Continued ship of the week. MC90

User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Continued ship of the week. MC90

Post by Captain Seafort »

Deepcrush wrote:This is a load of crap. You're little add in of "Star" cruiser vs cruiser. The only 300m ship that we've seen on film is called a frigate. A huge differnce from being a cruiser.
The Neb-B is listed in the EGtV&V as a "Rebel Cruiser", and you also got the Carrack class light cruiser, Dreadnought class heavy cruiser, and the Vindicator and Interdictor cruisers. There's a huge range of ships that are referred to as such based on their role, rather than their size.
Again, this is just more of your crap.
Then prove it.
More of your crap. ISDs are often the largest ships in local battle groups as there are only (est) 16 SSDs in the Imperial fleet. Unless you're of the mind the Empire is made of only 16 sectors and not the thousands or millions stated or implyed.
There are far more than 16 SSDs in the Imperial fleet - the term is a colloquialism for all ships larger than an ISD. There may only be 16 Executors, but they're the largest ships in the fleet - you're ignoring the Allegiances, the "humpback" design, the Praetors, Procurators, Mandators, Vengeance, Giel's battleship, the communications ship, etc, etc.
That's certainly one of it's roles, and a colloquial term. It's official title is in the acronym - ISD. Imperial class Star Destroyer.
Mon Cal Cruisers = Cruiser as stated by canon.
http://www.starwars.com/databank/starsh ... index.html
Again, they're certainly big enough for independent ops, and probably filled the cruiser size bracket in the pre-Endor Mon Cal fleet. However, by Imperial standards they fall squarely into the destroyer bracket between the Vic and the ISD.
300m ship = Frigate as stated by canon.
http://www.starwars.com/databank/starsh ... index.html
Again, in this case your own source describes it as a cruiser at one point. I entirely agree that it's too small to be a "proper" cruiser at the largest scales, but neither are ISDs.
I'd like to know what people think about the MC90 in contrast to the Nebula. Since latter seems to be the birth cause of the former.
The Neb's the better design. It's weapons are poorly positioned, and it's a poorer ship than the ISD, but it's still better than the Mon Cals - they're too lumpy to be considered good designs, regardless of their effectiveness.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: Continued ship of the week. MC90

Post by Deepcrush »

The Neb-B is listed in the EGtV&V as a "Rebel Cruiser", and you also got the Carrack class light cruiser, Dreadnought class heavy cruiser, and the Vindicator and Interdictor cruisers. There's a huge range of ships that are referred to as such based on their role, rather than their size.
Meaningless. We have a canon statement that it is a Frigate. The way they use it isn't important.
Then prove it.
:laughroll:

Wow, how did I know you'd whore out??? You're the one trying say canon is wrong so you're the one who has to prove it. If you can't then just run away.
There are far more than 16 SSDs in the Imperial fleet - the term is a colloquialism for all ships larger than an ISD. There may only be 16 Executors, but they're the largest ships in the fleet - you're ignoring the Allegiances, the "humpback" design, the Praetors, Procurators, Mandators, Vengeance, Giel's battleship, the communications ship, etc, etc.
So how does a battleship being big make a Cruiser not a Cruiser?????
That's certainly one of it's roles, and a colloquial term. It's official title is in the acronym - ISD. Imperial class Star Destroyer.
Star Destroyer is a title given to the basic design covering Acclamator, Venator, Victory, Tector, Imperial, Interdictor, Pellaeon, Eclipse, Executor, Republic and Nebula. All of which are different classes but were all of the Star Destroyer line.
Again, they're certainly big enough for independent ops, and probably filled the cruiser size bracket in the pre-Endor Mon Cal fleet. However, by Imperial standards they fall squarely into the destroyer bracket between the Vic and the ISD.
Pathetic excuse for how you're so full of shit. They're cruisers, pure and simple. You know it, I know it and now you're just running circles. They are stated canon as Cruisers. Get over it. The Victory is a Destroyer. The Mon Cal Cruisers are CRUISERS.
Again, in this case your own source describes it as a cruiser at one point. I entirely agree that it's too small to be a "proper" cruiser at the largest scales, but neither are ISDs.
It was treated as a cruiser because they didn't have real cruisers. Even so, its still a frigate. As in even the Rebels CALLED it as such.
The Neb's the better design. It's weapons are poorly positioned, and it's a poorer ship than the ISD, but it's still better than the Mon Cals - they're too lumpy to be considered good designs, regardless of their effectiveness.
You like the Neb over the MC90? Why is that?
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Continued ship of the week. MC90

