Talk:Jul 'Mdama's Covenant

From Halopedia, the Halo wiki

Revision as of 11:54, April 23, 2014 by Tacitus (talk | contribs) (→‎Bump)

Jumping the gun?

Isn't it a bit early to claim the new Storm Grunts and Jackals are 'subspecies'? Artistic license should come into consideration here regardless of changes to how the enemies actually look. The Godzilla suit of today looks different than the ones in prior films, it's still the same character though. Manwiththegun 15:35, 13 August 2012 (EDT)

The Halo Bulletin 5.9.12 explicitly states that the new Grunts are canonically different from those in previous titles. These differences are not just real-world aesthetic changes; they actually represent another in-universe variation of the Unggoy. Indeed, the majority of the Bulletin is devoted to discussing and theorizing why the new Grunts look different from those who've come before: "As for how the Grunts of past Halo games and Halo 4 compare: Are they different species, a result of natural mutation, selective breeding, or genetic mutation within a single species? We’re not ready to show our cards here just yet. We can say that there are certain species on Earth which exhibit extraordinary differences within their kind (Great Dane vs. Pomeranian) and that there are vastly numerous species similar enough to categorically lump them together (look up Plover)." The Bulletin says that a more concrete explanation for these physical differences will be given in due time.
The morphological variation among the Kig-Yar has been explained both here and in the revised Encyclopedia as the result of divergent evolution on different moons, planetoids, and asteroids in the Y'Deio system. For example, the Skirmishers come from a satellite with higher gravity than Eayn, causing them to evolve much heavier muscles than their kin. Considering that the straight-beaked Jackals of Halo 2, the slope-beaked Jackals of Halo 3 through Anniversary, and the dromaeosaur-like Skirmishers all belong to the same species, it isn't much of a stretch to assume that the Jackals in Halo 4 represent yet another phenotype; the real-world Galapagos finches have a similar, (though less extreme), degree of morphological diversity.
Consider society on Earth prior to the Halo Array's activation. Several distinct species and subspecies of the homo genus were all lumped together as humanity, like the aforementioned plover. It is entirely possible that the Unggoy and the Kig-Yar societies are structured in a similar manner, with different species of the same genus all categorized as the same race. Overall, think of all these aesthetic changes in a Watsonian manner rather than a Doylist one. --Courage never dies. 17:34, 13 August 2012 (EDT)

I'm interested in the idea that the variations in Jackal/Grunt morphology don't conform to Earthly taxonomic conventions - after all, these are alien species, and their evolutionary history might be very weird indeed. It would add a whole new interesting layer to the fiction behind these things - and plus, anything's a better explanation than just saying "Well, we got tired of the old Grunts and Jackals so we made ourselves some brand-new ones." SPARTAN-347 22:47, 13 August 2012 (EDT)

Fair enough, I just was curious as to whether these alternations were artistic license or not. Manwiththegun 16:54, 14 August 2012 (EDT)

The Storm.

They aren't "Covenant Storm", they are just "The Storm".ArchedThunder 22:07, 13 August 2012 (EDT)

Elite Changes

Anyone note any changes to the Sangheili physiology? The Grunts and Jackals are pretty obvious, but the Elite look the same. Bioniclepluslotr 10:02, 19 August 2012 (EDT)

Nothing significant enough to warrant a canonical explanation. They finally look how they should (not counting armor): The lean but powerful look of the halo reach elites, minus the disproportionate parts of the leg and torso, but with the head/dermal physiology of Halo 3 and halo 2 era elites. signxb.jpg 19:38, 5 November 2012 (EST)

Storm Ranks

The Storm is not apart of The Covenant, and should not have it's ranks intermingled with Covenant Ranks. The Storm should have their own category of ranks like 'Refumee's Heretics do.

--AvuMedTelcam 23:28, 22 September 2012 (EDT)

Refumee's Heretics didn't have any rank system. And the Storm are likely to recycle familiar ranks to better organise themselves following the fall of the Covenant.— subtank 23:33, 22 September 2012 (EDT)

They had a crude ranking system. Heretic Minors and Heretic Majors. And this Storm faction seems like it doesn't utilize Covenant Ranks at all save Zealot. Also, if you read The Thursday War Preview thing on Amazon which turned out to leak the majority of the novel, these elites are from a Sangheili colony world that was not apart of the Covenant. They actually refer to Sanghelios as the Old World. As per the Encylopedia basically all Sangheili that serve in the Covenant came from Sanghelios. The Covenant ranks are not familiar to them. This is why I am saying it would make more sense to put them as their own category because they have no place to be mingled between Covenant ranks.

--AvuMedTelcam 10:03, 23 September 2012 (EDT)


As I posted in this talk page.

