Skip to main content

Forums / Community / Halo Universe

Clarification on MAC gun?

OP A Puzzled Mind

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. ...
  5. 3
Erm, I have bough every single book and encyc from Halo. Nevermind the timeline inconsistency, I'll let 343 explain that in the future?

But I couldn't help but notice in the campaign previews that a certain frigate was able to shoot its MAC gun in atmo. Jorge was shocked too, until we see that it's a peashooter.

Honestly, the 1.17 teraton figure is symbolic, but was it necessary to go heads on tail and then show hardcore fans like me something out the blue how such how stupidly weak that MAC gun was in that cutscene. It didn't even reach kiloton firepower. It's no damn wonder humanity was losing. I mean, is this a revision by Frankie or the cinematic director had no idea wtf he was doing.

To clarify what I'm saying, that cutscene is disasterous to canon.

Honestly, you guys need to do something about this.
I imagine that to use the MAC gun on a ground target with friendly forces nearby, the firing crews aboard that frigate did something simple, like dialing down the muzzle velocity, so as to limit the destruction to the enemy. After all, it's not like it's the first time we see a MAC cannon used on a ground target, much less fired in atmo.
Are you 100% sure it was a MAC gun?
The UNSC do have other Highly powered weapons on their Frigates.
They clearly called it a MAC gun.

But the tradition of MACs being peashooters started with Halo Wars where the "MAC blast" barely took down tanks. Instead of like the books where they destroy a kilometer-long ship in one hit.

Heck, even the mass driver at the end took down a cruiser! The game is inconsistent within itself!
I don't see the inconsistency. There is nothing that says a MAC can't come in different sizes to suit it's deployment platform.
I've talked about this with other communities and we agree that the books make the MAC seem stronger than it is.
I think we allways forget to consider that the energy of MAC rounds is extremly concentrated on the velocity vector.
Such a projectil would rather just vanish in the ground, leaving a nice and deep hole, than producing a gigantic explosion, like a nuclear bomb. (Not that I don't wish to see that. ^^)
The bigger problem with firing MACs in atmosphere is air. Where this thing fires all hell will break loose.
The harmless flash in front of the frigates in Halo 3 and Reach is a joke. Even a candle produces more light than that!
Not to mention the unmatchable sound and shock wave a hundred tons projectil would cause cuting through air.

In case of reality the Halo GAMES need some major improvements.
Just a thought for the original Topic:
There are many different size M.A.C.'s (Magnetic Accelerator Cannons) therefore it is possible this MAC was simply a small one. While I agree it appears vastly under powered taking this into account can help with some of the annoyance.
Looking at it from a physics stand point maybe when in atmo power needs to be reduced in order to not damage the ship. Potential reasons include: Thrusters normally used to stabilize recoil from a power shot are in use stabilizing the ship in atmosphere against gravity making it harder to account for the mass recoil, excess friction due to the weight of the object (can't remember if it is junk metal or tungsten) since gravity is now pulling on it, and other reasons due to feeling the effects of gravity and atmosphere.

In Regards to Halo Wars MAC:
Yeah no disagreement from me here MAC in Halo Wars was like....wat? But it made sense otherwise game would have been to one sided.
They are powered by super conducting coils. Who is to say they weren't fired at 50% charge?

Use more power for larger ships. Power down for a more tactical strike.
It's not the first time we've seen the MAC blast, I didn't really see anything wrong with it, it hit such a small target that anything in the round that was explosive didn't have much to impact upon, and went right through it. Imagine hitting a No. 2 pencil with a .50 caliber sniper rifle and expecting something cool to happen.
Quote:
Erm, I have bough every single book and encyc from Halo. Nevermind the timeline inconsistency, I'll let 343 explain that in the future?

But I couldn't help but notice in the campaign previews that a certain frigate was able to shoot its MAC gun in atmo. Jorge was shocked too, until we see that it's a peashooter.

Honestly, the 1.17 teraton figure is symbolic, but was it necessary to go heads on tail and then show hardcore fans like me something out the blue how such how stupidly weak that MAC gun was in that cutscene. It didn't even reach kiloton firepower. It's no damn wonder humanity was losing. I mean, is this a revision by Frankie or the cinematic director had no idea wtf he was doing.

To clarify what I'm saying, that cutscene is disasterous to canon.

Honestly, you guys need to do something about this.
Who is to say that they can not manually change the strength of a MAC blast?
Quote:
They clearly called it a MAC gun.

But the tradition of MACs being peashooters started with Halo Wars where the "MAC blast" barely took down tanks. Instead of like the books where they destroy a kilometer-long ship in one hit.