Post by Captain Seafort »

Deepcrush wrote:Meaningless. We have a canon statement that it is a Frigate. The way they use it isn't important.
We also have a canon statement that it's a cruiser, from your own link. It shows that the term is bandied about willy-nilly as a role as well as an official designation.
You're the one trying say canon is wrong so you're the one who has to prove it.
I'm pointing out canon to you you idiot.
So how does a battleship being big make a Cruiser not a Cruiser?
It doesn't. It doesn't make a destroyer a cruiser either.
Star Destroyer is a title given to the basic design covering Acclamator, Venator, Victory, Tector, Imperial, Interdictor, Pellaeon, Eclipse, Executor, Republic and Nebula. All of which are different classes but were all of the Star Destroyer line.
Most of those are correct, and the term certainly exists as a colloquialism for the big wedge-hulled ships, but the Ex and Eclipse were formally designated Star Dreadnoughts, not destroyers. That's not true of the likes of the ISD, which is a destroyer role-wise, as well as being a "Star Destroyer" type ship.
Pathetic excuse for how you're so full of s**t. They're cruisers, pure and simple. You know it, I know it and now you're just running circles. They are stated canon as Cruisers. Get over it. The Victory is a Destroyer. The Mon Cal Cruisers are CRUISERS.
Like I said - that's probably the role they filled in the pre-Endor Mon Cal fleet, owing to the relatively smaller size of Mon Cals compared to Imperial ships. That doesn't change the fact that they fall into the same size bracket as Imperial destroyers.
It was treated as a cruiser because they didn't have real cruisers. Even so, its still a frigate. As in even the Rebels CALLED it as such.
Exactly. The same logic applies to ISDs, as true Star Cruisers such as the Allegiance and humpback are available to your average sector fleet.
You like the Neb over the MC90? Why is that?
Because I'm not a fan of oversized gherkins. The Neb's weapons may be badly arrayed, but the basic wedge-hull design is sound.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
Tsukiyumi
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 21747
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
Contact:

Re: Continued ship of the week. MC90

Post by Tsukiyumi »

Looking at the links Deep provided, it appears he's correct about the SD being a cruiser.

Which is also called a Destroyer...

Do either of you have any other links showing canon size brackets? I'll admit, I don't know what's considered canon in SW.
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: Continued ship of the week. MC90

Post by Deepcrush »

Size is more of a general run over being a specific rate. Though, most everything 300m and under is treated as an escort.
Which is also called a Destroyer...
Star "Destroyer" is a general term to cover the model run by the Wessix family and designs modeled by them.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Continued ship of the week. MC90

Post by Captain Seafort »

It's used as a general term for the wedge-hulled ships, true, but some ships are officially designated "destroyers - the VicStar, VenStar and ImpStar being the best-known examples.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
Tsukiyumi
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 21747
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
Contact:

Re: Continued ship of the week. MC90

Post by Tsukiyumi »

I'd like to see some links, please.

Again, I don't know what's considered canon in SW.
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: Continued ship of the week. MC90

Post by Deepcrush »

We also have a canon statement that it's a cruiser, from your own link. It shows that the term is bandied about willy-nilly as a role as well as an official designation.
We have a canon statement that it was used in replacement of a cruiser since they didn't have real cruisers. Nice try with twisting things. You failed but still nice try.
I'm pointing out canon to you you idiot.
No, you're pointing out your opinion dispite how its been defeated by canon.
It doesn't. It doesn't make a destroyer a cruiser either.
The ISD is stated by canon to be a Cruiser. The term Star Destroyer is a model run unless you're next round of horse shit is going to say the SSD is also a destroyer.
Most of those are correct, and the term certainly exists as a colloquialism for the big wedge-hulled ships, but the Ex and Eclipse were formally designated Star Dreadnoughts, not destroyers. That's not true of the likes of the ISD, which is a destroyer role-wise, as well as being a "Star Destroyer" type ship.
Again you're trying to twist what we've heard in canon. The SSDs were called by their titles as SUPER STAR DESTROYERS in film which is canon.
Like I said - that's probably the role they filled in the pre-Endor Mon Cal fleet, owing to the relatively smaller size of Mon Cals compared to Imperial ships. That doesn't change the fact that they fall into the same size bracket as Imperial destroyers.
The only Imp destroyer class around is the Victory which is 900m. Far shorter then the MCs 1200m.
Exactly. The same logic applies to ISDs, as true Star Cruisers such as the Allegiance and humpback are available to your average sector fleet.
You really do love to stack that shit of yours don't you. "True" star cruisers? Really? Are you just that pathetic that now you have to make ships up like some fanboy to try and save your worthless ass? Why don't you run off like a good bitch and find me a canon statement about these "True" Star Cruisers of yours.
Because I'm not a fan of oversized gherkins. The Neb's weapons may be badly arrayed, but the basic wedge-hull design is sound.
Both points are fair enough. So, you need a ship to replace or rival the ISD. What do you use?
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
Tsukiyumi
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 21747
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
Contact:

Re: Continued ship of the week. MC90

Post by Tsukiyumi »

I'd like to see more links, and a slight toning down of the hostility, or I'm going to start using green font.
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: Continued ship of the week. MC90

Post by Deepcrush »

Tsukiyumi wrote:I'd like to see some links, please.

Again, I don't know what's considered canon in SW.
SW.com
http://www.starwars.com/vault/databank/

Also the live action films.
SW1 though SW6.

Novels, comics and games are treated as quasi-canon as in Names and Locations. However all of these are open to change by LucasTM.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: Continued ship of the week. MC90

Post by Deepcrush »

Tsukiyumi wrote: and a slight toning down of the hostility, or I'm going to start using green font.
I'm not being hostile, just insulting him. Besides, its not my fault he's a living punch line. :laughroll:
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
Tsukiyumi
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 21747
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
Contact:

Re: Continued ship of the week. MC90

Post by Tsukiyumi »

So, info from starwars.com is considered canon?

Thanks.
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Continued ship of the week. MC90

Post by Captain Seafort »

Deepcrush wrote:We have a canon statement that it was used in replacement of a cruiser since they didn't have real cruisers.
That's exactly what I said you blind idiot. Just as sector groups used ISDs as cruisers as they didn't have any real cruisers.
No, you're pointing out your opinion dispite how its been defeated by canon.
If you're so fucking confident then prove it.
The ISD is stated by canon to be a Cruiser.
As is the Neb-B, a statement we both agree is bullshit.
The term Star Destroyer is a model run unless you're next round of horse s**t is going to say the SSD is also a destroyer.
"Super Star Destroyer" is a colloquialism for all ships larger than the ISD, not a classification in its own right.
The SSDs were called by their titles as SUPER STAR DESTROYERS in film which is canon.
As I said, it's a colloquialism.
The only Imp destroyer class around is the Victory which is 900m. Far shorter then the MCs 1200m.
And the VenStar, and the ImpStar, as I've pointed out repeatedly.
you have to make ships up
We've had this argument before, and I posted images of said ships from Dark Empire.
Why don't you run off like a good bitch and find me a canon statement about these "True" Star Cruisers of yours.
'"Star Cruiser" was also a term utilized by the Imperial Navy. In this instance, it formally denoted Super Star Destroyers which were lesser in size and strength than their Star Battlecruisers and Star Dreadnoughts. Their size-range began at several times the size of an Imperial-class Star Destroyer'

Wookiepedia, referencing AotC:ICS.
So, you need a ship to replace or rival the ISD.
Why? If it ain't broke don't fix it.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Continued ship of the week. MC90

Post by Captain Seafort »

Deepcrush wrote:
Tsukiyumi wrote:I'd like to see some links, please.

Again, I don't know what's considered canon in SW.
SW.com
http://www.starwars.com/vault/databank/

Also the live action films.
SW1 though SW6.

Novels, comics and games are treated as quasi-canon as in Names and Locations. However all of these are open to change by LucasTM.
Specifically, all live action SW and their derivatives (i.e. the films, novelizations and audio dramas) are considered "G" canon, and override everything else.

Everything else is "C" canon, which means it's "fact" unless directly contradicted by G-canon.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
Tsukiyumi
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 21747
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
Contact:

Re: Continued ship of the week. MC90

Post by Tsukiyumi »

Cool.

So, links?
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
Locked