Talk:Glassing

"Unidentified Brute"

Is it just me, or does it sound more like a Prophet speaking? 65.96.101.124 16:57, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree, it sounds more like a prophet than a brute. Perhaps it is Truth speaking but there is no way to tell, definetly more likely to be a prophet though. It has been changed accordingly. --142.217.125.64 23:42, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

It sounds more like an Elite. Prophets' voices are more refined, more calm; Brutes voices are more rugged, more rough. Elites, on the other hand, have the same British accent that Prophets have, but when they get pissed they sound like the voice in the trailer. --GPT_(talk)^(eating) 23:46, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

When the -blam- did Elites pick up British accents? Last time I checked, the Prophets didn't have a British accent either. Maybe slight accenting in some parts of speech, but not a full British accent. In the trailer, the voice that says that Earth will burn, that is Truth's voice. He said it in a cutscene in Crow's Nest I think. ElectricSquid 16:15, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

No,

No, Its an angry prophet's voice, i dont know witch one's voice but its a confirmed prophets'. 100% Positive. --þ†öW讥 22:21, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Banshees glassing? LOL

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. -- CoH|Councillor]] Specops306 - Kora 'Morhek 22:30, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Halo wars

So there is a superattack for the Covenant in Halowars.That means that the humans have supersttacks,too.And no banshees cannot glass.

You're stupid, Banshees can glass. Why don't you pick up a book and read, and maybe you'll find that spaces go after periods. And maybe you'll even learn how to spell! Kougermasters 15:56, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, it a LOT easier to glass a planet with a warship, not a banshee. Even a thousand banshees could be destroyed with almost no effort by heavy weaponry.Ketsumaye 02:55, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Sources much?

Does anyone think how great Halopedia would be if our other pages had this many sources? Kougermasters 15:56, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Glassing or Razing

I am a student of geology. I have seen videos of the saga of HALO, and it was "glassed" is a bit outdated for the game. In my view it is better "razed" that "glassed" because it speaks of a war. Well, that's all. User:H A L O Legend

Aye, but think of what happens when superheated plasma is dropped in amounts that could turn London into a crater in minutes... Everything melts, and when it cools, it will be hard rock, and lots of glass... hence the phrase. ~Enlightment~ 22:54, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

Glassing in "Gears of War II"

I played "Gears of War II" and noticed something very peculiar. The Hammer of Dawn is very similar to glassing the saga of HALO, as they have the same power of destruction. Even the trailers of the game for the first part is that the Hammer of Dawn if it looks like the glassing. --H A L O Legend 20:29, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

its GLASSED not RAZED

legend, who cares about your view? glassed is the term. STOP REPLACING GLASSED WITH RAZED. SPARTANF-259 03:34, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Legend, the reason the term "glassing" is used is because the surface of the land is literally turned to glass. 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. Honor Guard Spartansniper450 16:17, Nov 20, 2008 (UTC)

... I hate reports... KAC-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. KAC-File:Knatbus.jpg|24px]] 16:42, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Aftermath?

When the Covenant glass a planet do you think they restore it (terraform) with some indigenous life from prior to the bombardment, or do they simply destroy it's unique ecosystem without a second thought? If Habitable worlds are as rare as implied in Contact Harvest, any intelligent race should covet them (I would).

All they do is kill everything and everyone and move on. Durandal-217 02:22, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

The covenant expect to be turned into gods.... (It hought hte egytians had a lot of gods! lol) so why keep such... earthly possessions.. (hehe) ~Enlightment~ 22:56, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

The Return says that the glass hardens and becomes a crater full of charcoal - coloured rock. Matt98 15:09 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Glassing isn't just done by plasma!

Plasma isn't the only thing that can glass a planet people! Something that cause extreme amounts of heat, like a nuclear warhead, can do it. This term is used in other science fiction (and possibly in the real world, but I'm not sure), and usually just describes any large scale orbital bombardment. Carbine 01:31, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Ever heard the term, "turning something into a glass parking lot"? That's a real world reference.

Smoke

01:35, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

And I'm not trying to anger any other players by saying this, I'm just trying to state a scientific fact, so please do not blow up at me like poor legend up there. Carbine 01:31, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the UNSC attacked a Covenant planet with a giant warhead, but it didn't glassed it, it blew up a quarter of the planet thing. Ketsumaye 02:58, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Is glassing achieved via "plasma raindrops" or "beam strikes"?

The article says that the main form of glassing is:

"The first and the most common method used is when a ship or ships build up plasma along their lateral lines and discharge lances of plasma from orbit, which are guided until they impact the surface. This is repeated until every square centimeter of the planet is destroyed; in most cases it only takes the Covenant twelve hours to glass a planet."

Is there any evidence for this being used as the main form of glassing? In both Halo 2 and Halo 3 we see Covenant capital ships use underside energy projectors/laser beams to destroy something; in Halo 2 such a "solid" beam is used to destroy Regret's temple, and in Halo 3 Africa is glassed via similar "solid" beams.

Furthermore, in the Halo: Reach artwork it is possible to see, if you look closely, a couple of CCS-class ships firing similar solid beams; it being the case that "before the beginning, we know the end", it's probably safe to assume that artwork is meant to represent glassing.

Last, but not least, Halo Wars itself depicts a glassing attack; the "cleansing beam", which is a solid "laser-like" particle beam.

Yet the article also says that

"The second method is used when a ship must effectively destroy a ground target from low range. This method involves building up plasma from the underside of the ship and then discharging it in a laser beam form; this method of low-range glassing has only been witnessed a few times"

A few times? It's the only form of glassing we've EVER seen. Is there any evidence for this being lesser-used?

I've always imagined glassing to look like thousands and thousands of plasma bolts, like the ones emitted from Phantoms, streaking down from orbit, like millions of purpley-red raindrops, creating miniature splashes on the planet surface, much like the first description given in the article. And indeed, that's how I WANT to imagine glassing to look; I think it's a fantastic, grim, horrifying scene to imagine. Cruisers gliding over a planet firing particle beams, ala the second version, just doesn't have the same chilling effect on me.

So while I might be questioning the evidence for "the most common method", I'm eager to be proven wrong, if only so that I can preserve my own mental image of glassing, in line with the first description, and not the in-game depictions so far.  :)

82.5.228.183 22:17, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

What you said you've always imagined glassing to look like is how they glass a planet. And that's why it is the most common method because its always been described like that every time they've glassed a planet. Halo: The Fall of Reach Prologue Page 8 "Three dozen Covenant ships—big ones, destroyers and cruisers—winked into view in the system. They were sleek, looking more like sharks than starcraft. Their lateral lines brightened with plasma—then discharged and rained fire down upon Jericho VII. The Chief watched for an hour and didn’t move a muscle. The planet’s lakes, rivers, and oceans vaporized. By tomorrow, the the atmosphere would boil away, too. Fields and forests were glassy smooth and glowing red-hot in patches."

