Talk:Energy projector

Size?

I would like to ask about something and please forgive me if the facts i am disputing ARE correct or substantiated: I would like to point out that there are references to freds comment in halo first strike (According to Fred, only the "big ships have them) but surely this couldnt be the energy projector talked about on the page as when i re-read the book (my freinds copy) it made a hole wide enough for a covie grav lift to fit into whereas the energy projector on the page is said to be a needle thin beam...??? Aswell as the above i would like to add my opinion-I beleive that the energy projector is completely different to the mystery sniper ships weapon in halo the fall of reach (as it is needle thin) also i would like to say that i do not think that there has been any refference to is effectivness as to taking down the sheilds of a Covenant frigate or a Covenant destroyer with a single hit which is also stated on the page...hope this helps and if it dosent...well ill just assume it helps a little until im told otherwise. thanks for reading.—This unsigned comment was made by 62.253.128.15 (talk • contribs). Please sign your posts with ~~~~

• I strongly fail to concur. I will reread the "needle-thin" part, so let's reserve judgement. The part of taking down the shields of a Covie frig or destroyer comes from Halo: Ghosts of Onyx. I'm putting that part back up.—This unsigned comment was made by RelentlessRecusant (talk • contribs). Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Don't the covenant flagships have them too? Also, perhaps in space view cortana saw them in needle thin. If they were shot on groundwise it would appear much larger. Keep in mind that the book did say that the energy projector that was fired blasted the roof of the structure and that it melted the roof around the whole from sheer heat making it appear much larger than it actually wasHalo3 00:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)--Halo3

Its pretty simple: the beam itselfe is thin but has a wide effect area because the energy spreads out after impact with the target.Maiar 11:39, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

It is probably like lightning. When an electon "jumps" between a cloud and the ground it supperheats the air, making a white flash. AJ Werefang 18:10, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Picture!

Picture in the article doesn't show energy projector. Why? Because ships using beam weapon in pic are CCS cruisers... which don't have energy projectors. And glassing is done by plasma bombardment. Maybe the beam in the pic is plasma, 'coz it's possible that the Covenant has invented same kinda (but not as efficient?) plasma manipulation like Cortana in Halo:FS -Guest

All Covenant weapons are plasma based ProphetofTruth 14:35, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

CCS Battle-cruisers(note the BATTLE bit, its actualy a diferent class of ship than just cruiser) do have at least one energy projector. and energy projectors are the most efficient glassing weapon the covenant have because its effenct area is massive and it can do a sweeping shot due to its beam nature.

Assault Carrier Weapon?

Hello, I think that the weapon the assault carrier in Halo 2 is using against the Marathon-Cruiser is an Energy projector, because it's destroying the ship with just a single hit. Also its in the middle section of the ship, directly over the reactors. I think this would be the best place for such a powerful weapon. It can't be a plasma torpedo because this wouldn't look like a beam. And pulse laser aren't so big. (Sorry for my english) Sgt Perez 14:57, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Until a Bungie guy in recon armour and with a flaming head comes up to me and says it, it isn't true. This isn't the place for speculation, unless you want to put that in its own special "Theories" column or something. --TerminalFailure 03:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

When you think about it, what else could it be? considering the effect and appearence.Maiar 11:43, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I think this theory is plausible. The description of the weapon from Fall of Reach fits the one in that scene perfectly. It's a fast, blue beam that penetrates a UNSC ship with a single hit. Plus, it's on the top side of the Assault Carrier.--Jugus 20:17, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

The Projector

I think that all these weapons are probably energy projectors although in different forms, as it makes sense the Covenant could have more then one type. Not only that, but it is possible they can widen or thin the beam down for various purposes. As for the smaller ships using an energy projector, like I said before, it could simply be of a different type then the one used by the sniping ship. It would certainly be smaller though. As for firing in different directions, rerouting the beam I would assume couldnt be that difficult for the Covenant. Does this seem like the most plausible explanation? Tarius

Well the UNSC has different sizes of MAC for different ships so i suppose this is possible.

Covenant Plasma Weaponry

Good Day, upon this issue I place this, my own opinion. Aside from the Brutes, the Covenant weapon systems rely mostly upon the use of plasma, that is; super heated, ionized gas (Traditionally that of hydrogen particles). The nature of plasma is that as its particles are super charged and literarily spewing energy, most of which is extremely high levels of heat, the particles vibrate violently, giving it its liquid-like appearance. As it is a substance between solid and liquid, this makes it a significantly difficult substance to manipulate, even with technology accorded to the Covenant. The so called "Energy Projector" therefore is a misplaced name, as plasma is in fact matter, not energy. Therefore, the only weapons that fall under the label of energy projector, must be any form of Covenant Weapon that emits a beam, or bolt of energy, such as the Beam seen in the level "Cairo" of the Halo 2 Campaign when a Maranthon-Class Cruiser get hit by it and disrupted. The Energy Projector shown and commonly known is more accurately described as a Plasma Projector, and instead of being a focused beam of energy, is in fact more of a forced spray of plasma. Most likely using the same magnets utilized in a Plasma Rifle, the seen Plasma Projector, such as with the CCS-Battlecruiser, builds up ionized gas at the point of the weapon, where it will rapidly heat. Using the magnets provided with the weapon, the plasma is shot forward with tremendous velocity, sending it at first in a concentrated beam, though afterwards it tends to cone outwards, as seen at the end of the level "Floodgate" in the Halo 3 campaign, when the Fleet of Retribution's CCS-Battlecruisers are seen Glassing the City of Voi. (This method of the weapon being used is merely speculation based on observation, and is described to press the point of my argument that the so called "Energy Projector", is either affiliated with the wrong category of Covenant vessel weapon, or is in fact a misplaced name) Unfortunately, because the weapon is only named in the novels, it is difficult which weapon is specifically designated by this name, so I leave it to the mind of Bungie and the authors of the novels to decide what exactly is an Energy Projector of the mighty Covenant Warships. Anglomachian