Heck, even the mass driver at the end took down a cruiser! The game is inconsistent within itself!
They could destroy two ships in one hit, if they lined up.

As to the Mass Driver, I think it's easy to just go along with the fact that "it shot the Plasma core". That'll do for me.
A lot of these guys have valid points.

MAC guns come in a variety of strengths and sizes. The shot strength can be adjusted up to a maximum, depending on the power source of the craft or installation in which it is mounted. MAC rounds also come in a variety of sizes. These variables all allow for an assortment of possible purposes.

The MAC gun fired to down that Covey ship in Reach was probably from one of the planet's Orbital Defense Platforms which bear some of the largest MACs in use by the UNSC, explaining how it went through the ship's shielding with such ease. Meanwhile, the MAC gun the UNSC frigate (not a very large ship in comparison with others) fired to take down the Covey shield tower was one of the smallest.

MAC guns being used in Halo Wars was funny, but were only used because the developers couldn't think of any other iconic weapon to give the UNSC for such a purpose.

All things considered, I can find nothing wrong with the implimentation of the MAC guns in any of the Halo games, nevermind Halo: Reach. Even in the books, it often took multiple MAC rounds fired from UNSC vessels just to collapse a single Covenant ship's shield before being able to perforate the craft itself. While the Covey ship weapons always seemed so much more powerful (especially after Cortana got ahold of one of them).

Anyway. It's all in good fun. Just take a step back from what you think you know and allow yourself to be re-inspired. I mean, that's kind of what Halo: Reach is about, isn't it - seeing the Covenant, UNSC, Spartans and the War again for the first time. Personally, I love it all.
As DeepCee stated above, remember that a MAC is powered by superconducting coils. Bluntly, a MAC is just a pipe with a lot of electromagnets powered on in succession in order to propel the projectile forwards. The speed in which the magnets are turned on could be slowed down, in order to create a weaker shot for a tactical target.

As for the MAC blasts in Halo Wars, those were fired by a modified Pheonix-Class Colony Ship, and the MACs were once mere Mass Drivers, MACs used for non-tactical purposes, and those are used as danger-close support to ground forces, rather than larger targets, such as ships. And the fact that they can barely destroy tanks, etc: gameplay=/=canon.
If 343 believes me an idiot, sure I'd believe Bungie's limited timeline of events. Don't get me started on how stupid the storyline was or what they call "canon".

And no, ODPs are only semi-moveable, meaning they can't do a 360 and shoot at Reach. It's more likely some frigate shot the Corvette from high orbit. Speaking of which, where were the ODPs...Halo Reach fails so much to live up to anything. Couldn't even show a proper space battle like they did in Halo 2.

And yes, I do have a theory of variable yields, but would it kill for 343 to be consistent with anything. I like how in the Encyclopedia that I bought tells me the MAC is magnitudes more powerful, yet these silly cutscenes show me what a waste of money I paid for that book.

And no "reinspired" doesn't apply to everyone. What you consider "reinspired", I consider a waste of my time if they suddenly expect to buy more novels and games if they can't keep their own franchise competent written.
Well not everything is explained and is left to you to piece together the events. That is not to say some tidbits aren't left in plain sight for us to look at.

One example would be on "Long Night Of Solace" when after you board the Covenant corvette you can see the placement of all the Orbital platforms on the hologram of Reach and how the super carrier managed to "sneak" by.

As for the inconsistencies between the book and the game? Well, we will have to wait and see if it is explained.
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. :-)
Thanks :)
MAC can stand for Magnetic Accelerato Cannon (such as those typically mounted on an Orbital Platform or Naval Ship) and there are also the Mass Accelerator Cannons (such as the MAC Blast by the UNSC Colony Class Ship Spirit of Fire or the Mass Driver at the end of Reach).

What's the difference? I'm not certain. I think Mass Accelerator Cannon is smaller than the Magnetic Accelerator Cannon (hence the smaller amount of damage). The payloads delivered by these variants are probably smaller as well. Also, I believe that the Mass Accelerator Cannon(s) mounted on the Spirit of Fire were free moving rather than fixed like the standard MAC. On the other hand, the MAC shot featured in Reach appeared to be your typical MAC as opposed to the seemingly smaller Mass Accelerator Cannon.

One consolation is that explosions in Space are different than explosions in atmosphere if you weren't too impressed with the animation...
Quote:
Are you 100% sure it was a MAC gun?
The UNSC do have other Highly powered weapons on their Frigates.
"Frigate-31 Heavy is inbound, and MAC rounds have been authorized."

"MAC rounds? In atmosphere?"
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. ...
  5. 3