Halo First Strike Page 31-32 "Three Covenant cruisers broke through the clouds and drifted toward the generator complex. Their plasma artillery flickered and glowed with energy. Fred snapped open his COM channel and boosted the signal strength to its maximum. "Delta Team: Fall back. Fall back now!" Static hissed over the channel, and several voices overlapped. He heard one of his Spartans—he couldn't tell who—break through the static." "More voices crowded the channel, and Fred thought he heard Admiral Whitcomb's voice, but whatever orders he issued were incomprehensible. Then there was only static, and then the COM went dead. The cruisers fired salvos of plasma that burned the sky. Distant explosions thumped, and Fred strained to see if there was any return fire—any sign that his Spartans were fighting or retreating. Their only hope was movement; the enemy firepower would shred a fixed position. "Fall back," he hissed. "Now, damn it." Kelly tapped him on the shoulder and pointed up. The clouds parted like a curtain drawn as a fireball a hundred meters across roared over their position. He saw the faint outlines of dozens of Covenant battleships in low orbit. "Plasma bombardment," Fred whispered. He'd seen this before. They all had. When the Covenant conquered a human world they fired their main plasma batteries at the planet—fired until its oceans boiled and nothing was left but a globe of broken glass. "That's it," Kelly murmured. "We've lost. Reach is going to fall."

Halo: The Cole Protocol Chapter 19 Page 148 "On the screen, plasma roiled and grew on the sides of the Covenant cruisers as the ships prepared to rain fire fire down upon the world the humans called Charybdis IX"

Page 150 "Far below, the sleek, sharklike shape of a Covenant cruiser passed over the patches of land, and as it did so, everything underneath it glowed. The Screen flickered off, jumping to a new scene: a shot from the top of a skyscraper in downtown Scyllion. What looked like shimmering rain fell from the sky, but whatever it touched the city exploded into actinic flame. Buildings melted, slumping over and then bubbling down into a lavalike mix of asphalt and concrete and shattered glass. The camera wavered as blue haze began to build up near it, and then it melted and static filled the screen. Another live feed, from far outside the city, showed the blue waterfalls of plasma strike the river, sending up a giant cloud of steam as it was vaporized."

It also very important to remember that the Covenant utilize multiple methods of glassing, each Covenant ship is armed with over a dozen or more weapons. The beam strike is used when a Covenant ship is too close to the surface of a planet to release a bolt, the ship would be affected by the resulting blast.

Every time the Covenant have used the beam it has always come from underneath the ship, not from the side, and it has always been used when a Covenant ship is close to the surface of a planet, in the Battle of Pegasi Delta the cruiser, hovering not far above the ground fires the beam to kill the SPARTAN-IIIs fighting below, in Halo 2 the carrier fires at the temple, because they are close to the ground, in Halo 3 the ships firing their beams to glass Voi because they are too close, and in the background of the Halo: Reach image you can see mountains in the background meaning they are too close to the surface.

As for Halo Wars, I don't count that, it is impossible to effectively glass a planet using a beam of plasma from orbit, it doesn't work that way. Durandal-217 23:18, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

- Excellent, thanks for your input; much appreciated! 82.5.228.183 22:51, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

I thought that the Covenant only used the plasma bolts (rain drop), as seen in Halo CE end cutscene of the first leval, untill the laser beam of plasma was invented by the humans who had boarded the Covenant ship in First Strike, which was adopted by the Covenant later. I have a faint memory of Cortana realizing that it was possible to fire the cannon with out first charging it (The Covenant aren't very original). I know it shows the laser beam being used in Halo Wars but I personally only consider that to be half canon. --Hsad 02:00, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

The Covenant have always used laser beams, their ships are equipped with more than 12 energy weapons depending on the class. They use the bolts when they just want to glass a planet from orbit, but if for some reason something is of interest to them and they need to just clear an area they use the excavation beam. If they were to fire the bolts too close to the surface the impact would affect the ship. As for the improved Covenant weaponry Cortana used on the Ascendant Justice that never fell into Covenant hands it was only her improved navigation through slipspace that they captured and than used. Durandal-217 02:25, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

Halo 3: ODST

In ODST the Covenant vessels are said to be 'charging their excavational beams' before they perform the low level glassing as seen in Halo 3. Molotovsniper 21:38, September 25, 2009 (UTC)

• O o

/¯/___________________________ _\

| IMMA CHARGING MAH LAZER!!!

\_\¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯/ --Bronze98 01:44, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

Restoration?

Is there any known way to restore a glassed planet? Tell me if there's any canonical way mentioned but I have one theoretical way.

Since the planet is now mostly composed of a glass-like material, eventual erosion, or simply convental bombing with solid projectiles, will break it all up into sand. After that, one needs to plant a lot of desert-hardy plants, like cactuses, so that the area starts to retain water better. Since condesation cycle has been heavily disrupted, the planet is still going to undergo nuclear winters, but eventual holding of water by plants and the sand being able to trap in heat better is going to cause it to melt and instead, the planet will simply undergo massive planetary floods.

As for the return of soil, that is a lot harder, as you simply can't really change sand but decomposition of dead animals and plants may eventually start forming peat, a sub-ancestor of soil.

Eventually, you going to result in a planet with a largely monolithic biosphere, with a lot of sand and sand plants, maybe even sand trees!, if genetics can create those in the 26th. The planet is going to flood a lot, though the ratio of it may start lessening each decade with the returning atmosphere. You don't really get the same planet as before, but it's a start. It'll just take a REALLY long time, though. Does this theory sound resonable?Tuckerscreator 19:14, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

There is no way to restore a planet to its previous state once its been glassed. Period. Durandal-217 22:49, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

Maybe by terraforming the planet which would take more than a few decades to complete?- 5əb'7aŋk^(7alk) 22:51, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

That's exactly what I suggested. Did you read my theory, Durandal?Tuckerscreator 22:52, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

Thing is, the animals aren't there to decompose, they were turned to ashes. Of course, there is another way, remove said glass, and started breaking the rocks under neath...

But then you gotta remember, the atmosphere is burnt out by the flames. ~Enlightment~ 23:00, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

You just import the animals. First bring herbivores to regulate the plants, then carnivores to regulate those, etc. As for the atmosphere, that also has to be imported in the sense, while the plants and animals take care of the greenhouse gases, you'll probably need shipments others like hydrogen regurlarly until they been being recycled by the plants there. Might take a good century to fix.Tuckerscreator 23:07, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

Soil problem solved! Since the ashy soot left from the initial burning is comparable to volcanic soil, which is among the richest of all soils... well, it's pretty self explanatory, so the cooling of the atmosphere will allow us to harvest it!Tuckerscreator 23:11, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

Colony reclamation would be an attractive prospect for the UNSC, but I don't see how it could happen in the immediate future, for a number of reasons;

• 1.) The glassed crust would need to be completely removed, exposing bare bedrock, and a layer of soil added in its stead. I don't see any feasible way of generating enough soil to cover an entire planet.
• 2.) The climate cycle has been completely annihilated, and if there is any atmosphere left it is going to be likewise shot to hell, with a hell of a lot of carbon. Atmosphere reclamation may be possible in the future, but there's little humanity can do to affect the weather.