Since the "Storm" is only a splinter faction of the former-Covenant (which has now broken up and disseminated since the Great War) and, in certain aspects, completely different from the Covenant military altogether; it only makes sense if we create and organize a separate rank structure for the newly specific military roles Storm has introduced. Granted, some are, in retrospect to the time-era, related to titles given by the Covenant from before (suck as the Ranger specialists), they are still different. Killjax 13:54, 23 September 2012 (EDT)

Exactly.--AvuMedTelcam 15:00, 23 September 2012 (EDT)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5WbZezbtEo Pause at 0:16. That "Warrior" Sangheili is actually a General, as identified in the commendation box. The Strom uses Covenant Ranks. What was posted on the Renders is just a description tag aside from Zealot and Ranger, obviously. --AvuMedTelcam 11:50, 13 October 2012 (EDT)

Covenant Loyalists?

Since they are led by Elites and follow the teachings of the Prophets, wouldn't this make them Covenant Loyalists? Maybe they're the remnants of the Loyalists? --ADinoSupremacist 21:10, 23 September 2012 (EDT)

No. They are labeled "Storm" for a reason. If they were "Loyalists", 343i would of expanded upon that explanation. I guess theoretically they are, but its a slightly different meaning in this case. Killjax 22:33, 23 September 2012 (EDT)

At most they're a Loyalist faction--210.56.88.111 00:17, 24 September 2012 (EDT)

IGN labeled them elites that follow the Prophet's teaching. IGN is also the first three letters of ignorance. The Thursday War confirms these elites have nothing to do with the Prophets. But I guess we'll have to wait till October 2nd to make that official.--AvuMedTelcam 12:43, 24 September 2012 (EDT)

Whatever happened to the Jiralhanae?

I don't know what the rest of you people are thinking, but does anyone have any idea about whatever happened to the Jiralhanae? I know they didn't just die off or get hunted down in the last days of the Covenant Civil War by the Sangheili, but how come I we haven't seen any sign that the Brutes are coming back in Halo 4? I mean, the Gravity Hammer is making a return, but why not the Brutes? Any thoughts, ideas, or clues, anyone? --Xamikaze330 19:38, 27 September 2012 (EDT)Xamikaze330

Can't answer canonically, so I'll answer Doylist-ly: the Great Schism's importance was drastically diminished in Glasslands, as it's barely mentioned and we even see Brutes on the sides of the Elites. Possibly that's where their absence stems from. Tuckerscreator(stalk) 23:58, 27 September 2012 (EDT)
This should help give you some insight into what happened to them. As far as the Grav Hammer is concerned, the Storm probably mustered up whatever weaponry they could find after the War & Great Schism, Brute weaponry included. Why just the GH, IDK.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 21:00, 27 September 2012 (EDT)
According to The Return, the Great Schism was still being fought circa 2559, at which point both sides had begun to run low on resources; the Jiralhanae had also fallen victim to countless internal conflicts. Glasslands shows not only that many Jiralhanae remained subservient to the Sangheili, but that the latter race had also succumbed to civil warfare: case in point, the Storm rifle was used in the Elites' civil wars. Because of this, I assume that the Great Schism continued, albeit diminished in scale, between 2552 and 2559. I guess some of the more sensible Brutes and Elites, (if only a handful), were more concerned about their own survival than committing genocide on each other and thus deigned to work together. Besides, they would have plenty of intraspecies wars to fight in addition to their interspecies struggle.
As for the gravity hammers, I have an answer. The Return motion comic shows Elites taking gravity hammers as trophies. According to Waypoint, the gravity hammers seen in Halo 4 have been recovered from the field; the Sacred Promissory has, thanks to being Floodified and blown up, stopped manufacturing the weapon. Beggars can't be choosers, so I guess the Storm don't have any qualms about using the hammer. Then again, maybe Frankie was being his usual evasive self and the Brutes will make a surprise appearance in Halo 4. --Courage never dies. 23:55, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

Name (closed)

To my knowledge, no one from 343 Industries has identified the Covenant remnants that appear in Halo 4 as the Storm. The only official source for the name is Official Xbox Magazine, which is technically a second-party source since it isn't straight from 343i. The Examiner article is merely a synopsis of the OXM feature, while every other online source I've found lazily cites Examiner. In many cases they're basically copy-paste jobs with a word or two changed to avoid outright plagiarism.

The Halo 4 Interactive Guide consistently refers to the remnant forces as the Covenant, just as 343 employees have done in countless interviews. Not once does it call them the Storm, which is instead presented as the catch-all designation for basic Unggoy, Kig-Yar, and Sangheili infantry. The Storm Jackal entry specifically states that they are called such because, "[They] are generally deployed in 'storm' or assault formations alongside other troops;" the same can likely be said for the storm rifle. Furthermore, the OXM article claims that the so-called Storm follow the teachings of the Prophets. We know from the Kilo-Five series that this is a turn of phrase at best, what with Jul hating the San 'Shyuum's collective guts and all.

