Covenant Millitary Edit
Before the subjects here were removed, i just wanna point out that whoever put that the statement on Covenant Millitary about the covenant ground forces being less capable than human ground forces is so right it doesn't do the Covenant justice. Even Grunts obliterate UNSC Marines with ease so going up against brutes, elites or hunters the marines have no chance. Whoever put down "It may be noted that despite that their technology is far more superior to the humans and their numbers are much larger as well, the covenant as ground warriors are much less capable and are often defeated and are often forced to retreat to glass the planet from space" needs severe medical attention because I think that it A) Downgrades the covenant severly B) Is so not true.—This unsigned comment is made by 188.8.131.52 (talk • contribs) . Please sign your posts with ~~~~!
- If the sentence degrades the article quality and stays untrue to canon, remove it. - 5əb'7aŋk(7alk) 19:50, June 26, 2010 (UTC)
- It's "so right", is it? Wonderful. People always see the light in the end. Please go away and read page 7 of Halo: The Fall of Reach, where Human forces "stonewall" Covenant forces on the ground at the Battle of Jericho VII, and page 8, where it reads, "On the ground, Spartans always won." Not to mention Human forces routinely tearing through Covenant ground forces in all of the games, Halo Wars and Halo 3: ODST included. It's in space where the Covenant has the advantage.--The All-knowing Sith'ari 19:54, June 26, 2010 (UTC)
- The UNSC are brilliant tacticians compared to the Covenant, who don't seem to have any plans, just going after anything. When it gets towards the end of the battle however, the UNSC chain of command will disintegrate and troops will become vulnerable. The 101st Drop Jet Platoon was destroyed by thousands of Unggoy. It doesn't mean that they are simply poor fighters, but that 45 men can't handle a thousand doses of burning plasma.-- Forerunner 19:57, June 26, 2010 (UTC)
- Regarding human forces winning in the games; that is debatable. It all depends on gameplay and difficulty settings; higher difficulties will see that human forces will be easily eliminated by the opposing forces. The best illustration of a ground battle between the UNSC and the Covenant would be in Halo Legends; Homecoming, The Prototype, and The Babysitter.- 5əb'7aŋk(7alk) 19:59, June 26, 2010 (UTC)
What was that about UNSC being brilliant tacticians as if the Covenant weren't !? I think you will find that if you read the article about Drones, at some point it will talk about a covenant tactic that can be used to wipe out a squad of UNSC Marines (which in the drones' case is to divert Marine fire upwards using the drones as a distraction whilst the infantry eliminate the marines or something like that). So the Covenant are good at ground combat as well as space it's just that there's much more of a difference in ability when it comes to UNSC-Covenant space combat as the covenant tend to be much more skilled at space combat than the UNSC, but even on ground when going against Marines or ODST the Covenant are still better than the UNSC it's only when the spartans help them, Marines' morale is boosted and that's probably why the UNSC wrongly get all the credit when going against the Covenant on ground-battles.
To debate against that you'll need to read this first "Yanme'e are deployed in battle situations, such as aerial insertions, among the Covenant, and, during the Great Schism, the Covenant Loyalists. They are used for surprise aerial ambushes and assaults, such as catching Human troops off guard and causing them to shoot upwards as a diversion so that their allies may attack on the ground. This is a common Covenant tactic that can be used to wipe out a whole squad of UNSC Marines."
This means the covenant millitary personell are excellent strategists and tacticians, they do have a mind you know they may have their flaws yeah which are exploited by the spartans but so do the UNSC and the covenant have slaughtered loads of spartans by 2552 a Jiralhanae killed one with his brute shot during Operation: First Strike which although wasn't on a planet it was still infantry combat (close-range).
That's right 90, and another strategy the covenant use involving the grunts is to use the latter to soften up the UNSC Soldiers the covenant are fighting and force the UNSC troops to waste ammo on the grunts and have the brute/elite leader finish them off. Often works as long as the chief isn't around.