Reclamation may not be an option, but that doesn't exclude the colonisation of previously unprofitable planets that were overlooked by the UNSC in favour of the better-suited colonies like Harvest, already perfectly inhabitable. However, there are still huge problems that need to be surmounted;

• 3.) With the human race reduced to a couple of hundred million, there simply aren't enough colonists to make colonisation a worthwhile enterprise. Neither would the UNSC want to spread its few remaining citizens across a small empire, still vulnerable.
• 4.) Even if all of that could be overcome technologically, in terms of resources and manpower there are simply more important things to focus on first, such as the restoration of the military to a state where it is able to protect human interests, the reconstruction of civilian infrastructure, and the changeover from a military junta to a democratic government. Throwing money and manpower at a lost cause has never been popular.

And, for the record, by "sand plants" I'm assuming you mean plants that can survive in an arid, sandy environment - they have existed for millions of years, and are already being used in reclamation projects, though decidedly local in nature. Beaches exist only because of sand dunes, which in turn rely on various species of grass for coherence. Beachgoers trample those plants, destroying the dunes, and ruin the beach - the reintroduction of those plants restores the dunes.-- Administrator Specops306 - Qur'a 'Morhek 09:36, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

It is true that adding soil would be an extremely difficult thing to do, and I don’t think that’s practical to do so. But that’s not what my theory was saying, rather it was suggesting that one could bombard the planet with MACs so that the glass gets crushed into sand, then planting plants that are suited for arid environments. The “nuclear snow” could provide water, and the plants themselves could be kept in a greenhouse while the gases they create are regularly released into the air, to recreate the atmosphere. You’ll end up essentially with a sand planet with lots of plants, but it’s a temporary solution until when more animals can be introduced, allowing their dead bodies and the igneous ash to be used as soil. It will still take a VERY long time, and some problems will still come up though, like creation of an ozone layer, and other matters but it’s a start. Sorry if it sounds like I’m re-stating the hole thing but I think I need to make it a bit clearer about how exactly it would go. Anything else I’ve missed?Tuckerscreator 22:16, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

Human power

It is incredible what the human race can do in times of crisis. XXVI century is a fact that we are beyond what we believe. One thing is to reconstruct the worlds destroyed by the Human-Covenant War. Many think it is hard but in my opinion is a big challenge to be overcome. The union is strength.--H A L O Legend 20:43, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

In the trailer of the game of Halo: Reach observes that the Covenant I attack the planet but, according to my observation determine that glassed part of the surface, and not the whole planet like was thinking, but if he was one of the mas affected during the war. My conclusion is that the irresolute planets were not so affected, like that the human population did the possible thing to survive. You prop according to the history, the UNSC I leave the planet after recovering it but a faction Covenant still has to protecting it. If there were glassed the whole planet, the serious atmosphere difficult to tolerate for the life. But as all they know " what does not kill you, it does you mas strongly "--H A L O Legend 23:12, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

??? Could you clean this up please? Because I'm having a bit of a hard time understanding some of it. Anyways:

1. You determined from a trailer about a minute and a half long that the Covenant didn't glass the whole planet how?

2. You concluded from one low end glassing (there is a Forerunner relic on Reach)that Humans who the Covenant are wiping from the face of the galaxy survived on worlds hit with enough firepower to boil the oceans and atmosphere away and reach to an unknown depth of the crust?

ProphetofMercy 10:18, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

Habitable

Is a glassed planet habitable? I thought it drained the atmosphere into space, but in Halo Wars, there are still people on Harvest. Teh lolz! Bionicle+Lotr 02:13, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

In most cases no, they are not. Once a planet is glassed completely the atmosphere begins to slowly boil away, after a day its gone and you are left with in a sense a skeleton of a once lush and beautiful world. However the Covenant in some exceptions will take out key strategic locations of a planet to gain access to an area or object of interest - Reach is a fine example of this. However from the moment the Covenant begin destroying key elements that make a planet habitable it is slowly dieing. Halo Wars didn't get that right at all. Durandal-217 02:41, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

Neither did Contant Harvest, it seems. Unless of course, Halo Wars did get it right.-- Forerunner 22:27, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

Atmosphere boiling away? lol!

I read this article earlier and I felt the need to offer a tidbit of info; Glassed planets WOULD NOT lose their atmosphere, even a little! This statement is getting more and more annoying as time goes by, for one reason, Earth has had worse than glassing happen to it's surface over it's 4.6 billion year history. several times.

Most will not know what I am referring to (no offence guys!), but the story goes like this:

100 million years after Earth had cooled and condensed in it's current orbit, it was being pummeled by asteroids, comets and planetesmials during the "Early Heavy bombardment". During this time, Earth had a nearly 50 bar (50 atmospheres) atmosphere of hydrogen, helium, neon, methane, Carbon Dioxide, and many other pollutants. This atmosphere was heated to well over 5000 degrees Celsius by the constant bombardment by these asteroids for millions of years. The culmination of this peroid ended with a smashing of the Mars-sized protoplanet Theia into Earth, Sending super heated material out into space to form rings, and later, the moon.This massive impact devastated the Earth, sending it's atmosphere into orbit, vapourizing it's oceans and killing it's microbes in a single day, much like glassing in Halo.The temprature of Earth rose to Twenty Thousnad Degrees and still, the atmosphere was forced away by the impact, not the heat of the impact.

But the atmosphere returned, the oceans refilled their basins, and microbes, somehow, survived the global catastrophe. Read this and tell me that the air of a planet would boil away after a buch of squids in hollowed-out peices of metal send arcs of plasma to the surface, try it, I dare you.

Sorry for the rant, but it was neccesary to dispel of the "Bad Science" in this fact. Have a good night guys, and I'll see you on halo :) —This unsigned comment was made by UAFS (talk • contribs). Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Note that the above is still a theory/hypothesis and should not be taken as fact.- 5əb'7aŋk^(7alk) 01:06, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

1. It is a canon fact that the Covenant are able to remove the atmosphere of planets and the power to do so is well within in their reach.

2. Proof that oceans had formed by that time and life existed. As I recall Earth had yet to cool down enough for oceans to exist and life had yet to form. A Mars size planet would have easily wiped out all life on a planet. And once again it is canon in the Haloverse and Covenant have more than enough firepower.

To farther prove my point, here is a link:

http://en.wikipedia.org./wiki/History_of_the_Earth

And anyways off the top of my head you only need about 3.3 x 10^26 J to accelerate the mass of the atmosphere to escape velocity. Which happens to be an order of magnitude short of the 3.5e27 J required to boil the oceans away. Only problem is the atmosphere would not be gone until the next day in the TFoR quote, but can be reconcile it with the fact that a new atmosphere composed of vapourised crust and ocean would replace the first.

