Halo 3 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: why r there so many halos?
  • Subject: why r there so many halos?
Subject: why r there so many halos?
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

i never read the books so this may be in there somewhere and tell me if it is. if one ring can eliminate all of the floods food supply, why r there so many? why would you need more than one?

  • 06.13.2006 10:30 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: owner17
i never read the books so this may be in there somewhere and tell me if it is. if one ring can eliminate all of the floods food supply, why r there so many? why would you need more than one?


its true but you over looked something...range thats why there 7 errr 6 halos

  • 06.13.2006 10:32 AM PDT

Quick as a razor, sharp as a bullet.

something confusing...
the halos are positioned to eliminate the flood food throughout the galaxy, but if one fires three galactic radii, why are 7 needed?
do the halos serve another purpose to do with their location...?

  • 06.13.2006 10:34 AM PDT

Quick as a razor, sharp as a bullet.

the universe is not 3 galactic radii big.

  • 06.13.2006 10:37 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

you cant destory the whole universe coz it always grows, if they were made more than 100000 years ago then it wud had grown out of thier reach

  • 06.13.2006 10:38 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: alexander2006
you cant destory the whole universe coz it always grows, if they were made more than 100000 years ago then it wud had grown out of thier reach

we find new planets, they dont grow out of no where

  • 06.13.2006 10:41 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Tartan 118
something confusing...
the halos are positioned to eliminate the flood food throughout the galaxy, but if one fires three galactic radii, why are 7 needed?
do the halos serve another purpose to do with their location...?


that is exactly what i meant but i couldnt say it right

  • 06.13.2006 10:43 AM PDT
  • gamertag: opog
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Tartan 118
something confusing...
the halos are positioned to eliminate the flood food throughout the galaxy, but if one fires three galactic radii, why are 7 needed?
do the halos serve another purpose to do with their location...?


We are never told that one ring can fire three galactic Radii. We are told that when ALL the rings activated all life within 3 radii of galctic center died.

There Forerunner needed 7 rings becuase one wasn't enough. And 7 is darker.

  • 06.13.2006 10:46 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

well then why is it a big deal if only one is set off?

  • 06.13.2006 10:48 AM PDT

To Make Posts is Glorious

Some threads will get posts before others and it is the duty of the Leadership to ensure that posts are made that best suit the public welfare.

"heh"

Posted by: owner17
well then why is it a big deal if only one is set off?


For one, a huge chunk of sentient life in the galaxy is dead.

  • 06.13.2006 10:50 AM PDT

Posted by: owner17
Posted by: alexander2006
you cant destory the whole universe coz it always grows, if they were made more than 100000 years ago then it wud had grown out of thier reach

we find new planets, they dont grow out of no where


No, the universe is expanding, and planets are basically growing out of no where sort of speak. It's physics.

  • 06.13.2006 10:52 AM PDT
  • gamertag: opog
  • user homepage:

Posted by: owner17
well then why is it a big deal if only one is set off?


When halo is activated it is possible that all the other Halos activate with it. In Two Betrayls 343 Guilty Spark says


More or less. Technically, this installation's pulse has a maximum effective radius of twenty-five thousand light years. But, once the others follow suit, this galaxy will be quite devoid of life, or at least any life with sufficient biomass to sustain the flood.


Also, the two Halos that we have been on may be close to Earth, if they are activated we will die

  • 06.13.2006 10:54 AM PDT

I put on pants for this?

maybe youre asking the wrong question. why didn't the foreruners make more halos because it seems not all flood were starved to death as they originally thought (gravemind) and if one could do it on a halo then there may be more flood creatures like gravemind that could eventually have gotton off their halo prison and travel to other galaxies that dont have the same procedures as the forerunners and infect those galaxies.

  • 06.13.2006 11:13 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

The maximum effective range of Halo (or at least Installation 04) was 25000 light years. In astronomical terms, that's not a whole lot.

  • 06.13.2006 11:28 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

You all know that halos were also for research and such right? The weapon was a fail safe if they escaped. And they probley dont give the flood much credit but they would probley go to the forrunners hommeworld and eat them, the balst halo of everything in the Milky way( or what ever galixie there in) is desroyed and over the next buillions of years will re-grown

  • 06.13.2006 11:38 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

The halo rings each fire three galactic radii... due to the fact that the universe as far as we know is neverenidng the fat that there are 7 halos (bungies lucky nuber none the less) therefore firing a total of 21 galactic radii whiich as far as the forruners know is as far as any sentient life that can support the flood will be killled or that the flood would be unnable to travel that far in order to sustain themselves .

  • 06.13.2006 3:18 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

not to mention back up incase one fails

  • 06.13.2006 3:19 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Why arn't there so many Halos?

  • 06.13.2006 3:19 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: DeadlyAmbitionz
Seven to make sure the ENTIRE universe is destroyed.

Now that one is gone, does that mean theres a gap?

Actually, even seven wouldn't cover the entire galaxy. My guess is that it's more to do with Bungie's 7 obsession than anything else.

  • 06.13.2006 3:22 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Posted by: Panther Reloaded
Posted by: DeadlyAmbitionz
Seven to make sure the ENTIRE universe is destroyed.

Now that one is gone, does that mean there's a gap?

Actually, even seven wouldn't cover the entire galaxy. My guess is that it's more to do with Bungie's 7 obsession than anything else.


the gap in the halos dont affect earth, that's why the "ark" is there

i reed this some where els before the halo 3 annoncement

[Edited on 6/13/2006]

  • 06.13.2006 3:24 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I think halo three should end with the halos setting off and the planet 04 was supposed to destroy was the grunt homeworld...

  • 06.13.2006 3:27 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Drazerin
The halo rings each fire three galactic radii... due to the fact that the universe as far as we know is neverenidng the fat that there are 7 halos (bungies lucky nuber none the less) therefore firing a total of 21 galactic radii whiich as far as the forruners know is as far as any sentient life that can support the flood will be killled or that the flood would be unnable to travel that far in order to sustain themselves .


small glitch there. they only fire 25,000 light years. where as three galactic sentai is 3 times the size of the known universe. and 25,000 lights years isn't that big....well it is, ust not universe X 3 big.

  • 06.13.2006 3:29 PM PDT