- Just to make ABSOLUTELY clear, the books completely indicate that, in ground engagements in anything apporaching equal numbers, the humans come out ON TOP. Humans may be smaller and physically weaker than elites, but they tear through the lesser races (Grunts, jackals) and even generally inflict heavier casualities on the elites too, which most people can ALSO see from Halo 2, 3 etc... Read The Flood. ODSTs in particular outfight the Covenant from one end of the book to the other. Try Halo Wars too, where the marine squads are vastly superior to the grunt units, which include an elite leader. It's clear, from lore, that the UNSC wins the ground engagements pretty damned often, and only fails in the ship-to-ship, space combat thanks to vastly inferior tech. The statement should have been left in the article. The UNSC IS superior in ground combat. But what would I know about infantry combat? I only spent three years with 1st Ranger Battalion. We picked up these games in Iraq, and I've been hooked on the lore since, HellJump04 16:57, September 17, 2010 (UTC)HellJump04
- I think we should point out that the UNSC may have provided superior numbers of infantry compared to the Covenant. Furthermore, the Covenant have demonstrated poor tactical prowess (Also note that in a lot of in-game engagements, the Marines out-number the Covenant; some even taking cover). I believe that if the Covenant deployed more infantry than necessary (Like the beginning of Operation Barbarossa, where many Wehrmacht divisions saw little to no action whatsoever) or relied on a better tactic than "send the grunts in first", I feel that they probably would have been able to win on both the ground and in space. Of course, this is just my opinion and is open for debate.-- Forerunner 17:15, September 17, 2010 (UTC)
- It's all opinion of course, as none of this is real. By lore though, the UNSC are always outnumbered but still manage to win the vast majority of ground engagements. Even beating the games on Legendary, specifically ODST and Reach, I was impressed with the marksmanship and tactical skill of the UNSC ground troops. It is proven in the books, comics and even some videos that the UNSC's reliance on marksmanship and squad-based tactics makes them slightly superior in ground combat, even against Elites. Read the Helljumper comics, The Flood and First Strike. In The Flood specifically, ODSTs take on and destroy a much larger Elite force at the Bluff battle, engage and destroy, while outnumbered, Covenant units on the raid to the Pillar of Autum and in many other situations. The snipers are a big key to those, but on the Covenant attack on the bluff, a fireteam of four ODST troops equipped with thermal imagers takes on a Covenant Special Ops squad consisting of six elite and many grunts and wipes it out in straight-up, direct action combat. The literature makes it clear that UNSC forces are better in ground combat. No way out of it. HellJump04 18:46, September 17, 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the insight. It seems that while the Covenant should be able to defeat the UNSC on the ground (Having shields and generally superior technology), their tactics and caste system-based culture (the aforementioned "send the grunts in first" method) cripple their effectiveness. Although your Helljumper source is bias (The ODSTs being specially-trained marines, and not simply any human), I agree with "Halo: The Flood"'s depiction of a groundside engagement, with the Alpha base forces hiding tanks around the butte to destroy unsuspecting groups of vehicles.-- Forerunner 18:53, September 17, 2010 (UTC)
- Hey, thank you Fore. You have a brain in your head, and it is a pleasure to debate with you! Your points are valid too, and yes, ODSTs are loosely based off of U.S. Navy SEALs, MARSOC/Force Recon and the British SAS, so they're not ordinary. It goes to show though that it's not what's done to a man or woman that makes him or her a warrior, but what they have inside. You fight with your heart and with your mind, all of it. In that sense, the humans are the true warriors in Halo. HellJump04 19:02, September 17, 2010 (UTC)
What source(s) actually refer to the The Covenant as 'The Covenant Empire'. Every other place I look call it The Covenant and I cant find any indication that it is actually an Empire.
CoalitionofIndependantRepublics 13:39, July 31, 2010 (UTC)
- I don't really know. "The Covenant" wasn't allowed and "Covenant (Faction)" was just stupid.-- Forerunner 14:21, July 31, 2010 (UTC)
- Ask CommanderTony.