The only one here with "bad Science" is you. And even if you were right than it would be you vs Halo canon.

ProphetofMercy 08:58, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

What gives Mercy? I don't recall kicking your dog or punching your wife (or husband), i appreciate the response, but hold it on the emotive response. If I am wrong, I am wrong, as long as you can prove it (which you very satisfactorily attempted to do!), but I don't use this site to be insulted, nor did I use this site to insult canon/Bungie or you. And to respond to your vigorous rebuking of my theory (scientific theory)

1. You are correct in this regard, the Covenant are capable of removing the atmosphere of an Earth-like planet, but not via normal glassing. It would be necessary to heat the air to millions (literally dozens/hundreds of millions) of degrees centigrade in order to sufficiently excite the atmospheric molecules enough to reach escape velocity (10.735 km/s relative to Earth's rotation). This would require far more power than simply Burning the planet with cooler plasma, but would achieve the same effect, rendering the planet uninhabitable, rendering it worthless to the UNSC but allowing much easier reclamation should the covenant decide to utilize the planet for whatever reason in the future (supply depot/dump?)

2. Using the wikipedia article you provided I read a helpful observation, and I quote: "As the planet cooled, clouds formed. Rain gave rise to the oceans. Recent evidence suggests the oceans may have begun forming by 4.2 Ga.[22] At the start of the Archaean eon, the Earth was already covered with oceans." look at the "Origin of the oceans and atmosphere" section in your provided article. Also, the Mars-sized planetoid Theia hit Earth a mere 70-100 million years after the formation of the solar system, before the Earth cooled and had oceans, and before life. Life was found (in the form of microfossils) to have lived, at a reasonably advanced level, 3.6 billion years ago. This necessitates that life have arisen Earlier, and according to some ideas,, possibly even before 4 billion years, while the water was contaminated and hot. Even if Theia were to have impacted Earth, life would have survived, if not on Earth but above it. Life forms have been found by miners in South Africa more than a kilometer underground, these would survive practically any impact. Even if the crust were to be blown into space, at least some bacteria would survive inside jettisoned rocks in space, as several species can withstand hundreds of G's of acceleration (with a high fatality rate). These rocks would rain on Earth and reseed it with life, even if it were reduced to a single microbe in population, it would give rise to the whole diversity of life yesterday (metaphorically), today and tomorrow.

Your "off the top of your head" rates are close to correct, but you are mistaken for what the aftermath would be. If Earth's atmosphere were to be boiled away today, 99% of life on the planet would die, aside from extremophile bacteria underground, but the air would return. If the air were blown off, the rarefied molecules of gas would trail in Earth orbit for several years, at a slightly lower speed than Earth orbits. The gas would "fall" into the planets gravity well and be reincorporated into the atmosphere as it cooled off. The air would return, the water would come next (as it was present in the gas trail as it evaporated), and maybe, just maybe, life would one day return to the surface to begin anew. Planets have a certain love for their atmosphere, which will part them only if blown away by the solar wind, which has insufficient strength to blown all the air away at Earth's orbital distance.( this presumes the planet orbits a yellow star, which ours does)

One more thing, the Covenant does indeed have the capability to completely devastate a planet, stripping it's atmosphere away, but then again, so does the UNSC, The Flood, Even we primitive beings could do it at sufficiently high levels of effort.(via directed asteroids/mass drivers). Ironically, the UNSC's Magnetic Accelerator Cannons would make better bombardment weapons than the Covenant plasma lances and pulses, as the massive kinetic impact would devastate hundreds of kilometers and blast away the atmosphere, while the plasma would simply raze.

So before you say I have bad science, read up on it and do some homework, cause' Bungie and company/writers/developers/artists have this wrong. The covie's may actually purposefully drain the atmosphere to render it even more worthless, but this wouldn’t be done with plasma, but probably an unseen-unmentioned weapon/tool that certain Covenant bring in after the battle. so.....yeah :).--UAFS 01:58, December 21, 2009 (UTC)UAFS

Ah...if the Covenant can boil away the first atmosphere in one hour with plasma torps then they have alreay put enough energy into the planet to boil away the first before a second one forms from the vaped oceans and crust.

Evolutions

From what I read in Halo: Evolutions, it looks like complete glassing is only reserved for special occasions, due to the tremendous effort required. This seems to reconcile the fact that the UNSC originally had 800 colonies, but only 76 were glassed. All the others were only partially bombarded to take out population and military centers. It seems like this would make the UNSC's post-war reclamation efforts vastly easier as well. As for the misconception that every conquered planet was glassed, it is easy to see why the humans would think that, due to the limited contact they had with their planets after they fell to the covenant.

That is what I have thought all along, but now we finally have evidence. Thank you. --Fluffball Gato 05:32, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

It's really more of a retcon, Nylund made it very clear in Fall of Reach and First Strike that the Covenant were always very thorough and didn't leave a single square centimeter un-glassed.--Jugus 06:09, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

Could you post the section on glassing from it that talks about this please? Also the UNSC only had 17-21 major population centers; the rest were just about anything like asteroids etc.etc. from the Halo Enc. (have to double check later though)... know off to email Bungie to try and get glassing retcon back to TFoR and FS type. On second thought though it could just be that planets like Reach were closer to normal glassing since we know the Covenant have Plasma torps with a yield of 1 Teraton of TNT for standard yield (based off fact that ship MAC is 1.17 TT of TNT) so the glassing that put it at 77 TT per torp (assuming 1 minute recharge rate for pg. 8 of TFoR off of just the oceans being vapped) can just be the Covenant showing off for any UNSC forces still around.

207.200.116.133 08:29, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

In the story The Return, it says that the prohpets had the shipmaster glass the Covenant symbol of faith into the world, then have them glass remaining armies and population centers, which is said to a common act.--Sgt.T.N.Biscuits 17:51, December 8, 2009 (UTC)

2 questions

A few questions about glassing, I hope you don’t mind 1. Does lechatelierite have any known use or function or is it just refuse? And how is it different compared to actual glass? 2. Do the Covenant have any mentioned way of restoring a glassed area? Seems like that would be useful events like the Grunt rebellion.(I have a theory about glassing restoration above. Check it out if you haven’t read it.)Tuckerscreator 22:24, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

Well the Balaho was never glassed, the Covenant don't seem to care about restoring worlds tainted by heresy, so it is doubtful they have a way to reverse the destruction of a planet's surface. Also the Prophets seem content to exploit the universe as long as they make a gain. So again doubtful. And if you wanna know more about lechatelierite go on wikipedia, it is glass, the "actual glass" you may be referring to is probably the purified version we use. And on that note, the Covenant don't use the glass for anything, they take a piece and install in in a macabre chandelier in High Charity and leave the world behind. ProphetofTruth 18:50, December 8, 2009 (UTC)

Why the revert?

