Talk:UNSC carrier: Difference between revisions
From Halopedia, the Halo wiki
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
==Armament== | ==Armament== | ||
Cite armament. Cheers, '''[[User:RelentlessRecusant|<font color="red">Relentless</font>]][[User talk:RelentlessRecusant|<font color="blue">Recusant</font>]][[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]]''' 16:06, 19 November 2006 (UTC) | Cite armament. Cheers, '''[[User:RelentlessRecusant|<font color="red">Relentless</font>]][[User talk:RelentlessRecusant|<font color="blue">Recusant</font>]][[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]]''' 16:06, 19 November 2006 (UTC) | ||
The cruiser in Battlegroup Stalingrad was never stated as a Marathon-class, if it were a Halcyon-class then it would only make sense that a modern carrier was the flagship. With that being said, at the Battle of Sigma Octanus the Leviathan (a Marathon-class) was the flagship despite there being carriers present. The simple definition of a carrier would make it less effective against Covenant capital ships as Longswords lack the capability to break through shields. | |||
Revision as of 17:54, January 13, 2007
This artical needs more!—This unsigned comment was made by Darth nexes (talk • contribs). Please sign your posts with ~~~~
Armament
Cite armament. Cheers, RelentlessRecusantFile:Jedi Order.jpg 16:06, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
The cruiser in Battlegroup Stalingrad was never stated as a Marathon-class, if it were a Halcyon-class then it would only make sense that a modern carrier was the flagship. With that being said, at the Battle of Sigma Octanus the Leviathan (a Marathon-class) was the flagship despite there being carriers present. The simple definition of a carrier would make it less effective against Covenant capital ships as Longswords lack the capability to break through shields.