- (cur) (prev) 18:02, July 2, 2009 CommanderTony (Talk | contribs | block) m (40,526 bytes) (moved The Covenant to Covenant Empire: "The Covenant" just doesn't fly.)
-- Forerunner 14:22, July 31, 2010 (UTC)
So if I understood that right, it was changed because one of the mods didn't like the name Bungie had given the the series' main antagonist?
CoalitionofIndependantRepublics 20:55, August 5, 2010 (UTC)
- No - he didn't like the word 'the' disambiguating the article from the level.-- Forerunner 21:20, August 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, that was a pretty inane claim you made right there CoalitionofIndependantRepublics. Bungie gave them the name of "Covenant". "The" is not part of their official title. Your claim of "because one of the mods didn't like the name" would hold truth if CommanderTony rename the article to something like "Forerunner Alliance", but "Covenant Empire" is meant to give the article a better sounding name. Having the article be called either just "Covenant" or "The Covenant" would sound stupid. And the Covenant is logically an empire. 184.108.40.206 03:02, August 9, 2010 (UTC)
- I did a quick google books search and it seems like "Covenant Empire" was used in at least Ghosts of Onyx and First Strike, however official this title is remains to be found tho, but ther's my 2 cents Person122 03:01, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
Request for Move - July 2010 Edit
- Main article: Halopedia:Requests for Move/Covenant Empire - July 2010
I was reading through the article earlier. I read the Weapons Section, when I noticed this statement in it:
" The plasma that is used in Covenant weapons is mined from deep inside the Unggoy planet Balaho. When it was depleted, their technology had already become so advanced they were capable of synthesizing millions of tons of plasma in a single day."
This is pure crap right here.Missing Mandible 04:42, August 9, 2010 (UTC)
C in C Edit
I don't think Truth woud be the commander in chief. I propose that it is changed to Xytan (pre great schism) and an unknown brute (post great schism. Grupa 'Zamamee 22:24, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
The hierarchs are the absolute heads of the Covenant, and Truth is the head of the hierarchs. Truth was able to control Tartarus and make Xytan work in the fringes. Commander in Chief is not for the hightest ranked general. Its for the highest military power, which is Truth. Tgor365 22:42, September 11, 2010 (UTC)
Covenant vs USNC (ground combat) Edit
With regards to the UNSC being superior in ground combat unopiniatedly, that is pretty debatable. I think youll find that the spartans make the difference in most of the battles in which the USNC won on ground, without the spartans the UNSC on ground are screwed. On difficulties namely normal and above, the covenant much more often than not, crush the AI marines and odsts on ground combat, for example: recently, i've played halo 2 the level gravemind and i went up against brutes (i freed the marines from their prison) and a single beserking brute totally annihalated an entire squad of marines not to mention when i reloaded checkpoint and fought to the bit with the covenant civil war (killed what covenant i needed to WITHOUT the marines helping) and two brutes again RAPED the whole marine group. Both the covenant's and UNSC's tactics are good, covenant defeats came about due to gifted unsc tacticians (officers like admiral cole or captain keyes) and spartans, just as much as unsc defeats came about due to gifted covenant tacticians (notably thel' vadam, rtas vadum or even tartarus to an extent).
Now in the battle of alpha base, the covenant were defeated by tanks because their objective (i think) was to launch a stealth attack and execute master chief or something of the sort. If it was a full scale attack the covenant were aiming to launch, they would have been able to take over alpha base within minutes because they would have had the gear to do that particular task. Know what I mean? These aren't excuses for covenant defeats just as much as superior covenant technology isnt an excuse for unsc defeats (unsc get defeated in space because of tactics not JUST TECHNOLOGY).
Should refrence 21 be deleted (outdated)?Edit
"The Sangheili are the only known race permitted to build and operate starships within the Covenant, though the crews are always composed of a mix of races." Jiralhanae and Kig-Yar are known to command Covenant ships now, and Sangheili cannot produce them. XsnakeX51 01:46, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
reference to the Roman Republic? Edit
is it just me, or does the government within the covenant strongly resemble that of the Roman Republic? your hierarchs are the consuls, the council is the senate, the prophets are the patricians, the sengheli are the plebiens, the other administrations are the other administrations, and everybody else is everybody else!
or am i the only one who thinks that they compare?
