{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by kgj:
8/29/2013 7:37:18 PM
16
So. 1.17 teratons.
Beating a long dead horse? Maybe.
Anyone have the link to the post where Vociferous confirmed this was a legitimate estimate?
Because... uh... yeah. It's still pretty incredible.
Well the image has GTFOd. So much for that one. Regardless my point stands.
-
3 RepliesReminds me of something I read. [quote]The humans had invented a weapon horrifying in both it's effect and simplicity. Utilizing common silica grains referred to by them as "sand" they had destroyed a world. They first gathered many tons of sand and then accelerated it to just under the speed of light, then releasing it from the containers it was accelerated in they allowed it to hit the world they had targeted. Normally the atmosphere of a world would destroy any such particles but their sheer velocity had enabled them to pass through the atmosphere before friction could destroy them. Each grain impacted with enough force to shatter continents [/quote] OP bro, totally OP.
-
4 RepliesWTF did the UNSC Grafton have when it fired in-atmosphere then? A fcking pea-shooter? O_o
-
4 RepliesI honestly don't think Voc understood the ramifications of the Teraton yield, but unfortunately, its canon. To put this into perspective, 1.17 Teratons is 1170 Gigatons, which is 1170000 Megatons. The Tsar Bomba was 50 Megatons. The 64 kiloton MAC figure is far, far more reasonable.
-
37 Replies[url]https://forums.halowaypoint.com/yaf_postst604_Clarification-on-MAC-gun.aspx[/url] [quote]Hey folks, moved this to Fiction because it makes more sense there. A Puzzled Mind, you've got some great questions, but I think this one has been answered throughout this thread quite effectively by other users. The reality of MAC weaponry and asynchronous linear induction technology is that there isn't one particular model with one specific setting. Like any machine given in our contemporary, 21st century military, there are a variety of types of that weapon and there are several methods in which the weapon can be deployed or used. This means that situations like the ones seen in Halo: Reach, those talked about in the novels, and those depicted in the encyclopedia are not wholly and individually exclusive. They can all exist in the same universe. :-)[/quote]
-
2 RepliesCan someone inform me as to what's going on?
-
Still not as stupid as the Imperium of Man firing broadsides of projectiles at .5c without ripping their ships in half. How they are able to generate that amount of power while simultaneously traveling at .7c is a mystery for the dark ages.
-
Someone out this into context? So could this like, destroy the Infinity or a Covenant Cruiser?
-
2 RepliesThe Fall of Reach confirms that only the SMACs fire at 40% the speed of light.
-
So MAC's are more powerful than my fist? According to this, the IMP only attests to 45 megatons. But then again, it doesn't factor in Superman's density. Plus, he can go well beyond 99% the speed of light, of course.
-
9 RepliesWas it different before?
-
4 Replies1.17 Teraton's should be the SMACs only. And only ones with incredible upgrades. And wait, wasnt the Halo encyclopedia written in 2009? How come some haven't heard of this/Why hasn't it always been this way? Too many questions ._.
-
Surely if it travels at 40% the speed of light, it would gain a bit of mass?
-
4 RepliesThat sounds like bullshit to me, as in Reach they were all like "FIRIN A MAC IN ATMUSPHER?!" followed by a largely unimpressive explosion. Also I love the Halo Encyclopedia. It helps me poop.
-
That is equivalent to like 100,000,000 Hiroshima bombs isn't it?
-
Dafuqureadin
-
21 RepliesWHAT IS THAT GLORIOUS BOOK?
