was the more realistic and balanced remake of the halo 1 pistol. [[User:MakeItGoSplodey|MakeItGoSplodey]] 04:43, 6 July 2008 (UTC)  

== The pistol is not semi-auto ==

The strength of other weapons is not relevant if it can't do the ranges in general that the pistol does. 50 foot distance TSK anyone? So shut the frick up you moron. So I suppose having to dodge pistol idiots like yourself and getting within the 15 to even 5 foot diameter distance to instakill you with an RL or Shotgun isn't skill? Right. Thank GOD Halo 3 will fix these idiotic people who STILL think the pistol is balanced.

Ok, tell you what, the disadvantage section has it uses, every weapon has its disadvantage, I say, even a shotgun has it's weakness, everything has a weakness, nobody's perfect, and I think that personal attack on this page is violating Halopedia's rule seriously. [[User:Master Chief Petty Officer|'''<font color="Silver">'''Master'''</font><font color="DarkGray">'''Chief'''</font><font color="Gray">Petty</font><font color="DimGray">Officer</font>''']]_{[[Special:Contributions/Master Chief Petty Officer|<font color="RoyalBlue">Spartan Contribution</font>]]} 07:32, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Ummm, I just read through the technical specs of the gun and noticed that there is a pretty detailed description on how to reload the M6D, and a description describing it as similar to modern day handguns. This by extension, effectively describes how to reload and operate most modern day handguns. And while it isn't extremely difficult to figure out, hard to find knowledge, or anything of the sort. I feel that knowledge and information like that shouldn't be so detailed, especially on a Halo wiki. I propose complete removal of the paragraph, or at least editing to cut down the detail overall. I would like to point out this is not paranoia that we may inadvertently cause a shooting. Indeed, I feel that this is hardly enough information to cause any sort of serious damage in the world. I just feel that such information isn't truly necessary or relevant. Like I said, this is a proposal, if you disagree, feel free to say so. [[User:XRoadToDawnX|XRoadToDawnX]] 19:41, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I propose the removal of much of the Technical Specifications section, as it deals with modern and trivial details of pistol usage rather than actual technical specifications. I also propose the deletion of the Influences section because it's data seems to be speculation and thus banned form this wiki.

::Thank you. The editing guidelines seem vague, especially on what constitutes cleanup per the Cleanup tag. On a related note, a stub is an article that does not contain all the information that could be there, correct? So if an article is short only due to a lack of information (the subject is only mentioned on one page of a novel, for example), does it merit a stub tag? Also, thinking of the articles [[M70]] and [[A2]], how unimportant/short do articles need to be to be nominated for deletion? -- [[User talk:Nutarama|Nutarama]] 17:24, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

:::What I use is the [[Blog:Improving_Articles_-_Introducing_"MOS"|M.O.S.]], proposed in a blog by Subtank a while ago. If I'm cleaning an article, I try to bring it in line with what is outlined there. From that point on, you may use your own judgment. I read your talk page - what she meant was just going in and removing things at random without any explanation. If you leave a note in the edit summary saying that you are cleaning up the article, you won't be bothered. Now, if it's something that may be contested, you can remove it and then bring it up on the talk page (I've done this a few times).  

::::Ok, thanks. I did that in my first 6 hours here, and I had no idea what the edit summary box was for or how to use it. -- [[User talk:Nutarama|Nutarama]] 15:12, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

While the game manual states that it is fully automatic, that is from the standpoint of the game controls - you can hold the trigger on the controller down and it will fire. However, one can observe Master Chief pulling the trigger in succession, NOT holding down the trigger. That he doesn't cock it and he doesn't hold down the trigger means it is ONLY semi-automatic!