Yesterday, I updated the glassing page to include the new information from Halo:Evolutions as well as some explanations on the different types of glassing. Today, I come back and it's all gone. The History bar says that User:Durandal-217 reverted because of "terrible grammar and formating." Maybe so, but that's only a temporary problem, bad grammar and formatting gradually fades away with more editors visiting. But the new information DID have to go up there, since Halo:Evolutions has revealed so much.

So I would like permission to restore the page to the last edit by User:-Ascension-, since he respected my edit and took the time to fix some of the grammar and formatting. If not, then at least inform what mistakes and problems there are with my edit so that I can correct them and restore the information later. The current page version is much too crammed and in dearth of this new information so that it is why I ask. Thank you.Tuckerscreator 00:36, March 8, 2010 (UTC)

Your edit was more like a forum post then an article, you deleted the gallery and spread the images all over the place and it looked terrible. And I already added the updated information you initially wanted to include in the history section. Durandal-217 00:41, March 8, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining, Durandal. I'm still a rather new user and I'm satill learning when it comes to writing articles. Could please give me some examples of where my re-write came off as "forumy" and could be improved for next time? Because this page does need a re-vamp and below are my reasons.

First, the image spreading was because I was trying to give some examples of instances where the different types of glassing have been seen in-game. Galleries are not required for every article, in fact, I would discourage them, because it implies the article is not well-written enough that these images can be integrated. Except in a case of an article having an excess of images where integration is not feasible, such as with the Halo: Reach page, I would not recommend gallery sections for many articles.

The page needs to be made more reader-friendly. Right now, there are only three sections(not counting the Trvia section) and they have been lumped to together largely in a pack of text that is quite an eyesore. This is especcially a problem with the first paragraph, since it has so much detail but the many complicated terms make read it very difficult.

Thirdly, the page does not have enough information, or it is all misplaced. One line about the required attendance of a Minor Prophet is not enough to explain all the detailed information that Halo:Evolutions gave about pre-glassing rituals. The trivia section is also misplaced, as it could easily be its own new section and could even be expanded to include a list about the known glassed planets. And finally, there needs to be a section explaining the usages and cost of glassing, which is what I added earlier before the edit was reveted.

So what I am asking is that we find which sections in my previous edit were badly written, and then we revert the edit and I correct them. A badly written reboot is only a temporary problem, as the fact that it is adding new information to the site atones for the errors and errors can be easily corrected by more experienced users. But a badly written article is a much worse problem, as withholding any attempts to re-boot it will ensure that it remains forever stagnant.Tuckerscreator 21:00, March 8, 2010 (UTC)

Detail is needed and is required for any article, sacrificing detail for the sake of dumbing things down to be "reader friendly" doesn't fly with me, so I under no circumstances will not allow any sacrifice of important details. Next we will not be reverting to your version of the page because it was servilely flawed, and the information you placed was either irrelevant, or misunderstood, I will detail the following problems below:

• The first section of the article is completely unnecessary, as all of those things can be detailed within the history section of the article. Also the entire religious ritual as seen in Evolutions has only been documented once. You wrote this as if it happens all the time which it does not. In many cases we know lesser prophets are stationed on Covenant ships for different purposes, some of which are to oversee major events, others for pure religious purposes. The part you write about glassing used to speed up an invasion is incorrect. Glassing is not used to speed up any invasion, glassing is used to destroy a major population center or an entire planet, or to wipe out military installations, not to speed anything up.
• The second section of the article should actually be the first part and digging is technically the same as the second method.
• The third section is unnecessary.
• Uses has already been reclassified into history and contains the most relevant information.
• All images are to go into a gallery as per MOS, other pages are more flexible depending on the size of the article in question, however this page should only have one visible image inside the article and that is the Reach image.

Upon reading your points I do agree that there are tweaks that the page would benefit from, but as far as a revamp goes, it is unnecessary. How I would like to move forward, is to keep the contents formatting of the page unchanged but add to it without making it look "dirty". Here is how I would like to move forward on the structuring.

Contents

1. Doctrine

This section begins as it does now with minor differences and then leads in to what methods they employ.

1.1 Orbital Bombardment

This section explains as it does now, how orbital bombardment works, what is done - minor additions will be made, this will also be merged with the effects caused by orbital bombardment.

1.2 Low Range Bombardment

This explains both the low range bombardment the Covenant employ as well as its uses an an excavation tool.

2. History

History should remain as it is now with one exception.

2.1 Human-Covenant War

Here will detail how glassing is used during the war.

3. Halo Wars

No changes.

4. Trivia

No changes.

5. Gallery

No changes.

If you agree with the proposed contents, than with all due respect, I should be the one to handle the articles new structuring and formatting. Anything you wish to add is welcomed so long that it is written correctly, and is done right, I will supervise what you add and if I feel it can be done better, or is not needed I will change/remove for the quality purpose of the article. Is this agreeable? Durandal-217 01:00, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

That sounds great, good format. Admittedly, I would prefer for more image integration within an article, but if that's what the Manual of Style says, then I guess that's how we'll have to keep it. Would recommend that I work on the reformat one section at a time, or all at once?

Also, Halo:Evolutions does say that glassing has been used to speed up an attack. Two lines from the book say: The Covenant used smaller plasma bombardments frequently to easily destroy human cities and armies. and later on, In almost all cases plasma bombardments were used purely as weapons, tools to speed the destruction of the humans.

Minor Prophets are also required for each "cleansing." It mentions it mentions that nobody else in the shipmaster's clan has ever been allowed an opportunity to escort a Prophet and there is also the fact that the Prophet must announce the gylph in which to begin the process, which they say is required. The Shipmaster also mentions the fact that he has practiced heavily for this, which implies a pre-set process. I forgot to mention the gylph part above in my earlier post, that also needs to be in the article.Tuckerscreator 15:53, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

What Evolutions is trying to say is that in the initial stages of an invasion the Covenant will use smaller plasma weapons to wipe out major population centers before moving on to destroy an entire planet. The same thing is referenced in Cole Protocol. Chapter 21, page 152 "Energy rolled over the square buildings that the humans loved to cluster near one another on the ground. That made it all the more easier for the Covenant to destroy them." The part about glassing being use to speed up the destruction is a literal term. What its saying is, rather then send an entire invasion force to kill everybody on a planet which costs lives, time and what not, they just glass the planet from orbit because it's a easier, faster, streamlined process.

As for the Minor Prophet part, yes that is for the most part is true, however we do know that there are cases in which a religious ritual is not needed in order to destroy a human world, Harvest is one of them, so we know that this may be flexible so we must take that into account. We also know that only one planet has been engraved with a glyph, and that this is not standard, as no other canonical source has ever shown, or detailed such and until other sources do; then it has to remain neutral because of it. The part about the prophet declaring a glyph is not an issue though because the Covenant often declare and showcase glyphs.

Once I've finished modifying the article, if there is anything you wish to add to it, do it in one swoop, because going in and editing each part of the article makes it look like you are point whoring Halopedias editing reward system, which is a bannable offense. Remember that.