Basically, I'm suggesting A) that OXM mistook the name of an infantry classification for the whole faction, and B) that they don't know the lore well enough to distinguish the Prophets' religion from general worship of the Forerunners. I know that we should wait for the game's release before we jump to conclusions, so I'm not suggesting that the article be moved right away. However, I feel that this definitely merits attention. --Courage never dies. 12:46, 30 October 2012 (EDT)

You have a point. I looked through several of the past Bulletins and not once did they say anything along the lines of "Storm faction". 343i always said the "Covenant" or in the case of the H4 guide, "newly established Covenant order" from "previous Covenant body" (Grunt Imperial description). The word "Storm" when used as a verb simply means to "Move angrily or forcefully in a specified direction" and those ranks are tied to that action. So in a sense, the Examiner may be incorrect. Therefore, Jul 'Mdama may simply be the new leader of the Covenant. If that's the case I guess we should take all the information here and merge it with "The Covenant".--Killamint [Comm|Files] 17:35, 30 October 2012 (EDT)
I would suggest a separate article since this is "newly established Covenant order" from "previous Covenant body" as to avoid confusion. Maybe "Covenant (post-war)" is a better title for this newly established order?— subtank 21:43, 30 October 2012 (EDT)
Here's another issue: The sneak-peek terminal merely shows Jul 'Mdama leading his expeditionary fleet to Requiem. There is no indication that he is the leader of the Covenant or even his own faction. I think that "Covenant remnant" would be the best title, though "Covenant (post-war)" would also work. Either way, I'll go about removing all references to the Storm once a decision has been made.
The post-war Covenant reminds me quite a bit of the Galactic Empire after Palpatine's death at Endor. The government was fragmented and restructured, but it remained the Empire nonetheless, at least nominally. Likewise, it continued to be a thorn in the side of the dominant government until a new, universal threat emerged. Just replace the Empire, the New Republic, and the Yuuzhan Vong with the Covenant, the UEG, and the Didact, respectively; the parallels are quite clear. --Courage never dies. 23:08, 30 October 2012 (EDT)
I think it's pretty much a given from the Kilo-Five trilogy that Jul 'Mdama is the leader. Not so sure about the parallels to Star Wars. :P — subtank 23:22, 30 October 2012 (EDT)
I can kinda see what you're trying to get at, but the Galactic Empire, when it fragmented, it then became the Imperial Remnant. Trust me, I know this stuff extremely well. I am a Star Wars buff, among many other science fiction themes. But to be honest, I have been wondering, where did the whole "Storm" faction thing start popping up? I mean, how did this Covenant Loyalist-type splinter faction start out being called the "Storm"? Where does it say "Storm"? I'm confused. --Xamikaze330 (talk|contribs) 23:28, 30 October 2012 (EDT)Xamikaze330
After reading through the guide again, I'm thinking the "Storm" is simply the Covenant, minus the Prophets (and Brutes). From the Zealot artice in the guide: "But with the absence of the San'Shyuum leadership, the Zealots have shifted into the more practical arena of social and political leadership, operating as the consummate head of the Covenant." File:Colonel Grade One.pngCol. Snipes450File:Colonel Grade One.png 00:05, 31 October 2012 (EDT)
Edit conflict - @Subtank - Oops. I thought I had removed "or even his own faction." We should eventually create a separate article for 'Mdama's expeditionary fleet. That way we would have articles for both the post-war Covenant as a whole and for the specific fleet encountered in Halo 4.
@Xamikaze330 - I too am a huge Star Wars fan. I have dozens of novels and comic books, almost as many games, and so forth. As for the Galactic Empire parallel, I was just using a generalization. The term "Imperial Remnant" is mostly used by the New Republic and its successor states; loyal Imperial subjects continued to acknowledge their government simply as the Empire even decades after the Yuuzhan Vong War. On topic, though, we've been discussing that the name "Storm" comes from a misunderstanding on behalf of Official Xbox Magazine. Basically, there's no such thing as the Storm, only a remnant faction which still identifies itself as the Covenant. --Courage never dies. 00:13, 31 October 2012 (EDT)
I definitely agree we should rename this - all official material so far has only called them "Covenant", most recently the Interactive Guide, so I think we can safely say the "Storm" is a misinterpretation on OXM's part as you said. As for the new title, I'm in the favor of calling this "Covenant remnant"; mainly because I like to avoid having brackets in titles wherever possible. Spelling "remnant" with a lowercase letter should make it clear we're not trying to sell it as a proper name like the Imperial Remnant in Star Wars, merely a description similar to Covenant separatists. --Jugus (Talk | Contribs) 02:01, 31 October 2012 (EDT)
If it's true that they aren't known as the Storm, the we got some major overhauling and correcting to do on a wide span of pages.--File:1221751884 I-animated-this-for-you.gifEnder the XenocideFile:1221751884 I-animated-this-for-you.gif 04:32, 31 October 2012 (EDT)
Indeed.Sith-venator Wavingstrider Fett helmet.jpg (Commlink) 22:03, 3 November 2012 (EDT)
We may also need people to change the name over at Halo Nation. And quickly. I've seen this faction called "the Storm" as far away as Tv Tropes's Halo pages! Tuckerscreator(stalk) 17:02, 4 November 2012 (EST)
Then what are we going to call the Storm Rifle? Not an argument, just a question. Tuckerscreator(stalk) 16:13, 4 November 2012 (EST)
"Storm rifle" is a literal translation of the German word for assault rifle, so the weapon's name refers to its function rather than its users. I just hope that people don't get the idea that "storm" is a proper noun. —This unsigned comment was made by Braidenvl (talk • contribs). Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Voting