Regarding the definition of plasma, you are talking complete boulderdash. A plasma is a substance with all the gas properties in addition to new ones. Additional properties include, any degree of ionisation present (from very little to total); a thermal range extending below 0 degress celcius. It is a phase beyond gas, not between liquid and solid. It gives off electromagnetic radiation similiar to a finger print of its chemical composition due to recomibination of charges within the plasma. Because plasma is electromagnetic, it can be controled be electric and magnetic interaction. The larger the potential difference within the plasma the more responsive it will be to external electric or magnetic fields. Note, although plasma has a voltage within it, no current flows, it is merely a excellent electrical conductor. Examples of plasma include: candle flame, turbine jet, solar corona, fire, tokomak fusion, Aruora.Plasmic Physics 11:27, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

How interesting - - - - - - - /\/\/\/\/\

Energy Projector in the Human Starships

The UNSC to owe to have this type of weapon included in your heavy arsenal. I say, estan in the XXVIth century. The technology of it this must at the time have developed this type of weapon as the " Hammer of Dawn " in Gears of War.--H A L O Legend 20:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't make any sense... could you rephrase that?- 5əb'7aŋk^(7alk) 20:42, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I think he's trying to say the Gears of War Hammer of Dawn is an Energy Projector, and proves its part of Halo canon(?) -- Administrator Specops306 - Qur'a 'Morhek ^{Honour Light Your Way!} 21:13, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Energy projector vs. super MAC platform

I would just like to toss an idea out, and I figured this would be the most relevant page to post it on. Specifically, in the Battle of Reach (this argument also applies to the First Battle of Earth), the massive Covenant supercruiser used its projectors to obliterate human vessels at extreme range. Why, then, did it not use this tactic against the MAC platforms? Range in space combat will ultimately be determined by two things, because there is no drag in space. The first key is the firing ship's muzzle velocity, the second being the maneuverability of the target. Now, even if you believe the completely impossible (see MAC talk page) 50% speed of light muzzle speed for the super MAC, the supercruiser (or any energy projector equipped ship) still has twice that muzzle velocity. So the covenant ship wins that half of the range argument. Secondly, MAC platforms are STATIONARY (or at least move in a completely predictable orbit), whereas the supercruiser can maneuver as needed. Together, these two things should make it blindingly obvious that any covenant fleet with even one ship equipped with an energy projector should be able to effortlessly obliterate MAC platforms. On top of this, ship mounted MACs are even more limited in muzzle velocity, and human ships have their usual inferior systems, which would imply drive systems as well. Thus, a covenant fleet should be able to outrange any human vessel so horribly that the battle would be over before the human vessels even got within range. If anyone has any commentary on my arguments here, please post it. If anyone wonders, this response comes from a piece of trivia that used to be on this page stating it was unknown why the assault carriers did not destroy the MAC platforms in this manner in the First Battle of Earth. Quakeomaniac 23:21, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

I believe that the reason is that the ship has to reroute all power to the Energy Projector which would leave it a siting duck for a minute or two if I recall correctly, which would give the MAC stations the chance to destroy it (In GoO, a large Covenant cruiser of the AJ type had to reroute all of its power to the Energy Projector which left it powerless). Also, this is Sci-fi, if you want to go against the MSAC canon speed then here is an example from ST that makes no sense: In a TOS ep. has Spock state that HALF AN OUNCE of anti-matter would blow half the atmosphere off an Earth-like planet...and it did. So if you are going to try and counter how silly things are in Halo saying "but its impossible!" Will no cut it.

Ok to begin with, why in the world would a ship be designed such that it has to use ALL of its power just to fire one weapon? Also, go re-read the encounter between the Incorruptible and the brute frigates. You clearly missed something. Namely, it is stated that a normal energy projector shot is not sufficient to destroy a covenant ship. The Incorruptible diverted all of its power to the weapon, yes, but it was an enormously overpowered shot so that it could destroy the frigate in one hit. This is not a normal circumstance, but an act of desperation. Also, the Reverence-class ships appear to be somewhat underpowered for their size. The ship depicted in Genesis and Legends (which has been classified as a battleship based on its abilities and size) was capable of firing several projectors at once, as was the FoR supercruiser. As for Star Trek getting a number incorrect, two things to say. First, it was probably an exaggeration about the dangers of antimatter. Second, the show was made in the 60's! Come on now, give them a break. Antimatter was not as well understood at that time. I, personally, will go with the exaggeration concept. P.S sign your posts. Quakeomaniac 17:57, January 26, 2010 (UTC)