I've already begun work on the revision and I should be done later tonight, as I have other things I need to attend to today. Durandal-217 19:19, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

Looking over it again, maybe I would suggest one change to your proposed format. Could we change the title of the first section from “Doctrine” to “Effects(Of glassing)” or “Results(Of glassing)” and move it after the section about the different types and uses of glassing? That would give it a more rffective transition, from when glassing is used to what it does. And your last few arguments make sense. Thanks for the help! And thanks for the advice, I didn’t know one could get banned for “Point raping.”Tuckerscreator 05:29, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

Also, we should a list of the known glassed planets. That could be useful.Tuckerscreator 05:34, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

No, it should called Doctrine because that is what glassing is - a military doctrine. Using a title exactly like Effects (of glassing) is unprofessional and I believe I've already taken care of what you're talking about. As for a list of known glassed planets I will consider that, still working on it should be done in a hour or so. Durandal-217 05:47, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

And there we go, article updated - one more thing if you are going to make an edit, don't go excessively overboard with explaining who said what for any ritual or what not as it just looks like filler material, such minute details are not always necessary. Durandal-217 09:03, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

I like it! Thanks a lot for the help! I only made a few minor eidts, fixing a few grammar errors, and adding a link the Energy Projector article and Wikipedia's article on Lechatelirite. Too bad the Manual of style has that current image policy, but aside from that, I like how it is. Thanks for helping.Tuckerscreator 05:24, March 11, 2010 (UTC)

Ariel?

Why is Ariel listed a Glassed planet? The Covenant left after Dutch and Romeo destroyed the artifact, and I don't remember them Glassing it afterwards. TDSpiral94 05:32, March 11, 2010 (UTC)

The Covenant must of destroyed whatever was left, the Covenant do not just get up and leave an enemy controlled planet regardless of what is lost. Durandal-217 05:37, March 11, 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. --Jugus (Talk | Contribs) 09:23, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

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?Tuckerscreator 04:06, May 2, 2010 (UTC)

No. Under certain conditions images being used for reference could, or should be added. However this article should not have any images spread throughout it because its 1: too small and 2: looks clean and professional the way it is now. And you missed it in MOS go back and look under weapons. Durandal-217 04:41, May 2, 2010 (UTC)

Can't find the section, Durandal, don't see any section labeled "Weapons." But I'll take your word for it. At any rate, what I'm suggesting is not an image spread. Rather, what I'd do is put a picture of an Orbital Glassing with that corresponding section, and of a low-range glassing in that corresponding section, to make it easier to understand. A smaller edit could be putting the image from "The Return" in the "Doctrine" section, since it feels somewhat out of palce compared to the other images in the gallery. They've done a similar thing on the MJOLNIR Powered Assault Armor/Mark IV page, since there are several different types. Does this sound like a reasonable proposal?

That is the only way I could fit a couple of images into an article and make it look tolerable, we usually (for some odd reason) like to put images to the right but with this article it looked terrible, the way I've got it set up works but that's as much as you can put into the article itself without looking messy. Durandal-217 06:48, May 2, 2010 (UTC)

Why do say it looks untolerable in that? It seems to me like a page with more picture would be easier to read and get more traffic if it were easier on the eyes, and I’ve found that people are more willing to read a large amount of information if there’s a picture accompanying it. At any rate, it’s not a lot of them I’m asking for, just two. Tuckerscreator 02:40, May 3, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, so you did it! Thanks then. Do you mind if I make the pictures a little larger? Just to make them easier to see.Tuckerscreator 05:02, May 4, 2010 (UTC)

If you make them any bigger it makes the text uneven. Durandal-217 05:17, May 4, 2010 (UTC)

Did a little test with "Preview", hmm, you're probably right. At least the Reach picture. Or the orbital lance one.Tuckerscreator 02:23, May 5, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and a little off-topically, I think this should be added: on Bungie.org, Joseph Staten confirmed that the "800+" colony number given in the first Halo manual was something made up a non Bungie employee. See here: http://forums.bungie.org/halo/archive28.pl?read=847640 Tuckerscreator 02:29, May 5, 2010 (UTC)

And yet to this day nobody has ever contradicted that. Even the Halo encyclopedia and the story so far bonus on Halo Legends does not contradict that. Durandal-217 05:03, May 5, 2010 (UTC)

I guess he said it a little too late or something, or he didn't make the information obvious enough. But still, I'd like for it to be noted on the page, as the Trivia section deals directly with this matter.Tuckerscreator 05:21, May 6, 2010 (UTC)

Terraforming

The terraforming, may be the solution to rebuild that the planets affected during the Human-Covenant War. I think this process is a reality XXVI century, science and technology purchase will have evolved that time. Although in my view, the complete recovery of a human colony glassed through that process takes a period of 12-36 months (1-3 years). Do not know. I hope you good answers. --H A L O Legend 17:19, May 19, 2010 (UTC)

Trivia Section, the Data Pads and the Concept of Glassing

In the trivia section, listed as the second bullet point, is the information regarding the conclusions of the AI Assembly found in the Data Pads. The last sentence says:

"However, the Covenant fleet was later discovered to be many times larger than imagined."

Where in the Data Pads is that mentioned? I obviously know that the Covenant had a larger ship count than Humanity, but in order to Glass a planet in entirety, the Covenant would need a ridiculous amount of ships. The article describes Glassing as if it were a process which reduced all of the surface to molten slag, had the potential to boil away the atmosphere and oceans and leave it a dead husk forever. That was true. That could be true. However, the Covenant have neither the ship count nor the ability to discharge those levels of energy that could achieve that result given the scope of the Human-Covenant war.

If it takes 2000 ships 30 years to glass an Earth sized planet, then in order to do it in a week, you would need 3'120'000 vessels, all over the one colony and all discharging thier weapons continuously for the target time period. Bump that number down to 10'000 ships, it takes 6 years. How many ships do the Covenant have? That is the question. It sure as hell ain't over 3 million. I would guess it as struggling to break the 5000 mark; given how many vessels they lost in the war, the implications of the NOVA event at Joyous Exultation, the state of the post Halo 3 universe described in Evolutions and then the general behaviour of the Covenant with respect to specific "endgame" devices and plans such as the Forerunner Fleet in Halo Wars, The Knowing, Halo and Project Exodus.

What I am trying to say is that Glassing would be as destructive as that, given that the Covenant had that many ships at its disposal, but the fact is that they do not, therefore Glassing in that context is not.

The second point is the power of their weapons. The ship to time ratio is given ultimately by the strength of their weaponry. It is because their weaponry is not powerful enough that they are not actually able to Glass a planet completely in effective time spans. Halsey comments on it in her Journal, as do the AI in the Data Pads, as does common sense. (Any power capable of discharging the amount of energy equal to several million kilograms of antimatter in the space of a few days or weeks would be unbeatable to the UNSC.) The fact that there are Human-Covenant space battles, the fact that they are not instant wins for the Covenant and even in some cases wins for the UNSC suggests that they have not that level of destructive capability at their disposal. The weaponry used to Glass is also used in ship-to-ship engagements (Energy Projector). It is in space battles that this was determined by the AI.