Candidates

  1. Covenant (post-war)
  2. Covenant remnant

Votes

I think it's safe to say that we reached a full consensus on the naming. You all are welcome to fix any reference to the Storm in other articles. — subtank 08:49, 5 November 2012 (EST)

I can start some of it this afternoon (lunchbreak), starting with the moving of this article, unless someone beats me to it.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 10:39, 5 November 2012 (EST)
That looks like my cue... I'll make a start on it. --TentacleTornado 16:55, 5 November 2012 (EST)
Oh, I didn't realise when this was done.. Nevermind. --TentacleTornado 16:57, 5 November 2012 (EST)

Unidentified

I am aware this matter is closed, but isn't there a precedent for having articles on an unamed subject to be titled "Unnamed (short discriptor)", as seen here: http://www.halopedia.org/Unnamed ? signxb.jpg 17:36, 5 November 2012 (EST)

They're not "unidentified". 343i has been identifying them as the Covenant but they are not the original Covenant, just a "remnant", surviving group of them- hence "Covenant remnant". Also, as Jugus said earlier, we prefer to avoid having brackets in titles wherever possible.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 18:44, 5 November 2012 (EST)
Not unidentified, but unnamed. In this case, "Unnamed Covenant Remnant". signxb.jpg 19:19, 5 November 2012 (EST)
Same difference. They have been identified numerous times as the Covenant (especially on the H4 interactive guide), so they are not "unnamed" either. Putting that in the name wouldn't make any sense as it would confuse readers. "Remnant" is more proper and helps readers understand that they are the Covenant but not the original empire they used to be. Also the note at the top and bottom of the article already covers the reason for the title name. Now if the game identifies them as, I guess "Storm" or otherwise, than we'll move the article accordingly.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 19:37, 5 November 2012 (EST)
But those places they are identified as the covenant aren't written from in canon. Out of canon, of course they will be referred to as just the covenant, because there is no other covenant in the game (presumably). I will hold off on this matter more until I play the game. signxb.jpg 22:31, 5 November 2012 (EST)

Storm...Wait a minute...

I don't know what the rest of you people have been thinking, but maybe we weren't entirely wrong about calling this faction the "Storm". On Halo Waypoint there are still some things like weapons and infantry types that have the term "Storm" in the title classification. Perhaps it really was going to be called the "Storm", or else not. I guess it's all speculation. Anybody else have any thoughts or confirmed information to share? --Xamikaze330 (talk|contribs) 23:26, 6 November 2012 (EST)Xamikaze330

From all the gameplay and cutscenes I've seen, the faction is repeatedly referred to as "Covenant" and never as "Storm". Tuckerscreator(stalk) 00:27, 7 November 2012 (EST)
That's a rather bad reason. Are grunts ever called unggoy in game? There's plenty of canonical information that was at a time or still is only mentioned in promotional stuff, that had that info included in the wiki at the time and still do. signxb.jpg 12:02, 7 November 2012 (EST)
Sometimes, yes. Usually in chatter dialogue. "Do I look like an Unggoy?" Tuckerscreator(stalk) 12:13, 7 November 2012 (EST)
You get my point, though. signxb.jpg 21:40, 7 November 2012 (EST)
To be expected, honestly. As I said, just speculation. Please disregard speculation then. Not sure why though. Or maybe Storm Jackal can be translated as "Assault Jackal". Whatever. --Xamikaze330 (talk|contribs) 00:35, 7 November 2012 (EST)Xamikaze330

Large Remnant ship

InfinityRam.jpg

I'm not sure where to post this so as this page is connected as the remnant used it I'll post it here. In Spartan Ops 'Departure' cutscene the Infinity is seen ramming a Covenant vessel that looks alot like a CCS-battlecruiser, however if you watch the scene in which this happens half a dozen CCS ships actually pass between this unidentified ship and the camera revealing that this vessel is aproximately the size of a Assault Carrier. I do not believe it has been given a page on this wiki yet. VARGR 20:00, 8 November 2012 (EST)