Crubs 05:49, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
- I do feel that the Covenant's form of government shares parallels with those of classical Earth, a comparison to the Roman republic and the senate has not come to mind. Personally, I'd have taken the Hierarchs for a single entity - the dictator. Like the dictator, the Hierarchs posess the power to contradict the decisions of other politicians - the Hierarchs contradicted the High Council's decision on executing Thel in High Charity to sending him on a suicide mission.-- Forerunner 13:11, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
- Don't many executives and presiding officers of republics have the same powers to "contradict?" As far as i'm concerned, these "contradictions' are a matter of "checks and balances". Such as the power to veto, dissolve parliament, or pardon criminals (as was done with arbiter).
- checks and balances often exist even when a dictator is appointed (in theory/de jure). the senate supposidly presided over the Dictator, the President of the Weimar was supposed to preside over the Fuhrer.
- in the covenant, three hierarchs are appointed (there's your two-thirds rule). but like Adolf, Truth was able to become autocrat once the presiding officer(s) were out of the way. after that, Truth staged a coup against the Sengheli house of the Council. Hitler did the same thing with opposing parties within the Reichstag.
- Dictators are often appointed as a last resort in times of emergency, but hierarchs don't seem to be that way. Often times, when there's an emergency, power automatically centralizes into a single figurehead without legal intervention. when the Supreme Court said no to Andrew Jackson, he went through with what he wanted to do anyways. Yet he wasn't impeached. Similarly, Lincoln issued some rather extreme executive orders to handle the civil war, pushing the constitution to its limits; the courts didn't even intervene during the process.
- Think about it, if a figurehead has negative intentions, the Constitution becomes nothing but a piece of paper. any presiden't could "manually dissolve" congress or the courts, but there would be an outrage of the public. however, what if a nuke went off in DC, and a civil war sparked? our center for national identity destroyed, and violence across the nation, people would gladly take Bush as their Fuhrer; just consider the fact that his approval was over 90% after 9/11.
- then consider that the Covenant just had their holiest of places destroyed, while the homeworld of the responsible party is discovered; throw in a civil war and desecrate the holy city with all-consuming parasite, all while picking off the sources of checks and balances and your Republican consul now becomes Fuhrer und Reichskanzler.
- This would also be relevent, as it would link the Covenant to the Roman Catholic Church. Crubs 06:11, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
I'm confused; who is on who's side? Edit
Let's go all the way back to Halo 2. Near the end of the game, the Brutes took over as guards of the Prophets, replacing the Elites. Jackals and Drones joined the Brutes. The Elites rebelled and by their side were Grunts and Hunters all the way up until the end of the game, and they joined the humans. In Halo 3, however, there's a twist... the Hunters and Grunts are somehow the enemy again. Meaning it's just the humans and the Elites against the Covenant. Now we have Halo 4, and in a gameplay video I saw on YouTube, Spartan starts out in the forest and is engaged by an Elite with an Energy Sword. So are the Elites the enemies again? Why did the Hunters and Grunts turn in Halo 3 to the bad side? I'm so confused... BNK [E|T|C] 04:41, June 8, 2012 (UTC)
No, Christmas is a human holiday. It's just for laughs any time it's mentioned by the Covenant. GodzillaMaster 05:10, July 24, 2013 (UTC)
Covenant Currency? Edit
It is likely that the Covenant has a form of currency, but nothing has been mentioned so far. All information about any form of Covenant Currency is conjuncture, which is why I have removed "Rupee" from the Covenant Empire Page.
Changing picture to the actual one. All proof is in the gallery. I don't understand why people delete those images when they are official and in official media. If you have played Halo 5 it's abundantly clear that the new pic is the actual symbol of the Covenant both old and new.Rise of Sanghelios (talk) 00:52, March 1, 2016 (UTC)