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. -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? -- Specops306 ^{Autocrat Qur'a 'Morhek} 01:47, 25 October 2010 (EDT)

"The careful immolation of every vital part of the planet."

It seems to implicate that not every square inch is hit - only areas vital to functioning of a colony (Grain Belts, fresh water bodies, forests etc.) Remembering as well, that the second colonisation of Arcadia was by rural farmers. It served as a bread basket after the initial invasion. To destroy it as a population centre - destroy cities. To destroy it as a farming world, you may need to destroy such regions as grain belts. (vital parts). She then seems fairly sceptical of the destruction itself in the remainder of the passage. More to the point, it seems to indicate what I am saying. They only target the vital parts, because they cannot destroy every single part.

As for the total ship count of the Covenant Empire, there is no solid number, but you can get a rough idea. First get a base number. This is the amount that was destroyed in the War:

- Chi Ceti: 1
- Second Battle of Harvest: 1
- Alpha Aurigae: 12
- Harvest Campaigns: At least 1. These campaigns lasted for 5 years.
- XI Bootis A: 8
- Groombridge-1830: 3
- First Battle of Arcadia: 1 (perhaps 2)
- The Rubble: 1
- 18 Scorpii: 1
- Psi Serpentis: 300
- Algolis: 1
- The Package: 1
- TORPEDO: 7
- Sigma Octanus IV: 3
- Deliver Hope Trailer: 1
- UPPERCUT: 2
- Reach: 210 (Or 468 with new TFoR edition)
- Line Installation 1-4: ~12
- Alpha Halo: ???. At the end of CE, Cortana says "An entire armada obliterated".
- Aftermath of Alpha Halo: 7
- Second "Battle" of Reach: 20
- Eridanus Secundus: 1
- FIRST STRIKE: 485, Unyielding Heirophant
- Earth: At least 15. (Unknown exactly how many ships Truth lost here.)
- High Charity: ???. Battles between Brute and Elite probably yielded a moderate-high number.
- Onyx: 54
- Joyous Exultation: "Hundreds". Two massive combined fleets numbering in the hundreds, 60% wiped out.
- The Ark: 30

Total that we know: ~1180 (or ~1438 with TFoR re-release)

- The Great Schism (Post Halo 3): ???. After the fall of the Covenant, this rapidly descended into scattered skirmishes, the end result of which forced the Sangheili to pull back to defend the Homeworld. They are running out of ships that cannot be easily replaced. So I am left with a sense that after the War, Covenant ships are not bountiful in number.

Factor in the implied number at High Charity, Joyous Exultation, The full Battle of Earth, the undocumented Harvest Campaigns and all the other battles from the war that have unknown Covenant ship casualties, it is safe to assume that the Covenants loses were probably in the 1500 - 2000 range. Just imagine how many ships would be required to "smash" Earths defence net given the result at Reach, and then look at how many ships Truth had left that actually made it to the Ark (30).

Joyous Exultation is an important point to note as well. If the NOVA at Joyous Exultation wiped out 60% of a fleet of "hundreds" which represented most, if not all, of the Sangheili fighting forces (Halo Encyclopaedia, Pg 201), then the remaining 40% will also only be in the "hundreds". It was described as essentially levelling the playing field between Loyalist and Sangheili forces, so the Loyalist fleet is also likely in the "hundreds", the same as the Sangheili after the NOVA. So if you take Loyalist and Sangheili (Pre-NOVA), then you have a total Covenant ship count that is 140% of the fleet of "hundreds" surrounding Joyous Exultation. "Hundreds" is less than "thousands", otherwise it would be described as such, would it not? Describing "thousands " in terms of "hundreds" (e.g. thirty hundred for 3000) is redundant. Add the loses to this concept, and it is not hard to believe the Covenant fleet not being as large as once thought.

As for the power of their weapons. They state that it takes 15 seconds to glass one acre. How can they know this? They say they learned this by observing the Covenants weaponry in space. The weapon that is used primarily to glass has also been seen being used in space battles, the Energy Projector. If this weapon was that powerful there would seriously be no competition. The difference in wattage between a week and 30 years for the amount of energy required to glass a planet in anything near totality is so large that it is impossible to underestimate by that amount. At the very least, it represents a plot hole as to how Humanity is able to last more than a few seconds against the Covenant in space. Or possibly that the Covenant is so imitative with respect to their own weapon systems (borderline stupid) that they have such polarized weaponry. -Anton1792 14:36, 25 October 2010 (EDT)

What Anton1792 posted. Quite an interesting read. What Anton1792 has said so far is along the lines of true canon. However, one must question; do all ships share this trait (using the glassing ability at 15 seconds per acre)? I would assume the smaller ones (i.e. CCS-class) would, but not the larger, heavily equipped ships (i.e. Assault Carrier). It would be more realistic/make more sense if it were so. If not, then it would be highly detrimental to the Covenant fleet, for having such generalised onboard weaponry. Thus, I would assume the observations made by the AIs, as described in the Data Pads of Halo: Reach, were only based on the CCS-class (which is the common warship seen throughout the HCW) and not other ships.

The argument that Anton1792 raised is similar to the Slipstream Speed issue we've experienced in the past (that is, in halo.wikia.com); we were wrong to generalise that all Covenant ships have the ability to travel in slipsteam at 912 ly/day (or whatever that number is) and that all UNSC ships are only capable at travelling 2.1 ly/day. In the end, we came to the conclusion that it is only unique to one ship and generalisation shouldn't be practised unless officially and specifically stated. :) - 5əb'7aŋk^(7alk) 19:27, 26 October 2010 (EDT)

Notice how most of the planet's surface seems to be intact.

That post is certainly an interesting read. It seems that Bungie intentionally put this in the data pads to set the matter straight. The statements by the AIs aren't treated as speculation or uncertain assumptions, but factual information backed up by hard evidence. From a technical standpoint, glassing has always been problematic. The energy required to glass a planet has always been inconsistent with the Covenant ships' firepower in space engagements. I think this quote sums it up:

The energy required to quickly dispatch a planet is...well, if they continuously had that magnitude of power at their disposal, there would be no Human-Covenant ship-to-ship battles.

They would win. Instantly. Without exception.