I was thinking that it could be an ORS-class heavy cruiser or a Reverence-class cruiser. Infinity has a beam (width) of 833 meters, including the large port and starboard hangar bays. By that screenshot alone, factoring in her beam and the bow to amidships of the Remnant flagship, you could roughly estimate that she's approximately 2.5 to 3 kilometers in length. That would put it in the ballpark of an ORS. Grizzlei ♥ ツ

It could be a DDS-class carrier perhaps as the size would match. VARGR 21:41, 8 November 2012 (EST)

No. The Essential Visual Guide says that the three carrioer classes (DDS, CAS, and CSO) have very similar appearances. Missing Mandible 00:57, 9 November 2012 (EST)
Ah ok. Should we give it it's own page then as "Unidenified Covenant Remnant ship" then? VARGR 13:01, 9 November 2012 (EST)

Based on the size of the two different ships, I'm thinking the large one was the standard ccs battlecruiser. And the small ones were light cruisers. You also see many small cruisers throughout the campaign. masterclod (not sure how to sign)

It might be a covenant supercruiser. Flavius Aetius 16:56, 10 November 2012 (EST)

To sign press ~ four times. No the small ones are CCS battlecruisers as they are the correct scale compared to the Infinity and the exact same design as CCS cruisers seen in the main campaign. Could be the supercruiser perhaps. VARGR 20:01, 10 November 2012 (EST)

How so? A CCS-class is 1.8 kilometers long, one-third the Infinity's length; the larger cruiser is (relatively) correctly scaled compared to the "smaller" ones, which seems to be shorter than the Infinity's width. The ships surrounding the Dawn in the first campaign level also appears ridiculously small compared to the battlecruiser Noble Six downed in Reach - seriously, how could a single missile rip even an unshielded CCS-class apart?
Of course, another possibility is that it's an optical illusion - the ships might simply be very far away or very close to the camera. Either way, Halo 4 has some serious scaling issues, especially with the retconned Dawn.-Kronos101 20:10, 10 November 2012 (EST)

I just played dawn again, they are Definitly not ccs, in forerunner when the elites come down in drop pods you can see a ccs directly above you. It is much bigger so the smaller ones are Definitly light cruisersMasterclod 01:12, 11 November 2012 (EST)masterclod

While I haven't looked at the one in Forerunner, the ones in Dawn are CCS actually, the discussion above is on the large ship Infinity rammed into in Departure.File:Colonel Grade One.pngCol. Snipes450File:Colonel Grade One.png 01:03, 11 November 2012 (EST)

Look at the one is forerunner and compare it to the cruiser in dawn, it's MUCH bigger. And the one that infinity crashed into IS a ccs. It just looks giant because its surrounded by light cruisers Masterclod 01:12, 11 November 2012 (EST)masterclod

I think Masterclod is right about the cruisers in Dawn being smaller. Just take a look at the one John floats through, there's no way that's a full size CCS. As for the one the Infinity rams, that doesn't look like it could be a CCS either, this time because it's too big, given the size estimates of 3km Grizzlei made, almost double the size of a CCS. Alex T Snow 04:21, 12 November 2012 (EST)
The one in dawn is obviously a light cruiser considering it's only 2-3 times the size of the rear half of the FUD. This one has to be a supercruiser or DDS, and it's not a CCS because no known iteration of the CCS has those spikes on it's neck.

It can't be a Reverence because the Reverence class was 1400 Meters, smaller than a CCS. Flavius Aetius 12:44, 12 November 2012 (EST) 

 Im Thinking its a ccs, maybe the spikes are just there to show more detail?

Someone needs to put light cruisers in the ships section, because the remnant seems to have a lot. Masterclod 16:18, 16 November 2012 (EST)Masterclod

They really don't as they are CCS. Its the large ship the Infinity hits thats not a CCS as its clearly far to large - aprox the size of a Assault carrier. VARGR 08:33, 21 November 2012 (EST)

An Assault Carrier is larger than Infinity itself, this ship is just the right size to be a CCS. The smaller cruisers are abviously CRS-class light cruisers, as they are smaller than the Charon-class light frigates. M0aHerder 08:37, 17 December 2012 (EST)

Yes, it was obvious for me. When you think about it it makes more canonical sense for these to be smaller CRS-class cruisers and the big one the CCS. Covenant faction from Kelekos. Makes much more sense, evidence points toward it. So we should change the pages to adjust. Erickyboo 00:46, 18 December 2012 (EST)