For me, the data pad seems like a way to correct that. It's obviously a retcon, but they're basically saying that glassing on a global scale is impossible to the Covenant. There's obviously the issue of larger ships having more powerful weaponry, but I doubt the differences are drastic enough to make any difference when glassing an entire planet. --Jugus (Talk | Contribs) 02:59, 27 October 2010 (EDT)

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. - Halo-343 (Talk) 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. Tuckerscreator^(stalk) 10:40, 27 October 2010 (EDT)

Maybe it's just zealous rhetoric, mostly for the scare, and it's possible the Covenant themselves consider it "full" if every human on the planet is dead. Even without completely covering the planet in plasma, there's going to be some serious environmental damage on a global scale. --Jugus (Talk | Contribs) 11:07, 27 October 2010 (EDT)

That is indeed true, and something that needs to be taken into account. However, the power of their weapons would have to be increased drastically for it to make any meaningful difference. We have no idea how many ships the UNSC had at the time, but it's probably more than one thousand. Either way, it's considerably more than what the Covenant had in most of their glassing operations; I would assume it was rare they had over a hundred ships present at a time. In a hypothetical, and unlikely, scenario where a thousand Covenant ships were to glass an Earth-sized planet, even if they had double the firepower they have in space combat, it would still take 15 years to glass the planet, and if it had deep oceans, considerably more. For them to be able to perform the task in a matter of days or even weeks, the firepower unleashed in glassing would have to be dozens of times greater than in direct space combat.

If we look back to some other recent depictions of glassing, there's a noticeable pattern. It started with Halo Wars, where Harvest, a planet thought to have been glassed completely, still retains a breathable atmosphere and intact buildings and such. Even more obvious is The Return in Evolutions, where it is made clear that the Covenant don't always perform glassing on a planetary scale. Only in rare cases, Kholo in this case, the Hierarchs order an "absolute annihilation" of a planet. However, even here, it is nowhere near as absolute as we've thought before, as evidenced by how after the war, the planet still has a breathable atmosphere, intact structures and even wooden boats remaining. Had the devastation been as complete as depicted in the first novels, this would not be possible.

In the end, considering some of the recent treatments of the concept, this wasn't that big a revelation. It's simply the final link in the chain, the developers' way of re-defining the concept of glassing and delivering the new definition to us without outright saying "this is a retcon". Instead, they have the AIs of the Assembly explain what the moniker "glassing" really means and why it was adopted in the first place. --Jugus (Talk | Contribs) 11:07, 27 October 2010 (EDT)

Just noticed something. I was watching the Halo: Reach Announcement trailer not too long ago, and noticed something regarding each of the points. The blasts that are occuring there are Reach on TRULY massive, I would place them at roughly the size of the state of Texas(roughly, of course!) which of course exceeds the size of every known Covenant ship(even that supercarrier that nearly 9 times the size of New Mombasa!) This too me suggests something. Although the Covenant might not have the capability to absolutely lay waste to the entire planet and burn it to glass, they certainly do try, and perhaps the retcon is not the amount of firepower the Covenant has, but in the strength of that firepower itself. Same situation with Kholo, where we clearly observe the glassing commencing, and Harvest, which initially was being done by only one ship. Remember, there are two methods of glassing, orbitally, and low-range. Low-range definately has the ability to cook whatever it hits to glass, and even manage to drain that lake nearby New Mombasa in just hours, but it's impractical because it affects such a small area. However, the orbital bombings that we see in the Reach trailer exceed the size of ANY Covenant ship, so perhaps the distinction is in the power of the payload, not how big of an area said payload actually affects. Any thoughts? Tuckerscreator^(stalk) 23:07, 27 October 2010 (EDT)

So just to clarify my point, seeing that a re-scan looks a little confusing to me!, what I'm saying that perhaps to carry over the same idea of orbital bombardment, but keep consistent with the calculated destruction given, that the Covenant are able to launch vast plasma blasts across planets in hours like previously thought, but perhaps that increasing the area of range reduces the power of the actual blast itself, hence why much of the landmass still seems to be intact. When they want to full on BURN something, then they resort to low-range glassing, where they can truly gurantee that the terrain beneath with burned to death. This seem to perhaps answer the question? Tuckerscreator^(stalk) 11:15, 28 October 2010 (EDT)

I always saw the data pads as under estimating the Covenant. Maybe the Covenant ships nee to push their reactors to the absolute limit and redirect all energy to glass.98.154.61.193 20:05, 28 October 2010 (EDT)

Plutonium?

A plasma is a gas that has been ionised, and Covenant plasma is superhot - that is all we know about the plasma used by the Covenant. My guess is that it's Plutonium-based plasma. This is because Plutonium-based nuclear explosions leave behind a glassy residue, just like the highly-radioactive element used in glassing. Further backing it up, Plutonium becomes a gas at 3228 °C - certainly enough to melt Titanium plating, which as a melting point of 1668 °C.-- Forerunner 11:48, 27 December 2010 (EST)

Best Ambigious

"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.

I've decided to revisit this issue again, because I really don't think the page sufficiently addresses it. There's a drastic rift between the article's information and the most recent canon, and I think that certain things need to be covered more.

The first thing is that this does appear to be a retcon. From Bungie's standpoint, this actually makes a lot of sense. Scientifically, orbital plasma bombardment of a planet is highly unfeasible. The power requirements, even from a Tritium Fusion Reactor or, as I once suspected, antimatter reactor, are enormous. It would be simpler just to blow up the planet. With all the insane requirements necessary, not to mention all the energy needed for before in the space battle, getting there in the first place, and heading back, scientifically, as when I've also read from the scientists who have discussed, orbital glassing is simply too impractical to be likely.

On the other hand, we know full well the Covenant attempts it. From videos and trailers that depicted glassings, a single ship has been able to airstrike an area roughly the size of Texas. Whether it permanently damages the area to glass is debatable, but feasibly, they are able to attempt the attack.

Furthermore, the Assembly's assumption of the Covenant's total firepower was based proportionally on their fleet being the size of the UNSC's. We know that in the early days of the war, the UNSC tended to outnumber the Covenant, this can easily be seen in Halo Wars: Genesis. In later days however, they actually outnumbered them, and it took a 4 to 1 ratio for the UNSC to beat their fleets. Again, all through observation of the canon.

2nd, while the Assembly never outright retracts their statement on the insane time that it take to glass a planet, despite the possible update on the Covenant fleets, it does say that terraforming efforts have been calculated for Harvest and the other Outer Colonies, being estimated to nearly 110 to 300 years to restore. A glassing would definitely create a disaster of that magnitude, particularly with the need to terraform, and really real other reason can be brought up for it.

And finally, there is the issue of the Covenant themselves. If they do not have the power to glass, it brings up a great many questions about, say, the Sanctum of the Hierarchs and their collection of shards, or the glassing ritual seen in The Return. The Covenant certainly does try, as well as before in the past with the Grunt Rebellion and the Taming of the Hunters, and that even for the purpose of boasting, that they never ask once in their head how they can’t actually uphold it.

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. Tuckerscreator^(stalk) 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. 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. Tuckerscreator^(stalk) 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. 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. Tuckerscreator^(stalk) 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."

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). 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. Tuckerscreator^(stalk) 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. 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 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.--The All-knowing Sith'ari 10:42, 22 October 2011 (EDT)