In light of all the evidence, yes, that seems to be the case. Might also point out this and the forum post linked in it. Besides, this would hardly be the first time they had two radically different sized ships that look identical... --Jugus (Talk | Contribs) 01:10, 18 December 2012 (EST)
Agree with you 100%. The Infinity rams a CCS-class which does seem proportionate in size to the Infinity. It can't be a larger ship since their height would be similar in size to the Infinity's like the CAS. The smaller ones are definitely CRS-class or a new class (might be revealed in the last Kilo-Five trilogy book). I will post an image (one I managed to save before it was deleted from this site) later today for clarity & comparison.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 11:10, 18 December 2012 (EST)

Terrorists

Should it be noted that the members of the Covenant Remnant are referred to as terrorists?18:40, 16 December 2012 (EST)—This unsigned comment was made by 72.80.103.245 (talk • contribs). Please sign your posts with ~~~~

[citation needed]...Only one individual within the faction was referred to as a terrorists. Otherwise, no other members were referred to as such.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 11:10, 18 December 2012 (EST)

Remnant symbol

Is there a symbol that the Covenant remnant use like the previous one?--Killamint [Comm|Files] 11:10, 18 December 2012 (EST)

Equipment

I can understand the Elites having no armor on their arms due to lack of resources, but what's with the Grunts? Did they think they could bite Marines with their mouths or something?

Infobox

I was thinking it could be userful to put the faction infobox on this page, i mean it 1 of the most important faction during the post war era as well as halo 4. CF001 14:13, 11 January 2013 (EST)

I don't see why not.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 04:39, 12 January 2013 (EST)

Name

In Spartan Ops episode 9 cutscene Halsey calls this faction "Covenant Cultists". Therefore this name should get a mention within the article say on the first sentence as another name they are known by. VARGR (talk) 15:19, 8 March 2013 (EST)

She was just using a general descriptor. The Covenant remnant can be defined as a cult around a leader. Tuckerscreator(stalk) 15:26, 8 March 2013 (EST)

New Non-Official Name Proposition: 'Hesduros Covenant'

I've personally felt that the name "Covenant Remnant" is rather vague and odd to say, and we should re-name the article "Hesduros Covenant," as this is the main planet they're centered on. Yes or no? - DarkAuk (talk) 17:38, 9 March 2013 (EST)

Covenant remnant is better name and descriptor, given that they are a splinter faction of Covenant continuing their war on humanity. As for the name "Hesduros", I'm afraid those who are not familiar with the books would be completely confused about what it's name is referring to. Plus that would be a fan-made name.--Spartacus Talk • Contribs 20:20, 9 March 2013 (EST)

Additionally, there's no indication that the Covenant remnant is made only of Hesduros Sangheili. 'Mdama could have added more to his ranks from other Elite dissenters any time between 2553 and 2557. Tuckerscreator(stalk) 22:57, 9 March 2013 (EST)

Jul 'Mdama and Prometheans

It appears in spartan ops that 'Mdama controls the mechanical Promethian forces. When did command of these forces switch from the Didact to 'Mdama? --Weeping Angel (talk) 22:55, 5 June 2013 (EDT)

When the Didact got killed by John. Pokebub (talk) 00:44, 6 June 2013 (EDT)
So when the Didact died, all of his forces just magically started taking orders from 'Mdama? --Weeping Angel (talk) 15:55, 6 June 2013 (EDT)
Well, when the Didact died, all the Promeatheans turned back to blue and blue means they are in no one's control. So, 'Mdama must've used something to make them all take orders from him.

A Possible Issue

Just figured I should give a heads up. It seems that our choice of name (Covenant remnant) has caused some confusion in the fanbase. Similar to the URF (though not as drastic as what happened there), people seem to think this is the official name and have started putting a lot into the name. Many seem to be under the impression that it is literally what remains of the Covenant (same goals, beliefs, politics, structure etc). I think we should be cautious here, we don't want our choice of naming for an article to skew the canon in any way.--Soul reaper (talk) 04:58, 21 July 2013 (EDT)

I understand where you're getting at but we already have this as a precaution:

{{ArticleName}}

So with that being said, if anyone ignores that message and takes it as an official canon name, then that's their fault/ignorance. Also the games continuously refer to them as the Covenant regardless. We use "remnant" to distinguish them from the former Covenant as its not the exact same faction. As for their goals, they still follow some of them, minus the ones from the prophets.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 07:18, 21 July 2013 (EDT)
I didn't really have any problem with "Covenant remnant", but maybe something like "Covenant (post-war)" would sound less fan-made. With that, it's 100% sure that fans won't be confused. Imrane-117 (talk) 07:38, 21 July 2013 (EDT)
Well we already voted on this a while back and found "remnant" to be a more logical naming convention for the new faction, not that I disagree with "(post-war)" being a good title. Plus its not necessarily fan-made, again the "teal" message above coveys that.--Killamint [Comm|Files] 07:56, 21 July 2013 (EDT)
Yeah sorry, I didn't meant "remnant" was all "fan-made", merely that it was more possible that fans would take it as an official name. While the Covenant remnant page does precise the name isn't canon, the rest of Halopedia often uses the term in other pages. But "Covenant (post-war)" isn't really a solution, because of the Covenant separatists' existence. Some time ago, I was suggesting "Jul 'Mdama's Covenant", but with Spartan Assault and Merg Vol's role in it, I'm not sure that would be a good idea. Imrane-117 (talk) 08:13, 21 July 2013 (EDT)
I think we all have gotten used to "remnant" as a name. 343i didn't really give them a name so we had to give them something. Of course 343i still refers to them as "the Covenant".--Killamint [Comm|Files] 08:19, 21 July 2013 (EDT)
My bad, sorry if I caused some confusion. I didn't intend to imply that we should change the name right now, more so that we should keep an eye out for the term popping up in any official material. If it's just fans getting confused then there's no big problem, it's just we know sometimes people working on official materials use this site as a reference and that's what we need to be alert for.--Soul reaper (talk) 09:46, 21 July 2013 (EDT)
(reset indent) Oh boy, guess I will have to step in and clear up this problem. Might as well tell everyone that both this faction in Halo 4 and the faction in Halo: Spartan Assault are one and the same. The new Halo 4: Essential Visual Guide doesn't really touch on this faction in detail, only that it continually refers to this faction simply as "the Covenant". No other information is available. Hope this clears it up. --Xamikaze330 [Transmission|Commencing] 14:45, 14 September 2013 (EDT)Xamikaze330
I'm not sure who didn't think that they were the same faction, all the Spartan Assault pages were made in mind that the faction was Jul 'Mdama's. The biggest pointer to them being the same faction was Parg Vol leading troops during the Battle of Draetheus V.Sith-venator Wavingstrider Fett helmet.jpg (Commlink) 15:23, 14 September 2013 (EDT)

Multiple factions

I think there is something we need to address. While Jul 'Mdama;s Covenant may be the most prominent organization we've seen that doesn't mean there aren't other organizations out there. I'm a bit of out of date on some information so if i am wrong about something please tell me.

The fleet from Spartan Assault. How sure we that its part of Jul's forces? What if it was a separate organization that later joined Jul's forces? What about the latest post-Covenant organization from the Escalation comics?

Lord Hierarch (talk) 16:14, 12 December 2013 (EST)Lord Hierarch

You're right in that we don't know if the Covenant from Spartan Assault were affiliated with Jul's faction - it just seems most likely given that not many groups would be capable of marshaling forces on that scale. I'm not yet sure about the context of the "Guardians of the Righteous" from Escalation and whether it is in fact the proper name for Jul's faction or a wholly separate group. On the other hand, 343i's manner of referencing Jul's group in the Halo 4 guide pages on Waypoint as the new Covenant suggests that there are no other post-Covenant factions of any notable significance. --Jugus (Talk | Contribs) 01:30, 16 December 2013 (EST)
Edit conflict - As for the nature of Merg Vol's group, I think it's ambiguous enough for the Spartan Assault Covenant to be listed separately from Jul's on the same page. While the prevailing opinion is that the Covenant who attacked Draetheus V were merely an offshoot of the larger body led by 'Mdama, there's no truly solid evidence for that. One might reasonably argue that Parg Vol indicates continuity within the same organization from 255x through February 2558. However, I see two major alternatives: A) Parg jumped ship after his clan-mate's death and offered his services to 'Mdama's more zealous cult. After all, Parg is described as a "known terrorist"; having a history with two Covenant offshoots would play into the tried and true "ties to multiple radical sects" trope. B) Parg took the reins after his relative's death and merged the remnants of "his" Covenant with Jul's, leading to the incarnation seen in Halo 4.
Frankly, I'm not sure the so-called "Guardians of the Righteous" are an organization at all. It's just as likely that was addressing himself and his followers with religious rhetoric, cf. "Sentinels - the Holy Warriors of the Sacred Rings". Then again, the next issue very well might clarify the matter. Like Jugus said, maybe it's the name of Jul's organization, which will allow us to - thankfully - be rid of this "Covenant remnant" mess. --Our vengeance is at hand. Gravemind.svg (Talk to me.) 02:03, 16 December 2013 (EST)
Good point about the "Guardians of the Righteous". While it could be 343i giving us a heads-up about the name, as you said it could also just be meaningless religious lingo. Suppose we'll just have to wait and see, though maybe we should hold off creating an article about the supposed faction until the nature of the reference is clarified. Or maybe someone could ask Chris Schlerf on Twitter, like they did with this matter? --Jugus (Talk | Contribs) 23:49, 16 December 2013 (EST)
It doesn't seem to me that we have clear evidence of multiple factions. Given that complete lack of information on other remnants, the high probability of there only being one main splinter group instead of several, and the repeated references by 343i to to the covenant, why are putting on this page that there are multiple groups? --Weeping Angel (talk) 22:19, 20 December 2013 (EST)

Bump

"What does it mean to be 'Covenant' today? A hundred warlords claim they rule the Covenant, but each of them leads only a small faction."
— Zef 'Trahl, Halo: Escalation #5

I've mentioned this before, but Escalation #5 has prompted me to bring it up again. Jul 'Mdama's so-called Covenant is undeniably the most significant from a story perspective. However, there's no proof that it's the only major remnant force, let alone the largest or most powerful. For instance, I still believe Merg 'Vol's invasion force was completely independent of 'Mdama's group. Anyway, Zef 'Trahl makes it clear that numerous demagogues claim to be the legitimate leaders of the Covenant; as such, referring to 'Mdama's faction as the Covenant remnant is misleading. Given this revelation, I think it would be best to rename this article "Covenant remnants" and give 'Mdama's Covenant its own page. Thoughts? --Our vengeance is at hand. Gravemind.svg (Talk to me.) 12:33, 23 April 2014 (EDT)

I don't see why not. That is an interesting revelation though.--Killamin7 [Comm|Files] 12:43, 23 April 2014 (EDT)
That is undeniably the best course of action, especially in light of that quote. By having a page for Covenant remnants apart of Mdama's faction it's easier to list the affiliations of characters, for example. Still hoping they'll give names for these factions though, but some clarification is better than nothing. --Jugus (Talk | Contribs) 12:54, 23 April 2014 (EDT)

Food for Thought

In the recent preview of Issue #3 of Halo: Escalation Lasky refers to the faction attacking the peace talks as Covenant Remnants. Hard to tell if the R should be capital or not since the entire comic is in capital letters.Sith-venator Wavingstrider Fett helmet.jpg (Commlink) 14:11, 14 February 2014 (EST)

I'm thinking the capitalization came from the community's confusion over the way Halopedia used the name. Also, once more with the naming issue, what if we renamed the article to "Post-2552 Covenant", "Post-2552 Covenant factions", or something along those lines? I'm thinking those titles better describe the state of the post-war Covenant, especially when there seems to be more than one faction. It also notes that there is a distinct difference between the HCW Covenant and the post-war factions.--Spartacus Talk • Contribs 15:38, 14 February 2014 (EST)
Eh out of those two I'd rather go with Post-2552 Covenant, I still think it's all one big faction. Heck me and Snore have even started calling them the JMC (short for Jul 'Mdama's Covenant remnant).Sith-venator Wavingstrider Fett helmet.jpg (Commlink) 15:09, 15 February 2014 (EST)
Well the problem with not having an official name is coming up with one on our own. Personally I prefer Covenant remnant, because ultimately it the remains of a hegemony of alien races who worship the Forerunners, only more focused on the Ur-Didact than a general worship. File:Colonel Grade One.pngCol. Snipes450File:Colonel Grade One.png 17:08, 15 February 2014 (EST)
I'm with Snipes with this one. Plus we have Lasky actually saying that, though plural.Sith-venator Wavingstrider Fett helmet.jpg (Commlink) 20:52, 15 February 2014 (EST)

I'm assuming the "Covenant remnants" in Escalation is just descriptive terminology, like Halo 4 Essential Visual Guide which refers to 'Mdama's faction as "a remnant of the Covenant" on the Song of Retribution page. Either way, we can't really draw any definite conclusions given the capital letters issue. As for changing the title, I'd rather keep the current one for now. It's by no means perfect but it works, if only because similar terminology has now been used a couple of times in official material. I just wish people would use more varied nomenclature when linking this page because sticking to the "Covenant remnant" title makes it look like it's a proper name when that's not the intent. For instance, there's nothing wrong with calling the faction "Covenant" as long as there's proper context; official material (e.g. Spartan Ops) does it most of the time. Then there's all sorts of descriptors you can use, like "new Covenant", "reformed Covenant", "resurgent Covenant", "Jul 'Mdama's Covenant", etc. "Covenant remnant" just works well as a title because it doesn't necessitate capitalizing the descriptive part, which would be the case if we had it preceding the "Covenant" in the title. Still, all this makes me wonder why 343i hasn't given the faction a proper name; can't have been that hard to namedrop them as the "New Covenant", for example. --Jugus (Talk | Contribs) 23:02, 16 February 2014 (EST)

Unless it's 343i just seeing what people will say and do. If so, we learned people will stick to the first thing they hear, regardless of the source or origin, and no matter how hard you tell them it's not the right name they refuse to believe you because...I have no idea.Sith-venator Wavingstrider Fett helmet.jpg (Commlink) 07:00, 20 February 2014 (EST)
Retrieved from "https://www.halopedia.org/index.php?title=Talk:Jul_%27Mdama%27s_Covenant&oldid=1074948"